WHarris1 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 Garland is 24 Schoeneweis is 30 So they’d go with Garland Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 Absolutely no to Garland! Rowand maybe. Both of 'em? Colangelo can kiss my Kentucky located ass! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox It To Em Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 That's a terrible trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 No way... While Arizona would like us to give them a great major league centerfielder and a guy who will eventually be a #2 starter (Especially in the national league.) KW would need to be shot if he made this deal. First off who replaces Aaron's defense in CF. I sure don't want to see Timo out there everyday and Gload can't even figure out RF. I don't want to rely on having to trade for a CF afterwards because the other GM's will sense our desperation and make us pay through the nose. Second Jon Garland will give us at least 15 win's this year and Show isn't getting any better. So we'd essentially maybe gain 2 wins and then still have to find a 5th starter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 If they want to "start" talking about Schoeney and Timo, ok ... but damn! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goober Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 I trade those 2 guys in a second, we would not miss either one of those guys. AR had 2 good months in 2 years and JG please he is a career 12-12 5.00 plus era pitcher all over him. If that and a couple of mid level prospects is all they want spin the wheel make the deal. you forgot the "Lets be progressive for once." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 Trade Crede, this team needs a new look offensively like not swinging for the fences. You could include Crede in a package with some minor leaguers for RJ then trade for someone like Joe Randa who does all the little things that Crede doesn't to play third base. I know I will get ripped for this but I am sick of this swing for the fences crap. Trade for Randa? A 36 year old career mediocrity who has NEVER hit 20 homers? His OBP is good- until this year (it stinks) And he's on the DL What's worse would be to trade rowand and garland and prospects for johnson I'd be more interested in trading rowand an an okay prospect for beltran (which is about what houston gave up to rent him) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 Trade for Randa? A 36 year old career mediocrity who has NEVER hit 20 homers? His OBP is good- until this year (it stinks) And he's on the DL What's worse would be to trade rowand and garland and prospects for johnson So trading a 4th OF and a #3/4 starts as well as some prospects for probably the best pitcher in all of baseball isn't worth it? Um. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 OUt of curiousity, who did people think that AZ was going to ask for??? Yeah they want talent for one of the best pitchers in baseball. Duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 OUt of curiousity, who did people think that AZ was going to ask for??? Yeah they want talent for one of the best pitchers in baseball. Duh. You mean you were suprised when the didn't ask for Jackson, Dransfeldt, Burke, and Davis? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 So trading a 4th OF and a #3/4 starts as well as some prospects for probably the best pitcher in all of baseball isn't worth it? Um. He's not the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 He's not the best. Very close if he isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 6th in ERA. 1st in K's. 2nd in wins on a bad team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 So trading a 4th OF and a #3/4 starts as well as some prospects for probably the best pitcher in all of baseball isn't worth it? Um. Including top propects? I wouldn't do it. I don't care much about losing Rowand. Garland is 24 years old and a pretty good pitcher right now. JOhnson is 40 and getting him would financially preclude us from signing some hitters that we desparately need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 Including top propects? I wouldn't do it. I don't care much about losing Rowand. Garland is 24 years old and a pretty good pitcher right now. JOhnson is 40 and getting him would financially preclude us from signing some hitters that we desparately need. Where did it say they would command top prospects with Garland and Rowand? I would assume they would look for 2 mid level with JG and AR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 6th in ERA. 1st in K's. 2nd in wins on a bad team. I'd rather have Schmidt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 I'd rather have Schmidt. Umm, that's nice. Too bad the Giants are contenders. I guess we shouldn't trade JG if we have to settle for the 2nd or 3rd best SP rather than the 1st best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 I'd rather have Schmidt. SF is in first place for the Wild Card. They aren't trading their #1 starter. Be realistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 SF is in first place for the Wild Card. They aren't trading their #1 starter. Be realistic. I didn't say trade for him I said he's better than Johnson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 This trade is only really beneficial if we make it to the playoffs. With good health. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 I am 100% against any trade that includes Garland. Rowand, Borchard, Sweeney, Diaz ... whoever. But not Garland. We've suffered through his maturing process and he's just about "there". No f***ing Way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 you forgot the "Lets be progressive for once." Added that later Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 Am I the only one who would do this in an instant? No. I do it in an instant too. Garland is not as good a pitcher as apparently everyone thinks. He does not have plus stuff, and quite frankly, he does not have good focus/demeanor on the hill. If we can get RJ for Garland and Rowand, along with a few other prospects, I do it in a heartbeat. If he had stuff like Carlos Zambrano, I could see why we would not give him up. But he does not. He has a mediocre breaking ball, a mediocre sinker, and a fastball that hits 94 when he's at his best. I'll take RJ, thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 No. I do it in an instant too. Garland is not as good a pitcher as apparently everyone thinks. He does not have plus stuff, and quite frankly, he does not have good focus/demeanor on the hill. If we can get RJ for Garland and Rowand, along with a few other prospects, I do it in a heartbeat. If he had stuff like Carlos Zambrano, I could see why we would not give him up. But he does not. He has a mediocre breaking ball, a mediocre sinker, and a fastball that hits 94 when he's at his best. I'll take RJ, thanks. Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted July 17, 2004 Share Posted July 17, 2004 Garland better not go anywhere. I'd part with arow to get rj but in no way do I want to part with JG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.