Garland to be dealt shortly

[reillymcshane]

Rosenthal is saying Garland is close to go being traded.

 

Texas is the likely destination. Perhaps elements including Danks for Garland/Anderson.

 

Story

 

Edited my mixing up of players.

[TooLiveBrew]

Anderson is on the White Sox, not Rangers. It sounds like the Rangers' desire for Anderson as well, without a clear piece to add on with Danks, might be the snag here. This deal has been talked about for a while now, and seems likely. I just don't see a proven MLB starter going for merely one prospect. I wonder who the Rangers can offer, in addition to Danks, that can net them both Garland & Anderson.

[brewers255]

the deal is off

 

The White Sox and Rangers are no longer set to do a Jon Garland deal, says FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal.

 

Rosenthal indicated yesterday that it was basically a done deal, but now he says the Orioles and other teams are also talking to the White Sox about Garland. Talks with the Rangers could be revisited. A deal with the Orioles would likely involve Hayden Penn and additional young pitching. Such a move would put Baltimore in prime position to finish firmly in fourth place in the AL East.

[JohnBriggs12]

I think if they wanted to, the Brewers could get involved in this.

 

Jenkins, Davis, Turnbow?

 

Jenkins fills an OF need.

 

Davis gives them a replacement starter.

 

Turnbow because the Sox are hoarding hard throwing relievers because they think Cooper can turn them all into Bobby Jenks.

[paul253]

I think they'd want young pitching in return. Is Mark Rogers too much to give up for Garland? I am not convinced Rogers is going anywhere, but maybe the Sox would like his potential

[colbyjack]

At first I wondered why the White Sox would make such a move, then I looked at found he is going to make $10M next year and $12M in '08. That's crazy. For a guy with a career 4.44 ERA and only one season in which his ERA was below 4.00 as a full-time starter?

 

Plus he gives up too many hits and doesn't strike out very many batters. He's durable, which is a huge plus, but so is Doug Davis, whom I'd much rather keep, or re-sign Tomo Ohka. Of course, Garland is only 27, which is another plus, but otherewise he's an average pitcher, unless you can convince me that his best days are ahead of him.

 

Jenkins, Turnbow and Davis for Garland? Only if your intent is to save $5 million for the 2007 season.

[princeginterhallhelms04]

Jenkins, Turnbow and Davis for Garland?

I kind of like that deal but i am not sold on garland yet. Living close to chi and hearing sox fans they either lover or hate him. Seems like a risky bet for us.

[JohnBriggs12]

Garland has won 36 games over the past two seasons. His sinker is considered to be one of the best in baseball, though his GO/AO ratio dipped more into the average range in 06. Try getting a guy with that many wins for 2yr/$22 million on the open market.

 

A lot of people think that the innings piled up by Sox starters in 05 (Garland threw 237 that year), affected their performance in 06.

 

Certainly could have been a factor, but durability has been a trademark of Garland who hasn't missed a start in over 5 years.

 

As to concerns about his ERA being high, and strikeouts low, well, he doesn't get to face pitchers in the AL. That's worth probably a strikeout a game and AL ERA's of 4.50 is probably equivalent of a 4.20 in the NL.

 

With the Cubs adding Soriano, and Houston adding C. Lee, the division is going to be even tougher on lefties. That's why I'd like to see Davis gone and replaced by a right hander.

[colbyjack]

I agree with the notion that the NL Central is pretty right-handed heavy, but Davis has always been better against right-handed hitters due to his cutter. Lefty hitters actually hit him pretty good, so to get rid of him because the team could face more right-handed hitters would be a very poor decision.

 

I'm still not sold on Garland. I don't doubt his numbers would improve in the NL, but he still got hit pretty hard last season, and his reputation seems to be better than his actual production.

 

While I like the idea of shedding the contracts of Jenkins, Turnbow and in this case, Davis (since we would be trading for a player that would probably be equivalent of Davis' productivity, at least prior to '06), talent for talent however, I'd rather re-sign Ohka.

[mothershipconnection]

That's simply too much cash to give up for a guy with one good season under his belt. To think they may get Danks or another solid prospect for him is crazy.