greasywheels121 Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 10:26 AM) The Sox made a crapload of money in 2005, and stand to make a lot more in 2006. They have almosrt doubled their season ticket sales. LET THEM EXPAND THE BUDGET!!! They already have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 The Sox made a crapload of money in 2005, and stand to make a lot more in 2006. They have almosrt doubled their season ticket sales. LET THEM EXPAND THE BUDGET!!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> THEY HAVE, by a lot. I wish people on this board would look at reality instead of just one piece of the puzzle. They are several million over budget, by all accounts. Garland is in line for a huge arbitration award, perhaps $8 million. What is it about this situation that people don't, or refuse, to understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 Expand it more! Whatever it takes so we can repeat as champions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 Forget it. Heck I would love them to have a huge 100M payroll every year but reality says it won't happen, so why bother arguing it. They are several million over budget, they have never operated significantly over budget in 25 years, I don't expect it to start now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 09:21 AM) What do you propose to do about them being several million over budget? I think they can handle it. If there was any truth to the rumor KW was looking at Tejada, the payroll was only going to go higher if he was acquired. Vazquez's acquisition only added a million or two to the payroll, and that was after they offered Garland a 3 year deal at $8 million a year, a figure at the high end of what he would get in arbitration. I don't agree with the people who say keep him and trade him at the deadline. If the Sox are in contention and Garland's pitching like he did in 2005, there is no way they could let him go then. Chances are he will be gone, and as a guy who really couldn't stand Garland until last season, I think its a mistake unless you get a package like the A's got for Mulder. I would rather have 1 season of Garland pitching for the White Sox than 3 or 4 seasons of some "tools" prospects playing for Kannapolis and Birmingham before being released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 I think they can handle it. If there was any truth to the rumor KW was looking at Tejada, the payroll was only going to go higher if he was acquired. Vazquez's acquisition only added a million or two to the payroll, and that was after they offered Garland a 3 year deal at $8 million a year, a figure at the high end of what he would get in arbitration. I don't agree with the people who say keep him and trade him at the deadline. If the Sox are in contention and Garland's pitching like he did in 2005, there is no way they could let him go then. Chances are he will be gone, and as a guy who really couldn't stand Garland until last season, I think its a mistake unless you get a package like the A's got for Mulder. I would rather have 1 season of Garland pitching for the White Sox than 3 or 4 seasons of some "tools" prospects playing for Kannapolis and Birmingham before being released. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We agree on not trading him at the deadline, there are several reasons that's a bad idea. Whatever the payroll math, they are over budget, and we are not talking a few hundred thousand, we are talking several million. Plus they have holes in the bullpen and KW and Guillen are huge advocates of having a great bullpen, as they should be. They do not want to lose a very good pitcher to free agency for draft picks. That is not how KW has operated, maybe Schueler did but not this administration. They are over budget by probably $5-6 million at least, factoring in arbitration raises. They need bullpen help. KW has said these guys need to sign an extension or he'll move on with his plans. If they don't move Garland they'll have to move someone else. I doubt they move guys who are signed, they will move a guy who doesn't want to commit here. Garland or Contreras. Since there have been signs that Contreras is more willing to work something out than Garland, we are hearing Garland linked in all kinds of rumors. Not coincidental, quite logical actually. I realize this board would like to stack this team as much as possible, I would too. However the White Sox do not do business this way. I am not thrilled with the reality but that's what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:29 PM) THEY HAVE, by a lot. I wish people on this board would look at reality instead of just one piece of the puzzle. They are several million over budget, by all accounts. Garland is in line for a huge arbitration award, perhaps $8 million. What is it about this situation that people don't, or refuse, to understand? I think payroll has a lot to do with dealing Jon That said, what would /do you think of a deal with the astros centered around Qualls and Garland? The sox can lock up a top quality set up man for a few yrs at a reasonable rate, and probably get a pitching prospect in the deal. Qualls being an extreme GB pitcher who can get K's and give up few walks would fit in very well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 I think payroll has a lot to do with dealing Jon That said, what would /do you think of a deal with the astros centered around Qualls and Garland? The sox can lock up a top quality set up man for a few yrs at a reasonable rate, and probably get a pitching prospect in the deal. Qualls being an extreme GB pitcher who can get K's and give up few walks would fit in very well <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I saw this on an Astros board, I think you authored it in fact. Yes I think this is the type of deal they will try to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:57 PM) I saw this on an Astros board, I think you authored it in fact. Yes I think this is the type of deal they will try to make. someone from their side started the thread who saw in MLB rumors. I just proposed what it would take from the sox side. If the sox wanted a LH SP Troy Patton has excellent numbers from high A. It would take more than Jon to land him [and Qualls], as he was the #4 rated prospect in the SAL league from BA. But top pitching prospects are at a premium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 The Garland trade threads are closed. The thread about his signing is pinned in Pale Hose Talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 QUOTE(BlackBetsy @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 07:20 AM) Jon Garland for Brandon Wood, straight up. Would you take it? Jon Garland and Joe Crede for Brandon Wood and Kendry Morales. Would you take it? [edit] FYI- The Angels reportedly offered the Royals Brandon Wood AND Casey Kotchman for Mike Sweeney. Allard Baird, not knowing his head from his ass, reportedly turned the Angels down. I smell BS. The Angels have always said they won't deal Brandon Wood and they sure as s*** wouldn't do it for Sweeney. No GM would be stupid enough to turn that deal down either, but I guarantee you the Angels didn't make that trade. Stoneman doesn't give up his untouchables and Brandon Wood is as untouchable as it gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts