DBAHO Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 I'd rather put my money on RJ's knees holding up than Garland reaching his potential that we have been talking about for every god damn year. But the long - term benefits of Garland reaching his potential are too great to ignore in my opinion. People are giving Joe Crede another chance, why not Jon Garland. If he was pitching in the NL, he'd have much better figures for sure. I don't want to give up Garland for the main fact Jason Grilli or Felix Diaz will be our 5th starter in 2005. No thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted November 8, 2004 Author Share Posted November 8, 2004 Johnson would be taking up almost 1/4 of our payroll. We weren't willing to pay Maggs that amount and we probably won't for Carlos Beltran either. Unless payroll gets significantly bumped up ti the $75 to $80 million mark, it's going to be hard for us to fill our holes with RJ on our payroll. were on the same page.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 But the long - term benefits of Garland reaching his potential are too great to ignore in my opinion. People are giving Joe Crede another chance, why not Jon Garland. If he was pitching in the NL, he'd have much better figures for sure. I don't want to give up Garland for the main fact Jason Grilli or Felix Diaz will be our 5th starter in 2005. No thanks. Crede has been in the bigs 2 full years. Garland has been in for 4 full, and started in 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 But the long - term benefits of Garland reaching his potential are too great to ignore in my opinion. People are giving Joe Crede another chance, why not Jon Garland. If he was pitching in the NL, he'd have much better figures for sure. I don't want to give up Garland for the main fact Jason Grilli or Felix Diaz will be our 5th starter in 2005. No thanks. Garland has had more chances then Joe, I know JG is younger but we've been waiting for him to reach his potential forever now, he's going to be a 4th or 5th starter in the al imo for the rest of his career, I have no problem with Jon but he's never going to be a number 1 or 2 guy in my career, the possibilities of having a top 3 of rj, freddy and buehrle is to great to pass up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 I'm only on page three, but it's bugged me that nobody has corrected this.... yet, they may have by the time I make it to page ten, but Jon Garland is property of the Chicago White Sox through the 2006 season. He has two more years here. How so? This will be his 6th year in the majors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted November 8, 2004 Author Share Posted November 8, 2004 Garland has had more chances then Joe, I know JG is younger but we've been waiting for him to reach his potential forever now, he's going to be a 4th or 5th starter in the al imo for the rest of his career, I have no problem with Jon but he's never going to be a number 1 or 2 guy in my career, the possibilities of having a top 3 of rj, freddy and buehrle is to great to pass up. There are players the same age as Jon who are or will be first year players. Lets look at Garland like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 So eventually you'd be trading 2 years of Jon Garland for about $3 to $4 mill with the potential of him turning into a 15 game to 20 game winner plus prospects and Paul Konerko, for 2 years of Randy Johnson with dodgy knees for 2 more years at $16 million. There's no doubt there'd be a boost in marketing and the crowds, but will it really improve our team? In my opinion Lieber and Garland > Randy Johnson. Then you can trade Konerko, possibly to Oakland for Tim Hudson or in some other deal for a bullpen piece perhaps (Julio and Hairston?) that will better suit our needs. In the playoffs, Randy Johnson > Lieber and Garland and thats big time. Thats what this is about, putting a team together that can win the world series and make the series. Â This deal goes a long way to doing that. I know the Cubs failed this year with an awesome pitching staff, but they had a crap bullpen and some injuries. I still am confident in the Sox chances and I'd definately make this deal. Â If Bmac/Sweeney/Anderson are involved I'd think twice. However, give them a prospect like Schnurstein (good 3rd base prospect, but the Sox have Josh Fields ahead of him) and then I'd be alright and I think the Dbacks would be interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Which deal would you rather do? Â Deal #1) Johnson -> Konerko, Garland, prospects(Young, PTBNL(one of the 2004 draft class)) Â Deal #2) Johnson -> Konerko, Diaz, (one of Sweeney, Anderson; one of BMac, Honel, PTBNL(Gio)) Â --------------------- Â I'd push hard for #2. The goal is to put a winning (read World Series) club on the field in year 1. Deal #2 essentially allows you to keep garland in favor of Diaz and some higher level prospects. Â This is assuming that the original deal doesn't already include them (which I'm almost positive it does) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Let's not forget the fact most young pitchers in the majors don't get it until the mid to late 20's. Kevin Brown is a perfect example, he struggled in his first 3 full years and put up the same sort of stats as Garland. Next season, 21-11 with a 3.32 ERA. If Garland is traded, some other team will reap the benefits of us developing him for them over the past 3 seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 There are players the same age as Jon who are or will be first year players. Lets look at Garland like that. Very true but Jon's been in the majors for quite a while now, I was almost positive he was going to get to that 15 to 18 win mark this year and instead of improving he took a step backwards. I'd also like to keep jon but to get a pitcher the caliber of Rj, cya JG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Which deal would you rather do? Deal #1) Johnson -> Konerko, Garland, prospects(Young, PTBNL(one of the 2004 draft class))  Deal #2) Johnson -> Konerko, Diaz, (one of Sweeney, Anderson; one of BMac, Honel, PTBNL(Gio))  ---------------------  I'd push hard for #2. The goal is to put a winning (read World Series) club on the field in year 1. Deal #2 essentially allows you to keep garland in favor of Diaz and some higher level prospects.  This is assuming that the original deal doesn't already include them (which I'm almost positive it does) 2  Prospects are suspects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Johnson would be taking up almost 1/4 of our payroll. We weren't willing to pay Maggs that amount and we probably won't for Carlos Beltran either. Unless payroll gets significantly bumped up ti the $75 to $80 million mark, it's going to be hard for us to fill our holes with RJ on our payroll. Correction: We weren't willing to pay Maggs that amount for five years It's not like we're trading for RJ to become a better team for the next 3 years. It's to win big this year. Â And how much more of a problem is our bullpen if we have a guy like Randy Johnson who pitched as many innings as Mark Buehrle? If we get another guy who can go 8 strong, it would really help our bullpen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Forgot to add this... Â Don't get too excited about this yet folks... Sexson and Delgado have to be off the table first. Konerko's value is considerably lowered with those two free agents available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Johnson would be taking up almost 1/4 of our payroll. We weren't willing to pay Maggs that amount and we probably won't for Carlos Beltran either. Unless payroll gets significantly bumped up ti the $75 to $80 million mark, it's going to be hard for us to fill our holes with RJ on our payroll. I fully expect RJ to be one of those players that goes above and beyond the proposed resources. I'd bet that the payroll would be around 80 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 In the playoffs, Randy Johnson > Lieber and Garland and thats big time. Thats what this is about, putting a team together that can win the world series and make the series.  This deal goes a long way to doing that. I know the Cubs failed this year with an awesome pitching staff, but they had a crap bullpen and some injuries. I still am confident in the Sox chances and I'd definately make this deal.  If Bmac/Sweeney/Anderson are involved I'd think twice. However, give them a prospect like Schnurstein (good 3rd base prospect, but the Sox have Josh Fields ahead of him) and then I'd be alright and I think the Dbacks would be interested. There's no doubt this deal is built for us to make the world series. I'm just worried that if we don't, this deal will backfire on us big - time. Of course if the Twinkies lose Radke, and we get RJ no doubt we should be favorites, but the Indians could be getting Radke and they'd have an awesome pitching staff as well. It's not like the AL Central will be a forgone conclusion if we make this deal. The Cubs had injuries no doubt, and didn't have the necessary depth to back it up. If RJ goes down, with Diaz or Grilli as our 5th starter, I'd say we wouldn't have much in the way of depth to back that up either. I wouldn't mind dealin Schnurstein too much either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Forgot to add this... Don't get too excited about this yet folks... Sexson and Delgado have to be off the table first. Konerko's value is considerably lowered with those two free agents available. Looks like Sexson or Delgado, 1 of em, will be headed to Seattle. So Arizona will be in a market for a 1B soon enough, I bet they wish they didn't give up on Lyle Overbay so fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 I fully expect RJ to be one of those players that goes above and beyond the proposed resources. I'd bet that the payroll would be around 80 million. Exactly. They did it for Albert Belle, and they were led to believe that they were going to do it for ARod, there is precidence for this kind of thing. It does fit both historical Sox moves, and the stated main objective of KW for this winter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Looks like Sexson or Delgado, 1 of em, will be headed to Seattle. So Arizona will be in a market for a 1B soon enough, I bet they wish they didn't give up on Lyle Overbay so fast. Yeah everything I've read puts Sexson in Seattle and Delgado in Baltimore, but there's plenty of time for deals to fall through. And a short while ago Sexson was all but assured to end up in Arizona. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Exactly. They did it for Albert Belle, and they were led to believe that they were going to do it for ARod, there is precidence for this kind of thing. It does fit both historical Sox moves, and the stated main objective of KW for this winter. Ok so let's see the payroll will be $80 mill if we acquire RJ. It'd be approx. an extra $4 mill added to our payroll if we do the Garland plus Vizquel so that's $8 mill. Then there's an extra $5 to $8 mill still to be able to spend on another starter or a bullpen piece possibly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Randy's career stats against every team. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlbpa/players/4288...r&type=Pitching Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Ok so let's see the payroll will be $80 mill if we acquire RJ. It'd be approx. an extra $4 mill added to our payroll if we do the Garland plus Vizquel so that's $8 mill. Then there's an extra $5 to $8 mill still to be able to spend on another starter or a bullpen piece possibly. Current Payroll....$63.00M(about) Konerko.............(8.75) Garland.............(3.00) Johnson.............16.00 ========================= Adjusted Payroll...$67.25 Add Vizquel..........4.00 ========================= Adjusted Payroll...$71.25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xero Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/basebal...sports-baseball  What a horrible trade in my opinion. Randy Johnson will do nothing for us... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Randy Johnson will do nothing for us... Obviously, someone has not been reading the thread. :rolly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Ok so let's see the payroll will be $80 mill if we acquire RJ. It'd be approx. an extra $4 mill added to our payroll if we do the Garland plus Vizquel so that's $8 mill. Then there's an extra $5 to $8 mill still to be able to spend on another starter or a bullpen piece possibly. You're basing your figures off the base figure (16 mil) of Johnsons contract. I've read posts within this thread detailing a certain amount of salary could be deferred. If true, it changes the complexion of this deal. Â The players included in the trade (ideally the quality of our prospects) will likely determine the money Arizona will cover from RJ's 05' salary. If Sox give up Sweeney/Andersen/McCarthy (in addition to Konerko/Garland) perhaps Arizona covers a few million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xero Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Obviously, someone has not been reading the thread. :rolly Yes I have, why can't I express my opinion? 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.