YASNY Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(aboz56 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:32 PM) I still don't prefer trading him before the season starts. In a sense it would be a White Flag deal for the 2007 campaign and could really look bad for the organization. This is a pivotal year for us to get back into the playoffs (Thome isn't getting any younger, Dye will be a FA and Crede's future is uncertain) and I don't see us doing it by trading away two veterans like Garcia and Buehrle. Tough spot for KW. Aboz in favor of trading Mark? That'll be the day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 11:27 AM) Well, instead of speculating about what we would get for Mark if we dealt him right now, let's assume it would fall somewhere in between what Freddy and McCarthy netted us. Is that something we are ready to accept? No. I would want to get at least the equivalent of what McCarthy netted us...2 solid, ready or nearly ready MLB caliber players/top prospects, and something else thrown in to sweeten the deal. A lefty who should chew up 230 innings should be at the top of the list for a lot of teams. Hell, how much were the A's talking about for Zito last offseason? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 02:38 PM) Aboz in favor of trading Mark? That'll be the day! If we deal him, unless we get back a MLB ready starter, we are looking at 2004 all over again with a Roulette Wheel rotation, at least that's the way I see it. Garland Contreras Vazquez ????? ????? Throw in the fact that Vazquez is not that good and our pitching could be awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:38 PM) No. I would want to get at least the equivalent of what McCarthy netted us...2 solid, ready or nearly ready MLB caliber players/top prospects, and something else thrown in to sweeten the deal. A lefty who should chew up 230 innings should be at the top of the list for a lot of teams. Hell, how much were the A's talking about for Zito last offseason? I agree. I think MB should net more than B-Mac did, actually. Ideally, a leftfielder who is significantly better than Pods, and 2 high level pitchers as you described them. That would probably make me pull the trigger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:38 PM) No. I would want to get at least the equivalent of what McCarthy netted us...2 solid, ready or nearly ready MLB caliber players/top prospects, and something else thrown in to sweeten the deal. A lefty who should chew up 230 innings should be at the top of the list for a lot of teams. Hell, how much were the A's talking about for Zito last offseason? Well, from what I understand, they wanted Heilman and Milledge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(aboz56 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:39 PM) If we deal him, unless we get back a MLB ready starter, we are looking at 2004 all over again with a Roulette Wheel rotation, at least that's the way I see it. Garland Contreras Vazquez ????? ????? Throw in the fact that Vazquez is not that good and our pitching could be awful. Oh, don't take me so literally. You're a huge MB fan and I was tweaking you on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:40 PM) I agree. I think MB should net more than B-Mac did, actually. Ideally, a leftfielder who is significantly better than Pods, and 2 high level pitchers as you described them. That would probably make me pull the trigger. Guys, haven't we learned our lesson already? Mark is not going to net more than McCarthy. With these salaries skyrocketing, and Buehrle becoming a FA after next year, he isn't going to get more than a guy who is ml ready with 5 years left before he can become a free agent. It just isn't going to happen. Edited December 28, 2006 by iamshack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 02:41 PM) Oh, don't take me so literally. You're a huge MB fan and I was tweaking you on that. I prefer a Buehrle apologist. Thank you very much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(aboz56 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:39 PM) If we deal him, unless we get back a MLB ready starter, we are looking at 2004 all over again with a Roulette Wheel rotation, at least that's the way I see it. Garland Contreras Vazquez ????? ????? Throw in the fact that Vazquez is not that good and our pitching could be awful. Throw in the fact that Garland isn't that good, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 I'm really starting to see KW's logic. Much as I like Buerhle, if you can get 3 top tier young pitchers for him just at the cusp of ML play (or 2 pitchers and a couple very high level positional prospects), I say do it. And use the money to get us the best leftfielder money can buy. And after all of that, we'd STILL have money to burn. Remember that Buehrle is a rental. And that he is coming off a genuinely bad season. I don't think KW could get 3 top tier prospects for him. He got only 1 top tier prospect for Garcia. I say do it. And use the money to get us the best leftfielder money can buy. If you mean this offseason, then it doesn't matter how much money you free up, there are no decent OFers still on the market. Trading Buehrle would cap a white flag offseason, thus giving up completely on 2007. I can't get behind that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:42 PM) Guys, haven't we learned our lesson already? Mark is not going to net more than McCarthy. With these salaries skyrocketing, and Buehrle becoming a FA after next year, he isn't going to get more than a guy who is ml ready with 5 years left before he can become a free agent. It just isn't going to happen. I think that's probably true. But let's not underestimate the stupidity of some General Managers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:44 PM) Remember that Buehrle is a rental. And that he is coming off a genuinely bad season. I don't think KW could get 3 top tier prospects for him. He got only 1 top tier prospect for Garcia. I say do it. And use the money to get us the best leftfielder money can buy. If you mean this offseason, then it doesn't matter how much money you free up, there are no decent OFers still on the market. Trading Buehrle would cap a white flag offseason, thus giving up completely on 2007. I can't get behind that. Getting the best LF money can buy doesn't necessarily mean a free agent. There are other ways. I will admit that trading Buerhle puts this offseason over a certain line. As of this moment, I feel this team is a little better than at the end of 2006, and WAY better for 2008 and beyond. If we trade Buerhle though, even if we get what I projected, a logical argument could be made that we will take a step back in 2007. White Flag? Uh, no. But our pitching strength is certainly diminished, or at least there is a strong probability it will be diminshed (not a known fact, of course). But even at that, I think if the offer is truly spectacular, it has to be considered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwolf68 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 02:44 PM) Throw in the fact that Garland isn't that good, too. And throw in the fact Vazquez isn't that good either. I'd rather have Jon Garland any day of the week and twice on Sundays over that headcase Vazquez. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:48 PM) I will admit that trading Buerhle puts this offseason over a certain line. As of this moment, I feel this team is a little better than at the end of 2006, and WAY better for 2008 and beyond. If we trade Buerhle though, even if we get what I projected, a logical argument could be made that we will take a step back in 2007. White Flag? Uh, no. But our pitching strength is certainly diminished, or at least there is a strong probability it will be diminshed (not a known fact, of course). But even at that, I think if the offer is truly spectacular, it has to be considered. Agreed. And Kenny would at least consider it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(kwolf68 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:48 PM) And throw in the fact Vazquez isn't that good either. I'd rather have Jon Garland any day of the week and twice on Sundays over that headcase Vazquez. I'd prefer Vazquez though neither are my idea of Aces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 (edited) I'd prefer Vazquez though neither are my idea of Aces. I think both are pretty solid #3 starters, with Vazquez being more erratic from year to year. What this team really needs is a dependable ace. Best case scenario, when do you think Danks could actually pitch like an ace for a full season in the majors? I'd say the best (reasonable) case would be 2009. - edited to change 2008 to 2009. I think 2008 will be Danks first full season in the majors and I doubt he'd pitch like an ace in that season. 2009 is more reasonable if he progresses to ace pitching. Edited December 28, 2006 by SoxHawk1980 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:59 PM) They trade Buerhle, it will be looked at as a White flag deal, and the Chicago media will tear Williams and the Sox apart. Now I'm not saying it would be the wrong move. I am an advocate of seeing what you can get for Mark now, but at the same time, you have to look at the big big picture, and that includes the casual fan and media. Trading 3 starting pitchers, 2 of which were faces of the World Series club really hurt the image of the club, at least to the general public. A good baseball move always isn't a good marketing move, and some times those things have to be looked at. As Boz said, Kenny is in a very tough spot here. You stick with Mark, he plays out the season, we see what happens. The season is over, he walks, we get picks back that wont be ready till AT least 2010, and who knows if they ever make it out of AA. Or, do you see if you can get some AA-AAA guys now, take a step backwards in 07, and really get ready for 08 and beyond? I like that idea, but having an "off" year in 07 might not fly with alot of fans... You are definitely right about the fans. And if, for example, Buerhle and/or Crede, two of the most popular players on the team, get sent packing before 2007... there will be consequences. Winning is big, but not everything. To clarify, move Buerhle now if you get a really great offer, like what I said earlier. But the offer would need to be really, really great, and involve at least one pitcher ready to go in 2007 and do well. If that offer isn't out there, then leave him there for his last year, and let the crew of impressive young arms develop for a year. I just can no longer say "keep Buerhle regardless" anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 01:58 PM) I think both are pretty solid #3 starters, with Vazquez being more erratic from year to year. What this team really needs is a dependable ace. Best case scenario, when do you think Danks could actually pitch like an ace for a full season in the majors? I'd say the best (reasonable) case would be 2009. - edited to change 2008 to 2009. I think 2008 will be Danks first full season in the majors and I doubt he'd pitch like an ace in that season. 2009 is more reasonable if he progresses to ace pitching. I think that even with his erratic nature I'd prefer Vazquez to Garland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 02:03 PM) You are definitely right about the fans. And if, for example, Buerhle and/or Crede, two of the most popular players on the team, get sent packing before 2007... there will be consequences. Winning is big, but not everything. To clarify, move Buerhle now if you get a really great offer, like what I said earlier. But the offer would need to be really, really great, and involve at least one pitcher ready to go in 2007 and do well. If that offer isn't out there, then leave him there for his last year, and let the crew of impressive young arms develop for a year. I just can no longer say "keep Buerhle regardless" anymore. So your saying there wouldn't be any significant fan uproar when we let Mark walk with nothing but two draft picks in return? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 12:04 PM) So your saying there wouldn't be any significant fan uproar when we let Mark walk with nothing but two draft picks in return? How much uproar was there when the Sox let Ordonez walk for no draft picks? (And from genuine Sox fans, not from Mariotti, who would create uproar either way) Edited December 28, 2006 by Balta1701 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 03:04 PM) So your saying there wouldn't be any significant fan uproar when we let Mark walk with nothing but two draft picks in return? If you offer something like 6/90 and he turns it down, a lot of the fans will live with it. Of course the ignoramuses will b**** and moan for a while, but I'd rather go the arbitration route with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 02:04 PM) So your saying there wouldn't be any significant fan uproar when we let Mark walk with nothing but two draft picks in return? Oh, there would be uproar either way. The average fan will complain about anything and everything, realistic or unrealistic. There would be a share who complained even if we signed him to a lucrative deal, saying we spent too much $ for a soft-tosser. We all know how this town works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 02:04 PM) So your saying there wouldn't be any significant fan uproar when we let Mark walk with nothing but two draft picks in return? There will be uproar no matter what, at this point, unless the team were to sign Buerhle to a new long-term deal. But in reality, that sort of deal might make the team a lot worse in the long run. That is KW's tough spot, as was pointed out earlier. Now, which will cause a worse fan reaction - trading Buerhle, or losing him after 2007? If you take a new contract out of the picture, for this question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 So your saying there wouldn't be any significant fan uproar when we let Mark walk with nothing but two draft picks in return? I think there would be much less. If you let leak that Buehrle is asking for $15+ million a year for 4+ years and then say that the team is going to spend that money to fill other holes, that would quell much fan unrest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Dec 28, 2006 -> 02:08 PM) I think there would be much less. If you let leak that Buehrle is asking for $15+ million a year for 4+ years and then say that the team is going to spend that money to fill other holes, that would quell much fan unrest. No it wouldn't. Logic might tell you that makes sense, but there would be plenty of b****ing in the fan base about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.