PDA

View Full Version : Garland for Abreu


getonbckthr
12-07-2005, 09:07 PM
I was over at Flubs fan site, Inside The Ivy, because I like seeing what other teams fans are talking about. They have a post on there about Peter Gammons reporting the Sox and Phils discussing a deal of Garland for Abreu. Few questions here. Anybody here hear about this? If this does happen can Abreu play CF? Do we feel confident enough that El Duque can pitch the whole year? or Would this be leading to a deal involving Anderson and some prospects for a guy like Zito or Vasquez? Finally can we afford it?

ChiSoxIn06
12-07-2005, 09:09 PM
They talked about it on The HotList without much weight to it...They pretty much agreed that they wouldn't do it because Garland hasn't established himself as a 1 or 2 starter yet..keyword is yet.

nodiggity59
12-07-2005, 09:10 PM
We could probably afford it but we'll see. Our rotation would be severely weakened w/ losing JG. And I don't think we'd have the cash to add Abreu AND replace JG, so we'd be looking at Duque in the rotation. We'll see but if we have to dump JG, I'd love for it to be in exchange for a guy like Abreu.

JermaineDye05
12-07-2005, 09:12 PM
bull complete bulll, well I'm pretty sure it is cause I was wathing this on the hot stove on espn and gammons says to phillips, what if the sox offered someone like jon garland to the phils for abreu, do you see that happening? and that was all I heard now he could have been just saying that thinking it off the top of his head or he may have reported it earlier and I missed it and he was going back on that but from what I heard he never said they were discussing anything, but I started watching like 40 min after it started

HebrewHammer
12-07-2005, 09:15 PM
Honestly, if we can get a player like Abreu for Garland, why not deal him now instead of losing him? Garland's stock is at an all time high and we have the depth at SP to absorb his loss. Why not take advantage?

wsox3505
12-07-2005, 09:15 PM
Philly wont make this move because Garland can walk after the season. They want to get a #1 or #2 pitcher that is already locked up or very young.

Garland is young, but not locked up. No deal.

nodiggity59
12-07-2005, 09:21 PM
I don't know why I care about this rumor, but I just had a thought. What if we traded for Villone from the Fish (should be cheap) and moved Cotts into the rotation following a JG for Abreu deal?

Gotta love the Hot Stove:redneck

buehrle4cy05
12-07-2005, 09:23 PM
:hawk
"Where would he play???"

Left?

Actually, there's no use in speculating on it because the idea ain't goin' nowhere.

mdep524
12-07-2005, 09:26 PM
Can Abreu play CF?

Can Abreu bat second?

Are the Sox willing to take on his massive contract?

Would the Phillies take Jon Garland for him straight up?

Do the Sox have a reliable starting pitcher replacement lined up, not named El Duque?

If the answer to all of those questions are "yes," I'd say the trade has merit and I would do it in a heartbeat. The chances of those all being "yes"es are about .05%.

mdep524
12-07-2005, 09:29 PM
Philly wont make this move because Garland can walk after the season. They want to get a #1 or #2 pitcher that is already locked up or very young.

Garland is young, but not locked up. No deal. Yeah, well good luck with that. No one trades "#1 or #2 pitchers that are young/locked up." Even for Bobby Abreu.

gr8mexico
12-07-2005, 11:10 PM
Can Abreu play CF?

Can Abreu bat second?

Are the Sox willing to take on his massive contract?

Would the Phillies take Jon Garland for him straight up?

Do the Sox have a reliable starting pitcher replacement lined up, not named El Duque?

If the answer to all of those questions are "yes," I'd say the trade has merit and I would do it in a heartbeat. The chances of those all being "yes"es are about .05%. If the Sox can get Abreu for Garland then YES!!! Because Garland wont be sticking around after next year.Scottie moves over to CF and Brian Anderson can take over Dye when he leaves after the '06 season. It gives Anderson enough time to develop. The Sox could go after a pitcher like Matt Morris career #s 101 wins/ 61 losses 3.61 ERA. I know he just came off shoulder surgery but he should really improve next year.

mdep524
12-07-2005, 11:30 PM
If the Sox can get Abreu for Garland then YES!!! Because Garland wont be sticking around after next year.Scottie moves over to CF and Brian Anderson can take over Dye when he leaves after the '06 season. It gives Anderson enough time to develop. The Sox could go after a pitcher like Matt Morris career #s 101 wins/ 61 losses 3.61 ERA. I know he just came off shoulder surgery but he should really improve next year. Some of that stuff sounds OK in theory, and Bobby Abreu is worth thinking outside the box for, but I don't see it happening. First of all, adding Abreu and Morris, who wants ~$8 million/year, would skyrocket the payroll out of sight for 2006. There's very little chance the Sox would do that. That said, if Philly would really make an Abreu for Garland straight up deal, which I highly, highly doubt, you have to look at it.

gr8mexico
12-07-2005, 11:51 PM
Some of that stuff sounds OK in theory, and Bobby Abreu is worth thinking outside the box for, but I don't see it happening. First of all, adding Abreu and Morris, who wants ~$8 million/year, would skyrocket the payroll out of sight for 2006. There's very little chance the Sox would do that. That said, if Philly would really make an Abreu for Garland straight up deal, which I highly, highly doubt, you have to look at it. I guess money might be the only problem here because the Sox might not want to add that much payroll.

SoxSpeed22
12-07-2005, 11:53 PM
That would be a steal for the Phillies. They get one of our main pieces and we get a gold-glove winning outfielder that fell off the face of the Earth in the second-half. (Yes I'm aware that he won a gold-glove, the purpose of the teal was to emphasize how stupid the system is!) In case you don't believe me, after hitting 43 Homers in the Home run derby...
AVG-.260, HR-6, RBI-44, BB-50 (I like that), K-69 compared to,
AVG- .307, HR-18, RBI-58, BB-67, K-65 (In 58 more ABs)
I think Abreu would fit in well in the Cell, but our starters are much more important, now that we filled our lefty need.
And one more thing, stop making these threads about who to put in center.
EDIT: The last sentence is the main reason I responded to this thread.

HotelWhiteSox
12-08-2005, 12:40 AM
I was watching this, there's nothing to it, they were going through a segment where Phillips was predicting on where players would end up. Gammons gave him a hypothetical on if he would do Abreu for Garland if he was the Phillies' GM and he said no because he would want someone better than Garland. Gammons thought of it on the spot since Phillips said the Phillies were looking for a stud pitcher to trade Abreu for, nothing to it.

Fredsox
12-08-2005, 06:16 AM
I was under the impression that we won the WS because of our pitching staff. We have a unique opportunity to field a BETTER pitching staff this year the way we sit right now and, oh by the way, we solidified our offense as well.

I cannot think of how acquiring Abreu would improve our chances of repeating as champions in 2006 by sending ANY of our starting pitching. As far as Garland walking in 2007, let's worry about that later. I want another ring in 2006.

chitownhawkfan
12-08-2005, 06:47 AM
I was under the impression that we won the WS because of our pitching staff. We have a unique opportunity to field a BETTER pitching staff this year the way we sit right now and, oh by the way, we solidified our offense as well.

I cannot think of how acquiring Abreu would improve our chances of repeating as champions in 2006 by sending ANY of our starting pitching. As far as Garland walking in 2007, let's worry about that later. I want another ring in 2006.

Thank you FredSox I couldnt have said it any better, as for changing the outfield...

:dye: :pods: :anderson:
WE ALREADY HAVE AN OUTFIELD!

doublem23
12-08-2005, 08:31 AM
Eh, it's just one of those deals that makes sense until you step back into reality and re-examine it.

GoSox2K3
12-08-2005, 09:30 AM
I was under the impression that we won the WS because of our pitching staff. We have a unique opportunity to field a BETTER pitching staff this year the way we sit right now and, oh by the way, we solidified our offense as well.

I cannot think of how acquiring Abreu would improve our chances of repeating as champions in 2006 by sending ANY of our starting pitching. As far as Garland walking in 2007, let's worry about that later. I want another ring in 2006.

Yes, thank you.

I guess fans need to fill the offseason void somehow. Now that all the Juan Pierre trade rumors are over, we have apparently moved on to *sigh* Jon Garland trade rumors.

pythons007
12-08-2005, 09:49 AM
I don't think we need to tweak anything else for this team. This is our team for next year, PERIOD.

C A.J.
1B Paulie
2B Iguchi
SS Uribe
3B Crede
OF Pods
OF Anderson
OF Dye
DH Thome

SP MB
SP Garcia
SP Jon G
SP Contreras
SP McCarthy

veeter
12-08-2005, 10:12 AM
The scary or stupid thing about this thought is, here we would go again, being a slugging team. Instead of C.Lee it would be Abreu. Let the Garland thing play out and hopefully you can sign him to a deal. But to trade him for a big bopper makes no sense. But like 98% of what is said in the off season, it's B.S.

getonbckthr
12-08-2005, 10:19 AM
Yes, thank you.

I guess fans need to fill the offseason void somehow. Now that all the Juan Pierre trade rumors are over, we have apparently moved on to *sigh* Jon Garland trade rumors.
Garland will be a free agent at the end of the next season. It appears he won't come back and will probably wanna go back close to home and/or get a huge deal (thanks Toronto). His value is very high right now. If he next season pitches like the past he loses that trade value but will maintain a high FA signing cost. Yes its nice to have the mindset of only worring for the upcoming season, but it wouldn't hurt to set the groundwork for a long term reign at the top. Thats the only reason I am concerned about this. Also lets say we got Abreu for Garland and and a couple of prospects. Garland through arbitration will get around 6-7 million, Abreu will get 13. The added salary there would be about 6 million. To clear that amount deal El Duque. I know he is injury prone and gets 6 million. However you will always find a team in need of pitching (Yankees had interest last year). Your probably saying but we only 4 pitchers now! Thats where the newly expendable Brian Anderson comes into play. Pittsburgh has a ton of major league ready pitching talent. I propose Anderson for Oliver Perez. Salaries are a wash. Perez wouldn't be a free agent until 2008.

getonbckthr
12-08-2005, 10:29 AM
The scary or stupid thing about this thought is, here we would go again, being a slugging team. Instead of C.Lee it would be Abreu. Let the Garland thing play out and hopefully you can sign him to a deal. But to trade him for a big bopper makes no sense. But like 98% of what is said in the off season, it's B.S.
Bobby Abreu career average is 20 pts higher, averages 20 sb's more a year, plays a gold glove OF, haven't heard anything in regards of being a bad guy in the clubhouse, plus he goes balls out every play. A comparison of Lee to Abreu is an insult to Bobby Abreu.

BeviBall!
12-08-2005, 10:48 AM
Abreu is 5-tool. If you can get a player of this quality for a Garland, you run, don't walk, to make it. This said, no way is there an ounce a truth to this.

veeter
12-08-2005, 10:54 AM
Bobby Abreu career average is 20 pts higher, averages 20 sb's more a year, plays a gold glove OF, haven't heard anything in regards of being a bad guy in the clubhouse, plus he goes balls out every play. A comparison of Lee to Abreu is an insult to Bobby Abreu.That's fine and I think Abreu is great. But forsaking pitching for more offense is just stupid. refer back to the 2001-2004 white Sox. How did we just win the Worls Series. Pitching, pitching, pitching.

getonbckthr
12-08-2005, 10:57 AM
That's fine and I think Abreu is great. But forsaking pitching for more offense is just stupid. refer back to the 2001-2004 white Sox. How did we just win the Worls Series. Pitching, pitching, pitching.
I hear what your saying but I would hate to lose Garland for nothing. Plus, as I said earlier, I think we could swing Anderson to PITT for Oliver Perez who can be a dominating LHP and struggled last year due to an injury (punching a wall).

veeter
12-08-2005, 11:02 AM
I hear what your saying but I would hate to lose Garland for nothing. Plus, as I said earlier, I think we could swing Anderson to PITT for Oliver Perez who can be a dominating LHP and struggled last year due to an injury (punching a wall).But why would Pitt trade a good, young, cheap LEFTY for Anderson?

getonbckthr
12-08-2005, 11:05 AM
But why would Pitt trade a good, young, cheap LEFTY for Anderson?
They have plenty of young stud pitchers ready, plus it would give them a young stud to put somewhere in the OF. It would benefit both teams. Also I checked a few depth charts. 2 of them don't even have Perez as a starter next year, which I assume would make him available.

veeter
12-08-2005, 11:11 AM
They have plenty of young stud pitchers ready, plus it would give them a young stud to put somewhere in the OF. It would benefit both teams. Also I checked a few depth charts. 2 of them don't even have Perez as a starter next year, which I assume would make him available.Well if he can't even crack the Pirate rotation, how do you consider him a suitable replacement for Garland?

Ol' No. 2
12-08-2005, 11:12 AM
But why would Pitt trade a good, young, cheap LEFTY for Anderson?Don't you LOVE trade ideas that rely on the other team being stupid?:redneck

getonbckthr
12-08-2005, 11:15 AM
Well if he can't even crack the Pirate rotation, how do you consider him a suitable replacement for Garland?
2004- 12-10 2.98 era 239 k's.
2005(injured)- 7-5 5.85 era 97 k's.

veeter
12-08-2005, 11:29 AM
Don't you LOVE trade ideas that rely on the other team being stupid?:redneckExactly.