PDA

View Full Version : Garland turns down 3 year deal


Stoky44
12-01-2005, 12:27 PM
On ESPN radio 1000, they reported that Garland turned down a 3 year deal, money not stated. Guess we go into arbitration with Jon for ~$7.5 mil., its his last year.

crazyozzie02
12-01-2005, 12:30 PM
Question: Who reported this? Is it Levineline?

If this is ture though, Jon (or maybe it is maggs in costume) is an idoit. No matter how much i try, i cannot like this man. Oh well, his loss

Stoky44
12-01-2005, 12:34 PM
Bruce Levine said the Sox were in talks with a 3 year deal, and they are no longer.

crazyozzie02
12-01-2005, 12:36 PM
Its Bruce. Take it with a grain of salt. I still stand by my "If its true comment"

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 12:41 PM
There's also a lot of time before the arb hearings for the Sox & Jon to negotiate. It's actually not so surprising that Jon & his agent might hold out to see where the market for FA pitchers is ending up this year. Once they see where AJ Burnett, Paul Byrd, and other FA pitchers sign, they'll have a far better ability to determine what's fair for Jon and what they might be able to get in arbitration on the 1-yr deal.

NonetheLoaiza
12-01-2005, 12:53 PM
On ESPN radio 1000, they reported that Garland turned down a 3 year deal, money not stated. Guess we go into arbitration with Jon for ~$7.5 mil., its his last year.

I don't think Garland is going to get anywhere near 7.5 mil through arbitration. I think it might be near 5.5, or 6. IIRC, Buehrle made 6 mil this past year, so I don't think an arbitration panel is going to award Garland too money. Although, it depends on what the offers are.

OEO Magglio
12-01-2005, 12:57 PM
I don't think Garland is going to get anywhere near 7.5 mil through arbitration. I think it might be near 5.5, or 6. IIRC, Buehrle made 6 mil this past year, so I don't think an arbitration panel is going to award Garland too money. Although, it depends on what the offers are.
You're absolutely correct, Jon wouldn't get close to 7.5. Whether it's a long term deal or not I highly doubt he goes to arbitration.

It's Time
12-01-2005, 01:00 PM
Someone will throw 4/40 at Garland next year. Lets face it, teams are paying out the nose for pitching. Garland knows this and would be foolish not to test the market. If he has another good year, he'll be in high demand.

bayzbol44
12-01-2005, 01:03 PM
$10 million a year for Garland?

Hangar18
12-01-2005, 01:07 PM
Someone will throw 4/40 at Garland next year. Lets face it, teams are paying out the nose for pitching. Garland knows this and would be foolish not to test the market. If he has another good year, he'll be in high demand.

So in other words, were looking at 2006 as Jon Garlands last season?

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 01:08 PM
Someone will throw 4/40 at Garland next year. Lets face it, teams are paying out the nose for pitching. Garland knows this and would be foolish not to test the market. If he has another good year, he'll be in high demand....or even if he has another mediocre year. Burnett has NEVER won more than 12 games in a season and he'll get a $9-10M/yr contract thrown at him. Clement has never won more than 14 and Pavano had one good year of more than 12 wins. I wouldn't blame Garland a bit for going to arbitration and cashing in next winter.

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 01:09 PM
So in other words, were looking at 2006 as Jon Garlands last season?

Do you ever give up on this crap? Was it not enough that the Sox resigned Konerko to a 5/$60 deal?

SSN721
12-01-2005, 01:10 PM
$10 million a year for Garland?

I beleive it, look at what all these crappy pitchers are getting paid around MLB. It seems that going .500 will get you a 10-12 mil a year contract. I dont like Jon not signing a contract but I can understand, he can probably get more eventually.

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 01:12 PM
I beleive it, look at what all these crappy pitchers are getting paid around MLB. It seems that going .500 will get you a 10-12 mil a year contract. I dont like Jon not signing a contract but I can understand, he can probably get more eventually.

It wouldn't be surprising to see the Sox sign Jon to a long-term, 8-9-10 type of deal, maybe with a team option for say $12 in yr 4. Jon gives up about $1M/yr, gets some security against injury, and still gets to hit the market in his prime.

SSN721
12-01-2005, 01:13 PM
So in other words, were looking at 2006 as Jon Garlands last season?

Ugh, at least we didnt wait til the offseason was over before dissing management for being cheap. What about Konerkos deal?

OEO Magglio
12-01-2005, 01:14 PM
$10 million a year for Garland?
He'd get atleast 10 mill if he hits free agency.

lostletters
12-01-2005, 01:17 PM
Lets face it: Garland is being smart.

Baseball is a business, and like Konerko he has every right to test the market.

If he has another season where he wins 15+ games, his value will be VERY high the next year. Why lock yourself into a long term deal?

I would love him to play for the white sox after next year, but I can see him wanting to test the free agent market like Paulie to find his value.

He is a young pitcher, with alot of talent, who is not fragile. That is worth quite a bit in the mlb. If he has another winning season, and is seen as consistant, his value will be very high.

It's Time
12-01-2005, 01:21 PM
So in other words, were looking at 2006 as Jon Garlands last season?

:rolleyes:

wdelaney72
12-01-2005, 01:24 PM
It will be interesting to see how the Sox handle this. I don't think there's a whole lot of Brandon McCarthy's in the farm system to replace hm should he walk after 2006. Garland will get paid in 2007. He's earned it and the market will provide him the opportunity. I hope we can keep him.

The Wall
12-01-2005, 01:29 PM
Ugh, at least we didnt wait til the offseason was over before dissing management for being cheap. What about Konerkos deal?

Atleast he is not making a statement there. :rolleyes:

Mots09
12-01-2005, 01:32 PM
Gosh i think back to 2002 and 2003 who would have ever thunk 10mil for JG..

mercy

KRS1
12-01-2005, 01:41 PM
Wow, this kinda sucks, hopefully though he is just holding out for a little more money and more years.

DaleJRFan
12-01-2005, 01:46 PM
I heard Levineline's comments on the radio... and if they are true, it wouldn't surprise me if KW moves Garland in the Winter meetings to make a move for another starter (that is a part of his plan 'B'). Though, I like Garland as a player and I hope they (Sox/JG) can get a deal worked out... 3yr 6,7,8 sounds good to me...

MsSoxVixen22
12-01-2005, 01:47 PM
I hope the Sox and Jon can find something that works for everyone involved. I think Jon deserves more $$. How much more, I'm not sure. I hope he sticks around though

DaleJRFan
12-01-2005, 01:57 PM
this could be beneficial to the Sox in their hopes for repeating... if JG is pitching for a contract in 06, he'll certainly want to throw 2-hit shutouts every time he goes to the bump...

Mohoney
12-01-2005, 02:08 PM
When I was thinking about the arbitration-eligible players, I was kind of hoping that the Sox would offer Garland 3 years, $20 million, with a 4th year player option at $8 million, and that he would accept.

I have no idea what the Sox offer was, and I'm not trying in any way to insinuate that this was it. This was just something in my head.

The $7.5 MM number that people think Garland would get probably came from the insane Kris Benson contract.

Chicken Dinner
12-01-2005, 02:24 PM
He'd get atleast 10 mill if he hits free agency.

Not from the Sox. (or at least the white ones)

34 Inch Stick
12-01-2005, 02:26 PM
It will be interesting to see how the Sox handle this. I don't think there's a whole lot of Brandon McCarthy's in the farm system to replace hm should he walk after 2006. Garland will get paid in 2007. He's earned it and the market will provide him the opportunity. I hope we can keep him.

I wouldn't be shocked if Cotts was itching for a spot in the starting rotation if he has another good season.

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 02:28 PM
Not from the Sox. (or at least the white ones)

:?:

They gave $9M/yr to Garcia 1.5 years ago. If Garland has another strong season, I'd bet they're willing to go to $10-11M/yr for him.

Jjav829
12-01-2005, 02:34 PM
Someone will throw 4/40 at Garland next year. Lets face it, teams are paying out the nose for pitching. Garland knows this and would be foolish not to test the market. If he has another good year, he'll be in high demand.

Maybe. But you have to factor in that 2005 was this year. What I mean is that there is no guarantee Garland will have the same season next year. I'm not saying I expect these things to happen, but it's possible that he has a horrible 2005 . It's possible he blows out his arm before going into free agency. If either one of these things happens Garland won't be getting anything near 4/40. It's a huge risk for him to take. We'll see how much of a gambling man Garland is. My money would be on Garland eventually accepting a 3-year deal somewhere in the $21-24 million range.

kevin57
12-01-2005, 02:38 PM
Although $10M/year for Garland seems outrageously high, given how much teams are thirsting for solid pitching, any of the Sox staff (okay, not Marte) would do alright on the market.

It's also been suggested that the somewhat surprising high salaries being given to FA's this year will only trigger more of the same next year. The Cubs paid a whole lot of money for two middle relievers. They're good...but at that cost?

cbrownson13
12-01-2005, 02:48 PM
I've felt (for no specific reason) for a long time that Jon would leave via free agency when his time comes. He just seems like the type of guy that would want to pitch out west. He's a California guy and it just seems to me that he would prefer to be out there. He's never seemed to show a lot of enthusiasm or excitement for the Sox. Maybe that's just his personality, but that doesn't strike me to be the case.

salty99
12-01-2005, 03:09 PM
Remember Esteban Loaiza just got 3 years 21 mil from the A's so I am not surprised if Garland is holding out for 9-10 mil a year.

zach23
12-01-2005, 03:16 PM
Ugh, at least we didnt wait til the offseason was over before dissing management for being cheap. What about Konerkos deal?

Didn't wait? Hangar has been bitching and moaning since the last out was made in the World Series. He pouted openly that Konerko would be gone and kept predicting this was his last season here because the Sox are cheap.
This is typical for him, start bitching about something that may or may not happen a full year from now, with all the bitching coming on the heels of the Sox not only winning the World Series but also going out and getting Thome and resigning Konerko to a huge contract.
Don't worry, if Jon is signed soon he will just start bitching about Mark being gone after his contract is up in a few years. The kicker will be the day he screams at the Sox for being cheap when they don't resign Dye after he screamed all season that Dye sucks and only came here because he came cheap.
Hangar is like a broken record playing on a record player locked inside a room and blaring over a loudspeaker. It just keeps going and going and nobody can make it stop.

Taliesinrk
12-01-2005, 03:24 PM
It'll be very interesting to see how the Sox approach this situation. After just going through the whole PK situation, I wouldn't be surprised if the Sox jumped on it and offered him a long term deal this winter that seems high; that way if he does well next year, they won't have to pay abt. 15 mil. more (see: PK's new deal).

OTOH, I don't know which way would be the way to go. Like Garland's current situation, PK had his breakout year the year before he was a FA. It could have been the right move by the Sox in the PK situation, and they just got unlucky.. either way, I'll be watching..

soxfanreggie
12-01-2005, 03:26 PM
In class, of course I was working out Sox contract details that I would offer. I came up with 4 years $30 million (7.5 per year ave...likely to be a 6-7-8-9) but noted that it would probably only be a 3 year deal around 20-22 million. I do agree with some who say Jon could command $9-10 mil per year. I have faith that Burls will be around here like he says, as long as the Sox want him, and I think Burls is worth $9-11 mil. per year for what we get out of him...look for a team like the Yankee$, especially if he has another good year, to give Jon a 4 year $40 mil deal or more. After seeing them pay like...$50-60 million combined for Randy Johnson, Mike Mussina, and Kevin Brown...Garland would be a steal for them if they only had to pay him $10 mil per.

sullythered
12-01-2005, 03:30 PM
Didn't that bust-off Kris Benson get around 10 mil from the Mets? Jon is worth at least as much as him. Though, if it was Bruuuuth reporting, I don't believe it. He hasn't gotten anything right in... well ever, really.

Steelrod
12-01-2005, 03:59 PM
Someone will throw 4/40 at Garland next year. Lets face it, teams are paying out the nose for pitching. Garland knows this and would be foolish not to test the market. If he has another good year, he'll be in high demand.

...and if he reverts back, he'll screw himself. Basic baseball economics is for a young player to sign one multiyear contract to set themselves up for life. If they are as good as they think they are, they go to town on the next one. Garland will be 27-28 then and entering his prime. Remember Rocky Biddle. 1 year at 2 million instead of a multi year, next year...out of baseball!

depy48
12-01-2005, 04:22 PM
Lets not forget that Jon and Mark Buehrle are close friends. Mark could have a sizeable influence on Jon, possible persuading him to stay.

getonbckthr
12-01-2005, 04:23 PM
He doesn't want to sign the contract deal him. This could turn out like Maggs and the Sox can't afford that to happen. Maybe we could pull off A deal for Zito or something. Someone said already that they feel JG will leave as soon as he can, I agree with that comment.

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 04:28 PM
He doesn't want to sign the contract deal him. This could turn out like Maggs and the Sox can't afford that to happen. Maybe we could pull off A deal for Zito or something. Someone said already that they feel JG will leave as soon as he can, I agree with that comment.If you're looking to sell high, Jon Garland's value will never be higher. But you need to get another solid starter in return, or we'll be counting on El Dookie again.:(: I like the Garland for Vazquez deal discussed in What's the Score.

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 04:29 PM
He doesn't want to sign the contract deal him. This could turn out like Maggs and the Sox can't afford that to happen. Maybe we could pull off A deal for Zito or something. Someone said already that they feel JG will leave as soon as he can, I agree with that comment.

Zito's FA after '06. Same situation as JG, only he's been declining whereas Garland's been improving.

It's early guys. Many of these things don't work themselves out until you get a lot closer to the arb deadline.

KRS1
12-01-2005, 04:34 PM
I've felt (for no specific reason) for a long time that Jon would leave via free agency when his time comes. He just seems like the type of guy that would want to pitch out west. He's a California guy and it just seems to me that he would prefer to be out there. He's never seemed to show a lot of enthusiasm or excitement for the Sox. Maybe that's just his personality, but that doesn't strike me to be the case.

Jon doesnt seem to enthusiastic about anything, did u see when he struckout Tejada, it was a simple stare and walk back to the dugout. Thats the kinda guy he is. He knows not to get too high or to down on himself b/c there is always new business around the corner for him. Everytime I see him in the dugout he's having a good time as anyone, it's just they dont highlight him as much then as when he's pitching. It's all about the mentality u take out to the mound and his is a somber look of concentration, and then when it's time to celebrate he's all about it. I'm not going to take this as hard as some others here saying trade and the like, I just think this could have been the first meeting between the 2 parties and we layed our offer just like they layed their interests. The occasion where an agent and a GM agree right away on deal r few and far between, and to chalk this up as a loss already is a mistake.

TomBradley72
12-01-2005, 04:43 PM
Remember Esteban Loaiza just got 3 years 21 mil from the A's so I am not surprised if Garland is holding out for 9-10 mil a year.

The way teams are overpaying for pitching (Loaiza, Burnett, Eyre, Howry)...if Jon stays healthy and has another 15-18 win season...$10M/yr. is in the bank. No way would I trade him in the offseason...even if he plans on going the FA route...he will help us get another ring in 2006 and that's more important than what might happen in 2007 and beyond. If I was him...I negotiate the best possible 3 year deal I could and sign it. Piitchers are always 1 pitch away from their career taking a complete turn for the worse due to injury....a three deal would still set him up for life financially.

WestSox
12-01-2005, 04:47 PM
Someone will throw 4/40 at Garland next year. Lets face it, teams are paying out the nose for pitching. Garland knows this and would be foolish not to test the market. If he has another good year, he'll be in high demand.

Unfortunately, I agree. But I'm not sure that it's a smart move for Garland. As great as he was this year, he was mediocre from '00-'04. If he falls back to 12-13/4.60, he probably won't get 4 years/$40 million. And if he suffers an arm injury, he's screwed. If I were him, I would've taken the 3-year deal for security (assuming it was $15-20 mil range).

KRS1
12-01-2005, 04:57 PM
Unfortunately, I agree. But I'm not sure that it's a smart move for Garland. As great as he was this year, he was mediocre from '00-'04. If he falls back to 12-13/4.60, he probably won't get 4 years/$40 million. And if he suffers an arm injury, he's screwed. If I were him, I would've taken the 3-year deal for security (assuming it was $15-20 mil range).

The sad thing is some teams will still pay 10 a year for 4.6 if the guy had one stellar year, so all Jon has to do is make it through the season and he'll get that pay check.

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 05:01 PM
Unfortunately, I agree. But I'm not sure that it's a smart move for Garland. As great as he was this year, he was mediocre from '00-'04. If he falls back to 12-13/4.60, he probably won't get 4 years/$40 million. And if he suffers an arm injury, he's screwed. If I were him, I would've taken the 3-year deal for security (assuming it was $15-20 mil range).That's just it. Below .500 pitchers who had one good year in their career ARE getting offers like that: Carl Pavano, Jaret Wright, AJ Burnett, Matt Clement. Look up those guys' numbers - they're no better than Garland. Even if he has another 12-12 season, he'll still get 3 yr/$30M offers next year. Pitching is the most sought-after commodity there is, and even mediocre pitchers are getting big contracts. If I were his agent, I'd tell him he'd be nuts to accept anything less than 3 yr/$24M.

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 05:05 PM
That's just it. Below .500 pitchers who had one good year in their career ARE getting offers like that: Carl Pavano, Jaret Wright, AJ Burnett, Matt Clement. Look up those guys' numbers - they're no better than Garland. Even if he has another 12-12 season, he'll still get 3 yr/$30M offers next year. Pitching is the most sought-after commodity there is, and even mediocre pitchers are getting big contracts. If I were his agent, I'd tell him he'd be nuts to accept anything less than 3 yr/$24M.

That or a bit higher sounds about right. You're not buying out multiple years of FA, it's just 1. So you need to be a lot closer to market. Don't be fooled by Buehrle's 6-7.75-9 deal. That was signed a couple years ago. Pure salary inflation would take that to a starting salary of 7-8 mil. Add in that he's closer to FA than Mark was and you have something more like Garcia's deal.

WestSox
12-01-2005, 05:14 PM
That's just it. Below .500 pitchers who had one good year in their career ARE getting offers like that: Carl Pavano, Jaret Wright, AJ Burnett, Matt Clement. Look up those guys' numbers - they're no better than Garland. Even if he has another 12-12 season, he'll still get 3 yr/$30M offers next year. Pitching is the most sought-after commodity there is, and even mediocre pitchers are getting big contracts. If I were his agent, I'd tell him he'd be nuts to accept anything less than 3 yr/$24M.

I didn't realize that Wright and Burnett got that kind of money. Wowsers! No wonder the Yankees and Red Sox can't get to the ALCS anymore. :roflmao:

So, I guess that if Buehrle and Garcia are still under contract with the Sox in '07 (and if B-Mac becomes a decent #3), Garland might be going elsewhere.

Maybe I'm just overly-cautious with money, but after seeing what happened to Nomar a year and a half ago, I'd be pushing to get a three- or four-year deal done NOW if I were Garland. An elbow or shoulder injury this coming season would kill his free-agent value. Then again, it's possible that and KW aren't serious about re-signing him right now. Since the financial terms of the Sox's offer weren't released, it's difficult to tell.

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 05:28 PM
I didn't realize that Wright and Burnett got that kind of money. Wowsers! No wonder the Yankees and Red Sox can't get to the ALCS anymore. :roflmao:

So, I guess that if Buehrle and Garcia are still under contract with the Sox in '07 (and if B-Mac becomes a decent #3), Garland might be going elsewhere.

Maybe I'm just overly-cautious with money, but after seeing what happened to Nomar a year and a half ago, I'd be pushing to get a three- or four-year deal done NOW if I were Garland. An elbow or shoulder injury this coming season would kill his free-agent value. Then again, it's possible that and KW aren't serious about re-signing him right now. Since the financial terms of the Sox's offer weren't released, it's difficult to tell.Burnett hasn't yet, but he will. The price of pitching, even mediocre pitching, is insane. Kenny is in exactly the same situation with Garland as he was with Konerko a year ago. He's coming off his best year of his career, but you have to ask if he can repeat it. Regardless of what other teams are paying, is it worth it to the Sox to have $24M tied up in a 12-12 pitcher? Offer him a big contract now and you could be stuck. Wait a year and he could be priced out of your range. Tough decision.

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 05:40 PM
Burnett hasn't yet, but he will. The price of pitching, even mediocre pitching, is insane. Kenny is in exactly the same situation with Garland as he was with Konerko a year ago. He's coming off his best year of his career, but you have to ask if he can repeat it. Regardless of what other teams are paying, is it worth it to the Sox to have $24M tied up in a 12-12 pitcher? Offer him a big contract now and you could be stuck. Wait a year and he could be priced out of your range. Tough decision.

Difference is that hitters are a lot more fungible than pitchers. IMO you lock Garland up on a near-market-rate deal. He's trended up the past few years, is young enough that you can realistically expect him to improve, and is at a position where you don't currently have a ton of guys who can step in right away.

Plus, the rest of the team is mostly locked in for a bit and you're looking at freeing up anywhere from $5-15M in '07 from Dye/Duque/Hermie. So you've got the flexibility. Stick with your strength, give Jon his $$$ (as long as he's not being unreasonable), and focus on worrying about resigning/replacing Garcia/Buehrle after '07.

Optipessimism
12-01-2005, 05:48 PM
Offer him a big contract now and you could be stuck. Wait a year and he could be priced out of your range. Tough decision.

True, but even if the Sox offered Garland something like 3/30 or even a bit larger and he were to fall off back to his 2003/2004 numbers, someone would still take him off our hands and give us something nice for him. A team like the Yanks would probably eat his whole contract and give us a couple good prospects (if they have any) for the same reasons that you mentioned before. One good year = enough money to happily suck for the rest of your life.

Although, I doubt Garland's numbers decline much at all simply because we have a real catcher finally, much better defense, and more power in the lineup. So even if Garland is less than the same pitcher he was last year, the fact that he plays on this team will make sure he gets a good number of wins and an ERA around 4 or under.

I think the real question though is how much they'll be willing to continue to commit to the payroll if the Sox go deep into the postseason again. Personally, if it were between the two, I'd like to give that extension to Contreras.

Taliesinrk
12-01-2005, 05:58 PM
Jon doesnt seem to enthusiastic about anything, did u see when he struckout Tejada, it was a simple stare and walk back to the dugout. Thats the kinda guy he is. He knows not to get too high or to down on himself b/c there is always new business around the corner for him. Everytime I see him in the dugout he's having a good time as anyone, it's just they dont highlight him as much then as when he's pitching. It's all about the mentality u take out to the mound and his is a somber look of concentration, and then when it's time to celebrate he's all about it. I'm not going to take this as hard as some others here saying trade and the like, I just think this could have been the first meeting between the 2 parties and we layed our offer just like they layed their interests. The occasion where an agent and a GM agree right away on deal r few and far between, and to chalk this up as a loss already is a mistake.

Ahhh... yes.. the voice of reason..

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 06:01 PM
Difference is that hitters are a lot more fungible than pitchers. IMO you lock Garland up on a near-market-rate deal. He's trended up the past few years, is young enough that you can realistically expect him to improve, and is at a position where you don't currently have a ton of guys who can step in right away.

Plus, the rest of the team is mostly locked in for a bit and you're looking at freeing up anywhere from $5-15M in '07 from Dye/Duque/Hermie. So you've got the flexibility. Stick with your strength, give Jon his $$$ (as long as he's not being unreasonable), and focus on worrying about resigning/replacing Garcia/Buehrle after '07.Actually, his trend has been almost flat until 2005. He won 12 games every year like clockwork. And to answer Optipessimism, if he fell back to the pre-2005 Garland, you wouldn't find anyone to take that contract. That's why the Yankees keep paying teams to take players off their hands - they grossly overpay. You can make good arguments either way, but at the end of the day, it's a calculated gamble. I guess that's why Kenny makes the big bucks.

KRS1
12-01-2005, 06:01 PM
Just give him 5 years 45 mil and be happy that we can build around him and Bmac for thats stretch. It's not like that would be a huge payroll hit since we will be losing the salary from Dye, Pods, Hermanson, Duque, along with Mark, Freddie, and Count deals in 07'. As long as we plan to build around the core of youth we have coming our payroll should be very stable the next 5 years.

It's Time
12-01-2005, 06:01 PM
Stick with your strength, give Jon his $$$ (as long as he's not being unreasonable).

4/40 is not unreasonable.

Paulwny
12-01-2005, 06:09 PM
I don't think money will be an issue, length of contract is another story. Unless JR has another change of heart, 3yr contracts for pitchers is the max. If Garland is looking for > 3yrs , it's a toss up.

nodiggity59
12-01-2005, 06:09 PM
Just give him 5 years 45 mil and be happy that we can build around him and Bmac for thats stretch. It's not like that would be a huge payroll hit since we will be losing the salary from Dye, Pods, Hermanson, Duque, along with Mark, Freddie, and Count deals in 07'. As long as we plan to build around the core of youth we have coming our payroll should be very stable the next 5 years.

I agree except I'd want 5/$40mil because I still would only want to pay him about $6mil this year. We can afford JG if we let Count walk after next year. I know Contreras has been lights out, but he'll be 35 in '07 and it would be impossible to invest ace money in a guy that age. So you figure you lose Count and Duque - that's $10mil of the rotation off the books right there. Throw $7mil back at JG, MB, and Freddy and $3 mil at a #5 stopgap starter till BMac needs more cash. At that point, we'd need another guy from the farm to grab the #5 spot.

KRS1
12-01-2005, 06:13 PM
I agree except I'd want 5/$40mil because I still would only want to pay him about $6mil this year. We can afford JG if we let Count walk after next year. I know Contreras has been lights out, but he'll be 35 in '07 and it would be impossible to invest ace money in a guy that age. So you figure you lose Count and Duque - that's $10mil of the rotation off the books right there. Throw $7mil back at JG, MB, and Freddy and $3 mil at a #5 stopgap starter till BMac needs more cash. At that point, we'd need another guy from the farm to grab the #5 spot.

I think 7, 8.5, 10, 10, 10 is reasonable when considering the market.

longshot7
12-01-2005, 06:22 PM
Didn't wait? Hangar has been bitching and moaning since the last out was made in the World Series. He pouted openly that Konerko would be gone and kept predicting this was his last season here because the Sox are cheap.
This is typical for him, start bitching about something that may or may not happen a full year from now, with all the bitching coming on the heels of the Sox not only winning the World Series but also going out and getting Thome and resigning Konerko to a huge contract.
Don't worry, if Jon is signed soon he will just start bitching about Mark being gone after his contract is up in a few years. The kicker will be the day he screams at the Sox for being cheap when they don't resign Dye after he screamed all season that Dye sucks and only came here because he came cheap.
Hangar is like a broken record playing on a record player locked inside a room and blaring over a loudspeaker. It just keeps going and going and nobody can make it stop.

You Hangar bashers are all the same, and in fact, kinda remind me of Big Brother from 1984 - change the present, change the past too. Yes, the Sox resigned Paulie, but when they change their entire history of being cheap bastards, let me know.

Steelrod
12-01-2005, 06:22 PM
True, but even if the Sox offered Garland something like 3/30 or even a bit larger and he were to fall off back to his 2003/2004 numbers, someone would still take him off our hands and give us something nice for him. A team like the Yanks would probably eat his whole contract and give us a couple good prospects (if they have any) for the same reasons that you mentioned before. One good year = enough money to happily suck for the rest of your life.

Although, I doubt Garland's numbers decline much at all simply because we have a real catcher finally, much better defense, and more power in the lineup. So even if Garland is less than the same pitcher he was last year, the fact that he plays on this team will make sure he gets a good number of wins and an ERA around 4 or under.

I think the real question though is how much they'll be willing to continue to commit to the payroll if the Sox go deep into the postseason again. Personally, if it were between the two, I'd like to give that extension to Contreras.

That being the case, give the money to the catcher, if he's the reason for pitching success!

Daver
12-01-2005, 06:22 PM
One thing to keep in mind when you are talking about starting pitchers and contracts, GM's look at W/L, but pay more attention to innings pitched compared to age. Jon is 26, does not have a gaudy W/L record, but does record a lot of innings per season, pitchers generally reach their potential between 26-28, and for 5-6 years are at the top of their game (on average), Jon is smart to accept arbitration and test the market, by this time next year he could command 12-15 million a year, yes it is a gamble, but one worth taking, unless the Sox come up with a multi year deal that he and his agent feel is closer to market value. Jon's agent is the same as the one Paul Konerko uses, his name escapes me at the moment, Paul's deal proves the agent in not doing this to make himself the most money, but to protect the interest of his client.

The ball is in Kenny William's court.

Randar68
12-01-2005, 06:24 PM
Jon's agent is the same as the one Paul Konerko uses, his name escapes me at the moment,

Craig Landis?

Jerome
12-01-2005, 06:36 PM
I wouldn't take that if I were him either. He sees the Yankees giving Jaret Wright and Carl Pavano all that money, the market for pitching is insane. He will probably wait until after 06 and try for 10 million per year.

Unless Ozzie Guillen has another daughter he can marry off.

KRS1
12-01-2005, 06:46 PM
I wouldn't take that if I were him either. He sees the Yankees giving Jaret Wright and Carl Pavano all that money, the market for pitching is insane. He will probably wait until after 06 and try for 10 million per year.

Unless Ozzie Guillen has another daughter he can marry off.

Freddy is married to his niece.

caulfield12
12-01-2005, 07:07 PM
One thing to keep in mind when you are talking about starting pitchers and contracts, GM's look at W/L, but pay more attention to innings pitched compared to age. Jon is 26, does not have a gaudy W/L record, but does record a lot of innings per season, pitchers generally reach their potential between 26-28, and for 5-6 years are at the top of their game (on average), Jon is smart to accept arbitration and test the market, by this time next year he could command 12-15 million a year, yes it is a gamble, but one worth taking, unless the Sox come up with a multi year deal that he and his agent feel is closer to market value. Jon's agent is the same as the one Paul Konerko uses, his name escapes me at the moment, Paul's deal proves the agent in not doing this to make himself the most money, but to protect the interest of his client.

The ball is in Kenny William's court.

I think the only GM in baseball that would overpay by that much is either the NY Mets, Rangers, Tigers, LA Dodgers or Billy Beane. Who knows, maybe the Red Sox or the Cubs, trying to get revenge for the Karchner deal, lol.

I cannot think of very many pitchers with Garlands K per IP ratio that have ever received contracts of over $10 million. GMs love the big power guys, and the power arms....they always have those closet doubts about the Buehrles and Garlands of the world.

Garland could be the next James Baldwin...although he is younger and has not suffered an arm or shoulder injury.

With all these numbers being thrown around, it seems ludicrous to believe that Garland would ever be paid more than Buehrle or Garcia. It is just not going to happen. The White Sox would have more luck scrounging around for the next Loaiza of 2003 than throwing $30-40 million at Garland.

RowanDye
12-01-2005, 07:15 PM
One thing to keep in mind when you are talking about starting pitchers and contracts, GM's look at W/L, but pay more attention to innings pitched compared to age. Jon is 26, does not have a gaudy W/L record, but does record a lot of innings per season, pitchers generally reach their potential between 26-28, and for 5-6 years are at the top of their game (on average), Jon is smart to accept arbitration and test the market, by this time next year he could command 12-15 million a year, yes it is a gamble, but one worth taking, unless the Sox come up with a multi year deal that he and his agent feel is closer to market value. Jon's agent is the same as the one Paul Konerko uses, his name escapes me at the moment, Paul's deal proves the agent in not doing this to make himself the most money, but to protect the interest of his client.

The ball is in Kenny William's court.


Jon's performance in Game #3 of the ALCS certainly did not hurt his case either. Nasty..

jabrch
12-01-2005, 07:21 PM
Do you ever give up on this crap? Was it not enough that the Sox resigned Konerko to a 5/$60 deal?

Why do you still read it - or worse yet try and argue with it?

We go out and win a World Series, resign our only most significant FA (with all due respect to Frank, his expected contribution is limited), we bring back all the key players from last year, we add one of the best LH bats in the game, we surely raise payroll, and he's bitching about the same stuff still. Flight, since you have gotten here, has he changed one bit? Why would you expect him to now?

caulfield12
12-01-2005, 07:23 PM
Jon's performance in Game #3 of the ALCS certainly did not hurt his case either. Nasty..

But also showcased one of his weaknesses...he can give up the long-ball at inopportune moments. I was pretty comfortable during that Angels game (I think it was 5-2 or 6-2 then), but I just never am totally relaxed with JG on the mound, waiting for that big inning to pop up out of nowhere. This was especially the case in the second half of the season.

jabrch
12-01-2005, 07:27 PM
Same as with Paulie...

If JG wants to stay here, be a part of what we have going, and be extremely rich, JR and KW will present him that opportunity. If he wants to go elsewhere, or he wants to go for the absolute largest paycheck, and he doesn't want to be a part of what we have going on here, then he can play this season for us, prove he is worth 4/40, and then go out and get it. Either we will agree he is worth it and pay him, or I'll take our two draft picks and happily thank him for his time, and waive goodbye.

I'm not so attached to Jon Garland that him leaving after this year for FA to make money would be the worst thing in the world. I'm surely not going to criticise management for not overpaying him now after his first really good season ever. 3 years at say 21mm is a very strong offer for a guy who otherwise will get between 5 and 6 in arbitration this year. He doesn't like it - that's fine. Let's see him go out there, win 20 games, take us back to the world series, and prove he is worth more. Then he can get 4/50 next year for all I care.

I won't defend the wealthy owners, but I sure as hell won't cry for the wealthy players.

Daver
12-01-2005, 07:37 PM
I think the only GM in baseball that would overpay by that much is either the NY Mets, Rangers, Tigers, LA Dodgers or Billy Beane. Who knows, maybe the Red Sox or the Cubs, trying to get revenge for the Karchner deal, lol.

I cannot think of very many pitchers with Garlands K per IP ratio that have ever received contracts of over $10 million. GMs love the big power guys, and the power arms....they always have those closet doubts about the Buehrles and Garlands of the world.

Garland could be the next James Baldwin...although he is younger and has not suffered an arm or shoulder injury.

With all these numbers being thrown around, it seems ludicrous to believe that Garland would ever be paid more than Buehrle or Garcia. It is just not going to happen. The White Sox would have more luck scrounging around for the next Loaiza of 2003 than throwing $30-40 million at Garland.

Take a long look at the deals given to A.J. Burnett, Kris Benson, and Carl Pavano, all of them close to ten mil a year, and with another good season next year, Garland will have better numbers than all of them, in both W/L as well as total innings pitched, and has a history of being healthy, he will be able to command at least ten mil a year in a league where quality starting pitching is thin enough to read a newspaper through. Mark took a three year contract in 2004 that was close to market value at the time, knowing that he would still be in his prime when that contract was over, as did Garcia, the market price keeps going up, not down.

There is nothing more valuable in baseball than proven starting pitching, position players can be replaced far easier than starting pitchers.

caulfield12
12-01-2005, 07:37 PM
Same as with Paulie...

If JG wants to stay here, be a part of what we have going, and be extremely rich, JR and KW will present him that opportunity. If he wants to go elsewhere, or he wants to go for the absolute largest paycheck, and he doesn't want to be a part of what we have going on here, then he can play this season for us, prove he is worth 4/40, and then go out and get it. Either we will agree he is worth it and pay him, or I'll take our two draft picks and happily thank him for his time, and waive goodbye.

I'm not so attached to Jon Garland that him leaving after this year for FA to make money would be the worst thing in the world. I'm surely not going to criticise management for not overpaying him now after his first really good season ever. 3 years at say 21mm is a very strong offer for a guy who otherwise will get between 5 and 6 in arbitration this year. He doesn't like it - that's fine. Let's see him go out there, win 20 games, take us back to the world series, and prove he is worth more. Then he can get 4/50 next year for all I care.

I won't defend the wealthy owners, but I sure as hell won't cry for the wealthy players.

Let us say you had $22 million to sign a pitcher.

Would you...

1) Pay Jon Garland that amount over three years.

2) Sign Millwood, Matt Morris, Esteban Loaiza (I know he is gone, just talking about the tier of $6-9 million dollar pitchers), Jarrod Washburn, Jeff Weaver, AJ Burnett. Maybe trade for Jason Schmidt, etc.

Burnett and Millwood would be more expensive...something like $9-10 million with the way this offseason is going...Washburn, Morris, Loaiza and Weaver would be pretty similar. Washburn came up quite a bit on threads....want no part of Weaver or Morris, Weaver because he is a jackass, and Morris does not look like the same pitcher he used to be.

3) Go cheap and try to get two of the following....

Paul Byrd
Jamie Moyer
Kenny Rogers
Byung Hyun Kim

jabrch
12-01-2005, 07:40 PM
I'd take Garland, Burnett, Schmidt, Morris or Milwood. I surely wouldn't overpay JG one year before he becomes elig. for FA.


Let us say you had $22 million to sign a pitcher.

Would you...

1) Pay Jon Garland that amount over three years.

2) Sign Millwood, Matt Morris, Esteban Loaiza (I know he is gone, just talking about the tier of $6-9 million dollar pitchers), Jarrod Washburn, Jeff Weaver, AJ Burnett. Maybe trade for Jason Schmidt, etc.

Burnett and Millwood would be more expensive...something like $9-10 million with the way this offseason is going...Washburn, Morris, Loaiza and Weaver would be pretty similar. Washburn came up quite a bit on threads....want no part of Weaver or Morris, Weaver because he is a jackass, and Morris does not look like the same pitcher he used to be.

3) Go cheap and try to get two of the following....

Paul Byrd
Jamie Moyer
Kenny Rogers
Byung Hyun Kim

caulfield12
12-01-2005, 07:47 PM
I'd take Garland, Burnett, Schmidt, Morris or Milwood. I surely wouldn't overpay JG one year before he becomes elig. for FA.



Call me crazy, but I would almost rather sign Contreras right now to a two-year extension than Garland for 2-4 more years.

I think everyone makes the assumption that Jose will be gone after 2006, but he has lifetime security and stability with his family in the US, he feels VERY comfortable with Ozzie and this coaching staff, El Duque and Uribe will be around (doubt Timo)...do you really think Jose will try to get an $10-12 million dollar contract elsewhere if he has a repeat of the second half and playoffs for the entire 2006 season?

knocko94
12-01-2005, 08:07 PM
Conteras is a little too old and not far enough removed from his suckfest in NY for him to get a 10+ million multi year deal.

He's turned out great for the Sox, and I'd like it if he got an extension. Let's say, 2y/16m. He strikes me as the kind of guy that won't break down, and could pitch for a few more years. Hopefully he's not 40 years old.:o:

The big 4 of Buehrle/Garcia/Garland/Conteras can't last forever, as they will all be well paid.

caulfield12
12-01-2005, 08:13 PM
Take a long look at the deals given to A.J. Burnett, Kris Benson, and Carl Pavano, all of them close to ten mil a year, and with another good season next year, Garland will have better numbers than all of them, in both W/L as well as total innings pitched, and has a history of being healthy, he will be able to command at least ten mil a year in a league where quality starting pitching is thin enough to read a newspaper through. Mark took a three year contract in 2004 that was close to market value at the time, knowing that he would still be in his prime when that contract was over, as did Garcia, the market price keeps going up, not down.

There is nothing more valuable in baseball than proven starting pitching, position players can be replaced far easier than starting pitchers.

The problem is that all of those guys are power pitchers, whereas Jon and Mark are not. Start naming the $10 million dollar guys with .500 career records and 4-5 strikeouts (average) per 9 IP. There are not many. Greg Maddux and Glavine come to mind...but I think they struck out more batters than JG historically.

There is probably a GM somewhere that would have taken Danny Wright over Garland as little as two years ago.

Daver
12-01-2005, 08:23 PM
The problem is that all of those guys are power pitchers, whereas Jon and Mark are not. Start naming the $10 million dollar guys with .500 career records and 4-5 strikeouts (average) per 9 IP. There are not many. Greg Maddux and Glavine come to mind...but I think they struck out more batters than JG historically.

There is probably a GM somewhere that would have taken Danny Wright over Garland as little as two years ago.

I'll take a Greg Maddux/Mark Buehrle style pitcher over a high K power pitcher every day, and twice on Sunday, how many trips to the DL have Jamie Moyer, Mark and Maddux have over their careers due to arm problems?

zach23
12-01-2005, 09:13 PM
You Hangar bashers are all the same, and in fact, kinda remind me of Big Brother from 1984 - change the present, change the past too. Yes, the Sox resigned Paulie, but when they change their entire history of being cheap bastards, let me know.

Yeah, it is so much better to wallow in **** from the past that can never be changed, no matter how often you continuosly bitch about it, than to be happy for the fact that the team has won the World Series and put themseleves in a good position to have a chance at a repeat.

What's done is done, why not let it go and enjoy what is presently going on and what appears to be a pretty good future at least for the next few years? I'm not trying to change the past, I am just enjoying what we have now and not worrying about what can't be undone.
I figured there would be quite a few people that still wouldn't be happy no matter how good things got. Posts like this and Hangar's posts that pop up in every single thread that discuss any contract talks remind me of that almost daily.

When you invent that time machine to go back and change the past so you can finally be happy, let me know.

WestSox
12-01-2005, 09:20 PM
Let us say you had $22 million to sign a pitcher.

Would you...

1) Pay Jon Garland that amount over three years.

2) Sign Millwood, Matt Morris, Esteban Loaiza (I know he is gone, just talking about the tier of $6-9 million dollar pitchers), Jarrod Washburn, Jeff Weaver, AJ Burnett. Maybe trade for Jason Schmidt, etc.

Burnett and Millwood would be more expensive...something like $9-10 million with the way this offseason is going...Washburn, Morris, Loaiza and Weaver would be pretty similar. Washburn came up quite a bit on threads....want no part of Weaver or Morris, Weaver because he is a jackass, and Morris does not look like the same pitcher he used to be.

3) Go cheap and try to get two of the following....

Paul Byrd
Jamie Moyer
Kenny Rogers
Byung Hyun Kim

Millwood, Morris, Schmidt, Washburn, and Burnett would command all $10-$15 million/year on the free agent market right now. Schmidt, Morris, and Millwood have all been better than Garland over the course of their respective careers.

Jamie Moyer is washed up, Kenny Rogers is crazy, Paul Byrd is decent but not great, and Byung Hyun Kim just plain sucks.

Al Franken AA
12-01-2005, 10:37 PM
I've felt (for no specific reason) for a long time that Jon would leave via free agency when his time comes. He just seems like the type of guy that would want to pitch out west. He's a California guy and it just seems to me that he would prefer to be out there. He's never seemed to show a lot of enthusiasm or excitement for the Sox. Maybe that's just his personality, but that doesn't strike me to be the case.

Garland had a great season and was clutch in the playoffs and series. But, I see what you see--he doesn't seem to be all that thrilled about being with the Sox.

Ask yourselves this: Would you offer Garland $10 mil a year for 3-4 seasons or would you like to have that money to shop for your own pitcher?

Also, I think the Sox are offering salary arbitration to Garland. Why does a team do this when they have him under contract for a certain amount of money? Is there a benefit to this?

Thanks

Al Franken AA
12-01-2005, 10:42 PM
He doesn't want to sign the contract deal him. This could turn out like Maggs and the Sox can't afford that to happen. Maybe we could pull off A deal for Zito or something. Someone said already that they feel JG will leave as soon as he can, I agree with that comment.
I'm all for that!
Package Garland for Zito now!

Jurr
12-02-2005, 12:32 AM
The thing with Garland is the problem with championship ball clubs. You can't keep all of that talent together. The Sox currently have 4 (and if McCarthy pans, 5) aces. The law of averages says that money is eventually going to become a problem, and it definitely will start with Garland. Oh well...for '06 we will have 4 aces and some serviceable 5th starter. That's fine. Maybe Lance Broadway will keep pouring it on.

Oh well. Entropy strikes again.

Tragg
12-02-2005, 12:52 AM
I'm all for that!
Package Garland for Zito now!
"Package"? Trade man for man, perhaps. But isn't Zito a F/A soon as well?

Jjav829
12-02-2005, 01:03 AM
"Package"? Trade man for man, perhaps. But isn't Zito a F/A soon as well?

Zito is a free agent next year, as well.

And by "package" he just meant that it would take more than Garland to get Zito.

kitekrazy
12-02-2005, 02:04 AM
Gosh i think back to 2002 and 2003 who would have ever thunk 10mil for JG..

mercy

He could also be the next Loaiza. Let's see how he does in 2006. Sometimes balking at early money is not always a good thing. Remember that former Sox RF named Ordonez who said "no" to a nice contract? Greed can backfire.

rjdmichjr
12-02-2005, 02:41 AM
Just a gut feeling he will be traded next week, just a gut feeling...Don't know who or for what..KW has something up his sleeve....

Al Franken AA
12-02-2005, 02:59 AM
Just a gut feeling he will be traded next week, just a gut feeling...Don't know who or for what..KW has something up his sleeve....
If the reports are accurate that Garland has turned down a 3-year deal, then look for KW to move him and get a pitcher that could replace him for longer than one year like Vasquez of Arizona...

Garland has to do it again this year to make me a total believer that he's as good as he showed last year. I'm not totally sure that the Sox's brass are total believers in him, either.

nodiggity59
12-02-2005, 03:04 AM
Just a gut feeling he will be traded next week, just a gut feeling...Don't know who or for what..KW has something up his sleeve....

Right. Expecially if Crede's health is worse than we know.........KW may be inclined to move both.....we shall see.

Coolpapa
12-02-2005, 03:24 AM
:kermit :kermit [QUOTE=crazyozzie02]Question: Who reported this? Is it Levineline?

caulfield12
12-02-2005, 07:49 AM
Millwood, Morris, Schmidt, Washburn, and Burnett would command all $10-$15 million/year on the free agent market right now. Schmidt, Morris, and Millwood have all been better than Garland over the course of their respective careers.

Jamie Moyer is washed up, Kenny Rogers is crazy, Paul Byrd is decent but not great, and Byung Hyun Kim just plain sucks.

Burnett is the only one of those that will be over $10 million average.

Because of their ages and injury histories, Morris and Millwood will get less.

Washburn, probably $7-8.5 million.

Hitmen77
12-02-2005, 09:41 AM
If I were the Sox, I would NOT sign Garland to anything more than a 3 yr extension at this point (certainly not a 5 yr deal!). For a 4-5 yr deal with the money you guys are talking about, the Sox may as well wait til next year's free agent market.

WestSox
12-02-2005, 10:30 AM
Burnett is the only one of those that will be over $10 million average.

Because of their ages and injury histories, Morris and Millwood will get less.

Washburn, probably $7-8.5 million.

Wrong. Tom Gordon just signed a three-year/$18 million deal and he's freaking 38 and not that good.

Millwood and Morris are both 31 (not old) and have both been studs for multiple years. They may not get five-year deals, but are going to get paid well over $10 million/year in this market.

kitekrazy
12-02-2005, 11:21 AM
:kermit :kermit [QUOTE=crazyozzie02]Question: Who reported this? Is it Levineline?


So does this violate the code of conduct?

You agree, through your use of the Forums, that you will not post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, libelous, inaccurate, rude, racist, disrespectful, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, threatening, obscene, profane, pornographic, racially or ethnically offensive, invasive of a person's privacy, or which otherwise violates any law

soxinem1
12-02-2005, 12:41 PM
Amazing what a good month and a half does for your resume......

I guess we better hold on to El Duque or maybe give Hermanson the year off so he can go back to starting on '07.

If Buerhle is due 6 million this year, being a consistent winner and 7 inning pitcher, how can one justify garland getting 3/22 million.

Maybe Steinbrenner will take Burnett and Garland. Then they can pay Pavano, AJ, and Long Jon 35 mill a year for a combined 30 wins a season.

Let him walk after 2006 and let some other team put up with him being over paid. He's a James Baldwin of a different color.

caulfield12
12-02-2005, 01:02 PM
Amazing what a good month and a half does for your resume......

I guess we better hold on to El Duque or maybe give Hermanson the year off so he can go back to starting on '07.

If Buerhle is due 6 million this year, being a consistent winner and 7 inning pitcher, how can one justify garland getting 3/22 million.

Maybe Steinbrenner will take Burnett and Garland. Then they can pay Pavano, AJ, and Long Jon 35 mill a year for a combined 30 wins a season.

Let him walk after 2006 and let some other team put up with him being over paid. He's a James Baldwin of a different color.

We also could look to Cotts, but that would seriously destabilize our bullpen situation, especially if Marte is dealt. Relieving looked to be a short-term gig for Neal, and now it looks like he might be so good at it he wonīt get the opportunity to be a starter anytime soon.

soxinem1
12-02-2005, 01:16 PM
That is such an old tactic. I remember Gene Nelson was supposed to only be a temporary reliever. Then that's all he did. Once they show something in the pen, they rarely go back...

Billy Wagner was supposed to be a starter too, in fact he struck out over 200 in a season once in the minors. But he did so good in the pen they altered the plan too.

WestSox
12-02-2005, 02:42 PM
If Buerhle is due 6 million this year, being a consistent winner and 7 inning pitcher, how can one justify garland getting 3/22 million.

Because the market for decent pitchers has gone through the roof. Tom Freaking Gordon just got 3 years/$18 million to be a closer in Philly. He's 38 freaking years old and hasn't been an effective closer since the late '90s!

Buehrle signed his contract years ago. If he were a URF today, he could easily get 5 years/$60 million.

caulfield12
12-02-2005, 04:01 PM
Because the market for decent pitchers has gone through the roof. Tom Freaking Gordon just got 3 years/$18 million to be a closer in Philly. He's 38 freaking years old and hasn't been an effective closer since the late '90s!

Buehrle signed his contract years ago. If he were a URF today, he could easily get 5 years/$60 million.


You have to love what this is going to do to the Indians.

They probably wont resign Wickman (retirement), so their only option right now might be aging Trevor Hoffman.

I hope their GM falls into the trap of going for the name guy instead of re-signing Millwood and Elarton. I am pretty sure Betancourt or Riske could do a decent job sharing the position. It would make more sense to the Indians that giving Hoffman $8 million per season, adding to last years $42 million payroll.

soxinem1
12-02-2005, 04:21 PM
Somehow this needs to hold the line somewhere. Gordon and Farnsworth stand to make a ton just because the market is light.......

Buerhrle just signed his in the last year or so, so I guess the Sox lucked out.

I just cannot justify it. Some of these guys who have been paid a ton the last few years to do nothing. Scrubs like Dave Mlicki, Willie Blair, and Jose Lima have just killed the salary structure because since teams gave them ridiculous contracts a few years ago guys today are getting paid for having a few good months, not just a season.

Stoky44
12-02-2005, 04:30 PM
:kermit Who reported this? Is it Levineline?

This always gives me a laugh.

TaylorStSox
12-03-2005, 12:13 AM
The problem is that all of those guys are power pitchers, whereas Jon and Mark are not. Start naming the $10 million dollar guys with .500 career records and 4-5 strikeouts (average) per 9 IP. There are not many. Greg Maddux and Glavine come to mind...but I think they struck out more batters than JG historically.

There is probably a GM somewhere that would have taken Danny Wright over Garland as little as two years ago.

Garland is a power pitcher. He doesn't blow people away, but he overpowers hitters with that hard sinker. If you're just looking at the gun, 95 is enough to be considered a power pitcher. He hits 95 when he throws his 4 seamer, which is rare.

Garland still has the highest upside of any of our starters. His development has gone as scheduled. He has the smoothest delivery around which makes him a minimal injury threat. He rarely over throws, which helps the injury risk. He's the best fielding pitcher we have. Yes, even better than MB imo. I would move Garcia or Contreras if it meant freeing money to lock up Garland.

Frater Perdurabo
12-03-2005, 08:41 AM
:tomatoaward:

The Sox need to do everything in their power to lock up Jon Garland long-term. The starting pitching is the core of this team, and keeping a strong starting rotation is the key to remaining on top of the AL Central (or any division for that matter).

DaleJRFan
12-03-2005, 08:55 AM
Garland is a power pitcher. He doesn't blow people away, but he overpowers hitters with that hard sinker. If you're just looking at the gun, 95 is enough to be considered a power pitcher. He hits 95 when he throws his 4 seamer, which is rare.

Garland still has the highest upside of any of our starters. His development has gone as scheduled. He has the smoothest delivery around which makes him a minimal injury threat. He rarely over throws, which helps the injury risk. He's the best fielding pitcher we have. Yes, even better than MB imo. I would move Garcia or Contreras if it meant freeing money to lock up Garland.

HOORAY! Someone finally said it! JG throws a 95 mph 4seamer, a 92-94 mph 2seamer and a 90-92 mph sinker... How is that NOT power?? The only real difference between JG and other MLB "power pitchers" is that the prototypical power pitcher sets up the hitters with a hard, straight fastball and uses a a sharp breaking slider to get batters to chase out of the zone. Garland was using his change a lot this year as his out pitch, even sometimes sticking with the fastball to make guys put the ball in play.

I don't want to see KW "move" anyone to make salary room for Garland. If JR and KW want a dynasty, pay the players that got you there. Garland, Buehrle, Garcia, Konerko, Pods, AJ, Jenks, Politte, Cotts... gotta lock em up. It's not as if Garland is irreplacable, but what is the alternative?

Flight #24
12-03-2005, 10:19 AM
2005 starting rotation: Contreras(6)-Garcia(8)-Buehrle(6)-Garland(3.5)-Hernandez(4.5) = 28M

2006 starting rotation: Contreras(6)-Garcia(9)-Buehrle(7.75)-Garland(8)-McCarthy/Hernandez(5) = $35.75

2007 starting rotation: Garcia(10)-Buehrle(9)-Garland(9)-McCarthy(.33)-???? = $28M + #5 starter

2008 starting rotation: Garland(10)-McCarthy(2 - via arb/contract)-Buehrle(11-resigned) as the anchors.

It makes complete sense to resign Garland because he'll end up as the anchor on the staff past 2007, plus you'll have $10.5M freed up from the rotation alone after '06 from Contreras/Garland. Plus you'll be looking at Dye's 5M coming available after '06, likely replaced with Young/Owens.

caulfield12
12-03-2005, 10:43 AM
2005 starting rotation: Contreras(6)-Garcia(8)-Buehrle(6)-Garland(3.5)-Hernandez(4.5) = 28M

2006 starting rotation: Contreras(6)-Garcia(9)-Buehrle(7.75)-Garland(8)-McCarthy/Hernandez(5) = $35.75

2007 starting rotation: Garcia(10)-Buehrle(9)-Garland(9)-McCarthy(.33)-???? = $28M + #5 starter

2008 starting rotation: Garland(10)-McCarthy(2 - via arb/contract)-Buehrle(11-resigned) as the anchors.

It makes complete sense to resign Garland because he'll end up as the anchor on the staff past 2007, plus you'll have $10.5M freed up from the rotation alone after '06 from Contreras/Garland. Plus you'll be looking at Dye's 5M coming available after '06, likely replaced with Young/Owens.

It makes sense, but does he really want to stay here? I donīt think Jonīs affiliation with the White Sox is quite as strong as say....Konerko, Rowand, Buehrle, etc.

The question with the Konerko deal was the 5th year, which JR eventually decided to match when the gun was pointed to his head with the Angels and Orioles deals on the table.

With Garland, itīs how much are they willing to pay above $9 million per season....keeping in mind that Buehrle and Garcia would be making less than Jon. Something about that just bugs me...Garcia doesnīt deserve any more money, but Mark should get a slight raise to keep him above Garland IMO.

Not that the White Sox would be likely to do that, of course.

Tragg
12-03-2005, 10:47 AM
It makes sense, but does he really want to stay here? I donīt think Jonīs affiliation with the White Sox is quite as strong as say....Konerko, Rowand, Buehrle, etc.

Everybody says MB wants to be a Cardinal; the Cardinal fans think he wants to be a cardinal. One clown posted some trade idea (we'd get Jason Marquis - sounded fair to me - agh). The point is, what does that stuff mean? You put forth a competitive team, offer a competitive contract and see what happens.

caulfield12
12-03-2005, 10:58 AM
Everybody says MB wants to be a Cardinal; the Cardinal fans think he wants to be a cardinal. One clown posted some trade idea (we'd get Jason Marquis - sounded fair to me - agh). The point is, what does that stuff mean? You put forth a competitive team, offer a competitive contract and see what happens.

Not much...simply that a Barry Bonds or Manny Ramirez would not have thought twice about leaving a WS winner and disappointing the fans who were loyal to them (especially the little kids sitting at the dinner table asking why Paulie had left)...instead preferring to put personal over team.

PK is simply a high quality individual...one of the best things KW and OG did was purge the organization of the stagnancy that seeped in under Manuel while simultaneously dealing or freeing players like Lofton, Clayton, DAngelo Jimenez, Carlos Lee, Magglio Ordonez, Jeff Abbott, Julio Ramirez, etc., that were talent risks but were not great clubhouse or team unity contributors.

The irony is that this was Frankīs worst year statistically but best as a teammate in 17 years.

The only player KW cast aside that everyone really liked (as a person) was Jose Valentin, and now Rowand (you can make arguments about Foulke and Durham, as both apparently were not as well-liked by management).

But Thome is probably even a better teammate than Rowand.

KW learned that instead of worrying simply about high risk-high reward talent (see the names above), players like Iguchi, Dye, Hermanson, El Duque and AJ would be perhaps equally important for their contributions both on the field and in the clubhouse in contributing to the embracing of OGīs team-oriented approach to baseball, as well as their vast post-season experience. I am amazed that OG was so successfully transitioned from an offense-oriented club to a speed, pitching and defense-centered one.

ode to veeck
12-03-2005, 11:07 AM
Remember Esteban Loaiza just got 3 years 21 mil from the A's so I am not surprised if Garland is holding out for 9-10 mil a year.

that's just insane... where are all the FOBBs to explain that brilliance

jdm2662
12-03-2005, 11:31 AM
With the insane contracts pitchers are getting now, I wouldn't blame Garland one bit if he tested the market. He is putting pressure on himself to perform like he did last season to earn this. MB didn't sign the first long term contract offered to him because he felt he could get more. When he had an off year in 2003, he regretted it and signed a contract. In any case, it's just not possible to keep all the starters the Sox have now in the long run. Some one is going to be needed to let go. I'm not worried about it. Whatever happens, they still won the World Series this season...

caulfield12
12-03-2005, 11:42 AM
that's just insane... where are all the FOBBs to explain that brilliance

Irony 101

KW fleeced by Beane for Keith Foulke...but loses a potential starter in Neal Cotts that would be costing him a LOT less than he is paying Loaiza.

White Sox dig up Loaiza off the scrap heap, paying nothing but a split major-minor contract, and eventually flip him for our most valuable 2nd half player and probably the 2nd best pitcher in the AL right now.

Beane sees castoff Miguel Olivo (gee, do you want that ace set-up guy Chad Bradford back again?) get flipped, along with one of the best 2nd round draft picks in recent history, Jeremy Reed, for another starter in Freddy Garcia, a pitcher who haunted the Aīs and Beane while in the division.

Beane dumps Mulder and Hudson instead of Zito...jury still out on this one, Harden and Blanton have lots of potential if they can stay healthy...but probably the biggest blow to the team was losing Tejada offensively. Of course, if healthy, Bobby Crosby could be a VERY good player. But they are not close to fielding a team to compete with the Angels.

Not to mention the rent a closer by the year backfired as Koch, Rhodes and Dotel self-destructed. Only thing that made up for it was the very intelligent draft of Huston Street, a major league ready college pitcher.

WestSox
12-03-2005, 11:45 AM
You have to love what this is going to do to the Indians.

They probably wont resign Wickman (retirement), so their only option right now might be aging Trevor Hoffman.

I hope their GM falls into the trap of going for the name guy instead of re-signing Millwood and Elarton. I am pretty sure Betancourt or Riske could do a decent job sharing the position. It would make more sense to the Indians that giving Hoffman $8 million per season, adding to last years $42 million payroll.

Agreed. They'll get their money's worth (as much as possible in this crazy market) with Milwood if they decide to go in that direction, but I'll gladly watch them over-pay for Hoffman. They'll be screwed when he goes on the DL in July and they no longer have the resources to pull the trigger at the trade deadline.

WestSox
12-03-2005, 11:50 AM
Not much...simply that a Barry Bonds or Manny Ramirez would not have thought twice about leaving a WS winner and disappointing the fans who were loyal to them (especially the little kids sitting at the dinner table asking why Paulie had left)...instead preferring to put personal over team.

PK is simply a high quality individual...

Agreed again. He'll never be the players that Ramirez and Bonds are, but sometimes that just doesn't matter. The '05 Sox showed that good chemistry and selflessness are major factors in winning. You're better off trying to get it done as a team with, using Keyshawn-speak, a group of "flashlights" rather than one or two "stars".

caulfield12
12-03-2005, 11:51 AM
Agreed. They'll get their money's worth (as much as possible in this crazy market) with Milwood if they decide to go in that direction, but I'll gladly watch them over-pay for Hoffman. They'll be screwed when he goes on the DL in July and they no longer have the resources to pull the trigger at the trade deadline.

I think Millwood made $7 million last season, and would be a $9-11 this season, as the market is currently going. Big question will be the number of years...he never got a multi-year pact from Cleveland, and I donīt think their new owner will authorize that type of deal for a 30-something hurler.

Thankfully, the Indians donīt have the young starters like the Twins, so they might have to replace two guys.

They were smart not to overpay Howry, you canīt blame anyone for that decision.

After Hoffman, I would like nothing more than a Manny Ramirez acquisition which backfires on the team chemistry Wedge is putting in place and leaves the Indians without any payroll flexibilty nor leeway to go out and improve at the break. And the Indians would never be able to eat his egregious contract...donīt think we will see that one happen, as the Indians have to improve their pitching....well, not improve, but shore up the starting and the bullpen now.

Ramirez SHOULD be a temptation but you do not pull the trigger if you have any sense at all...which, according to those who voted him executive of the year, he does, lol.

WestSox
12-03-2005, 12:18 PM
I think Millwood made $7 million last season, and would be a $9-11 this season, as the market is currently going. Big question will be the number of years...he never got a multi-year pact from Cleveland, and I donīt think their new owner will authorize that type of deal for a 30-something hurler.


I don't know much about the current regime in the Indians front office, but somebody will definitely offer Millwood a four- or five-year deal. If Tom Gordon's 38-year-old ass can get a three-year deal, a quality starting pitcher who is seven years younger will easily get a five-year deal. My feeling is that they'll bite the bullet and re-sign Millwood because, frankly, it's the smart thing to do. The guy had a 2.86 ERA (!) over 192 innings this year. Unless he asks for waaay too much money, they're going to need him if they want to win 90+ games again next year.

kevin57
12-03-2005, 01:05 PM
I would like to see Garland locked up, but I'm not terribly optimistic, for reasons already stated:

1. Garland will want to test the market.

2. Garland will likely want more than a 3-year deal which management has been loathed to give to pitchers (and I don't blame them, but "market forces" may force them to rethink (a la Konerko)).

3. Garland does not seem to have the same "Sox Love" that other players do...one factor that I think kept Konerko in town, especially as opposed to Baltimore.

KyWhiSoxFan
12-03-2005, 01:16 PM
If they cannot sign Garland before the season starts, they will probably lose him. So, if you're KW, if you don't believe you can sign him you have to trade him this winter. I would trade him to a team that wants a No. 1 and is willing to give us their No. 4 starter in return, plus one of their best pitching prospects.

caulfield12
12-03-2005, 04:16 PM
If they cannot sign Garland before the season starts, they will probably lose him. So, if you're KW, if you don't believe you can sign him you have to trade him this winter. I would trade him to a team that wants a No. 1 and is willing to give us their No. 4 starter in return, plus one of their best pitching prospects.

We can keep him all season and take the draft picks, or we could hold out for maximum value at the July 31st deadline, like the Burnett sweepstakes this past season that never materialized. That is a risk.

It would be difficult for a contending team like the Sox to deal a top starter in mid-season, and take another teams starter in replacement. Yes, prospects, but I cant imagine getting a quality starter in return...because why would that team want to give up a pitcher if they need to add a pitcher at the deadline for whatever reason? I still think Garland is a 4 and we would be getting another 4...so we would only be adding a prospect or two. Maybe, but it would be pretty disruptive.

TaylorStSox
12-03-2005, 05:49 PM
It makes sense, but does he really want to stay here? I donīt think Jonīs affiliation with the White Sox is quite as strong as say....Konerko, Rowand, Buehrle, etc.

The question with the Konerko deal was the 5th year, which JR eventually decided to match when the gun was pointed to his head with the Angels and Orioles deals on the table.

With Garland, itīs how much are they willing to pay above $9 million per season....keeping in mind that Buehrle and Garcia would be making less than Jon. Something about that just bugs me...Garcia doesnīt deserve any more money, but Mark should get a slight raise to keep him above Garland IMO.

Not that the White Sox would be likely to do that, of course.



How do you know anything about Jon Garland's loyalty to the Chicago White Sox? We can sit here and play pocket GM and scout all day. When you start assuming things about a players loyalty to a team, you really make yourself look like an ass.

ilsox7
12-03-2005, 05:52 PM
How do you know anything about Jon Garland's loyalty to the Chicago White Sox? We can sit here and play pocket GM and scout all day. When you start assuming things about a players loyalty to a team, you really make yourself look like an ass.

Very well said.

jabrch
12-03-2005, 06:16 PM
I would trade him to a team that wants a No. 1 and is willing to give us their No. 4 starter in return, plus one of their best pitching prospects.

Not a chance in heck we trade Garland for a #4 and a prospect. Just to clarify - look at who #4s are for the majority of the teams in baseball. NOT GOOD. If Garland wants to prove he is worth a 5/55 type deal, let him do it on the field AGAIN for us. If he pitches that well, and proves worthy of that, then we will likely have another very good year, and we will get two draft picks in compensation. If we aren't doing so well at the deadline, we can trade him. And if he has a more Garland-like season (not as breakout-like as last year was) then who knows - he may end up staying.

But you go down the list of teams and list their #4 starter - I don't want to trade Garland for that and a prospect from many teams in baseball. We are playing for now - not for prospects. We didn't acquire Thome and resign PK to trade a potentially strong SP and get a weak SP and prospects.

jabrch
12-03-2005, 06:19 PM
Only thing that made up for it was the very intelligent draft of Huston Street, a major league ready college pitcher.

When Beane does it, it is intelligent...when other teams do it, it is dumb... FOBB101

Hitmen77
12-06-2005, 03:19 PM
I just read Hal's article on arbitration for Garland and that raises a question for me. If a player and a team go through arbitration, are they precluded from turning around and agreeing to a multi year deal? I know that arbitration rulings are only for a 1 year contract, but I wasn't sure if that limited the team and player from agreeing to an extension later.

Regardless of the answer, I understand Hal's point about how arbitration hearings lead to bad feelings - which lessen the possibility of an amicable agreement in the near term.

Ol' No. 2
12-06-2005, 04:30 PM
I just read Hal's article on arbitration for Garland and that raises a question for me. If a player and a team go through arbitration, are they precluded from turning around and agreeing to a multi year deal? I know that arbitration rulings are only for a 1 year contract, but I wasn't sure if that limited the team and player from agreeing to an extension later.

Regardless of the answer, I understand Hal's point about how arbitration hearings lead to bad feelings - which lessen the possibility of an amicable agreement in the near term.I don't think there's anything that precludes them from coming to an agreement later, but arbitration hearings are usually in February, so that's pretty late. Very few cases actually go to arbitration. More often they come to an agreement on a 1-year deal.

Hangar18
12-15-2005, 01:54 PM
Kenny is in exactly the same situation with Garland as he was with Konerko a year ago. He's coming off his best year of his career, but you have to ask if he can repeat it.

Regardless of what other teams are paying, is it worth it to the Sox to have $24M tied up in a 12-12 pitcher? Offer him a big contract now and you could be stuck. Wait a year and he could be priced out of your range. Tough decision.

This is an excellent Post ....... and one that I think is already being answered with the JG trade rumors floating around. Zach23 and Flight24 will like this answer .........

Hangar18
12-15-2005, 01:56 PM
If they cannot sign Garland before the season starts, they will probably lose him.

NICE prediction .......

alohafri
12-15-2005, 02:10 PM
If they cannot sign Garland before the season starts, they will probably lose him. So, if you're KW, if you don't believe you can sign him you have to trade him this winter. I would trade him to a team that wants a No. 1 and is willing to give us their No. 4 starter in return, plus one of their best pitching prospects.

Package him with Uribe and a prospect for that guy playing short for Baltimore!!!
(Yes, I know it is Tejada)