Jon Garland

Garland's second go-round with the Dodgers didn't go well, as the right-hander managed just nine starts due to injuries, ultimately undergoing season-ending shoulder surgery in July. He was a solid innings-eater for the Padres in 2010 (3.47 ERA, 1.315 WHIP in 200 innings), but it remains to be seen how he'll recover from surgery. Look for Garland to net an incentive-laden deal with some organization this winter, but it's unlikely he'll be guaranteed a rotation job headed into spring training.

As his tour of the NL West continued, Garland pitched 200 innings for the Padres with pretty good results. He posted career bests in ERA, strikeout rate, groundball rate, and not surprisingly, BABIP. It wasn't all roses as his walk rate climbed to 3.92 BB/9IP. Never one to miss time due to injuries, Garland continues to eat innings like Pac-Man eats ghosts. He's pitched at least 190 innings in nine consecutive seasons. In the offseason he signed with the Dodgers. While he'll still have a pitcher-friendly home park, it's likely his numbers will take a slight dip across the board moving away from Petco.

Garland finished with typical Garland-like numbers again in 2009, tossing 204 innings while going 11-13 with a 4.01 ERA and a 109:61 K:BB. Though his strikeout rate (4.8 K/9IP) was the highest it has been since 2003, Garland is never going to be much of a fantasy asset outside of perhaps AL/NL-only leagues due to the lack of strikeouts. As he gives up his share of flyballs, monitor where he ends up in terms of ballparks before buying in for 2010.

Garland went 14-8 with a 4.90 ERA and 90 strikeouts after being acquired by the Angels in exchange for Orlando Cabrera last winter. Garland provided the innings the Angels were looking for, but he gave up a ton of hits and wasn't even used in the playoffs. Garland will be a free agent this offseason and it's unlikely he will return to the Angels, with the club needing to commit large amounts of money to other places of the team. Still, Garland has recorded double-digit victories in each of the last eight seasons and should receive a healthy contract from whichever team decides to add him to their squad.

Garland never seemed to get fully healthy after complaining of shoulder tightness early in the spring and got absolutely pounded in July and August. Despite his struggles he actually posted a lower WHIP (1.325) and ERA (4.23) than the previous season when he went 18-7 which just goes to show how silly it is to measure a pitcher based solely on his win-loss record. He'll give you average numbers in the WHIP, ERA and strikeout departments but will soak up the innings. Dealt to the Angels in the offseason, he should benefit from a better bullpen and a friendlier home ballpark.

For a staff ace, Garland was incredibly hittable in 2006. He was second only to Zach Duke in hits allowed with 247, tied with teammate Mark Buehrle. It made his All­-Star season of 2005 appear to be an anomaly, especially because his 2006 numbers compare somewhat to his pre-2005 seasons. But Garland is a better pitcher now than before, continuing to be stingy with walks and turning in his best record to date. The trouble with him in 2006, and heading into 2007, is his poor outings were very poor and there was no predicting when they would take place. He allowed six runs in six innings to the Yankees in early August, but then allowed one earned run over the next three starts to Kansas City, Minnesota and Detroit. He's an enigma . . . who happens to be on more often than he is off.

Statistically Garland's sudden success appears rooted in two things -- a reduced walk rate (1.91 BB/9, after 3.15 in 2004) and a reduced ISO allowed (.144, down from .186). The free passes he can continue to be stingy with, but if Brian Anderson or anyone else can't adequately fill Aaron Rowand's cleats in center field, a return to a 4.00+ ERA could be in the cards for Garland. Given that his value has never been higher, and the 'regression to the mean' cloud that hangs over his head, don't chase top dollar for him this season.

Another year, another .500 record and an ERA north of 4.50. It's hard to see where he goes from here -- he's still somewhat young, but he's been stagnant for three years, and there are zero indications that he's getting better. Anything's possible of course, but we're not betting he pulls it all together.

Garland's 2003 was nearly identical, in the end, with his 2002. Given how inconsistent he's been over his brief career, this has to count as some sort of progress. The next step: shooting for something more than consistent mediocrity.

Yes, the numbers are unimpressive. Yes, someone with his raw stuff should be able to strike out more than 5.23 batters per nine innings in his sleep. But that's still better than the year before, as were his walks, hits and home runs allowed. Just keep reminding yourself that he won't even turn 24 until the very end of next season, that in four of six months last year he had an ERA below 4.00, and that if and when it all does come together for Garland it's more likely to be a sudden unpredictable surge than a gradual evolution.