PDA

View Full Version : Score Reports Buehrle Deal "Likely" Done


Pages : [1] 2 3

gf2020
06-27-2007, 05:43 AM
Linkage: http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/444903,CST-SPT-mark27.article

I am up at 4:40 in the morning and really can't believe my eyes. Aren't we a bunch of cheap losers?

In this division, you don't get better by getting rid of someone of Mark's caliber. I would love for this to happen.

mcp5185
06-27-2007, 06:09 AM
This is really good news!

GregO23
06-27-2007, 06:13 AM
wow im happy i stood up too. I needed some good news in chicago sports. this already made my day:D:

I am also hearing that the Dodgers actually like Contreas alot more then they liked Buehrle for some reason. My buddy told me this so I Dont know where he heard it but I know he wouldnt make it up. They are willing to give up more, maybe becuase of the secruity in contracts, so if we can land one of there young pitchers for him our future rotation with Buehrle and Garland leading the way would look amazing =)

VenturaFan23
06-27-2007, 06:43 AM
I just saw that scroll across on NBC news. I couldn't believe it either! :bandance:

soxfanatlanta
06-27-2007, 06:44 AM
Anybody know what kind of numbers are flying around?

delben91
06-27-2007, 06:47 AM
Sounds good. However, I'm really hesitant to believe anything the Sun-Times says these days.

Boondock Saint
06-27-2007, 06:47 AM
I'll save my enthusiasm until we get him signed...I don't want to get excited only to have it fall apart.

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 06:49 AM
Sounds good. However, I'm really hesitant to believe anything the Sun-Times says these days.

I'm hesitant to believe anything from anyone when it comes to trade/extension/contract discussions.

Goose
06-27-2007, 07:27 AM
I'm hesitant to believe anything from anyone when it comes to trade/extension/contract discussions.

True, however, it sure is nice to hear this little comment:

What is confirmed is that Buehrle's agent, Jeff Berry, was in the Tampa area with his client this week and that the White Sox remain Buehrle's first choice of where he wants to play past this season -- with any other team a distant second.

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 07:52 AM
True, however, it sure is nice to hear this little comment:

Nice to hear but we've heard these lines before, both from players and agents.

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 08:02 AM
This is a good sign, but I am sure we would all agree that we'll believe it when we see it happen.

The Immigrant
06-27-2007, 08:02 AM
Not to rain on everyone's parade, but this article is basically pure speculation by Joe Cowley.

russ99
06-27-2007, 08:31 AM
I hope they're not just jerking our chain.

I'll believe it when Mark signs on the dotted line.

Jaffar
06-27-2007, 08:45 AM
Well today is Wed.......KW's favorite day for making moves.

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 08:47 AM
What's most promising is that the article mentions that Buehrle may have dropped his request from 5 to 4 years. If that's true, I have a hard time imagining that KW, seeing Buehrle's resurgence and given his importance as a franchise "face" player, wouldn't be able to find something that works.

Git 'er done, then focus on trading Dye, Iguchi, Contreras/Vazquez, and IMO Pods for position prospects (or pitchers with a plan to flip some for position guys).

I really really like what we're hearing of late: 1) Buehrle's coming closer to an extension and 2) Garland's not available (so he's theoretically another SP cornerstone).

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 08:51 AM
What's most promising is that the article mentions that Buehrle may have dropped his request from 5 to 4 years. If that's true, I have a hard time imagining that KW, seeing Buehrle's resurgence and given his importance as a franchise "face" player, wouldn't be able to find something that works.

Git 'er done, then focus on trading Dye, Iguchi, Contreras/Vazquez, and IMO Pods for position prospects (or pitchers with a plan to flip some for position guys).

I really really like what we're hearing of late: 1) Buehrle's coming closer to an extension and 2) Garland's not available (so he's theoretically another SP cornerstone).

The time will be key. If he is looking for five years, it seems to me that the chances of KW inking him to that deal seem slim to none. Four seems much more likely. If he stays the same Buehrle, he could be looking at another decent payday. He would only be 32 at the start of that contract.

Trav
06-27-2007, 08:53 AM
Could this be a sign and trade type of situation to bring more players in return?

DumpJerry
06-27-2007, 08:59 AM
Kenny: don't do it! Use the money to sign Aaron Rowand! (ignore my sig below)

Gammons Peter
06-27-2007, 09:13 AM
I wouldn't get my hopes too high. This might just make a nice excuse for KW to say "well, we tried"

JohnTucker0814
06-27-2007, 09:13 AM
What's most promising is that the article mentions that Buehrle may have dropped his request from 5 to 4 years. If that's true, I have a hard time imagining that KW, seeing Buehrle's resurgence and given his importance as a franchise "face" player, wouldn't be able to find something that works.

Git 'er done, then focus on trading Dye, Iguchi, Contreras/Vazquez, and IMO Pods for position prospects (or pitchers with a plan to flip some for position guys).

I really really like what we're hearing of late: 1) Buehrle's coming closer to an extension and 2) Garland's not available (so he's theoretically another SP cornerstone).

3. Reports are that teams actually like Contreras more than Buehrle and are willing to send more top prospects if Contreras is dealt...

tebman
06-27-2007, 09:17 AM
Nobody really knows anything, of course, but good news nonetheless. I said last summer that I just couldn't believe that the Sox and Buehrle wouldn't do whatever they needed to do to work out something. KW, JR, and all of us want him to stay, and MB has said the same thing.

I don't know any of these folks personally, but they all seem to be genuinely honorable people with a low tolerance for pretension. Besides being a franchise-leading pitcher, MB's personal quality is something that can't be replaced. Who would the Sox have instead? Zambrano? Please.

Buehrle makes the whole staff better and I think KW knows that. I hope my impressions are accurate and this gets done sooner rather than later.

Hitmen77
06-27-2007, 09:22 AM
This would be really good news, BUT I'll believe it when it's official. A few days ago, Buehrle was "hours away" from being traded to Boston and locked up to an extension w/ Boston. I really hope this Sun-Times report is true:praying:, but I think it's going to be a wild "emotional roller coaster" ride for us Sox fans for the next months as these trade/contract rumors fly.

What's most promising is that the article mentions that Buehrle may have dropped his request from 5 to 4 years. If that's true, I have a hard time imagining that KW, seeing Buehrle's resurgence and given his importance as a franchise "face" player, wouldn't be able to find something that works.

I think the Sox would agree to 4 years. As far as the 5th year,if this is indeed true, maybe there's room for middle ground on a 5th year. A 5th year option for the Sox with a fairly generous buyout for Mark if they don't pick up that option?

Git 'er done, then focus on trading Dye, Iguchi, Contreras/Vazquez, and IMO Pods for position prospects (or pitchers with a plan to flip some for position guys).

I really really like what we're hearing of late: 1) Buehrle's coming closer to an extension and 2) Garland's not available (so he's theoretically another SP cornerstone).

If the Sox can somehow keep Buehrle, I think they'll definitely trade either Jose or Javy by spring training next year. I would trade Jose. I think he's at his peak value. He's doing fairly well at the moment and seems to be coveted by other teams. My fear with him is that some time soon (by next season), he's going to really start to show his age by getting injured or declining enough to make him untradeable.

StepsInSC
06-27-2007, 09:27 AM
3. Reports are that teams actually like Contreras more than Buehrle and are willing to send more top prospects if Contreras is dealt...

What reports? The article that inspired this thread is based on says the exact opposite:
If Contreras is sent to the Mets, he would bring back a smaller return than Buehrle.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/444903,CST-SPT-mark27.article

Hitmen77
06-27-2007, 09:27 AM
Could this be a sign and trade type of situation to bring more players in return?

If you mean sign Mark and then trade him. IF they get a deal done, I wouldn't be surprised if Mark got a 1 yr no-trade clause worked into the deal. He doesn't want to take a hometown discount because he wants to stay just to be shipped off by the Sox. IIRC, Garland got a one year no-trade clause when he signed his extension after 2005.

JohnTucker0814
06-27-2007, 09:38 AM
What reports? The article that inspired this thread is based on says the exact opposite:


http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/444903,CST-SPT-mark27.article

While that report says the return is less for Contreras, every other article I've seen from NY papers says the Mets would be willing to give up more prospects for Contreras... I don't have time to back through the Buehrle thread to quote them, but there were several quotes in that thread that confirm what I originally stated...

FJA
06-27-2007, 09:38 AM
What reports? The article that inspired this thread is based on says the exact opposite:


http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/444903,CST-SPT-mark27.article

http://www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-1/1182745891118460.xml&coll=1

According to an official with one of the teams involved, the Mets also have asked the White Sox about former Yankees right-hander Jose Contreras, who is signed through 2009. The official, who asked not to be identified because the deals he was talking about are not done, said the Mets would be more likely to give up top minor-league talent for Contreras than they would for Buehrle.

Makes sense considering the Mets would have Contreras through 2009 and Buehrle only through the end of the season. It would also reunite him with Duque, so they're probably confident he would be able to adjust quickly in the offensively-inferior NL.

Jaffar
06-27-2007, 09:39 AM
What reports? The article that inspired this thread is based on says the exact opposite:


http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/444903,CST-SPT-mark27.article

Omar Minaya has said that he would not give up top prospects for Buehrle because he is a rental player and has talked about Contreras specifically because he is under contract. That is what I have been reading the past week before what this article said.

Law11
06-27-2007, 09:40 AM
3. Reports are that teams actually like Contreras more than Buehrle and are willing to send more top prospects if Contreras is dealt...

And vasquez as well. makes sense. The contracts are locked up.
Trading top prospects for rent-a-players is falling by the wayside. Teams are more interestd in guys locked up for a few years.

StepsInSC
06-27-2007, 09:45 AM
http://www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-1/1182745891118460.xml&coll=1



Makes sense considering the Mets would have Contreras through 2009 and Buehrle only through the end of the season. It would also reunite him with Duque, so they're probably confident he would be able to adjust quickly in the offensively-inferior NL.

Thanks for the linky. I had only read Mets' fans reactions on a MB and they didn't care too much for JC.

KRS1
06-27-2007, 09:47 AM
I share the feelings that others have already stated about not getting my hopes up, but this is something to brighten up my day.

Jerko
06-27-2007, 09:50 AM
So, he DID get on the plane to Tampa afterall??????? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

FJA
06-27-2007, 10:02 AM
Thanks for the linky. I had only read Mets' fans reactions on a MB and they didn't care too much for JC.

A good friend who's a Mets fan expressed these very sentiments to me yesterday. I think Contreras could work out well for the Mets ... I don't know about all the way through 2009, but for the time being, I think the move to Shea and the NL would benefit him tremendously.

That said, it's been my hunch (and my wish) that Kenny would move Contreras and Vasquez to free up money for Buehrle and Garland extensions. Can you imagine Contreras and Vasquez as our 1-2 down the line? Ugh. We'd definitely need to pick up another top-of-the-rotation, probably more expensive pitcher. With Buehrle and Garland locked up long-term at 1-2 (and Danks, while often pitching like a rookie, sometimes showing sings of top-of-the-rotation potential), I'm much more confident in our ability to figure out a good, young rotation at 3-4-5 and not having to worry too much about the 1-2.

jdm2662
06-27-2007, 10:08 AM
Ok, three days ago Mark was being traded. Now, he's being signed? um, I'll wait until the ink on the contract is dried before I believe anything. As long as a trade happens that helps the Sox OR he is signed before the off season happens, it's good news.

Mr. White Sox
06-27-2007, 10:16 AM
This would be amazing, but like jdm said, due to this story I'm not putting any more stock into trade rumors (or signing rumors) until something gets done. An extension would be awesome, and then they can trade Contreras/Dye/etc. if they need to.

duke of dorwood
06-27-2007, 10:20 AM
It would be amazing and make so much sense. Not having to replace his production would be a major hurdle in retooling for next year

balke
06-27-2007, 10:20 AM
Could also be that the extension makes him better trade bait (which IMO it would). They could pull down more prospects if they had him under contract. They could also hold out just a little longer before giving up, see if a deal worth doing comes along, and if not they keep Mark Buehrle and rebuild in the offseason.

I think signing him is the right choice in any situation right now.

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 10:21 AM
And vasquez as well. makes sense. The contracts are locked up.
Trading top prospects for rent-a-players is falling by the wayside. Teams are more interestd in guys locked up for a few years.

THis could be Kenny's master plan, sign guys to deals that are below or at market, and then in trade discussions you can offer up a) a rental of premium talent or b)a longer-term guy who's good but not great.

Even with a lesser return, I'd much rather deal Contreras and keep Buehrle. I'm completely comfortable with a rotation of Buehrle-Garland-Vaz/JC-Danks-and a rookie from the stable acquired this past offseason.

The only question in my mind is what you can do with the offense once you've kept Mark. Hopefully you can get enough in return for JC/Dye/Iguchi/etc to plug in and contribute quickly so that you can take advantage of the prime years of Mark & Jon.

That all assumes it gets done, of course, but the sequence of rumors regarding this deal makes me more optimistic(starting late last week and increasing to now with a the latest rumor that it's very close).

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 10:23 AM
Could also be that the extension makes him better trade bait (which IMO it would). They could pull down more prospects if they had him under contract. They could also hold out just a little longer before giving up, see if a deal worth doing comes along, and if not they keep Mark Buehrle and rebuild in the offseason.

I think signing him is the right choice in any situation right now.

It is highly unlikely that Mark would sign any type of extension without some sort of NTC for at least the first year of the deal.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 10:25 AM
Even with a lesser return, I'd much rather deal Contreras and keep Buehrle. I'm completely comfortable with a rotation of Buehrle-Garland-Vaz/JC-Danks-and a rookie from the stable acquired this past offseason.



I've said all along that if Mark accepted 4 years, the Sox would get a deal with him done. If that's the case, then I think if Contreras can get you something good, you go ahead and trade him. I like Jose a lot, but if you can re-sign Mark to a reasonable deal AND get something good in return for Jose, you do it. It's a no-brainer.

The Immigrant
06-27-2007, 10:27 AM
It is highly unlikely that Mark would sign any type of extension without some sort of NTC for at least the first year of the deal.

Exactly. Sign and trade deals only happen in the NBA, where no one except Kobe Bryant has a no trade clause.

infohawk
06-27-2007, 10:29 AM
It would probably kill the windsock to have to write a positive story about how the Sox signed Mark to an extension. He's probably already got the "cheap, ungrateful Sox let star cornerstone pitcher go" story sitting in his hard drive. If the Sox struggle next year, how long until he flip-flops and writes about how KW blew it by not acquiring prospects for Mark? If Mark re-signs, we need to archive all the stories by Chicago sportswriters and hold them accountable if they develop memory loss.

jabrch
06-27-2007, 10:35 AM
Glad to see both sides are still talking.

WhiteSox5187
06-27-2007, 10:36 AM
So, he DID get on the plane to Tampa afterall??????? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
No, he drove down to Tampa...wanted to see if that new truck of his is working.


SO within a week we go from Mark being "99% sure" he was re-signing to a deal with Boston all but being done to him now about to re-sign again? Until something official happens, I'm going to hold off. It has been an emotional roller coaster one way or the other.

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 10:43 AM
It would probably kill the windsock to have to write a positive story about how the Sox signed Mark to an extension. He's probably already got the "cheap, ungrateful Sox let star cornerstone pitcher go" story sitting in his hard drive. If the Sox struggle next year, how long until he flip-flops and writes about how KW blew it by not acquiring prospects for Mark? If Mark re-signs, we need to archive all the stories by Chicago sportswriters and hold them accountable if they develop memory loss.

I'd bet it doesn't take that long. It'll be about how dumb KW is for not recognizing that his team is absolutely horrible and beyond saving, and instead of trying to truly rebuild, he's happy to muddle along and waste what he'll classify as good but not great pitching by not having the flexibility to upgrade the O. He'll also throw in some lines about how the real problem with the Sox is JR & Ozzie.

RockJock07
06-27-2007, 10:45 AM
It might happen but as most of you are saying, I'll believe it when I see it.

Kenny is talking to MB's agent but he's still on the horn with Boston and every other team aswell. My gut is telling me that this report by Cowley stikes fear in a Boston or anyone else with interest in Boston. KW is driving up the market for MB. Boston knows they are a lock for the WS if they get MB, kenny has all the leverage.

As far as Jose, trade him somewhere, package Uribe if you can. Put Andy at SS, please start trading the dead weight on this club.

SoxxoS
06-27-2007, 10:52 AM
Does anyone else not want to let Javy go? Javy is the quintessential 3rd starting pitcher - Good enough stuff to go out and shut a team down, but not consistant enough/good enough to be an "ace."

I guess it depends on what you can get for him - and if Gavin Floyd can suceed at the major league level.

I think you are asking for trouble with a Buehrle/Garland/Danks/Gio/Floyd rotation. At least if you keep Javy, you have the "margin for error/injury" with those three young guys.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 10:53 AM
Boston knows they are a lock for the WS if they get MB, kenny has all the leverage.

There is no such thing as a lock for the World Series. Not even close.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 10:54 AM
Does anyone else not want to let Javy go? Javy is the quintessential 3rd starting pitcher - Good enough stuff to go out and shut a team down, but not consistant enough/good enough to be an "ace."

I guess it depends on what you can get for him - and if Gavin Floyd can suceed at the major league level.

I think you are asking for trouble with a Buehrle/Garland/Danks/Gio/Floyd rotation. At least if you keep Javy, you have the "margin for error/injury" with those three young guys.

I really want them to keep Javy. His deal, at worst, is a market deal. At best, he is a bargain. If there is a market for Jose and a deal gets done with Mark, then he is the one to go, IMO.

RockJock07
06-27-2007, 10:55 AM
There is no such thing as a lock for the World Series. Not even close.

My $ is on Boston, I'll use lock, you can use any word you want.

wulfy
06-27-2007, 10:56 AM
Does anyone else not want to let Javy go? Javy is the quintessential 3rd starting pitcher - Good enough stuff to go out and shut a team down, but not consistant enough/good enough to be an "ace."

I guess it depends on what you can get for him - and if Gavin Floyd can suceed at the major league level.

I think you are asking for trouble with a Buehrle/Garland/Danks/Gio/Floyd rotation. At least if you keep Javy, you have the "margin for error/injury" with those three young guys.

Agree 100% - Buehrle/Garland/Vasquez/Danks/Arm From Minors would be a very good and very affordable rotation. You balance out Buehrle/Garland/Vasquez money with two major league minumums (or close).

Let's get this done so we can figure out how to fix the damn bullpen.

KRS1
06-27-2007, 10:56 AM
There is no such thing as a lock for the World Series. Not even close.

Isnt this the same guy who called SD a lock for the WS just last week?

GoSox2K3
06-27-2007, 10:57 AM
I really hope this is true. I'm not going to get my hopes up though because we hear so many false rumors that I'll believe it when it's announced.

It would certainly mean trading JC or JV, but I'd much rather have a rotation anchored by Mark and Garland and then Danks and rookies at the back end of the rotation than rely on Jose and Javy to be our "anchors".

jabrch
06-27-2007, 10:58 AM
Does anyone else not want to let Javy go?

I will let anyone go if what we get back is good enough. I would not just "let Javy go" if that means giving him up for nothing. I like Vazquez. Despite his record this year, he has been very effective. QS in about 2/3 of his starts - no complete blowups - he's been solid for a #3/#4. And he's affordable for the rest of this contract.

FoulkeFan
06-27-2007, 10:58 AM
I really want them to keep Javy. His deal, at worst, is a market deal. At best, he is a bargain. If there is a market for Jose and a deal gets done with Mark, then he is the one to go, IMO.

Also, Vazquez has a limited no-trade clause, although he would probably accept a trade to Boston or the Mets. I thought he wanted to be a short flight away from his home in Puerto Rico, if I remember correctly. He seems least likely to go then for that reason, IMO.

I would like them to keep Javy too, but not as much as I want them to keep Buehrle! I will always have fond memories of Jose from 2005, but he's a lot older than MB. If we can get something for him and he can go play for a contender again, then that's a deal that works for everyone.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 11:00 AM
My $ is on Boston, I'll use lock, you can use any word you want.

Calling a team a lock in September is risky enough, let alone June. A lot can happen in 3 months.

GoSox2K3
06-27-2007, 11:01 AM
Also, Vazquez has a limited no-trade clause, although he would probably accept a trade to Boston or the Mets. I thought he wanted to be a short flight away from his home in Puerto Rico, if I remember correctly. He seems least likely to go then for that reason, IMO.

I would like them to keep Javy too, but not as much as I want them to keep Buehrle! I will always have fond memories of Jose from 2005, but he's a lot older than MB. If we can get something for him and he can go play for a contender again, then that's a deal that works for everyone.

In that case, he would have no say in the matter. His trade clause is limited to the nine West division teams.

Of all the Sox veteran starters, I'd rather see Jose go first before Javy. Javy is younger and, though mediocre, he is durable and not a big injury risk.

veeter
06-27-2007, 11:03 AM
Contreras re-uniting with El Duque makes perfect sense.

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 11:07 AM
Here's the hope: Kenny & Buehrle both start talking about the extension, and Kenny ratchets up the trad discussions, but without a 72-hour window because he'd like to try and resign him after the season. Then Kenny finds the lack of an extension is killing the trade value AND as the rumors crank up, Burls finds he really wants to stay and is willing to work to make that happen.

Minds meet and they agree on something, and recreate the proud tradition of "White Sox Wednesday".

:bandance::gulp::supernana::happybday:)

Frontman
06-27-2007, 11:11 AM
I'll keep my fingers crossed. Here's to hoping.

DoItForDanPasqua
06-27-2007, 11:12 AM
I will let anyone go if what we get back is good enough. I would not just "let Javy go" if that means giving him up for nothing. I like Vazquez. Despite his record this year, he has been very effective. QS in about 2/3 of his starts - no complete blowups - he's been solid for a #3/#4. And he's affordable for the rest of this contract.

I think 13 million is a bit much for what he's giving us. Of course his numbers are similar to AJ Burnett's, and the two make a comparable amount of money.

DoItForDanPasqua
06-27-2007, 11:15 AM
****, now I'm going to have to listen to sports radio all day to find out what happens.

jabrch
06-27-2007, 11:16 AM
I think 13 million is a bit much for what he's giving us. Of course his numbers are similar to AJ Burnett's, and the two make a comparable amount of money.

First, I believe his deal is 11.5 per, not 13. Second, look at what a FA pitcher gets these days - that's the market for a veteran FA SP who is a virtual lock for 200+ IP and 30+ starts. Heck, guys worse then him will get deals for more money than this this year.

DoItForDanPasqua
06-27-2007, 11:19 AM
First, I believe his deal is 11.5 per, not 13. Second, look at what a FA pitcher gets these days - that's the market for a veteran FA SP who is a virtual lock for 200+ IP and 30+ starts. Heck, guys worse then him will get deals for more money than this this year.

He makes 13 this year and then 11.5 for the remainder. For his career, he has a losing record and a 4.34 ERA: that's no bargain.

seventyseven
06-27-2007, 11:33 AM
Agree 100% - Buehrle/Garland/Vasquez/Danks/Arm From Minors would be a very good and very affordable rotation. You balance out Buehrle/Garland/Vasquez money with two major league minumums (or close).

Let's get this done so we can figure out how to fix the damn bullpen.

Agree 100000000%. And make it snappy.

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 11:34 AM
My dad woke me up at 5:30 to tell me the news this morning. I was so happy. This is absolutely outstanding. You know it's a bad year when this article might make my baseball season.

But then again how many times has the Suntimes been wrong. And what if this is a sign and trade?? :mad:

jabrch
06-27-2007, 11:34 AM
he has a losing record and a 4.34 ERA: that's no bargain.

Well - the contract we'd be talking about trading is 11.5mm per year. So let's deal with just that.

I'm not sure how you figure that 11.5mm is too much to pay for him. The "losing record" thing implies that W/L % is a good measure of his worth. I think it isn't. 6 of his seasons with with Montreal. 1 was with a sub .500 Arizona team. and 1 was with this disaster of a Sox team. He's had two seasons with decent clubs, one Yankee team, and us last year.

As far as his ERA, 4.34 is actually not bad at all for 11.5mm. Find me a list of FA pitchers who have a long history of throwing over 200 IP and 30+ starts every year, who are never injured, with ERAs under 4.34 who do it for under 11.5mm...

jabrch
06-27-2007, 11:35 AM
And what if this is a sign and trade??

There is no such thing as a "sign and trade" in MLB.

Goose
06-27-2007, 11:37 AM
There is no such thing as a "sign and trade" in MLB.

Are you saying that a team cant extend a player's contract (assuming that there is no "No Trade" clause in it) and then turn around and trade the player?

In all seriousness, I was unaware of that...just want to make sure I understand you.

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 11:37 AM
There is no such thing as a "sign and trade" in MLB.

True but it could happen right. It is not illegal or anything to sign a player during the season then a week later trade him. I could be totally wrong, but.

balke
06-27-2007, 11:37 AM
First, I believe his deal is 11.5 per, not 13. Second, look at what a FA pitcher gets these days - that's the market for a veteran FA SP who is a virtual lock for 200+ IP and 30+ starts. Heck, guys worse then him will get deals for more money than this this year.

2007 Salary: $13,000,000

3 years 34.5 MIL

ShoelessJoeS
06-27-2007, 11:40 AM
Get it done Kenny!!!

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 11:42 AM
Would tarp sliding be allowed in his contract?

Foulke You
06-27-2007, 11:42 AM
Does anyone else not want to let Javy go? Javy is the quintessential 3rd starting pitcher - Good enough stuff to go out and shut a team down, but not consistant enough/good enough to be an "ace."

I guess it depends on what you can get for him - and if Gavin Floyd can suceed at the major league level.

I think you are asking for trouble with a Buehrle/Garland/Danks/Gio/Floyd rotation. At least if you keep Javy, you have the "margin for error/injury" with those three young guys.
I agree that a back end of the rotation of Gio/Floyd/Danks would probably be too young and inexperienced to compete with the Tribe and Tigers. However, if the Sox move Dye, Iguchi, and Contreras, and even Mackowiak they will have cleared enough payroll to add another veteran free agent pitcher in '08. Buehrle is going to be a rich man with his new contract but something tells me it isn't going to break the bank and prevent him from making future moves. That just isn't KW's style.

ChetChat
06-27-2007, 11:44 AM
Would tarp sliding be allowed in his contract?

I hope so!

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 11:45 AM
He makes 13 this year and then 11.5 for the remainder. For his career, he has a losing record and a 4.34 ERA: that's no bargain.

Gil Meche career: 60-50, 4.49. Salary: $11M
Ted Lilly career: 65-62, 4.54. Salary: $10M
Carl Pavano career: 62-64, 4.27. Salary: $10M
Vicente Padilla career: 69-69, 4.26. Salary: $11M

Javy Vazquez career: 103-110, 4.34.

His comparables put him right in line with the salary on his extension. And the guys listed are nowhere near as durable as Javy with 6 of his past 7 years going for 200+IP (and the one exception was 198IP).

jabrch
06-27-2007, 11:50 AM
Are you saying that a team cant extend a player's contract (assuming that there is no "No Trade" clause in it) and then turn around and trade the player?

In all seriousness, I was unaware of that...just want to make sure I understand you.

Nearly all contracts signed these days have 1 year no-trade. And teams would have terrible reputations in the market if they signed a veteran star like Buehrle and then traded them right away.

The concept of a "Sign and Trade" is a basketball concept where the salary cap encourages that behavious. (you have to trade matching contracts and the existing team can pay a guy more than other teams can).

I highly doubt Mark would sign a contract with the Sox that would allow for him to be traded right away.

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 11:51 AM
2007 Salary: $13,000,000

3 years 34.5 MIL

2007 Sox responsibility: $9.5M. Arizona may have made a bad deal, but the Sox haven't. Javy's 2007 performance at <$10M is a bargain. And a guy of Javy's caliber for 2008-10 at $11.5M is at or slightly below market value.

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 11:54 AM
I highly doubt Mark would sign a contract with the Sox that would allow for him to be traded right away.

This is a guarantee. If Mark resigns it's because he gives a hometown discount and wants to be here, in which case he'll ask for at least a temporary no-trade. If he doesn't mind going elsewhere, then why would he resign now? Better to hit the market in that case.

The only way the "no non-trade" scenario works is if KW can convince Mark to resign and be traded out of the goodness of his heart to get better return for the Sox. I know Mark likes the org, but that's a stretch.

SoxxoS
06-27-2007, 11:56 AM
4 year 50 million

NICE. 12.5 a year for Mark Buehrle? Not bad at all.

CHIsoxNation
06-27-2007, 11:57 AM
4 year 50 million

Just heard that!! This is great news.

:bandance::bandance::bandance: :gulp:

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 11:57 AM
4 year 50 million

If true, un****ingreal. Now THAT'S a bargain. I figured it'd be 4/60.

balke
06-27-2007, 11:57 AM
Gil Meche career: 60-50, 4.49. Salary: $11M
Ted Lilly career: 65-62, 4.54. Salary: $10M
Carl Pavano career: 62-64, 4.27. Salary: $10M
Vicente Padilla career: 69-69, 4.26. Salary: $11M

Javy Vazquez career: 103-110, 4.34.

His comparables put him right in line with the salary on his extension. And the guys listed are nowhere near as durable as Javy with 6 of his past 7 years going for 200+IP (and the one exception was 198IP).

I don't know about worse pitchers getting more money. Javy's good stats came in the NL. His AL ERA's go 4.91, 4.42, 4.84, and presently he's at 4.15.

He's 39-42 in that span. 1 year with the Yankees, 1 with the Diamondbacks, and 1 and like 1/3 with the Sox. He's pitched about 207 innings per in that span.

3 of 4 pitchers on that list are pretty good examples of overpaying talent (Meche worth it). Vazquez is overpaid as well, although Vazquez isn't overpaid much. There's a lot of mediocre pitchers that can give these kinds of #'s for less money.

Rocky Soprano
06-27-2007, 11:57 AM
Hell Yes! :gulp:

jenn2080
06-27-2007, 11:58 AM
I am so happy I could jump and down at my desk!!!!!!!!!!!

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 11:58 AM
Nearly all contracts signed these days have 1 year no-trade. And teams would have terrible reputations in the market if they signed a veteran star like Buehrle and then traded them right away.

The concept of a "Sign and Trade" is a basketball concept where the salary cap encourages that behavious. (you have to trade matching contracts and the existing team can pay a guy more than other teams can).

I highly doubt Mark would sign a contract with the Sox that would allow for him to be traded right away.

Thank you. I learn something new everyday.

Goose
06-27-2007, 11:58 AM
Nearly all contracts signed these days have 1 year no-trade. And teams would have terrible reputations in the market if they signed a veteran star like Buehrle and then traded them right away.

The concept of a "Sign and Trade" is a basketball concept where the salary cap encourages that behavious. (you have to trade matching contracts and the existing team can pay a guy more than other teams can).

I highly doubt Mark would sign a contract with the Sox that would allow for him to be traded right away.

I agree on your points, however, that is not to say it cannot be done. It just means that it is not likely to be done. Your original statement made it seem like the CBA, or something, had a rule as such...

24thStFan
06-27-2007, 11:59 AM
Good move! Congratulations, Mark.

Mr.1Dog
06-27-2007, 11:59 AM
:):bandance::bandance::gulp: WOO HOO!!!!!!!!!

jabrch
06-27-2007, 12:00 PM
There's a lot of mediocre pitchers that can give these kinds of #'s for less money.

Like?

Who would you suggest the Sox go out and sign to be in the middle of the rotation next season if we were to trade Javy?

kruzer31
06-27-2007, 12:00 PM
Great Move Kenny , a bright spot for the 2007 season

RockJock07
06-27-2007, 12:02 PM
Considering Lilly got 4 years $40, this is an alsolute bargin, wow, I'm at a loss for words, this is why Kenny is one of the best GM in baseball.

RockJock07
06-27-2007, 12:03 PM
It's not offical though, just heard the scoreboard update. but it's close and it MAY be done.

KRS1
06-27-2007, 12:04 PM
Fingers crossed, on knees praying.:D:

jenn2080
06-27-2007, 12:04 PM
It's not offical though, just heard the scoreboard update. but it's close and it MAY be done.


***!?!?!?!?

dakuda
06-27-2007, 12:04 PM
It is just a 'source' saying so. Hopefully it is true, and confirmed soon.

CHIsoxNation
06-27-2007, 12:04 PM
Considering Lilly got 4 years $40, this is an alsolute bargin, wow, I'm at a loss for words, this is why Kenny is one of the best GM in baseball.

This also goes to show how much players like playing for this organization as well. Paulie and Garland also signed for a lot less then they could have gotten if they went elsewhere.

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 12:04 PM
If true, un****ingreal. Now THAT'S a bargain. I figured it'd be 4/60.

Same here. I am shocked at the low value. Mark took a hell of a discount.

munchman33
06-27-2007, 12:05 PM
I can't believe he wouldn't ask for more money than that. If it's true, WOW. What a hometown discount!

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 12:05 PM
This also goes to show how much players like playing for this organization as well. Paulie and Garland also signed for a lot less then he could have gotten if they went elsewhere.

To be fair, Konerko gave up $5 million by not signing with the Orioles but who wants to play for the Orioles?:D:

Steelrod
06-27-2007, 12:05 PM
That's good for us, and good for him. How much money is not enough to cause someone to disrupt his life.
Mark's great, great, grandchildren are now well provided for, and he won't have to uproot his life. I am very happy for him, and look forward to many more years with him. I guess he spoke the truth about wanting to stay here.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 12:06 PM
Same here. I am shocked at the low value. Mark took a hell of a discount.

Yea, if this turns out to be true, Mark gained a few points in my book. I've never been enamored by him, but this will change that a bit.

WS in 05
06-27-2007, 12:06 PM
Bozo Bruce doesn't have anything to do with this does he?

upperdeckusc
06-27-2007, 12:07 PM
A good friend who's a Mets fan expressed these very sentiments to me yesterday. I think Contreras could work out well for the Mets ... I don't know about all the way through 2009, but for the time being, I think the move to Shea and the NL would benefit him tremendously.

That said, it's been my hunch (and my wish) that Kenny would move Contreras and Vasquez to free up money for Buehrle and Garland extensions. Can you imagine Contreras and Vasquez as our 1-2 down the line? Ugh. We'd definitely need to pick up another top-of-the-rotation, probably more expensive pitcher. With Buehrle and Garland locked up long-term at 1-2 (and Danks, while often pitching like a rookie, sometimes showing sings of top-of-the-rotation potential), I'm much more confident in our ability to figure out a good, young rotation at 3-4-5 and not having to worry too much about the 1-2.

For christ's sake people, it's VAZQUEZ. JAVIER VAZQUEZ.:mad:

slobes
06-27-2007, 12:07 PM
Yeaaaaa baby!!:bandance::supernana:

jabrch
06-27-2007, 12:08 PM
I agree on your points, however, that is not to say it cannot be done. It just means that it is not likely to be done. Your original statement made it seem like the CBA, or something, had a rule as such...

No - it "can" be done - but it isn't done. There'd be no reason. In baseball, teams do that via the "72 hour window" type deals.

I can't think of any high profile, star players, who have ever had this happen to them. Again - it isn't that it "can't" happen, but it doesn't.

The term Sign and Trade is overused since it is a very specific event that happens all of the time in basketball as a strategy, and an event that, while possible, doesn't happen hardly ever in baseball because it offers no benefit to the player, and most contracts have language that make it impossible.

HotelWhiteSox
06-27-2007, 12:08 PM
4 year 50 mill according to the Score!

They basically reported it as breaking news as a done deal (not sure if posted already, just logged on)

:smile:

balke
06-27-2007, 12:08 PM
Like?

Who would you suggest the Sox go out and sign to be in the middle of the rotation next season if we were to trade Javy?

John Danks. Gavin Floyd. Lance Broadway. Gio Gonzalez. 4.30+ as an ERA is about league average. He's about 4.50+ in the AL so far. I think a young pitcher should be able to fill in the rotation pretty well for less than a million.

dakuda
06-27-2007, 12:09 PM
The keep changing between saying 'agreed in principle' and 'done deal'.

In my mind, those are different things. Which one is it?

balke
06-27-2007, 12:10 PM
4 year 50 mill according to the Score!

That's absolute robbery if true. Great deal for the Sox if they get it done like that. Keep him and Garland TOGETHER! And if he's that cheap, they can afford to keep Vazquez around probably.

lostfan
06-27-2007, 12:10 PM
Man, this is one of the best deals ever for a SP, from a management standpoint. What a bargain, if you can call 50 million that.

jabrch
06-27-2007, 12:11 PM
John Danks. Gavin Floyd. Lance Broadway. Gio Gonzalez. 4.30+ as an ERA is about league average. He's about 4.50+ in the AL so far. I think a young pitcher should be able to fill in the rotation pretty well for less than a million.

Not a single one of those meets the description we are talking about.

Find me a pitcher with a history of 200+ IP and 30+ starts who was a veteran FA who would cost less than 11.5mm.

upperdeckusc
06-27-2007, 12:11 PM
Does anyone else not want to let Javy go? Javy is the quintessential 3rd starting pitcher - Good enough stuff to go out and shut a team down, but not consistant enough/good enough to be an "ace."

I guess it depends on what you can get for him - and if Gavin Floyd can suceed at the major league level.

I think you are asking for trouble with a Buehrle/Garland/Danks/Gio/Floyd rotation. At least if you keep Javy, you have the "margin for error/injury" with those three young guys.

I'm probably one of the biggest Vazquez supporters, and i know they are few and far between with the majority of sox fans. It's kind of cliche', but he does/always has a bad string of luck, whether its cuz of bullpen giving up his inherited runs, no offensive support, etc. For a #3 or 4, he's above average by far. And now that he has a contract and knows (hopefully) he wont be bouncing around to other teams like he has been, he can focus solely on pitching and giving us more performances like he's shown us against the cubs and toronto etc.

jabrch
06-27-2007, 12:11 PM
4 year 50 mill according to the Score!

They basically reported it as breaking news as a done deal (not sure if posted already, just logged on)

:smile:

I'd be stunned - and thrilled

Gammons Peter
06-27-2007, 12:11 PM
Great news if true. Now lets extend Jon

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 12:12 PM
WOOHOO, maybe the discount is due to tarp sliding! Time to sport the Mark Buerhle jersey tonight!

Fungo
06-27-2007, 12:12 PM
A bargain for sure if true. 4yrs/$50 mil...I bet Mark working tarp sliding back in.

Hopefully this raises Contreras' trade value.

jdm2662
06-27-2007, 12:12 PM
The keep changing between saying 'agreed in principle' and 'done deal'.

In my mind, those are different things. Which one is it?

Because all these so called news outlets want to be the first to report something, eventhough it may not be official. Like I said, I am waiting until the ink is dry. I know 4/50 is a lot of money, but I find it hard to believe he would settle for that. He can get much more on the market. If he did, Mark will be my permanent favorite Sox 4 LIFE!

jabrch
06-27-2007, 12:12 PM
Stunned and thrilled... 12.5mm per and only 4 years?

HotelWhiteSox
06-27-2007, 12:12 PM
I knew there was tiny hope after Sunday's game when PK said he thought they could still agree on something, but never really expected

Great news! See they were just waiting for a winning streak

Other teams were already making it likely that they didn't want to give up top prospects anyways.

jenn2080
06-27-2007, 12:13 PM
Because all these so called news outlets want to be the first to report something, eventhough it may not be official. Like I said, I am waiting until the ink is dry. I know 4/50 is a lot of money, but I find it hard to believe he would settle for that. He can get much more on the market. If he did, Mark will be my permanent favorite Sox 4 LIFE!


maybe he is one of those guys who would rather play for a team he liked then get paid up the ass.

stl_sox_fan
06-27-2007, 12:13 PM
That's good for us, and good for him. How much money is not enough to cause someone to disrupt his life.
Mark's great, great, grandchildren are now well provided for, and he won't have to uproot his life. I am very happy for him, and look forward to many more years with him. I guess he spoke the truth about wanting to stay here.

Yeah but what about his great, great, great grandchildren? Will someone please think about the great, great, great grandchildren?

Hope this turns out to be true. The St Louis stations were already talking about Buehrle and how his addition to the Cards rotation would lead them to victory.

balke
06-27-2007, 12:15 PM
Not a single one of those meets the description we are talking about.

Find me a pitcher with a history of 200+ IP and 30+ starts who was a veteran FA who would cost less than 11.5mm.

I don't really care about his IP total. We have Buehrle who does that better. Not a lot of pitchers give a lot of IP. But, similar production with 20 less IP should be fine for the Sox if they spend money on bullpen arms instead, which they obviously need to.

As far as ERA and win total, I think a lot of pitchers can get 12 wins and put up a 4.30+ ERA. And yeah, they might not make it to the 7th IP every game. I honestly wish Vazquez wouldn't make it to the 6th and beyond, he's horrible past 6 innings.

Rocky Soprano
06-27-2007, 12:15 PM
If this turns out to be true, I am going to go out and buy his jersey.

upperdeckusc
06-27-2007, 12:15 PM
I think 13 million is a bit much for what he's giving us. Of course his numbers are similar to AJ Burnett's, and the two make a comparable amount of money.

isnt the extension 3yrs/34.5 mil? im no math major, but i think that's 11.5 mil/yr.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 12:15 PM
maybe he is one of those guys who would rather play for a team he liked then get paid up the ass.

If this is true, he'd also only be 32 at the end of this deal. If he keeps pitching 200+ innings every year, he'd be in line for another fairly lucrative contract.

RockJock07
06-27-2007, 12:16 PM
Yeah, I hear almost a done deal and then on mully and hanley says it's done, so take your pick I guess.

I'm shocked, just shocked. What a deal for the Sox.

Secondly, with MB signing this extension, I think this means that the Jose is dealt soon.

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 12:17 PM
If this turns out to be true, I am going to go out and buy his jersey.

Same here. Next week versus the O's I think I will be making a stop at Grandstand. the question is black, white or gray?

hi im skot
06-27-2007, 12:17 PM
Holy crap this is awesome!

I heart Mark Buehrle!

Goose
06-27-2007, 12:18 PM
4 year 50 mill according to the Score!

They basically reported it as breaking news as a done deal (not sure if posted already, just logged on)

:smile:

I am not buying it. 12.5/year sounds too low for MB...it has to be an error on the Score's part.

If true, WOW!!!

JohnTucker0814
06-27-2007, 12:18 PM
I wouldn't call this a hometown discount... How many of us are comfortable with out existing jobs, like the owners we work for, enjoy the people around us on a daily basis. If you had the choice to make maybe 10-20% more than you are currently making why wouldn't you just stay with the comfort of your job? Maybe that is what he is thinking.

These are the types of guys that people should be looking at as role models. Not the Soriano's that what the biggest contract and try to refuse to play LF because he knows if he is a 2b he gets more money...

Hopefully this all comes to fruition... now send Contreras to LA for a SS & SP!

HotelWhiteSox
06-27-2007, 12:19 PM
Yep Mully and Hanley had it as breaking news and done,


I was expecting them to say '60',

4 years, 50, wow

:worship::KW:reinsy :burly

CHISOXFAN13
06-27-2007, 12:20 PM
Same here. Next week versus the O's I think I will be making a stop at Grandstand. the question is black, white or gray?

I was thinking the same thing this morning. I think I'll go with the no-hit home!

This really is fantastic. Let this be the start of something.

Rocky Soprano
06-27-2007, 12:20 PM
Same here. Next week versus the O's I think I will be making a stop at Grandstand. the question is black, white or gray?

I'm going to go with black. :D:

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 12:20 PM
I wouldn't call this a hometown discount... How many of us are comfortable with out existing jobs, like the owners we work for, enjoy the people around us on a daily basis. If you had the choice to make maybe 10-20% more than you are currently making why wouldn't you just stay with the comfort of your job? Maybe that is what he is thinking.

These are the types of guys that people should be looking at as role models. Not the Soriano's that what the biggest contract and try to refuse to play LF because he knows if he is a 2b he gets more money...

Hopefully this all comes to fruition... now send Contreras to LA for a SS & SP!

10-20% is low. There would have been a team out there willing to offer at least $15MM per year and probably for 5-6 years.

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 12:21 PM
If this is true, he'd also only be 32 at the end of this deal. If he keeps pitching 200+ innings every year, he'd be in line for another fairly lucrative contract.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1618502#post1618502

:D:

soxfanatlanta
06-27-2007, 12:21 PM
Happy Wednesday, Everybody!!!

:bandance::bandance::bandance::bandance: (one for each year)

jabrch
06-27-2007, 12:21 PM
I don't really care about his IP total.

If you don't care about how many innings he throws, and assumedly you don't care that he never misses starts, then I don't have much to say other than that we totally disagree on how to evaluate pitching.

I like Danks, Gio, Broadway and Floyd's potential; but none of them have anything to do with the question that I was discussing with whomever before you chimed in. If you want to have a different discussion about the merits of proven veterans vs rookies, we can do that in a different discussion.

salty99
06-27-2007, 12:21 PM
I LOVE IT! Mark has always been my favorite pitcher and a clubhouse favorite.

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 12:22 PM
ESPN Radio 1000 and the wacko-headed Levine said there is no new news to report on a potential extension with Burly.

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 12:22 PM
I wouldn't call this a hometown discount... How many of us are comfortable with out existing jobs, like the owners we work for, enjoy the people around us on a daily basis. If you had the choice to make maybe 10-20% more than you are currently making why wouldn't you just stay with the comfort of your job? Maybe that is what he is thinking.

The MLBPA frowns upon players taking less than they are worth.

BRDSR
06-27-2007, 12:23 PM
If true, fantastic!

Mark, KW, and Reinsdorf have made me a very happy guy today. They're a couple days early on my wedding present though. What do you think they'll get me for that?!

Edit: I'll accept a win on Friday.

Risk
06-27-2007, 12:24 PM
Awesome deal--kudos to Kenny and Mark for getting the deal done.:bandance::gulp::):supernana:

Risk

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 12:25 PM
This still seems too good to be true. I don't like relying on a sportscrap station for "confirmation." I would hold back on all of the celebrating until a real source comes out with the same details.

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 12:25 PM
If true, fantastic!

Mark, KW, and Reinsdorf have made me a very happy guy today. They're a couple days early on my wedding present though. What do you think they'll get me for that?!

Edit: I'll accept a win on Friday.

More then one happy guy and girl i think.

upperdeckusc
06-27-2007, 12:25 PM
ESPN Radio 1000 and the wacko-headed Levine said there is no new news to report on a potential extension with Burly.

hmmm. still a little iffy on this whole thing....

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 12:26 PM
This still seems too good to be true. I don't like relying on a sportscrap station for "confirmation." I would hold back on all of the celebrating until a real source comes out with the same details.

*retrieves Dark Lord from storage*

RockJock07
06-27-2007, 12:26 PM
Mully and Hanley: not confirmed but, their sources say that it's done.

voodoochile
06-27-2007, 12:26 PM
hmmm. still a little iffy on this whole thing....

Yeah, I'm going to move it to WTS until we get some kind of official confirmation...

Edit: Nevermind, We'll just get 20 more threads by people convinced they are the first to report it...

dakuda
06-27-2007, 12:27 PM
If this turns out to be true, I am going to go out and buy his jersey.

I picked up Pierzynski w/WS patch after he signed the 4 year deal, I may get a Buehrle now as well.

I am not one to put names on a jersey, but I have been known to make an exception.

BRDSR
06-27-2007, 12:28 PM
ESPN Radio 1000 and the wacko-headed Levine said there is no new news to report on a potential extension with Burly.

Meh...I think at this point Levine is more likely to be wrong than the Score. Think about it. Levine didn't get the scoop. He's pissed. Every Sox fan in Chicago is tuned into the Score right now. Ratings drop. How can we get ratings back up? I know! Lets report the opposite! At worst, everybody will be flipping back and forth.

I won't believe it until it's a story on whitesox.com. However, at this point in the day, if I had to put money on it, I'd believe the Score before I believe Levine.

voodoochile
06-27-2007, 12:30 PM
Meh...I think at this point Levine is more likely to be wrong than the Score. Think about it. Levine didn't get the scoop. He's pissed. Every Sox fan in Chicago is tuned into the Score right now. Ratings drop. How can we get ratings back up? I know! Lets report the opposite! At worst, everybody will be flipping back and forth.

I won't believe it until it's a story on whitesox.com. However, at this point in the day, if I had to put money on it, I'd believe the Score before I believe Levine.

If you were the Sox which station would you leak it to?

Heck, keeping Levine and ESPN in the dark while having their home station break the story would be good for ratings long term..

SoxxoS
06-27-2007, 12:30 PM
Meh...I think at this point Levine is more likely to be wrong than the Score. Think about it. Levine didn't get the scoop. He's pissed. Every Sox fan in Chicago is tuned into the Score right now. Ratings drop. How can we get ratings back up? I know! Lets report the opposite! At worst, everybody will be flipping back and forth.

.

I like the way you think - Nicely played.

balke
06-27-2007, 12:31 PM
If you don't care about how many innings he throws, and assumedly you don't care that he never misses starts, then I don't have much to say other than that we totally disagree on how to evaluate pitching.

I like Danks, Gio, Broadway and Floyd's potential; but none of them have anything to do with the question that I was discussing with whomever before you chimed in. If you want to have a different discussion about the merits of proven veterans vs rookies, we can do that in a different discussion.

You asked who would fill in his spot. I said Danks, and listed a rookie for 5th starter.

If Buehrle is gone, there's no point to me in keeping an expensive Vazquez. If Buehrle stays for as cheap as it seems we got him, then heck yeah keep Vazquez. Buehrle is a way better pitcher than Javy.

If Buehrle is out of that rotation (and returns a good young starter), then it makes more sense to cut loose Javy, and build young and build a bullpen. Why would the Sox need those IP and that salary if they'll have so many holes in the rotation and bullpen?

Javy is a great pitcher for a contender. He's an overpriced and overrated pitcher for a team that isn't going to compete.

upperdeckusc
06-27-2007, 12:32 PM
Meh...I think at this point Levine is more likely to be wrong than the Score. Think about it. Levine didn't get the scoop. He's pissed. Every Sox fan in Chicago is tuned into the Score right now. Ratings drop. How can we get ratings back up? I know! Lets report the opposite! At worst, everybody will be flipping back and forth.

I won't believe it until it's a story on whitesox.com. However, at this point in the day, if I had to put money on it, I'd believe the Score before I believe Levine.

Touche', touche'

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 12:32 PM
If you were the Sox which station would you leak it to?

Heck, keeping Levine and ESPN in the dark while having their home station break the story would be good for ratings long term..

Well said no comeback Voodoo.

balke
06-27-2007, 12:33 PM
If you were the Sox which station would you leak it to?

Heck, keeping Levine and ESPN in the dark while having their home station break the story would be good for ratings long term..

It is the same station that let North ambush Cooper though. But, you're right you give the late breaking stuff to your home network. Someone should tune in to Comcast and see if they are reporting it too.

dakuda
06-27-2007, 12:35 PM
The latest update just said they 'likely' are close to completing the deal for '4 years and around $50M'

Someone just needs to officially confirm this or not....

salty99
06-27-2007, 12:37 PM
Well if the Sox call a press conference then we will know.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 12:37 PM
It is the same station that let North ambush Cooper though. But, you're right you give the late breaking stuff to your home network. Someone should tune in to Comcast and see if they are reporting it too.

Nothing on Comcast. I turned to it while I wait for the Comcast guy to show up at my place.

champagne030
06-27-2007, 12:37 PM
I picked up Pierzynski w/WS patch after he signed the 4 year deal,

IIRC, it's a 3 year deal (3/15M). He's a free agent after next season.

bryPt
06-27-2007, 12:38 PM
Can Phil Roger's be fired now once the contract is signed. I mean this guy has been going after the Sox on all fronts about them NEVER going to sign him, sign him for cheap, etc.... Once MB signs that contract, Phil should be out of a job for all the lies and crap that moron has been writing since last October.

Oh and phil, how is that Big Z signing going?

soxinem1
06-27-2007, 12:38 PM
Not to puit rain on the parade, but this article notes nothing but pure speculation. Even though the story about BOS may be true, it means nothing util the deal is done.

I remember in 2004 when Magglio was supposedly close to signing an extension a few times, and nothing happened.

When I see KW, MB, and JR all smiling at the press conference, I'll believe it.

And if so, good for Buehrle. He would be the first homegrown Sox FA in a long time to not leave in a bitter fashion.

Bucky F. Dent
06-27-2007, 12:39 PM
As we head down the road to our eleven game win streak :D:, this would be very good news.

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 12:39 PM
I just turned the Score on. Did they report this with the urgent BREAKING NEWS sounder ("Now, breaking sports news on WSCR the Score.")? If so, this is a great day!

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 12:39 PM
Well if the Sox call a press conference then we will know.

It might be hard with the team in Tampa. MB is down there; is KW down there or up here?

kba
06-27-2007, 12:40 PM
Rosenthal chimes in:

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6967378

dakuda
06-27-2007, 12:40 PM
IIRC, it's a 3 year deal (3/15M). He's a free agent after next season.

I could remember wrong. Maybe I just remember thinking that is 4 years total. Eh, I am Polish, what do I expect? :D:

CHIsoxNation
06-27-2007, 12:42 PM
It might be hard with the team in Tampa. MB is down there; is KW down there or up here?

I know the paper said that Mark's agent was down there as well. I wouldn't be surprised if Kenny made the trip.

Gammons Peter
06-27-2007, 12:43 PM
Le Vine currently poo-pooing the deal, saying he just spoke with top Sox people and nothing is going on

HotelWhiteSox
06-27-2007, 12:43 PM
ESPN Radio 1000 and the wacko-headed Levine said there is no new news to report on a potential extension with Burly.

More reason to believe the news

Nothing on Chicagosports.com, if it was Zambozo they would at least cite the Score and post it as a report, I remember they gave us weeks/months of 'Zambozo extension Close!/Coming Soon!' headlines





(Of course if the Score is wrong then that would be a *****)

upperdeckusc
06-27-2007, 12:44 PM
Le Vine currently poo-pooing the deal, saying he just spoke with top Sox people and nothing is going on

ugggggghhhhhhhhh:angry:

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 12:45 PM
Le Vine currently poo-pooing the deal, saying he just spoke with top Sox people and nothing is going on

So Levine is contradicting a report by the Sox' flagship radio station?

goon
06-27-2007, 12:46 PM
I'll be waiting for something official, but if the news is true it's very exciting. However, someone needs to go in the rotation to bring in some young position players. There seem to be reports everywhere about the Mets and Contreras which would make a lot of sense for both teams, Jose is a guy who could dominate with the Mets.

Rocky Soprano
06-27-2007, 12:46 PM
Le Vine currently poo-pooing the deal, saying he just spoke with top Sox people and nothing is going on

Like they would tell him anything.

HotelWhiteSox
06-27-2007, 12:47 PM
Le Vine currently poo-pooing the deal, saying he just spoke with top Sox people and nothing is going on

****, it almost sounds to good to be true, if this was all wrong then the Score is dead to me (already deserved it after they were too cheap to pay Rooney)

gf2020
06-27-2007, 12:47 PM
Man, Phil Rogers was right. This organization gets more and more despicable every day.

The other Windsock, Heinebird, in his infinite wisdom said the White Sox should give MB a blank check and offer 5 years for 75 million.

Good Guys 1
Absolutist 0

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 12:48 PM
****, it almost sounds to good to be true, if this was all wrong then the Score is dead to me (already deserved it after they were too cheap to pay Rooney)

Urban legend: Rooney wanted to go to St. Louis. Back to the issue at hand, let's see what Ofman says at noon.

jdm2662
06-27-2007, 12:49 PM
More reason to believe the news

Nothing on Chicagosports.com, if it was Zambozo they would at least cite the Score and post it as a report, I remember they gave us weeks/months of 'Zambozo extension Close!/Coming Soon!' headlines





(Of course if the Score is wrong then that would be a *****)

As I said before, news outlets will do anything to be the first to break such news, just to say they did. This is despite the fact the deal isn't quite done. And I will say it again, I will wait until the ink dries.

Gammons Peter
06-27-2007, 12:52 PM
Wasnt Levine burned yesterday, saying the Jacque Jones deal was final

rocky biddle
06-27-2007, 12:55 PM
Wasnt Levine burned yesterday, saying the Jacque Jones deal was final

Levine's wrong a lot more than he's right. Every offseason he has every free agent "almost locked up" by the Cubs. I also heard him refer to the cubs as 'we' on the MJH show earlier this year. In short, he's a douche.

AJ Hellraiser
06-27-2007, 12:57 PM
Urban legend: Rooney wanted to go to St. Louis. Back to the issue at hand, let's see what Ofman says at noon.

Rooney did want to go to St. Louis... he grew up there... he is a lifelong Cardinals fan....

Not to burst your bubble, but I was covering a Cardinals game last year and saw him on the field during BP.... asked him how the new job was going and if he likes it there better than in Chicago.. he said it couldn't have worked out better and that he'd trade in his White Sox world series ring for a Cardinals one any day of the week

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 12:59 PM
Rooney did want to go to St. Louis... he grew up there... he is a lifelong Cardinals fan....

Not to burst your bubble, but I was covering a Cardinals game last year and saw him on the field during BP.... asked him how the new job was going and if he likes it there better than in Chicago.. he said it couldn't have worked out better and that he'd trade in his White Sox world series ring for a Cardinals one any day of the week

To clarify, I was saying the poster's statement about WSCR lowballing Rooney was urban legend. I was trying to say that Rooney wanted to go to St. Louis.

AJ Hellraiser
06-27-2007, 12:59 PM
On a side note with all this Buehrle contract extension news...

Believe nothing the Sun-Times writes at this point..,since Saturday they have changed course 3 times... first reporting a source close to Buehrle said the pitcher would re-sign in the offseason, then reporting a trade is imminent and now reporting he will re-sign by the end of the week

The only reason this is news (if in fact it is true) is because either KW is trying to push last buttons, that he is upset with the offers thus far and is trying to get a team to panic (which isn't good).. OR he has since realized there is a big market for some other of his players such as Contreras, Vasquez, Dye, Uribe, Iguchi, Thome and Buehrle doesn't need to go

jsg-07
06-27-2007, 01:00 PM
If this has been posted or if someone knows more about how this works then I apologize. But the rumor around my office is that the players union is holding it up because they are ticked that he is extending under "market value."

Can they do that?? Again.. I dont know a whole lot on how this works but if that is the case, that is really ****ty

AJ Hellraiser
06-27-2007, 01:00 PM
To clarify, I was saying the poster's statement about WSCR lowballing Rooney was urban legend. I was trying to say that Rooney wanted to go to St. Louis.

My bad.. I didn't catch that.., sorry!

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 01:01 PM
Ofman says...

...Buehrle "close" to signing the extenstion.

The Immigrant
06-27-2007, 01:01 PM
Mully and Hanley just said the 4/$50 deal "appears to be done" and the sides are just dotting the i's and crossing the t's before the announcement is made.

Offman says "sources tell the Score" that Buehrle is close to signing the deal.

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 01:01 PM
If this has been posted or if someone knows more about how this works then I apologize. But the rumor around my office is that the players union is holding it up because they are ticked that he is extending under "market value."

Can they do that?? Again.. I dont know a whole lot on how this works but if that is the case, that is really ****ty

Are those spreading the rumors in your office Cub fans?

Blob
06-27-2007, 01:02 PM
Just waiting... :unsure: :wired:

jsg-07
06-27-2007, 01:03 PM
Are those spreading the rumors in your office Cub fans?

lol.. no they are in fact sox fans...Again, it may be crap, but I figured this was the place to get something like this answered.

we fired all the cub fans here on Monday!!

veeter
06-27-2007, 01:04 PM
Holy ****!!!!

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 01:05 PM
lol.. no they are in fact sox fans...Again, it may be crap, but I figured this was the place to get something like this answered.

we fired all the cub fans here on Monday!!

MY EYES!!!

:tealtutor:

Meanwhile, Murph is crediting "us" the Sox fans for pressuring the "bean counters" to re-sign Buehrle.

spiffie
06-27-2007, 01:06 PM
If this has been posted or if someone knows more about how this works then I apologize. But the rumor around my office is that the players union is holding it up because they are ticked that he is extending under "market value."

Can they do that?? Again.. I dont know a whole lot on how this works but if that is the case, that is really ****ty
I do remember something about when A-Rod was almost traded to Boston, he was willing to restructure his deal to take less money, but the player's union wouldn't let him take as big a cut as he and the Red Sox were hoping for. Don't know if that's true or not, but I seem to remember it.

HotelWhiteSox
06-27-2007, 01:07 PM
Urban legend: Rooney wanted to go to St. Louis. Back to the issue at hand, let's see what Ofman says at noon.

I am going from what Rooney told am1000 in an interview, who said he would've stayed if the money was right (wanted to feel respected)

cbrownson13
06-27-2007, 01:08 PM
The league would be a better place if more players were like Buehrle and took less money to stay with their teams. If true, this only boosts Mark's reputation as a fan favorite and makes me feel a lot better for spending so much money on that Buehrle jersey last year.

Martinigirl
06-27-2007, 01:08 PM
I hate that I have to listen to Mike Murphy to hear about this story.

hi im skot
06-27-2007, 01:09 PM
I hate that I have to listen to Mike Murphy to hear about this story.

What a lame-o...first time I've ever listened to him...

The Immigrant
06-27-2007, 01:09 PM
I do remember something aboutu when A-Rod was almost traded to Boston, he was willing to restructure his deal to take less money, but the player's union wouldn't let him take as big a cut as he and the Red Sox were hoping for. Don't know if that's true or not, but I seem to remember it.

I believe that was the case and that the CBA prevents teams and players from restructuring deals in a way that leaves the player worse off financially. Those rules should only apply to restructurings of existing agreements, however, not to contract extensions. Mark is getting at least a $3 million annual raise, after all, so it's a different situation.

WS in 05
06-27-2007, 01:10 PM
What does it say to other players in the league that two consecutive years, we have had players take home team discounts!!!

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 01:11 PM
I believe that was the case and that the CBA prevents teams and players from restructuring deals in a way that leaves the player worse off financially. Those rules should only apply to restructurings of existing agreements, however, not to contract extensions. Mark is getting at least a $3 million annual raise, after all, so it's a different situation.

That's my understanding as well. Mark is more than likely worth more money but there really isn't any recourse for the union.

Goose
06-27-2007, 01:11 PM
I am hitting the refresh button like a monkey on this site and 4 others to find something out.

I get nothing.

Lip Man 1
06-27-2007, 01:14 PM
If this comes to be, it would be outstanding news in a season that hasn't had much positive news to talk about.

Now if they could work something out with Garland they could have (at least) a secure front end of the rotation for the 'tweaking,' 'rebuilding' whatever you want to call it.

Lip

voodoochile
06-27-2007, 01:15 PM
I do remember something about when A-Rod was almost traded to Boston, he was willing to restructure his deal to take less money, but the player's union wouldn't let him take as big a cut as he and the Red Sox were hoping for. Don't know if that's true or not, but I seem to remember it.

Different situation. ARod had a contract. He was willing to reduce the already signed contract and the Players Union didn't want to start a trend which might lead to lower contracts down the road or allow teams to demand players take a pay cut ala ARod to get traded to the team they want to go to.

Buehrle has no contract. He should be free to sign for whatever he wants to and the union would have no say even if they might discourage it, they wouldn't hold things up especially without a competing contract on the table (an impossibility at this stage of the game) to point to.

Have no idea whether this deal is actually going down or not, but I am calling bull**** in no uncertain terms on the union portion of said rumor...

BRDSR
06-27-2007, 01:15 PM
I am hitting the refresh button like a monkey on this site and 4 others to find something out.

I get nothing.

Haha, me too. I'm a confirmation away from getting in my car, driving to Grandstand, and purchasing a Buerhle jersey. Last year it was between AJ and Buerhle, and I chose AJ. This resigning would definitely make Buerhle next on the list.

ShoelessJoeS
06-27-2007, 01:16 PM
Hell YES!!!

tebman
06-27-2007, 01:17 PM
Standing by...

:praying:

jsg-07
06-27-2007, 01:17 PM
Have no idea whether this deal is actually going down or not, but I am calling bull**** in no uncertain terms on the union portion of said rumor...[/quote]

I agree and hope that is the case. Again, I had nothing more than an office rumor on the situation. That is why I asked.

Frontman
06-27-2007, 01:19 PM
For those who don't want to listen to Murph, I'd say listen to ESPN, as Mark has been the talk of national radio, as to where he'll wind up. Plus, they do updates every 20 minutes anyways.

And no, I'm not Dan Patrick.

:)

rocky biddle
06-27-2007, 01:19 PM
I can't listen to this Murph show any longer. It's brutal. I'll keep checking here and whitesox.com for updates.

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 01:20 PM
Different situation. ARod had a contract. He was willing to reduce the already signed contract and the Players Union didn't want to start a trend which might lead to lower contracts down the road or allow teams to demand players take a pay cut ala ARod to get traded to the team they want to go to.

Buehrle has no contract. He should be free to sign for whatever he wants to and the union would have no say even if they might discourage it, they wouldn't hold things up especially without a competing contract on the table (an impossibility at this stage of the game) to point to.

Have no idea whether this deal is actually going down or not, but I am calling bull**** in no uncertain terms on the union portion of said rumor...

The only thing he couldn't do is sign a contract for more than 20% less than his 2006 salary (or 30% of 2005) as this is explicitly forbidden by the CBA.

But that scenario doesn't seem very likely.:redneck

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 01:21 PM
The only thing he couldn't do is sign a contract for more than 20% less than his 2006 salary (or 30% of 2005) as this is explicitly forbidden by the CBA.

But that scenario doesn't seem very likely.:redneck

I don't believe that's true. I think those percentages apply to arbitration awards, i.e. a team cannot reduce a players salary in arbitration by more than 20%.

In a new contract, there are no restrictions other than the minimum salary.

SoxxoS
06-27-2007, 01:22 PM
I couldn't think of a worse radio sports talk host than Mike Murphy...and that includes if http://youtube.com/watch?v=W45DRy7M1no that guy was on the radio -

BOOM GOES THE DYNAMITE

BRDSR
06-27-2007, 01:22 PM
The only thing he couldn't do is sign a contract for more than 20% less than his 2006 salary (or 30% of 2005) as this is explicitly forbidden by the CBA.

But that scenario doesn't seem very likely.:redneck

So...what would 19% less than last year's salary be? I'll be LIVID if the White Sox pay him a penny more!

Jaffar
06-27-2007, 01:22 PM
ESPN update reports per Levine that he talked to Buehrle's agent and there are NO TALKS between them and the Sox for a contract.......Somebody is way wrong!

salty99
06-27-2007, 01:23 PM
ESPN update reports per Levine that he talked to Buehrle's agent and there are NO TALKS between them and the Sox for a contract.......Somebody is way wrong!


Yup someone's credibility is going down the toilet.

tebman
06-27-2007, 01:23 PM
I can't listen to this Murph show any longer. It's brutal. I'll keep checking here and whitesox.com for updates.
Good call. Murphy is the luckiest man in Chicago, being able to hold down a job as a radio host for 15 years while having no discernable talent.

And he's a myopic Cub fan.

Get your news on WSI. :gulp:

SoxxoS
06-27-2007, 01:23 PM
The score is in deep **** if this is the case -

Something isn't right...call me captain obvious. http://markramsey.com/wp-content/captain.obvious.jpg

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 01:24 PM
ESPN update reports per Levine that he talked to Buehrle's agent and there are NO TALKS between them and the Sox for a contract.......Somebody is way wrong!

Who would be wrong? The White Sox flagship station or a goofy reporter from a rival station. But if it turns out the Score is wrong, look for a lot of crows to appear at NBC Tower.

Noneck
06-27-2007, 01:25 PM
1 m less a year than Vasquez and 1 more year than Vasquez. It makes no sense for Burls to take this knowing what Zito got. Something stinks! And remember "If something seems to good to be true, It probably is"

Mr. White Sox
06-27-2007, 01:26 PM
Again, I'm not taking stock in anything until I got confirmation from a reliable news source. That includes rumors about trades or signings. I have reformed!

tebman
06-27-2007, 01:26 PM
Who would be wrong? The White Sox flagship station or a goofy reporter from a rival station.

...and the secret word for Levine is "goofy!"

http://timstvshowcase.com/youbety2.jpg

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 01:26 PM
1 m less a year than Vasquez and 1 more year than Vasquez. It makes no sense for Burls to take this knowing what Zito got. Something stinks! And remember "If something seems to good to be true, It probably is"


Vazquez will make $11.5M next year, so the "1M less per year" really doens't mean anything because his current contract isn't comparable (especially since it's subsidized by the DBacks).

It's still cheap, but not because of Vaz.

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 01:27 PM
Ofman's 12:30 update upcoming.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 01:28 PM
Ofman's 12:30 update upcoming.

I'd bet it comes at 12:30.

Noneck
06-27-2007, 01:30 PM
Vazquez will make $11.5M next year, so the "1M less per year" really doens't mean anything because his current contract isn't comparable (especially since it's subsidized by the DBacks).

It's still cheap, but not because of Vaz.

I thought Vasquez got a three-year, $34.5 million contract extension.

Law11
06-27-2007, 01:31 PM
Again, I'm not taking stock in anything until I got confirmation from a reliable news source. That includes rumors about trades or signings. I have reformed!

thank you.
When its on the sox website I'll believe it.

spiffie
06-27-2007, 01:31 PM
I thought Vasquez got a three-year, $34.5 million contract extension.
He did, the extension runs from 2008-2010.

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 01:31 PM
I don't believe that's true. I think those percentages apply to arbitration awards, i.e. a team cannot reduce a players salary in arbitration by more than 20%.

In a new contract, there are no restrictions other than the minimum salary.

Article VI(D)

Maximum Salary Reduction

(1) A Club may not tender, sign or renew a Player under reserve to the Club pursuant to Article XX(A) of this Agreement and paragraph 10(a) of the Uniform Player’s Contract to a Uniform Player’s Contract that provides a salary for Major League service that constitutes a reduction in excess of 20% of his previous year’s salary or in excess of 30% of his salary two years previous.

Article XX(A) states:

Subject to the rights of Players as set forth in this Agreement, each Club may have title to and reserve up to 40 Player contracts. A Club shall retain title to a contract and reservation rights until one of the following occurs:
(1) The Player becomes a free agent, as set forth in this Agreement;

10(a) of the Uniform Player Contract staes:

Unless the Player has exercised his right to become a free agent as set forth in the Basic Agreement, the Club may retain reservation rights over the Player by instructing the Office of the Commissioner to tender to the Player a contract for the term of the next year by including the Player on the Central Tender Letter that the Office of the Commissioner submits to the Players Association on or before December 12 (or if a Sunday, then on or before December 11) in the year of the last playing season covered by this contract.

SoxxoS
06-27-2007, 01:32 PM
Nobody Gives A **** About What Barrett Would Have Done Murph You Garbage Can

Dan Mega
06-27-2007, 01:33 PM
thank you.
When its on the sox website I'll believe it.

Ding ding ding. I hope its true though.

DoItForDanPasqua
06-27-2007, 01:34 PM
1 m less a year than Vasquez and 1 more year than Vasquez. It makes no sense for Burls to take this knowing what Zito got. Something stinks! And remember "If something seems to good to be true, It probably is"

Your right, Buehrle is a top tier pitcher. He can easily get 15m+.

Noneck
06-27-2007, 01:37 PM
He did, the extension runs from 2008-2010.

Thats what I thought, So Burls will be making 1m more a year according to this report than Vasquez in years 2008-2010. It still doesn't make any sense to me why he would take it. It still stinks to me.

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 01:40 PM
Article VI(D)




Maximum Salary Reduction


(1) A Club may not tender, sign or renew a Player under reserve to the Club pursuant to Article XX(A) of this Agreement and paragraph 10(a) of the Uniform Player’s Contract to a Uniform Player’s Contract that provides a salary for Major League service that constitutes a reduction in excess of 20% of his previous year’s salary or in excess of 30% of his salary two years previous.




As your cite notes, this refers to paragraph 10 of the UPC, which is "renewal", and which covers non-FA transactions (renewal for guys not arb-eligible,tendering of contacts for arb-eligible guys, and arb awards).

I do not believe this applies to FA transaction, and this I believe would fall under that.

EDIT: I see you too found the UPC and included it. I still don't believe it applies to this situation since the Sox are effectively signing Buehrle as an FA, but I could be wrong.

The Immigrant
06-27-2007, 01:43 PM
If this report by WSCR turns out to be bogus, I'm heading over to NBC Tower with my trusted pitchfork in hand.

Dan Mega
06-27-2007, 01:43 PM
Ofman's 12:30 update upcoming.

Anything? :pray:

Dan Mega
06-27-2007, 01:44 PM
If this report by WSCR turns out to be bogus, I'm heading over to NBC Tower with my trusted pitchfork in hand.

I'll grab my torch and will be right behind you.

FoulkeFan
06-27-2007, 01:44 PM
Nothing confirmed. :(

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070627&content_id=2052136&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

jsg-07
06-27-2007, 01:44 PM
http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070627&content_id=2052136&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

just saw this on whitesox.com

DoItForDanPasqua
06-27-2007, 01:45 PM
If this report by WSCR turns out to be bogus, I'm heading over to NBC Tower with my trusted pitchfork in hand.

While you're there, demand that they fire Farmer and Singleton.

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 01:46 PM
If this report by WSCR turns out to be bogus, I'm heading over to NBC Tower with my trusted pitchfork in hand.

Will you be able to get past Art Norman when you arrive?

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 01:46 PM
http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070627&content_id=2052136&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

just saw this on whitesox.com
There's no official announcement," a White Sox team spokesman said. "Anything else is speculation."

That makes it really sound like there's something to the report, otherwise I'd expect "we're not talking" or at least "no comment".

Also FWIW, WSCR is still reporting that "sources say Sox & Buehrle are close to a deal". So they're not backing off at all despite I'm sure knowing that levine says Jeff Barry denies any contract talks.

itsnotrequired
06-27-2007, 01:47 PM
As your cite notes, this refers to paragraph 10 of the UPC, which is "renewal", and which covers non-FA transactions (renewal for guys not arb-eligible,tendering of contacts for arb-eligible guys, and arb awards).

I do not believe this applies to FA transaction, and this I believe would fall under that.

EDIT: I see you too found the UPC and included it. I still don't believe it applies to this situation since the Sox are effectively signing Buehrle as an FA, but I could be wrong.

But Buehrle hasn't declared himself a free agent yet. The Sox still have rights to him. I thought you could only go lower if it was a totally new contract (i.e. like after Maggs got hurt). Would a Buehrle signing be an extension of an existing contract or a new contract? If it is an extension, I read it as if the Sox could not lower salary more than 20%. If it was totally new, they could offer less.

spiffie
06-27-2007, 01:47 PM
I notice there's no real denial of anything. They say that there's no official announcement, and that any news is speculation, but nowhere do they refute the idea of the two sides being close to an agreement. Simply that they don't confirm anything at this time. Hopefully this bodes well.

ilsox7
06-27-2007, 01:47 PM
That makes it really sound like there's something to the report, otherwise I'd expect "we're not talking" or at least "no comment".

I was about to post the same thing. That gives me more optimism.

Viva Medias B's
06-27-2007, 01:48 PM
http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070627&content_id=2052136&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

just saw this on whitesox.com

Hmmm. It's not a press release but Scott Merkin's spin on it. It's what we would call "The White Sox would neither confirm nor deny..."

DoItForDanPasqua
06-27-2007, 01:48 PM
Will you be able to get past Art Norman when you arrive?

:rolling:

Flight #24
06-27-2007, 01:48 PM
But Buehrle hasn't declared himself a free agent. The Sox still have rights to him. I thought you could only go lower if it was a totally new contract (i.e. like after Maggs got hurt). Would a Buehrle signing be an extension of an existing contract or a new contract? If it is an extension, I read it as if the Sox could not lower salary more than 20%. If it was totally new, they could offer less.

That's the key question. I know that I have never heard of any such restrictions for example on veterans who want to stay with their team and will take a paycut to do so.

Zisk77
06-27-2007, 01:49 PM
Would tarp sliding be allowed in his contract?

Actually, this was the sticking point in the negotiations. Now, Not only will Mark be allowed to tarp slide during rain delays, but He will be required to do so. Sox rain delays will no be sponsored by slip n slide, which will pay the Sox 85 mil over 5 yrs. to be the official sponser of the Sox rain delay!

kevingrt
06-27-2007, 01:50 PM
Hmmm. It's not a press release but Scott Merkin's spin on it. It's what we would call "The White Sox would neither confirm nor deny..."

Scott Merkin usually puts a optimistic/positive spin on things, which is good in this case.

Steelrod
06-27-2007, 01:53 PM
The holdup is a clause requiring Kenny to surf the tarp during the next rain delay!!