I really dont see how it could be a good idea to trade Garland. All the benefits of trading him are all the reasons we should keep him. Hes young. hes been consistent and getting better and we have him for two more years.

Says who? He's pretty much an average pitcher who had one solid season, that's it. Jon is prime trade bait because he does have value because of his youth and we could probably get a top of the rotation return for a non top of the rotation starter.

Says who? He's pretty much an average pitcher who had one solid season, that's it. Jon is prime trade bait because he does have value because of his youth and we could probably get a top of the rotation return for a non top of the rotation starter.

mmm hmm. If you lock up Buehrle, garland automatically becomes the top trade bait. Not to mention, I see how hes getting better by watching him, but pure stat heads are going to see that last year's numbers where the same as a couple of years ago, which doesnt suggest improvement.

Edited March 7, 200719 yr by RockRaines

mmm hmm. If you lock up Buehrle, garland automatically becomes the top trade bait. Not to mention, I see how hes getting better by watching him, but pure stat heads are going to see that last year's numbers where the same as a couple of years ago, which doesnt suggest improvement.

I'm the last person in the world who can be called a stat head but Jon hasn't showed much improvement at all minus 05. He was pretty much our most inconsistant starter last season but he had a nice stretch where everyone else was sucking wind so it made him look even better. Jon is what he is, he's an average innings eater who you basically know what you're going to get out of. I'd trade him in a heart beat for the right package.

I am hopeing that something does get done with Mark B. $14M and 3 or 4 years is certainly on par with other contracts we have ben seeing and maybe even better than some.

Garland is a RHSP

Buehrle is a LHSP

 

LHSP >>> RHSP.

 

That's why you try to keep Buehrle. Garland will get a lot back in a trade, but not as much as Buehrle. Garland will get a lot in free agency, but not as much as Buehrle. IMHO.

Garland is a RHSP

Buehrle is a LHSP

 

LHSP >>> RHSP.

 

That's why you try to keep Buehrle. Garland will get a lot back in a trade, but not as much as Buehrle. Garland will get a lot in free agency, but not as much as Buehrle. IMHO.

 

That's of course ignoring the obvious that Buehrle is clearly the better pitcher. If for some reason the Sox are out of contention at the deadline, knock on wood, I would think a team like the Mets would give up a hell of a package for Garland seeing that it can be justified since Garland is locked in for 2008. I would have no qualms with a Garland trade whatsoever. (Note: This is only if Buehrle can be locked up, of course.)

I wasnt really saying its better to trade MB than Garland. I think we should keep both of them. Im saying Garland is a good asset to the rotation and we should keep him around. We have enough young pitchers. If we keep trading away our team for prospects when are we finished? This team is still built to win now and those guys both are key elements of that.

That's of course ignoring the obvious that Buehrle is clearly the better pitcher. If for some reason the Sox are out of contention at the deadline, knock on wood, I would think a team like the Mets would give up a hell of a package for Garland seeing that it can be justified since Garland is locked in for 2008. I would have no qualms with a Garland trade whatsoever. (Note: This is only if Buehrle can be locked up, of course.)

Thats what I was saying, if Buehrle is locked up, Garland immediately becomes the most tradeable pitcher due to his contract, his age, and his consistency. IN the NL garland might be closer to a sub 4 ERA that what he does in our division at our park.

The useless jersey club is a pretty awesome one which includes: Damaso Marte, Billy Koch and Joe Borchard. So don't feel too bad.

You forgot Bmac

 

Edited March 7, 200719 yr by IlliniKrush

You forgot Bmac

 

I have Jenks, Buehrle, AJP, and Fisk. So far so good.

You forgot Bmac

 

Oh I remembered. He doesn't belong in that exclusive company though.

Edited March 7, 200719 yr by Rowand44

This is my belief -- he's refering to the methods used to evaluate players. By suggesting he does things differently, he's refering to scouting more than statistical data. Why else would Floyd be on this ballclub, afterall?

 

I think you are right -- "Scout the player, not the stats". We'll see how well that works out with Floyd.

 

I really woudln't get worked up over the quote though. Williams isn't the chairman of the Fed, and I doubt he's choosing his words with great precision. I think it was just his way of saying he though they would "championship-caliber" pitchers, but at the same time he didn't want to put pressure on them to own the league in 2007.

I'm the last person in the world who can be called a stat head but Jon hasn't showed much improvement at all minus 05. He was pretty much our most inconsistant starter last season but he had a nice stretch where everyone else was sucking wind so it made him look even better. Jon is what he is, he's an average innings eater who you basically know what you're going to get out of. I'd trade him in a heart beat for the right package.

 

Actually, I think Buehrle was the most inconsistent Sox starter last season. He went from about 2 months of a sub-4 ERA to being the worst starting pitcher in baseball for about the last 3 months.

 

Jon Garland is not an ace or anything, but he's significantly better than average. His 4.5 ERA last season was 24th in AL. I think people don't realize how good a 4.5 ERA is now. Garland did that pitching home games in the Cell, which is a significant handicap. Also, from early June through September his ERA was 3.55 in 21 games. That's an impressive stretch of very good pitching. And to top it off BP ranks him as one of starting pitchers least likely to get injured in baseball. If the Sox trade him, they should get a good return.

This is my belief -- he's refering to the methods used to evaluate players. By suggesting he does things differently, he's refering to scouting more than statistical data. Why else would Floyd be on this ballclub, afterall?

 

KW has stated this before. While he looks at the stats he believe more in what he and his MLB scouts see. He his evaluations aren't driven by pure statistical data. He brought this up in regards to Iguchi when they signed him. The comments were (paraphasing here) "We were worried about signing him because nobody saw him live. We thought we saw enough on video to think it is a good signing."

 

This is one reason I like KW. Use all of the information available. Don't get caught up in only one aspect of evaluation. He isn't always right, nobody is. But he also make gutsy moves which you need to do to win. It's awfully difficult to win being conservative.

Edited March 7, 200719 yr by ptatc

it sure would be nice to know that all the 4 horsemen are locked up.

i expect a big year out of javy.... still on the fence when it comes to mark... i hope he is able to come back strong after that piss poor second half.

 

The 4 Horsemen are Contreras, Buehrle, Garcia, and Garland. I should say "were."

yes, you should say were....

the four horsemen are now: mark, jose, jon, and javy

3 years @42M with an option for a 4th. That's probably what KW is going to offer here.

 

And honestly, if you can get a deal like that done, I'd probably do it. But I'd make sure a no trade clause is NOT included.

 

Why you ask? Well to keep our options open. We've seen the demand for starting pitching this off-season. In the next off-season if a John Danks is ready to crack that rotation, you can trade a Garland or Vazquez for prospects, to help solidify this team as a contender over the long - term, free up payroll AND let a young stud into the rotation.

 

For KW to come out with 2 starting pitchers locked up for the next 3-4 seasons, while getting 4 pitching prospects for 2 our of old starters, I think he's done a very good job this off-season, and one that has been underrated.

For KW to come out with 2 starting pitchers locked up for the next 3-4 seasons, while getting 4 pitching prospects for 2 our of old starters, I think he's done a very good job this off-season, and one that has been underrated.

 

Other than the Podsednik resigning, I have no problems with the offseason. The McCarthy move is ballsy, but I think we're getting more talent. Hopefully Danks can become a solid #3 for the Sox and Masset can be a strong reliever for a while.

 

But that Pods signing... yugh. So useless. When he takes a roster spot away from Anderson or Eduardo Perez not gonna be a fun day.

Other than the Podsednik resigning, I have no problems with the offseason. The McCarthy move is ballsy, but I think we're getting more talent. Hopefully Danks can become a solid #3 for the Sox and Masset can be a strong reliever for a while.

 

But that Pods signing... yugh. So useless. When he takes a roster spot away from Anderson or Eduardo Perez not gonna be a fun day.

Agreed.

 

I think KW is hoping that Pods is going to return to his pre 2005 ASB form, but I don't see that happening.

Agreed.

 

I think KW is hoping that Pods is going to return to his pre 2005 ASB form, but I don't see that happening.

ill bet on Pablo producing more than PODS this season.

I really don't see a Buehrle deal getting done, but that's just me.

 

Unless he really wants to stay in Chicago, he'd be stupid to not test the market and see what is out there.

I say forget about Buehrle for now, and try and get Dye and Iguchi... Also, when was the last time Levine ever got something rright?

If the reports are accurate, Buerhle basically turned down the same contract extension Vazquez just signed last All Star break, which was right at the beginning of his freefall. IMO either he's starting to question if he can get people out anymore or he's going to be asking for a lot more than Levine thinks.

If the reports are accurate, Buerhle basically turned down the same contract extension Vazquez just signed last All Star break, which was right at the beginning of his freefall. IMO either he's starting to question if he can get people out anymore or he's going to be asking for a lot more than Levine thinks.

Agreed. If MB thinks he'll return to form, he'll wait and cash in. And on the Sox side, you have to be concerned about the catastrophe that was last year.

 

I still think the possibility of an extension died last year, and I'm not gonna believe any differently until a contract is actually signed, whatever Levine says.

He thinks KW will counter with 3yrs @ 14 with an option for a 4th.

 

I think it would be great for both sides if this contract came to pass.

If Mark really wants to be a White Sox this would be fair.

He should sign it before the start of the season, also, like Vazzy.

No matter what the parties say, his contract will be in all the articles, especially

Moronotti all year long.

If Mark gets rocked, it will be contract talk.

If Mark pitches a gem, there will be contract talk.

It's not going to be pretty.

He should pull a Vazzy and sign for three and the Sox should give that option you

speak of. Isn't this a no brainer for both sides???

If the Cardinals want him so badly then they can make KW an offer he can't refuse.

SIGN MARK NOW THIS IS A DISTRACTION THE SOX DON'T NEED.

Edited March 8, 200719 yr by greg775