PDA

View Full Version : Buehrle rumours


MHOUSE
06-17-2003, 01:49 AM
I was surfing the Brewers fan site and much has been made in the NL Central (home of the Cardinals) about Buehrle's "fan problems" and attitude in Chicago.

Mark for J.D. Drew was mentioned as was a Buehrle/Konerko for Sexson/prospect deal. Also Jenkins for Buehrle straight up. I personally like the Jenkins deal moving Lee to DH and have Frank at first. Dealing Konerko and getting Sexson would be great, but that'd be tough for Milwaukee with his $6 million. I wouldn't want to touch J.D. Drew (for hear of injuring him! :D: ), but it seems that there are options open should Chicago decide to move Buehrle.

I sit on the fence: I see the upside of keeping such a young talent (even with a rough season now), but also the lack of attitude, St. Louis rumours, high load of innings pitched, etc. It's a tough call, but is Buehrle the guy to go?

Chisoxfn
06-17-2003, 02:09 AM
Buehrle/Konerko for Sexson and Sheets and we throw in something and I'll listen.

Buehrle is a stellar young pitcher whose best years are still ahead of him. I think the Sox need to rebuild, but moving him at a point where his value is at a low, isn't the way to do it.

MHOUSE
06-17-2003, 02:14 AM
Originally posted by Chisoxfn
Buehrle/Konerko for Sexson and Sheets and we throw in something and I'll listen.

Buehrle is a stellar young pitcher whose best years are still ahead of him. I think the Sox need to rebuild, but moving him at a point where his value is at a low, isn't the way to do it.

Buehrle for Sheets isn't an improvement as Mark has proven more at age 24 than Sheets has at age 25. Both are young stud pitchers with lots of upside and potential and I think Milwaukee would rather have them both than swap them. This would be a trade for the sake of making one. Sexson would be an upgrade from Konerko at the moment, but I think Paulie could be as good in the long run. I don't like this trade and I don't think Milwaukee would listen.

fquaye149
06-17-2003, 07:48 AM
what i like about sheets is he wouldjn't be throwing 150 pitches per in 44 starts for the sox.

hold2dibber
06-17-2003, 07:54 AM
Any talk of trading Buehrle would be insane. If the Sox trade Buehrle, the rotation next year is Loaiza, Garland, Wright, Rauch and I don't know who. 75 wins would be a major accomplishment. There's no way they'd be able to get equal starting pitching talent for Buehrle. Thus, no way I'd trade him. (If the Sox tie up Colon with a 4 year deal, then I might possibly maybe theoretically perhaps consider moving Buehrle, but even then, only for a deal that blew me away.)

SoxOnTop
06-17-2003, 08:08 AM
Why do you even ask the question? Have you too been brainwashed by JR into believing that the only way to win is to blow up the team and ship out all of your proven comodities for unproven players. Buerhle is a tough young pitcher with 16 and 19 win seasons under his belt. Despite the last 2 months, this kid is a straight up winner and I don't know any Sox fans who think otherwise. Plus, he's not a free agent for at least 3 years!!!! You don't dump the core of your team just for the sake of change. Especially, when you have him cheap.

gosox41
06-17-2003, 08:13 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Any talk of trading Buehrle would be insane. If the Sox trade Buehrle, the rotation next year is Loaiza, Garland, Wright, Rauch and I don't know who. 75 wins would be a major accomplishment. There's no way they'd be able to get equal starting pitching talent for Buehrle. Thus, no way I'd trade him. (If the Sox tie up Colon with a 4 year deal, then I might possibly maybe theoretically perhaps consider moving Buehrle, but even then, only for a deal that blew me away.)

The Sox rotation would be worse without Buehrle, but look at how the Sox have done voer the last 2 years wtih Buehrle pitching great. Barely .500.

Overall, I'm against trading Buehrle. But if someone offers a great deal, I think the Sox should listen because they have enough other holes that need to be filled. Sexson/Sheets does nothing to excite me for Buehrle straight up. A young stud SS would be the start of getting my attention. Not trading for a worse pitcher and another DH/1B.

Also, as much as I'd like Loiaza and hopefully Colon back next season, it is JR running this team.

Bob

hold2dibber
06-17-2003, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
The Sox rotation would be worse without Buehrle, but look at how the Sox have done voer the last 2 years wtih Buehrle pitching great. Barely .500.

I think that's flawed logic. Buehrle isn't the reason they haven't been better the last few years. He's been one of the few bright spots. To get better, you replace the guys who aren't very good with guys who are good.

Overall, I'm against trading Buehrle. But if someone offers a great deal, I think the Sox should listen because they have enough other holes that need to be filled. Sexson/Sheets does nothing to excite me for Buehrle straight up. A young stud SS would be the start of getting my attention. Not trading for a worse pitcher and another DH/1B.

A stud SS would not do it for me. That would just be fixing one hole but creating another. The Sox starting pitching is pretty thin once Colon (presumably) is gone. With both Colon AND Buehrle gone, the rotation is a disaster. I supose I would listen to trade offers for Buehrle (or anybody else), but my point is that you'd be very, very unlikely to get a starting pitcher of equal value (there just aren't many under 25 starting pitchers with Buehrle's credentials out there), and I wouldn't trade him for anything other than a MLB-ready starter (again, with the possible exception of doing so if Colon re-signs).

Gumshoe
06-17-2003, 10:09 AM
ARE YOU GUYS INSANE?

You don't trade left handed starters that are twenty game winners

PERIOD.

With Garland stepping up how he has, if there is a shot in HECK to keep Colon, you've got Buehrle/Colon/Loaiza/Garland. Are you kidding me? If we still had Foulke, crap, even without hitting this year we'd be 37-31 this year ...

The guy to MOVE is Koch. Marte is much better and we just don't need a closer who walks 2 guys per appearance. You know?

PS - Paul K is about to go on a tear. You heard it here first. He had EXCELLENT at bats against a hall of fame pitcher last night.

DirtySouthsider
06-17-2003, 10:16 AM
If you trade Buehrle and Konerko you better get at least another pitcher and a center fielder or shortstop in return....not another 1st baseman. You have to be able to fill needs if you are going to make a blockbuster trade. If you get Sexson and Sheets in return I believe you are just treading water!

And for the record I don't want to trade them anyway!

Gumshoe
06-17-2003, 10:40 AM
Exactly. First of all, Konerko is probably every bit as good as Sexson, and there is no way Sheets is NEAR Buehrle.

Second, do you really want KW making any trades? Didn't think so. Just be patient, Konerko is going to return to form. Sure it may have been too late, but he is still an All Star. We've got issues, but making trades right now is not a way to solve them ... especially with how fickle White Sox fans opinions are ...

Gumshoe

Randar68
06-17-2003, 11:18 AM
:threadsucks

guillen4life13
06-17-2003, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
:threadsucks

You said it.

34 Inch Stick
06-17-2003, 12:03 PM
Finally, an appropriate response to the thread. Buhrle goes nowhere until it is absolutely assured that he will walk in 2006. Nothing in 2006 is assured in 2003.

Thunderstruck30
06-17-2003, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by SoxOnTop
Why do you even ask the question? Have you too been brainwashed by JR into believing that the only way to win is to blow up the team and ship out all of your proven comodities for unproven players. Buerhle is a tough young pitcher with 16 and 19 win seasons under his belt. Despite the last 2 months, this kid is a straight up winner and I don't know any Sox fans who think otherwise. Plus, he's not a free agent for at least 3 years!!!! You don't dump the core of your team just for the sake of change. Especially, when you have him cheap.

Exactly. The Sox should keep Buehrle and keep Loaiza. And they should try and resign Colon because he's a great starter that can go deep into the game and thats something the Sox need. A rotation of Colon, Loaiza, Buehrle, Garland, and whoever would be great for next year.

gosox41
06-17-2003, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
ARE YOU GUYS INSANE?

You don't trade left handed starters that are twenty game winners

PERIOD.

With Garland stepping up how he has, if there is a shot in HECK to keep Colon, you've got Buehrle/Colon/Loaiza/Garland. Are you kidding me? If we still had Foulke, crap, even without hitting this year we'd be 37-31 this year ...

The guy to MOVE is Koch. Marte is much better and we just don't need a closer who walks 2 guys per appearance. You know?

PS - Paul K is about to go on a tear. You heard it here first. He had EXCELLENT at bats against a hall of fame pitcher last night.

I'd love to lose Koch. Do you know of any team that has expressed interest. I can find teams that need relievers, but I can also find most of the same teams that don't want to take on an extra salary (ie St. Louis) especially one as big as Koch.

Bob

FarmerAndy
06-17-2003, 04:01 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Exactly. First of all, Konerko is probably every bit as good as Sexson

I wouldn't bank on it. Paulie did string together a few impressive years, but I think Sexton's future is much brighter.

(I'm not endorsing a trade here, I'm just sayin'.....)

fquaye149
06-17-2003, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
ARE YOU GUYS INSANE?

You don't trade left handed starters that are twenty game winners




i know this is not necessarily the whole story but:


do you trade left handed starters that are 20 game losers?

MHOUSE
06-18-2003, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by fquaye149
i know this is not necessarily the whole story but:


do you trade left handed starters that are 20 game losers?

I dunno if that's fair to say about Buehrle since we all know he wasn't at fault for most of those losses. He's going to be a Cardinal someday and we can only hang onto him for so long. Perhaps this is why his demands were so high? Maybe he doesn't want a long-term contract here.

Iguana775
06-18-2003, 07:55 AM
Originally posted by MHOUSE
I dunno if that's fair to say about Buehrle since we all know he wasn't at fault for most of those losses. He's going to be a Cardinal someday and we can only hang onto him for so long. Perhaps this is why his demands were so high? Maybe he doesn't want a long-term contract here.

It's not his fault that he threw meat for most of the season?

hold2dibber
06-18-2003, 08:25 AM
Originally posted by MHOUSE
I dunno if that's fair to say about Buehrle since we all know he wasn't at fault for most of those losses. He's going to be a Cardinal someday and we can only hang onto him for so long.

It cracks me up when people act like it is a foregone conclusion that Buehrle is going to be wearing Cardinal red in 2007. First of all, who knows how good Buehrle will be then? Who knows how much money he'll be able to demand? Who knows if the Cardinals will need a starter? Who knows if they'll have the $ to sign him? How often is a player able to dictate which team he plays for? I know the answer to the last one -- not very often, unless he's willing to pull an "Andre Dawson" and sign for WAY under market just to play for the team of his choice. Dan Plesac has wanted to play for the Sox his entire career. Hasn't done it yet.

Perhaps this is why his demands were so high? Maybe he doesn't want a long-term contract here.

Nope - from all reports that I saw, the Sox offers to Buehrle have never extended past 2006; he is going to be Sox property through 2006 regardless of whether he signs a deal or goes year-to-year. So the reason he didn't sign CAN'T be that he was unwilling to delay his "inevitable" relocation to St. Louis. The reason he didn't agree to the Sox offer was that he didn't think they offered enough.