Garland

devilalum

Heavily Redacted
Joined
Jul 30, 2002
Posts
16,776
Reaction score
3,187
The Diamondbacks and free agent right-hander Jon Garland have reopened contract talks, a development that comes less than two weeks after Garland spurned the club'stwo-year offer, the Arizona Republic reported. The newspaper reported that it is unclear if Garland came back to the Diamondbacks or if the team sought him out. Garland had turned down a two-year offer believed to be in the $13 million-$14 million range. Garland could be more open to the Diamondbacks because other windows appear to be closing. The New York Mets, having already signed Freddy Garcia, appear to be closing in on a deal with Oliver Perez and Dodgers appear to prefer lefty Randy Wolf. The Diamondbacks believe Garland, who pitched for the Angels last season, would provide stability in their rotation, giving them four pitchers, along with Brandon Webb, Dan Haren and Doug Davis.
 

Gnomad

Roamin' Gnome
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Posts
577
Reaction score
1
Location
Chandler, AZ
6th in Cy Young voting in '05 (clearly a career year for him, the rest aren't all that similar..3.50 ERA). career 4.47ERA. 108 strikeouts a year avg. Been in the AL all of his career (2000) so he doesn't/can't hit.

I'm passive on the guy. I suppose he's good enough, but he's not worth 12mil a year.
 

Yuma

Suns are my Kryptonite!
Joined
Jan 3, 2003
Posts
22,885
Reaction score
12,647
Location
Laveen, AZ
The Diamondbacks and free agent right-hander Jon Garland have agreed to terms on a one-year deal with an option for 2010, according to major league sources.

It appears the contract is similar to one of the proposals the sides discussed two weeks ago, in which the deal would include an option that could be exercised by either the player or team. The value of the buyout would change depending on which side declines the option.

The specifics of the deal are not known, but Garland's guaranteed money is believed to be in the $6 million to $8 million range.

The deal is pending a physical.

That Garland is available at a price that’s manageable for the Diamondbacks is likely a result of the sluggish economy a down year in 2008 for Garland. Last season with the Los Angeles Angels -- his first year away from the Chicago White Sox -- he posted a 4.90 ERA and saw an increase in base runners allowed and a decrease in his strikeout rate.

Given that, his decision to decline arbitration from the Angels was viewed as a surprise in the industry. In arbitration, he only would have received a one-year contract, but it would have been worth more than the $12 million he made in 2008.

Still, Garland is viewed as a dependable innings-eater. He has thrown at least 191 innings in each of the past seven seasons, ranking eighth in games started and 12th in innings pitched since 2002. He has spent his entire career in the American League, posting a 4.47 ERA in nine seasons.

Garland is a Type B free agent, meaning it will not cost the Diamondbacks a pick to sign him.

Though their repertoires are different, think of Garland as something of a right-handed Doug Davis. He isn’t overpowering and gives up his share of base runners, but he always has taken the ball and provided innings -- a valuable service, particularly at the back of a rotation.

Slotting in behind Brandon Webb and Dan Haren, Garland’s presence will help lessen the club’s reliance on young right-hander Max Scherzer, whose workload the Diamondbacks will try to limit.

The innings he is expected to provide also should help in keeping fresh a bullpen that isn’t as deep following the free-agent departures of Brandon Lyon and Juan Cruz.

Garland, who is 6-foot-6, is a sinkerball pitcher, but his career ground ball/fly ball ratio (1.29) skews only slightly toward keeping the ball on the ground. Last season, he had a ratio of 1.79.

Got him cheaper than $12 million! :D
 

Mulli

...
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Posts
52,529
Reaction score
4,603
Location
Generational
I am pretty sure he is better than "a right handed Doug Davis."

At least a little better.
 

Lefty

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Posts
12,569
Reaction score
961
I like this signing. The only concern is he gives up a lot of homers.
 

Gnomad

Roamin' Gnome
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Posts
577
Reaction score
1
Location
Chandler, AZ
I am pretty sure he is better than "a right handed Doug Davis."

At least a little better.

They post similar numbers. Garland had an oustanding season a few years ago. The rest have been quite pedestrian.

What's DD making these days, anyway?

I'm ok with Garland. Not sure any #4 is worth this much $$, but it seems options are slim these days. Also, being from the AL, he may have a bit better numbers this year.
 

Diamondback Jay

Psalms 23:1
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Posts
4,910
Reaction score
1
Location
Mesa
Garland agreed to a one-year deal with a mutual option for 2010. The deal is pending a physical, the source said. The agreement was first reported by the Arizona Republic.


Garland will make a base salary of $6.25 million in 2009, a source said. The option year will pay him $10 million.

If Garland wants to return for 2010 and the Diamondbacks decide not to exercise the mutual option, he will receive a $2.5 million buyout.

If Garland rejects the option and elects to go back on the free agent market, he will receive a $1 million buyout.

The exact specifics.

I love the signing myself.. Garland will more than adequately fill in as the #3-#4 starter here and his contract is moderately cheap.
 

HooverDam

Registered User
Joined
May 21, 2005
Posts
6,560
Reaction score
0
Good signing, our rotation should be pretty damned impressive this year. Now if only our bats can wake up.
 

BC867

Long time Phoenician!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
17,827
Reaction score
1,709
Location
NE Phoenix
Randy Johnson - no; Jon Garland - yes ?

Two months ago, the D'backs rejected RJ's request for a 50% pay cut to $6.5 million, to get his 300th victory in Sedona Red.

Now they're going to sign Garland to a contract worth between $7.25-8.75 million.

Here is a comparison of last season's stats.

NAME......IP....W-L....ERA....K....BB
Johnson..184..11-10..3.91..173..44
Garland..196..14-8....4.90...90..59

Baseball is sport's most nostalgic game. RJ should have been re-signed to finish his career here. But even the stats back it up.

Not to mention the extra 3/4 to 2 1/4 million dollars that they will be paying Garland.

The article said that it's possible that more money has since been made available because of fewer, or less costly, picks in the upcoming amateur draft. 'Sounds like a lack of foresight.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/diamondbacks/articles/2009/01/28/20090128dbacksgarland-CR.html
 
Last edited:

HooverDam

Registered User
Joined
May 21, 2005
Posts
6,560
Reaction score
0
Probably with those stats are 1. Garland was pitching in a MUCH tougher division and 2. Who knows how RJs back will hold up? I would've loved to see RJ get his 300th win here certainly, but this organization has given him enough, he should've taken a bigger discount.
 

joeshmo

Kangol Hat Aficionado
Joined
Feb 23, 2004
Posts
17,247
Reaction score
1
Two months ago, the D'backs rejected RJ's request for a 50% pay cut to $6.5 million, to get his 300th victory in Sedona Red.

Now they're going to sign Garland to a contract worth between $7.25-8.75 million.

Here is a comparison of last season's stats.

NAME......IP....W-L....ERA....K....BB
Johnson..184..11-10..3.91..173..44
Garland..196..14-8....4.90...90..59

Baseball is sport's most nostalgic game. RJ should have been re-signed to finish his career here. But even the stats back it up.

Not to mention the extra 3/4 to 2 1/4 million dollars that they will be paying Garland.

The article said that it's possible that more money has since been made available because of fewer, or less costly, picks in the upcoming amateur draft. 'Sounds like a lack of foresight.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/diamondbacks/articles/2009/01/28/20090128dbacksgarland-CR.html

Can you really compared a AL pitchers stats to a NL pitchers stats that easily.

Also doesnt Randys 45 year old body and bad back have to be in your disscussion as well.
 
OP
OP
devilalum

devilalum

Heavily Redacted
Joined
Jul 30, 2002
Posts
16,776
Reaction score
3,187
RJ is my all time favorite pitcher but the guy is REALLY old, he's a mega downer in the clubhouse and he's held together with scotch tape.

I don't need another nostalgia tour. Didn't we do that last year?
 

Diamondback Jay

Psalms 23:1
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Posts
4,910
Reaction score
1
Location
Mesa
Two months ago, the D'backs rejected RJ's request for a 50% pay cut to $6.5 million, to get his 300th victory in Sedona Red.

Now they're going to sign Garland to a contract worth between $7.25-8.75 million.

Here is a comparison of last season's stats.

NAME......IP....W-L....ERA....K....BB
Johnson..184..11-10..3.91..173..44
Garland..196..14-8....4.90...90..59

Baseball is sport's most nostalgic game. RJ should have been re-signed to finish his career here. But even the stats back it up.

Not to mention the extra 3/4 to 2 1/4 million dollars that they will be paying Garland.

The article said that it's possible that more money has since been made available because of fewer, or less costly, picks in the upcoming amateur draft. 'Sounds like a lack of foresight.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/diamondbacks/articles/2009/01/28/20090128dbacksgarland-CR.html


Big difference here BC is this..

Johnson's pushing 45..

Garland's 29.
 

BC867

Long time Phoenician!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
17,827
Reaction score
1,709
Location
NE Phoenix
Big difference here BC is this..

Johnson's pushing 45..

Garland's 29.
Good point. But I personally would rather have seen this happen when RJ is 46 (with #300 as a D'back, then move into his Personal Services D'back contract) and Garland 30. :)
 

Diamondback Jay

Psalms 23:1
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Posts
4,910
Reaction score
1
Location
Mesa
Good point. But I personally would rather have seen this happen when RJ is 46 (with #300 as a D'back, then move into his Personal Services D'back contract) and Garland 30. :)

I'd have loved to see RJ retire a Diamondback, however his contractual demands were too steep for someone of his age and productivity.
 
Top