qwerty Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 He'll make over $4 mill a yr in 05 and 06 That is not overpaying if he can pitch around a 4.30 era or so, which he is capable of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmteam Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 I have to agree with qwerty on this one. If I'm Littlefield, Garland plus Honel or Munoz looks like a fairly attractive offer to me...if I don't have to pay for any of Kendall's salary. If I had to pay a third to a half of his salary, I'd probably look to also get someone like Cotts or Adkins out of the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesox91403 Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Kenny is going to have to get aggressive, and I have confidence that he will. If he pieces the right deal together, Kendall can still end up a Chicago White Stocking. He may overpay, but it still could get done. Careful there. the White Stockings is former name used by the franchise that is now known as The Cubs (aka The Pinheads)!!!!!!!! :fthecubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 That is not overpaying if he can pitch around a 4.30 era or so, which he is capable of. He's capable of that ERA in the NL but not the AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 But if I'm a cost-conscious GM, I'm pretty scared by the thought that Garland has a fluke good year, and becomes too expensive to keep, and too unstable to sign. Redman does give you some cost certainty, and he's been pretty reliable. I must have skipped over this. Say Garland is traded and has a good year in Pitt. If he's a FA after the yr [i don't know if this is true or not] and Pitt. probably can't afford what his agent is asking for. Around the deadline, and the Bucs are out of it, they can put Garland on the block, like they did with Benson. Teams will overpay for a guy having a breakout yr, with a lower NL ERA coming from the AL and his higher ERA. But would they overpay for a Redman having an average yr in the 4.70 era range? Not likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 I must have skipped over this. Say Garland is traded and has a good year in Pitt. If he's a FA after the yr [i don't know if this is true or not] and Pitt. probably can't afford what his agent is asking for. Around the deadline, and the Bucs are out of it, they can put Garland on the block, like they did with Benson. Teams will overpay for a guy having a breakout yr, with a lower NL ERA coming from the AL and his higher ERA. But would they overpay for a Redman having an average yr in the 4.70 era range? Not likely. Eh, I don't know about these numbers you're throwing out here -- you suggest Benson was having a breakout year, but he had an era of 4.22 when he was traded. Which is pretty close to what you said Redman could do in the NL (4.3). Yet here he has a 4.7.... Benson still has this #1 overall pick buzz -- I wouldn't count on quite the same return for Garland, even though he's probably just as good a pitcher. And NY was desperate. Last few days shows they still are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Eh, I don't know about these numbers you're throwing out here -- you suggest Benson was having a breakout year, but he had an era of 4.22 when he was traded. Which is pretty close to what you said Redman could do in the NL (4.3). Yet here he has a 4.7.... Benson still has this #1 overall pick buzz -- I wouldn't count on quite the same return for Garland, even though he's probably just as good a pitcher. And NY was desperate. Last few days shows they still are. Benson did have a "breakout year"---for him anyway. He was one of the biggest SP's out there teams wanted to get at the deadline [who knows why, but he was wanted by a lot of teams]. My point was Garland could post an ERA under 4.00 and teams would drool over him like they did Benson if Pitt. put him on the block to get a return on their investment if they couldn't or wouldn't sign him to a long term contract Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Benson did have a "breakout year"---for him anyway. He was one of the biggest SP's out there teams wanted to get at the deadline [who knows why, but he was wanted by a lot of teams]. My point was Garland could post an ERA under 4.00 and teams would drool over him like they did Benson if Pitt. put him on the block to get a return on their investment if they couldn't or wouldn't sign him to a long term contract I just don't think Garland has quite the same 'following', for whatever the reason. Maybe it's Anna, I don't know. Still, that's not a best-case, but at least a pretty good-case scenario for Garland. If he's got a 4.70 era (not unimaginable), or a 5, you get little in a trade, and not much relief in arbitration -- maybe he's non-tendered. If you have Redman, you have a pretty consistent guy, you figure he averages 4.5 in the NL over the next 2 seasons. It's boring, but that stability might be worth the extra cost, which isn't too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Kris Benson is singlehandedly the most over-rated pitcher in baseball. The Mets were morons for giving up the prospects they did to get him from Pittsburgh and the Mets were even bigger morons for giving him a 3 year deal worth a little more then 7 million a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AddisonStSox Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Kris Benson is singlehandedly the most over-rated pitcher in baseball. The Mets were morons for giving up the prospects they did to get him from Pittsburgh and the Mets were even bigger morons for giving him a 3 year deal worth a little more then 7 million a year. Absolutely correct! I was stunned when I saw the $$$ the Mets gave him. Its absurd. #1 overall pick or not, he has not merited that type of deal at this point in his career, not even close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 you guys notice after that omar vizquel deal and KW said he was mad that news got out that he was one of their targeted guys we really havent heard much of anything of what we are going after...So i expect a complete shocking move from him and anyone thats close to being on the trading block is a possibility when we are talking about the one known as Kenny Williams... This offseason can be very exciting or very boring like last year but KW is so damn unpredictable at times that its almost useless to go off of rumors involved with the white sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 He's capable of that ERA in the NL but not the AL He had a 4.21 era with detroit and pitched 2-3 innings. I think he is more than capable of doing that again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 I still cream my pants at the thought of having Kendall on this team. He fills so many holes on this team all in once. He'll maybe he can ever DH on the days he doesn't catch (Thomas instead of Gload at 1B those games maybe.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 It's seems to me that Garland should have more trade value than Benson had at the deadline. Benson had been iffy health and performance wise. Yet Garland has at least proven he could be a solid inning eater, has stayed healthy, plus has the potential to be a good ML pitcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 all i can say is im glad im not the GM of the sox heh i would have a very hard time trading garland as i think he is right now one of the best #5 starters in the leauge. he also has the potential to break out and show us what we have all been waiting for. i would just be hard pressed to trade that away and open another hole in our rotation. not having a solid starter at the back end of our rotation as we do now is hard enough... having TWO gaping holes in the rotation would be even harder our biggest need right now IMO is to get a front end starter ( a #2 or #3 starter ) without trading any pitching.... getting a free agent would be ideal.. then trading paul konerko for someone with a high OBP hopefully it will happen like this, but i doubt it will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm676 Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 A's/Pirates Trade Don't know how reliable Ken Rosenthal is, but he said the trade is done pending physicals and Kendall waiving his clause. However, Oakland may now have to unload one of their big 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 this sux s***balls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 this sux s***balls. You have a way with words my friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Has Kenny even expressed interest in Kendall? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 That is not that good of a deal for the Pirates, imo. Great deal by Billy Beane though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 ****It is unclear whether the A's would keep Kendall or trade him to another team, possibly the Dodgers. But the Dodgers, seeking to re-sign free-agent third baseman Adrian Beltre and add starting pitching, may want to address other needs before catcher. If a deal goes down, there could be some chance of us getting Kendall. I dont know if we would deal with Oakland, or we would have what they want. The athletics intention is to keep him from every thing i have read. They would not give up one of the big three if they were not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 A's/Pirates Trade Don't know how reliable Ken Rosenthal is, but he said the trade is done pending physicals and Kendall waiving his clause. However, Oakland may now have to unload one of their big 3. I knew we weren't getting him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSteve Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 I knew we weren't getting him. Damn. Who are we going to get? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Damn. Who are we going to get? I have no idea at this point. I've just got a feeling we're not gonna be too pleased with this off season. I hope i'm wrong though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSteve Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 I have no idea at this point. I've just got a feeling we're not gonna be too pleased with this off season. I hope i'm wrong though. That is the feeling I am starting to get as all the guys we are targeting are not really going to come here. 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.