PDA

View Full Version : Garland or Garcia?


SweetnesSox
04-06-2006, 10:11 PM
I was discussing this with a few different people, wanted to know what you guys thought:

Who's a better pitcher: Jon Garland or Freddy Garcia?

I suppose we're taking into effect future seasons to... kind of a "who would you rather keep if you had to pick one" question.

MrRoboto83
04-06-2006, 10:34 PM
Garcia has been a proven performer year after year.

santo=dorf
04-06-2006, 10:37 PM
Garland needs to prove last year was the real deal. Everybody that didn't pick Garcia should take a look at each pitcher's career numbers, and then rethink their pick.

SweetnesSox
04-06-2006, 11:29 PM
Garland needs to prove last year was the real deal. Everybody that didn't pick Garcia should take a look at each pitcher's career numbers, and then rethink their pick.

what about Jon's promise? He has a much larger upside imo...

IlliniSox4Life
04-06-2006, 11:48 PM
what about Jon's promise? He has a much larger upside imo...`
Jon MAY have a bigger upside and more promise, but so does Mark Prior. In Priors case, it's a matter of staying healthy, in Jon's case, it's a matter of living up to his potential. Neither is gauranteed. Right now, Freddy has got to be the better pitcher.

StockdaleForVeep
04-06-2006, 11:59 PM
Gar gar has one good season and he's good? He's a career .500 pitcher
He's another loiaza but younger

JohnBasedowYoda
04-07-2006, 12:00 AM
Garcia has been a proven performer year after year.


True, we shouldn't judge him (Garcia) by a rough game the other day. I think he had trouble with his velocity before and bounced back. His record on the road and day games is incredible. Before 2005 Garland has been a pretty consitent .500 pitcher

doublem23
04-07-2006, 12:02 AM
what about Jon's promise? He has a much larger upside imo...
Scott Radinsky, Jon Rauch, and Kip Wells all had some killer upside too, man. Maybe we should add their names to the poll.

Though, if we're just talking about 2006, they may have the same number of wins, but Jon's ERA is a lot better.

I think this question would be a lot better if the question was who is going to be the better pitcher 3-5 years down the line? There's an argument.

StockdaleForVeep
04-07-2006, 12:04 AM
Scott Radinsky, Jon Rauch, and Kip Wells all had some killer upside too, man. Maybe we should add their names to the poll.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/news/1999/06/24/twins_whitesox/t1_caruso_ap_01.jpg
"Dont forget me skip!"
(like batman and soy, i look for any chance to insert mike caruso into a thread)

Huisj
04-07-2006, 12:08 AM
Gar gar has one good season and he's good? He's a career .500 pitcher
He's another loiaza but younger

A little tough on Garland considering he hasn't even pitched a game yet this year, don't you think? He's already a Loaiza? Sheesh, give him a chance.

Garland turned 26 at the very end of the season, and so far in his career he is 64-61 with a 4.42 ERA. He's had seasons of 12, 12, 12, and 18 wins.

Loaiza turned 26 after the 1997 season. At that point in his career, he was 21-23 with a 4.65 ERA. He had had seasons of 8, 2, and 11 wins.

In Loaiza's career, his highest season win totals are 21, 12, and 11 twice. Garland has won 18 and then 12 three times at a much younger age.

How does all this make Garland another Loaiza?

doublem23
04-07-2006, 12:09 AM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/news/1999/06/24/twins_whitesox/t1_caruso_ap_01.jpg
"Dont forget me skip!"
(like batman and soy, i look for any chance to insert mike caruso into a thread)

Nice, though, I will add that while soy milk has done nothing for mankind in its existance (except be the butt of a good Lewis Black monologue), at least Mike Caruso was part of this (http://flyingsock.com/OldComiskey/GloriousSweep.htm).

I still remember that game like it was yesterday. Hard to believe it's already been 7 years. :o:

StockdaleForVeep
04-07-2006, 02:32 AM
A little tough on Garland considering he hasn't even pitched a game yet this year, don't you think? He's already a Loaiza? Sheesh, give him a chance.

Garland turned 26 at the very end of the season, and so far in his career he is 64-61 with a 4.42 ERA. He's had seasons of 12, 12, 12, and 18 wins.

Loaiza turned 26 after the 1997 season. At that point in his career, he was 21-23 with a 4.65 ERA. He had had seasons of 8, 2, and 11 wins.

In Loaiza's career, his highest season win totals are 21, 12, and 11 twice. Garland has won 18 and then 12 three times at a much younger age.

How does all this make Garland another Loaiza?

Your right, he hasnt pitched yet, but look at this, garcia has been heralded as a great pitcher since the minors, hence why the mariners got him. He has shown in repeated seasons he can pitch very very good. Garland has one good season(well first half to be accurate) and now people wanna say he's better than garcia? This is the exact same claim people made about loiaza. He does not do anything "amazing" pitching wise, he is not a power pitcher like a clemens\jenks\pedro and is not a finess pitcher like maddux or buehrle. There's a reason why hitters tee off on him more than he shuts them out

StockdaleForVeep
04-07-2006, 02:33 AM
Nice, though, I will add that while soy milk has done nothing for mankind in its existance (except be the butt of a good Lewis Black monologue), at least Mike Caruso was part of this (http://flyingsock.com/OldComiskey/GloriousSweep.htm).

I still remember that game like it was yesterday. Hard to believe it's already been 7 years. :o:

I still remember the epic press conference that season of Aguilera leavin the twins for the sCrUBS

Also side note lookin at yer contact info, what is skype?

Bobbo35
04-07-2006, 06:49 AM
Garcia has been a proven performer year after year.

Garcia's track record outweighs Garland. I believe that Garland though has become a much more effective pitcher and has all the tools to be a better pitcher than Freddy, but not yet.

1951Campbell
04-07-2006, 08:11 AM
Garcia's better, because part of being a good pitcher is the ability to do well consistently. Jon seems to have gotten his act together to the point where he too can now be good consistently, but he still has to prove it over a few seasons.

SweetnesSox
04-07-2006, 01:00 PM
Garland's winning the poll, but all the posts are about Garcia...

anyone? anyone?
Bueller?

Railsplitter
04-07-2006, 01:07 PM
Interesting to see that it is almost a toss-up. I go with Garland all the way.

gobears1987
04-07-2006, 01:10 PM
Garcia, he is a proven winner. He just had one game and dumb dark clouds like Minnie Me are yelling trade him.:rolleyes:

house215
04-07-2006, 01:14 PM
Garland's winning the poll, but all the posts are about Garcia...

anyone? anyone?
Bueller?

Well, you think Garland is better, you tell us why.

jandm859
04-07-2006, 02:01 PM
At this pont in their careers, i have to go with Garcia. He's proven that he is a solid starter. Lets hope that last year was the start of Garland becoming the pitcher we have hoped he would become. Next start big for freddy, arm tired or arm trouble (God Forbid)

SweetnesSox
04-07-2006, 02:04 PM
Well, you think Garland is better, you tell us why.

basically just because Freddy hasn't made any steps in the past few years, and Jon took a huge one last season. I think Garcia's hit his plateau and Jon has yet to reach his.

TomBradley72
04-07-2006, 02:17 PM
Well, you think Garland is better, you tell us why.

I voted Garland.

Over the past three years:

2003: Garcia- 12 Wins, Garland: 12
2004: Garcia- 13 Wins, Garland: 12
2005: Garcia- 14 Wins, Garland: 18
Total: Garcia-39, Garland: 42

Age: Garcia- 29, Garland- 26

Garcia got off to a fast start in his career...but seems to be leveling off a bit. Garland has a nice trajectory right now...I'm not one that thinks last year was a fluke for him. If I had to pick one or the other to be part of the staff for the next 2-3 years....I'd go with Garland.

gobears1987
04-07-2006, 02:20 PM
Bradley, that is very innacurrate to go by wins. Remember the Mariners offense didn't hit worth **** during those years. He was losing games when he'd give up only 2 or 3 runs. WHy don't you compare ERAs?

SweetnesSox
04-07-2006, 02:33 PM
Bradley, that is very innacurrate to go by wins. Remember the Mariners offense didn't hit worth **** during those years. He was losing games when he'd give up only 2 or 3 runs. WHy don't you compare ERAs?

Garcia:
2005: 3.87
2004: 4.46/3.2
2003: 4.51

Garland:
2005: 3.50
2004: 4.89
2003: 4.51

basically the same over a three-year span.

miker
04-07-2006, 02:42 PM
Freddy has a slight edge because of his years of consistent quality.

If Jon can back up last season this year, he's as good or better.

Of course if we get any more outings like that disaster on Tuesday, my analysis will change appropriately.:angry:

StockdaleForVeep
04-07-2006, 02:46 PM
basically just because Freddy hasn't made any steps in the past few years, and Jon took a huge one last season. I think Garcia's hit his plateau and Jon has yet to reach his.

What do you want him to do? Garcia won 17 games his rookie season, 18 wins 2 years from that and 16 the year after that. Comin to the whitesox he went 9-4. What, u wont be satisified till he gets cy young?

TomBradley72
04-07-2006, 02:53 PM
Garcia:
2005: 3.87
2004: 4.46/3.2
2003: 4.51

Garland:
2005: 3.50
2004: 4.89
2003: 4.51

basically the same over a three-year span.

And Garcia's '03, '04 (1st half) ERA's were in a pitcher's park Safeco...side note: it's a very close call.....and I love Freddy...but if I had to chose one....I'd go with Garland......

Huisj
04-07-2006, 03:06 PM
I guess the thing that's frustrating about Garcia is that while he's fairly consistent as far as his season-to-season stats go, he can be rather hit or miss game-to-game or even inning-to-inning. It's like he loses focus now and then and then walks a bunch of guys or gets bombed for an inning or two, then gets his head together and pitches real well for the rest of the game. Some innings he just has this look about him like he just doesn't care, and then he'll turn it on all the sudden an inning or two later. This could explain why with his talent and stuff, he still has never quite been able to blossom into the full ace he looked like he could be after his first few years in the league.

SweetnesSox
04-07-2006, 03:26 PM
What do you want him to do? Garcia won 17 games his rookie season, 18 wins 2 years from that and 16 the year after that. Comin to the whitesox he went 9-4. What, u wont be satisified till he gets cy young?

no, but consistent numbers like those in a sox uniform would be nice...

depy48
04-07-2006, 03:28 PM
Garcia seems to laxidasical on the mound. I think that Jon Garland puts more effort forth, and is more coachable. Like I have always been taught..... "Ability is great, Availability is critical"
And it doesnt hurt that Garland is my favorite White Sox player.

santo=dorf
04-07-2006, 04:47 PM
I voted Garland.

Over the past three years:

2003: Garcia- 12 Wins, Garland: 12
2004: Garcia- 13 Wins, Garland: 12
2005: Garcia- 14 Wins, Garland: 18
Total: Garcia-39, Garland: 42

Age: Garcia- 29, Garland- 26

Garcia got off to a fast start in his career...but seems to be leveling off a bit. Garland has a nice trajectory right now...I'm not one that thinks last year was a fluke for him. If I had to pick one or the other to be part of the staff for the next 2-3 years....I'd go with Garland.
:rolleyes: at only looking at wins.

Danny Wright had 14 wins in 2002. 'Nuf said.

StockdaleForVeep
04-07-2006, 05:20 PM
:rolleyes: at only looking at wins.

Danny Wright had 14 wins in 2002. 'Nuf said.

and 6 wins total before and after that

Point with garcia is he has proven he can win, with or without an offense

Epark84
04-07-2006, 07:36 PM
depends on which garcia shows up

jongarlandlover
04-07-2006, 08:26 PM
Hey Sweetness! Decided to bring the argument here, too?

And of course you know who I voted for. And why I did. :D:

gobears1987
04-07-2006, 08:41 PM
depends on which garcia shows upNo, it is more like which Garland shows up, Jon or Judy. Tonight we are seeing Judy.

friarhky22
04-07-2006, 08:47 PM
Looks like Garland's got the big-inning woes back again.

gobears1987
04-07-2006, 09:13 PM
Looks like Garland's got the big-inning woes back again.I hate to say it, but Judy is back:mad:. (Actually Judy returned mid season last year)

TheOldRoman
04-07-2006, 09:16 PM
I hate to say it, but Judy is back:mad:. (Actually Judy returned mid season last year)
You're right, the season is shot because he had one horrible outing (in which he was backed by horrid defense). Oh, and his playoff outings last year, we will overlook those, too.

:dumbass:

gobears1987
04-07-2006, 10:47 PM
You're right, the season is shot because he had one horrible outing (in which he was backed by horrid defense). Oh, and his playoff outings last year, we will overlook those, too.

:dumbass:Did you see Garland after his 8 game winning streak? He was back to being Judy. This isn't new this year. He did it last year starting in late May. He would have some really amazing starts, and then during the other starts he would revert to Judy and have the big inning. You really should've known that. People were screaming at Freddy for his loss earlier in the week, but that's not the normal Freddy Garcia. The last 5 or 6 years have sadly proven this is the real Jon Garland.

Jurr
04-07-2006, 11:13 PM
Did you see Garland after his 8 game winning streak? He was back to being Judy. This isn't new this year. He did it last year starting in late May. He would have some really amazing starts, and then during the other starts he would revert to Judy and have the big inning. You really should've known that. People were screaming at Freddy for his loss earlier in the week, but that's not the normal Freddy Garcia. The last 5 or 6 years have sadly proven this is the real Jon Garland.
He didn't shake off the lapses behind him tonight, but Jon Garland is a different pitcher than he used to be. It's not fair to say that tonight is a total revert to his younger days. Garland is different now because he has added a changeup to his arsenal. His sinker was elevated by maybe an inch tonight, and that's all it takes. It cost him.

Get Back There!
04-08-2006, 02:42 AM
Just can't see myself going against Freddy on this one.....Jon's performance tonight though was a total fluke

jongarlandlover
04-08-2006, 09:02 AM
Come on guys, it was one game! Did you see how windy it was at KC last night? Can you give the guy a break, I'm sure it wasn't easy to pitch with that wind. Can we stop bashing Jon here?

Sweetness? Sweetness?! Where are you?!