Jon Garland

[trottime]

Garland is the 5th starter.

 

No team in the majors has an ace 1-5, the White Sox are pretty damn close.

 

Every person in the majors is human and every one is going to go through a slump at some time.

 

You would think last season winning the World Series would breed some **** loyalty in Sox fans.

 

**** sickening.

 

You go with the horses that got you there, you dont just ** take them in the back and shoot them because they had a bad day.

 

Its much more sickening that you feel it necessary to use language like that. There are young people that visit this site and they do not need to be exposed to your limited vocabulary.

[qwerty]

Thanks for deleting my harmless post guys.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Apr 13, 2006 -> 02:01 PM)

Garland's lack of K's suggest that he's not nearly as good of a pitcher as his ERA and WHIP suggested last season. Simply put, a lot of balls get put into play when he pitches.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ever hear of "pitching to your defense?" Even the best strikeout pitchers put the ball in play 2/3's of the time. :rolly

[Gene Honda Civic]

Its much more sickening that you feel it necessary to use language like that.  There are young people that visit this site and they do not need to be exposed to your limited vocabulary.

You haven't spent much f***ing time here yet have you?

 

Take a step into the first few pages of the gamethreads. Some of those entries would make Duke Lacrosse players blush.

[ShoeLessRob]

Ever hear of "pitching to your defense?"  Even the best strikeout pitchers put the ball in play 2/3's of the time.  :rolly

 

I know this doesn't really go along with Strikeout pitcher but look at Mark, he is by no means a strikeout guy so he uses the defense behind him to get the outs.

 

He defiently "pitches to his defense".

[aboz56]

Well although I am not going to throw Garland under the bus like some are here, I do think that 2005 may be the best season he can have.

 

What we need from him is 200+ innings as usual and having him keep us in the ballgame. He can't really be judged on whether he kept us in the game for his first two starts due to the run support he received, but he can definitely throw better and we all know that.

 

Was he deserving of the deal he got? Perhaps. Will he have to pitch better to justify it? Definitely.

 

With that said, my guess is that we have the best 5th starter in the league and people should just relax and let Garland work things out. He'll be fine and should win 13-15 games with a respectable ERA.

[Baines3]

Sure Garland is off to a slow start, but heck it is only April and only 2 starts. He will get things back on track.

[T R U]

You haven't spent much f***ing time here yet have you?

 

Take a step into the first few pages of the gamethreads. Some of those entries would make Duke Lacrosse players blush.

 

[Felix]

The Sox should have traded Garland last offseason when his trade value was at an all-time high to bolster the bullpen and make way for Brandon McCarthy in the rotation. Instead, they signed him to a rather large contract for a pitcher thats been average throughout his career (the exception being 2005).

 

I hope that Garland does well, and rebounds from his first two starts in 2005 fashion, but I just don't see it happening. He should rebound, yes, but I doubt it will be anywhere near as good as he was in '05. Expect his numbers to be around where they were in 2002 and 2003.

[RockRaines]

The Sox should have traded Garland last offseason when his trade value was at an all-time high to bolster the bullpen and make way for Brandon McCarthy in the rotation.  Instead, they signed him to a rather large contract for a pitcher thats been average throughout his career (the exception being 2005).

 

I hope that Garland does well, and rebounds from his first two starts in 2005 fashion, but I just don't see it happening.  He should rebound, yes, but I doubt it will be anywhere near as good as he was in '05.  Expect his numbers to be around where they were in 2002 and 2003.

hahahaha, ok man. Then our bullpen would be shot, and we would be out a solid starter. Im glad you arent the GM. I will make sure to tell Garland that his season is over after 2 starts, he might as well retire for the season.

[Felix]

Then our bullpen would be shot

Thanks for reading my post

The Sox should have traded Garland last offseason when his trade value was at an all-time high to bolster the bullpen and make way for Brandon McCarthy in the rotation.  Instead, they signed him to a rather large contract for a pitcher thats been average throughout his career (the exception being 2005).

 

we would be out a solid starter.

You don't think McCarthy is a solid starter? Alright.. if you say so..

[whitesoxfan99]

hahahaha, ok man.  Then our bullpen would be shot, and we would be out a solid starter.  Im glad you arent the GM.  I will make sure to tell Garland that his season is over after 2 starts, he might as well retire for the season.

He stated in his post that he would have traded Garland to bolster the bullpen. How does that result in our bullpen being shot?

[DBAHO]

KW was never going to trade Garland to upgrade the pen and farm system because that doesn't increase our chances of winning the World Series this season, and that's what he said all along.

 

Besides, it's not like our bullpen has been a major weakness for us so far (and I think a lot of people thought it would be, but it hasn't been so bad so far).

[mr_genius]

We'll see

 

 

I think Garland will be able to turn it around fairly quickly. If I'm wrong and he sucks the rest of the year, yea we should have traded him. lol

[Rowand44]

He stated in his post that he would have traded Garland to bolster the bullpen.  How does that result in our bullpen being shot?

To be honest, I don't think we could have got a better bullpen arm than what Brandon is going to do for us.

[Felix]

To be honest, I don't think we could have got a better bullpen arm than what Brandon is going to do for us.

I agree with that, but thats not the only thing to look at. I think that the combination of BMac starting and the reliever that could have been acquired would have been better than the combination of Garland starting and BMac in the pen.

[DBAHO]

I agree with that, but thats not the only thing to look at.  I think that the combination of BMac starting and the reliever that could have been acquired would have been better than the combination of Garland starting and BMac in the pen.

And what relievers could we have gotten for Garland? For example would you be saying a combination of B-Mac and Heilman in the pen would be better than Garland and B-Mac in the pen?

[witesoxfan]

The only thing I said is that his K/9 is low enough to believe he's gonna get rocked every once in a while. What happened last year in terms of ERA and WHIP is a total fluke. Sorry if that offends some of you.

 

Nowhere in this thread am I saying I am ready to ship Garland out. He's a fine fourth/fifth starter and will probably go 16-13 with a 4.2-4.4 ERA. We have plenty of offense to bail him out most of the time.

 

That's happened throughout his career, and that happened last year even - how will that stop him from being a very good pitcher? As bad as sinkerballers with low K/9's can be, they can also be on the exact opposite end of that spectrum, and be very good for stretches of time if they get right.

 

I also don't see how you can't say the exact same thing about Buehrle...1 K/9 is a rather large difference, but it's not half a point difference in ERA or more. Obviously we saw that last year, but why can't you see it this year either? So much more of it spotting pitches well, mixing it up well, and having your fielders make the plays behind you.

 

I see no reason he can't have a very solid year, without considering he's a #4 starter. I would personally take 16-13 4.30 ERA...nothing wrong with that out of a #4...but I think he can put up even better than that too, something around 15-18 wins with a sub 3.75 ERA. He did it last year, so he suddenly can't do it this year?

[Chisoxfn]

I didn't write this team off after they started 1-4 and I'm not writing Jon off after 2 starts.

 

Give me a freaking break people.

[qwerty]

I didn't write this team off after they started 1-4 and I'm not writing Jon off after 2 starts.

 

Give me a freaking break people.

 

Hey f*** face...

 

There are young people that visit this site and they do not need to be exposed to your limited vocabulary.

[Harry&JimmyRocked]

1 good year, got his big payday and will be 1st to be shipped out in trade after 2006 to make room for BM and that is fine with me.

 

 

DING!!!

[Kyyle23]

Hey f*** face...

 

There are young people that visit this site and they do not need to be exposed to your limited vocabulary.

 

Thats f***ing hilarious.

 

Gotta love a thread that meanders its way down to a Grammar/Spelling/Language thread.

 

Especially when newbies with 4 posts under their belt start lecturing. lol

[Felix]

And what relievers could we have gotten for Garland? For example would you be saying a combination of B-Mac and Heilman in the pen would be better than Garland and B-Mac in the pen?

I don't exactly have a list of the relievers that we could have gotten, but yes, I do think that BMac + Heilman would be a better combination than BMac + Garland, and if we traded for Heilman, we would have also been able to bolster the farm system in the same trade.

[JoshPR]

Garland's lack of K's suggest that he's not nearly as good of a pitcher as his ERA and WHIP suggested last season. Simply put, a lot of balls get put into play when he pitches.

 

Huh!!!

 

So you're saying that a pitcher is no godd cause he doesn't strike People Out?? I think Pitching is GETTING PEOPLE OUT not only striking them out. There's many pitchers in the hall ofd fame that weren't strikeout guys..

 

And balls get put into play if there hit at someone there outs.

[GoodAsGould]

Huh!!!

 

So you're saying that a pitcher is no godd cause he doesn't strike People Out?? I think Pitching is GETTING PEOPLE OUT not only striking them out. There's many pitchers in the hall ofd fame that weren't strikeout guys..

 

And balls get put into play if there hit at someone there outs.

 

 

I think what he was trying to say is even though Contreras went 8 innings only 1 ER against a hot Tigers offense..... All he had was 2 K's so it must go down as a bad start and he is obviously our worse starter.