Jump to content

White Sox named as a possibility for Garland


DaTank

Jon Garland  

136 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you welcome him back to the Southside?

    • Yes, no matter how much money he wants.
      7
    • Yes, for the right price.
      117
    • No.
      12


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 04:39 PM)
I'm sick of everyone always agreeing with me. Rarely does anyone actually call me out, sometimes I have to fabricate an disagreement just to get some good dialogue going.

 

If it makes you feel any better I disagree with a lot of what you say on here, I just don't say anything cause your my boy Kal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Shadows @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 04:47 PM)
If it makes you feel any better I disagree with a lot of what you say on here, I just don't say anything cause your my boy Kal

Carl, you possess both the coolest avatar and the funniest name on this site. Your disagreement is assumed everywhere you don't post and in all subjects wii-related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Shadows @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 05:47 PM)
If it makes you feel any better I disagree with a lot of what you say on here, I just don't say anything cause your my boy Kal

I think you and I disagree more than we agree on topics pertaining to baseball.

 

That love you have for Willy T. has been burning strong for a few years now, I remember you waxing poetic about him back when he was still with the Astros, I still think you're nuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So this one writer, Heyman, says the Sox might be a possibility for Garland. Not a rumor, no source, no other writers agreeing. Just one guy saying he could be a possibility. I'd say this is beyond thin.

 

But for the sake of discussion, I'd like to see Garland on the south side as a 4/5 starter, for the right price. Problem is, it won't be the right price, Garland would hesitate to come back to Chicago, and the feeling may be mutual for the Sox. Plus, if we pay JG some 8 or 10 mil a year, that precludes any free agent signings for CF or elsewhere, and pretty much requires we trade Dye.

 

Overall, it would need to be a super-cheap deal for this to be worth it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 04:51 PM)
I think you and I disagree more than we agree on topics pertaining to baseball.

 

That love you have for Willy T. has been burning strong for a few years now, I remember you waxing poetic about him back when he was still with the Astros, I still think you're nuts.

The entire baseball world seems to be on your side with this one. Willy T is f***ing awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 08:39 PM)
Obviously Garland would fit back into our rotation perfectly with the emergence of Danks and Floyd. It would give Ozzie the flexibility to have a L,R,L,R,L rotation the entire season. If Stone is right and the market drops in January i would love to have Garland for $8 million/season with incentives. . But im guessing he gets nothing less than 10 mill/season...

 

 

Could be and I would love to Jon Garland back with the Sox

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I stated in a previous thread, a 3 year 27-30 million dollar contract with some incentives/bonuses would be perfect. He would make our rotation a whole lot less crappy. He might not be a stud, but he's a very solid 3-4 guy. I would also try and get Garland pitching more games on 3-4 days rest instead of 4-5 days as I firmly believe with him, when he's arm is tired, his "sinker" will be a lot more effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this thread turned out to be interesting...

 

As for the topic at hand, I would definitely like Garland back on this team, and I would absolutely do a 3 year deal for $8M/yr. Not sure if someone will end up overpaying for Jon, but I have a hard time believing someone will with the way this off-season has been going so far. I don't think $8M/year is all that unrealistic, even if it would be a pay-cut for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Garland would be a decent pickup. He'd probably settle for a 2 yr deal, as he'll find most teams may be backing off him due to his increased numbers. Only if he's healthy, though. I don't want the sox to pay $9+ mill. for a 4th or 5th starter. Though I'd rather pay Garland $9 mill. than Vazquez 2009 salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is exactly what I'm talking about, instead of discussing the topic at hand you have to get all personal and correct grammatical errors. Indicators of a person who doesn't know how to conduct himself in an argument.

 

And no, a pitcher's W/L record is not a good way of proving his worth as a player.

Seriously. Did someone just hotlink a post from WSI?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 02:39 PM)
Obviously Garland would fit back into our rotation perfectly with the emergence of Danks and Floyd. It would give Ozzie the flexibility to have a L,R,L,R,L rotation the entire season. If Stone is right and the market drops in January i would love to have Garland for $8 million/season with incentives. . But im guessing he gets nothing less than 10 mill/season...

 

 

Garland had a bad year last year. If memor serves, he gave up 250 hit s (or so) in about 190-200 innings. That's not so good. I don't want him back.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 08:25 PM)
Why was Javy Vazquez's $11.5 million a year to be a 4/5 starter, "reasonable", and paying Garland to do the same thing, except win a couple more games and strikeout a bunch less, insane? I'm not a big fan of Garland, but I'd rather have him than Javy. And you can probably pay him less money.

I don't recall anyone saying anything like that. Or if someone did, that's a pretty gross misrepresentation of what they actually meant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 08:23 PM)
Wow I missed a Steve-Kalapse argument

It was more of a fun-ument.

 

We both argued things we didn't believe to kill an hour. It was pretty silly. (I that wins are all that matters, he that he doesn't want Garland back whatsoever)

Edited by Steve9347
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact is that Jon Garland has proven he can be a #4 starter in our ballpark, something Richard, Poreda, Marquez, etc.etc. haven't. If he comes for under 10 million, I say do it, you'd essentially be receiving Tyler Flowers, Brent Lillibridge, Gilmore, Rodriguez, Garland & some cash for Javy.

Edited by Jimmywins1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jimmywins1 @ Dec 18, 2008 -> 10:04 PM)
The fact is that Jon Garland has proven he cant be a #4 starter in our ballpark, something Richard, Poreda, Marquez, etc.etc. haven't. If he comes for under 10 million, I say do it, you'd essentially be receiving Tyler Flowers, Brent Lillibridge, Gilmore, Rodriguez, Garland & some cash for Javy.

I assume you mean he's proven he CAN?

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...