Is it a tough decision or an easy one?

Not garland.

Watch me be the only Garland vote...

and its Jon, by the way.

and its Jon, by the way.

Yea, that kind of voids the poll, don't you think? I mean, there is no such player as 'John Garland' so why wouldn't anyone take Alfonso Soriano over this fake player?

I noticed that after I posted it.

 

 

But, it's not like I can fix it. :finger

I'll take Jonny boy. He will turn out fine and Alfonso is an accident waiting to happen.

I'll take Jonny boy. He will turn out fine and Alfonso is an accident waiting to happen.

Garland would be better for this team than Soriano in the long run....

 

say NO to Alphonso

Garland would be better for this team than Soriano in the long run....

 

say NO to Alphonso

I have a feeling garland will not be here for the long run...

Garland would be better for this team than Soriano in the long run....

 

say NO to Alphonso

And who is "Alphonso"? Any relation to JoHn Garland and Jose ValentinE?

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6154

 

 

 

:headshake

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6396 :headshake

 

There are alot more pitchers just like garland than people think.

I noticed that after I posted it.

 

 

But, it's not like I can fix it.  :finger

I gotch 'yer back. The answer is Phil Rogers was smoking something when he wrote that article.

Jon Garland. If we were a team stocked with good pitching, who needed an offensive boost, then maybe Soriano. But I don't want a second baseman who will strike out over 100 times a year and hardly take a walk. We sign another good starter in the offseason, push Garland down to the #5 spot, and allow him to develop, without big expectations of him needing to win 15 to 18 games for us to make the playoffs.

Thanks..Da Cheat

Watch me be the only Garland vote...

and its Jon, by the way.

Welcome aboard to SoxTalk too.

I gotch 'yer back.  The answer is Phil Rogers was smoking something when he wrote that article.

Something extremely good.

Welcome aboard to SoxTalk too.   

Thanks.

And who is "Alphonso"?  Any relation to JoHn Garland and Jose ValentinE?

a simple "its spelt Alfonso" would make you look better than pointing out a spelling error like you did

a simple "its spelt Alfonso" would make you look better than pointing out a spelling error like you did 

I think he was just joshing you i may be wrong though.

I think he was just joshing you i may be wrong though.

I didnt see any sign of it...

 

but if he was its all good then...

 

but I dont have time to argue on the boards right now, my favorite movie (ROCKY IV) is on, and I MUST watch...

 

Damn Ivan Drago is a beast

I'm kind of amazed that Jon is getting this much support. All I ever hear is how much of an overrated, underacheiving punk he is, and he is dead even with Soriano. I hate to give away pitching when we have had such problems at the end of the rotation, but I think this would be a sweet move. It gives us another slugger, and someone that can actually score from first on a double. I would think he would run as much as he once did on the Sox. He isn't the on base guy we need, but I still think that is a fairly sizeable upgrade if we move Uribe from 2nd to SS and lose Valentin. My only major problem would be his salary, I don't want him for anymore than like $7 mil because there are obvious holes in his game(D, OBP, lots of K's). I think the real comparison should be between Valentin and Soriano, since Valentin would probably be the odd man out if this trade happened. He's batting much better than Jose with just as much power(more in most years) and much more speed, plus they are about equal in terms of defensive ineptitude. What would be really interesting is if we could bring in a 3rd team to get some of the players we need(like a young SP and an OBP guy with some speed). I gotta believe that Garland doesn't have anywhere near the trade value Soriano does, which is why I think we gotta do this trade if it is out there, whether or not we keep him.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6396   :headshake

 

There are alot more pitchers just like garland than people think.

Oh - there's a lot of 24 year old pitchers who have posted ERA's right around 4.50 every year, and continues to pitch as a solid fifth starter - which he will be next year?

 

And don't give me, 'We can just go pick up Glendon Rusch.'. When Glendon Rusch is able to log 200+ innings and put up an ERA under five, then you can talk to me... :rolly

 

EDIT: I'd also like to know all of the fascination with Soriano. He'll hit us some homers, steal some bases - but he still won't solve our problem of not having guys who will get on base and create more contact.

 

I'm also puzzled as to why Soriano's production has dipped going from more of a pitcher's park in New York to a definite hitter's park at Texas... Has he been injured this year?

I don't think Garland is ever going to reach his so called "potential", in fact I think he's been about as good as he's ever going to be. Additionally, I don't want Soriano. I guess "none of the above" was not an option here.

Oh - there's a lot of 24 year old pitchers who have posted ERA's right around 4.50 every year, and continues to pitch as a solid fifth starter - which he will be next year?

 

And don't give me, 'We can just go pick up Glendon Rusch.'.  When Glendon Rusch is able to log 200+ innings and put up an ERA under five, then you can talk to me...  :rolly

Brett myers.

Adam eaton.

Jake peavy.

Zack greinke.

Brandon webb.

Are only several, i can name a bunch more if you would like that are the same if not better.