D'Backs Sign Jon Garland

I think his numbers will slightly improve pitching in the NL West.

Should have kept Johnson if they were going to shell out that cash for Garland.

Garland is overrated. $8M is too much.

D'backs were better off with Randy Johnson at that price.
Especially since there were reports that Johnson was willing to sign for less than what they eventually gave Garland.

Garland is more of an innings eater, but Johnson is the better pitcher and plus he would have the whole celebration of winning his 300th game this year, so the D-backs could have milked that.

Silly.

Lumpster,

You hit it, now Boras will really try and milk the Mets for Ollie.

''They were willing to give 1/6-8 to Garland, but they wouldn't give it to Randy Johnson? Huh?''

I hate this deal too because Jon Garland is NOT worth this money, but there is also a definite difference in reliability between Johnson and Garland. Garland is likely to make 25 average starts next year, while it is highly less likely for Johnson to make that many.

It is what it is - Garland is an innings eater that goes seven innings or deeper very often and Arizona did need a reliable starter to pitch every fifth day behind their two studs. The money is off, but the concept is not.

"Should have kept Johnson if they were going to shell out that cash for Garland."

Agreed. Unit is much better then Garland. Garland is a glorified Steve Traschel imo...

I guess the D-Backs were looking for less of an injury risk and more of an innings eater. Both of which DO NOT describe RJ. 1yr/6MM isnt too bad I guess. I imagine this knock Petit out of the rotation.

I'm just gonna say it. I honestly believe that Jon Garland will win 16-18 games this year.

So Garland wil be the third starter and will likely be on the mound or the winning pitcher in the game where the D'Backs eliminate the Cubs from the playoffs this year.

I'm just gonna say it. I honestly believe that Jon Garland will win 16-18 games this year.
________________________-

I'll take that bet. Minor league games don't count... called it.

Put Perez in the AL and let's see him post a decent record, not that he has anyway with his 55-60 on a decent mets team anyway and it's fairly apparent why Garland got 8 million and I am NOT a big fan of him and his junk either, just that perez has always been hype out of NY since they got him, walking the bases loaded and sometimes getting out of trouble in NY, with an occasional nice game per season thrown in.

The stats are almost all in Garlands favor and especially so innings where Garland has pitched 190+ innings since 2002 and Perez has done that only 2 times and pitched over 150 innings 3 times his entire career.

wow $6-8 million for one year of Garland. What was RJ willing to sign for like 4 mil? I understand RJ has the injury risk but the D-Backs have a pretty durable rotation as it is and a lot of depth in the minors.

Cashman signed Pettitte just in time. Imagine trying to convince Andy to take what he did after Garland got this deal.

"ZIPS says Johnson is 141 IP of 4.41 ERA, Garland is 191 of 4.71. Takes strain off of the bullpen without giving up too much in the way of quality. He will pitch deeper into games and likely be healthier."

Is ZIPS park adjusted? I don't think it is if I remember right. If that's a case, those numbers skew a lot more in Johnson's favor.

"I could have seen 8-10 over two years"

Let's just pretend for a second that they signed him to an one year deal worth 6M.

Do you really believe that a 2 year deal paying him 5M per(a la the 10M total) would be better than an one year deal at 6M?

haha 16-18 games? Are you kidding? He's not playing with the Yankees, Cubs, Phillies or Mets offense you realize right? I'd like some action on that too.

As a Dodger fan I'm happy about this signing.

"I think his numbers will slightly improve pitching in the NL West."

I wouldn't be so sure. His HR rate will almost certainly climb playing in that division.

"Put Perez in the AL and let's see him post a decent record"

He might do better on an AL team, where that big fastball coming from the left side could benefit him significantly.

According to Ringolsby, ARI offered Johnson $6M... which he declined. His contract with SF is $8M guaranteed with $5M in performance bonuses. So, no, they couldn't get RJ at this price. And we still do not know the final details on the Garland money.

I'm OK with this signing. I'd rather have Garland than Wolf or Looper or God forbid, Pedro. And the mutual option is good.

I'm not as low on Petit as some, but at this point Garland is an upgrade over him while they break-in Scherzer.

When will people get thru there thick skull that Randy Johnson is 50 years old almost?

You can pick up Redding like the Mets did for 2 million and that would be an upgrade over Randy Johnson at this point.

Garland could have accepted arbitration and made 15 million with the Angels! This is a great deal.

When Randy Johnson is in the nursing home he'll still be better than Jon Garland.

I think a lot of teams would be happy to pay $6 MM for a roughly league average 200 IP. That's like getting a pretty much guaranteed 200 innings for almost half what Carlos Silva makes. Not a terrible deal at all.

Agreed 6 million is not worth it for Garland in the AL, but I think he will pitch much better in the NL.

The D-Backs top 3 of Webb, Haren, Garland will beat Johan, Maine, Pelfrey to the ground in the playoffs.

I think this sets the tone for the Dodgers to land either, or both of, Wolf and Looper. I'd rather get Looper as his health isn't a question. He is a cheaper, more effective version of Garland IMO.

Expect the Dodgers to sign one of these guys within 24 hours.

"Expect the Dodgers to sign one of these guys within 24 hours."

Which would make me happy as a Diamondbacks fan.

Russell: what is your obsession with the Mets?

Oh, and that scenario won't happen for two reasons: 1. the Mets will add Perez or Sheets, and 2. the D'Backs won't even make the playoffs

Anyone want to guess what Manny's OPS* vs the d-bax will be now?

Im saying it improves from 850+ to 1200 or so. I cant see him doing anything but hit home runs off a homeless man's mark mulder (when mulder was bad).

*assuming he signs with a NL West team.

Yeah, I don't think the reliability is worth that much.

Not when the guy is reliably a below average starter.

Reliable mediocre performance shouldn't cost anywhere near $7M.

As a Braves fan, I fully appreciate captkeith17's relief.

Until the Lowe/Kawakami signings, my biggest fear was that Wren would find some way to get Garland.

"Trust me D'backs fans, you dont want Ben Sheets, ask any brewer fan.
"

At least when Sheets is healthy, he's actually good.

Garland just isn't good.

I agree with scribbletone. HOW THE HELL DID GARLAND GET MORE THAN PETTITTE???

Maybe b/c Garland wasn't tied up to one team. Remember It was Yankees or retirement, while Garland maybe had more options

I'd rather have the Unit over Garland on a short term deal. At least with the Unit, if healthy, you know what you're getting. The ability to take the ball every 5 days is great but when you're getting the sugar knocked out of you then it's not so good. 5.99 ERA after the all-star break...

Although now it looks bad that Garland didn't take arbitration.

"I think they made the right choice. Arizona gets a guy who they know will pitch 200 innings with a 4.00-4.50 era. Johnson is a bigger risk for injury and could flake out after he gets to 300 wins.
"

Why do people think Unit would flake out?

He has zero reputation for flaking out. Even if he has nothing to play for, I'd assume that he's got class.

It's a major strawman argument.

Didn't Pettitte say that other teams were under consideration, such as LA and Houston? Either way 1/5.5+ for Pettitte and 1/8.5 for Garland is simply astounding.

Also, anyone who thinks Randy Johnson is done should look at his 2008 performance, especially post all star break. He's far from done.

"Don't underestimate future Hall of Famer randy johnson. I'd rather have him over garland. So would a lot of players in the d'backs club house, they loved him as a teammate"

ARI offered $6M, RJ declined. He wanted out/more money/a ballpark easier on his stat line... who knows?

Never counted Minor League games, but, alright.
______________________

Yeah, I was kidding.

$8.5M sounds more likely.

>

Their (Wolf's and Looper's) performance vs. ARI.

"To say the Dbacks won't make the playoffs if rediculous, .... i forgot, who was in the world series for the american league last year?"

Spelling ridiculous the way you spelled it is ridiculous.

-"While Garland won 14 games for the contending Angels, he posted the highest ERA (4.91) and WHIP (1.51) of his career, failing to reach 200 innings for the first time since 2003. The 29-year-old has twice won 18 games, but only once in his career has he posted an ERA under 4.00 (3.50 in 2005)"

That 2005 White Sox pitching staff was unheard of: every single regular had a career year, thats so wild.

And yet at every turn Ozzie did nothing but praise the offense, that guy may be the dumbest manager in the game. Way to not acknowledge your biggest strength, god I hate that dude....

"Bottom line: $8.75MM guaranteed."

Nope... it is $7.25 mil guaranteed. $6.25 mil in '09 and if Garland rejects the option, he gets another million. $6.25 + $1.00 = $7.25 mil.

Haha Ken Rosenthal is always wrong. That guy's a joke

Not to turn this into a White Sox thread, but I'm pretty sure a large part of the so-called "ozzie ball" they played in 2005 was pitching and defense. Maybe pitching more so, but you don't have the ALCS they did against the Angels, with I think a total of 2 innings from their relievers, without acknowledging the awesomeness that their starters had that year.

Back on topic, I think with Webb, Haren, Davis, and Scherzer, the Diamondbacks could have afforded the risk that was RJ. Sure, you don't know if he will get injured, but I'd take a half season of him and a half season of Petit versus a whole of Garland.

Johnson era in 2006 in the al 5
Next year in 2007 era in the nl 3.81
Johnson 2008 3.91 in the nl.
garland 2007 in the al 4.23
Garland 2008 in the al 4.9
Next year in the nl = not bad
Plus innings he pitches and he is younger. He should of gotten less money. I expect a 4 era or lower from garland. He is better the Johnson.
Garland strikeouts have gone down but so have his innings. He still gives you alot of innings though. More then johnson.

The D-backs should have resigned Randy Johnson if they were going to spend $8+ on a pitcher.

come on mynameboart, you as well as everybody knows that garland is not a better pitcher than johnson. about the Ks, there is no contest. he had a career high of 115 in 221 innings! though I agree with the less money comment.

im saying the d backs did overpay for garland for the market.
About zito his numbers didn't improve because he lost his speed on his fastball. Garland doesn't have these problems. Johnson is old i would be very concerned with him. Also his back and he is a risk and isn't better on the mound then garland. He can give you solid innings at a fair price which are the type of moves which help win ball games. If zito pitched they way he did in the al in the nl he would have a very low era.
To sum it up
Garland is over payed for the market.
Garland is better then Johnson.
Smart move getting a solid player that will help your bullpen.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/garlajo01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/j/johnsra05.shtml
And for an example of al and nl the difference of al vs nl
recently
look at 2003-2007
http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/clemero02.shtml

"come on mynameboart, you as well as everybody knows that garland is not a better pitcher than johnson. about the Ks, there is no contest. he had a career high of 115 in 221 innings! though I agree with the less money comment."
He isn't a strikeout pitcher you don't need to strike somebody out to get them out.

Garland posts worse k/9, bb/9, slightly better HR/9, and worse FIP numbers than Johnson. As my friends from Frangraphs put it

"Deciding that you want Jon Garland instead of Randy Johnson is a disastrous decision. Yes, Johnson is old, but he's still an excellent major league pitcher. Garland is a #5 starter whose best skill is not getting hurt.

In a market where good pitchers are signing for bargain rates, the D'Backs just paid non-bargain rates for a bad pitcher. Congratulations, Arizona, you've officially screwed up your entire offseason."