Garland

[Balta1701]

I wasn't so much comparing the two as I was saying that the 18-10 year may be the best we will ever see from Garland. You probably will never see Esteban Loaiza win 21 games in a season again, either. Either way, too early to tell.

 

Even so, 12 wins a season isn't bad for a back of the rotation starter.

One key difference though is that Loaiza lost a lot of velocity the year after his 21 win season, Garland is still throwing at the speeds he had last year, he's just not controlling things well or pitching very smart.

[WCSox]

Jon was a very consistent pitcher for us last season, his "breakout" year if you will. He's going to have times in his career where he'll be inconsistent, I think we all know that. His main problem is that he's not throwing enough first pitch strikes, and is falling behind in the count.

 

If Coop can get him on workin on fixing that, I think he can get back to some sort of resemblence to the form he put up last season.

 

I wouldn't call giving up 10ER in 4 starts being consistent, that's a nice little stretch there for Jon. If we're complaining about pitchers, what about Mark Buehrle who's given up 27 hits in his last 3 starts?

 

That comparison doesn't make sense to me. Unlike Garland, Buehrle has had only one "mediocre" season as a full-time starter. Buehrle has been one of the better pitchers in the league for several seasons. On the other hand, Garland has yet to show that last year wasn't a fluke. He still has a lot to prove.

 

I'm confident that Jon can snap out of this and pitch more like the guy that we saw last year. But, as Milkman pointed out earlier, 2005 may have been more of a "career year" than a "breakout year" for Garland. The jury's still out on that one. And while fans may have been more forgiving back in 2003 when Jon was stuck at the back of the rotation and being paid signficantly less, his $29 million contract has raised expectations substantially.

Edited May 13, 2006 by WCSox

[G&T]

Even so, 12 wins a season isn't bad for a back of the rotation starter.

 

While this is true, I'm sick of making this excuse for him after last season's success. Plus, there is another guy on this team that might win more than 12 games a year and he isn't in the rotation yet. That tells me that if Garland doesn't show a semblance of last year, he might find himself gone in a trade.

That said, I'd much rather he start pitching better than get traded.

[DBAHO]

That comparison doesn't make sense to me. Unlike Garland, Buehrle has had only one "mediocre" season as a full-time starter. Buehrle has been one of the better pitchers in the league for several seasons. On the other hand, Garland has yet to show that last year wasn't a fluke. He still has a lot to prove.

 

I'm confident that Jon can snap out of this and pitch more like the guy that we saw last year. But, as Milkman pointed out earlier, 2005 may have been more of a "career year" than a "breakout year" for Garland. The jury's still out on that one. And while fans may have been more forgiving back in 2003 when Jon was stuck at the back of the rotation and being paid signficantly less, his $29 million contract has raised expectations substantially.

My point was on the Buerhle thing was that we've seen Mark go through stages before where he has struggled and given up a lot of hits, and that's what's happening to JG now. It's a welcome reality check for him hopefully, and I still think he'll turn it around. He wasn't exactly in a contract year last season, since the Sox still held his rights for another 2 seasons, IIRC, so it's not really like another Adrian Beltre type of situation.

 

Pitchers can fluctuate from year to year, I understand that. But I find it hard to believe that JG is suddenly a mediocre starter again, considering his age, his arm and no health issues, and he's still throwing the same type of stuff. I think he'll turn it around still, but we're lucky we've got a good insurance plan in B-Mac just in case.

[Rowand44]

Contract year dude. Now that he got his money he's back to his old form. We all talked about the possibility of this happening.

When did Jon ever have an era at almost 7?? This is a bad stretch as of right now, he's not all the sudden back to his old form...oh ya, since when was last year his contract year?

[Dick Allen]

I believe Garland is making around $7 million this year, which is right around or a little below what his arbitration number would have been. He makes $22 million total the next 2 seasons. If he's the pre-2005 Garland in 2006, its going to be very difficult trading him. He was great last year, but even JR has said last year is in the past. This is a guy who has been very hittable from the last couple of weeks of spring training on. Widger mentioned earlier in the year that he had a sore shoulder, and nobody picked up on that. I don't know if its still bothering him. A lot of people were putting the blame on his mediocrity before on Jerry Manuel, and of course Ozzie was getting a lot of credit for his success last season. It was never Manuel's fault Garland got lit up often, just as its not Ozzie's fault he's getting hit hard this season. He's a #4 or #5 guy who had everything fall into place for himself last season. If his control is off, like Buerhle he will get hit, especially if his sinker isn't working, which it hasn't much this year. His control is off more than Buerhle's. As long as he's not injured, he will still have some good games, he always has, but they won't be as frequent as last season.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I agree that Jon should be so much better than what we've seen thus far, and it's really disappointing that he keeps having these outings where he gets shellacked. Hell, he even had AJ doing the catching for him last night and still got crushed. No more Widger as an excuse.

 

I hate to have to say it, but I'm going to say it anyway...if Jon keeps putting up games like last night...well, it might be time to start looking at the backup option with the incredible changeup. Give Jon some extra rest out in the pen or something like that.

 

You don't give out 29 million dollar contracts to relievers.

[WCSox]

My point was on the Buerhle thing was that we've seen Mark go through stages before where he has struggled and given up a lot of hits, and that's what's happening to JG now.

 

Yes, and my point was that Mark has historically gotten himself out of those stages very quickly, so few people bother to worry about him. Outside of 2003 (14-14/4.14), he's been one of the elite pitchers in the league since '01. On the other hand, Garland's history (excluding last year) was nothing BUT inconsistent and mediocre pitching.

 

But I find it hard to believe that JG is suddenly a mediocre starter again, considering his age, his arm and no health issues, and he's still throwing the same type of stuff.

 

Considering that Garland was a mediocre starter for three straight years prior to '05, I don't see why he's necessarily going to stay on his '05 pace. As you pointed out, his age and arm strength suggest that he may. Coop may have also been a major factor in his development, which would also support your point. But some pitchers are just all over the place in terms of year-to-year consistency. Jose Lima was bad when he came up with the Tigers, had two brilliant years in Houston, reverted back to an awful pitcher and was traded back to the Tigers where he continued to suck, had a few good starts in KC before tanking the rest of the '03 season, had a decent year with Dodgers in '04, and was horrible again in KC last year. Of course, that's an extreme example, but I still think that Kenny took a bit of a gamble by re-signing Garland. Only time will tell...

[Balta1701]

You don't give out 29 million dollar contracts to relievers.

You don't keep McCarthy in the bullpen if Garland can't cut it.

[Jordan4life_2007]

You don't keep McCarthy in the bullpen if Garland can't cut it.

 

Great. Let's move Jon to the 'pen. I'm sure he'd flourish.

[Balta1701]

Great. Let's move Jon to the 'pen. I'm sure he'd flourish.

Maybe just for a couple weeks while he gets his head together, rests up his arm, and works on whatever he's missing?

 

A ton of people here get furious with Ozzie when he loses games with the "Sunday lineup", giving the regulars too much rest, we can't sacrifice a single game, etc. Well if Garland is turning into a terrible loss every other time out, maybe we ought to give the kid a shot.

[Gene Honda Civic]

Great. Let's move Jon to the 'pen. I'm sure he'd flourish.

I'd be surprised if he didn't

 

Garland's best at the beginning of games.

1st inning -- .252 .320 .378

2nd Inning -- .240 .325 .372

3rd -- .275 .324 .458

4th -- .258 .332 .434

5th -- .310 .364 .495

6th -- .284 .354 .490

7th -- .253 .314 .419

8th -- .266 .328 .468

[WCSox]

A ton of people here get furious with Ozzie when he loses games with the "Sunday lineup", giving the regulars too much rest, we can't sacrifice a single game, etc. Well if Garland is turning into a terrible loss every other time out, maybe we ought to give the kid a shot.

 

Ozzie should stick with him at least until the break. Also consider that trading Garland may affect the team's ability to re-sign Buehrle.

[Balta1701]

Ozzie should stick with him at least until the break. Also consider that trading Garland may affect the team's ability to re-sign Buehrle.

I have no urge to see JG traded. I just want him to stop costing us games.

[Gene Honda Civic]

Ozzie should stick with him at least until the break. Also consider that trading Garland may affect the team's ability to re-sign Buehrle.

Garland has a full no-trade clause in '06

[Felix]

You don't give out 29 million dollar contracts to relievers.

You don't give out 29 million dollar contracts to mediocre starters either, but that was already done.

[WCSox]

I have no urge to see JG traded. I just want him to stop costing us games.

 

Considering that McCarthy is more than capable of starting right now and that all of our starters are making big money, one of them will most likely be gone next year. I used to think that Garcia would be the odd man out, but it'll probably be Garland if he continues to pitch this way.

[worldchampsox05]

You don't give out 29 million dollar contracts to mediocre starters either, but that was already done.

i agree..Jon hasnt done anything so far this year to prove that he is worth that 29 million..

[G&T]

You don't give out 29 million dollar contracts to mediocre starters either, but that was already done.

 

Plenty of teams give much worse contracts to mediocre pitchers.

[Felix]

Plenty of teams give much worse contracts to mediocre pitchers.

That doesn't make Garland's contract any better, especially with the no-trade clause for '06.

[witesoxfan]

You don't give out 29 million dollar contracts to mediocre starters either, but that was already done.

 

Correct. You give them 60 million dollars.

[G&T]

That doesn't make Garland's contract any better, especially with the no-trade clause for '06.

 

I think it does because the other bad contracts that have been given out set the market and Garland's deal isn't that bad considering his age and the year he had in 2005. Many teams will take that contract just for a guy who can take the ball every 5 days. If Garland is put on the trading block there will be someone saying that he just needs a change of scenery. In any event, you have to admit that he isn't breaking the bank.

Like I said before though, I'd rather that he pitch better so that he doesn't need to be dealt.

[BobDylan]

Nice to see our own fans turn on our players so quickly, especially after what Jon did last season.

 

So he has a good year last year and he earns the right to suck balls and not get hammered by the fans?

[Jordan4life_2007]

So he has a good year last year and he earns the right to suck balls and not get hammered by the fans?

 

Or maybe we can still support Jon through his rough patch and hope he gets on track soon? My bad. This is Soxtalk we're talking about.

[effectivelywild]

I really hope Garland gets back on track. Last year, when he was on, he was a force. That being said, I hope that his slow start this season is due to small sample size and not that last year was a fluke. If I have ever prayed against a regression to the mean, let this not be it. I would love if Garland 2005 could show up on this staff. Also, you know, a harder throwing Garcia. Just wishing.