CWSGuy406 Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 BTW - Phil Rogers says Garland will get four million in arbitration, yet how would that happen? He has a 10-10 record with a 4.90 ERA or so. How would he get his salary almost doubled with those type of numbers? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSteve Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 BTW - Phil Rogers says Garland will get four million in arbitration, yet how would that happen? He has a 10-10 record with a 4.90 ERA or so. How would he get his salary almost doubled with those type of numbers? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's baseball for ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 BTW - Phil Rogers says Garland will get four million in arbitration, yet how would that happen? He has a 10-10 record with a 4.90 ERA or so. How would he get his salary almost doubled with those type of numbers? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I think it is bulls*** how has will get a raise while being worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisoxfan14 Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 Definetly Jon Garland! DEFINETLY!!! Cuz we don't need Soriano! We got Willliam! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 BTW - Phil Rogers says Garland will get four million in arbitration, yet how would that happen? He has a 10-10 record with a 4.90 ERA or so. How would he get his salary almost doubled with those type of numbers? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I think phil rodgers was trying to boost his case by falsly inflating JG's salary #. There's no reason for JG to get a 66% raise... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 Ok I thought abuot it for a second Rogers is an idiot.... MB was 2nd year arbitration eligible, and he got less than $4 Mil on the season. MB>>>>JG I understand that MB's contract increased each year, but that was in line with probable arbitration awards and FA looming on the horizon... If JG is going to get 4MIL at arbitration, trade him... And I'm a JG fan. That's just too much $ to be committing to someone who hasn't ever stepped it up; too much for a 5th starter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBetsy Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 If JG is going to get 4MIL at arbitration, trade him... And I'm a JG fan. That's just too much $ to be committing to someone who hasn't ever stepped it up; too much for a 5th starter. Agreed. If Garland gets $4.0 million there is something wrong with the system. l expect him to get more like $2.8-$3.0 million, which is still a raise from the $2.3 million he is making this year. But in any case, I don't see paying $6- $8 million for Soriano's .279/.320/.475 line. I know the White Sox can get that kind of production for much less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wong & Owens Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Let's see, the Sox have been flailing unsuccessfully for 4 years now courtesy of a lineup chock full of low-OBP, strikeout-heavy power hitters, and you want to give up a 24 year-old pitcher with plenty of upside for........a low-OBP, strikeout-prone power hitter. Pitchers require time to develop. The number of 24 year old pitchers that were dominating from day one can be counted on two feet over the last 10 years. While Garland's lack of progress is frustrating to be sure, he hasn't gotten worse, the stuff is there, and he seems VERY durable. If you keep him, at worst you get a solid 4th starter, but at best a 15-18 game winner. Garland will get it, eventually, just be patient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 DONT LISTEN TO THEM JONNY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! f*** soriano, Valdez at short is good enough for me, Garland is a solid pitcher every time out except for one bad inning everytime, as soon as he learns to bear down, he is going to be the a ground ball machine, if you all want to pick up overrated free agents, I know a team across town in blue and red that are looking for some sucker fans :fthecubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Ugh. It's not .280-24-81. It's .279/.322/.472. Compare that to Juan Uribe at .271/.318/.491. Roughly speaking, Juan Uribe has hit as well as Alfonso Soriano has. Don't let the 81 RBI fool you - If Soriano had the same number of at-bats as Uribe (428), he'd have 62 RBI...almost exactly the same as Uribe. So why is he worth soaking up $6-8 million per year that can be spent on pitching when we already have him on our team? I'm also convinced that Uribe is going to get BETTER rather than worse over the next few years: Walk rate: 2001 8 BB 273 AB - .029 BB/AB 2002 34 BB 566 AB - .060 BB/AB 2003 17 BB 316 AB - .054 BB/AB 2004 29 BB 428 AB - .067 BB/AB He's getting a better eye as the years improve. If he can hit .275 with a .335 OBP, he'll be a relatively valuable player. I like Juan, and especially if he costs $1 million/year like he should for the next couple of years. And his three year averages are roughly .290/.326/.506 with an OPS of of .890 away from the hitter friendly Yankee Stadium (cause for concern is Soriano's wretched OPS away from Arlington this year...which makes close to no sense looking at his numebrs historically). Not to mention you're getting a guy who can be a 40-40 man and get roughly 200 hits a year. But if you honestly believe that Juan Uribe and Jon Garland are going to pan out, you might need to stop huffing gas. Taking away the first two months of the season, Uribe has walked a grand total of 15 times in about 270 ABs. While Uribe can be very good with the bat, it seems he has caught the Joe Crede syndrome, one in which he is awful for months at a time. The numbers are still there for Uribe to fall flat on his face and put together one of those great .123/.190/.228 months that I come to expect from him. Then we move to Jon Garland. I don't believe that Jon is in the Kip Wells position, one where he'll succeed after moving on from the South Side. I sincerely believe that Jon will be a mediocre pitcher at best for the remainder of his career, and after seeing his numebrs progressively WORSEN year after year, I don't see how he'll improve. His sinker is insanely overrated, and his mental capacity is quite possibly limited to that of a goldfish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBetsy Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 But if you honestly believe that Juan Uribe and Jon Garland are going to pan out, you might need to stop huffing gas. Taking away the first two months of the season, Uribe has walked a grand total of 15 times in about 270 ABs. While Uribe can be very good with the bat, it seems he has caught the Joe Crede syndrome, one in which he is awful for months at a time. The numbers are still there for Uribe to fall flat on his face and put together one of those great .123/.190/.228 months that I come to expect from him. I don't know if they are going to pan out, but I do know that paying $6-$8 million for Soriano when you have Uribe doesn't make much sense. I don't think Uribe is great, I just don't think that Soriano is worth $4-$6 million more than him. That money could be spent elsewhere. Remember, we are talking about (in this thread) a proposed Garland/Soriano deal. Making this deal means the Sox now have two holes in their rotation - the 4 and 5 spots. Not making this deal means that if the Sox sign someone like Radke (I doubt it, but I pray), or another 1/2/3 starter, Garland is relegated to the #5 hole and Contreras goes to the #4 hole. A Contreras/Garland 4/5 combo would be one of the two or three best 4/5 combos in the AL. Moreover, taking pressure off Garland in the #5 hole probably makes him a better pitcher. Just a hunch. I think the $4-$6 million saved from Soriano could buy about 1/2 of a #2/#3 starter. The only question is whether the Sox would be willing to spend the other half to get a proven top of the rotation guy. Kenny Williams has said the Sox are interested in doing that. Heck, adding a #2/#3 guy to this team as it is currently constituted probably is enough to pull the Sox even with the Twins. But trading Garland for Soriano probably sets them back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted September 7, 2004 Author Share Posted September 7, 2004 But if you honestly believe that Juan Uribe and Jon Garland are going to pan out, you might need to stop huffing gas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 I wish you would all stop talking about Radke and Koskie, if we buy any Twins players, im boycotting the next season :fthecubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted September 7, 2004 Author Share Posted September 7, 2004 I wish you would all stop talking about Radke and Koskie, if we buy any Twins players, im boycotting the next season :fthecubs Fine with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 I wish you would all stop talking about Radke and Koskie, if we buy any Twins players, im boycotting the next season :fthecubs If they are good why does it matter what team they were on? I would take a player from the twins because they apparently know how to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 I wish you would all stop talking about Radke and Koskie, if we buy any Twins players, im boycotting the next season :fthecubs Why wouldn't you want guys who play the game right on your team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Because I want a team, not a bunch of players. You really think that bringing some Twins in the clubhouse would boost morale??? If so, then you havent been on many teams to begin with. The last thing they need is some of the enemy in the clubhouse :fthecubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted September 7, 2004 Author Share Posted September 7, 2004 When they join the Sox they aren't the enemy anymore. :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Because I want a team, not a bunch of players. You really think that bringing some Twins in the clubhouse would boost morale??? If so, then you havent been on many teams to begin with. The last thing they need is some of the enemy in the clubhouse :fthecubs Do you think they will not try for the white sox because they once played for the twins? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Because I want a team, not a bunch of players. You really think that bringing some Twins in the clubhouse would boost morale??? If so, then you havent been on many teams to begin with. The last thing they need is some of the enemy in the clubhouse :fthecubs If these guys are THAT dedicated to MN they will all take massive paycuts to go play for the Twins anyway, so anything like that would be moot. Meanwhile in the real world, these guys play for the name on the paycheck, and they will go out and play that hard for whoever they sign with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 And as far as they go for being players who play the game right??? if being an almost lifetime 500 pitcher with an ERA over 4 counts as playing the game right, then we have some serious issues if we think thats the way to throw. Especially when everyone has been complaining about Garland, who is shaping up to have about the same career path. And koskie's 249 avg looks alot like most of the players we have already, including his OBP. If you can tell me how this improves our team while killing our payroll, please enlighten me :fthecubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 And koskie's 249 avg looks alot like most of the players we have already, including his OBP. If you can tell me how this improves our team while killing our payroll, please enlighten me :fthecubs Koskie's obp is better than many of are hitters this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 not really, its even lower than willie's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 and his slugging is worse than uribe's, not exactly a huge improvement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 7, 2004 Share Posted September 7, 2004 Koskie's obp is better than many of are hitters this year. Crede .295 OBP .401 SLG .696 OPS 16 HR 55 RBI Koskie .343 OBP .488 SLG .831 OPS 22 HR 59 RBI Hmmm I wonder why people are interested in Koskie. 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.