According to ESPNNEWS the Astros and White Sox are talking about a deal which would send Garland to the Astros for 2 pitching prospects (don't know who but obviously that's important). I'm trying to find an internet link that confirms this. I'm not too sure about Garland (FA after this year, didn't really impress until last year). But if we don't give up anything huge (Hirsch/Patton), I guess it's OK.
As long as it isn't Hirsch or Patton, that would be huge. Garland as our #3 pitcher makes us almost as strong as we were last season. Don't get me wrong...Roger Clemens he isn't. He is, however, what would amount to a great #3 pitcher. Oswalt Pettitte Garland Backe Wandy, Zeke, whomever EDIT: I didn't even consider the possibility of Clemens coming back during the season. That would be huge!
I liked him last year. Definently a servicable number 3. He did win 18 games last year. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6396
Super, Did you see the report or are you reading the post on the AstrosDaily forums about it? The reason I ask is that people on the Sox boards (soxtalk.com) know absolutely nothing about it and aren't even discussing it. From the post on AD (not an established poster), I worry it's something like ESPN or ESPN radio discussing hypothetical deals created by the radio hosts and then someone takes it as rumor that the teams are talking. It would be great if true, I'm just worried about the validity of the rumor.
That would be huge for us. He had an incredible first half before coming down to earth in the second half. Still only 27 years old.
he doesn't need to be an ace. as a number 3, i'll take him. i wouldn't give up both hirsch and patton, maybe one, but not both.
I hate giving up talent for rent a player situations, the league is littered with former Astro's talent cuz of this. If it happens hopefully, we can sign him beyond this year.
^^^ working out a long term deal wouldn't be impossible, and i know they are both high prospects but sometimes you just don't know how they will perform at the next level. tim redding had all the physical tools if not more than roy oswalt and he wasn't good in majors and scott elarton was highly thought of and now he's wandering around from club to club. i'm saying that garland is a KNOWN commodity and sometimes giving up one really good prospect isn't the worst thing in the world. and you have to give up SOMETHING in order to get something in return.
Ya, tha must have been it, just speculation - and I've been looking around for a link - that must have been it. Here is the closest I could find, and it says the Astros and Cards need a pitcher and the White Sox have one - that's it: http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...olumn?coll=cs-home-utility&ctrack=1&cset=true Considering the White Sox just gutted their farm system to get Vazquez, trading one of their best LHP prospects, I'd say it would make no sense unless Patton was involved to give them another lefty or we traded a hitter. But then again, they might not be able to sign everyone on their rotation the next couple of years, so prospects might not be the worst thing in the world.
From Stark's Rumor Central: He lists the Astros, Cardinals and Orioles as interested parties. Hakeem, I don't trade one of my top 2 prospects for a guy who has had one good year (he had a good year in 2001, but only started 16 games), and is "determined to test the open market."
Cards won't sign him after paying 13.5 mil for looper. We should, but probably won't. Astacio and Wandy?
I have to agree that we shouldn't take the chance. If you are talking about having him for only one year, then it's really a crapshoot whether or not he'll be better than average. And to cost us 2 prospects- no thanks.