WCSox

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 03:41 PM) "Below average"? Garland ranked 113th among starters in tRA last season at 5.74, that is terrible, he's had several very mediocre seasons where he's been around a 2-2.5 WAR player and one decent year when he was a 3.5 WAR player. Admittedly me saying Perez is "good" was a little kind, but if I was to risk $10m+/year on one of the two it would be Perez because of the upside but personally I wouldn't touch either of them. Despite what your stat cherry-picking suggests, Garland doesn't "suck." In fact, he's had a significantly better career than Perez (whose 100 ERA+ last season was pretty average). But I agree that Perez will likely (and rightfully) garner a larger contract, due to his youth, better stuff, and better numbers over the past two seasons.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 11:28 AM) There's not a chance. I just wonder what kind of offers he's getting. I would doubt he's even getting $8 million a year offers QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 11:30 AM) If that's true, and he can be had for like $6M per, then I hope the Sox try to sign him. Last year definitely hurt Jon's market value, but $6 mil a year for someone with Jon's track record, age, and lack of an injury history seems way low. I suspect that much of this talk about the economy driving down prices is a concerted effort on the behalf of the owners to drive down their payrolls. And they might actually walk the walk once in a while by telling over-priced vets with diminished skills (Griffey, Pedro, etc.) to take a hike. But when it comes to players who can still play, they're still shelling out top dollar. The Yankees just spent like madmen. The Red Sox just gave Youkilis $40 million while he was still under team control (smart move, but still a $40 million commitment in a bad economy). And then the Braves (not the same market as NY and BOS) just gave 35-year-old Derek Lowe $60 million. Despite what owners and GMs are saying, their actions suggest that if you're relatively young and skilled, you're still going to get paid reasonably well.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 12:14 PM) Who do you see out there offering Garland more than $10 million per season and/or a multi-year deal A lot of teams could use a middle/back of the rotation vet like Jon. And despite last season, he isn't exactly washed up. I'm can't say for sure that he'd get more than $10 million/year, but 4/40 seems very reasonable to me. At minimum, I'd say he could get 4/35. Even with the bad market, the Braves gave a 35-year-old Derek Lowe 4/60. Teams may whine about the economy, but their actions clearly show that they're still willing to spend.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 11:31 AM) Well Perez has better stuff than Garland for starters (even if he doesn't use it effectively and has high pitch counts and walk rates). Perez is also coming off an excellent season in 2007, and a pretty good one in 2008, with a good finish in 2008 from his Post ASB numbers. This is unlike Garland who has an ERA of 5.99 in Post ASB 2008. So I can see why when you look at Perez's age and stuff, and numbers over the past 2 seasons, why he would get more money in a contract than Jon Garland. I wasn't arguing that Garland is worth more than Perez... or even the same amount. Perez had a WHIP of 1.40 and an ERA+ of 100 last season. That's better than what Garland did, but to call Garland "terrible" and Perez "good" - based on essentially one season - is silly. Perez being "average" and Garland being "mediocre" is a lot more accurate.

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 11:15 AM) Why? Oli Perez is good, Garland is terrible He's coming off of a below-average year. He also has several solid years, youth, and a ring on his side. Oliver Perez has had some absolutely terrible seasons (especially for the NL), so I'm not seeing your logic here.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 11:06 AM) I really thought Jon was the Ex-Sox pitcher who was most likely to come back here, until I read about his disconnect from Ozzie. It kind of makes it doubtful if it is true. That's just fine with me. Even in a depressed market, I imagine that he stands to get a minimum of $35-40 million. I'd rather roll the dice on Clayton Richard.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 10:49 AM) I'll agree with that, but it's not because I think the Central will implode like it did last year. I just think that the Rays, Yankees, and Red Sox are going to be feasting on enough teams that it'll be hard for the WC to not come out of the east. Yeah, I see a lot of decent 82-87 win teams in the Central this year, but no WC winner.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 07:04 AM) 2) Sign Jon Garland for $24-27 million over 3 years I don't see Jon taking less than $10 million/year, especially when he's supposedly asking for $13 mil per. I'd also think that a pitcher still in his prime would want a four-year deal.

QUOTE (TheBigHurt @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 11:03 AM) Wow, when you have to mention names like Pedro, Freddy, Bartolo and Uribe you know your team is in bad shape. Kind of like how Kenny acquired "has-been retreads" like Contreras and El Duque in the not-too-distant past?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 10:37 AM) The one downside of that is that it would bury 2 of CR, JM, and AP in the minors, while the other is consigned to the pen. I'm something of a believer in a pitcher needing a chance to work the kinks out in the big leagues, most of the time, before they can move on. Floyd and Danks had really good 08 campaigns...but both of them got the chance to struggle in 07. McCarthy, for example, was pretty rough in his first campaign in the bigs in 05, but then was dynamite when he was called back at the end of the season. You get the occasional Verlander who just comes up and destroys people based on raw stuff, but if a guy needs to learn to pitch in the big leagues, then they need time to learn to pitch, and the 5th starter spot can be a useful place to do that. I agree with that in general, but I'm not sure that Kenny wants to go through another 2007-like re-tooling year with the rotation. After shelling out all of that money on Linebrink and Dotel last season, with this being the last season of JT and JD, with the Central appearing to be pretty wide-open at this point, and coming off of a division win, I'd be more inclined to go for it with veteran SPs and put off the young pitching development until 2010.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 10:08 AM) I know its unlikely, but, think about this for a minute. What if Colon and Freddy were both actually healthy for most or all the season? That makes the rotation pretty sick. Not likely I know, but, fun to think about. I'd love for Kenny to give Freddy the same deal he just gave Colon. If it doesn't work out, again, little is lost.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 09:42 AM) WOW. I am not surprised by the up front money, but the incentives are nothing. That is officially a steal. A rookie costs us $500,000, so even if we cut him early, we barely lose more than we would have given to anyone else. Agreed. Definitely a good low-risk, potentially-high-reward deal.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 08:31 AM) that's the thing, I don't see a lot of them. Sheffield and Rogers were both old, so bad seasons makes sense (though possibly not to the level that they had), Nate Robertson just isn't very good (though again, maybe not to a 6+ ERA...he's not much better than a 5 ERA pitcher though), their bullpen isn't that talented and they cut Aquilino Lopez who was one of their best relievers last year, and outside of really Guillen and Bonderman, injuries didn't strike them that badly (Granderson missed like 2-3 weeks at the beginning of the season but was healthy the rest of the season). I just don't think they are a very good team at all and without another move or so, I'd be surprised if they finished out of last place. Agreed. They have too many stars in their mid-30s or older. Their bullpen is a complete mess and, out of their starters, I'd have a tough time seeing anybody other than Verlander or Bonderman bouncing back. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 08:40 AM) I fully expect that at least one team will be surprisingly good, maybe more than that. That's how it always is in baseball. I agree with this as well. But I'd be surprised if more than one was playoff-good. It's difficult to see a Wild Card team coming out of the Central... at this point, anyway.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 11:30 PM) what move did Detroit make that makes them a better team than the Sox? They traded for a mediocre starting pitcher in Edwin Jackson, traded for a so-so catcher, and signed one of the worst offensive shortstops in the game to platoon with a utility guy at SS? And they are suddenly going to finish ahead of the Sox? Consider me confused on that part alone. Agreed, and I'll add that the Central doesn't look very competitive at all right now.

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 06:01 AM) He turns 31 this month and he stole 34 bases last year despite 2 trips to the 15 day DL and bereavement time off. I think he has the speed, but I want Anderson's glove out there. I'd rather see Figgins at 3b, 2b, or LF. I agree. If Kenny doesn't sign a FA CF, I believe that this season would be a good time for Anderson to "sink or swim" in a full-time role. QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 06:51 AM) massive? Fields, Betemit, and Viciedo are all legitimate options at 3B, and it's not crazy hard to find a stopgap 3Bman for a season. I wouldn't call it massive. Fair enough, but I don't feel particularly comfortable with any of those guys in the lineup. That would involve Uribe taking a paycut from last season, and I'm not sure that he'd be down with that. I also don't see him taking a one-year deal... he can get more than that on the FA market. The Sox are shedding an absolute ton of payroll next season, so I don't see how giving Juan a 2/8 deal is going to be a financial issue. It seems like a good insurance policy for a team that is still up in the air at 3B and 2B.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 04:45 AM) I was reading somewhere Garland is still asking for $13 million a year, although if someone offered a guy with his WHIP $10 million a year for 5 years, if I were his agent, I would tell him to take it. LOL at Jon thinking that he's worth $13 million a year. QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 05:10 AM) I wouldn't give Garland 3 years 27 mil in the current market. I'd rather the Sox went after Sheets or Pedro. I agree.

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 05:05 AM) Abreu is a free agent. In the current sluggish free agent market, the Sox should get him cheaper than Dye. The biggest advantage would be the player the Sox acquire by trading Dye. Abreu + Players aquired for Dye > Dye. Abreu adds team speed and OBP as well. He and Ozzie are buddies so that is another reason that he would be likely to want to play for the Sox if there was an opportunity. Sorry, he WOULD be owed more contractually than Dye. He's a nice player and all, but his OPS has fallen over the past 5 or 6 years and he'll be entering the downside of his career soon. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to him wearing a Sox uniform, but I guess that it would depend on the contract. Anything more than three years would be out of the question, IMO.

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 04:53 AM) Swish got traded to the Yanks as you may remember. Paulie and Thome are pretty much unmovable, so Dye would have to be the guy. And I don't see Kenny spending on Sheets, unless he comes down significantly in price. And even then, his recent shoulder, elbow, AND back injuries are a risk for even $30 million. But with so much money coming off of the books next year, who knows. I also don't see KW bringing Garland back into the fold, given his market value and his weak 2008. I think it's much more likely that we see another retread signed to a one-year deal, like your suggestions of Garcia or Pedro.

I'm not understanding the Abreu love. Nice player and all, but in somewhat of a decline as a hitter, can't play defense, and is owed more contractually than Dye. I'd rather stand pat with Dye. If I'm going to deal Dye, it's not going to be for another corner OF. CF, SP, and infield are more pressing at this point.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 03:16 AM) If they sign both Freddy and Colon [to 1 yr, incentive deals], these would be decent low risk moves. It's much better than locking into Garland for $20 + mill. for 3 yrs. I agree. And I suspect that Garland will be looking for a deal closer to 5 years/$50 million.

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 03:49 AM) Now the Angels and KW know just how much cash needs to come with Figgins in the Dye/Konerko trade. I might be in a minority here, but I wouldn't mind this. We have an excess of corner OFs, no leadoff hitter, and a massive question mark at 3B. Moving Quentin to RF and Swisher to LF would also be a defensive plus. I also wouldn't mind seeing Kenny give Uribe a two-year deal if the price is right (say, $8 million) to act as sort of an infield super-sub. Defensively, he'd be a great insurance policy.

QUOTE (MO2005 @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 01:11 PM) O.k. lets be serious here. Do you blame anyone for picking this team to be last in our division? Are you kidding? The Sox won 89 games last year, despite losing their stud setup man and the would-be AL MVP. And they're supposed to drop to 72 wins? Based on what? I don't expect them to win the division again, but I see absolutely zero evidence for last place and 8 fewer wins than the Royals. It's difficult to make a prediction like this in mid-January, but I don't see how the Sox are going to fall that far below .500. I'll say 80-82 at this point. And speaking of ridiculous, LOL at this Yankee fanboy for predicing 102 wins for HIS team.

QUOTE (StatManDu @ Jan 4, 2009 -> 07:41 PM) Those two strikes cost him huge in terms of hits. Instead of battling to get 3,000 hits at the end of his career The sad thing is that Harold wasn't going to get to 3,000 hits in a reasonable amount of time with the way that he was playing at the end of his career. He looked like he was swinging his bat in slow motion. I agree with the others who don't think that Harold is HOF-worthy. He had an outstanding career and is one of my all-time faves, but he was never a dominant player and failed to reach any of the major statistical hitting benchmarks.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 5, 2009 -> 08:41 PM) I just don't think there's much to this at all but typical Internet rumors. That's good news, because this trade would be massively retarded.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 12:39 PM) i would love to have Garland for $8 million/season with incentives Agreed. But despite sucking last season and never coming close to repeating 2005, my guess is that he won't take a pay-cut.