PDA

View Full Version : Sox-Ranger idea


getonbckthr
12-12-2005, 01:11 PM
Garland for Benoit and Mathews jr (and maybe a prospect).
The way I look at it from our point of view. We get something for Garland, and also it allows El Duque and Bmac to pitch in the rotation. Benoit can handle the 5th spot when El Duque gets hurt. Matthews give a solid, veteran backup OF, who can play CF regularly if Brian Anderson isn't working out. From the point of view of Texas. They have alot of depth in the OF and need a proven top of the rotation pitcher. With thier pocketbook and with Jon's age they can give him a 5/60-65 deal right now, or they can wait til after the season and pay him. Personally I think its a deal that would work for both teams. Who knows Benoit might be able to find what his potential by leaving Texas.
Combined Mathews and Benoit would make 2 million dollars. Garland following arbitration hearings will probably get around 7-9 million. Length remaining on current contracts, Mathews still has 2 years remaining until he is a free agent, Benoit still has 4 years left. Just an idea.

MERPER
12-12-2005, 01:13 PM
Benoit and Matthews are scrubs... at this time, Garland's value is at its peak... if we are going to trade him before the season begins, KW better get a helluva lot more than a backup OF to sit on the bench and a pure No. 5 starter with very little upside...

AWFUL TRADE IDEA

NardiWasHere
12-12-2005, 01:16 PM
There is another thread in What's the Score that talks about a package with Garland as the centerpiece to get Tejada.

... BUT, I like your proposal better!:D:

samram
12-12-2005, 01:18 PM
Can't the Sox get anybody further down their depth chart than those guys? They have to have a 10th outfielder and a 29 year old AAA pitcher that the Sox could get instead. Odibbe McDowell should be available.

getonbckthr
12-12-2005, 01:20 PM
Can't the Sox get anybody further down their depth chart than those guys? They have to have a 10th outfielder and a 29 year old AAA pitcher that the Sox could get instead. Odibbe McDowell should be available.
Mathews was their starting CF last season. Benoit has the potential to be a solid pitcher, his problem is pitching in Texas.

Banix12
12-12-2005, 01:23 PM
Garland for Benoit and Mathews jr (and maybe a prospect).
The way I look at it from our point of view. We get something for Garland, and also it allows El Duque and Bmac to pitch in the rotation. Benoit can handle the 5th spot when El Duque gets hurt. Matthews give a solid, veteran backup OF, who can play CF regularly if Brian Anderson isn't working out. From the point of view of Texas. They have alot of depth in the OF and need a proven top of the rotation pitcher. With thier pocketbook and with Jon's age they can give him a 5/60-65 deal right now, or they can wait til after the season and pay him. Personally I think its a deal that would work for both teams. Who knows Benoit might be able to find what his potential by leaving Texas.
Combined Mathews and Benoit would make 2 million dollars. Garland following arbitration hearings will probably get around 7-9 million. Length remaining on current contracts, Mathews still has 2 years remaining until he is a free agent, Benoit still has 4 years left. Just an idea.


Hell no. If I'm trading Garland I'm getting comperable talent in return. That prospect had better be damn close to a sure thing to trade a solid middle of the rotation starter for a journeyman OF and a back of the rotation swingman. Especially a pitcher who is 28 and has bounced from the big club and AAA for five years, last season as a swingman. His potential is fading.

There are far superior, younger pitchers, even just talking in terms of potential, that could be acquired for Jon Garland. Saving money is one matter, giving a solid major league pitcher away for players that could very well be on the scrapheap in two months is completely different.

getonbckthr
12-12-2005, 01:27 PM
It's obvious we need to deal Garland instead of losing him for nothing. Other teams realize this as well. Why would they give top talent for Garland. Like I saw 1 thread Garland and Uribe for Tejada. Baltimore would be crazy to do that deal. Deal a superstar for Uribe who fields as well as Tejada but with a weaker bat and a pitcher who could walk at the end of the season. What exactly do you guys see as the market for Garland, I just can't picture it being very strong.

miker
12-12-2005, 01:27 PM
Odibbe McDowell should be available.:rolling:

wdelaney72
12-12-2005, 01:29 PM
Dealing a guy before he turns into a FA just to get a few prospects are the actions of a team not in WS contention. We're trying to win another WS. Garland stays.

Banix12
12-12-2005, 01:34 PM
It's obvious we need to deal Garland instead of losing him for nothing. Other teams realize this as well. Why would they give top talent for Garland. Like I saw 1 thread Garland and Uribe for Tejada. Baltimore would be crazy to do that deal. Deal a superstar for Uribe who fields as well as Tejada but with a weaker bat and a pitcher who could walk at the end of the season. What exactly do you guys see as the market for Garland, I just can't picture it being very strong.

Even if they wouldn't give up full value for Garland, there are plenty of teams that would give more up than a 31 year old OF who has been on 6 teams in 7 major league seasons and a 28 year old fading prospect who is two years older than Garland.

I don't think it is an obvious need to deal Garland. If he walks next season I would be OK with it as long as he helped pitch the team to the playoffs again next season. I would be willing to take that risk. Teams however will give up top talent for Garland because 1)it can help them win next season and there are very few good pitchers on the current market 2)they get a whole season to try to sign him to an extension without other teams bidding for him. If a high market team trades for him it could very well happen.

They would at least give up more than the garbage you are proposing.

SoxSpeed22
12-12-2005, 01:35 PM
:anderson:"Can't you do better than that?"

CHIsoxNation
12-12-2005, 01:39 PM
It's obvious we need to deal Garland instead of losing him for nothing. Other teams realize this as well. Why would they give top talent for Garland. Like I saw 1 thread Garland and Uribe for Tejada. Baltimore would be crazy to do that deal. Deal a superstar for Uribe who fields as well as Tejada but with a weaker bat and a pitcher who could walk at the end of the season. What exactly do you guys see as the market for Garland, I just can't picture it being very strong.

There is nothing "obvious" about dealing Garland. This team is built to win now and Garland is a key component to winning again. I'd rather see him have a killer season, win another championship and walk at the end of the season then to be traded for a couple of scrubs on the Rangers. The SOX have enough talent in the farm to bring someone up to fill in for Garland if they need to next year. Not to mention they might be able to grab someone from free agency or move Cotts back into the starting roll.

I don't know why so many people feel it's necessary to trade Garland. :dunno:

Chisox003
12-12-2005, 01:42 PM
Eww..... :o:

Getonbackthr, some, wait no, all of your trade proposals are just mind boggling....:?:

Optipessimism
12-12-2005, 03:18 PM
There's no reason to trade Jon unless we get back something that would make it worthwhile. If we can land another big name bat then I'm all for it, but I doubt KW has a sign outside his office that says 'Free Erotic Backrubs.'

Tragg
12-12-2005, 07:13 PM
I compare the Burnett ideas in July - we GIVE top flight young talent for 2 months of a free agent to be - to the ideas we see now - we GET another grizzled mediocre vet and a promising pitcher for a free agent to be....and wonder... why?

ATXBMX
12-12-2005, 07:48 PM
:?:

These trade threads just get worse and worse.

chaotic8512
12-12-2005, 07:57 PM
My guess is that everyone's getting afraid due to the fact that Garland has turned down at least one 3-year offer, and everyone's already assumed the Sox are not going to pick him back up regardless. I hardly know the guy, but if I had to guess, Garland is just determined to show he can do better than his 2001-2004, that he'll continue putting up years comparable to 2005. He, therefore, is waiting until the year passes so he can prove himself. His value will increase if such were to occur, but I have a feeling he would take a lesser offer (albeit only slight less) from us given the chance. I'm not ready to throw full support behind the idea of him coming back at increased salary after '01-'04, but if he puts up another '05-like year, I'm all for it. Hell, even halfway between the two would be alright... it's not like Garland's ever going to be anything more than a #2 or #3 starter.

Crede_Fan
12-12-2005, 08:15 PM
I'm confused. Aren't we trying to repeat? If so, why would we trade the guy that won 18 games, Pitched in the All Star game, won 1 ALCS complete game, and won 1 WORLD SERIES game? :rolleyes:

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2005, 09:36 PM
I'm confused. Aren't we trying to repeat? If so, why would we trade the guy that won 18 games, Pitched in the All Star game, won 1 ALCS complete game, and won 1 WORLD SERIES game? :rolleyes:If you figure it out, let me in on it.