quickman

QUOTE(JimH @ Jan 1, 2006 -> 09:28 PM) Oh my God, do you mean the White Sox were offering Garland up in trade up until he signed an extension? Shocking. Paging VAFan, who can't seem to figure out the business aspect of baseball. WHAT WERE They thinking? Not the great Jon Garland? Do you think they will offer Contraras in a trade before the season?

QUOTE(JimH @ Jan 1, 2006 -> 09:42 AM) I don't think so. Every team in the league wants guy like this. He plays a very good CF, can run, is young, etc. He's not the 4th OF you're portraying him to be, he is better than that. Personally I would like to see the Sox get this guy. I keep coming back to Guillen saying he wants more speed, maybe Owens is the 4th OF. Who knows but it's interesting to kick around. Unfortunately I will have top agree with you again. I will say I would also like a pitcher in return as well. The Whitesox scouts saw alot of tavaras in october and OZzie saw him for four tough games. I would also like to see him in the lineup. Something will happen soon. I can smell it!

QUOTE(JimH @ Jan 1, 2006 -> 09:29 AM) Now that the group hug therapy is over, let's talk about Vazquez. Have you seen him pitch or are you just going off stats like you usually do? As for Contreras, either they will sign him to an extension that isn't outrageos (and I hope they do) or he'll be moved. Probably sooner than later. The White Sox are one of very few teams with a starting pitching surplus. If they get overwhelmed by a deal for a pitcher who won't sign an extension, good for the White Sox. It's smart business. for many here its not about good business, its about who there favorite player is. Vasquez is five or six years younger than contraras and needs to visit the psych counselor once a month instead of weekly.

I don't know what to say..I just don't

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 01:06 PM) I thought Garland didn't want to be here? Your right dick, and I humbly say I am was wrong. Money talks and now the sox are over budget. anyone think Mcarthy will now be traded?

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 03:07 PM) I'd say that sounds pretty accurate. Now, I don't know if this is common procedure or not, but, from what I've heard, the organization went out of their way to tell Aaron that he's not only welcomed back, but, they might try to acquire him sooner rather than later. Again, this could all just be positive spin for a guy going through a pretty rough time, both in the game of baseball and out. I just liked hearing the door was open. If Everett and Alomar are any indication of Kenny bringing back players he feels strongly for, there is no reason to believe Rowand's name won't be brought up given the right situation. Quick point: He said the same thing to Brook Fordyce when he left for the orioles. He never came back. It makes no sense that Rowand would come back in the near term (this year). After his contract is up and if we don't have a center fielder then I can see it. otherwise lets get back to getting garland outta here.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Dec 26, 2005 -> 05:27 PM) is this thread really happening? Is this like a some sort of server "echo" in which whatever topic has been discussed ad nauseum is automatically regurgiated in a new and more annoying way? Oh boy another thread about garland being traded.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 26, 2005 -> 07:04 PM) And the implications for the White Sox are: Pitching is getting even more expensive. Garland's price continues to go up, as does Contreras' for that matter. 5 years and $60 million for Kevin Millwood, that is insane. Insane for the Texas Rangers to stupidly give him that much money, and insane for the game of baseball. Boras does his "job" again, raising the salary bar for everyone else. Javier Vazquez looks more like a bargain acquisition each and every day. Its insane money and stupid of texas to pay. They are not learning. Millwood won't last three years much less five and that money is nuts. Actually for me baseball needs to check themselves into bellevue for some therapy.

QUOTE(whitesox1976 @ Dec 25, 2005 -> 11:02 PM) It seems to me that David Wells has caused trouble every place he went. I have heard other rumors of him going to the Red Sox. Yankees would be better off without him. I know its christmas and you may have had too much egg nog. Wells was on the Redsox, not the yankees. I never saw a rumor of him going to or the yankees thinking about signing wells. He was not on the Yankees last year.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 10:27 PM) Ok so is St. Louis a stupid team for almost signing A.J Burnett to a 4 year $40M deal? Burnett has better stuff than Garland, I'll give him that. But A.J has pitched in a pitcher's park for his entire career. In 2005, he had away splits of 7-8 with a 3.80 ERA. Garland had better home and away splits in 2005 then that. Remember when we got Neal Cotts and he first came up with the big team? He didn't produce right away, and like I've said before 3/4'ers of Soxtalk wanted him out. When he acquired him was he a top prospect? No, he wasn't. Look at what Oakland got for Tim Hudson and Mark Mulder last season. Sure Atlanta were able to re-sign Hudson, and Mulder still had an option year on his contract in 2006, but the Mulder deal especially showed what teams will offer for good starting pitching if they become available. The issue for a team trading for Jon Garland is this, are they gonna be able to lock him up? I said right now, the odds of that are about 20:80, which hurts Garland's value, but if a team like the Angels or Dodgers traded for him, I think Garland's about a 50:50 to re-sign long - term with them because of the homegrown factor. PS I completely agree that if a west coast team trades for him, he would sign on.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 10:27 PM) Ok so is St. Louis a stupid team for almost signing A.J Burnett to a 4 year $40M deal? Burnett has better stuff than Garland, I'll give him that. But A.J has pitched in a pitcher's park for his entire career. In 2005, he had away splits of 7-8 with a 3.80 ERA. Garland had better home and away splits in 2005 then that. Remember when we got Neal Cotts and he first came up with the big team? He didn't produce right away, and like I've said before 3/4'ers of Soxtalk wanted him out. When he acquired him was he a top prospect? No, he wasn't. Look at what Oakland got for Tim Hudson and Mark Mulder last season. Sure Atlanta were able to re-sign Hudson, and Mulder still had an option year on his contract in 2006, but the Mulder deal especially showed what teams will offer for good starting pitching if they become available. The issue for a team trading for Jon Garland is this, are they gonna be able to lock him up? I said right now, the odds of that are about 20:80, which hurts Garland's value, but if a team like the Angels or Dodgers traded for him, I think Garland's about a 50:50 to re-sign long - term with them because of the homegrown factor. In my opinion yes the cardinals would have been stupid. To pay a 500 pitcher 10 million a year in my opinion is overpaying. Just my opinion. Don't know what your argument is, but my argument is I beleive the sox would do quite well with getting a couple of mid tier prospects or a reliever and a mid tier prospect. I think I have remained consistant. I would be very happy with this type of trade but who cares if I am happy the whitesox will do what they think is best they can do in this market. Sometimes I think certian people believe our players are the best. They are not, we had the best team last year, not the best players.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 09:16 PM) If Garland's departure gives us a disappointing package, I'll be very frustrated. If that were to occur, I can't wait until the season before Sheets becomes a free agent. To compensate for the discrepancy between Sheets and Garland, a poor package--opposed to a disappointing package, should be enough. Since it's a high certainty he'll seek a ridiculous contract in free-agency, I figure a bullpen arm and several fringe, mid-level prospects will get it done. Who would give up a good package for a pitcher they know is leaving the following season, right? For comparison sake: Sheets has endured back/shoulder injuries, opposed to Garland, and will be late 20's-early 30's when the contract is done. Sheets respectable ERA and WHIP would surely drop in the American League. Sheets stuff is undeniably better than Garlands, but in the final year of both contracts, would his talent alone be enough to warrant a substantially higher package? I realize Sheets has ace potential, whereas Garland is typical #2, but it shouldn't be the difference between trading gold and crap. If there is justice in the baseball world, we will not be "extremely disappointed." Then I believe you will be dissapointed. Despite the fact I don't care much for garland, He pitched well last year. The best year he had. other years he was average. He could go either way right now and he is in his escape year. I just don't think he will draw what people on this board think. I could be wrong, but if I am not I won't be dissapointed at all. I wouldn't pay him the money based on 1 season nor would I pay burnett. Only stupid teams would do that. We didn't win with a big payroll, or a great farm system, we won by getting good players for good value and being right. You see I think neal Cotts is a good pitcher with some better upside. I would have considered him a middle tier guy when we got him. He was not there top guy . If we could get a couple of these middle tier guys that is what I expect.

I really believe many of you will be extremely dissapointed with what we get for garland. Quite frankly I truly believe many of you are over rating his trade value. We will see what comes out of it.

QUOTE(Chek2002 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 12:33 PM) I saw this rumor out there: "Reports now indicate that now the Chicago White Sox may be the third team involved in the Tejada deal. The trade would have to be something like this: The Cubs get Tejada and cash , and Baltimore gets Contreras, Garland, and OF prospect Ryan Sweeney from the White Sox, and the White Sox get Prior and a prospect from Baltimore." It's no secret Kenny Williams has been trying to move Jon Garland, who's already turned down at least one contract extension. This deal would greatly improve Baltimore's rotation giving them two front of the rotation starters in one shot. It would also give the White Sox more room financially to sign Buehrle to an extension after the '07 season." What do you think? who made this up

QUOTE(kramer99 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 12:07 PM) I think some of may overlook the negative Public Relations that the sox would get if they trade garland and get nothing in return... If we get top prospects the sox can say they are preparing for the future, If we get bullpen help they can say we get immediate help now....but if we get low level prospects and a crappy bullpen guy, the PR would be terrible. To some fans it would seem like we are dismantleing the pitching staff strictly for money. i would understand if KW has to save money on the payroll ...but if gets nothing in return, it could end up costing the sox alot of money too. It is important that the sox keep looking like they are making moves to win again in 2006 and in 2007, 2008 and 2009. I actually disagree that the sox would get negative PUB. We won the world series. KW is a god right now, we added 15 million to payroll, added a solid rotation guy, a huge star in thome, and a coveted all purpose guy. I think we have done alot. Garland is not worth a negative pub story. In fact before last year the pub was if we should even keep the 500 pitcher. Garland is not a superstar.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 02:34 PM) Just so the record is clear, if Garland is going to be traded, fine. My points have always been: 1. Don't undervalue him. The guy was our second best starter last year, and is only going to get better, ie., put up similar years to 2005 in the future. 2. Don't just dump him. Given his real value, to trade him without getting impact players (or several potential impact players) in return would not be a good deal for the Sox. 3. Keeping him for a single year may give us our best possible chance at repeating as WS Champs. After all, we've learned the hard way what happens when we are a starter short during the season. Better to have 6 than 4 (when an injury causes someone to go down). I trust Kenny Williams agrees with all three of these points. Thus, I expect we'll either keep him or get great value in return. Your value and the value of the market are different. He is entering his last year before free agency. His value goes down. Therefore the sox will get "what they can" for him and most likely it will be one or two players that will be more ready to play in 2006 or 2007 than draft picks that maybe ready or NOT by 2010. Furthermore they they will stick to a budget..they will not break the budget for John fing Garland especially after his agent told KW there will be no negotiating. THEY WANT HIS ASS OUT OF HERE. KW will do his job and get his peter pan ass out.

QUOTE(FlaCWS @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:07 PM) I was on record saying I was against trading Marte - nothing against Makiowack (butchered spelling, I know), who is a very good player - I just hate giving up a young, hard-throwing lefty just because he had one sub-par year (ok, maybe one and a half). I think we have a good one in Cotts, but I'd feel much better if we had another lefty in there to replace Marte. The pickings are slim in free agency so I'm wondering if we have anyone at AA or AAA who might be a good candidate. I don't follow the minor leagues that closely so I'm wondering if anyone can tell me whether we have someone already in-house who could potentially fill the role. No we will get another lefty via trade.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 04:12 PM) There is such a thing as reading too far in to what others are saying, and I have to say that this is a classic example of that, VAfan. Who said that Jon Garland is at the zenith of his career? Who said that this is as good as he is ever going to be? You keep confusing "We can trade Jon Garland for MAX value right now" with "Jon Garland isnt going to get any better, therefore we must trade him.". Noone said Garland sucks, Noone said Garland isnt going to get any better. What everyone else is doing right now, besides you, is stepping back and realizing that Jon Garland probably doesnt see himself staying with the White Sox past his arbitration years because of a multitude(hawkism!) of reasons, among them being A) the White Sox are not going to be in a position to pay him what he will command in the open market, B ) He is a SoCal native, C) He has been jerked around by the White Sox organization in the past, D) he probably doesnt care for the media perception of him in this town, etc. al. In other words, it probably isnt in the cards. Now the White Sox have to make a business decision and attempt to fortify positions for the future because they have extra pitching right now. This team is damn good, and trading Jon away isnt going to change the face of the team. This isnt to say that something will not be done. KW could be posturing and something could be worked out. But this isnt a likely scenario. While i will be sorry to see Garland go, I will certainly understand his reasoning. You are far too sentimental about holding on to players. Yes Kyyle very nice post. Hopefully your English is better than mine.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 02:03 PM) So, in other words, I post a statement from AJ Pierzynski, and you respond with .... nothing? I'm not predicting anything. I've made the point, backed up completely by numbers, that Garland was our second best pitcher last year. And I've refuted the point that, at 26, he's somehow reached the zenith of his career in 2005 and will never be more valuable than he is now. I would not be surprised if he were traded, but I certainly hope the Sox don't just push him out the door by making a lowball offer and then claiming they couldn't sign him. If he won't take a market 3-year deal, then I'm ready to move on. But I have no illusions that Javier Vazquez will be an improvement over Jon Garland for the next two years of Vazquez's contract. As for Crede, who doesn't know about Scott Boras? But it is ridiculous to just throw up your hands and say - that's it. If he's got Boras as his agent, he's automatically gone. What if Mark Buehrle signed Scott Boras as his agent. Would you put him on the block tomorrow? I'll take this bet - that Joe Crede is an "overrated .240 hitter." I would wager that Crede won't hit as low as .240 in any year for the next 5. I would also wager, unless his back forces him on the DL, that his 22 HRs from 2005 will be his new floor. I don't know what you were watching in the postseason, but Joe Crede was right there with Paul Konerko and Jermaine Dye (in the WS) as our most dangerous hitter. His 2B drove in the winning run in game 2 against the Angels. He hit the HR to tie game 5 against the Angels, and drove in the winning run in that game too. Against Houston, he hit the go-ahead HR that won game 1 (not to mention at least 2 game-saving stops at 3B). Plus, he started the 5-run rally against a cruising Roy Oswalt with a HR in game 3. That's 4 out of our 11 wins where Crede was perhaps the key offensive player in our lineup. Pretty good for an "overrated .240 hitter." All Boras's clients want is money. The Sox can either choose to pay up or let the guy go elsewhere. I think Joe Crede finally figured out his hitting problems last year, and we'll now see a guy who may slump a little when he's not hot, but won't fall off the deep end like he did for two months of last year. So, this is the last point at which Crede will be available for a bargain price. I think the Sox should take advantage of their opporutnity. I am trying to keep my composure with you. You argue like my 9 year old changing words around. You called me out in one of your endless arguments. I responded to your question. "I have no written evidence that garland wants to go to the West coast" I state that I beleive I am right and we will wait and see. In addition I commented that Crede will not be in the Whitesox plans in 2008 and I stated my reasoning for that. I did not challenge you to any bet despite what you may have appeared to read. Now I do think Crede is a below average hitter. Thats my opinion. To answer your other question in the last thread if Buerhle was represented by Boras he would not be signed either. Again show me who on this team beside Crede is represented by Boras. In addition who have we signed in recent history that is a boras client. Let me know how I can be more clear to you. Its really quite a simple post. Garland will be gone and will eventually sign to a team on the West Coast and Crede will eventually be gone because of Boras. Simple stuff. Not too hard to comprehend.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:38 AM) Really? That's interesting. In my estimation, that seems exactly the type of player Kenny and company would be interested in. Assuming Garland is traded, the Sox really don't have another Brandon McCarthy to be that sixth/spot-starter of sorts. In my opinion, Fogg fits the bill. He isn't going to dazzle anyone, but, he wouldn't have to. If he could be had for a resonable contract--presumably 1-2 years at the $1.2-$1.5M mark--I would think he'd draw some interest from his former team. I'm thinking--and, again, I could be way off--Kenny will bring in one of our two remaining bullpen spots via free agency or trade and let the youngsters--that is, Reynoso, Tracey, Munoz, Bajenaru, etc.--compete for that final vacancy. You sign/trade for the lefty and let the righties compete. You sign/trade for the righty and let the lefties compete. I completely agree with you. I would if he complies make a serious inquiry to sign him. He could be your long man in the pen.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 03:11 PM) I think you might be in the minority. Have you seen the market for starting pitching this off-season? Have you seen what quality pitchers are getting? Have you seen what bad pitchers are getting? It's insane. Chalk it up to Burnett's contract, the Sox proving you win championships with pitching and defense, or whatever else you want, but pitching...especially young, cheap, effective pitching...you are going to have to pay for it. Look no further than a trade completed yesterday for Christ's sake. If Adam Eaton and a bullpen arm are worth an organization's number one prospect--HANDS DOWN--an MLB-ready young arm, and another prospect or two, why are you telling me the Sox can't ask, or can't expect an organization's number one prospect in return. If you trade Garland to a West Coast team, his value also increases as he has been known to want to sign on the west coast when he hits free agency. Put it all together. Kenny should expect a number one prospect in return for a guy that has finally put it all together and found himself amongst the best in baseball last year. Garland was a f***ing all-star. I don't care if he is in his walk year. You find a team that will pay for a healthy, effective, cheap #2 starter. Period. I'm just not buying it. how do you know he wants to play on the west coast? VA FAN Impersonation

QUOTE(VAfan @ Dec 20, 2005 -> 03:31 PM) My post was started November 24th. AJ said in today's Trib that he's spoken with Garland and Garland told him he would like to come back. Post the link please from someone who has spoken with Garland that he wants to go back to the West Coast. As for Crede, I think the best way to deal with Boras is to lock in his client early before he becomes a star. I think that window for the Sox is this offseason. By the end of next year, after Crede has a much better year in 2006, I would agree with you that he's likely unsignable. Crede has 3+ years of full time service, but I can't tell from some Google searches whether he'd be a free agent in 2008 or not until 2009. Who knows? Well VA we will see who is right. I have no written proof. I will emphatically state that Garland will sign with a team on the west coast specifically california within two years. (He may not have a choice this year) I guess we will have to wait. I am willing to do so. I am a very patient man. I will also state his time with us is extremely limited despite the fact you like him. I do believe his trade value is more when dealing with a west coast team, because I do believe he has made it known he would rather play on the west coast. If he gets traded to the Dodgers padres or angels, he will sign longer term.I am sure KW doesn't give a s*** if you like him or anyone else. I would suspect they do not want to jump way over garcia or Buerhle's salaries too much or else they get themselves in a 2007 jam. I am certain KW is thinking ahead. Now as far as Crede, he may not be traded THIS YEAR but he will not be in the Sox plans in 2008 because of Boras. So if you have a taker now then trade him. Reason is because you will be in the same jam you are with Garland today. Teams will back off because of boras. That said, there may not be a match this year. So we will probably keep the overrated 240 hitter THIS YEAR. I have answered your questions I believe, and now I am done on this thread. I am certain you will bring up the same argument when you start another thread.

All this tells us is that Kenny has not gotten any bites that were good offers. He will hold out for more. People go down in spring training or early season. His cards maybe better at that time. I am sure he wants to unload garland but he has not gotten what he thinks is good trade material in return. The problem with this is we will need relievers in hte meantime. He maybe over budget and hopefully he will be allowed to start over budget. We will see.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 05:52 PM) Jim, Adressing his posts are alot like this= :banghead its just not worth the trouble. Rock the crappy part is I think there is something new in a thread, but its the same old story, same b****ing and moaning. The titles change but the subject are the same, stupid stuff.

Haven't all these issues been discussed till we puke in other threads? It appears people don't read or jsut like to start new threads. Point #1- garland does not want to resign here. He likes california thats where he will go. it really doens't matter what KW wants or if the sox give him 10 million. He will become a free agent. Point #2 - Crede will not sign long term if his agent is boras. May not happen this year but he will be gone unless he changes agents. Why is this so hard for people to understand?