Garland Haters and Lovers prior to 05'

[Guest JimH]

LOL, and CRector?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

He still pops up at another Sox site from time to time, in between asking "Would you like fries with that?" and "Welcome to WalMart".

 

One of the guys at a Blackhawk site hung "Rectum" on him.

 

I will try to be nice now. Thanks for the indulgence!

[greg775]

Good research. It is a fun post to look at.

I think the last guy I truly hated was Royce.

I wonder if we were 8-18 if everybody would be all over Dye.

I think I would.

[Soxfest]

I am happy JG is 5-0 but i want a whole year not 1 month to see if he has really turned the corner for real. The bad news is that his strikeout rate (3.9 K/9) is pitiful, and he hasn't faced any of the top five scoring teams in the American League.

Edited May 3, 2005 by Soxfest

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

I'll admit being very down on Garland.

 

As a former hater I owe Jon a congrats for making me eat my words...and I gladly do so.

 

This is more a reply to your signature than to what you said. It must make more than a few people happy ( including me) that Garland and Dontrelle Willis are both former Cub farmhands.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

I am happy JG is 5-0 but i want a whole year not 1 month to see if he has really turned the corner for real. The bad news is that his strikeout rate (3.9 K/9) is pitiful, and he hasn't faced any of the top five scoring teams in the American League.

 

Garland haters have been able to crow for a few years now. I just wanted to give the lovers a little bit to crow about also. If it doesn't last you can say " I told you so " right back.

[GoodAsGould]

I am happy JG is 5-0 but i want a whole year not 1 month to see if he has really turned the corner for real. The bad news is that his strikeout rate (3.9 K/9) is pitiful, and he hasn't faced any of the top five scoring teams in the American League.

 

Id say Detroit is one of the top offenses in the league, the only reason stats might now show so is because of how good our starting pitching has been. Also who cares about strikeouts if you are getting people out?

[Jordan4life_2007]

I am happy JG is 5-0 but i want a whole year not 1 month to see if he has really turned the corner for real. The bad news is that his strikeout rate (3.9 K/9) is pitiful, and he hasn't faced any of the top five scoring teams in the American League.

 

 

Not to be rude, but get a life man. How can you say anything bad about Garland right now? Is this Brandofan posing as Soxfest?

[Rowand44]

I am happy JG is 5-0 but i want a whole year not 1 month to see if he has really turned the corner for real. The bad news is that his strikeout rate (3.9 K/9) is pitiful, and he hasn't faced any of the top five scoring teams in the American League.

Jon has beaten some good offenses. As far as his strikeout rate who the hell cares? He's a groundball fricken pitcher, the less strikeouts the better with Jon.

[jackie hayes]

Jon has beaten some good offenses.  As far as his strikeout rate who the hell cares?  He's a groundball fricken pitcher, the less strikeouts the better with Jon.

Huh??? Doesn't matter what kind of pitcher you are, strikeouts help you. Not saying you can't live without them, but to say you're better off w/ fewer strikeouts -- you can't seriously believe that.

[Rowand44]

Huh???  Doesn't matter what kind of pitcher you are, strikeouts help you.  Not saying you can't live without them, but to say you're better off w/ fewer strikeouts -- you can't seriously believe that.

I'd rather Jon throw 20 groundballs in a game then strikeout 20, if he's throwing groundballs that means he's pitching well. In his instance a groundball is more important then a strikeout.

[jackie hayes]

I'd rather Jon throw 20 groundballs in a game then strikeout 20, if he's throwing groundballs that means he's pitching well.  In his instance a groundball is more important then a strikeout.

If he strikes out someone, the next guy's no less likely to hit into a dp, if that's what you're getting at.

 

O/w, that's nonsense. A k means -- no ground balls out of anyone's reach, no dribblers, no high bounces, no bad bounces, no bad hands, no bad throw, no bad catch -- it's an out, and you're done. Strikeouts are never hits. Groundballs can be. What are you talking about?

[Rowand44]

If he strikes out someone, the next guy's no less likely to hit into a dp, if that's what you're getting at.

 

O/w, that's nonsense.  A k means -- no ground balls out of anyone's reach, no dribblers, no high bounces, no bad bounces, no bad hands, no bad throw, no bad catch -- it's an out, and you're done.  Strikeouts are never hits.  Groundballs can be.  What are you talking about?

Ok Jackie, my point is I could care less how he's getting outs and strikeouts for him really don't mean much, he's supposed to get ground balls. If he's getting ground balls it's more likely he's right and pitching the way he's capable of, that's it.

[jackie hayes]

Ok Jackie, my point is I could care less how he's getting outs and strikeouts for him really don't mean much, he's supposed to get ground balls.  If he's getting ground balls it's more likely he's right and pitching the way he's capable of, that's it.

So if for one game Jon suddenly became Roger Clemens that would be bad?

 

No argument that an out's an out. But this is like saying a slap single's better than a home run, if Juan Pierre's hitting. That may be what he usually does, but a hr is always better. A strike out is a pitcher's hr, it's always, always better.

[ottawa_sox]

If he strikes out someone, the next guy's no less likely to hit into a dp, if that's what you're getting at.

 

O/w, that's nonsense.  A k means -- no ground balls out of anyone's reach, no dribblers, no high bounces, no bad bounces, no bad hands, no bad throw, no bad catch -- it's an out, and you're done.  Strikeouts are never hits.  Groundballs can be.  What are you talking about?

 

Personally, I prefer groundball pitchers. Strikeout pitchers usually surrender a higher home run to hit ratio. And while sinkerballers give up ground ball bleeders, strikout pitchers give up more 'duck snorts'. One of my favorite White Sox pitchers was Bob Locker. Reaching first on Locker was like setting up the double play. He would give up about 1 home run per 25 innings pitched. I think it was Eddie Stankey who used to reward his pitchers if they threw 20 ground ball outs. Several of his pitchers used to be able to do it (i.e Horlen, John). Hitting into double plays is more demoralizing for the opposition and less taxing, energy-wise on your own staff. A good sinkerballer is capable of throwing an 8 hit shut out and barely going over 100 pitches. Most strikeout pitchers can be worked for more walks as well.

Edited May 3, 2005 by ottawa_sox

[jackie hayes]

This is not about what type of pitcher Jon is. When he strikes out someone, he's still going to be a groundball pitcher on the next pitch. But a strike out is better than a groundball for a flyball pitcher, is better than a groundball for a groundball pitcher. Isn't that obvious?

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

5-0, 1.38 ERA, hardly walking anybody. Do K's matter ? K's show dominance yes . Clemens , Ryan, Carlton, Jonson all were dominant pitchers but K's are not needed to be dominating. Jon is showing you that now . What further proof do you need? Classic strikeout pitchers are few and far between. Jon doesn't need to become Clemens in order to keep winning.

Edited May 3, 2005 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[ottawa_sox]

This is not about what type of pitcher Jon is.  When he strikes out someone, he's still going to be a groundball pitcher on the next pitch.  But a strike out is better than a groundball for a flyball pitcher, is better than a groundball for a groundball pitcher.  Isn't that obvious?

 

I don't think it is obvious if the groundball gets a double play. And what of the obvious advantage to getting someone out or 2 outs on one pitch. I would also think it would be obvious that infielders behind sinderballers would be kept on their toes a little better. Admittedly, if the hitter does not put the ball into play, then he is less likely to do any damage. But, for me, that is looking at the small picture. Over the course of the whole game, I would prefer to have a sinkerballer in my corner.

[jackie hayes]

5-0, 1.38 ERA,  hardly walking anybody. Do K's matter ? K's show dominance yes . Clemens , Ryan, Carlton, Jonson all were dominant pitchers but K's are not needed to be dominating. Jon is showing you that now . What further proof do you need? Classic strikeout pitchers are few and far between. Jon doesn't need to become Clemens in order to keep winning.

Good God.

 

In the game...is a strikeout (note the "out") better than a groundball (note the lack of an "out")?

[CWSGuy406]

Sheesh. You guys are overcomplicating things.

 

A strikeout is the only type of out that a pitcher can control. It ensures an out. Does a groundball ensure an out? No.

 

Jackie isn't saying that Jon needs to strike more guys out (though it would be nice). Jackie isn't saying that Jon is a bad pitcher because he doesn't strike guys out. He's saying (and if I'm off base, then just give me an internet b**** slap Jackie ) that a strikeout is the best thing a pitcher can do.

[jackie hayes]

Sheesh.  You guys are overcomplicating things.

 

A strikeout is the only type of out that a pitcher can control.  It ensures an out.  Does a groundball ensure an out?  No.

 

Jackie isn't saying that Jon needs to strike more guys out (though it would be nice).  Jackie isn't saying that Jon is a bad pitcher because he doesn't strike guys out.  He's saying (and if I'm off base, then just give me an internet b**** slap Jackie   ) that a strikeout is the best thing a pitcher can do.

No, that's exactly what I'm saying. I thought "Not saying you can't live without them..." and "No argument that an out's an out" made that clear, but maybe not.

 

Jon's not going to change, he'll always be a gb pitcher. But how in the world can anyone say that a strikeout is not the best outcome of an ab, in the pitcher's view? It's like saying making contact is better than a home run.

 

Edit: And I've NEVER said Jon's a bad pitcher. The only even slightly negative comment I've had about him (that I could find on a search) is that a money conscious team may prefer Redman to Garland, b/c he was signed for 2 years instead of just one -- with the caveat at the time that I don't think Redman is any better than Jon. And I'm not saying anything bad now. Only, if Jon strikes out the first 20 batters of the game, I won't be complaining... That's negative???

Edited May 3, 2005 by jackie hayes

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(3E8 @ May 2, 2005 -> 09:19 AM)

Whatever happened to Ozzie the Airdale?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who gives a s***?

 

I believe that idiot tried to make the case that KW lost on the Alomar-Pacheco trade. :headshake

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Good God.

 

In the game...is a strikeout (note the "out") better than a groundball (note the lack of an "out")?

 

I know what you mean. I'm just yanking your chain because you found something to gripe about on the best pitcher in the AL right now . Bringing up his K/BB ratio was complicating things. Useless and moot.

[whitesox91403]

I will admit that I have always been down on garland and to be honest, i didn't give him much a chance this season either. Jon's April was incredible, no one can take that away from him. But now Jon, do it in May and June...etc..........

 

And the reason I really do not like Garland to this day is the fact that he basically called Konerko out on that error last year.

[soxfan420]

Good God.

 

In the game...is a strikeout (note the "out") better than a groundball (note the lack of an "out")?

what about groundout?????

[jackie hayes]

what about groundout?????

Remember that I was responding to the statement "the less strikeouts the better with Jon".

 

Look, if you're looking at the outcome of a game after the fact, and you take it as given that Jon has already thrown a cg so, then obviously it doesn't matter one whit if he had 27 strikeouts or 27 warning track fly balls. The game's over at that point. But if in the course of a game you find yourself saying, I'd rather Jon not strike this guy out, then you're nuts. A strikeout is virtually always better than the uncertainty of having the ball in play. That's all I'm saying on this, I still can't believe anyone thinks strikeouts hurt the pitcher's team.