Levine: Garland To Be Traded

[Rowand44]

TRY HERE INSTEAD

Can you change the title or get rid of this thread all together? Damn, admins do nothing around here.

[southsider2k5]

Can you change the title or get rid of this thread all together?  Damn, admins do nothing around here.

 

See you amatuers don't realize if you delete or merge the thread right away, they just post another one. The key is to give them a second to see this, and then merge away. And you want to be my latex salesman :headshake

[Rowand44]

See you amatuers don't realize if you delete or merge the thread right away, they just post another one.  The key is to give them a second to see this, and then merge away.  And you want to be my latex salesman :headshake

Blah, blah, blah. Excuses for everything. :headshake

Edited December 22, 2005 by Rowand44

[Chisoxfn]

Would all the Garland bashers who say such ignorant bulls*** like Garland had a "so-so" second half take the time to back their s*** up? Oh wait, if they looked at Garland's second half splits, they'd see that while there was a minor drop off in production stats, he averaged barely over a hit an inning and had a 3.65 ERA. He also had a bad month in August and then bounced back to a solid September and a great start in October.

 

Hey guess what guys, Freddy Garcia had an ERA of 4.28 in the second half. Mark Buehrle had an ERA of 3.84 in the second half. Only Jose Contreras had a better second half ERA startingwise than Garland. And all of you are ready to chuck him out the boat? Why aren't you people saying the same stupid s*** about having a bad career prior to this season about Contreras?

 

Jesus f***ing Christ, open up your goddamn eyes.

 

I think Garland is possibly our 2nd best starter. I happen to think he can be better than Buehrle, but he is hands down better than Freddy.

[Chisoxfn]

You cant put contreras as the best pitcher on the team at this point.  He had a great second half, and a good postseason.  But He has posted and ERA of over 5 in 2 of his 4 full seasons in the MLB.  Jon hasnt posted a single season above 5 when he pitched full time. And since Mark has been starting full time, he has only broken a 4 ERA ONCE from 2001 to 2005.

Last season the best starter for the full season was Jon Garland...hands down. I love Buehrle, but he really hit a funk at one point and Contreras was amazing in the 2nd half but had a so-so 1st half (maybe even worse than so-so).

 

Get your heads out of your asses and realize this. We will be trading our best pitcher of last year whose entering his prime and instead go with a guy in Vazquez who has great stuff but has b****ed and moaned the last two places he has gone while not living up to his potential.

 

I'm sorry, I hate this move and I wish the Sox would take its chances on Garland. Worse case we get draft picks. I liked this team better before we made the Vazquez deal cause the Vazquez deal meant he was going to replace Garland in the rotation.

 

However, financially I understand some things. But we are defending world series champs, keep the god damn pitching staff in tact or upgrade it, but don't give up our best starter from last year unless your getting a s***LOAD in return.

 

Ken Williams will get hammered by me if he doesn't make some good moves. I don't buy into this Jon only will play on the west coast either. He's being smart, but no one is going to tell me if you didn't offer him up a 5/60 deal he wouldn't at least think long and hard. I'm not saying do it, but maybe you throw it his way near the middle of the season and move someone else.

 

Garland has been steady and really turned a corner next year. I'll be shocked if he isn't amongst the NL's best next year (if he does go to the NL).

[ptatc]

Last season the best starter for the full season was Jon Garland...hands down.  I love Buehrle, but he really hit a funk at one point and Contreras was amazing in the 2nd half but had a so-so 1st half (maybe even worse than so-so). 

 

Get your heads out of your asses and realize this.  We will be trading our best pitcher of last year whose entering his prime and instead go with a guy in Vazquez who has great stuff but has b****ed and moaned the last two places he has gone while not living up to his potential.

 

I'm sorry, I hate this move and I wish the Sox would take its chances on Garland. Worse case we get draft picks.  I liked this team better before we made the Vazquez deal cause the Vazquez deal meant he was going to replace Garland in the rotation.

 

However, financially I understand some things.  But we are defending world series champs, keep the god damn pitching staff in tact or upgrade it, but don't give up our best starter from last year unless your getting a s***LOAD in return. 

 

Ken Williams will get hammered by me if he doesn't make some good moves.  I don't buy into this Jon only will play on the west coast either.  He's being smart, but no one is going to tell me if you didn't offer him up a 5/60 deal he wouldn't at least think long and hard.  I'm not saying do it, but maybe you throw it his way near the middle of the season and move someone else. 

 

Garland has been steady and really turned a corner next year.  I'll be shocked if he isn't amongst the NL's best next year (if he does go to the NL).

 

All of your points are valid except:

 

1. The White Sox will not offer a pitcher more than 4 years. Some other sucker will. Look at all of the contracts signed for more than four years and they all have injury issues or they were young and were inconsitent and not worth the money. There may have been one or two that have worked out but the odds are against it.

 

2. Garland does not want to be here. From So Cal. his future bride is from Hawaii and wants to stay in So. Cal. Call it "Curtis Conway" syndrome.

 

In order for him to stay we would really have to overpay. Something the Sox won't (and shouldn't) do. Especially for a pitcher who has one really good year.

Edited December 22, 2005 by ptatc

[WHarris1]

I'm sorry, I hate this move and I wish the Sox would take its chances on Garland. Worse case we get draft picks.  I liked this team better before we made the Vazquez deal cause the Vazquez deal meant he was going to replace Garland in the rotation.

That's the problem. KW doesn't want to enter the offseason with a hole in the starting rotation. If he goes in with MB-FG-JG-JC-BM as his rotation he is gonna lose JG and have to fill that hole.

 

Instead he has a rotation that will be together for 2-3 years

[Chisoxfn]

That's the problem.  KW doesn't want to enter the offseason with a hole in the starting rotation.  If he goes in with MB-FG-JG-JC-BM as his rotation he is gonna lose JG and have to fill that hole.

 

Instead he has a rotation that will be together for 2-3 years

I understand that part.

[beck72]

So now we have built-in acceptance mechanisms regarding Kenny Williams? 

 

This is the kind of s*** I'm warning Soxtalk about.  Kenny has not yet earned "Can't Do No Wrong" status.  He simply hasn't.  To accept a lesser package and chalk it up to "Kenny doing his best," puts you in dangerously close to the North side Sheep Phenomenon. 

 

I've been one of Kenny's biggest backers on this site.  I was down-right confused by the Vazquez deal, but, I have since seen the light.  All I'm saying is we can not grant Kenny a hall-pass just yet.  He has a HUGE chip here in Garland and he needs to get a fair package in return.

 

Another thing--people are acting like Kw should be publicly flogged if he doesn't get the top prospects of whatever team trades for jon.

 

The trades and personnel moves the sox have made the last few years aren't just KW running wild. It's the entire organization being consulted and scouting other players--the majors and minors.

 

When I say KW should be given the "benefit of the doubt" that he can get a good return on Jon, I'm also talking about the entire organization. The sox organ. has had a very good record in recent yrs of players panning out, whether it's via trade, FA signing, waivers, etc. I hold no "man love" for KW. But I trust the sox organ. to keep building on the sox success for the short and long term.