SSH2005

I wouldn't want a 34 year old reliever with a 1.42 WHIP being the major leaguer in return for Garland.

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/...t=.jsp&c_id=cin

The great thing about this trade is that Adam Eaton is eligible for free agency after next season. Garland's trade value has to be pretty huge then.

The prospect is minor-league catcher Billy Killian... http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5184050

Garcia did get a lot better pitching at the Cell from 2004 to 2005. He was really bad at the Cell in 2004.

Sure, Garland could be brought back but I doubt the Sox will give him the money that he wants. And not because they are too cheap but because he would mess with the future payroll plans for our team. I doubt KW could justify spending $50+ million on a pitcher who isn't dominant, doesn't have ace-quality stuff, and who has only had one good season thus far.

Unless the prospect that the Rangers are receiving from the Padres is extremely good, I'd have to agree.

Agreed, and I wouldn't mind Duaner Sanchez + a couple good prospects for him.

I agree with you but I really think that the Padres robbed the Rangers in this trade. Right now, Chris Young is at least equal to Adam Eaton. But he's also younger and will probably be better than Eaton in the future. Adrian Gonzalez and Terrmel Sledge is worth more than Akinori Otsuka and a prospect, depending on the prospect of course.

You must see a lot of flyballs in their future.

I see how the addition of Otsuka helps the Rangers' bullpen but how does trading a talented young pitcher for another pitcher of similar quality help their rotation? And Young could be better than Eaton eventually. I don't get it.

Wow, pretty big trade. Looks like the Rangers won't be wanting Garland now. Time to talk to the Dodgers.

Was about to say this. There's a lot of potential for injury in that lineup so I can agree with you guys.

Weasel out of what? A 3.98 ERA would have been in line with Buehrle's previous numbers, just like my post stated.

What does Blalock's hype have to do with anything? You do know that there was a TON of hype for Crede as well, right? The stats show that Blalock is a better hitter than Crede, period.

Not at all. I would not define a 3.98 ERA as "sucking." Definately a little high of an ERA for pitchers like Buehrle and Santana but I would not label it "sucking." Buehrle has a 3.63 career ERA and put up ERA's of 4.14 in 2003 and 3.89 in 2004. A 3.98 ERA isn't much higher than those numbers.

Good question. Santana was never sucking if you look at his month-by-month game log: http://minnesota.twins.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/...6371&statType=2

Oh yeah, the stats bear it out as well.

Just scanning this thread, the majority of posters think that Blalock is a better player than Crede. RockRaines doesn't really need anyone to back up his argument.

I think their lineup is set. Rafael Furcal SS Kenny Lofton CF J.D. Drew RF Jeff Kent 2B Nomar Garciaparra 1B Jose Cruz LF Bill Mueller 3B Dioner Navarro C They need another starting pitcher now.

It means that they will both be free to sign with any other team.

Man, first the guy in your sig and now the guy in your user name. Brutal.

1.) RMackowiakXX 2.) POzuna38

http://losangeles.dodgers.mlb.com/NASApp/m...xt=.jsp&c_id=la Wow, that's quite a bit of money for Lofton.