« Wild Rumor From Gotham Baseball | Main | Cubs Close To Signing Preston Wilson? »

Jon Garland Re-Signs With White Sox

A Bruce Levine radio report on ESPN Radio 1000 indicates that Jon Garland has re-signed with the White Sox for three years, $29MM.  The contract is backloaded: $7MM in 2006, $10MM in 2007, and $12MM in 2008.  The contract has a no-trade provision for 2006 only, so the Sox have flexibility if they don't want to be on the hook for the final $22MM.

The deal is another excellent move by GM Kenny Williams.  With any type of decent showing in 2006, Garland stood to command a five or six year deal averaging as much as $11MM annually.  Perhaps the the 26 year-old simply wanted security and doesn't expect to repeat his 2005.

The move would likely lead to a trade of Jose Contreras unless he settles for a similar contract.  There has been some speculation that the Cardinals might be interested.  Given that Kenny Williams is on good terms with Walt Jocketty and they speak about players regularly, it's entirely feasible.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Jon Garland Re-Signs With White Sox:


What a Rotation!!!

I guess this is goodbye
to Contreras

This is a wonderful move for my other team:
Your 2005 World Series Champions

I'll be praying for a 2006 ALCS:
ChiSoX VS Yanks

BOOM...take notes Hendry you scab.

Perhaps the South Side is turning into a desirable place to play that can command a discount, a la St. Louis or San Diego.

Yeah...Hendry blows and so do all those morons who go through those turnstyles on Clark & Addison

I really think that the Brewers will finish ahead of Chicago's Losers

Playing for a contender whose expectations are kind of low when you compare with NY, Beantown, & even the Northside

In addition there is not much pressure playing on the SouthSide

Yea the pressures of the northside are immense. With all of the drunken fans cheering for pop ups because they do not know any better.
Coming off of a world series win there is usually low expectations though, so I agree with you on that one. Oh wait nevermind you are clueless

Its the truth most ChiSoX fans just hope to win the AL Central and just make it to the ALCS.
ChiSoX Fans are well aware of how strong in past years the Yanks, Sawx, Halos, and A's have been.
I think they'll be grateful
if the ChiSox are contenders (ALCS) and won't
b*tch & moan like other fan bases

Since 2003, Cubs fans have turned on their identity: "Lovable Losers"

Never mind the pointless shots at Cubs fans - why do you think Sox fans would be satisfied with an ALCS appearance coming off a WS win?

There is no way I will be satisfied without an appearance in the Show. After all these great moves KW has made, I'm more demanding a series win this year than last. Of course pending terrible injuries, there is no team on paper who can match up with the Sox pitching defense and hitting

What does this do to Contreras' value? Will Williams get less for him now because everyone knows Chicago has a surplus and probably needs to move someone to make room for McCarthy? He really doesnt have much to prove in the minors at this point.

I believe many SoX fans are well aware that a team which is "hot" in October has the best chance to win it all (Marlins of 03)
I don't think they would be quite p*ssed if ex. they were to lose to the Evil Yankees
Many understand its difficult to repeat and its especially difficult for a mid-market team


James, I don't think it hurts his value. As with Zito, teams with surpluses in starting pitching always hold the cards. Williams still has months to deal Contreras, and his team is stronger with him aboard. He'll get full value for Jose.

Hey Monger,
Where could you see Jose going???
Maybe Jose for Blalock???

flash in the pan, are you still bitter that our 5th starter is better than your ace???
hows matt karchner looking...thanks for giving us garland.

but i guess you are right, maybe we should have made some offseason moves like the cubs, jones is amazing.

I really hope the sox do not go for Blalock, he is just another product of the ballpark there and if you look at his away stats they are complete crap.

The Red Sox have made one of the most intriguing offers - outfielder Manny Ramirez and starting pitcher Matt Clement for shortstop Miguel Tejada says the Baltimore Sun, but several high-ranking Orioles officials remain opposed to trading the team's best player within the American League East.

How bout Jose Contreras, Juan Uribe & Jesse Owens for Michael Young

I would love to see young in a sox uniform, hopefully they wouldnt throw in owens or anderson though, bc i see dye or pods being gone after this year.

You would have to throw in either Owens or Anderson to sweeten the deal

The Trade
- Strengthens the Rangers Rotation: Millwood, Contreras, & Eaton (possible Clemens)
- Give then An Adequate replacement in Juan Uribe
- Improve their Outfield with the acquisition of an Owens

The SoX in return recieve an above-average ShortStop
who would fit in nicely:

1. S. Podsednik
2. M. Young
3. J. Thome
4. P. Konerko
5. J. Dye
6. T. Iguchi
7. A.J. Pierzynski
8. B. Anderson
9. J. Crede

Nice move by Chicago today, I'd be much more inclined to call last year turning to corner as opposed to a fluke. What I don't get is why people are assuming this rules out a trade; I don't recall seeing mention of a no trade clause so this could be a way of making him even more enticing.

He has a no trade clause for 2006. While I don't see Garland traded, this makes him more valuable in a trade because he's no longer a rental player. Also, with today's market, I think that's a great contract for the Sox. If anyone is traded, I would like to see Garcia go, but with Ozzie at the helm I don't see that happening.

Considering that career .500 pitchers on good teams go for $50 million ($10,000,000 arms, but $.10 hearts, brains and guts), this is a bargain.

Better to be a flash in the pan than to constantly fizzle and disappoint.

RE trading to the Rangers, no way. The Rangers are a good arm or 2 away from serious contention. Jose goes to the Royals, Tigers, Rays or NL.

Royals, Tigers, Rays? C'mon, who you foolin? Rays would never take that kind of salary on, who would even be worth obtaining from the Royals, and why would the Sox help the Tigers who do, in fact, have good hitting? I do question the inclusion of Uribe as two of the Rangers' top prospects are at ss, so they might want something else. You are correct in your assertion that the Rangers are a couple good pitchers away from serious contention, so what's wrong with JC? The only pitcher of note left on the FA market is Jeff Weaver. Is HE going to solidify the rotation? The great DVD of Texas won't be ready for at least a couple more years. They all got lit up at AA this past year. JC was the ace of a great Sox staff at the end of the year, something that the Rangers STILL don't have.

when michael young and teixeira made comments about wanting to win now, i don't think that translated to trade me, hes the rangers whole team, id rather take my chances on finding another arm for blalock or mench although a good shortstop so we could move young back to second would be another good move, i have my worries about young and kinsler/jimenez/derosa up the middle next year

A-Rod: Are you high right now? Why in the blue hell would Texas trade one of the best lead-off hitters in the AL, as well as a very good shortstop (who also makes league minimum) for Garland and Juan Uribe? That may be one of the stupidest things I've heard.

Rem: So, a career .500 pitcher is better than Zambrano or Prior? O...K...

I'd rather have Garland and a consistent 200 IP and at least 12 wins year in and year out then Prior and Wood's combined 10 IP any year...

"I'd rather have Garland and a consistent 200 IP and at least 12 wins year in and year out then Prior and Wood's combined 10 IP any year..."

Well, point out to me a year where Prior and Wood only combined for literally 10 innings pitched, and then we can use that argument. If, however, you want to talk about inconsistency due to injury, you do have something of a point...in regards to Wood. I'll take my chances with arguably the most decorated pitcher in college history, who has by and large dominated in the majors, over 200 innings and 12 wins of consistently mediocre pitching from Garland. The kid has had exactly 1/2 of 1 good season...

FT, I mentioned the Tigers, D Rays and Royals, to emphasize the point that Jose needs to be traded to the NL, because every other AL team has a chance to contend, and it's never a good idea to empower the competition.
That said, the tigers have signed more expensive and worse playes than Jose and his $8 mill; now that I think about it, what did they pay for Rogers?

I would take Garland over everyone but zambrano I will admit. But prior and wood are too injury prone for my taste along with this being a great deal amongst the huge deals to bj ryan and burnett.

Literally I didn't mean 10 IP of course but I love hearing every Cub fan I know start his sentence the same way for the past 3 seasons. "IF Prior and Wood are healthy for a change we could dominate." But they are never healthy, it's like seeing the same movie over and over, you already know how the story is going to end. Although I credit Prior because most of his injuries have been dumb luck ones, IE running into Giles, line drive off the elbow, but Wood is always hurt because he tries to throw the ball through the catcher instead of truly pitching.

one good year, other than that he suxx, and in his good year he still lost 10 times


Why would anyone be a flubs fan ?

Yes Garland sucks, that is why he is our 5th starter correct?? I bet the cubs would juice all over themselves if their fifth starter was a Cy young candidate. Instead they just keep telling themselves how great their overrated pitchers are to rid the thought of trading garland and dontrelle willis for nothing in return.

Why is everyone complaining and comparing the ChiSox to the Cubs, Yankees and BoSox. We won the World Series, yo! In case you haven't checked, that means that the Chicago White Sox were the best team in baseball last year (with mild apologies to the Cards). Get your asses out of 1995, dogs.

Southsider: Honestly, that annoys me, too. The fact of the matter is that Mark Prior will have a very successful career, as his mechanics are almost flawless. Wood, as much as I like him, falls off the mound too much, throws across his body, and overcompensates for his bad back by relying too heavily on his shoulder, which will lead to him being shelved frequently unless he changes his mechanics. If he changes his mechanics, he should go on to have a pretty good career, as he may have the best pure stuff of anyone in the game. However, since he and Prior haven't been healthy together since '03, I get annoyed at people saying "if."

Rem: The only thing you've posted that I can agree with is that BJ Ryan and AJ Burnett got huge deals that were way above market value. Other than that, let's break down things a bit:

1)Prior is too injury prone? He's not gonna crash into Giles or get a line drive off the elbow every year.
2)Garland was only the 5th starter for half of last season. Subsequently, he did well in the first half, before dropping off dramatically in the second half of the season.
3)The Cubs trades of Willis and Garland were calculated risks--neither of which paid off. While trading Willis hurts since the Cubs couldn't keep Clement, and since Alfonseca sucked in Chicago, and since Willis has potential to be one of the best pitchers in MLB. Trading Garland, even though not a "good" deal for the Cubs, doesn't really make me sad. One less 5th starter in our rotation, y'know?

BTW, you're so eager to bash Prior...how did you guys fair against him last year?

My take:

1. Prior IS injury prone, collisions aside. He's had a major Achilles problem and scary elbow inflammation that may be related to his recent control problems.

2. Garland's 3.38 ERA before the break compared to his 3.65 mark after it isn't a dramatic dropoff in my mind.

RumorMonger: You're right; but his record sure as hell dropped off after the all-star break. I personally care more about ERA than win-loss totals; a pitcher can pitch great and still have a losing record because of his team (Millwood in '05, Clement in '04), and likewise, a pitcher can be the beneficiary of a great offense (half of the Yankees starting rotation). However, every Sox fan that has tried telling me to change my views on Garland (which I've had for a couple years now) has cited his record last year. So, by looking at his record, one could say that after he moved from the #5 spot to the #2 spot, he didn't fare too well.

As for Prior, I would be willing to bet that his Achilles problem led to the elbow inflammation. If that is correct, than he's had 1 serious injury (collisions aside, as you said) in his pitching career. If we don't want to make that assumption, he's had 2 serious injuries in his pitching career. Either way, fans citing his 5 trips to the DL are using freak accidents to erroneously justify an argument that Mark Prior cannot stay healthy. Furthermore, many anti-Cubs fans look at the rumblings of the Mike Marshalls of the world and use that as justification for an asinine argument that Prior has poor mechanics which have caused his injuries. When you take out freak accidents, however, that argument really doesn't stand up too well.

Not sure if I agree on Garland, but that's a good point on Prior. 2006 will make the case one way or another, unless there's a third collision. Now that'd just be weird.

If he undergoes a third collision that leads to a DL stint, I'll say that he's got the worst freak luck of anybody in sports history.

As for Garland, I've never been sold on him, and basically, 1/2 of 1 good season does not justify him being hailed as an ace, let alone the second coming. It also doesn't justify, to me, his contract, but given other clubs' eagerness to grossly overpay for career .500 pitchers (ala Burnett), his value went up by default.

DrB: Now your reasoning is clear to me. However, I must disagree about trading to a contender. It is not always a bad thing. If the Angels wanted to trade Scot Shields for Contreras, I think that would be pretty close to fair (maybe an extra prospect?). As long as the Sox would be receiving key players from major league rosters rather than prospects, I have no qualms about trading between contenders. You may be helping out your rival, but he's helping you at the same time. If we're talking purely from a JC for prospects scenario, then yes, you cannot trade him to another contender.

Post a comment

This weblog only allows comments from registered users. To comment, please Sign In.