Hatchetman Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Brown had injuries which caused the dip in performance. and then some think steroids helped his career quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 So we can b**** and moan next year about the 5th starter hole being a black hole? Felix Diaz is not a major league starter. I'd rather pay Garland $3 million to go 11-11 from the 5th hole with a 4.8 ERA than to watch the parade of horribles the Sox trotted out this year - 100 earned runs in 100 innings (about that). Those extra 11 wins are worth a lot of $$, in my book. Here's to hoping that the Sox make a ground-ball, top-of-the-rotation starter like Clement, Odalis Perez or Carl Pavano their #1 free agent signing. Here's to hoping that Garland is a #5 starter for the White Sox next year and puts up the same numbers as this year.... And here's to hoping that Jose Contreras gets a brain transplant in the offseason. If our 5th starter is getting paid 4-5 million dollars to go .500 then we are retarded. We arent the yankees and dont have the payroll for that, on this team, the 5th starter is going to have to cost under a million, thats the bottom line OUT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Brown had injuries which caused the dip in performance. and then some think steroids helped his career quite a bit. Steroids have helped alot of players careers in general. Also do you have any reason to believe he was on steroids? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 not personally, but that's the rumor...just like with sosa, it's only a rumor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 If our 5th starter is getting paid 4-5 million dollars to go .500 then we are retarded. We arent the yankees and dont have the payroll for that, on this team, the 5th starter is going to have to cost under a million, thats the bottom line OUT Do you not expect us to sign a free agent pitcher this off-season? For the most part terrible starters in free agency will make more than 1 million Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 not personally, but that's the rumor...just like with sosa, it's only a rumor. Sosa is a different story, it is more than a rumor same goes with bonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 If Garland was pitching in a park like PETCO he would have far better numbers no doubt. But he's still only 24, been pitching in the majors for 3 or 4 years now, and to me if we trade him it'll be Kip Wells all over again. Fine with me, Kip wells is 5-7 and had already given up 14 homeruns by the time he was injured. This is basically along the exact same line as Garland with the same era, and BAA. They both suck ass OUT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Fine with me, Kip wells is 5-7 and had already given up 14 homeruns by the time he was injured. This is basically along the exact same line as Garland with the same era, and BAA. They both suck ass OUT The reason wells was pitching so bad i believe is because of his injury. In the last two years he had era's of 3.50 and 3.28. He has hardly ''sucked''. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 also check out brown's gopher ball rate compared to garland's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 The reason wells was pitching so bad i believe is because of his injury. In the last two years he had era's of 3.50 and 3.28. He has hardly ''sucked''. not great either, only one winning season, no thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Do you not expect us to sign a free agent pitcher this off-season? For the most part terrible starters in free agency will make more than 1 million we arent going to sign a 5th starter thats for sure. If you are going to sign an FA for a couple of mil, he isnt going to be the bottom of the rotation OUT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 not great either, only one winning season, no thanks Was it his fault that the offense did not score runs? He did his part but the offense did not do theirs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 we arent going to sign a 5th starter thats for sure. If you are going to sign an FA for a couple of mil, he isnt going to be the bottom of the rotation OUT We sign one of perez, clement, radke, morris. Book it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 We sign one of perez, clement, radke, morris. Book it. Perez, Radke, Clement ( i hope not) are not fifth starters, so not sure what that post is supposed to mean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Perez, Radke, Clement ( i hope not) are not fifth starters, so not sure what that post is supposed to mean I am just saying that we will have a fifth starter in making more than 1 million next year. Because one of them will be signed and garland will be pushed back into the 5th spot in the rotation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDsDirtySox Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 I believe JD's question was already answered by qwerty, 3E8, and yours truly. FOR SURE: Oakland, Boston, Yanks, Cubs, Florida, Houston, St. Louis. STRONG CASE: San Diego, L.A., Atlanta, Twins. A CASE: Cleveland, Mets, Toronto, Philly. That's close to 85% isn't it? Small Market teams: Twins, Indians, Florida, Oakland, Toronto. I totally disagree with your list. I'll give you Oakland, New York (A), and Chicago (N), and prolly even Atlanta, but as for the following: Have you looked at these other teams? Boston: Are you talking about Lowe who has 14 wins and an ERA over 5, with a lot less innings that Garland? Florida: Other than Pavano, No one else has been Dependable. Beckett has been awful, and Willis is below .500. Burnett is good, but still hasn't fully recovered for this season. Houston: I assume you are talking about one of the two guys that are out for the season, but when they were healthy they weren't that great. St. Louis: I think I could win 15 with that Offense and Defense on my side. San Diego: I'd take Garland over Wells or Eaton (and they are pitching in a Pitchers Park) The rest I think are big time stretches. I need to get back to some work, but I really think Garland is a better option that many out there. I will still stick to my 85%. I have heard many scouts compare Garland's stuff and attitude to that of Kevin Brown. Brown was viewed as a punk kid in Texas, but once he matured and got his act together, he became the #1 pitcher in Baseball (then the injuries got to him). I really like Garland and am still holding out hope that he will keep getting better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 I totally disagree with your list. I'll give you Oakland, New York (A), and Chicago (N), and prolly even Atlanta, but as for the following: Have you looked at these other teams? Boston: Are you talking about Lowe who has 14 wins and an ERA over 5, with a lot less innings that Garland? Florida: Other than Pavano, No one else has been Dependable. Beckett has been awful, and Willis is below .500. Burnett is good, but still hasn't fully recovered for this season. Houston: I assume you are talking about one of the two guys that are out for the season, but when they were healthy they weren't that great. St. Louis: I think I could win 15 with that Offense and Defense on my side. San Diego: I'd take Garland over Wells or Eaton (and they are pitching in a Pitchers Park) The rest I think are big time stretches. I need to get back to some work, but I really think Garland is a better option that many out there. I will still stick to my 85%. I have heard many scouts compare Garland's stuff and attitude to that of Kevin Brown. Brown was viewed as a punk kid in Texas, but once he matured and got his act together, he became the #1 pitcher in Baseball (then the injuries got to him). I really like Garland and am still holding out hope that he will keep getting better. St.Louis. But have you looked at the season all five of the cardinal starters have had this year? Highest era is 4.55 and the lowest is 3.46 which is pretty damn good. Florida- Pavano has been excellent this year. Becket has not been awful his era is 4.00 Willis has pitched pretty well just not lcuky enough to get the offensive support. Burnett's 3.74 era would be the best on our team. So they would also be better. Houston- Clemens, miller, and oswalt that is all i have to say. San diego- Peavy's era is 2.25,, david wells's era is 3.65, and brian lawrence's era is 3.92 all better than any of out starting pitchers .Every other team we have mentioned also is better at least this season. Watch a healthy brown pitch compared to a healthy garland pitch there is no comparison. They are nothing alike, garland fastball is straight the majority of the time. His sinker does not sink and he hangs a s*** load of breaking balls. Kevin brown rarely has any of those happen to him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 I am just saying that we will have a fifth starter in making more than 1 million next year. Because one of them will be signed and garland will be pushed back into the 5th spot in the rotation. and im saying, why have a 5th starter cost that much, unload garland and you just freed up 3 more million to sign a good fa OUT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 and im saying, why have a 5th starter cost that much, unload garland and you just freed up 3 more million to sign a good fa OUT For $3 million who do you expect to be able to sign that is going to put up better numbers than Garland? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 For $3 million who do you expect to be able to sign that is going to put up better numbers than Garland? I would also like to know the answer to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 For $3 million who do you expect to be able to sign that is going to put up better numbers than Garland? This isnt brain surgery, add that 3 million to your offer for a good top of the rotation guy, move grilli to the 5th spot, and you will have Mark, Jose, Freddie, FA, and Grilli. Never did I say buy a starter for 3 million, I am saying that moving Jon to the 5th spot and paying him that much money is a waste. this would look better than maybe missing out on a good deal because we want to keep sub .500 garland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 This isnt brain surgery, add that 3 million to your offer for a good top of the rotation guy, move grilli to the 5th spot, and you will have Mark, Jose, Freddie, FA, and Grilli. Never did I say buy a starter for 3 million, I am saying that moving Jon to the 5th spot and paying him that much money is a waste. this would look better than maybe missing out on a good deal because we want to keep sub .500 garland. Grilli would have a 6 era through out the course of a full season. If he gets lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 f*** grilli. diaz could keep it around 5.25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 This isnt brain surgery, add that 3 million to your offer for a good top of the rotation guy, move grilli to the 5th spot, and you will have Mark, Jose, Freddie, FA, and Grilli. Never did I say buy a starter for 3 million, I am saying that moving Jon to the 5th spot and paying him that much money is a waste. this would look better than maybe missing out on a good deal because we want to keep sub .500 garland. Apparantly it is brain surgery. Would you rather have Garland as a fifth starter, who will go out there and kick most other team's fifth starter's ass (assuming somone competent replaces him higher up in the rotation) or Grilli (or other [get me a fifth starter plug here] pitcher?) If Garland is our fifth starter, he wins 16+ games next year. Book it. If he's a 3 or 4, he's back to like now (whatever his record is) - sorry don't have time to look it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Grilli would have a 6 era through out the course of a full season. If he gets lucky. This is based on your theory that his 12 major league games is a good measuring stick of what a starter can do throughout his career. I guess that would make sense.....wait no it doesnt. BTW wasting 4 million dollars on a fifth starter is ridiculous. If you dont like Grilli, than maybe the SOX gm can put someone else in there that YOU would feel comfortable with. This is a numbers game, and regardless of our high hopes, we dont have much money. If we are going to lose more that half the games that Garland pitches, why not lose the same amount of games for 3 million less in payroll. 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.