GreatScott82 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 04:10 PM) How much does everyone think that Garland is going to get on the FA market next year. I am thinking a whole lot. Dogs like Burnett are getting 5 year deals. Millwood probably will get a 4 year deal at a rediculous rate. These are pitchers who have had injuries. Now we have Jon Garland who is 1.) young 2.) sinkerballer 3.) Playoff proven. How much is he going to get on the open market. Konerko's heart was with the sox, he stated he wanted to go through the FA process but he wanted to resign here. Garland is a different story. Its cha-ching time. I can see some team giving him a 5 year deal. Now do you really think that the whitesox will match a 5 year deal. Is Garlands heart with this team through and through. I say you get Vasquez for a few years, you keep the core of the team together and you have 5 good pitchers on this team. Remember in the end we are trying to build this like the Braves. You lose parts but not the whole. I respect your oppinion but i disagree. Keep Jon G and sign a free agent pitcher in the '06 offseason to replace him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Kevin Millwood is 31 years old with past injury issues and he's been rumored to be close to a 4-year, $44 million contract with the Mariners. Now think what a 27 year old Jon Garland with no injury issues in his career will receive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Keep Jon G and sign a free agent pitcher in the '06 offseason to replace him. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How much do you think a free agent starter will cost, and how many years will they want? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevHead0881 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:15 AM) I respect your oppinion but i disagree. Keep Jon G and sign a free agent pitcher in the '06 offseason to replace him. Fine strategy and all, but think about how much a free agent of Jon Garland's caliber would cost. And then realize that if we want to pick up a free agent pitcher that will fit in our price range, it will most likely be a pitcher far inferior to Garland. Sounds way too risky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:16 AM) How much do you think a free agent starter will cost, and how many years will they want? Picking up Vazquez just delays that decision a year, and you would be on the hook for $12.5 million with him. If this speculation is true, they obviously see something with Vazquez they think they can change and make him the stud the Yankees thought they were getting in 2004. I just think he is way too pricey and risky with his performance the last season and a half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthraxFan93 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 (edited) I think we should trade Garland for Kerry Wood. I hear he is God. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> WE might have to throw in Jenks and Guchi.. For the Talent of Wood As for the potential deal.. KW.. DO IT.. IF Cooper can fix Jose.. he can fix Vaz Edited December 13, 2005 by AnthraxFan93 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Jon Garland is a crap shoot. On one side you have a young pitcher that has gotten better each season and has tremendous upside and seems to be close to reaching it. On the other you have a guy that looks like he could regress and has previously disappeared at times. Vazquez is cut from the same mold. Both are horses though. If cash, and lots of it, is not involved this is a stupid trade. For Arizona to get $3M from the Yanks and not pass it on does not seem legitimate. I would think they would have to pass this cash on with the player. Is it not against the CBA that you can not buy players (i.e. Sox can not pay $10M to Florida for Orlando Cabrearra.) I thought the most cash that could be transferred for a player was $1M. Would not the cash for this contract need to be moved with the contract. I think the cash spoken of in any new deal is additional cash on top of the $3M yankee money. I think the Ozzie factor is in play as he feels he can get this kid to get back to his expo days. Ozzie has a way with Latino players and this is a bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Obviously, I wouldn't trade Contreras, but this is a perfect time to trade Garland. He is coming off a Career Year and will be a FA in 07. I've been saying that Garland part for a month now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthSide2004 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(rudylaw @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 04:25 PM) You said it perfect. I keep reading that everyone thinks this is good because Jon will leave with free agency next year. So what, so we are going to eat a horrible 2 year 24mil contract so we don't lose a free agent. Kenny is much smarter than that. Stupid trade, plain and simple Remember Esteban Loazia for Jose Contreras? It would be a very similar deal. Obviously Kenny thinks they can fix Javier, and his track record so far as a GM has been pretty impressive. The money still makes it a huge risk, IMO, but I trust Kenny's judgement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(SouthSide2004 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:35 AM) Remember Esteban Loazia for Jose Contreras? It would be a very similar deal. Obviously Kenny thinks they can fix Javier, and his track record so far as a GM has been pretty impressive. The money still makes it a huge risk, IMO, but I trust Kenny's judgement. None other than Jeff Brantley couldn't believe that trade. The idiot couldn't get over how the Yankees fleeced the White Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(rudylaw @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:40 AM) That Esteban is making a lot of money selling those guitars from the infomercials these days. or pitching in the starting rotation for Oakland... i dunno i'm not sold on this trade yet. It makes sense from a business standpoint but i honestly think we could still get more for garland than Javier Vazquez... I dont know.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 This just ruined my day. From the NY Daily News: CHICAGO WAY: Javier Vazquez, who has piqued the Mets' interest, may be on the verge of getting shipped to the Windy City. A baseball insider suggested the White Sox are the most likely destination for the Diamondbacks pitcher, possibly leading to a trade involving Jon Garland (a free agent after the 2006 season) or Jose Contreras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 I don't know if anyone else has mentionned this, but does anyone else think that trading Garland could have an adverse impact on our chances to keep #56 when he hits the FA market in 2 years? Jon and Mark are supposedly very good friends. It couldn't hurt our chances to keep the 2nd one if we manage to hold onto the first. And hopefully every little bit will help us keep Mark. I still say that if you put Mark and Jon in your pitching rotation for the next 6-7 years, you're going to have a winning team the next 6-7 years, and that alone is worth paying extra to hold onto them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:47 AM) This just ruined my day. From the NY Daily News: CHICAGO WAY: Javier Vazquez, who has piqued the Mets' interest, may be on the verge of getting shipped to the Windy City. A baseball insider suggested the White Sox are the most likely destination for the Diamondbacks pitcher, possibly leading to a trade involving Jon Garland (a free agent after the 2006 season) or Jose Contreras. Ten pages about this in trade winds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Rumors and such go in the TW forum, thread already started: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=44311 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 My bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(KevHead0881 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 04:25 PM) Fine strategy and all, but think about how much a free agent of Jon Garland's caliber would cost. And then realize that if we want to pick up a free agent pitcher that will fit in our price range, it will most likely be a pitcher far inferior to Garland. Sounds way too risky. It maybe risky. However, the market for pitchers might be lower next offseason and we can possibly acquire a solid started for a decent price. IMO the market was inflated this year due to the lack of them in the actual market. With the increase amount of starters in the free agent market next year I can see the $ dollar coming back to Earth alittle bit. For an example i think we can get a Mulder type pitcher for about 9 mill/ year for 3 years. However, this year it would have to be 12 mill/year for 3 years. I'll take my chances on next years market. That Vazquez money is an aweful lot just for 2 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 (edited) It would be nice to keep them, but this seems like a completely logical move. If Jon doesn't sign and bolts, the Sox get nothing in return. Hopefully this is just putting some pressure on Jon to make a decision. It seems now that if he doesn't sign a contract or extension he will be traded. I would rather trade for Zito, he had a down year and it would seem to be a fairly even trade. Edited December 13, 2005 by WinninUgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:50 AM) It maybe risky. However, the market for pitchers might be lower next offseason and we can possibly acquire a solid started for a decent price. IMO the market was inflated this year due to the lack of them in the actual market. With the increase amount of starters in the free agent market next year I can see the $ dollar coming back to Earth alittle bit. For an example i think we can get a Mulder type pitcher for about 9 mill/ year for 3 years. However, this year it would have to be 12 mill/year for 3 years. I'll take my chances on next years market. That Vazquez money is an aweful lot just for 2 years. The way I figure it is say Garland gets $8 million in arbitration. That is probably high but its still $3.5 million less than you would be paying Vasquez. Not trading for Vazquez then frees up a total of $16 million for 2007 considering Vazquez is scheduled to make $12.5 million in 2007. Unless they see something that would definitely make Vazquez a contender for the Cy Young, the trade would make no sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 (edited) What if it ends up being that the Sox trade Contreras instead of Garland? The DBacks have liked Contreras for a long time. Edited December 13, 2005 by fathom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:54 AM) The way I figure it is say Garland gets $8 million in arbitration. That is probably high but its still $3.5 million less than you would be paying Vasquez. Not trading for Vazquez then frees up a total of $16 million for 2007 considering Vazquez is scheduled to make $12.5 million in 2007. Unless they see something that would definitely make Vazquez a contender for the Cy Young, the trade would make no sense. I am sure the D-backs would pay a portion of the contract, KW is not going to do it straight up for that kind of money. If he was going to do that, he would sign Jon to a 5yr, $45 million contract and be done with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:56 AM) What if it ends up being that the Sox trade Contreras instead of Garland? The DBacks have liked Contreras for a long time. I just don't see the logic trading someone for a player they hope become. Its like when the Bulls traded Elton Brand for Chandler. Brand got 20 pts 10 rebounds a night. They were hoping Chandler would be able to do that. Why trade a guy who you know can do it for someone you hope will be able to? On top of that, Vazquez makes more money. It is a ridiculous trade for either of those guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:56 AM) What if it ends up being that the Sox trade Contreras instead of Garland? The DBacks have liked Contreras for a long time. I don't see that happening with the contracts unless they throw in Shawn Green (from Des Plaines). Vazquez and Green for Contreras and Anderson. Edited December 13, 2005 by WinninUgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthraxFan93 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Ten pages about this in trade winds. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So we can have another 10 pages here..not like there is much going on this time of year! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitlesswonder Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(WinninUgly @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:54 AM) It would be nice to keep them, but this seems like a completely logical move. If Jon doesn't sign and bolts, the Sox get nothing in return. The Sox would probably get 1 or 2 draft picks. Assuming Garland pitches well this year, they could pretty safely offer him arbitration. Garland would most likely decline, but if he accepted the Sox would get another year of his service for whatever the market rate is. So even though JG will likely opt for free agency after this year, whomever trades for him would probably get draft picks as compensation. I would think he's worth more than just Vasquez, especially if the Sox pick up vasquez at 12M a year. They should demand a good prospect as well. As for Buehrle, whether Garland is here or not, I think he's going to be Cardinal. 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.