<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The White Sox and Jon Garland agreed to a three-year, $29-million contract today, avoiding salary arbitration for a pitcher who led the team with 18 wins last season.Garland, who was scheduled to become a free agent after the 2006 season, will earn $7 million next season and $10 and $12 million the two following years.Garland, 26, had his finest year last season in helping the Sox to their first World Series title in 88 years, going 18-10 with a 3.50 earned-run average. He was named to the American League All-Star team after a first half in which he went 13-4, including an 8-0 start.He made two postseason starts during the Sox's run, throwing a complete game against the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim in Game 3 of the ALCS and earning a no-decision in Game 3 of the World Series.General manager Kenny Williams, in the midst of a busy offseason, had reportedly shopped Garland for pitching prospects. Instead Garland will remain with the team that pried him from the crosstown Cubs in a 1998 trade and will enter spring training as one of possibly six starters on the roster.Joe Crede and Rob Mackowiak are the White Sox's remaining arbitration eligible players.</div>http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines
Regardless of whether or not he's good in 2006, I love it that the Sox continue to fuck their financial future. And besides, I'd have never given him that deal now. I'd wait until maybe August to see if he was a fluke or not. He'll be a fluke next year and return to his normal suckiness.
1) How are they fucking their future, by locking up their younger talent long term?2) That extension is a steal in comparision to the AJ Burnett and Kris Benson deals and several others.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KyleOrton18 @ Jan 2 2006, 12:04 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Regardless of whether or not he's good in 2006, I love it that the Sox continue to fuck their financial future. And besides, I'd have never given him that deal now. I'd wait until maybe August to see if he was a fluke or not. He'll be a fluke next year and return to his normal suckiness.</div> Typical Cubs fan.
Garland isn't even a good pitcher!!! He's making more money than (should have won Cy Young this year) Johan Santana. And Garland is older than Johan. 1 good year for Garland and people think he's god. Same thing happened with Esteban Loiza (not sure how to spell his name), only difference is Esteban actually had a good year.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brooksie5 @ Jan 2 2006, 01:05 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Garland isn't even a good pitcher!!! He's making more money than (should have won Cy Young this year) Johan Santana. And Garland is older than Johan. 1 good year for Garland and people think he's god. Same thing happened with Esteban Loiza (not sure how to spell his name), only difference is Esteban actually had a good year.</div> 18-10 with a 3.50 ERA isnt a good year?The guy has shown more in his career then AJ Burnett or Kris Benson (or numerous other overpaid pitchers) have and yet he is making the same type of money as they are. How is that bad?I could see the complaining if he was making 14 million a season, but hes not even making 10 million a year average, which is about market value for a quality starter via free agency.PS: A better example then Esteban Loaiza is Carl Pavano on the Yankees. Had one really good season and is now being paid to be mediocre.
This is actually kind of funny since all the players are re-signing. Kinda sucks for Aaron Rowand - he got traded.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brooksie5 @ Jan 2 2006, 03:05 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Garland isn't even a good pitcher!!! He's making more money than (should have won Cy Young this year) Johan Santana. And Garland is older than Johan. 1 good year for Garland and people think he's god. Same thing happened with Esteban Loiza (not sure how to spell his name), only difference is Esteban actually had a good year.</div> Right.Garland has averaged 12 wins a season.Yea he's really bad.
I didn't say he was bad. He's mediocre. He's 28 so he's reached his full potential so he won't get any better.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brooksie5 @ Jan 2 2006, 10:29 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>I didn't say he was bad. He's mediocre. He's 28 so he's reached his full potential so he won't get any better.</div> He just turned 27.Off by a year,you were.
Besides that, I'd have waited until August at the earliest to see if he was for real, or if it was just a fluke.
