Garland re-signed, 'Beernitz' to replace Sosa

by Carlos on Dec 28, 2005 1:07 PM CST Comment 38 comments

According to ESPN Wire, the White Sox finally bought into the Jon Garland hype and re signed him to a contract worth seven, ten and twelve million dollars through the two thousand and eight season. See him go back to his 4.48 ERA self next year. With all due respect, check Esteban Loaiza's season two years ago and there's your last season Garland; at least they didn't sign Loaiza to a long term deal back then.

Also, the Orioles are close to signing RF Jeromy 'Beernitz' to be their replacement of Sammy Sosa in the outfield for 2006; the deal is reportedly worth twelve million dollars for two years of service.

Seems like they don't learn not to sign ex Cub outfielders.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 38 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Wow...

... some teams never do learn, do they?

If those numbers are correct for Garland, the Sox got a bargain based on the contracts for people like Burnett and Millwood.

by Al on Dec 28, 2005 1:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

two teams headed in opposite directions

the white sox just made a huge signing. that's a steal. garland isn't even comparable to loiza. loiza was a junk-baller. a poor man's maddux. garland is filthy. he's like mariano rivera, except a starter. he can just throw that two seamer on people's hands all day and they'll never hit it.

as for burnitz (as much as i enjoy his no-batting-glove approach to the game), if i'm tejada, i'm grabbing one of my illegit calling cards and begging for a trade even louder now....the orioles are going to SUCK.

by billywan on Dec 28, 2005 1:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

You're joking right

Comparing Garland and Mariano Rivera, is almost the same as comparing Willie Banks and Greg Maddux.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Dec 28, 2005 1:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

no, i'm not kidding

i realize it's a bit of a loose comparison. but having watched garland pitch last season quite a few times, i was really struck by how much better and smarter he'd gotten.

to me, the rivera comparison is this: garland throws that sinking two-seamer over and over, and everyone knows it's coming. but they still can't hit it (a la rivera's cutter). it's nasty. he starts it on the inside corner to righties, and by the time they swing at it, it's almost hitting their forearm. like i've said before, it's got maddux movement, but much better velocity.

and i don't think he's going to revert, i think he's going to get better. because the big change in him wasn't motion, or a new pitch. it was being smarter. it was learning to throw inside. and as he gets even smarter and learns to change speeds more, i think he'll keep getting better.

by billywan on Dec 28, 2005 2:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

K's

If no one could hit his cutter, he'd strike more people out. He has a K/9 avg of a mediocre to bad pitcher. Granted thats not all that matters, but its a pretty decent indicator. I definitely see him reverting. He wont be 13-4 w/ a 3.38 at the All Star Break next season.

by liverj00 on Dec 28, 2005 5:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

well...

he doesn't throw a cutter. it's sort of a two-seamer/sinker. and i suppose i meant by can't hit it "can't reach base safely on it." thus his WHIP of 1.17, fourth in the league. he's just not really a strikeout pitcher. he jams guys. lets them put it in play, but on his pitch.
so it's possible he'll regress. and with that horrible launching pad of a home field, his ERA could always balloon. and it's possible hitters will make adjustments on him. but this past year doesn't seem like a fluke to me.

by billywan on Dec 28, 2005 6:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Oops

I missed your comment initially about the sinker instead of the cutter. Either way, comparing him to Rivera doesnt seem right.

by liverj00 on Dec 29, 2005 9:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Garland was a top draft choice

so I dont think the comparison is valid to Loiza on that basis either.

However, Korey was a top draft choice too, so ya never know.

But the point is that the 2005 Garland was supposed to be what Garland was rather than necessarily an abberation.

Time will tell.

Either way, we paid Wood roughly the same (more?) on his last contract than Garland got a few years later (inflation).

NLBallClub

by NLBallClub on Dec 28, 2005 1:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

A steal???

For a .500 career pitcher who had a career half year last year adn wasn't spectacular the 2nd half. What was he 11-1 in the 1st half?? Ended up 18-10...

That is a lot of money to give to a guy who has had only 3 months of very good pitching and everything else average.

But right now, everything the White Sox touch turn to gold, so he will win the Cy Young next year...;)

by mannytrillo on Dec 28, 2005 6:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i guess

i think it's a steal, because i think he's gonna have a great year. so the white sox signed him relatively cheaply, considering the market, and to a sane 3-year deal.
when he wins another 18 next year, he'll be wishing he could go get 13 million a year for five years, or whatever the crazy going rate is.

by billywan on Dec 28, 2005 6:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Foundation made of sand.

"...adn wasn't spectacular the 2nd half. What was he 11-1 in the 1st half?? Ended up 18-10...

"...a guy who has had only 3 months of very good pitching and everything else average."

On what do you base this?

Excluding the first three months, April-June, here's what Garland did July-October:

17 starts, in only 5 of these did he give up 4 or more earned runs.
One loss, 2 ER in 7 IP.
4 NO DECISIONS where he pitched 6 innings or more.
In those 4 ND, One he allowed 3 ER, one with no ER, two with only one ER.

Is that "average?"

For the record, Garland...

3 wins gave up 4 runs or more.
3 Losses gave up 3 runs or less.

Overall, Garland had 32 starts, 23 of which were "QUALITY STARTS." Clearly, Garland could have had about 6 more wins with a little more luck.

by DrCrawdad on Dec 28, 2005 9:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Here are the relevant stats:

Pre-ASB: 17 starts, 13-4 (no no-decisions, unusual in this day & age), 120 IP, 109 H, 45 ER, 11 HR, 21 BB, 56 K, 3.38 ERA

Post-ASB: 15 starts, 5-6, 101 IP, 103 H, 41 ER, 15 HR, 26 BB, 59 K, 3.65 ERA

Slightly worse in the 2nd half, although it looks much worse if all you look at is the won-lost record.

Obviously, the Sox were 13-4 in the 17 games he started before the break; I don't have the full breakdown in what their record was in his four no-decisions. But in the 28 other starts, he was 18-10.

We'd take that.

by Al on Dec 28, 2005 9:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

IF

He continues to pitch like that...YES, but that is a big IF. He is stil a career .500 pitcher and we all remember Loiaza from a couple years ago.

I think it is a risky signing, but they are the world champs, they can take more risks.

by mannytrillo on Dec 28, 2005 9:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the rationality.

As your post shows, and I believe mine does as well, this attempt by "MannyTrillo" to diminish Garland's performance in '05 is without substance.

Garland had a very good season in '05, beginning to end. I expect that he'll do about the same in '06 and beyond, barring injury.

Jon could have waited and tested free agency after '06, and considering the market he would likely have commanded much more and for more years. Coming to terms with Garland on a 3 year contract is good news for the Sox and Sox fans. Without a doubt, Sox haters like "MannyTrillo" are having trouble coming to rational terms with the signing.

by DrCrawdad on Dec 28, 2005 9:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think he turned it around too...

I don't think he will start off 12-0 or whatever, but he'll be good. He was good the whole year, it's just that the offense shut it down for a while and that didn't benefit him in the win column.

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes. Time to sPaRkLe Jimmy!

by sparkles721 on Dec 28, 2005 9:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Frankly...

... given the deals that Kevin Millwood and A. J. Burnett got, I think the Sox got off cheap with Garland.

by Al on Dec 29, 2005 3:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think...

Burnitz should be renamed and called 'Sosa Replacement' or something.

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes. Time to sPaRkLe Jimmy!

by sparkles721 on Dec 28, 2005 1:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Wasn't Sosa

supposed to be signed with some mystery team or something by now? I thought I was reading that in early December.

2006 -- AC036097 -- Eamus Catuli!

by priorpwnz on Dec 28, 2005 1:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

... if this happens, Burnitz can rest easy, because he'll know where he'll be playing in 2007.

by Al on Dec 28, 2005 1:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That was...

according to Sosa, I think, so who knows what 'mystery team' will sign him.

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes. Time to sPaRkLe Jimmy!

by sparkles721 on Dec 28, 2005 1:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

just so

we have this squared away, I'm placing a ten dollar bet on Sosa signing with the Devil Rays.

2006 -- AC036097 -- Eamus Catuli!

by priorpwnz on Dec 28, 2005 1:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And I bet...

he won't. I really find it hard to see anyone give work to Sosa.

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes. Time to sPaRkLe Jimmy!

by sparkles721 on Dec 28, 2005 2:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

...I'm thinking

...that ole Sammy is the perfect prospect for our RF platoon.

by slink on Dec 28, 2005 2:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Of course!

Why didn't I think of that!

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes. Time to sPaRkLe Jimmy!

by sparkles721 on Dec 28, 2005 2:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Uhhh...

You are kidding, right?

I say we just keep Corey for the RF platoon unless we can actually get something for the guy.

by nickler on Dec 28, 2005 6:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No, I'm not kidding....

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes. Time to sPaRkLe Jimmy!

by sparkles721 on Dec 28, 2005 6:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I am definitely...

kidding nickler.

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes. Time to sPaRkLe Jimmy!

by sparkles721 on Dec 28, 2005 6:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

While you're at it -

What year will Jacque Jones will be playing RF for the O's? 2008 or 2009?

by Jobu on Dec 28, 2005 2:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

after we;re done with him

so 09

2006 -- AC036097 -- Eamus Catuli!

by priorpwnz on Dec 28, 2005 2:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sosa was traded with a year to go...

BeerNutz signed as a FA - THERE is my question.

by Jobu on Dec 28, 2005 2:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No joking here...

but maybe we could get Corey to start pitching.

He DOES have a good arm, and is a good athlete. Remember, Joe Nathan was an outfielder before; so was Tim Wakefield. I don't know. It certainly couldn't get any worse, and if we don't trade him, we have to use him for SOMETHING besides keeping score.

Do any of you think this is reasonable? Or is it as crazy as my idea of attaching a spaceship-like add-on to Wrigley?

by nickler on Dec 28, 2005 2:53 PM CST reply actions 0 recs