PDA

View Full Version : ESPN 1000 Reports Buehrle's & Sox Contract Talks


Stoky44
03-07-2007, 07:12 PM
Just heard on ESPN 1000 that Buehrle and his agent are going to submit a few contract ideas to Kenny and the Sox based on 3 and 4 year deals.

itsnotrequired
03-07-2007, 07:14 PM
Just heard on ESPN 1000 that Buehrle and his agent are going to submit a few contract ideas to Kenny and the Sox based on 3 and 4 year deals.

:KW

"Haven't you been reading the papers? There is no way we will offer any extensions in the offseason. Besides, the signing of Vazquez has doomed Buehrle to the scrap heap."

:redneck

goon
03-07-2007, 07:25 PM
I just read about this on another forum... wow, if we lock up Buehrle for 3-4 years.... MONEY.

SABRSox
03-07-2007, 07:25 PM
Good to hear. I'm sure the money may be on the high side, but at least they're talking and that's encouraging.

oeo
03-07-2007, 07:25 PM
If Buehrle is re-signed (especially now), I wonder what Mr. Phil Rogers is going to have to say? I mean, isn't it pretty much a given that these guys won't be back next year?

Then on the other side, WSI will be going into an uproar because we signed "another mediocre pitcher".

FedEx227
03-07-2007, 07:27 PM
Damn that's great to hear. I love that Buehrle is doing this NOW basically he's showing me he wants to stay here, especially after KW said he wasn't going to come to him with any offers, but instead Buehrle comes at him. Good stuff.

Then on the other side, WSI will be going into an uproar because we signed "another mediocre pitcher".

Buehrle is a big deal here, I don't think you'll see as much uproar.

I'm not in too-much love with Buehrle, but I do like the idea of a Buehrle, Vazquez, Garland, Danks, Gonzalez rotation for the next couple of years. Especially if Buehrle really has come to camp in better shape this year.

Crede_Fan
03-07-2007, 07:28 PM
I'm glad to hear it. Reminds me of last year when he locked up Jon & Jose.

DaveIsHere
03-07-2007, 07:28 PM
If it happens, will be interesting to read the headlines.

oeo
03-07-2007, 07:29 PM
Buehrle is a big deal here, I don't think you'll see as much uproar.

I'm not in too-much love with Buehrle, but I do like the idea of a Buehrle, Vazquez, Garland, Danks, Gonzalez rotation for the next couple of years. Especially if Buehrle really has come to camp in better shape this year.


There are quite a few people here that think Buehrle is toast.

soxfan1983
03-07-2007, 07:29 PM
http://www.dailyherald.com/search/printstory.asp?id=288187

"Signing Vazquez might open up discussions.“We made it clear to the entire camp that if somebody brought us a proposal that made sense both in the short term and the long term, that we would engage in conversation. We would sit back and consider it,” Williams said.
“The doors were never closed. The time it will close is the time the season starts so they can focus on the job at hand, and that is to win a championship.”"


this was in my newspaper today... Buehrle's agent must've read it too haha

itsnotrequired
03-07-2007, 07:32 PM
Let's throw out the possible deals:

3yr/$48 million

4yr/$60 million

champagne030
03-07-2007, 07:33 PM
Just heard on ESPN 1000 that Buehrle and his agent are going to submit a few contract ideas to Kenny and the Sox based on 3 and 4 year deals.

I hope that wasn't a Bruce Levine report. You could flip a coin to decide if the story is true if Bruce is doing the reporting.

If it is true, there will be a shuffling of the deck at some point. We will not have JC, MB, JG and JV as our 1-4 starters in '08. That would be a minimum of $45.5M for the four and if anyone has looked at our salary structure, that's not going to happen. I would suspect JG (although I'd rather it be JC and extend JG) would be on the market next offseason if MB signs an extension. Hopefully, that'll be a problem to deal with next offseason as defending WS champs.

FedEx227
03-07-2007, 07:34 PM
I like anything with 3 years.

SABRSox
03-07-2007, 07:34 PM
There are quite a few people here that think Buehrle is toast.

I don't think he's toast, but I want to see him pitch again. I am a little concerned about his second half. Hopefully he was just worn down from 2005, but who really knows?

nodiggity59
03-07-2007, 07:35 PM
I'd say 3 years, $39mil with an option 4th year and $54 mil. That's $13mil per year for the first 3 years. That's fair for both sides, as Buerhle by and large has earned a raise over the $9.5 he's making this year.

JB98
03-07-2007, 07:36 PM
I hope that wasn't a Bruce Levine report. You could flip a coin to decide if the story is true if Bruce is doing the reporting.

If it is true, there will be a shuffling of the deck at some point. We will not have JC, MB, JG and JV as our 1-4 starters in '08. That would be a minimum of $45.5M for the four and if anyone has looked at our salary structure, that's not going to happen. I would suspect JG (although I'd rather it be JC and extend JG) would be on the market next offseason if MB signs an extension. Hopefully, that'll be a problem to deal with next offseason as defending WS champs.

Contreras isn't real tradeable because he's old, and no one is really certain just how old. I tend to agree. One of those four is in his final season as a member of the White Sox, and at this point, we know that one is likely someone other than Vazquez.

Jjav829
03-07-2007, 07:37 PM
Then on the other side, WSI will be going into an uproar because we signed "another mediocre pitcher".


Mark Buehrle - 27 years old, 204 starts, 97 wins, 66 losses, 1428 IP, 19 CG, career 2.5 K/BB ratio, 3.83 career ERA and 1.26 WHIP...all while pitching in the AL. Oh, and he's left-handed, too.

Javier Vazquez - 30 years old, 288 starts, 100 wins, 105 losses, 1845.2 IP, 20 CG, career 3.2 K/BB ratio, career 4.34 ERA and 1.27 WHIP...most of which was accumulated in the NL.

One's a mediocre pitcher. One's a front-line starter who struggled last year. I think everyone can figure out which is which, but in case anyone can't, I'll give you a hint. The front-line starter had a 3.47 ERA in the 2005 playoffs for the World Champions, including a complete game with only 1 run allowed.

nodiggity59
03-07-2007, 07:37 PM
I hope that wasn't a Bruce Levine report. You could flip a coin to decide if the story is true if Bruce is doing the reporting.

If it is true, there will be a shuffling of the deck at some point. We will not have JC, MB, JG and JV as our 1-4 starters in '08. That would be a minimum of $45.5M for the four and if anyone has looked at our salary structure, that's not going to happen. I would suspect JG (although I'd rather it be JC and extend JG) would be on the market next offseason if MB signs an extension. Hopefully, that'll be a problem to deal with next offseason as defending WS champs.

The one who goes will be the one who brings the best deal in return.

FedEx227
03-07-2007, 07:37 PM
I like something like 3 years, $36 million with no option. I highly doubt he'll be extremely effective in the fourth year of this deal. And I'd hate to be locked up into giving that much money (if it was a player option and he wanted to stay).

itsnotrequired
03-07-2007, 07:39 PM
^ Sounds slightly reasonable, I like something like 3 years, $36 million with no option. I highly doubt he'll be extremely effective in the fourth year of this deal.

I just can't see Buehrle inking a deal like this. He's worth so much more on the open market. $12 million for 3 with no option would be one hell of a hometown discount.

oeo
03-07-2007, 07:39 PM
Mark Buehrle - 27 years old, 204 starts, 97 wins, 66 losses, 1428 IP, 19 CG, career 2.5 K/BB ratio, 3.83 career ERA and 1.26 WHIP...all while pitching in the AL. Oh, and he's left-handed, too.

Javier Vazquez - 30 years old, 288 starts, 100 wins, 105 losses, 1845.2 IP, 20 CG, career 3.2 K/BB ratio, career 4.34 ERA and 1.27 WHIP...most of which was accumulated in the NL.

One's a mediocre pitcher. One's a front-line starter who struggled last year. I think everyone can figure out which is which, but in case anyone can't, I'll give you a hint. The front-line starter had a 3.47 ERA in the 2005 playoffs for the World Champions, including a complete game with only 1 run allowed.

I explained my point a few posts down. A lot of people around here do not think Buehrle has anything left. I know he's not a mediocre pitcher, I'm one of his biggest fans and foresee a huge year from him this year. It really had nothing to do with Vazquez, more so the crap Buehrle has gotten this offseason.

SABRSox
03-07-2007, 07:39 PM
^ Sounds slightly reasonable, I like something like 3 years, $36 million with no option. I highly doubt he'll be extremely effective in the fourth year of this deal.

He won't sign for that low. 3 years, and something between 40 and 45 million. Personally, if they offer a 4 year deal between 55-60 million, I'd take that if I were the White Sox. That's a nice sum, but it's not an untradeable one, and that's going to be below market value for Buehrle.

Jjav829
03-07-2007, 07:40 PM
There are quite a few people here that think Buehrle is toast.

I'd love to know why anyone thinks that, other than because he struggled last year. We're talking about a 27-year-old who has never relied on his stuff, but rather his ability to pitch.

FedEx227
03-07-2007, 07:40 PM
Can't I hope :(

Yeah realistically as an above-average lefty starter he will yield 3 years/40-45 million.

Jjav829
03-07-2007, 07:41 PM
I explained my point a few posts down. A lot of people around here do not think Buehrle has anything left. I know he's not a mediocre pitcher, I'm one of his biggest fans and foresee a huge year from him this year.

Oh I get that your a Buehrle supporter. I just felt like making the point and used your post as a reason to make my post. :smile:

SABRSox
03-07-2007, 07:42 PM
I'd love to know why anyone thinks that, other than because he struggled last year. We're talking about a 27-year-old who has never relied on his stuff, but rather his ability to pitch.

You know what worries me just a bit, all the innings he's pitched. All pitchers break down and get injured at some point, and he's well overdue. There's just something about that second half that doesn't sit well. I'm hoping he bounces back and finally gets 20 wins this year, but I'm going to temper my expectations until I see him pitch in the regular season.

oeo
03-07-2007, 07:42 PM
I'd love to know why anyone thinks that, other than because he struggled last year. We're talking about a 27-year-old who has never relied on his stuff, but rather his ability to pitch.

Same here. :dunno:

Ask the people that think he's done, not me.

Okay, we're cool, so scratch this post. :D:

RedHeadPaleHoser
03-07-2007, 07:49 PM
I think Buehrle realizes that all the BS that went on in the offseason was no doing of his, or KW's.

If Mark inks a deal for the Sox prior to the season, I could see it will be incentive laden if he reaches his form ala 2005. Regardless, I think it's very promising that he and his agent have decided to re-invest time into this.

Jjav829
03-07-2007, 07:52 PM
You know what worries me just a bit, all the innings he's pitched. All pitchers break down and get injured at some point, and he's well overdue. There's just something about that second half that doesn't sit well. I'm hoping he bounces back and finally gets 20 wins this year, but I'm going to temper my expectations until I see him pitch in the regular season.

It's a valid concern, but I don't think that's reason to think that Buehrle is done being a high quality starting pitcher. I think last season was a result of all the innings Buehrle has thrown finally catching up.

While I've disliked the Braves comparisons, I do think there's a valid one here involving Buehrle. You look at a guy like Tom Glavine. He had a similar stretch during his mid-20's where he was throwing a ton of innings. From 1990 to 1993, Glavine's IP totals were 214, 246, 225 and 239. During that time Glavine had three 20 win seasons, two sub-3 ERA seasons and one season slightly above 3. Then in 94, the innings pitched kind of caught up to him. He made only 25 starts and threw only 165 innings (due to the strike), but had a 3.97 ERA. Obviously Buehrle's numbers aren't as good as Glavine's, but it was a similar type situation where the high innings early in his career kind of caught up to him (of course, who knows if Glavine's role in the negotiatons between the players and union weighed on him mentally). But Glavine bounced back and went on to have 4 more seasons with ERAs under 3 or just slightly over 3. I fully expect Buehrle to have the same kind of bounce-back this season.

Hitmen77
03-07-2007, 07:56 PM
If Buehrle is re-signed (especially now), I wonder what Mr. Phil Rogers is going to have to say? I mean, isn't it pretty much a given that these guys won't be back next year?

Then on the other side, WSI will be going into an uproar because we signed "another mediocre pitcher".


Yep, the dark clouds will always find something to complain about.

goon
03-07-2007, 07:57 PM
Contreras isn't real tradeable because he's old, and no one is really certain just how old. I tend to agree. One of those four is in his final season as a member of the White Sox, and at this point, we know that one is likely someone other than Vazquez.


Garland. I think all of the stories and rumors about Garland the past offseason had a lot of truth to them. With all of the young talent the sox have acquired, Kenny probably has faith that someone will step up into that role as early as next year.

soxfanatlanta
03-07-2007, 07:58 PM
It's a valid concern, but I don't think that's reason to think that Buehrle is done being a high quality starting pitcher. I think last season was a result of all the innings Buehrle has thrown finally catching up.

While I've disliked the Braves comparisons, I do think there's a valid one here involving Buehrle. You look at a guy like Tom Glavine. He had a similar stretch during his mid-20's where he was throwing a ton of innings. From 1990 to 1993, Glavine's IP totals were 214, 246, 225 and 239. During that time Glavine had three 20 win seasons, two sub-3 ERA seasons and one season slightly above 3. Then in 94, the innings pitched kind of caught up to him. He made only 25 starts and threw only 165 innings (due to the strike), but had a 3.97 ERA. Obviously Buehrle's numbers aren't as good as Glavine's, but it was a similar type situation where the high innings early in his career kind of caught up to him (of course, who knows if Glavine's role in the negotiatons between the players and union weighed on him mentally). But Glavine bounced back and went on to have 4 more season with ERAs under 3 or just slightly over 3. I fully expect Buehrle to have the same kind of bounce-back this season.

That is an excellent point. Although MB is not a Glavine, he is definitely worth keeping around for a while. I for one am keeping my fingers crossed.

Hitmen77
03-07-2007, 08:03 PM
I like something like 3 years, $36 million with no option. I highly doubt he'll be extremely effective in the fourth year of this deal. And I'd hate to be locked up into giving that much money (if it was a player option and he wanted to stay).

Isn't that essentially what Buehrle already turned down last year? :dunno:

...unless you are talking about 3 years after 2007, which in a sense gives him a 4 year contract. That is what was done for Contreras and Vazquez. Even so, I'm thinking it'll take more than $12 million/yr to lock him up.

veeter
03-07-2007, 08:05 PM
Garland. I think all of the stories and rumors about Garland the past offseason had a lot of truth to them. With all of the young talent the sox have acquired, Kenny probably has faith that someone will step up into that role as early as next year.What role is that? The team leader in wins the last two seasons? Garland isn't some run-of-the-mill 4th starter. He may end up being their best pitcher again this year. Moving Garland would be a huge mistake.

FedEx227
03-07-2007, 08:06 PM
Isn't that essentially what Buehrle already turned down last year? :dunno:

...unless you are talking about 3 years after 2007, which in a sense gives him a 4 year contract. That is what was done for Contreras and Vazquez. Even so, I'm thinking it'll take more than $12 million/yr to lock him up.

Yeah, I was dreaming, basically. I forgot that that is basically what we offered him before, and that the market is inflated right now, and that he's a lefty, and that he's 27 year old....haha.

What role is that? The team leader in wins the last two seasons? Garland isn't some run-of-the-mill 4th starter. He may end up being their best pitcher again this year. Moving Garland would be a huge mistake.

Agreed. Personally, he's the last guy we move. To me, it wouldn't be about getting the best talent back as it would be about riding ourselves of a contract. A Garland deal would only come if we were in dire need of offensive players, which I don't think we will be for another 2-3 years.

veeter
03-07-2007, 08:13 PM
My point is Contreras had a horrible second half last year too. Vasquez drove us all nuts, and probably will the next four years. Garland has quietly become the pitcher he was supposed to be, and Kenny and many others want to trade him. I don't get it. He has a rubber arm and doesn't bitch. Even when Ozzie wore him out in the dugout last year, for not beaning that guy. The rotation should be built around HIM and Mark. JC and or Vasquez should be the guys possibly out the door.

tebman
03-07-2007, 08:14 PM
Just heard on ESPN 1000 that Buehrle and his agent are going to submit a few contract ideas to Kenny and the Sox based on 3 and 4 year deals.

In the other thread about Vazquez's contract, I said that I thought KW and MB would be talking. Obviously, Kenny's reading my posts. :tongue:

But this just makes so much sense. We've talked before about the parallels to the Braves: pitching, pitching, and more pitching. Clearly it works, and Williams knows it. He also knows that professional athletes want to hang around teams that take long-term success seriously, and I think Buehrle is the kind of guy who's attracted to that kind of thinking. Konerko said that one of the big reasons he re-signed with the Sox was because KW got Thome. Would Buehrle have wanted to talk if Vazquez and Garland weren't locked up and if the bullpen hadn't improved? I don't know, but I've got to think that it helped.

He still might walk. But the Sox' odds of hanging on to him look better to me.

oeo
03-07-2007, 08:18 PM
My point is Contreras had a horrible second half last year too. Vasquez drove us all nuts, and probably will the next four years. Garland has quietly become the pitcher he was supposed to be, and Kenny and many others want to trade him. I don't get it. He has a rubber arm and doesn't bitch. Even when Ozzie wore him out in the dugout last year, for not beaning that guy. The rotation should be built around HIM and Mark. JC and or Vasquez should be the guys possibly out the door.

Garland had just as bad, if not worse, of a first half compared to Contreras' second half, and Contreras was having injury problems.

If Buehrle does re-sign, I think Garland is on his way out.

oeo
03-07-2007, 08:20 PM
Whitesox.com says that a contract will probably not get done by Opening Day.

But by reading between the lines of the comments made over the past two days from both Buehrle's agent and White Sox general manager Ken Williams, nobody appears ready to walk through those open doors during the next three weeks leading to the end of Spring Training.http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070307&content_id=1832910&vkey=spt2007news&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

Vernam
03-07-2007, 08:26 PM
While I've disliked the Braves comparisons, I do think there's a valid one here involving Buehrle. You look at a guy like Tom Glavine . . .Yes, not that our big four have earned comparison to Atlanta's in the 90s, but these salary trends are messing up the Sox' goal of sustaining a rotation the way Atlanta did. When I look at Buehrle, it's actually Maddux I think about. Not because they're similar pitchers, but because it would hurt like hell if we let him go and he then has a long, HoF run like Maddux did for the Braves. That isn't a good reason to overpay, I guess, because it's similar to making the decision based on sentiment. But at least it's paying a guy for what you expect he can do instead of what he's already done.

All the people itching for KW to budge, I hope they won't crucify him if he does and then MB reverts to late-2006 form. But I know a lot of 'em will. :cool:

Vernam

dwalteroo
03-07-2007, 08:27 PM
If Buehrle does re-sign, I think Garland is on his way out.

I have to say, I hope you are wrong.

veeter
03-07-2007, 08:37 PM
Garland had just as bad, if not worse, of a first half compared to Contreras' second half, and Contreras was having injury problems.

If Buehrle does re-sign, I think Garland is on his way out.This is untrue. I'll check the numbers but Jose was non-existent in the second half. At the worst point of Jon's season he was 4-3, with a high era. Contreras was way under .500 after the break. And actually you defeated your own arguement by pointing out that JC has injury problems. Why should we keep that around, as opposed to a MUCH younger, durable guy who makes the same money?

itsnotrequired
03-07-2007, 08:39 PM
This is untrue. I'll check the numbers but Jose was non-existent in the second half. At the worst point of Jon's season he was 4-3, with a high era. Contreras was way under .500 after the break. And actually you defeated your own arguement by pointing out that JC has injury problems. Why should we keep that around, as opposed to a MUCH younger, durable guy who makes the same money?

I agree that the Sox should try to keep Garland but he will be the pitcher that other teams want. They aren't going to offer up hot bats and top-flight prospects for Contreras but I'm guessing they will for Garland.

veeter
03-07-2007, 08:43 PM
I agree that the Sox should try to keep Garland but he will be the pitcher that other teams want. They aren't going to offer up hot bats and top-flight prospects for Contreras but I'm guessing they will for Garland.That's where acquiring all these stud prospects comes in. Why should the proven commodity be sacrificed?

Brian26
03-07-2007, 08:47 PM
I hope that wasn't a Bruce Levine report. You could flip a coin to decide if the story is true if Bruce is doing the reporting.

Although it seems fashionable to be derogatory towards Levine, he is still the most credible baseball reporter in the city. He's broken more stories than anybody in town in the past 25 years, so give him the benefit of the doubt. He's got connections, and I believe him in this case.

Brian26
03-07-2007, 08:48 PM
One's a mediocre pitcher. One's a front-line starter who struggled last year. I think everyone can figure out which is which, but in case anyone can't, I'll give you a hint. The front-line starter had a 3.47 ERA in the 2005 playoffs for the World Champions, including a complete game with only 1 run allowed.

The front line starter even had a save too.

veeter
03-07-2007, 08:49 PM
I'll shut up after this post, but why, after this tremendous news, does the discussion lead to something negative. "YEAH!! Contract talks with Mark may start!" "You know, this means Garland's out the door, don't you.?" Maybe the Sox will keep them all! Anyway, Garland is in the books through 2008, so we'll cross that bridge then.

oeo
03-07-2007, 08:55 PM
This is untrue. I'll check the numbers but Jose was non-existent in the second half. At the worst point of Jon's season he was 4-3, with a high era. Contreras was way under .500 after the break. And actually you defeated your own argument by pointing out that JC has injury problems. Why should we keep that around, as opposed to a MUCH younger, durable guy who makes the same money?

Is it?
Jose after the break...
5.40 ERA, 4 wins, 9 losses, 87.2 IP, 52 ER, 10 HR, 23 BB, .279 AVG.

Jon before the break...
5.37 ERA, 8 wins, 3 losses, 109 IP, 65 ER, 19 HR, 25 BB, .297 AVG.

Jon pitched more innings, but was pretty damn bad. He won 8 games, which were likely the result of great run support. Now, Contreras didn't throw as many innings, but I think the AVG against him pretty much tells you what kind of half he had.

And I never once had an argument for Contreras. I was just pointing out the fact that Garland had a pretty bad half of year himself. Regardless, though, healthy Contreras is a much better pitcher than Garland.

Dan Mega
03-07-2007, 08:56 PM
Tomorrow will be this:

Pressure From World's Best Newspaper (The Tribune, that's us) Forces Cheapskate Williams Into Contract Talks
We Take ALL The Credit

If Mark Signs an Extension:

Mark Who? Did Sox Overpay?
He's No Jason Marquis, Sources Say

veeter
03-07-2007, 08:58 PM
Is it?
Jose after the break...
5.40 ERA, 4 wins, 9 losses, 87.2 IP, 52 ER, 10 HR, 23 BB, .279 AVG.

Jon before the break...
5.37 ERA, 8 wins, 3 losses, 109 IP, 65 ER, 19 HR, 25 BB, .297 AVG.

Jon pitched more innings, but was pretty damn bad. He won 8 games, which were likely the result of great run support.

And I never once had an argument for Contreras. I was just pointing out the fact that Garland had a pretty bad half of year himself.When Garland was 4-3, his era was in the 7's. So ending up 8-3 and dropping it down to 5.37 is very good. He then went on to win 9 of his next 10 decisions. Jon pitched his ass off last year.

kobo
03-07-2007, 08:58 PM
Garland had just as bad, if not worse, of a first half compared to Contreras' second half, and Contreras was having injury problems.


Actually, no. The first 6 weeks of the season Garland was bad, his ERA after the first 2 games was over 13 I think. He had a start on the 12th of May against the Twins where he got pounded (11 hits 2HR, 7 runs 7 ER in 5 1/3), his record fell to 2-2 and his ERA was 6.75. After that he went 16-5 and lowered his ERA to 4.51.

veeter
03-07-2007, 09:01 PM
Actually, no. The first 6 weeks of the season Garland was bad, his ERA after the first 2 games was over 13 I think. He had a start on the 12th of May against the Twins where he got pounded (11 hits 2HR, 7 runs 7 ER in 5 1/3), his record fell to 2-2 and his ERA was 6.75. After that he went 16-5 and lowered his ERA to 4.51.I also remember him pitching through an arm problem early on. He said he couldn't fully get loose. Once his arm felt better, off he went.

Brian26
03-07-2007, 09:02 PM
Is it?
Jose after the break...
5.40 ERA, 4 wins, 9 losses, 87.2 IP, 52 ER, 10 HR, 23 BB, .279 AVG.

Jon before the break...
5.37 ERA, 8 wins, 3 losses, 109 IP, 65 ER, 19 HR, 25 BB, .297 AVG.

Jon pitched more innings, but was pretty damn bad. He won 8 games, which were likely the result of great run support. Now, Contreras didn't throw as many innings, but I think the AVG against him pretty much tells you what kind of half he had.

And I never once had an argument for Contreras. I was just pointing out the fact that Garland had a pretty bad half of year himself. Regardless, though, healthy Contreras is a much better pitcher than Garland.

When Garland was 4-3, his era was in the 7's. So ending up 8-3 and dropping it down to 5.37 is very good. He then went on to win 9 of his next 10 decisions. Jon pitched his ass off last year.

Actually, no. The first 6 weeks of the season Garland was bad, his ERA after the first 2 games was over 13 I think. He had a start on the 12th of May against the Twins where he got pounded (11 hits 2HR, 7 runs 7 ER in 5 1/3), his record fell to 2-2 and his ERA was 6.75. After that he went 16-5 and lowered his ERA to 4.51.

Sometimes I read threads like this and imagine this is what an arbitration hearing is like behind closed doors.

esbrechtel
03-07-2007, 09:03 PM
http://www.dailyherald.com/search/printstory.asp?id=288187

"Signing Vazquez might open up discussions.“We made it clear to the entire camp that if somebody brought us a proposal that made sense both in the short term and the long term, that we would engage in conversation. We would sit back and consider it,” Williams said.
“The doors were never closed. The time it will close is the time the season starts so they can focus on the job at hand, and that is to win a championship.”"


I saw Crede on comcast sports nite saying that he would love to stay in Chicago but he wasn't going to be the one approaching Kenny with the deal because he (Crede) isn't the one with the money...if Kenny wants him around he would offer him a deal...in other words Joe is gone :whiner:

Flight #24
03-07-2007, 09:04 PM
FWIW, if they resign Buehrle, it's great news no way around it. Because that means that if for some reason the kids they've accumulated are a general flop or don't appear able to fill more than a #5 slot (I don't think it's likely, but it's a possibility with any pitching prospect) - they can hold onto all 4 guys for '08.

On the other hand, if one or more of the guys are looking good, then you can afford to shop Garland/Jose or even Javy/Mark.

I like having multiple options, all of which are good, rather than being in position to have to have rookies pan out.

JB98
03-07-2007, 09:05 PM
I saw Crede on comcast sports nite saying that he would love to stay in Chicago but he wasn't going to be the one approaching Kenny with the deal because he (Crede) isn't the one with the money...if Kenny wants him around he would offer him a deal...in other words Joe is gone :whiner:

Huh? The Sox have control over Crede for two more seasons. Honestly, Joe's status isn't worth worrying about at this time.

veeter
03-07-2007, 09:05 PM
Sometimes I read threads like this and imagine this is what an arbitration hearing is like behind closed doors.I'm sure it's exactly the same. Except I'm not wearing a $1000.00 suit.

tebman
03-07-2007, 09:06 PM
FWIW, if they resign Buehrle, it's great news no way around it. Because that means that if for some reason the kids they've accumulated are a general flop or don't appear able to fill more than a #5 slot (I don't think it's likely, but it's a possibility with any pitching prospect) - they can hold onto all 4 guys for '08.

On the other hand, if one or more of the guys are looking good, then you can afford to shop Garland/Jose or even Javy/Mark.

I like having multiple options, all of which are good, rather than being in position to have to have rookies pan out.
:yup: :thumbsup:

JB98
03-07-2007, 09:06 PM
What role is that? The team leader in wins the last two seasons? Garland isn't some run-of-the-mill 4th starter. He may end up being their best pitcher again this year. Moving Garland would be a huge mistake.

I agree. I'm a huge Garland supporter. Unfortunately, the writing may be on the wall for Jon given the organization's feelings about Vazquez.

Daver
03-07-2007, 09:07 PM
Huh? The Sox have control over Crede for two more seasons. Honestly, Joe's status isn't worth worrying about at this time.

No they don't.

delben91
03-07-2007, 09:11 PM
No they don't.

I thought they had control over Crede next season too. Maybe I'm misunderstanding JB, but 2007 and 2008 would be 2 seasons.

JB98
03-07-2007, 09:13 PM
I thought they had control over Crede next season too. Maybe I'm misunderstanding JB, but 2007 and 2008 would be 2 seasons.

My understanding is he's arbitration-eligible after 2007, and 2008 would be his walk year.

2007 and 2008 equals two seasons, right?

chisoxmike
03-07-2007, 09:13 PM
Total turn of events. If the offers are fair, I hope Kenny takes it. Buehrle needs to stay.

delben91
03-07-2007, 09:15 PM
My understanding is he's arbitration-eligible after 2007, and 2008 would be his walk year.

2007 and 2008 equals two seasons, right?

I concur. :cool: If you could draw up a graph to better illustrate the point though, I'd be most appreciative.

JermaineDye05
03-07-2007, 09:15 PM
I saw Crede on comcast sports nite saying that he would love to stay in Chicago but he wasn't going to be the one approaching Kenny with the deal because he (Crede) isn't the one with the money...if Kenny wants him around he would offer him a deal...in other words Joe is gone :whiner:

I saw that interview as well and heard Joe say that. I also believe he said that he'll have his agent, satan, do all the contract talks so he can approach Kenny with the deal.

JB98
03-07-2007, 09:17 PM
I concur. :cool: If you could draw up a graph to better illustrate the point though, I'd be most appreciative.

I'll do that as soon as I finish drawing my graph about how good the Twins are going to be this year. :D:

goon
03-07-2007, 09:20 PM
What role is that? The team leader in wins the last two seasons? Garland isn't some run-of-the-mill 4th starter. He may end up being their best pitcher again this year. Moving Garland would be a huge mistake.


Don't be surprised if it happens after the season, but no way this season if we want to contend. I like Jon a lot, I like all our pitchers and recognize the fact that he has like 36 wins in the past two seasons. Yet between Gio, Haegar, Danks, Floyd, Sisco, Massett and Broadway someone will fill a spot in the rotation or two in the rotation.

If the Sox just signed Vazquez, have Contreras for the next two seasons, and possibly re-sign Buehrle, that leaves Jon, a Right-handed, sinkerball pitcher. There has been interest in Garland from many clubs who would be willing to give up high prospects and other worthy players.

veeter
03-07-2007, 09:22 PM
What's interesting is, lately noone has left the Sox when given the chance. Pauly stayed, when it looked suspect. Garland and Jose re-signed. Now MB is coming around. It's as if these guys fear leaving this good situation or something. The grass can't be greener, when you have the greenest grass already. That's not a Roger Bossard plug either.

veeter
03-07-2007, 09:24 PM
Don't be surprised if it happens after the season, but no way this season if we want to contend. I like Jon a lot, I like all our pitchers and recognize the fact that he has like 36 wins in the past two seasons. Yet between Gio, Haegar, Danks, Floyd, Sisco, Massett and Broadway someone will fill a spot in the rotation or two in the rotation.

If the Sox just signed Vazquez, have Contreras for the next two seasons, and possibly re-sign Buehrle, that leaves Jon, a Right-handed, sinkerball pitcher. There has been interest in Garland from many clubs who would be willing to give up high prospects and other worthy players.What does him being a right handed sinker baller have to do with?

GoSox2K3
03-07-2007, 09:34 PM
No they don't.

No they don't what? I'm pretty certain there are 2 more seasons to play before Joe is a free agent.

.....back on topic, I suspect this ESPN report about MB contract talks is much ado about nothing. I'm not going to get my hopes up until I hear something more specific.

CLR01
03-07-2007, 09:38 PM
I wonder if they will be submitted on a Cardinals letterhead. That would be hysterical.


http://whitesoxinteractive.com/chisox716/cards1.jpg

goon
03-07-2007, 09:43 PM
What does him being a right handed sinker baller have to do with?

We already have another sinkerball pitcher in Masset, doesn't seem like a very reliable pitch and Jon almost always needs it. I'm not saying I want him traded, it's just that he has the highest value and despite the fact he has a ring and has won a ****load of games the past two seasons, he ALWAYS gets good run support and his ERA is never great.

-Jose trade value isn't high and probably won't significantly increase even with a good season. Plus, he still has Ace quality pitches and is a horse.
-Mark is left-handed, reliable, doesn't *usually* give up a ton of runs, sucks up a lot of innings too.
-Vazquez is a guy the Sox seem to look at like Contreras. Dominate pitches, just needs to get his head, mechanics straight.

Those are the reasons those guys aren't going anywhere. That combined with Jon's high trade value, he will likely be the first pitcher to go, if anyone goes.

SouthSide_HitMen
03-07-2007, 09:45 PM
3 Years $43.5 million with a $15 million club 4th year option and $5 million buyout.

Kenny Williams is the best General Manager in the world (in any business) and will get this done. Perhaps he'll be able to sign Iguchi and maybe Dye will give us some type of "hometeam" discount to play for the greatest team in MLB. Dye and Iguchi turn 34 in 2008 so I think we can get something done for a reasonable amount and contract length.

Time will tell. Getter' done Kenny.

itsnotrequired
03-07-2007, 09:47 PM
I wonder if they will be submitted on a Cardinals letterhead. That would be hysterical.

http://whitesoxinteractive.com/chisox716/cards1.jpg

See, now this is funny.

TomBradley72
03-07-2007, 09:56 PM
I wonder if they will be submitted on a Cardinals letterhead. That would be hysterical.

http://whitesoxinteractive.com/chisox716/cards1.jpg

Evil.:cool:

Navarro's Talent
03-07-2007, 10:03 PM
Well, here's hoping that KW can work his magic. I want Buehrle to stay, especially considering that I think he'll return to form this season. Plus, he consistantly throws over 200 innings per year and stays healthy. If the Sox can get some sort of hometown discount, make the deal Kenny!

ChiSoxGirl
03-07-2007, 10:04 PM
I think that Buehrls trying to get this taken care of now shows that he's not only committed to wanting to stay on the South Side, but will definitely take the "Hometown Discount" that we've already seen Konerko, Dye, and a couple others take. If he sticks around, the majority of our rotation will be solidified for the next few years! http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c55/ZoSoKarl/banana-1.gif C'mon Buehrls... re-sign! http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c55/ZoSoKarl/praying.gif

pearso66
03-07-2007, 10:19 PM
As soon as I heard this the other day, My initial thoughts were, the 2 proposals he is submitting are 3 years 42 mil, and 4 years 52 million. So if they want him for the shorter term, its $14 mil a year, and if they give him the extra year of security, it's $13 mil a year. If I were the Sox, I'd jump at the 3 year deal, and if he continues to pitch like he's capable of, try to extend him near the end of that deal.

SluggersAway
03-07-2007, 10:23 PM
Kenny Williams is the best General Manager in the world (in any business)...

Now, that is funny and the height of hyperbole if only i didn't think it was meant literally.

EMachine10
03-07-2007, 10:32 PM
I thought Reinsdorf didn't endorse pitchers' contracts longer than 3 years...

IlliniSox4Life
03-07-2007, 10:37 PM
I wonder if they will be submitted on a Cardinals letterhead. That would be hysterical.


http://whitesoxinteractive.com/chisox716/cards1.jpg

That has got to be the funniest thing I've seen in my time here.

gobears1987
03-07-2007, 10:44 PM
I would love it if Buehrle stays on this team his entire career. He said recently he has decided he wouldn't want to play for the Cards because he heard of players having bad experiences playing for their hometown team.

gobears1987
03-07-2007, 10:45 PM
I thought Reinsdorf didn't endorse pitchers' contracts longer than 3 years...He is willing to make exceptions for someone like Mark who has shown he can stay healthy.

CLR01
03-07-2007, 10:49 PM
He is willing to make exceptions for someone like Mark who has shown he can stay healthy.

He told you this? The past certainly proves otherwise.

Hendu
03-07-2007, 10:50 PM
I like anything with 3 years.

With a team option for year 4. I hope this happens.

102605
03-07-2007, 10:53 PM
Oh man!


:praying:



Please make that jersey I have not a memory of the past! :D:

thomas35forever
03-07-2007, 10:59 PM
Nice. It'd be good to have more pressure taken off us this year. Plus, I wouldn't have to find a new favorite player on the Sox.

I actually drafted Contreras over him in my fantasy draft because I don't know what to expect of him this year.

SouthSide_HitMen
03-07-2007, 11:09 PM
Now, that is funny and the height of hyperbole if only i didn't think it was meant literally.

Food for thought:

Kenny Williams can land a roundhouse kick to your head from Tuscon, AZ. You are within his 3,000 mile range. :cool:

Hitmen77
03-07-2007, 11:29 PM
Just heard on ESPN 1000 that Buehrle and his agent are going to submit a few contract ideas to Kenny and the Sox based on 3 and 4 year deals.

I really would like to see MB stay with the Sox, but this report really doesn't tell me anything new. So Mark's agent is rumored by Levine to submit some proposals to the Sox - even if this is true, there's no indication that the 2 sides are even close to an agreement.

SluggersAway
03-07-2007, 11:33 PM
Food for thought:

Kenny Williams can land a roundhouse kick to your head from Tuscon, AZ. You are within his 3,000 mile range. :cool:

I think you got Kenny and Chuck Norris confused. :tongue:

WhiteSox5187
03-07-2007, 11:42 PM
I really would like to see MB stay with the Sox, but this report really doesn't tell me anything new. So Mark's agent is rumored by Levine to submit some proposals to the Sox - even if this is true, there's no indication that the 2 sides are even close to an agreement.
When I first read the title of this thread, I nearly jumped for joy but I keep reminding myself that "They're just submitting proposals!" over and over again. I really really hope that good news is just around the corner. But I'm trying to temper my emotions in case of bad news too.

veeter
03-08-2007, 06:14 AM
We already have another sinkerball pitcher in Masset, doesn't seem like a very reliable pitch and Jon almost always needs it. I'm not saying I want him traded, it's just that he has the highest value and despite the fact he has a ring and has won a ****load of games the past two seasons, he ALWAYS gets good run support and his ERA is never great.

-Jose trade value isn't high and probably won't significantly increase even with a good season. Plus, he still has Ace quality pitches and is a horse.
-Mark is left-handed, reliable, doesn't *usually* give up a ton of runs, sucks up a lot of innings too.
-Vazquez is a guy the Sox seem to look at like Contreras. Dominate pitches, just needs to get his head, mechanics straight.

Those are the reasons those guys aren't going anywhere. That combined with Jon's high trade value, he will likely be the first pitcher to go, if anyone goes.This is what cracks me up. You say Garland has the highest trade value of all the pitchers. Then you go on to say all that's bad about Jon, and all that's great about the rest. And when Nick Masset wins even one game in the majors, then you can maybe start to use his name in the same sentence as Jon Garland. And why isn't his sinker a reliable pitch? And if it isn't reliable, why does he always need it? Your statements make no sense at all.

Thome25
03-08-2007, 06:59 AM
How true is the report?? The media could be saying one thing and in reality it could be the total opposite.

I REALLY hope Buehrle signs an extension preferably for 4 years. If the White Sox are going to make an exception on their "3-year deal rule" then they should do it for Buehrle.

Buehrle is a home-grown talent who is a great clubhouse guy and a fan favorite. Not to mention the fact that he's still pretty young and coming into his prime.

Even still, I'm not optimistic that he'll sign. I'm not sold that this media report is true and if it is, who's to say the proposals by Buehrle's agent will even be in Kenny's ballpark money wise?

Goose
03-08-2007, 09:11 AM
Did not see this posted in this thread...

I am not so sure that the Sox and MB are actually talking, and if they are, they seem to be pretty far apart based on this ST article...

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/288643,CST-SPT-sox08.article

soxinem1
03-08-2007, 09:27 AM
It seems to me that the only time extensions have been signed recently is when the team announced them, ie, no media source broke the rumor days ahead of time that the two sides were even negotiating.

I also remember when the rumors of the Sox signing Magglio to an extension back in 2004 that never went anywhere, so I will contain any thoughts until/if it actually happens.

champagne030
03-08-2007, 09:33 AM
When Garland was 4-3, his era was in the 7's. So ending up 8-3 and dropping it down to 5.37 is very good. He then went on to win 9 of his next 10 decisions. Jon pitched his ass off last year.

Not to mention his ERA would have been 4.78 before the break if Pablo could at least catch a cold in LF. He personally allowed 7ER to be credited to Jon's line on 4/7/06 in KC.

tstrike2000
03-08-2007, 09:51 AM
My concern was that Buehrle would not tender any offers until becoming a free agent because he wants to cash in in the free agent market. Which is understandable given the amount of money thrown to starting pitchers recently. This especially being the case if he has a very good '07. My other concern is he would want a 5 year deal which the Sox don't typically do and/or he might want a change of scenery whether it be the Cardinals or someone else.

Will Buehrle regain his form? I say hell yeah. He's pitched a couple of bad halves of baseball over the last 6 years, but what really good pitcher hasn't over the course of their careers? Left handed starting pitchers, especially of Buehrle's caliber are at such a premium, this is very promising to hear, if it's true. If the Sox give a solid offer of 4 or maybe even 5 years, I think a deal here can get done and put this one to rest.

tick53
03-08-2007, 10:13 AM
Three or four year deals (especially three) would be right up their alley. You know how the Chairman feels about 5 years or more situations. I hope they reach some agreement.

esbrechtel
03-08-2007, 10:45 AM
I wonder if they will be submitted on a Cardinals letterhead. That would be hysterical.


http://whitesoxinteractive.com/chisox716/cards1.jpg
post of the week....:worship:CLR01

Dan Mega
03-08-2007, 11:01 AM
Did not see this posted in this thread...

I am not so sure that the Sox and MB are actually talking, and if they are, they seem to be pretty far apart based on this ST article...

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/288643,CST-SPT-sox08.article (http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/288643,CST-SPT-sox08.article)

Considering how the ST and Trib have been fabricating stories regarding MB and his contract status all offseason, I would take whatever they say with a grain of salt.

I'm willing to be that KW and Mark's agents may be trying hard to hammer something out before the season starts and have almost just completely shut the door in front of the Chicago media.

goon
03-08-2007, 11:03 AM
This is what cracks me up. You say Garland has the highest trade value of all the pitchers. Then you go on to say all that's bad about Jon, and all that's great about the rest. And when Nick Masset wins even one game in the majors, then you can maybe start to use his name in the same sentence as Jon Garland. And why isn't his sinker a reliable pitch? And if it isn't reliable, why does he always need it? Your statements make no sense at all.

what are you getting so defensive about? are you refusing to comprehend the facts in front of you?

-Jose won't get traded because his trade value is too low (age).
-Mark won't get traded because he's a solid, reliable, LEFT-ARM in the rotation, not to mention gives up less runs than Jon.
-Vazquez is a guy the organization looks at like an ace... and they now have him in a "cheap" contract for four years.

Jon has a low 90's fastball and when he doesn't have his sinker working (which does happen) or throw his 4-seam inside, he gets rocked. End of story. This isn't a fluke thing like Mark's '07 season, it happens every year. Jon has a ton of wins, but only TWICE in seven seasons has he had his ERA in the 3's. Kenny realizes that organizations like Jon because he pitches a lot of innings and has a lot of wins, his trade value is high, probably why he almost got traded to the Astros this offseason. I think Kenny is looking to benefit off of a pitcher that may look better than he is because he's racked up a lot of wins over the past two seasons.

I've defended Garland plenty of times on this site, so don't think I'm ripping on your favorite player of whatever he is to you. I'm looking at the big picture and why Jon looks to be the odd man out. Can you prove otherwise? Beyond saying , "Garland isn't a run-of-the mill 4th starter"... That means NOTHING to me.

Don't start throwing accusations out that my post doesn't make any sense because you are sensitive to Jon being traded. I don't want to see anyone get traded, but if someone is going, it will be Jon.

Lip Man 1
03-08-2007, 11:49 AM
For what it's worth.

I spoke with one of the beat writers covering the team last night and he got back with me this morning.

He said he has no idea where Bruce Levine got this information but that he personally spoke with Mark's agent and as of right now they have no intentions of presenting any proposals to Kenny or the White Sox.

Lip

GoSox2K3
03-08-2007, 12:04 PM
Although it seems fashionable to be derogatory towards Levine, he is still the most credible baseball reporter in the city. He's broken more stories than anybody in town in the past 25 years, so give him the benefit of the doubt. He's got connections, and I believe him in this case.

:bs:

Unless you meant that to be teal, I have no idea what you are basing your statement on. When has Levine been right about a Sox rumor.

....and don't tell me he was right about some trade in 2004 because that was 3 years ago and since then he's been throwing out nothing but rumors that almost always turn out to be totally baseless.

WhiteSox5187
03-08-2007, 12:09 PM
For what it's worth.

I spoke with one of the beat writers covering the team last night and he got back with me this morning.

He said he has no idea where Bruce Levine got this information but that he personally spoke with Mark's agent and as of right now they have no intentions of presenting any proposals to Kenny or the White Sox.

Lip
Well, it wouldn't be the first time that Levine has gotten something totally wrong. I thought that I read in the Trib yesterday that Mark and his agent were going over ideas, like what he would like to get and what the Sox would probably accept and were going to submit these ideas to Kenny. But, probably not. Too bad. Hopefully we'll get something worked out, but it looks like he'll probably walk.

Jaffar
03-08-2007, 01:00 PM
For what it's worth.

I spoke with one of the beat writers covering the team last night and he got back with me this morning.

He said he has no idea where Bruce Levine got this information but that he personally spoke with Mark's agent and as of right now they have no intentions of presenting any proposals to Kenny or the White Sox.

Lip

They way I heard it on the radio was that Mark told Levine this but it was not a quote so maybe Levine made some assumptions based on his conversation.

ondafarm
03-08-2007, 01:01 PM
If I was Mark, there is no way I'd even think about signing an extention right now.

He just came off his worst year as a major leaguer.

He just invested his time in the off-season in keeping himself in peak shape. He probably listened to the multiple sources saying "You ain't a kid now. You have to work your tail off to stay in major league shape. It came easy to you at the start, now if you want to get to 300 wins, you have to start paying the piper." It sounds like he heard this and took it to heart. I'd also say it is paying off. He wants to prove that to himself, his teammates, the management and the world (perhaps not in that order.) If he has a Cy Young worthy season this year would there be a difference in the contract he'd sign then as opposed to now? He needs to prove to himself he's worthy of it. Then and only then I think he'll sign.

Hokiesox
03-08-2007, 01:01 PM
Did not see this posted in this thread...

I am not so sure that the Sox and MB are actually talking, and if they are, they seem to be pretty far apart based on this ST article...

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/288643,CST-SPT-sox08.article


What in this article told you they were far apart? I didn't read that. all I read is MB is happy Vazquez signed and MB and his agent are pouting that Kenny said it was up to them to make a proposal. I imagine the article was not written very well, but that's the impression I got.

WhiteSox5187
03-08-2007, 01:06 PM
If I was Mark, there is no way I'd even think about signing an extention right now.

He just came off his worst year as a major leaguer.

He just invested his time in the off-season in keeping himself in peak shape. He probably listened to the multiple sources saying "You ain't a kid now. You have to work your tail off to stay in major league shape. It came easy to you at the start, now if you want to get to 300 wins, you have to start paying the piper." It sounds like he heard this and took it to heart. I'd also say it is paying off. He wants to prove that to himself, his teammates, the management and the world (perhaps not in that order.) If he has a Cy Young worthy season this year would there be a difference in the contract he'd sign then as opposed to now? He needs to prove to himself he's worthy of it. Then and only then I think he'll sign.
Well, I don't think Mark isn't going to sign because he wants to "prove himself to the world." I think he won't sign because he saw the market last year and thought "Hey! I've put up numbers comparable to Zito, if I have a good year this year, I could be in for a big payday!" But I dont' think it's because he's saying "I need to prove myself to the White Sox before I re-sign!"

HomeFish
03-08-2007, 01:29 PM
But I dont' think it's because he's saying "I need to prove myself to the White Sox before I re-sign!"

I think ondafarm meant that Mark was saying "I need to prove myself to the FA market".

ondafarm
03-08-2007, 04:50 PM
Well, I don't think Mark isn't going to sign because he wants to "prove himself to the world." I think he won't sign because he saw the market last year and thought "Hey! I've put up numbers comparable to Zito, if I have a good year this year, I could be in for a big payday!" But I dont' think it's because he's saying "I need to prove myself to the White Sox before I re-sign!"

Perhaps I could have said it better:

"I need to reprove myself to the White Sox before I re-sign!"

He's no longer a kid and he has to re-prove that he is actually a veteran who can pitch when he doesn't have the kid advantages.

If he has another miserable year and really hasn't learnt a wink from having a bad year, then I don't think the Sox will re-sign him. I think he needs to prove he's matured and is refocused on being a HoF caliber pitcher for the rest of his career. If he re-proves himself, I think the Sox will resign him to a big contract, deservedly so. Big payday yes, but I think his pride is on the line first.

MRM
03-08-2007, 08:38 PM
Just heard on ESPN 1000 that Buehrle and his agent are going to submit a few contract ideas to Kenny and the Sox based on 3 and 4 year deals.

Don't get excited. On the same day you heard this, MBs agent was quoted as saying they won't approach the Sox, they are awaiting the Sox to make an offer.

Lip Man 1
03-08-2007, 10:48 PM
From whitesox.com tonight. Story by Scott Merkin:


"A Wednesday night report from ESPN 1000, an all-sports radio station based out of Chicago, stated that Buehrle wanted agent Jeff Berry to submit contract proposals of the three- and four-year variety to the White Sox in an attempt to get a multi-year deal ironed out before the window of opportunity closed at the start of the regular season. On Thursday, Buehrle's camp said nothing has changed from what was said on Wednesday.

Those comments coming from Berry basically echoed Williams' thoughts that the door was open from Buehrle's side and they were willing to listen to any sort of viable offer from the team. As for Williams, he begrudgingly spoke again about the latest round of news.

"If I keep talking about it then I'll have to keep on talking about it," Williams said. "All I know about the situation is what I read in all of your guys' articles, that is not planning on making a proposal. It is what it is."

[B]Chalk up another one to Bruce Levine!

Lip

Brian26
03-08-2007, 11:01 PM
From whitesox.com tonight. Story by Scott Merkin:


"A Wednesday night report from ESPN 1000, an all-sports radio station based out of Chicago, stated that Buehrle wanted agent Jeff Berry to submit contract proposals of the three- and four-year variety to the White Sox in an attempt to get a multi-year deal ironed out before the window of opportunity closed at the start of the regular season. On Thursday, Buehrle's camp said nothing has changed from what was said on Wednesday.

"If I keep talking about it then I'll have to keep on talking about it," Williams said. "All I know about the situation is what I read in all of your guys' articles, that [Berry] is not planning on making a proposal. It is what it is."

Chalk up another one to Bruce Levine!

Lip

Hold on. I have the perfect explanation for this. Kenny and Levine thought Buehrle's agent was Jonathan Barry, not Jeff Berry.

Jaffar
03-09-2007, 08:23 AM
In all honesty, I don't see Mark and his agent or Kenny negotiating this through the media. Even though Levine said Mark told him this, I think it was Levine maybe making some assumptions. Nobody ever knows what Kenny is up to, when the deals are actually done is when the media knows what he is really up to.

veeter
03-09-2007, 08:42 AM
what are you getting so defensive about? are you refusing to comprehend the facts in front of you?

-Jose won't get traded because his trade value is too low (age).
-Mark won't get traded because he's a solid, reliable, LEFT-ARM in the rotation, not to mention gives up less runs than Jon.
-Vazquez is a guy the organization looks at like an ace... and they now have him in a "cheap" contract for four years.

Jon has a low 90's fastball and when he doesn't have his sinker working (which does happen) or throw his 4-seam inside, he gets rocked. End of story. This isn't a fluke thing like Mark's '07 season, it happens every year. Jon has a ton of wins, but only TWICE in seven seasons has he had his ERA in the 3's. Kenny realizes that organizations like Jon because he pitches a lot of innings and has a lot of wins, his trade value is high, probably why he almost got traded to the Astros this offseason. I think Kenny is looking to benefit off of a pitcher that may look better than he is because he's racked up a lot of wins over the past two seasons.

I've defended Garland plenty of times on this site, so don't think I'm ripping on your favorite player of whatever he is to you. I'm looking at the big picture and why Jon looks to be the odd man out. Can you prove otherwise? Beyond saying , "Garland isn't a run-of-the mill 4th starter"... That means NOTHING to me.

Don't start throwing accusations out that my post doesn't make any sense because you are sensitive to Jon being traded. I don't want to see anyone get traded, but if someone is going, it will be Jon.I love how you think you know what's going to happen. Are you really Phil Rogers? Like him, pretty much everything you say won't happen or is incorrect. That, my friend, is a fact in front of me.

soxinem1
03-09-2007, 09:33 AM
In all honesty, I don't see Mark and his agent or Kenny negotiating this through the media. Even though Levine said Mark told him this, I think it was Levine maybe making some assumptions. Nobody ever knows what Kenny is up to, when the deals are actually done is when the media knows what he is really up to.

This is very true. I think the only contract situation that the media had a clue on was Konerko. Other than that, most of his signings and trades have been done in a secluded way, which is the way it should be. I wouldn't want all these rumor-mongers who are just trying to 'out-scoop' each other broadcasting my business either until I am ready.

goon
03-09-2007, 01:35 PM
I love how you think you know what's going to happen. Are you really Phil Rogers? Like him, pretty much everything you say won't happen or is incorrect. That, my friend, is a fact in front of me.

wow, you got me there. no seriously, you really proved me wrong.

have a nice life!