Sox Lockup Vazquez to Contract Ext.

[RockRaines]

When I was in Tucson last year, I was sitting right behind homeplate and could see the gun they had set up there. I am not kidding when I say Buerhle was topping out at 80, and this was the last week or so of spring training.

He was downright spent last year. I have already liked what i saw this year. I believe his fastball avg speed last year was the second or third slowest in the league at about 84 mph.

[Chisoxfn]

He was downright spent last year. I have already liked what i saw this year. I believe his fastball avg speed last year was the second or third slowest in the league at about 84 mph.

His years of not really working out in the off-season caught up to him. I really do think Mark has the ability to be a Glavine type of pitcher (albeit he's more like a less dominant left handed version of Maddux and no he's nowhere near as good as Maddux who in my mind is one of the 20 best pitchers ever).

 

This off-season he apparently realized that as you get older you have to work harder and I think he's going to be much more like his old self. Its not like he ever relied on amazing stuff, but when you do lose that much off your fastball it means that inevitably all your pitches velocities get closer and teams just start to flat out tee off on you.

[NorthSideSox72]

A 91 MPH fastball in spring training was all I needed to see. I have full faith in Buehrle being the guy we all have known and loved as Sox fans and not the guy that was absolutely downright abysmal over the 2nd half of last season.

Wow. 91? I saw him pitch Monday, but I didn't see the radar (no display anywhere I could find). He looked decent, but that is huge if his velocity is back up to that point.

 

I may need to change my statement about MB being a disappointment next year...

[southsider2k5]

He was downright spent last year. I have already liked what i saw this year. I believe his fastball avg speed last year was the second or third slowest in the league at about 84 mph.

 

The lack of difference between his fastball and his change, is what killed him. If he is back sitting around 90 with his heat, he is going to be spectacular.

[Chisoxfn]

Wow. 91? I saw him pitch Monday, but I didn't see the radar (no display anywhere I could find). He looked decent, but that is huge if his velocity is back up to that point.

 

I may need to change my statement about MB being a disappointment next year...

I just remember seeing a clip somewhere. I also remember a quote from Graffy turning around and asking the catcher if Mark was throwing harder this year.

 

So I don't think he's consistently doing it but his velocity is back and I'd imagine he'll be more in the 86-89/90 MPH range. I have only seen the WGN game so I can't comment on how he's actually pitched.

[Harry Chappas]

In other words, you see the logic in giving 11 million per year to a guy who's been a total s***bag for 75% of his career, but one bad halfseason (in six full seasons) for Buehrle changes your entire opinion of him?

 

Makes total sense to me.

 

Mark Buerhle's going rate is $15M. Javier Vazquez's is $11M. Is your point that you think right now we should pay Buerhle the Zito contract he is looking for??????? It is not a decision of taking one over the other it is a decision as to which deals help the club in the long run.

[Hideaway Lights]

Mark Buerhle's going rate is $15M. Javier Vazquez's is $11M. Is your point that you think right now we should pay Buerhle the Zito contract he is looking for??????? It is not a decision of taking one over the other it is a decision as to which deals help the club in the long run.

 

My point is that the dude sees the logic in paying Vazquez $11M when Vazquez has been literally all over the map statistically over the past 5 years, but the ace of our staff has one bad 10 decision stretch and suddenly we're questioning his basic ability.

 

It's bonkers. In my opinion, rookies could be groomed to do what Vazquez does at far cheaper for 09 and 10. We have Vazquez for 07 already locked up. 08 would be the only real question mark, and if had Mark in my opinion it would really not be.

[southsider2k5]

My point is that the dude sees the logic in paying Vazquez $11M when Vazquez has been literally all over the map statistically over the past 5 years, but the ace of our staff has one bad 10 decision stretch and suddenly we're questioning his basic ability.

 

It's bonkers. In my opinion, rookies could be groomed to do what Vazquez does at far cheaper for 09 and 10. We have Vazquez for 07 already locked up. 08 would be the only real question mark, and if had Mark in my opinion it would really not be.

 

And actually even better than that, if we have people we feel are capable of giving us a Vazquez type preformance, that contract is EXTREMELY tradable on the open market right now. The contract and length are just long enough to give a team security of knowing he will be around, without being one of the idiotic Meche for 5 years type deals. This is literally the best of both worlds, and really opens up options for us, instead of forcing us to either sign someone else for a more expensive contract, overpay in a trade, or throw someone to the wolves who isn't ready.

[Hideaway Lights]

And actually even better than that, if we have people we feel are capable of giving us a Vazquez type preformance, that contract is EXTREMELY tradable on the open market right now. The contract and length are just long enough to give a team security of knowing he will be around, without being one of the idiotic Meche for 5 years type deals. This is literally the best of both worlds, and really opens up options for us, instead of forcing us to either sign someone else for a more expensive contract, overpay in a trade, or throw someone to the wolves who isn't ready.

 

I like the idea of having three starting vets and a couple of kids that we develop, I just like Mark in there more than Vaz. Hopefully we'll find a way to get Mark done, but I don't think so.

[southsider2k5]

I like the idea of having three starting vets and a couple of kids that we develop, I just like Mark in there more than Vaz. Hopefully we'll find a way to get Mark done, but I don't think so.

 

I am not sure what to think to be honest. Bruce Levine made it sound like they shouldn't be too far apart in their numbers, but both the Trib and ST quoted the infamous anonymous sources as saying they were no where near each other. If the offer from Mark's camp is indeed 4/52, I think a deal will get done. If Mark is using Barry Zito's deal as a serious basis for his negotiations, they are not going to have a chance in hell of getting a deal done, because he is going to be looking for at least 5 years, and something over $15 million a year. I think most everyone would rather have Mark locked up long term, but there are budgetary things to be considered. The fact of the matter is that Vazquez came to the Sox with an offer that was undermarket value for both years and dollars, by a ton, and Mark Buehrle has not. Who knows where Buehrle's camp is asking right now? I would really like to hear a firm wisper before I trash anyone on either side for this.

[ptatc]

I like the idea of having three starting vets and a couple of kids that we develop, I just like Mark in there more than Vaz. Hopefully we'll find a way to get Mark done, but I don't think so.

 

Your basic premise is correct. I would rather have MB than JV. But there is no way MB will sign for anything less than double the value of that deal. That would be about 5/14mil or so. He''ll get it but I would not lock a pitcher up for that long. It's a good deal for the flexibility in the pitching staff as others have stated. We keep him as a veteran innings eater if the kids have problems. If the kids do well, it's an easily tradable contract.

[hitlesswonder]

If Mark is using Barry Zito's deal as a serious basis for his negotiations, they are not going to have a chance in hell of getting a deal done, because he is going to be looking for at least 5 years, and something over $15 million a year.

 

Zito's contract is 7 years at 18M per year. 5 at 15 would be a significant discount.

[VAfan]

It doesn't matter whether JV's contract is "under market value" or better than Gil Meche's. That is completely irrelevant. What matters is whether he will continue to perform as he has over the past several years and be a .500 pitcher with an ERA in the high-4s, or will he learn to command his stuff and start winning like Jon Garland has done.

 

If it is the former, then this was a bad deal b/c between Floyd, Gio, Danks, Haeger, Masset, Sisco, Phillips, Broadway, etc., etc., etc. we ought to be able to find an extra pitcher by 2009 for the ML minimum who can be a .500 pitcher with an ERA in the high-4s. Then we could take the $10 million saved and devote it to building an outfield of major league players. Forget about Buehrle -- he's not coming back given the current market for pitchers. But the guy we could keep with that extra money almost won league-MVP honors last year and was the MVP of our WS victory.

 

If Javy somehow starts turning in 17-10 seasons, with ERAs in the low 4s or high 3s, then this deal will have been worth it. I think the likelihood of that is not high, but it is high enough that I'm not completely trashing this deal.

 

One other point -- forget about KW suddenly MOVING JV. It ain't going to happen. He's been after the guy for years, and now that he got him, he extended him out longer than any other pitcher on our staff. If JV collapses, KW won't be able to move him, and if he continues at his mediocre level, KW will always hope he can turn it around. I expect, for good or bad, we are going to have JV around for the next 4 years.

[YASNY]

It doesn't matter whether JV's contract is "under market value" or better than Gil Meche's. That is completely irrelevant. What matters is whether he will continue to perform as he has over the past several years and be a .500 pitcher with an ERA in the high-4s, or will he learn to command his stuff and start winning like Jon Garland has done.

 

If it is the former, then this was a bad deal b/c between Floyd, Gio, Danks, Haeger, Masset, Sisco, Phillips, Broadway, etc., etc., etc. we ought to be able to find an extra pitcher by 2009 for the ML minimum who can be a .500 pitcher with an ERA in the high-4s. Then we could take the $10 million saved and devote it to building an outfield of major league players. Forget about Buehrle -- he's not coming back given the current market for pitchers. But the guy we could keep with that extra money almost won league-MVP honors last year and was the MVP of our WS victory.

 

If Javy somehow starts turning in 17-10 seasons, with ERAs in the low 4s or high 3s, then this deal will have been worth it. I think the likelihood of that is not high, but it is high enough that I'm not completely trashing this deal.

 

One other point -- forget about KW suddenly MOVING JV. It ain't going to happen. He's been after the guy for years, and now that he got him, he extended him out longer than any other pitcher on our staff. If JV collapses, KW won't be able to move him, and if he continues at his mediocre level, KW will always hope he can turn it around. I expect, for good or bad, we are going to have JV around for the next 4 years.

 

That last line makes me think the possibility of Mark getting 4 years is possible. Effectively, Javy now has a 4 year/$47 million contract.