Will the real Jon Garland please stand up?

[CluelessJoe1919]

With the rate pitchers are getting paid now, Garland would be smart to test the market. And the Sox would be smart to deal him now.

[KRS1]

Originally Posted by asindc

This is why I think the Sox offer is fair. It is based on his entire career, not just last year. Besides, I think JG caught a bit of fortune during playoffs with the long layoff. His MO has been to wear down towards the end of the season. The layoff allowed him to get a second wind. Point being, he faded down the stretch again this year, so there's no indication that he won't do it consistently in the future since he has consistently done so before, even in a career year.

I'm not blasting him for not taking the contract, but I'd lose much respect for him if he blasted the team for not offering more.

He did fade down the stretch but he should have gotten at least 4 more wins by my count. I know shoula woulda coulda BS, but when your team doesnt score during 0,0,3,1 run outings its kinda hard to win.

[asindc]

Originally Posted by KRS1

He did fade down the stretch but he should have gotten at least 4 more wins by my count. I know shoula woulda coulda BS, but when your team doesnt score during 0,0,3,1 run outings its kinda hard to win.

Fair point. But I do think the offer is fair.

[KRS1]

Originally Posted by asindc

Fair point. But I do think the offer is fair.

We dont really know the exact offer just that it was between, 3 yrs 21-25mil, and thats a pretty broad spectrum. I personally think with the market he's worth as much a 9 per, but we probably wont give him that, thus making a trade the smartest thing to do.

[Goose]

Originally Posted by mweflen

Konerko did the same thing, and his equation was probably 25% A, 50% B, 25% D. I don't see anyone here ripping him a new one for taking $12mil from us when it might be better for the team if he took $10, or had deferred $$, or whatnot.

I disagree. PK did NOT do the same thing. Actually, the situations are completely different. The SOX were the ones that wanted to wait on PK's contract. If KW would have gone to PK in Spring Training, none of this would have happened to him. He would have accepted the contract and played the season. The Sox waited and they had to pay the price for an exceptional postseason. Dem's da breaks, and KW understood that.

Jon's situation is that an offer was maid and refused.

[WhiteSoxFan84]

Originally Posted by miker

So that means he should take less money (in theory) to stay with the White Sox?

No, it just kills your theory.

Originally Posted by Ol' No. 2

Nevermind the fact that the team tried to trade him at least twice and the fans booed him repeatedly up until this year.

It's called tough love. It's also called being a fan that cares. I know you don't mean anything negative about the fans when you say what you said, but if you suck, you will get booed. Just like how we will cheer our asses off for you if you do good.

Originally Posted by mweflen

I sure as hell know I'd relocate to Boo-Foo Montana for a job that promised to pay me a million bucks more than I make now. And I love Chicago, would never want to move.

Let's say you currently make $250,000 a year. If a company offered you a $1 mill more, that's a 400% raise. If you're making $9 million a year and another company offers you $1 million more, that's a 11% increase. Now honestly, 400%, I understand, but is 11% worth changing so much in your life? I know he doesn't live in Chicago during the offseason, but the regular season is a huge chunk of his life.

[Steelrod]

I have never understood the system.
You draft someone, give them a bonus, then pay them to go to your minor leagues, where you pay your coaches to make them better, then you bring them up, your big league coaches are paid to work with them, they sometimes succeed, sometimes fail. If they succeed, they hold you up for money or leave. If they fail, you've wasted all money spent on them, as well as all money spent on the 100's that failed.
I almost forgot, you spent millions scouting the world to find them.
I almost forgot, if you pay them a lot and they play badly, you lose, If they play well, they want to rework their contract.
Why would you expect players that pan out to be loyal?

[Goose]

Originally Posted by Steelrod

I have never understood the system.
You draft someone, give them a bonus, then pay them to go to your minor leagues, where you pay your coaches to make them better, then you bring them up, your big league coaches are paid to work with them, they sometimes succeed, sometimes fail. If they succeed, they hold you up for money or leave. If they fail, you've wasted all money spent on them, as well as all money spent on the 100's that failed.
I almost forgot, you spent millions scouting the world to find them.
I almost forgot, if you pay them a lot and they play badly, you lose, If they play well, they want to rework their contract.
Why would you expect players that pan out to be loyal?

That is not completely fair. Yes, they couch young players in the minors and spend a ton of money hoping that a few of them work out. If they do, then they get a contract in the Majors. If they pan out there, then they get offered another contract worth much more money. BUT they also offer years on that contract. Teams (read: Sox) don't offer pitchers more than 3 years generally because they dont want to be locked down when/if that player gets hurt. It works both ways. What we can take out of this is the following:

LOYALTY IS A DISEASE OF DOGS.

[mweflen]

Originally Posted by WhiteSoxFan84

Let's say you currently make $250,000 a year. If a company offered you a $1 mill more, that's a 400% raise. If you're making $9 million a year and another company offers you $1 million more, that's a 11% increase. Now honestly, 400%, I understand, but is 11% worth changing so much in your life? I know he doesn't live in Chicago during the offseason, but the regular season is a huge chunk of his life.

Let's say I'ma ballplayer. I know my career has very specific lifetime. Once I'm 40 or so, it's time to find a new line of work.

A million a year difference, even if it's only an 11% raise (I'd LOVE to get an 11% raise), over 5 years ends up being a lot of scratch, plus interest, to work with, if I want to invest, start a business, whatever.

Different people have different goals. If I were a ballplayer, I'd want to make as big a chunk as I could to give me the greatest number of possible options when I retire. Sure, I'd like to play in a city I loved (Garland has never expressed any particular love for Chicago) and win the highest honors, but if Tampa Bay was going to pay me twice as much, I would probably end up doing it.

I guess my point is just that everyone is an individual withtheir own motivations. Getting upset with JG is pointless. He's looking out for number one, and I don't think it's fair of us to think we'd do any different. We can admire the players who have different priorities, but we shouldn't rag on the ones who don't.

[WhiteSoxFan84]

Originally Posted by Steelrod

I have never understood the system.
You draft someone, give them a bonus, then pay them to go to your minor leagues, where you pay your coaches to make them better, then you bring them up, your big league coaches are paid to work with them, they sometimes succeed, sometimes fail. If they succeed, they hold you up for money or leave. If they fail, you've wasted all money spent on them, as well as all money spent on the 100's that failed.
I almost forgot, you spent millions scouting the world to find them.
I almost forgot, if you pay them a lot and they play badly, you lose, If they play well, they want to rework their contract.
Why would you expect players that pan out to be loyal?

I maybe misunderstanding you, but you're pretty much saying a player should pretty much stay with one team his whole career? So like, no free agency, no trading, etc? I maybe wrong with that assumption, but my point is this;what did that old school system lead our 1919 White Sox to do?

I'd rather have disloyal players going for the money rather than being led to lose games on purpose to make extra dough.

[mcfish]

Originally Posted by Steelrod

I have never understood the system.
You draft someone, give them a bonus, then pay them to go to your minor leagues, where you pay your coaches to make them better, then you bring them up, your big league coaches are paid to work with them, they sometimes succeed, sometimes fail. If they succeed, they hold you up for money or leave. If they fail, you've wasted all money spent on them, as well as all money spent on the 100's that failed.
I almost forgot, you spent millions scouting the world to find them.
I almost forgot, if you pay them a lot and they play badly, you lose, If they play well, they want to rework their contract.
Why would you expect players that pan out to be loyal?

Don't go crying for the teams/owners. First of all, players were essentially indentured servants for many many years in baseball. The owners screwed it up for themselves over the years and continue to do so by paying far too much money to free agents every single year. Second, 2005 was Jon Garland's 5th full year as a starter for this team. He had a 1 year contract in 2005. And yet, he's not a free agent because the Sox still have rights to him for next year by offering him arbitration. After 2006, he will finally have his first opportunity to become a free agent, and if he does so, then more power to him. I hate to see players make life more difficult for Kenny Williams, but it's not outside of Jon's rights to do so, and it's not like the team hasn't had ample opportunity with him before his first free agency year.

[KRS1]

Originally Posted by mweflen

Let's say I'ma ballplayer. I know my career has very specific lifetime. Once I'm 40 or so, it's time to find a new line of work.

A million a year difference, even if it's only an 11% raise (I'd LOVE to get an 11% raise), over 5 years ends up being a lot of scratch, plus interest, to work with, if I want to invest, start a business, whatever.

Different people have different goals. If I were a ballplayer, I'd want to make as big a chunk as I could to give me the greatest number of possible options when I retire. Sure, I'd like to play in a city I loved (Garland has never expressed any particular love for Chicago) and win the highest honors, but if Tampa Bay was going to pay me twice as much, I would probably end up doing it.

I guess my point is just that everyone is an individual withtheir own motivations. Getting upset with JG is pointless. He's looking out for number one, and I don't think it's fair of us to think we'd do any different. We can admire the players who have different priorities, but we shouldn't rag on the ones who don't.

Oh yeah, he'd have a real hard time getting by on 30 million for the rest of his life. He might have to pay a butler to scratch his *** and walk back and forth to fridge between all the nothing he has to do to make money. After a good career there's lots of golf vacations and downtime, let alone a great one(in terms of dollars).

[mweflen]

Originally Posted by KRS1

Oh yeah, he'd have a real hard time getting by on 30 million for the rest of his life. He might have to pay a butler to scratch his *** and walk back and forth to fridge between all the nothing he has to do to make money. After a good career there's lots of golf vacations and downtime, let alone a great one(in terms of dollars).

You're obviously very good at putting yourself in someone else's shoes. Do you laugh when people trip on the street, too?

[WhiteSoxFan84]

Originally Posted by mweflen

Let's say I'ma ballplayer. I know my career has very specific lifetime. Once I'm 40 or so, it's time to find a new line of work.

A million a year difference, even if it's only an 11% raise (I'd LOVE to get an 11% raise), over 5 years ends up being a lot of scratch, plus interest, to work with, if I want to invest, start a business, whatever.

Different people have different goals. If I were a ballplayer, I'd want to make as big a chunk as I could to give me the greatest number of possible options when I retire. Sure, I'd like to play in a city I loved (Garland has never expressed any particular love for Chicago) and win the highest honors, but if Tampa Bay was going to pay me twice as much, I would probably end up doing it.

I guess my point is just that everyone is an individual withtheir own motivations. Getting upset with JG is pointless. He's looking out for number one, and I don't think it's fair of us to think we'd do any different. We can admire the players who have different priorities, but we shouldn't rag on the ones who don't.

Good argument, but let me take my defense one step further.

YOU are Jon Garland. You decide to leave Chicago. You leave behind whatever it is you had. A few things that you leave behind are a team with a great defense. A great pitching coach that may have finally figured you out. And a manager and general manager who believe in you and love you.

You go to... the Yankees, or anyone for that matter. You sign that deal that gives you the 11% raise. You get 4 years $40 million from them (and let's say you turned down 4 years $36 million from the Sox) and are making $4 million more than you would have with the Sox.

With the change of scenery, you as a person begin to change. All of a sudden high expectations are laid upon your shoulders and you're feeling pressure that you've never felt before. You also start realizing that the new team you're on, doesn't have a defense as good as Chicago's. All of a sudden your mechanics start getting to you and you are not the same pitcher you were before. You want to ask Don Cooper how he figured you out and what he noticed, but guess what? He's no longer on your side. You're first year in New York is a disaster. You post a record of 8-13, 5.65 ERA. Steinberner doesn't know anything about you, other than you had one good season in Chicago. He's not Kenny Williams and decides he has seen enough, right after the New York media proclaims you as a one-year wonder. You get traded to... Colorado for God knows who. Needless to say, Colorado won't make your stats any better. You try to make it work and play their for a year. Baddd mistake. Your numbers look something like 6-15 with a 5.95 ERA. Now the Rockies want to get rid of you. They finally fool a mid-level team to pick you up. You play out the rest of your contract and don't do so well the last 2 years of your contract. Now, your market value is crapped out. By 2011, you are an average pitcher and will be lucky to pick up $6 mill per (inflation).

You look back and ask yourself, "Was that 11% difference worth the possibility of this happening?" And I understand that this scenario of his career collapsing can also play out if he stays in Chicago. But chances are, it is MUCH more likely to happen if he leaves.

[mweflen]

Originally Posted by WhiteSoxFan84

Good argument, but let me take my defense one step further.
YOU are Jon Garland. You decide to leave Chicago. You leave behind whatever it is you had. A few things that you leave behind are a team with a great defense. A great pitching coach that may have finally figured you out. And a manager and general manager who believe in you and love you.
With the change of scenery, you as a person begin to change. All of a sudden high expectations are laid upon your shoulder's and you're feeling pressure that you've never felt before.
You look back and ask yourself, "Was that 11% difference worth the possibility of this happening?" And I understand that this scenario of his career just collapsing can also play out if he stays in Chicago. But chances are, it is MUCH more likely to happen if he leaves.

Up until last year, I'd have agreed that staying in Chicago would mean less pressure and lower expectations. Now, I don't know