Garland to Dodgers??? (RUMOR)

OP
OP
binkar

binkar

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Posts
2,672
Reaction score
52
Looks like he has been dealt. He was shaking his teammates hands in the dugout and Hinch took him in the tunnel to talk to him and it looks like he is no longer with the team. No word on the details of the deal.

We better get a/some promising player(s) out of this deal. Garland has been fantastic lately.

EDIT: KTAR is reporting its the famous "a player to be named later".

Can someone explain to me what exactly "a player to be named later" means? Does that man the teams have agreed on a certain player but they wont announce it yet? Or does it mean they haven't agreed on a specific player yet?
 
Last edited:

Lefty

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Posts
12,579
Reaction score
986
Garland will get lit up if he pitches against the Diamondbacks when LA comes to town.
 

TheHopToad

Россия отстой!
Joined
May 29, 2006
Posts
4,019
Reaction score
231
Looks like he will still pitch on Thursday as scheduled....except for the Dodgers against the D-Backs. Weird.
 
OP
OP
binkar

binkar

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Posts
2,672
Reaction score
52

MaoTosiFanClub

The problem
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Posts
12,887
Reaction score
7,106
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
If it's Abreu that's a good deal for a one month rental. He'll have a good shot at taking Ojeda's place as our utility guy next year.
 

hafey

Registered
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
731
Reaction score
0
Good move. As I recall Garland's contract has an option next year at 8-10 million but also a very sizable buyout in the 4 million range. Smart to get out from underneath that with the Webb decision looming and what I imagine will be a buyer's market again this offseason.
 

joeshmo

Kangol Hat Aficionado
Joined
Feb 23, 2004
Posts
17,247
Reaction score
1
Byrnes is on the radio he cant mention the names of course becuase of rules but he keeps mentioning more then one player in return and when asked about starting pitching in 2010 and if we need to get a FA he mentioned that once the names are announced for this trade it will answer some of that.

Leads me to believe the deal is for more then one player and one is a starting caliber pitching prospect.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,522
Reaction score
8,713
Location
Scottsdale
Byrnes is on the radio he cant mention the names of course becuase of rules but he keeps mentioning more then one player in return and when asked about starting pitching in 2010 and if we need to get a FA he mentioned that once the names are announced for this trade it will answer some of that.

Leads me to believe the deal is for more then one player and one is a starting caliber pitching prospect.


:thumbup:
 
OP
OP
binkar

binkar

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Posts
2,672
Reaction score
52
Byrnes is on the radio he cant mention the names of course becuase of rules but he keeps mentioning more then one player in return and when asked about starting pitching in 2010 and if we need to get a FA he mentioned that once the names are announced for this trade it will answer some of that.

Leads me to believe the deal is for more then one player and one is a starting caliber pitching prospect.

I think it's because he was lumping the Rauch trade and Garland trade together. Both have "players to be named later" and that's why I think he kept talking about multiple players. I may be wrong, but that's how I took it.
 

Ryanwb

ASFN IDOL
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
35,576
Reaction score
6
Location
Mesa
If this team is depending on PTBNL aquired in end of the year waiver trades to help the club next year.... they are in trouble unless they robbed somebody Jeff Bagwell style
 

overseascardfan

ASFN Addict
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Posts
8,807
Reaction score
2,096
Location
Phoenix
What the h*** is taking so long for this trade to be completed? Garland has already been a Dodger for almost a month and were still waiting on our PTBN. I think we should get 2 players now and LA needs to pay his buyout, that's the price they pay for being scumbags. This is why you don't deal to division rivals, they will try to screw you, it's bad enough they didn't have to overpay for Garland now they want to stick th D'backs with a guy about to go through arbitration and collect a bigger paycheck.
 

joeshmo

Kangol Hat Aficionado
Joined
Feb 23, 2004
Posts
17,247
Reaction score
1
Anyone know if that has been resolved yet, or is there any new info?
 
Top