Jump to content

Jon Garland signs a 3 year extension


LosMediasBlancas

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 338
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 12:31 PM)
Mark must love this move, too.  Now his best friend is signed longer than him.

OK,not that I agree with this or actually think it is going to happen, but with KW you never know, does he completely blindside everyone and decide as a lefty he has zero chance to resign MB and he trades him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 10:27 AM)
I really didn't see this coming.

This means that McCarthy is likely pitching out of the pen.. something I don't really want to see, especially because I don't think Garland will pitch as well as he did last year.  Oh well, time will tell I guess.  It is a bargin considering the current pitching market.

Brandon McCarthy WILL be in the starting rotation next year. You may hear wierd reports about a hostage situation in spring training involving Ozzie or Cooper, but it will be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 12:26 PM)
Yeah, you guys are right.  Contract extensions are different than a FA signing.  While this would make Garland more attractive to other teams, it also gives us no reason to trade him now.

The Sox love bargains, and at $7 million next season, Garland is a bargain. The next 2 season, maybe not. It would surprise me if they traded him now, unless it was just a huge blockbuster. Next offseason, I wouldn't be surprised if he were moved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(SoxFan562004 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 10:32 AM)
OK,not that I agree with this or actually think it is going to happen, but with KW you never know, does he completely blindside everyone and decide as a lefty he has zero chance to resign MB and he trades him?

If it brings us back Pujols, I'm game. Otherwise...well, I never thought KW could give me a reason to burn him in effigy...

 

Otherwise, I think this may massively help us in resigning MB just because it keeps the staff together longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The payroll number is scary, but doesn't necesarily mean that we are trading someone. Bear with me here folks.

 

Coming into this off season, the goal stated for season tickets was to move the base from 11,000 to 15,000 people. Before January first even rolled around, we are at 20,000 people now, which means we are sitting on about an attendance of 1.6 million people before a single regular season single game ticket has been sold. Last year we sold about 1.3 million of those on our way to the World Series. This year we have a World Series title to sell tickets with. If we even sell another million tickets or so from here on out, we are looking at another 20% increase in attendace over 2005, theoretically putting that much more cash into the budget. I said it in August, and I will say it again, $100 million is very, very possible for this team to maintain in its current form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 12:34 PM)
Contreras will almost definitely get traded now.  As many on here know, I was saying all along he should be the one to get traded due to having the highest value at the time.  Teams look at Contreras as a potential ace, where as Garland is more of a 2-3.

 

I'm not so sure about that. Why trade a guy that could possibly be an ace?!?...especially at that price. Unless he brings back some really good returns. Could a deal with Tampa be on the horizon again?!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 12:34 PM)
Contreras will almost definitely get traded now.  As many on here know, I was saying all along he should be the one to get traded due to having the highest value at the time.  Teams look at Contreras as a potential ace, where as Garland is more of a 2-3.

The Southtown reported a week or so ago that Conteras was very close to signing an extension. I wonder if talks went south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 12:37 PM)
The payroll number is scary, but doesn't necesarily mean that we are trading someone.  Bear with me here folks.

 

Coming into this off season, the goal stated for season tickets was to move the base from 11,000 to 15,000 people.  Before January first even rolled around, we are at 20,000 people now, which means we are sitting on about an attendance of 1.6 million people before a single regular season single game ticket has been sold.  Last year we sold about 1.3 million of those on our way to the World Series.  This year we have a World Series title to sell tickets with.  If we even sell another million tickets or so from here on out, we are looking at another 20% increase in attendace over 2005, theoretically putting that much more cash into the budget.  I said it in August, and I will say it again, $100 million is very, very possible for this team to maintain in its current form.

I think the point of starting the TV netowork with the other teams was to increase revenue too, so I imagine with that in its 2nd year, the returns from that are probably being noticed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Wanne @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 01:38 PM)
I'm not so sure about that.  Why trade a guy that could possibly be an ace?!?...especially at that price.  Unless he brings back some really good returns.  Could a deal with Tampa be on the horizon again?!?

Because he's old and who knows if he can keep it together for an entire year. Trading him now, while his value is at an all-time high, makes the most sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is ironic. I remember not so long ago reading a thread topic that illustrated the Sox problems by pointing out the Yankees had six viable startes while the Sox had two. My have the tables turned, huh?

 

Right now, I bet in offices in the north side, Cleveland, Minnesota, Anaheim, Boston, and NY, there are more hands being thown in the air then at an annual Jerry Falwell special.

 

SFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 12:41 PM)
Does anyone else think that this suggests KW may seriously be considering running a 6 man rotation for at least a month or so?

I think they would put McCarthy in the bullpen if they came in with 6. Last year when Cooper was asked about it he said he doesn't like the 6 man rotation. Basically said it throws off schedules and he thinks extra rest can sometimes hurt a pitcher.

 

But who knows with KW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...