Garland is wanting to pitch on the west coast so we have really know shot of signing him ,so how about Garland for Zito atleast we would have a shot at re-signing Zito and still getting a good starter in return.

Why would Beane do that trade? To help the Sox out?

What makes you think Zito would sign an extension here? (He's a west coast guy right?)

I think we have a better than 75% chance of keeping Garland, but the thought that we might use him in a blockbuster is intriguing.

Why would Beane do that trade?  To help the Sox out?

What makes you think Zito would sign an extension here? (He's a west coast guy right?)

 

 

i thought the a's were trading zito so i think beane would have a better shot signing Garland seeing that garland likes it there,

I'm sure Beane wouldn't do JG for Zito straight up, but i like the idea.

QUOTE(C_LEE45 @ Dec 26, 2005 -> 04:38 PM)

i thought the a's were trading zito so i think beane would have a better shot signing Garland seeing that  garland likes it there,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...and the best Beane can get for Zito is a shot to sign Garland to an extension even though his agent said he wanted to test the market after the 2006 season???

 

 

:banghead

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?

If the A's felt like they couldn't fork over the money to sign Mulder, Zito, or Hudson to an extension, they aren't going to sign a slightly lesser pitcher to an extension for as much or more money than the other three would get

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?

 

 

Please you are making me sick! :puke

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?

 

 

you really dont have to read it and reply,

If the A's felt like they couldn't fork over the money to sign Mulder, Zito, or Hudson to an extension, they aren't going to sign a slightly lesser pitcher to an extension for as much or more money than the other three would get

 

 

i understand that and is a very good point BUT all am saying is maybe Beane will think Garland will start the season with oakland and like it and can sign him to an extension before the season is over,just a thought i would just hate to lose garland and not get a starter back because we dont know how Vaz will turn out and if count will sign thats all guys.

you really dont have to read it and reply,

 

The search function is there for a reason.

The search function is there for a reason.

 

search is turned off until the database is optimized by kap.

 

Buerhle is a St. Louis guy, he's signed. Kong is an LA kind of guy, he's signed. Randy Johnson was a low key, out of the spotlight guy, he's wearing pin stripes.

 

Players can't always get want they wa-ant. But they might find, they get what they need.

Players can't always get want they wa-ant. But they might find, they get what they need.

Just if they try sometime. -and that's all JG has really done.

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.

Oh boy another thread about garland being traded.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So, do you think it will happen?

 

Or maybe we should just keep him??

So, do you think it will happen?

 

Or maybe we should just keep him??

 

Maybe we should add another forum to the Hot Stove specifically for all things Jon Garland. I'm almost serious.

 

Maybe we should add another forum to the Hot Stove specifically for all things Jon Garland.  I'm almost serious.

 

 

Bad idea, we have a surplus of pitching so why trade a pitcher who will probably be a FA next year for another pitcher who will also become a FA. Also why would the A's want Garland???? This make's absolutely no sense, one of the worst trade ideas I've heard all yaer.

Bad idea, we have a surplus of pitching so why trade a pitcher who will probably be a FA next year for another pitcher who will also become a FA.

 

Unless we know for a fact that his numbers will decline this year, there's no reason to trade him. We are trying to win it all again this year, aren't we?

Garland is wanting to pitch on the west coast so we have really know shot of signing him ,so how about Garland for Zito atleast we would have a shot at re-signing Zito and still getting a good starter in return.

So, trade a FA pitcher, for an FA pitcher?

 

Nice

 

Dont forget to turn off your xbox.

Keep him.....for now. Since he'll be looking for the big bucks next year elsewhere, his numbers should be very good in '06. Milk him dry for a few months, then trade him at the deadline. At that point, every team on the cusp of a WC spot will be desperate for an arm. Trade him for whatever we might need at that time. We'll have enough starting pitching without him in the 2nd half.

Jon Garland for Brandon Wood, straight up. Would you take it?

 

Jon Garland and Joe Crede for Brandon Wood and Kendry Morales. Would you take it?

 

[edit]

 

FYI-

 

The Angels reportedly offered the Royals Brandon Wood AND Casey Kotchman for Mike Sweeney. Allard Baird, not knowing his head from his ass, reportedly turned the Angels down.

Edited December 28, 200520 yr by BlackBetsy

Keep him.....for now.  Since he'll be looking for the big bucks next year elsewhere, his numbers should be very good in '06.  Milk him dry for a few months, then trade him at the deadline.  At that point, every team on the cusp of a WC spot will be desperate for an arm.    Trade him for whatever we might need at that time.    We'll have enough starting pitching without him in the 2nd half.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What do you propose to do about them being several million over budget?

The Sox made a crapload of money in 2005, and stand to make a lot more in 2006. They have almosrt doubled their season ticket sales.

 

LET THEM EXPAND THE BUDGET!!!