"Terrible"? That's a pretty bold statement, and one that would be more accurately used to describe someone like Anderson (at the plate, at least). His numbers don't look good so far this year, but he's still a ML-caliber player. He had an OBP of .385 and hit 29 jacks last season, so I wouldn't say he's washed up just yet.

 

All you have to do is watch Edmonds play, and you can see he's clearly on the downside of his career. He's lost more than one step in the outfield, and his swing has more holes in it than the bottom of the Sox lineup.

 

Mulder is another pitcher who it looks like he's past his peak. He threw a ton of innings during the early part of his career, and he hasn't looked the same for over a year now. Some team's going to overpay for him this offseason.

Well first of all, Garland is an average pitcher. Nothing more. Don't pull out this "18 game winner" garbage, it doesn't mean anything in terms of how good a pitcher he is.

 

Second of all, Rowand has a .303/.353/.513 line this year and had a .310/.361/.544 line in 2004. On top of that, he plays phenomenal defense, is a clubhouse leader, and a fan favorite wherever he goes. He leaves it all on the field, and teams love players like that.

 

Now, I don't think they would accept that deal, but you vastly underrate Rowand and overrate Garland.

 

 

At Garland's worst, he's going to win you about 10-12 games, give you a league average ERA and eat up 200+ innings. Couple that with his upside and he's a valuable commondity. He's worth much more than an average hitting/good defensive CF.

 

Aaron Rowand man love is kind of creepy. Besides, I thought Kirk Hinrich was the new Aaron Rowand.

At Garland's worst, he's going to win you about 10-12 games, give you a league average ERA and eat up 200+ innings. Couple that with his upside and he's a valuable commondity. He's worth much more than an average hitting/good defensive CF.

 

Aaron Rowand man love is kind of creepy. Besides, I thought Kirk Hinrich was the new Aaron Rowand.

 

Considering I was not exactly a Rowand lover on this site, you're arguing with the wrong person about Rowand's greatness. As you said, at Garland's worst, he wins you 10-12 games. That's not exactly a promising statement about someone who's going to be making almost 10 million a year. The funny thing is that I would have never thought I'd see the day where I can clearly state that if this team had Rowand this season, and not Garland, we'd be a better overall team.

Garland is beyond dreadful. There are currently 97 pitchers in MLB who have pitched enough innings to qualify for leading the league in ERA. Garland is ranked 92. Doesn't sound like a guy due $22 million total for 2007 and 2008. His numbers are Jaime Navarro-esque.

Garland is beyond dreadful. There are currently 97 pitchers in MLB who have pitched enough innings to qualify for leading the league in ERA. Garland is ranked 92. Doesn't sound like a guy due $22 million total for 2007 and 2008. His numbers are Jaime Navarro-esque.

 

But....but....but....he's an 18 game winner.

Garland is beyond dreadful. There are currently 97 pitchers in MLB who have pitched enough innings to qualify for leading the league in ERA. Garland is ranked 92. Doesn't sound like a guy due $22 million total for 2007 and 2008. His numbers are Jaime Navarro-esque.

Some other interesting selections from that list

 

#78: Cliff Lee

#80: Randy Johnson

81: Matt Morris

88: Andy Pettitte

89: Felix Hernandez

90: John Lieber

92: Erik Bedard

97: Brad Radke

98: Jeff Weaver.

Some other interesting selections from that list

 

#78: Cliff Lee

#80: Randy Johnson

81: Matt Morris

88: Andy Pettitte

89: Felix Hernandez

90: John Lieber

92: Erik Bedard

97: Brad Radke

98: Jeff Weaver.

 

 

Basically, some damn good pitchers who are having poor halves. I count 6 guys that would net you a hell of a lot more than Rowand.

Basically, some damn good pitchers who are having poor halves. I count 6 guys that would net you a hell of a lot more than Rowand.

 

Who? The only ones who have any trade value left are Felix, C. Lee, and Bedard. The rest of the guys are old veterans with bloated contracts.

At Garland's worst, he's going to win you about 10-12 games, give you a league average ERA and eat up 200+ innings. Couple that with his upside and he's a valuable commondity. He's worth much more than an average hitting/good defensive CF.

So you are saying that Garland is an average pitcher. Thats exactly what I said. (oh, and for fun, Garland has only had 2 seasons with 200+ innings pitched)

 

Also, Rowand is not an average hitter. After last year, there was a question of whether 2004 was his true colors, or if 2005 was more likely for him. Thus far this year, he's doing pretty damn well. Not quite 2004, but far from being 2005. He's killing the ball on the road (showing that his numbers aren't really skewed by hitting in Philly), and played good defense. Couple that with his upside (shown in 2004, which is a better upside than Garland's), and he's a valuable commodity.

Edited June 3, 200619 yr by Felix

I can't believe people actually write crap like this. You can't really believe what you're saying.

 

 

Not sure why you have a problem with what is being said here... It's true.

So you are saying that Garland is an average pitcher. Thats exactly what I said. (oh, and for fun, Garland has only had 2 seasons with 200+ innings pitched)

 

Also, Rowand is not an average hitter. After last year, there was a question of whether 2004 was his true colors, or if 2005 was more likely for him. Thus far this year, he's doing pretty damn well. Not quite 2004, but far from being 2005. He's killing the ball on the road (showing that his numbers aren't really skewed by hitting in Philly), and played good defense. Couple that with his upside (shown in 2004, which is a better upside than Garland's), and he's a valuable commodity.

 

 

Rowand has more upside than Garland? WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

 

Jesus. Rowand has no upside. What you see is what you get.

 

 

Use some f***in common sense... .310 hitter

 

BTW... I don't mean to be an asshole, but it seems Sox fans have lost some common sense.

More likely I get pregnant. No way this team trades Rowand. He's a hero in this town, something management needs so desperately.

Seems the Phillie fans on their board have a high opinion of Rowand. We need him back.

Who? The only ones who have any trade value left are Felix, C. Lee, and Bedard. The rest of the guys are old veterans with bloated contracts.

They might not net you a lot more than Rowand, but the odds of them failing to improve their numbers as the year goes on are pretty remote for almost all the guys I put on my little list there.

Use some f***in common sense... .310 hitter

.905 OPS >>>>> 18 game winner

especially when you consider Rowand's spectacular defense. A .905 OPS would put him in the top 5 in all CF in every year since 2000 (didn't look at the years before that, not really worth it), and when you throw in the defense, it puts him as a top 5 CF all around.

Jim Edmonds can't contribute in the majors? Unless he's suffered some injury that I'm unaware of, that's not really an accurate statement.

 

 

Jun 2 The Cardinals will delay making a decision on whether or not to put Edmonds on the disabled list until the end of the weekend. The center fielder hasn't played since last Sunday because of an abdominal strain. A specialist ruled out a hernia on Wednesday."We're going to hold off on a decision for a day or so," trainer Barry Weinberg said. "We need to see how he feels."

All you have to do is watch Edmonds play, and you can see he's clearly on the downside of his career. He's lost more than one step in the outfield, and his swing has more holes in it than the bottom of the Sox lineup.

 

Mulder is another pitcher who it looks like he's past his peak. He threw a ton of innings during the early part of his career, and he hasn't looked the same for over a year now. Some team's going to overpay for him this offseason.

 

I've watched plenty of Edmonds and, yes, it's dead obvious that he's beginning to decline. Hell, that was evident last year. He took a significant drop in plate production from '04 to '05. Agreed also that he's going to have to move to LF at some point soon. But I certainly wouldn't say that he's "terrible." Even if he has to be moved to LF, he still has another productive year or two in him.

 

Mulder was pretty decent last season, although his WHIP has been up in the 1.36-1.38 range over the past two years. I'm not sure what effect being thrown into the rotation at age 22 had on him... we'll see how he finishes this season.

Man, I love the respect they give Rowand in Phili.

 

Oh yeah, a no-trade clause can be waived, I believe, if the players wants it to be.

 

Prolly been said earlier in the thread, but I only read page one and then posted this comment.

Guys, Garland is not going anywhere.

 

I just don't see Garland waiving his no trade clause, unless of course maybe...just maybe it's to a team in California. (Where Garland is from)

 

CWSOX45

I just don't see Garland waiving his no trade clause

Exactly. Why would he want to leave one of the best teams in baseball?

Jon Garland cannot be traded; however, John Garland might.

Edited June 4, 200619 yr by knightni

Nobody cares about the Ocho?

Man, I love the respect they give Rowand in Phili.

 

Oh yeah, a no-trade clause can be waived, I believe, if the players wants it to be.

 

Prolly been said earlier in the thread, but I only read page one and then posted this comment.

And I'm sure Jon Garland would want to waive that no trade clause to go to Philly.

 

.905 OPS >>>>> 18 game winner

especially when you consider Rowand's spectacular defense. A .905 OPS would put him in the top 5 in all CF in every year since 2000 (didn't look at the years before that, not really worth it), and when you throw in the defense, it puts him as a top 5 CF all around.

I still think a lot of teams would rather take the SP though, if Garland was performing at his 2005 level. Not that I'm saying Rowand isn't valuable at all, but getting a good SP who's signed for 3 years would be extremely valuable for a lot of teams.

 

I'm sure if you looked at say the Yankees, if Garland was performing like he did last season, he could actually be their #1 starter right now.

Nobody cares about the Ocho?

 

The ocho is my first and foremost sports-source of the day.

Take it for what it's worth, got it off the Philles board.

http://www.philaphans.com/forums/showthrea...&threadid=41726

 

I've heard the rumor about getting Rowand back since he was first traded, but we can't trade Garland yet.

 

 

 

Bob

I've heard the rumor about getting Rowand back since he was first traded, but we can't trade Garland yet.

Bob

Garland can be traded, however, he would have to be willing to waive his no trade clause and I don't think he wants to do so, although thats not to say its impossible to trade him.