PDA

View Full Version : Thornton and Castro Back


JermaineDye05
10-26-2010, 01:23 PM
Sox exercised their options. Though I don't think anyone had any doubts they'd be back.

Link (http://twitter.com/ChuckGarfien/statuses/28814361207)

DirtySox
10-26-2010, 01:23 PM
http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/1079253853/twitter_sox_normal.jpg
ESPNChiSox (http://twitter.com/#%21/ESPNChiSox) Doug Padilla
White Sox contract options exercised on Castro and Thornton. Waivers requested on Carlos Torres.
7 seconds ago (http://twitter.com/#%21/ESPNChiSox/status/28814468265)

russ99
10-26-2010, 01:56 PM
http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/1079253853/twitter_sox_normal.jpg
ESPNChiSox (http://twitter.com/#%21/ESPNChiSox) Doug Padilla
White Sox contract options exercised on Castro and Thornton. Waivers requested on Carlos Torres.
7 seconds ago (http://twitter.com/#%21/ESPNChiSox/status/28814468265)

Interesting. I wonder who gets on the 40-man in place of Torres.

sox1970
10-26-2010, 02:14 PM
Interesting. I wonder who gets on the 40-man in place of Torres.

Once the eight Sox free agents file after the World Series, there will be a bunch of spots open, and then they'll add to the 40-man from the minors in a few weeks. They probably have a few guys in the AFL being added--Johnnie Lowe and Anthony Carter are probably a couple pitchers being added.

kittle42
10-26-2010, 02:30 PM
But, but, but...Carlos Torres was a part of so many silly trade ideas over the past season. Obviously, his value was high.

doublem23
10-26-2010, 03:09 PM
Interesting. I wonder who gets on the 40-man in place of Torres.

Hopefully somebody who doesn't suck.

Daver
10-26-2010, 03:23 PM
Interesting. I wonder who gets on the 40-man in place of Torres.

Someone that is rule 5 eligible.

CWSpalehoseCWS
10-26-2010, 05:29 PM
Good to hear. Castro did a decent job and Thornton is a no-brainer.

DickAllen72
10-26-2010, 06:07 PM
Good to hear. Castro did a decent job and Thornton is a no-brainer.
Now, don't be so hard on Matt! :tongue:

SoxSpeed22
10-26-2010, 06:33 PM
Good moves. Castro is a good backup, now for starter, we'll have to see on that one.
Torres probably won't be anything more than AAA organizational filler.

ChiSoxGal85
10-26-2010, 07:32 PM
Picking up Thornton's and Castro's options was a no-brainer to me. Good that's done, but I'm waiting for some real news.

thomas35forever
10-26-2010, 09:47 PM
Where's the Torres appreciation thread?

chisoxfanatic
10-26-2010, 09:51 PM
Picking up Thornton's and Castro's options was a no-brainer to me. Good that's done, but I'm waiting for some real news.
Yea, I like Thornton, but this offseason won't be complete without re-signing Konerko.

soxfanreggie
10-26-2010, 11:14 PM
Yea, I like Thornton, but this offseason won't be complete without re-signing Konerko.

I agree - I'm in the camp to re-sign PK as long as it's a workable deal for the Sox. A while ago, I was hoping that we could add another option or two to Thornton's deal (pre-2010). Hopefully we can get something worked on that would keep him here for 2012 and 2013 as well. It could cost us more now, but I think it would still be a good extension.

LoveYourSuit
10-26-2010, 11:40 PM
Good to hear. Castro did a decent job and Thornton is a no-brainer.

Agreed.

For the limited amount of PT, he caught a better game than AJ and actually IMO hit the ball better.

WhiteSox5187
10-27-2010, 12:23 AM
Yea, I like Thornton, but this offseason won't be complete without re-signing Konerko.

I was talking about this with my dad and while I think that re-signing Konerko is essential there is at least a plan in place in case he leaves, it might not be good, but it's a plan. There is absolutely NO PLAN for replacing AJ. I think it is essential to re-sign both AJ and Konerko.

cws05champ
10-27-2010, 11:59 AM
Yea, I like Thornton, but this offseason won't be complete without re-signing Konerko.

I know this is an unpopular opinion but I am in the camp to trade Thornton while his value is at it's highest. He is in the last year of his deal and at 34 with injuries starting to creep in, it may be the best time to get great value from him. Thornton had left elbow inflammation and fluid drained from it in August. I just fear that he will start declining and his value will plummet.

Foulke You
10-28-2010, 02:15 PM
I know this is an unpopular opinion but I am in the camp to trade Thornton while his value is at it's highest. He is in the last year of his deal and at 34 with injuries starting to creep in, it may be the best time to get great value from him. Thornton had left elbow inflammation and fluid drained from it in August. I just fear that he will start declining and his value will plummet.
I think you keep him. Thornton is still a bargain at $3 million and is the most dominant left handed reliever in the AL. I just don't see us getting anyone of his talent for the same price. Trading him would also leave our bullpen way too thin and with only one good lefty in Sale.

russ99
10-28-2010, 04:40 PM
I know this is an unpopular opinion but I am in the camp to trade Thornton while his value is at it's highest. He is in the last year of his deal and at 34 with injuries starting to creep in, it may be the best time to get great value from him. Thornton had left elbow inflammation and fluid drained from it in August. I just fear that he will start declining and his value will plummet.

Bobby's more than likely gone, so we really need Thornton as a closing option, unless the Sox go out and spend $9M/per for a guy like Soriano. IMO, we need that for a bat, especially if Konerko leaves.

All of Thornton's closing chances were because Bobby was out, so I think if the role was given to him going out of spring training, he'd do much better than in the past.

Speaking of Konerko, our favorite rumor site (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/10/official-elias-rankings.html) got their hands on Elias rankings. Konerko, Manny and A.J. are Type A and Putz is a Type B. If we offer arb and they sign elsewhere, the Sox are getting draft picks. If I were Kenny, I'd consider doing so on all of them except maybe Manny.

khan
10-28-2010, 04:44 PM
I know this is an unpopular opinion but I am in the camp to trade Thornton while his value is at it's highest. He is in the last year of his deal and at 34 with injuries starting to creep in, it may be the best time to get great value from him. Thornton had left elbow inflammation and fluid drained from it in August. I just fear that he will start declining and his value will plummet.

I think you keep him. Thornton is still a bargain at $3 million and is the most dominant left handed reliever in the AL. I just don't see us getting anyone of his talent for the same price. Trading him would also leave our bullpen way too thin and with only one good lefty in Sale.

I agree with trading him, if the team has as many holes in it in 2011 as it clearly did going into 2010. Thornton is one of the few moveable pieces that KW has to get something in return. However, if the team is complete, then Thornton is a requisite towards seriously competing for the WS.

I think KW will likely keep Thornton, give him a contract, at which point Thornton's elbow will be shredded.

I also hate and despise the idea of wasting a pitcher of Sale's promise on the bullpen. Buehrle isn't getting any younger. Garcia isn't getting any healthier or younger. Floyd hasn't been getting better since he got his contract. Peavy isn't getting any healthier. Danks isn't getting any cheaper. And Boras/Jackson aren't getting any more generous. Sale may be more of a need for the starting rotation sooner than you think.

russ99
10-28-2010, 04:49 PM
I agree with trading him, if the team has as many holes in it in 2011 as it clearly did going into 2010. Thornton is one of the few moveable pieces that KW has to get something in return. However, if the team is complete, then Thornton is a requisite towards seriously competing for the WS.

I think KW will likely keep Thornton, give him a contract, at which point Thornton's elbow will be shredded.

I also hate and despise the idea of wasting a pitcher of Sale's promise on the bullpen. Buehrle isn't getting any younger. Garcia isn't getting any healthier or younger. Floyd hasn't been getting better since he got his contract. Peavy isn't getting any healthier. Danks isn't getting any cheaper. And Boras/Jackson aren't getting any more generous. Sale may be more of a need for the starting rotation sooner than you think.

Agree on your assessment, except Thornton. Closers get $8-9M a year in their FA year. IMO Kenny's not going to be spending that much, unless it's for a blue-chip closer. He's here only one more year, so that's a reason why he could be traded.

I also think that the chances are good that Mark is dealt this offseason. His little outburst about no re-negotiation during next season couldn't have sit well. The trick will be to convince someone to pay him $14.5M for the next two years (extra year kicks in if traded), and give the Sox something decent in return. Mark would need to waive his NTC too. The Sox may have to hand over some cash to make it work.

Waiting for the inevitable Rasmus-Buehrle trade ideas...

khan
10-28-2010, 04:58 PM
Agree on your assessment, except Thornton. Closers get $8-9M a year in their FA year. IMO Kenny's not going to be spending that much, unless it's for a blue-chip closer. He's here only one more year, so that's a reason why he could be traded.
I agree that KW won't spend $8-9M on a closer, because he's handcuffed by his stupid choice to dump $50M on an underperforming starting rotation.

However, Thornton is 34 years old, an age at which most pitchers do not improve. While no one disagrees with him being among the best in the business, if KW has an incomplete team assembled in 2011, keeping Thornton would be like putting a turbocharger on a Ford Pinto.

The better and smarter move [if the SOX aren't in position to compete in 2011] would be to cash in the trading chip of Thornton before he gets too old and expensive.


I also think that the chances are good that Mark is dealt this offseason. His little outburst about no re-negotiation during next season couldn't have sit well. The trick will be to convince someone to pay him $14.5M for the next two years (extra year kicks in if traded), and give the Sox something decent in return. Mark would need to waive his NTC too. The Sox may have to hand over some cash to make it work.

Waiting for the inevitable Rasmus-Buehrle trade ideas...

There is no damn way any GM with a 3-digit IQ trades for Buehrle. I've posted buehrle's stat lines for the past 3 seasons, and he's clearly on a downward trend in his career. He is ridiculously expensive at this time, and is no longer a top pitcher. His WHIP and K/9 have not been good in recent seasons. There is NO WAY he gets traded, IMO.

However, Jackson's miracle finish as a SOX pitcher and his somewhat more manageable contract [compared to Buehrle's] makes him more of a trade possibility, IMO.

Foulke You
10-28-2010, 06:27 PM
However, Thornton is 34 years old, an age at which most pitchers do not improve. While no one disagrees with him being among the best in the business, if KW has an incomplete team assembled in 2011, keeping Thornton would be like putting a turbocharger on a Ford Pinto.

The better and smarter move [if the SOX aren't in position to compete in 2011] would be to cash in the trading chip of Thornton before he gets too old and expensive.
You make it sound like we are committed to Thornton long term. We are only on the hook for one season of him at a relatively cheap $3 million. He only needs to pitch 60 to 70 innings or so. He averages that just about every season and I see no reason why it would suddenly change. Thornton has a lot of value as a set up man or as "closer insurance" if we don't re-sign Putz or if Sale falters in the closer role. If we plan on contending in 2011, we need Thornton. Also, I'm skeptical at the kind of haul Thornton would get in trade. He is the best at what he does, but at the end of the day, he is just a relief pitcher and I doubt many GMs will mortage the farm to get one lefty setup man regardless of how good he is.



There is no damn way any GM with a 3-digit IQ trades for Buehrle. I've posted buehrle's stat lines for the past 3 seasons, and he's clearly on a downward trend in his career. He is ridiculously expensive at this time, and is no longer a top pitcher. His WHIP and K/9 have not been good in recent seasons. There is NO WAY he gets traded, IMO.

If Mark Buehrle was put on the market tomorrow, that phone would definitely be ringing. He is a lock to throw 200+ innings every season and has averaged 13-15 wins per year in the last 3 years. He also is a lock to NOT make a trip to the DL as he has been one of our most durable pitchers. Oh, and he is a left hander to boot. You are mistaken if you think a GM wouldn't take his contract for the right package. With the premium placed on good starting pitching these days, despite Buehrle's high annual salary, there would be lots of interest. It's a lot of money but the potential trade partner would only be on the hook for 2 years. It's long term big money contracts that GMs worry the most about, not short term ones. Randy Wolf got 3 years, $30 million last year on the open market. Ben Sheets got $10 million for one year. You can bet that a GM of a contender would take 2 years $26 million for Buehrle.

khan
10-29-2010, 01:17 PM
You make it sound like we are committed to Thornton long term. We are only on the hook for one season of him at a relatively cheap $3 million. He only needs to pitch 60 to 70 innings or so. He averages that just about every season and I see no reason why it would suddenly change. Thornton has a lot of value as a set up man or as "closer insurance" if we don't re-sign Putz or if Sale falters in the closer role. If we plan on contending in 2011, we need Thornton. Also, I'm skeptical at the kind of haul Thornton would get in trade. He is the best at what he does, but at the end of the day, he is just a relief pitcher and I doubt many GMs will mortage the farm to get one lefty setup man regardless of how good he is.
Thank you for agreeing with me. Thornton as a setup man or closer IS valuable, especially given that he's a lefty. But, color me dubious as to what he will do in seasons BEYOND 2012, due to his age.

I also agree that if KW will actually put together a complete team, then Thornton NEEDS to be here. If he has a flawed team that is incapable of contending [as he did in 2010], then Thornton should be able to return something decent, assuming KW doesn't give away value.


If Mark Buehrle was put on the market tomorrow, that phone would definitely be ringing. He is a lock to throw 200+ innings every season and has averaged 13-15 wins per year in the last 3 years. He also is a lock to NOT make a trip to the DL as he has been one of our most durable pitchers. Oh, and he is a left hander to boot. You are mistaken if you think a GM wouldn't take his contract for the right package. With the premium placed on good starting pitching these days, despite Buehrle's high annual salary, there would be lots of interest. It's a lot of money but the potential trade partner would only be on the hook for 2 years. It's long term big money contracts that GMs worry the most about, not short term ones. Randy Wolf got 3 years, $30 million last year on the open market. Ben Sheets got $10 million for one year. You can bet that a GM of a contender would take 2 years $26 million for Buehrle.

For $14M/yr, you can have:

A 4.28 ERA, a 1.403 WHIP [one that is both climbing and .12 HIGHER than his career averages], a declining K/9 [which was never good, BTW], a increasing OBP allowed, and a guy with 2271 IP on his arm. NONE of these things are worth $14M/yr.

Don't get me wrong, as I believe Buehrle to be among the greatest pitchers ever to defend the colors of the SOX. And he is absolutely one of my all time favorite White SOX players. But you'd be kidding yourself if you think Buehrle's worsening performance and increasing age and huge contract aren't significant barriers to him being a valuable trade chip. If he is traded, KW will have to eat a significant part of the contract to get anything beyond salary relief to trade Buerhle, IMO.

DirtySox
10-29-2010, 01:23 PM
I don't think it has been mentioned but Thornton is currently, and will almost assuredly be a Type A after next season. He definitely would/will be offered arbitration by the Sox. If Matt is intent on finding a multi-year deal (he should be given his age), then draft picks stand to be gained if the Sox don't extend him themselves.

I don't think there is much harm in retaining Matt currently. The argument would be between receiving somewhat established prospects via trade versus draft picks at a later date.

khan
10-29-2010, 01:40 PM
I don't think it has been mentioned but Thornton is currently, and will almost assuredly be a Type A after next season. He definitely would/will be offered arbitration by the Sox. If Matt is intent on finding a multi-year deal (he should be given his age), then draft picks stand to be gained if the Sox don't extend him themselves.

I don't think there is much harm in retaining Matt currently. The argument would be between receiving somewhat established prospects via trade versus draft picks at a later date.
I don't disagree with this. BUT, if the team is incomplete, and has no prayer of competing, then having such a high-quality lefty setup man or closer is akin to putting leather seats on a geo metro.

Honestly, I'd rather that KW trade for someone else's prospects than to trust him to draft his own. He's been somewhat more successful at the former than at the latter.

DirtySox
10-29-2010, 08:13 PM
I don't disagree with this. BUT, if the team is incomplete, and has no prayer of competing, then having such a high-quality lefty setup man or closer is akin to putting leather seats on a geo metro.

Honestly, I'd rather that KW trade for someone else's prospects than to trust him to draft his own. He's been somewhat more successful at the former than at the latter.

I fully expect Thornton to be traded at the deadline or earlier if the team is out of it.

I think I would agree in that Kenny would be more likely to hit on a trade then with draft picks. Especially since Thornton signing elsewhere doesn't necessarily guarantee a 1st round pick. I don't have that much faith in either situation though.

Brian26
10-30-2010, 12:27 PM
The better and smarter move [if the SOX aren't in position to compete in 2011] would be to cash in the trading chip of Thornton before he gets too old and expensive.

I agree. This is the move that Kenny missed with Jenks after 2008.

Thornton was 29 when we acquired him. We've squeezed five good years out of him. Sell high.

Foulke You
10-30-2010, 04:06 PM
Thank you for agreeing with me. Thornton as a setup man or closer IS valuable, especially given that he's a lefty. But, color me dubious as to what he will do in seasons BEYOND 2012, due to his age.

I also agree that if KW will actually put together a complete team, then Thornton NEEDS to be here. If he has a flawed team that is incapable of contending [as he did in 2010], then Thornton should be able to return something decent, assuming KW doesn't give away value.
I definitely agree that he isn't worthless, as I said, I just question how much you are really going to get for him. I can't think of one recent instance where a lone setup man netted a king's ransom of prospects. I'm sure it has happened at some point, but not very often. I'd just assume keep him and take my chances that we'll contend again next year. It's not like we had a 72 win team in 2010, it was an 88 win team.


For $14M/yr, you can have:

A 4.28 ERA, a 1.403 WHIP [one that is both climbing and .12 HIGHER than his career averages], a declining K/9 [which was never good, BTW], a increasing OBP allowed, and a guy with 2271 IP on his arm. NONE of these things are worth $14M/yr.

Don't get me wrong, as I believe Buehrle to be among the greatest pitchers ever to defend the colors of the SOX. And he is absolutely one of my all time favorite White SOX players. But you'd be kidding yourself if you think Buehrle's worsening performance and increasing age and huge contract aren't significant barriers to him being a valuable trade chip. If he is traded, KW will have to eat a significant part of the contract to get anything beyond salary relief to trade Buerhle, IMO.
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I see Mark as a durable soft throwing lefty who doesn't need velocity to get outs, who never gets hurt, who tosses 200+ innings, and is a lock for 12 to 15 wins. There is no reason Buehrle couldn't be like Kenny Rogers or Tom Glavine and effectively pitch until he is 40 if he wanted to. You see Buehrle as an aging starting pitcher who is beginning some sort of huge decline and comes with an albatross contract. I happen to disagree with that outlook on Buehrle. I think Kenny paid market value for a pitcher that can do what he does. In fact, he makes less than many pitchers who don't produce as much as Mark. When I look around the league and see GMs paying AJ Burnett $16.5 million annually, John Lackey $18.5 million annually, Ted Lilly $13 million, Aaron Harang $12.5 million, Roy Oswalt $15 million, Bronson Arroyo $12 million annually, and so on. It becomes clear to me that yes, GMs ARE willing to take on that kind of salary to get the quality starting pitcher they need. Buehrle under contract for only 2 seasons on the open trade market would definitely have suitors and I don't think the Sox would have to eat much of that deal, especially if you dealt him to the big spender teams like the Angels, Dodgers, Phillies, Mets, Red Sox, etc.

khan
11-01-2010, 10:08 AM
I definitely agree that he isn't worthless, as I said, I just question how much you are really going to get for him. I can't think of one recent instance where a lone setup man netted a king's ransom of prospects. I'm sure it has happened at some point, but not very often. I'd just assume keep him and take my chances that we'll contend again next year. It's not like we had a 72 win team in 2010, it was an 88 win team.
With as ****ty as the farm system is right now, there is a lot of good that could be had for a player of Thornton's ability. On an incomplete team, he is an unecessary luxury, IMO. Look inside the record, and you'll see one that was inflated for a number of reasons. But there are other reasons to trade Thornton beyond that.


We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I see Mark as a durable soft throwing lefty who doesn't need velocity to get outs, who never gets hurt, who tosses 200+ innings, and is a lock for 12 to 15 wins.
Wins are a TEAM metric, and not a good metric of a pitcher's efficacy. They tell you exactly jack and **** about how good a pitcher is performing. [Hell, didn't Garland win 18 games twice? Does that make him a Hall of Famer?]

There is no reason Buehrle couldn't be like Kenny Rogers or Tom Glavine and effectively pitch until he is 40 if he wanted to. You see Buehrle as an aging starting pitcher who is beginning some sort of huge decline and comes with an albatross contract. I happen to disagree with that outlook on Buehrle. I think Kenny paid market value for a pitcher that can do what he does. In fact, he makes less than many pitchers who don't produce as much as Mark.
There is a difference between the economy back when Buehrle got his deal and the economy now. There is a difference between the free agent market then and the one now. Buehrle has admitted that he doesn't want to pitch until he's 40. And if you look at his performance in recent years, it is CLEAR that he's no Glavine or Rogers. [This means actual numbers that measure a pitcher's effectiveness, not team numbers like "wins."]


When I look around the league and see GMs paying AJ Burnett $16.5 million annually,
NYY. If the SOX have their kind of money, let us know, right?

John Lackey $18.5 million annually,
Boston Red Sox. Again, let us know if the SOX have the sawx's money. Oh, and Lackey is trending downward as well.

Ted Lilly $13 million,
LA Dodgers, who have more money than the SOX. But this is a truly moronic contract.

Aaron Harang $12.5 million,
Signed in a much-healthier economy in 2007

Roy Oswalt $15 million,
He's JUST BETTER than Buehrle. He's an actual ace. AND, this was on a hometown discount for the 'stros. [Oh wait, I forgot that you look @ the win total and see "13." I look at the SPARKLING 1.025 WHIP, the 8.2K/9 IP, and the 6.9 H/9IP and see an ace.]

Bronson Arroyo $12 million annually, and so on.
He's performed better than Buehrle in recent seasons, if you look at the numbers. He's probably the only pitcher that's making the correct wage on your list; Oswalt is underpaid, but the others are grossly overpaid, IMO.

It becomes clear to me that yes, GMs ARE willing to take on that kind of salary to get the quality starting pitcher they need.
NONE of these contracts are "good" contracts. They were all signed by richer teams, or for better pitchers, or by really dumb GMs. Why do you want KW to make stupid decisions?

Moreover, there is a difference between "trade value" and what a stupid GM will give to a player in Free Agency.

Buehrle under contract for only 2 seasons on the open trade market would definitely have suitors and I don't think the Sox would have to eat much of that deal, especially if you dealt him to the big spender teams like the Angels, Dodgers, Phillies, Mets, Red Sox, etc.
Again:

His WHIP was 1.403 this year. He gives up 10.5 hits/9IP. His K/9 is 4.2. He's 31 years old, and has 2200 IP on his arm. None of these things are good things for a pitcher's value. His performance is also worse this year than his career averages, and is trending downward. [Hell, even Freddy Garcia performed better than Buehrle this season.]

Set aside OUR affinity for the guy, and just look at his numbers. If they didn't have "Mark Buehrle" next to them, you'd say that he isn't getting better, and may no longer be good any more.

Balfanman
11-01-2010, 10:47 AM
It becomes clear to me that yes, GMs ARE willing to take on that kind of salary to get the quality starting pitcher they need. Buehrle under contract for only 2 seasons on the open trade market would definitely have suitors and I don't think the Sox would have to eat much of that deal, especially if you dealt him to the big spender teams like the Angels, Dodgers, Phillies, Mets, Red Sox, etc.

Buehrle is not that expensive. The option year that had to be picked up if he was traded expired in July 2010, when his 10/5 rights kicked in. A team trading for Buehrle only has him under contract for 2011.

Foulke You
11-01-2010, 12:09 PM
With as ****ty as the farm system is right now, there is a lot of good that could be had for a player of Thornton's ability. On an incomplete team, he is an unecessary luxury, IMO. Look inside the record, and you'll see one that was inflated for a number of reasons. But there are other reasons to trade Thornton beyond that.



Wins are a TEAM metric, and not a good metric of a pitcher's efficacy. They tell you exactly jack and **** about how good a pitcher is performing. [Hell, didn't Garland win 18 games twice? Does that make him a Hall of Famer?]


There is a difference between the economy back when Buehrle got his deal and the economy now. There is a difference between the free agent market then and the one now. Buehrle has admitted that he doesn't want to pitch until he's 40. And if you look at his performance in recent years, it is CLEAR that he's no Glavine or Rogers. [This means actual numbers that measure a pitcher's effectiveness, not team numbers like "wins."]



NYY. If the SOX have their kind of money, let us know, right?


Boston Red Sox. Again, let us know if the SOX have the sawx's money. Oh, and Lackey is trending downward as well.


LA Dodgers, who have more money than the SOX. But this is a truly moronic contract.


Signed in a much-healthier economy in 2007


He's JUST BETTER than Buehrle. He's an actual ace. AND, this was on a hometown discount for the 'stros. [Oh wait, I forgot that you look @ the win total and see "13." I look at the SPARKLING 1.025 WHIP, the 8.2K/9 IP, and the 6.9 H/9IP and see an ace.]


He's performed better than Buehrle in recent seasons, if you look at the numbers. He's probably the only pitcher that's making the correct wage on your list; Oswalt is underpaid, but the others are grossly overpaid, IMO.


NONE of these contracts are "good" contracts. They were all signed by richer teams, or for better pitchers, or by really dumb GMs. Why do you want KW to make stupid decisions?

Moreover, there is a difference between "trade value" and what a stupid GM will give to a player in Free Agency.


Again:

His WHIP was 1.403 this year. He gives up 10.5 hits/9IP. His K/9 is 4.2. He's 31 years old, and has 2200 IP on his arm. None of these things are good things for a pitcher's value. His performance is also worse this year than his career averages, and is trending downward. [Hell, even Freddy Garcia performed better than Buehrle this season.]

Set aside OUR affinity for the guy, and just look at his numbers. If they didn't have "Mark Buehrle" next to them, you'd say that he isn't getting better, and may no longer be good any more.
So, in an earlier post you are telling me that no GM would be dumb enough to ever take Buehrle and his contract from us in a trade. Now, in the above post you are telling me that a lot of those GMs WERE dumb and gave bad contracts to the pitchers I mentioned or they are simply just the Yankees and Red Sox who have a lot of money to burn. You kind've helped my point that GMs would find value in Mark Buehrle on the trade market. Remember, my main argument is that Buehrle WOULD have trade value. You also keep bringing up his WHIP from only the 2010 season but ignore all the positives he brings to the table and ignore his recent career numbers. I'm not saying Buehrle is Cy Young or a true #1 left handed starter like Sabathia or David Price. However, you are undervaluing what he brings to the table. Ted Lilly got paid by the Dodgers because he eats up a ton of innings, is a lefty, has a solid E.R.A., and can get you double digit wins. (yes, wins matter too but that is a separate debate) These types of pitchers don't grow on trees which is why Lilly's agent was able to negotiate that price. It's that same reason why Buehrle would have trade value if Kenny put out feelers that he was available despite his faulty WHIP from the 2010 season. Mark is not locked up on a long term contract, is a 200+ inning bullpen saver, a lefty veteran, and a guy you can count on for quality starts. This is a valuable piece to trade if KW chooses to do so. You are welcome to your opinion that he is in decline and that nobody would ever want to trade for him and his contract. I just happen to disagree with you on this one.

Foulke You
11-01-2010, 12:12 PM
Buehrle is not that expensive. The option year that had to be picked up if he was traded expired in July 2010, when his 10/5 rights kicked in. A team trading for Buehrle only has him under contract for 2011.
This makes Buehrle even more desirable in a trade to a contender if Kenny chooses to do so. Only 1 year due on his contract.

khan
11-01-2010, 01:52 PM
So, in an earlier post you are telling me that no GM would be dumb enough to ever take Buehrle and his contract from us in a trade. Now, in the above post you are telling me that a lot of those GMs WERE dumb and gave bad contracts to the pitchers I mentioned or they are simply just the Yankees and Red Sox who have a lot of money to burn.
That's part of the equation. The reality is that neither the yankees, nor the sawx, nor the dodgers, nor the scrubs appear to have the money to add a $14M contract. Taking away these rich teams limits his tradability.


You kind've helped my point that GMs would find value in Mark Buehrle on the trade market.
If KW ate ~$7M to $10M of the contract, there might be "value." But exactly what do you mean when you say "GMs would find value?"

Remember, my main argument is that Buehrle WOULD have "trade value." You also keep bringing up his WHIP from only the 2010 season but ignore all the positives he brings to the table and ignore his recent career numbers. I'm not saying Buehrle is Cy Young or a true #1 left handed starter like Sabathia or David Price. However, you are undervaluing what he brings to the table.
And you fail to recognize that Buehrle's numbers look like he's no longer a good pitcher, or at a minimum, on a downward trend that hits ALL pitchers of his age and with as many IP as he's had. Whether we like it or not, this appears to be the case. [And again, Buehrle is one of my all time favorite White SOX.]


Ted Lilly got paid by the Dodgers because he eats up a ton of innings, is a lefty, has a solid E.R.A., and can get you double digit wins. (yes, wins matter too but that is a separate debate) These types of pitchers don't grow on trees which is why Lilly's agent was able to negotiate that price.
1. Wins are immaterial towards judging a pitcher's ability. [See Oswalt, R. in 2010 as a reference.]

2. You keep bringing up stupid Free Agent contracts as if they have any relationship to TRADE VALUE. They don't. They are entirely different animals, because a trading partner gives up BOTH the money, and whatever assets in return for a player.

It's that same reason why Buehrle "would have trade value" if Kenny put out feelers that he was available despite his faulty WHIP from the 2010 season. Mark is not locked up on a long term contract, is a 200+ inning bullpen saver, a lefty veteran, and a guy you can count on for quality starts. This is a valuable piece to trade if KW chooses to do so.
While some of these things are true, none of these things are worth $14M in trade. Especially with a worsening trend in ALL the metrics that delineate good pitchers from middling ones.

You are welcome to your opinion that he is in decline and that nobody would ever want to trade for him and his contract. I just happen to disagree with you on this one.
Do you disagree with me on this? Do you ACTUALLY believe that Mark Buehrle is either improving, or remaining as good as he once was?

No matter what ELSE you've posted, the bolded part is all that really matters at this point, in terms of what trade value a player might have.


Sure, anyone has "trade value," including crappy players like Mark Teahen, which is a fairly vague and ill-defined view to take. But it isn't much "value," and for Buehrle, there isn't much value at that price point, IMO.

KMcMahon817
11-01-2010, 02:30 PM
That's part of the equation. The reality is that neither the yankees, nor the sawx, nor the dodgers, nor the scrubs appear to have the money to add a $14M contract. Taking away these rich teams limits his tradability.



If KW ate ~$7M to $10M of the contract, there might be "value." But exactly what do you mean when you say "GMs would find value?"


And you fail to recognize that Buehrle's numbers look like he's no longer a good pitcher, or at a minimum, on a downward trend that hits ALL pitchers of his age and with as many IP as he's had. Whether we like it or not, this appears to be the case. [And again, Buehrle is one of my all time favorite White SOX.]



1. Wins are immaterial towards judging a pitcher's ability. [See Oswalt, R. in 2010 as a reference.]

2. You keep bringing up stupid Free Agent contracts as if they have any relationship to TRADE VALUE. They don't. They are entirely different animals, because a trading partner gives up BOTH the money, and whatever assets in return for a player.


While some of these things are true, none of these things are worth $14M in trade. Especially with a worsening trend in ALL the metrics that delineate good pitchers from middling ones.


Do you disagree with me on this? Do you ACTUALLY believe that Mark Buehrle is either improving, or remaining as good as he once was?

No matter what ELSE you've posted, the bolded part is all that really matters at this point, in terms of what trade value a player might have.


Sure, anyone has "trade value," including crappy players like Mark Teahen, which is a fairly vague and ill-defined view to take. But it isn't much "value," and for Buehrle, there isn't much value at that price point, IMO.

There is no way on God's green earth that KW would have to eat anywhere near 10 million in order to have demand for Buehrle in a trade.

If KW wanted to trade Buerhle in the next week, I am confident that he wouldn't have any problem getting a decent return, without having assuming close to half of his contract.

Foulke You
11-01-2010, 02:56 PM
1. Wins are immaterial towards judging a pitcher's ability. [See Oswalt, R. in 2010 as a reference.]
Ah, but wins do matter. See Vazquez, Javier circa 2008. 200 innings pitched, 200 strikeouts, respectable E.R.A. but still finds a way to lose you ballgames. As I said though, that's a debate for a different thread and my final comment on this here.:tongue:


2. You keep bringing up stupid Free Agent contracts as if they have any relationship to TRADE VALUE. They don't.
Free agent pitcher signings illustrate the premium that GMs put on solid starting pitching and how much they are willing to commit financially to them. I think the amount of long term money GMs are willing to pay (PLUS draft picks for type A free agents in many cases) is a good barameter for a player's trade value. Again, Mark Buehrle is NOT signed long term. The financial risk associated with acquiring a 32 year old veteran pitcher doesn't extend beyond 2011. Many GMs are always willing to give more money for short term deals, especially for pitchers. I see no reason why a GM wouldn't do this for next season if the right deal is reached. Remember, they can always trade salary for salary too which lessens the financial impact of Buehrle's deal. My opinion happens to be that we could get a valuable piece in trade for Buehrle.


While some of these things are true, none of these things are worth $14M in trade. Especially with a worsening trend in ALL the metrics that delineate good pitchers from middling ones.

Do you disagree with me on this? Do you ACTUALLY believe that Mark Buehrle is either improving, or remaining as good as he once was?

No matter what ELSE you've posted, the bolded part is all that really matters at this point, in terms of what trade value a player might have.
I'm not questioning your loyalty to Buehrle but I'm just not seeing the same interpretation of his stats that you are that shows a big decline is coming in 2011 which is really all that matters when talking about his trade value for this offseason. Take a good look at his entire stat line for his career:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/6525/career;_ylt=Ausl5zg6N7iAXNUv1hbOmhaFCLcF

When you compare key stats from 2010, they really aren't THAT far off from his career averages. Remember, Mark has never been a perennial 20 game winner. What he gave us in 2010 is fairly close to what he has always given us which is a reliable left handed workhorse who eats innings and gives you quality starts. This is extremely valuable to any contending ballclub. Comparing his 2010 stats to his previous seasons, Mark's E.R.A. was 0.30 higher and his WHIP was only .12 higher than his career averages. Mark's hits allowed, walks, Ks, innings pitched, and HRs allowed were also very close to his career norms. Was 2010 a banner season? No, but I feel that it isn't unreasonable to think he will have a season more like 2008 or 2009 next year. The age thing doesn't concern me as much with a guy like Buehrle who has always been durable and has never relied on velocity to get hitters out. I'd be more concerned about age if it was a power arm like Jake Peavy we were talking about.

russ99
11-01-2010, 02:59 PM
If wins are useless stats, what about quality starts? Despite his relatively mediocre primary numbers, Buehrle had 19 the last 2 seasons, and 24 in 2008.

For reference, Sabathia had 26, 21 and 15 the last 3 years.

khan
11-01-2010, 04:05 PM
Ah, but wins do matter. See Vazquez, Javier circa 2008. 200 innings pitched, 200 strikeouts, respectable E.R.A. but still finds a way to lose you ballgames. As I said though, that's a debate for a different thread and my final comment on this here.:tongue:
I don't understand your point. Vazquez won 12 games in 2008, which in YOUR world means that he should have a bust in Cooperstown, right?

You actually make the point that wins DON'T matter when you cite Vazquez.

Free agent pitcher signings illustrate the premium that GMs put on solid starting pitching and how much they are willing to commit financially to them. I think the amount of long term money GMs are willing to pay (PLUS draft picks for type A free agents in many cases) is a good barameter for a player's trade value.
If this is the case, then why did Manny Ramirez come to the SOX for nothing? After all, his amount of long term money was rather high, was it not?

Again, Mark Buehrle is NOT signed long term. The financial risk associated with acquiring a 32 year old veteran pitcher doesn't extend beyond 2011. Many GMs are always willing to give more money for short term deals, especially for pitchers. I see no reason why a GM wouldn't do this for next season if the right deal is reached. Remember, they can always trade salary for salary too which lessens the financial impact of Buehrle's deal. My opinion happens to be that we could get a valuable piece in trade for Buehrle.
Thank you for admitting that KW would likely have to eat salary to trade mark Buehrle. This is the true issue with this team. And this is why I hated the Jackson addition.


I'm not questioning your loyalty to Buehrle but I'm just not seeing the same interpretation of his stats that you are that shows a big decline is coming in 2011 which is really all that matters when talking about his trade value for this offseason. Take a good look at his entire stat line for his career:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/6525/career;_ylt=Ausl5zg6N7iAXNUv1hbOmhaFCLcF

When you compare key stats from 2010, they really aren't THAT far off from his career averages.
However, they are ALL worse than his career averages. They are ALL worse than those of Freddy Garcia, with the exception of IP. NONE of them show that he is worth $14M/yr any more.


Remember, Mark has never been a perennial 20 game winner.
"Wins" are a team metric.

What he gave us in 2010 is fairly close to what he has always given us which is a reliable left handed workhorse who eats innings and gives you quality starts. This is extremely valuable to any contending ballclub.
This may be, but as you admitted, the SOX would have to eat salary to trade him. He is NOT worth $14M, except to the terminally stupid GM types.

Comparing his 2010 stats to his previous seasons, Mark's E.R.A. was 0.30 higher and his WHIP was only .12 higher than his career averages.
Actually, a change of .12 in a pitcher's WHIP is HUGE. The difference between his career WHIP of 1.28 and his number of 1.403 in 2010 is the difference between being solid, and being very mediocre. A 1.403 WHIP kinda sucks, to tell you the truth.

Mark's hits allowed, walks, Ks, innings pitched, and HRs allowed were also very close to his career norms. Was 2010 a banner season? No, but I feel that it isn't unreasonable to think he will have a season more like 2008 or 2009 next year.
He allowed the 2nd highest hits in his career. His K totals and [more tellingly] his K/9IP is WAAAAAYYYY down. All of these numbers and trends are alarming, NOT a small change as you would state...


The age thing doesn't concern me as much with a guy like Buehrle who has always been durable and has never relied on velocity to get hitters out. I'd be more concerned about age if it was a power arm like Jake Peavy we were talking about.

Fair enough. But he hasn't been getting better as he ages and adds IP to his arm. Do you disagree?

khan
11-01-2010, 04:12 PM
If wins are useless stats, what about quality starts? Despite his relatively mediocre primary numbers, Buehrle had 19 the last 2 seasons, and 24 in 2008.
Russ, thank you for reinforcing the fact that Buehrle is in decline. He had 24 QS [71% of his starts] in 2008, but only 19 in both 2009 and 2010. [Only 58% of his starts.]

Read that again: Mark Buehrle only had quality starts in 58% of his outings in each of 2009 and 2010. [The MLB average is 49%, BTW.]


For reference, Sabathia had 26, 21 and 15 the last 3 years.
Actually, Sabathia had 26 QS in 2010. [76% of his starts]
He had 21 QS in 2009. [62% of his starts]
He DID have 15 QS in 2008. For Milwaukee. But Sabathia had 10 MORE for Cleveland in 2008, for a total of 25 that season. [An INCREDIBLE 88% of his starts in 2008 were "QS."]

khan
11-01-2010, 04:27 PM
There is no way on God's green earth that KW would have to eat anywhere near 10 million in order to have demand for Buehrle in a trade.

If KW wanted to trade Buerhle in the next week, I am confident that he wouldn't have any problem getting a decent return, without having assuming close to half of his contract.
As I mentioned to foulke you, set aside OUR affinity for Mark Buehrle, and look at his numbers. Look at his performance. Look at which way the trends are pointing. Then, look at the huge contract.

When you're talking about a 1.4 WHIP or higher, it's not a good thing for Buehrle's trade value. When you realize that Buehrle's WHIP was HIGHER than Freddy Garcia's in 2010, you'll see why I think KW would have to eat a huge chunk of his contract to trade Buehrle.

BringHomeDaBacon
11-01-2010, 06:19 PM
I agree with everything that Khan has stated about the decline in Buehrle's performance. Foulke, however, raises an excellent point about the limited number of years left on his contract. That is the key to making him movable. He would be an ideal fit for a team that has some cash to burn and thinks they can win now and are one solid if unspectacular pitcher away. Whether that team exists, I can't say for certain.

One might be encouraged by the fact that the Brewers gave Randy Wolf almost $30 million for his age 33-35 seasons just last year.