PDA

View Full Version : How about a Garland?



Mario-Rijo
11-19-2006, 03:02 PM
It looks like the White Sox are on the verge of dealing him according to this Foxsports article. However take note that although it's speculated that it might be the Rangers, it doesn't actually state who it is. Could it be us, we certainly would have a need in a GB pitcher with durability. I guess I would prefer Jason Jennings but Garland isn't bad! But what young arm(s) would it cost us?



White Sox close to dealing Garland
Ken Rosenthal / FOXSports.com
Posted: Friday



The White Sox are close to trading right-hander Jon Garland, according to a rival executive, and the Rangers appear to be the most logical fit.

The Rangers pursued Garland at the general managers' meetings in Naples, Fla., and White Sox G.M. Ken Williams is intrigued by several of the Rangers' pitching prospects.
Minor-league left-hander John Danks likely would be part of any Rangers package for Garland, a sinker-baller whose style would adapt well to Texas' hitter-friendly Ameriquest Field.

The Orioles and other clubs also have engaged the White Sox in talks about Garland. The White Sox have been seeking young pitching for one of their veteran starters.

A deal between the White Sox and Rangers also could be expanded to include White Sox center fielder Brian Anderson. The Rangers could lose center fielder Gary Matthews Jr. to free agency.

Garland, 27, is signed for $10 million in 2007 and $12 million in '08. He has worked 211 or more innings in each of the past three seasons and won 18 games in each of the past two. However, his ERA rose from a career-best 3.50 in 2005 to 4.51 last season.

reds44
11-19-2006, 03:20 PM
We don't have the horses to get him.

Falls City Beer
11-19-2006, 03:24 PM
We don't have the horses to get him.

I don't know--I think the White Sox would be happy just dumping the guy.

Mario-Rijo
11-19-2006, 03:29 PM
Cueto? Wood? Pelland? I would consider dealing almost anyone else in the minors besides Bailey, Wood and EZ (I still believe he can be an outstanding back of the rotation arm). That said only Bailey is a no-no unless someone gives us the moon.

harangatang
11-19-2006, 03:53 PM
I think Judy is more on the Reds budget.

Johnny Footstool
11-19-2006, 04:57 PM
Garland is a prime example of how pitch-to-contact pitchers can go from good to bad in the blink of an eye.

red-in-la
11-19-2006, 05:33 PM
Well....somebody this side of Roy Oswalt has to be good enough....

Harang didn't throw hard enough, Arroyo was fodder.....so, who would be good enough?

mth123
11-19-2006, 05:40 PM
I don't know--I think the White Sox would be happy just dumping the guy.

I think they would too. They're looking for a back-up catcher. The reds could even the money some in 2007 by trading Larue for him. As long as the money doesn't stop a Harang deal.

GoGoWhiteSox
11-20-2006, 01:32 AM
Garland is a prime example of how pitch-to-contact pitchers can go from good to bad in the blink of an eye.
Umm...Jon Garland has won a combined 36 games over the course of 2005 and 2006. I think he's finally hitting his stride, not going from good to bad.

guttle11
11-20-2006, 01:42 AM
I think Judy is more on the Reds budget.


That darn drug testing is standing in the way, though.

schroomytunes
11-20-2006, 01:53 AM
If we were to trade for Jon GArland, then Im sure CHW would be inquiring about Bailey. I for one would not trade for Garland if Baileys gotta be sold. Now I would make this trade with the White Sox though.

Reds trade: David Ross

White Sox trade: Sean Tracey

The White Sox need a backup catcher behind Pierzinski, and Ross would provide much needed insurance at that position. While the Reds gain an arm for the bullpen, and free up a spot for another OF.

M2
11-20-2006, 02:12 AM
Garland's the new Jeff Suppan, the quintessential league average guy.

Sure, he had a career year in 2005, but outside of that season his ERA+ has been 100, 99, 100 and 103 in his four other full seasons an a MLB starter.

cincyinco
11-20-2006, 04:20 AM
Would you guys make a trade for Garland if you could get a guy like Brian Anderson involved?

Highlifeman21
11-20-2006, 10:36 AM
Would you guys make a trade for Garland if you could get a guy like Brian Anderson involved?


The same Brian Anderson who stunk up the joint in 2006? We have a player on our roster right now who might be one notch of a downgrade defensively, but can definitely outhit Mr. Anderson: Chris Denorfia.

Why would we want to go acquire another great CF defensive talent that will never be our everyday CF?

Now if we could send Griffey to the White Sox for some sort of starting pitching help, sign me up.

Johnny Footstool
11-20-2006, 10:39 AM
Umm...Jon Garland has won a combined 36 games over the course of 2005 and 2006. I think he's finally hitting his stride, not going from good to bad.
You can thank the White Sox offense for his wins.
Check his roller-coaster WHIP and ERA numbers from 2004, 2005, and 2006. His K/9 has been very consistent and very low. He relies on his defense to generate outs, which leads to inconsistent performance from year to year.

Johnny Footstool
11-20-2006, 10:57 AM
Well....somebody this side of Roy Oswalt has to be good enough....

Harang didn't throw hard enough, Arroyo was fodder.....so, who would be good enough?

Anyone with a K/9 near 7 would be a good start.

Arroyo's K/9 dropped from 7.15 in 2004 to a miserable 4.38 in 2005. Hence my skepticism when the Reds traded for him. This season, it came back up to almost 7 again.

Harang's K/9 was 4.75 when the Reds got him in 2003. Through sheer hard work, he brought it up to almost 7 in 2004 and 2005. Then it exploded to 8.30 last season.

Successful pitchers tend to miss bats.

asboog
11-20-2006, 06:01 PM
Being a White Sox fan I can say that it would take a miracle to get Garland away from us at this point and time. He is young, he isn't too over priced yet, and he was our most successful pitcher the past two years. Now if you are talking Javier Vazquez then that might be another story but you won't want him because of $ and he is a flyball pither which is bad enough at US Celluar let alone Great American

asboog
11-20-2006, 06:03 PM
The same Brian Anderson who stunk up the joint in 2006? We have a player on our roster right now who might be one notch of a downgrade defensively, but can definitely outhit Mr. Anderson: Chris Denorfia.

Why would we want to go acquire another great CF defensive talent that will never be our everyday CF?

Now if we could send Griffey to the White Sox for some sort of starting pitching help, sign me up.

Yes he stunk in the beginning of the season but he hit close to 300 for the second half.

cincyinco
11-20-2006, 06:17 PM
The same Brian Anderson who stunk up the joint in 2006? We have a player on our roster right now who might be one notch of a downgrade defensively, but can definitely outhit Mr. Anderson: Chris Denorfia.

Why would we want to go acquire another great CF defensive talent that will never be our everyday CF?

Now if we could send Griffey to the White Sox for some sort of starting pitching help, sign me up.

Denorfia isn't even in the same league as Anderson in terms of being a prospect. He struggled in his first full year, yes. But he's younger than 25, and his upside is still very good. Not all players do great in their first full taste of the majors. I think he's a prime candidate to rebound - and its making schrewd moves like this that seperate the good GMs from the bad ones.

Brian Anderson may turn into a "brandon larson" but he's worth taking a gamble on. Especially if you can get him for next to nothing becuase his organization has soured on him...

CWRed
11-20-2006, 10:23 PM
Just wondering. Is "A" John Garland better then "the" John Garland. Personally I'd like to have a Pete Rose, a Joe Morgan, a George Foster...ok, I've had enough. ;)

flyer85
11-20-2006, 10:26 PM
Reds don't need anything else hanging around their neck

Highlifeman21
11-20-2006, 11:47 PM
Denorfia isn't even in the same league as Anderson in terms of being a prospect. He struggled in his first full year, yes. But he's younger than 25, and his upside is still very good. Not all players do great in their first full taste of the majors. I think he's a prime candidate to rebound - and its making schrewd moves like this that seperate the good GMs from the bad ones.

Brian Anderson may turn into a "brandon larson" but he's worth taking a gamble on. Especially if you can get him for next to nothing becuase his organization has soured on him...

See this thread/post on the Denorfia/Anderson comparison.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1184127&highlight=anderson+denorfia#post1184127

Denorfia trumps Anderson. If Anderson's a throw in, then we might take him as a project, but if Anderson's a target, then I want nothing to do with that deal.

IslandRed
11-21-2006, 11:51 AM
Garland's the new Jeff Suppan, the quintessential league average guy.


Reds don't need anything else hanging around their neck

Depends on how you look at it, I guess. Garland's in the same general class as the Suppans and Lillys that are available on the free-agent market, and costs about what those guys will.

I generally agree with Johnny regarding the missing-bats issue, but Garland's an interesting case. He's become a rather extreme example of a "rely on his defense" pitcher, his K rate is low but so are his walks, and he keeps the ball in the yard for the most part. If he kept the ball in the GAB while Gonzalez and Phillips vacuumed up ground balls, he could do well here. Let me put it this way -- I'm willing to trade some K/9 for some GB/FB now.

Having said that, if we're going to spend some money to acquire a groundball-oriented pitcher in trade, Jason Jennings is still the choice.

Johnny Footstool
11-21-2006, 01:19 PM
Jennings would be great. He looks like a slightly less potent version of Brandon Webb from 2003-2004 -- sinkerball pitcher, low HR totals, decent strikeout numbers, lots of walks. Get him out of Denver and he could easily morph into a slightly less potent version of Brandon Webb from 2005-2006.

Unfortunately, I don't know who the Reds have to offer in a trade.