Rowand44 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(T R U @ May 30, 2006 -> 12:25 AM) It was 2.25 Dont insult G Money with that 2.5 non-sense lol, my mistake. Just throwing out numbers off the top of my head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ May 30, 2006 -> 12:24 AM) Hmm good point, I guess I didn't think of how deep into the season we are. I dunno, I guess I am suffering from the "only one stat matters" viewpoint, and we are 6-4 in Jon starts, which paces us at 18-12 in the first 30 starts from our #5 starter. And with that in mind, Jon can and probably will pitch at least a little better eventually, which could improve that record. The funny thing is Garland is doing exactly what we were looking for in a 5th starter from 2001-2004. He's hasn't been good, but he hasn't been incompetent either. 10 games in with his ERA as poor as it is, you just have to chalk it up to a lost season already. Hope he returns to at least pre-05 form and keeps winning games. Like you said, at this point, you're better off just watching the W-L column than ERA, because ERA is going to take a Cy Young second half for it to get back to the high expectations that some have attached to the high price tag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 His BAA was at .333 a couple of weeks ago, and now, it's down to .322. Hey, it's a step in the right direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ May 30, 2006 -> 12:34 AM) His BAA was at .333 a couple of weeks ago, and now, it's down to .322. Hey, it's a step in the right direction. Home: 1-0 2.75 ERA Away: 3-2 7.83 ERA I didnt know those numbers.. anyways, what I wanted to say here was the only real problem with Garland is that he has just been gettin hit around, at least hes not walking a ton of guys. I really dont see how he wont be better throughout the season, hopefully he gets his head straight.. Best thing is, he could be 7-2 right now but the "Offense" that is carrying him didnt score enough runs those games (He didnt get a loss in any of those either) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(T R U @ May 30, 2006 -> 02:40 AM) Home: 1-0 2.75 ERA Away: 3-2 7.83 ERA This can be explained. There are three home starts, 2 against Kansas City and 1 against Oakland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ May 29, 2006 -> 10:15 PM) Now on paper, you see that and say "how the f*** is that worth 3 and 29"....but if your 26 and throw 200 innings, while having a slightly below league average or so ERA, it's worth it....especially on a team like this where he is the #5. So, it's OK for the Sox to spend $10 and $12 million over the next two years for a guy whose ERA will likely be in the mid/upper 4's and WHIP will be somewhere around 1.3-1.4? Maybe in the Bronx, where the owner has more money than God, but not in Chicago. The Sox can't afford to overpay for mediocre pitching. KW's going to need to unload some salary in the offseason to supplement the 'pen. Right now, it looks like either Garland or Freddy will be the odd man out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 If it was a contract year fluke, we could just sign him to one year contracts every year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(3E8 @ May 30, 2006 -> 02:53 AM) This can be explained. There are three home starts, 2 against Kansas City and 1 against Oakland. And? Those are still games we need to win Why does everyone care what were paying him anyways, its not like its your money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(WCSox @ May 30, 2006 -> 10:15 AM) So, it's OK for the Sox to spend $10 and $12 million over the next two years for a guy whose ERA will likely be in the mid/upper 4's and WHIP will be somewhere around 1.3-1.4? Maybe in the Bronx, where the owner has more money than God, but not in Chicago. The Sox can't afford to overpay for mediocre pitching. KW's going to need to unload some salary in the offseason to supplement the 'pen. Right now, it looks like either Garland or Freddy will be the odd man out. What is the magical value for a player of his age and those statistics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(T R U @ May 30, 2006 -> 02:30 PM) And? Those are still games we need to win Why does everyone care what were paying him anyways, its not like its your money If we pay him too much, it prevents the Sox from signing/trading for other players. His earning 29 million over 3 years might prevent the Sox from getting bullpen help, because the teams payroll is already too high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ May 30, 2006 -> 01:33 PM) If we pay him too much, it prevents the Sox from signing/trading for other players. His earning 29 million over 3 years might prevent the Sox from getting bullpen help, because the teams payroll is already too high. If the payroll was really an issue we wouldnt have been throwing around money to Garland and Contreras like happened.. weve already got the 3rd highest payroll, somehow I am not seeing it as a big deal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winninguglyin83 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 What is his career record minus the 8-0 start last season? I believe, including this season, it is 68-63. There is your answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(T R U @ May 30, 2006 -> 11:34 AM) If the payroll was really an issue we wouldnt have been throwing around money to Garland and Contreras like happened.. weve already got the 3rd highest payroll, somehow I am not seeing it as a big deal Our payroll is over $20 million higher than last year (~$30 million higher if you don't count the money that we got back in the Contreras and Thome trades). If the Sox go deep into the playoffs again this year, the extra revenue from the postseason (not to mention the people who became season-ticket holders just to get WS tickets) and the associated merchandise sales probably won't be there. The Sox will need to retain their 20,000+ season-ticket-holder base to be able to support a payroll like this over the long run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ndgt10 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Jon Garland is a very good pitcher. There is no question in my mind that he will be our best pitcher for the rest of the season. He's a keeper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(WCSox @ May 30, 2006 -> 01:51 PM) Our payroll is over $20 million higher than last year (~$30 million higher if you don't count the money that we got back in the Contreras and Thome trades). If the Sox go deep into the playoffs again this year, the extra revenue from the postseason (not to mention the people who became season-ticket holders just to get WS tickets) and the associated merchandise sales probably won't be there. The Sox will need to retain their 20,000+ season-ticket-holder base to be able to support a payroll like this over the long run. Did you write off Contreras off at the beginning of last year? The market for good young starting pitching is alot higher than what we are paying Garland. We secured him for lower than market value, what more do you want? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:07 PM) Did you write off Contreras off at the beginning of last year? The market for good young starting pitching is alot higher than what we are paying Garland. We secured him for lower than market value, what more do you want? I fail to see how giving an average starter $10 million in 2007 and $12 million in 2008 is lower than market value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ May 30, 2006 -> 12:08 PM) I fail to see how giving an average starter $10 million in 2007 and $12 million in 2008 is lower than market value. AJ Burnett moved to the 60 day DL from the 15 day DL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 30, 2006 -> 02:17 PM) AJ Burnett moved to the 60 day DL from the 15 day DL. ^^^^ Kerry Wood anyone? Hold on, call waiting. Jeff Weaver is on the phone. Hello, Jeff, yes. Oh Livan Hernandez is having a BBQ? Who is invited? Oh Pavano is coming, nice is Loaiza bringing the food? Great. Kevin Brown is bringing the beers, he has alot of time and money on his hands these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 30, 2006 -> 07:30 PM) ^^^^ Kerry Wood anyone? Hold on, call waiting. Jeff Weaver is on the phone. Hello, Jeff, yes. Oh Livan Hernandez is having a BBQ? Who is invited? Oh Pavano is coming, nice is Loaiza bringing the food? Great. Kevin Brown is bringing the beers, he has alot of time and money on his hands these days. perfection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:17 PM) AJ Burnett moved to the 60 day DL from the 15 day DL. Except Burnett is an above average pitcher, he's just injury prone. QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) Kerry Wood anyone? Again, above average pitcher, just injury prone. QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) Hold on, call waiting. Jeff Weaver is on the phone. Hello, Jeff, yes. Hold on, Scott Boras is on the phone. QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) Oh Livan Hernandez is having a BBQ? For the last 3 years, his ERA has been below 4. QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) Oh Pavano is coming He was signed by the Yankees.. of course his contract will be bloated. QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) nice is Loaiza bringing the food? Can't defend that one, idiotic contract given out by Beane... a rarity. QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:30 PM) Kevin Brown is bringing the beers Again, the Yankees, injury prone, and a VERY good pitcher when fully healthy. Edited May 30, 2006 by Felix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ May 30, 2006 -> 12:40 PM) Again, the Yankees, injury prone, and a VERY good pitcher when fully healthy. The Dodgers signed that contract, the Yankees only traded for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:44 PM) The Dodgers signed that contract, the Yankees only traded for him. My mistake, but that doesn't stop the fact that he is (actually, more like was, but still..) a damn good pitcher when healthy. He's far from being an average starter. Edited May 30, 2006 by Felix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ May 30, 2006 -> 02:40 PM) Except Burnett is an above average pitcher, he's just injury prone. Again, above average pitcher, just injury prone. How can you be considered above average when you know that they aren't going to contribute for a part of almost every season, if not longer. At the end of the day their numbers are going to be comparable to an average pitcher who is around every start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:53 PM) How can you be considered above average when you know that they aren't going to contribute for a part of almost every season, if not longer. At the end of the day their numbers are going to be comparable to an average pitcher who is around every start. Well, last year, A.J. Burnett did have 32 starts (doesn't stop him from being injury prone, but it could have been a reason why the contract was so high), and did look pretty damn good in them (3.44 ERA, 117 ERA+). As for Kerry Wood (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not the best at Cubs lore), he was an amazing pitcher, and wasn't really thought to be injury prone until he blew out his shoulder. By then, his contract was already signed, and he had already had his amazing MLB debut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Felix @ May 30, 2006 -> 02:59 PM) Well, last year, A.J. Burnett did have 32 starts (doesn't stop him from being injury prone, but it could have been a reason why the contract was so high), and did look pretty damn good in them (3.44 ERA, 117 ERA+). As for Kerry Wood (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not the best at Cubs lore), he was an amazing pitcher, and wasn't really thought to be injury prone until he blew out his shoulder. By then, his contract was already signed, and he had already had his amazing MLB debut. So we are now evaluating pitchers based on one year? I would take Garland of last year over both of those "above average but injury prone pitchers." Your Garland hate makes you look foolish when trying to defend these other jokers. Garland is ALOT like Brad Radke, especially through this point in his career. Radke has been paid 9, 10.75, 8.75, 8.75, 7.75 million over his last 5 years. Is Garland, at a younger age and with today's ridiculous contracts for SP worth as much? I believe so. Edited May 30, 2006 by RockRaines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.