PDA

View Full Version : Garland to the Angels



Redsnake
11-19-2007, 12:47 PM
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/HeadLines.aspx?sport=MLB&hl=226455

I'm glad he has been traded and not to thr Reds. I just didn't think his numbers projected well in GABP. then again I would have taken him over Milton.

Vada Pinson Fan
11-19-2007, 01:13 PM
Garland, as a former 18 game winner, obviously has the knowledge and arm to pitch. We can't look at every pitcher and think of Eric Milton. It's difficult to say but at some point you have to hope a big investment type player works out for the Reds. What a pitcher or every day player does one year is never a given as to what will happen next year. Only an indicator but not absolute. I realize he had a so-so year last season 10-13.

I think the Angels will be better for acquiring Garland than not. As scarce as good pitching is to acquire, I wish it was the Reds getting Wayne Garland. Sorry, I meant Jon Garland. I just edited my mistake. The memory isn't what it used to be. Please excuse my error.

Happy Thanksgiving Everyone,

thatcoolguy_22
11-19-2007, 02:50 PM
http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/G/Jon-Garland.shtml

John Garland

27 years old, 4 consecutive years of over 200 IP, BB rate below 2.5 in last 3 years, GB% 45% average the last 3 years, K/9 rate below 5 the last 4 years...

Appears to be the definition of a number 3 starter.


Orlando Cabrera

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/Orlando-Cabrera.shtml

32 year old SS coming off the his 2nd gg, a career year where he had a .345 OBP and slugged .397 while stealing 20 bases.




Who Won IMO

Neither team

The White Sox traded the little amount of pitching depth they had for a 32 year old SS that is making 8.5 million per. Garland is not the dominant starter that his W/L record would indicate from 05 and 06. He is a pitcher that will walk less than 2 batters a game while striking out less than 5 to boot. This trade appears to be a bigger deal than what it is IMO

AmarilloRed
11-19-2007, 03:33 PM
We should have traded Gonzalez or Keppinger for Jon Garland.

thatcoolguy_22
11-19-2007, 04:15 PM
trade the best defensive SS we have seen in a Reds' uni since a young Barry Larkin, for a number 3 SP that has a a K/9 rate that hovers around 4.5 every year? That would have been disastrous. He has around a 45% GB rate and with Jeff "I only have more range than David Wells circa 2007" Keppinger he would have been crushed here at Great American Smallpark. Too many baserunners... Plus he is a 10million a year guy with only 1 year left on his contract

Jay Bruce
11-19-2007, 04:20 PM
trade the best defensive SS we have seen in a Reds' uni since a young Barry Larkin, for a number 3 SP that has a a K/9 rate that hovers around 4.5 every year? That would have been disastrous. He has around a 45% GB rate and with Jeff "I only have more range than David Wells circa 2007" Keppinger he would have been crushed here at Great American Smallpark. Too many baserunners... Plus he is a 10million a year guy with only 1 year left on his contract

It's actually 12 million for the year ;). Other than that, I cannot disagree with one thing you just said. These are the exact reasons that would have made Garland an awful target for the Reds to acquire.

GoReds33
11-19-2007, 06:13 PM
I like Garland. He is a good pitcher. I think that the White Sox got the best end of this deal. I think that Cabrera is a good shortstop. I think that he still has some gas in the tank. Another aspect is that Juan Uribe can still be traded, which basically would be all profit.

PickOff
11-20-2007, 03:05 PM
trade the best defensive SS we have seen in a Reds' uni since a young Barry Larkin, for a number 3 SP that has a a K/9 rate that hovers around 4.5 every year? That would have been disastrous. He has around a 45% GB rate and with Jeff "I only have more range than David Wells circa 2007" Keppinger he would have been crushed here at Great American Smallpark. Too many baserunners... Plus he is a 10million a year guy with only 1 year left on his contract

A young Barry Larkin? Gonzo had a horrible season defensively, posting worse stats and playing time than Barry when Barry was 38.

I realize errors, FB, and range factor have many flaws, but nonetheless

2002 Barry 38, 135gms, 12 e, +.009 FP, +.15 RFg

2007 Gonzo 30, 103gms, 16 e, -.012 FP, -.01 Rfg

Barry was better than the league and Gonzo worse in FP and Rfg, and there was a large discrepency in errors.

Gonzo is somewhat overated as a defensive shortstop and inconsistent year to year. He is league average at best currently. The fielding bible had him slightly above this year after ranking first last year. He is a disappointment to me, and I find him hard to watch.

GoGoWhiteSox
11-22-2007, 08:23 AM
I can't say that I like this deal at all. They traded away one of their more solid, dependable starters for another bat, which they really didn't need (who happens to be 32 by the way). Now they will be an even OLDER team come opening day next year.:thumbdown

*BaseClogger*
11-22-2007, 01:08 PM
I can't say that I like this deal at all. They traded away one of their more solid, dependable starters for another bat, which they really didn't need (who happens to be 32 by the way). Now they will be an even OLDER team come opening day next year.:thumbdown

yes but Cabrera has one year on his deal and could be gone after the season, same as Garland, so their respective ages matter very little...