Jon Garland signs a 3 year extension

[Balta1701]

So who wants to start the Jose Rumormill thread...

I was debating doing it as soon as I saw this thread....

[Kyyle23]

The audio from the conference call on MLB.com is very interesting. KW says the payroll is expected to settle in at 95 million, and he would prefer to keep all 5 starters he has now and give BMac time to develop and put on some weight and get situated with himself. some quotes

 

"Jose is the only question mark, I would prefer to keep all 5"

 

Insurance for one of the other 5 in case they go down due to a heavy workload in '05"

-in regards to McCarthy's role next year Edited December 28, 2005 by kyyle23

[Balta1701]

The audio from the conference call on MLB.com is very interesting.  KW says the payroll is expected to settle in at 95 million, and he would prefer to keep all 5 starters he has now and give BMac time to develop and put on some weight and get situated with himself.  some quotes

And all negotiations with Garland's people were cut off over a week ago after they rejected our initial offer and decided that they wanted to test the FA Market too.

 

Seriously, the only way KW can be trusted to speak the truth is if he says he wants to trade a guy and immediately says he doesn't want to trade a guy...thus guaranteeing that he'll be right at least 50% of the time.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Comparing last yr's endorsement money to this year's is ridiculous. Last year the White Sox were nobody. Now they are World Champions & said to have the best rotation in MLB. You obviously know nothing about marketing to suggest that last year should be used as a predictor for this year's endorsement opportunitites.

 

Who says the White Sox are over budget? I haven't read that stated anywhere. It would be ridiculous for the team to print that given that it's been widely reported how much they made in the post-season, how much they are getting from the new TV contract, & how sales have greatly increased at the gate.

 

There is no reason to believe that if the White Sox can remain JUST playoff contenders the next few years they will enjoy no less than a $30 million jump in revenue from 2005. If we assume the fast majority of that is going to player payroll they are under budget.

 

BMac is NOT going to be making the minimum for the next 6 yrs. That's ridiculous. He will be making a few million in 2 yrs & double to triple that in 4 yrs. Assuming he continues to improve. That's reality.

 

The NYY's just spent $13 mil/yr on one of the best (if not the best) leadoff hitters in the game. If Pods' game improves what's he going to be worth? Next to pitching leadoff hitter is the most important role to fill. Do we have any one other than Owens to fill that role? Is Owens a proven major league run producer?

 

This homerism is laugable. I imagine there are many of you who really would rather see BMac in the rotation next year than either Javier or Jose.

It reminds me of the infatuation some of you had with Wells, Rauch, & even Sirotka.

 

In case you haven't been paying attention Mark, Freddy, Jon, Javier, & Jose are ALL #1 starters. They would easily fill the ace role for other teams. The difference between #1 & #2 is not measured by stats alone.

It's a question of competition. Any one of these guys can be expected to beat Santana, Halliday, Zito, or Mussina. Can that be said of BMac? No.

[Dick Allen]

I love how these guys get basically $10 million a year for 3 years, guaranteed, and have the nerve to say they didn't want to "break the bank".

[AddisonStSox]

I'll just quit on this note, the one certainty this signing does grant is the ability to give it another go in 2006 with all six pitchers on the roster without hurting the club in the long-term.

 

Now that Garland is locked up at what Williams, Hahn, and co. figure to be market-price, they can keep Contreras during his walk year--a year known for increased effort/production--and have McCarthy as that sixth/spot-starter once again in 2006. If I were the Sox and I was worried that McCarthy wouldn't be happy with another year in Charlotte or a long-man type role with the ML club, I'd say tough s*** and, "listen, at least one of these starters is projected to need some time on the shelf given all the innings pitched in 2005, this World Baseball who-ha, etc. and you will be given a handful of starts in 2006 with a vacated spot just waiting for you in 2007."

[Balta1701]

Any one of these guys can be expected to beat Santana, Halliday, Zito, or Mussina.  Can that be said of BMac?  No.

September 23rd, 2005:

 

Johan Santana: 8 innings, 4 hits, 1 run.

Brandon McCarthy: 8 innings, 4 hits, 1 run.

[Dick Allen]

.

 

In case you haven't been paying attention Mark, Freddy, Jon, Javier, & Jose are ALL #1 starters.  They would easily fill the ace role for other teams.  The difference between #1 & #2 is not measured by stats alone.

It's a question of competition.  Any one of these guys can be expected to beat Santana, Halliday, Zito, or Mussina.  Can that be said of BMac?  No.

If you think Javier Vazquez is a #1 starter, you are the one who hasn't been paying attention the last year and a half sir.

[mr_genius]

I'll just quit on this note, the one certainty this signing does grant is the ability to give it another go in 2006 with all six pitchers on the roster without hurting the club in the long-term.

 

Now that Garland is locked up at what Williams, Hahn, and co. figure to be market-price, they can keep Contreras during his walk year--a year known for increased effort/production--and have McCarthy as that sixth/spot-starter once again in 2006.  If I were the Sox and I was worried that McCarthy wouldn't be happy with another year in Charlotte or a long-man type role with the ML club, I'd say tough s*** and, "listen, at least one of these starters is projected to need some time on the shelf given all the innings pitched in 2005, this World Baseball who-ha, etc. and you will be given a handful of starts in 2006 with a vacated spot just waiting for you in 2007."

 

 

i totally agree

 

and i don't think McCarthy will have a problem coming out of the pen. He knows he'll get his shot in the rotation soon enough.

Edited December 28, 2005 by mr_genius

[Balta1701]

Question: If Contreras pitches for the Sox throughout 2006 and then leaves as a free agent, do we still get draft picks? If so, do we know how many and what round they would be in?

[CWSGuy406]

Question:  If Contreras pitches for the Sox throughout 2006 and then leaves as a free agent, do we still get draft picks?  If so, do we know how many and what round they would be in?

 

I'd say that even if he pitched as a league average pitcher (100 ERA+, something like a 4.40 ERA, I'd guess), he'd still be a Type A free agent, which would mean two picks, I think. Both picks would be in the top 40 overall, but neither would be in the top 15.

 

And, if Kenny Williams isn't overwhelmed with an offer, this isn't a terrible fall-back option. Of course, I'd much prefer the Sox to get something done with LA, with a package built around Joel Guzman. Guzman + Brazoban + Broxton/Miller/Jackson/Elbert might be a good deal...

Edited December 28, 2005 by CWSGuy406

[Dick Allen]

I'd say that even if he pitched as a league average pitcher (100 ERA+, something like a 4.40 ERA, I'd guess), he'd still be a Type A free agent, which would mean two picks, I think.  Both picks would be in the top 40 overall, but neither would be in the top 15.

Isn't it the new team's first rounder if its not in the top 15 and a sandwich pick, or if it is in the top 15 2 sandwich picks?

[CWSGuy406]

Isn't it the new team's first rounder if its not in the top 15 and a sandwich pick, or if it is in the top 15 2 sandwich picks?

 

That's probably it... I always get arbitration rules/contracts confused.

[Balta1701]

I'd say that even if he pitched as a league average pitcher (100 ERA+, something like a 4.40 ERA, I'd guess), he'd still be a Type A free agent, which would mean two picks, I think.  Both picks would be in the top 40 overall, but neither would be in the top 15.

 

And, if Kenny Williams isn't overwhelmed with an offer, this isn't a terrible fall-back option.  Of course, I'd much prefer the Sox to get something done with LA, with a package built around Joel Guzman.  Guzman + Brazoban + Broxton/Miller/Jackson/Elbert might be a good deal...

Ok...the reason I was thinking about that is this...if Contreras does start the season with us, it may not be a good idea to trade him, because once the season starts, you'll know which teams are contenders and which aren't fairly soon. Right now, you could send Jose to a team like the Dodgers with the Dodgers having no idea how many people might get hurt this year, whether they'll be in contention, whether Bonds will drive the Giants to 105 wins, etc. But 2 months into the season, you've got an idea who's in the race, and if we're also in the race, then the teams interested in paying a lot for pitching would be the teams we'd be directly competing with for the trophy...and helping their pitching staffs might not be the best idea in the world.

[JUGGERNAUT]

I'll leave on a similar note. The White Sox don't have to trade any one. They are not in a position where they have a weakness so great that they must fill it outside of the organization.

 

As long as the 5 starters remain healthy BMac's not getting a spot start. These age suggestions for Contreras are ridiculous. He's in his early-mid 30's now. Garland, Mark, Freddy, & Vazquez have little history of DL time. This is not an El Duque situation. BMac should not expect any where close to the number of starts he got in 2005.

 

The White Sox are deep in candidates to fill the holes in the pen. BMac is not really needed there but if Contreras is a rent a player the extensive ML experience out of the pen would help prepare him for a starting role in 2007.

 

Crede might be a rent a player as well. I don't see Kenny allowing him to walk. He either signs or he'll be traded.

[JUGGERNAUT]

I think it goes without saying that 1 of 3 things will happen with Contreras:

1) He signs an extension

2) He has a subpar year & is traded

3) He has a good-great year & the White Sox offer Type A arbit. He declines & the White Sox get two high picks from the team that signs him.

 

There's no way Contreras will remain with the team if he is having a year so bad that he won't qualify for Type A. The NYY's always come a calling.

[JoeBatterz]

Great News about the signing of Garland! How did I miss it until now?

 

I hope they keep Contreas as well and see how this plays out. No since trading for the sake of trading.

 

[Flash Tizzle]

Ok...the reason I was thinking about that is this...if Contreras does start the season with us, it may not be a good idea to trade him, because once the season starts, you'll know which teams are contenders and which aren't fairly soon.  Right now, you could send Jose to a team like the Dodgers with the Dodgers having no idea how many people might get hurt this year, whether they'll be in contention, whether Bonds will drive the Giants to 105 wins, etc.  But 2 months into the season, you've got an idea who's in the race, and if we're also in the race, then the teams interested in paying a lot for pitching would be the teams we'd be directly competing with for the trophy...and helping their pitching staffs might not be the best idea in the world.

 

I agree with your concerns.

 

Also--If we're in contention midseason, and Contreras is pitching well enough to warrant another team overpaying, WHY do we trade him? Has Cleveland's resurgent second half or the White Flag trade taught us nothing? I just don't envision our club trading Count to another contender midseason--unless we're literally 10+ games out of first place. Or the package we'd receive for Contreras were too good to pass up.

 

In order for such a scenario to present itself, first we'd need McCarthy to show Williams Contreras is expendable. He'd have to be utterly dominating from the bullpen. The bullpen itself would have to be strong enough to support McCarthy's departure. Conceivably, everyone would need to produce numbers comparable to last year. Unless a trade involves a relief pitcher. Or the package we'd receive for Contreras would have to be too good to pass up.

Edited December 29, 2005 by Flash Tizzle

[Flash Tizzle]

I think it goes without saying that 1 of 3 things will happen with Contreras:

1) He signs an extension

2) He has a subpar year & is traded

3) He has a good-great year & the White Sox offer Type A arbit.  He declines & the White Sox get two high picks from the team that signs him. 

 

4) He's traded before the season begins.

[JUGGERNAUT]

For those of you who are NOT sold on Javier what part of 23 GS surrendering 3 runs or less does not fit the criteria of being a #1 pitcher?

That's what he did for the D-Backs in 2005.

 

Javier is 28 yr old. Here are his accomplishments:

256 GS, 1643 IP, 437 BB, 1418 K's, 19CG, 7 SO, 89W-93L

In 2005 he walked 46 while striking out 192.

In 2005 Mark walked 40 while striking out 149.

 

Mark's best yr (2004): 51BB, 165K's

Javy's best yr (2003): 57BB, 241K's

 

How any Sox fan can not be thrilled at the potential of Vazquez+AJ+Cooper is beyond me. This guy is electric.

[Guest JimH]

I think they pulled a fast one on Jon.. He wont have 5 years of service until the end of '06.. per the CBA, no no-trade clauses, no free agency. The team owns your rights 100%.

 

I bet the NT is for year 2 and they are reporting it wrong.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

He just finished his 5th full year and he had about 1/2 yr. in 2000.

[WinningUgly85]

I don't get it what was this with people saying he wanted to leave?

 

"I love the city," Garland said during a conference call with reporters. "It's where I wanted to play, where I wanted to be. And I'm happy to be there."

 

"It's something that I was going to do from the very start," he said. "I wanted to sign a long-term deal with the White Sox. I wasn't looking to break the bank."

 

"From Day One, everybody got along," Garland said. "If we can start off spring training the way we did last season, we're gonna have a good shot."

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?i...ce=MLBHeadlines

Edited December 29, 2005 by WinningUgly85

[SoCalSouthSider59]

Garland re signed, 3 years 29 mil.

 

 

Cool........

 

 

[OldSox2]

When did JR open up the purse strings? Doesn't seem like the same guy from a few years ago.

[Middle Buffalo]

When did JR open up the purse strings?  Doesn't seem like the same guy from a few years ago.

JR always disliked giving pitchers long term contracts. Money wasn't really the issue.