PDA

View Full Version : Jon Garland- Making it look easy.


veeter
05-17-2007, 05:40 PM
Garland made his debut in 2000, in a game where the Sox wore throw back 1967 uniforms. Why that matters, I don't know, but I remember it for some reason. He was 20, the youngest player in the Bigs. Now only 27, IMO, he has become one of the smartest pitchers in baseball. Without posessing dominant stuff, all he does is win. He's nearly been dealt to the Angels, Rangers and Astros. Why? I have no clue. He wins, he's durable, post-season tested, a team player and not money hungry. I know he's locked up through 2008, but what the heck, I suggest Kenny locks him up beyond that. Garland, Buerhle, and Danks should be our rotation's core for a long time.

sox1970
05-17-2007, 05:44 PM
Garland made his debut in 2000, in a game where the Sox wore throw back 1967 uniforms. Why that matters, I don't know, but I remember it for some reason. He was 20, the youngest player in the Bigs. Now only 27, IMO, he has become one of the smartest pitchers in baseball. Without posessing dominant stuff, all he does is win. He's nearly been dealt to the Angels, Rangers and Astros. Why? I have no clue. He wins, he's durable, post-season tested, a team player and not money hungry. I know he's locked up through 2008, but what the heck, I suggest Kenny locks him up beyond that. Garland, Buerhle, and Danks should be our rotation's core for a long time.

Agreed, plus Gio Gonzalez.

Unblyleven Bread
05-17-2007, 06:16 PM
I agree, I think Garland is underrated around here. Him, Buehrle and Danks give us an anchor for years to come.

veeter
05-17-2007, 06:17 PM
I agree, I think Garland is underrated around here. Him, Buehrle and Danks give us an anchor for years to come.And you sir, get the best user name award.

JB98
05-17-2007, 06:24 PM
Garland made his debut in 2000, in a game where the Sox wore throw back 1967 uniforms. Why that matters, I don't know, but I remember it for some reason. He was 20, the youngest player in the Bigs. Now only 27, IMO, he has become one of the smartest pitchers in baseball. Without posessing dominant stuff, all he does is win. He's nearly been dealt to the Angels, Rangers and Astros. Why? I have no clue. He wins, he's durable, post-season tested, a team player and not money hungry. I know he's locked up through 2008, but what the heck, I suggest Kenny locks him up beyond that. Garland, Buerhle, and Danks should be our rotation's core for a long time.

I agree, but FWIW, the organization definitely considers Vazquez part of the core, given his recent contract extension.

Daver
05-17-2007, 06:53 PM
I agree, I think Garland is underrated around here. Him, Buehrle and Danks give us an anchor for years to come.

Garland, and Danks are under contract for next year, Mark is not.

RockyMtnSoxFan
05-17-2007, 07:03 PM
I agree. I think that pitchers like Garland are a rare commodity. He's not a big name, but he's become remarkably consistent. He's young, no injury history, not real expensive ... I don't know why KW wanted to trade him, but I'm very glad it fell apart. I have an Astros friend who wishes the deal had been completed.

JB98
05-17-2007, 07:04 PM
I agree. I think that pitchers like Garland are a rare commodity. He's not a big name, but he's become remarkably consistent. He's young, no injury history, not real expensive ... I don't know why KW wanted to trade him, but I'm very glad it fell apart. I have an Astros friend who wishes the deal had been completed.

Garland is just an ideal No. 3 starter. I've always supported him. I'm glad he's still here, and I hope he stays the rest of his career.

JGarlandrules20
05-17-2007, 08:14 PM
He wins, he's durable, post-season tested, a team player and not money hungry.

I remember before he signed his contract extension, a lot of people were on him for being "money-hungry." Right after all that, he signed a very nice 3 year deal.

He doesn't get enough credit for being a good guy, not to mention a solid pitcher.

veeter
05-17-2007, 08:20 PM
I remember before he signed his contract extension, a lot of people were on him for being "money-hungry." Right after all that, he signed a very nice 3 year deal.

He doesn't get enough credit for being a good guy, not to mention a solid pitcher.That was right after the championship. He was a free agent and could have gotten much more. Kenny gave he and Contreras an ultimatum. They both signed.

Madscout
05-18-2007, 12:06 AM
I was at the game today and the only thing I didn't like was how he got behind in a lot of counts. There were a lot of places where he could have gotten in trouble where the D bailed him out, especially witht those double plays. He also had several walks. But it was funny. I didn't get the feeling that I usually get when I see a pitcher throwing a lot of balls. It was almost like he was forcing their hitters to be patient, and in a lot counts where he was behind he got a strike or two for free because they were already thinking walk.

Iwritecode
05-18-2007, 12:22 AM
I was at the game today and the only thing I didn't like was how he got behind in a lot of counts. There were a lot of places where he could have gotten in trouble where the D bailed him out, especially witht those double plays. He also had several walks. But it was funny. I didn't get the feeling that I usually get when I see a pitcher throwing a lot of balls. It was almost like he was forcing their hitters to be patient, and in a lot counts where he was behind he got a strike or two for free because they were already thinking walk.

That's called being effectively wild.

TheOldRoman
05-18-2007, 12:27 AM
That was right after the championship. He was a free agent and could have gotten much more. Kenny gave he and Contreras an ultimatum. They both signed.
Correction - he would have been a free agent after 06. Instead of taking the $4 mil or whatever he would have made last year and taking a chance that he would not get injured and screw himself over, he took the three year deal, will get $27 mil, and will get to test the market after 08 if healthy. I think it was the right move by him.

balke
05-18-2007, 12:37 AM
I was just reminded in another thread of the whole deal with Garland. People thought he was "too cocky" and didn't like that he wanted more support from the team offensively. Mod edit, removing Garland nickname that shall not be repeated. Be warned. Yeah, I wish it would've been modded back when people actually used it. it was just as ridiculous then.

I always liked his confidence, and thought his words were misinterpreted. He's a pitcher who believes in his talent, and who wants to win. That has led him to be the most winningest pitcher the past 3 seasons, and this on a team with some hitting droughts.

I would love to see this team go deep into the future with Garland, Buehrle, and possibly Danks. That said, these are two pitchers who need great D's around them, as they induce a lot of groundouts and Double plays.

BanditJimmy
05-18-2007, 12:48 AM
Garland is a solid #3 pitcher in a GOOD rotation.


I think it is more important to keep Buehrle long term than it is to keep Garland. The two best pitching prospects we have (Danks and Gio) are LH and can learn a lot by being under Buehrle's wing as already shown by Danks.

If we have Buehrle, Danks, & Gio for the next 5 years, the AL central is going to be in trouble because the best hitting in this division is LH. Some teams cannot find 1 LH starter to plug into their rotation.... we would have 3 good ones.

If signing Buehrle to a 5 year deal means we have to move Garland in a trade this off-season, then you have to do it IMO.

balke
05-18-2007, 01:08 AM
Garland is a solid #3 pitcher in a GOOD rotation.


Garland should've started the season as the ace IMO. Right now I would say the top 3 pitchers rank

Buehrle
Garland
Contreras

And I don't think they are seperated by much. By seasons end, Garland will probably have the most wins again. If that happens you have to wonder if he really is our ace.

Foulke You
05-18-2007, 03:11 AM
Garland made his debut in 2000, in a game where the Sox wore throw back 1967 uniforms. Why that matters, I don't know, but I remember it for some reason.
I remember his debut as well. He did ok for a rookie. He was making a spot start for the injured Cal Eldred. It was against Kansas City in Kaufman Stadium if I remember correctly. He also wore #52 for his debut and his first couple years on the Sox. I don't remember the 1967 uniforms though but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Frater Perdurabo
05-18-2007, 07:03 AM
I too think Garland, Buehrle, Vazquez and Danks are the "core" if the Sox want to remain competitive for the next 5-10 years.

SBSoxFan
05-18-2007, 09:59 AM
That's called being effectively wild.

That's called throwing into a teacup.

It appears Jon is poised to go on one of those 8 game winning streaks he's had the last couple of years.

puckereduppiet
05-18-2007, 10:30 AM
his stats' say it all.
go jonnnneeee!:cool:

veeter
05-18-2007, 11:03 AM
Garland is a solid #3 pitcher in a GOOD rotation.


I think it is more important to keep Buehrle long term than it is to keep Garland. The two best pitching prospects we have (Danks and Gio) are LH and can learn a lot by being under Buehrle's wing as already shown by Danks.

If we have Buehrle, Danks, & Gio for the next 5 years, the AL central is going to be in trouble because the best hitting in this division is LH. Some teams cannot find 1 LH starter to plug into their rotation.... we would have 3 good ones.

If signing Buehrle to a 5 year deal means we have to move Garland in a trade this off-season, then you have to do it IMO.Signing Mark and keeping Garland have nothing to do with eachother. Garland is signed through 2008.

Iwritecode
05-18-2007, 11:10 AM
That's called throwing into a teacup.

It appears Jon is poised to go on one of those 8 game winning streaks he's had the last couple of years.

I didn't get to see any of the game. Was it a really tight strike zone?

SBSoxFan
05-18-2007, 11:13 AM
I didn't get to see any of the game. Was it a really tight strike zone?

Hawk sure thought so, as did I. It did seem to be biased to the yanks as well. I think someone else posted it looked tight throughout the series.

hawkjt
05-18-2007, 01:05 PM
always have been a garland fan.. and he has proven kenny and co. correct by just being the most dependable starter over the last three years.. I really have a sense of confidence when he takes the mound.. he has great mound presence, fields his position spectacularly well, is extremely durable , and never points fingers..

He has worked faster the last three years which I think is an important adjustment he made with burls as an role model..

he should be a fixture on this sox staff for many year, I hope.. an anchor guy
along with burls.. with danks, and javvy.. we are tough for years to come.

Pitchers that go 200+ innings year after year are sooo valuable, you just have to keep them.