YASNY Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 What I find totally bizarro is that I accurately predicted Garland's salary to the freaking dollar here a few months ago. I mean, it was just a stupid wild ass guess, but I was on the money. What I find totally bizarro is that you actually remebered that. :rolly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox05 Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 What I find totally bizarro is that I accurately predicted Garland's salary to the freaking dollar here a few months ago. I mean, it was just a stupid wild ass guess, but I was on the money. Nice call Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox05 Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 Since you got that one right, will we win the World Series before 2017? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox05 Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 Everyone is so hard on Jon cause they expect him to be a star and I think he has that type of ability (not quite star, but a very good 2/3). Since he isn't at that level we just assume he's crap, but he can keep you in games and goes deep into most games. Only 24 too. 1.He's 25 2.He has always has always been a baby 3.He reminds me too much of Eddy Curry 4.He's inconistant 5.He doesn't have a good work ethic. 6.etc............... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 1.He's 25 2.He has always has always been a baby 3.He reminds me too much of Eddy Curry 4.He's inconistant 5.He doesn't have a good work ethic. 6.etc............... Even with all that ... He's a .500 double digit win pitcher with a 4.60 ERA and pitches 200+ innings a year. That's worth the money, because decent pitchers are hard to find. Plus ... the fact that he's only 25 is nothing but a positive. He will get better. Check out Schilling, Johnson, Kevin Brown at the same age or length of service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molto Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 1.He's 25 2.He has always has always been a baby 3.He reminds me too much of Eddy Curry 4.He's inconistant 5.He doesn't have a good work ethic. 6.etc............... 1. 25 is young 2. you know that for a fact? 3. Comparing Garland to a guy who is out of shape, lazy and greedy... makes no sense. 4. his numbers have been the same over the past few seasons. I believe he also was a league-leader in quality starts a year ago. 5. once again, where do you get that from? the guy hasn't had any arm problems and is in good enough shape to play his position very well. just because someone doesn't go jumping up and down on the mound and is low key doesn't mean he lacks work ethic. meet the guy on the streets or see him in the locker room and you'll see a very quiet, mellow guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox05 Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 1. 25 is young 2. you know that for a fact? 3. Comparing Garland to a guy who is out of shape, lazy and greedy... makes no sense. 4. his numbers have been the same over the past few seasons. I believe he also was a league-leader in quality starts a year ago. 5. once again, where do you get that from? the guy hasn't had any arm problems and is in good enough shape to play his position very well. just because someone doesn't go jumping up and down on the mound and is low key doesn't mean he lacks work ethic. meet the guy on the streets or see him in the locker room and you'll see a very quiet, mellow guy. 1.The guy said he was 24, I was just correcting it 2.Yes I know this for a fact. 3.I compare him to Eddy in the fact that they both got big hype but are both babies . 4.His #'s have been similar-correct, but they still have been below average. 5.Has he improved at all in the past 2 years??????EXACTLY! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 4.His #'s have been similar-correct, but they still have been below average. I would prove you wrong but i do not care anymore because i have argued enough today. Maybe cheat or someone else that feels like can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 ''White Sox signed RHP Jon Garland to a one-year, $3.4 million contract. Garland gets a $1.1 million raise for turning in his worst season as a pro. The White Sox should have done better here. Garland wasn't likely to win an arbitration case after finishing 12-11 with a 4.89 ERA. Maybe GM Ken Williams felt he had to get him signed now in order to make him more attractive trade bait, but that could backfire.'' This is what rotoworld has to say about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 I see Garland being traded soon. Just not in any deal for RJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 Garland to "piratees" in a Kendall deal, right TQ? How were the quesadillas Mr. Red Door? (we may stop in there tonite) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quickman Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 Garland to "piratees" in a Kendall deal, right TQ? How were the quesadillas Mr. Red Door? (we may stop in there tonite) I will take that right now, do it please. that would be one of my list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 Konerko, Garland and a prospect not named McCarthy, Anderson, Sweeney, Gonzalez or Fields for Kendall and Craig Wilson OR Kip Wells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 2.Yes I know this for a fact. You know this for a fact, how? I hate to harp on your age again (because I don't like doing it), but I don't know a lot of 14-year-olds who are allowed full access to the clubhouse, Spring Training, and are able to watch Jon's offseason workout program... Jon is reliable in the sense that in most of the games he pitches, he'll keep the scoring to four runs or less, he'll give you 200+ innings as a pitcher, and he'll also give you a sub-five ERA. If you have a number five that is able to do that, you should have a pretty damn good top four. At this point, Garland is a five. He still has room for improvement, but I don't know why (maybe you're not) you still have expectations of him to pitch as a number one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 How is Garland "guarunteed" to put up those mediocre numbers for 2005? Cory Lidle just signed a 2 year $6.2 million with the Phillies. I would take him over Garland. Get off of Garland's nuts already. He isn't anything special. :headshake Not a guaruntee but after doing it the last three years without any health problems he isn't likely to get much worse. In fact if anything he is going to improve. If we traded him to a national league team (or an AL team with a pitchers park) I wager you he would be a 20 game winner within 2 years and we will be b****ing because kw gave him up for too little. If we want a better pitching staff there is a simplier solution. MOVE THE DAMN FENCES BACK. Could you imagine how good Buherle's numbers would have been had we not played in a god damn lauching pad. Or Garcia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 Garland to "piratees" in a Kendall deal, right TQ? The first move of the offseason. Before the 12-7 deadline, Kendall for Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 I have no problem with it, bump GIRLand down to the #5 slot, sign a good #3 starter, give up on RJ and save the cash to try to land a SS somehow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 i really dont understand how we are building a team based around pitching... and trading pitchers for a catcher... i mean, i love kendall and all but that would open up 2 holes in our rotation? if kendall for garland goes down i hope that we can sign someone like clement or perez and make a trade for a pitcher now, if pitsburg included wells... then it makes sence as long as we dong have to give up much more then garland. 2 mid level prospects i just want the f***in season to start Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted November 20, 2004 Share Posted November 20, 2004 What I find totally bizarro is that I accurately predicted Garland's salary to the freaking dollar here a few months ago. I mean, it was just a stupid wild ass guess, but I was on the money. You must be psychic or have insider information on the front office. Which one is it? Can you ask my dead great-grandfather where he hid the key to the family fortune? Actually in today's game I think Garland is worth $3.4M. What they heck How much did we pay Koch and Navarro and neither one had as many wins as Jon. 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.