caulfield12 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 We might as well just go ahead and save $3 million and get back a return from either the Yankees or Red Sox. The only problem is that the Tigers would probably claim him first and then we'd have to pull Mark back. But all those teams could desperately use a veteran, proven 2nd or 3rd starter for the playoffs. Note: The only way I would do this is if they were pretty sure from all indications that he wasn't interested in coming back to the Sox in 2012...or if he agreed to come back and they could get a nice return when the team's essentially out of the race and will be bleeding red ink with abysmal attendance the final 5 weeks as all attention turns to the Bears, college football, Blackhawks and Bulls, etc. It doesn't matter whether they win tonight, this team is just not going to be able to play well enough when you make the types of lackadaisiscal plays we've seen from Ramirez, Pierre (that's about the 3rd or 4th time this season we've seen someone go from 1st and home on a single because of an outfielder's nonchalance or lack of awareness of the baserunner.... Alex Rios can't go back on a ball to save his life. I don't care if he had a double. He's been a horrible outfielder this season. He consistently misreads balls hit over his head and just as consistently misreads balls that end up landing in front of him. Really, there have already been four defensive errors because if Rios doesn't overrun that ball coming in and ending up having to throw from almost a dead stop, he gets the runner at home and this game is now tied. Adam Dunn is really going to kill off the fanbase and might be the end of JR too if he has to watch this for another season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Yeah, Mark wouldn't make it nearly that far through Waivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Why would the Tigers block a trade to a team that they are not competing against, when it hurts the team they are directly competing against? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) Because the Tigers don't have a second starter if the playoffs were to start tomorrow, it'd probably be Scherzer. (They are five deep through 2014, so they could easily afford to just "rent" Buehrle for the final five weeks and post-season). The Yankees clearly don't have defined 2nd or 3rd starters. We're going to need to save every penny we can payroll-wise the next 2-3 seasons, might as well start now. It already began with Teahen and Jackson being shed. Edited August 24, 2011 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 10:48 PM) Because the Tigers don't have a second starter if the playoffs were to start tomorrow, it'd probably be Scherzer. (They are five deep through 2014, so they could easily afford to just "rent" Buehrle for the final five weeks and post-season). The Yankees clearly don't have defined 2nd or 3rd starters. We're going to need to save every penny we can payroll-wise the next 2-3 seasons, might as well start now. It already began with Teahen and Jackson being shed. They're going to shed some next year, but they'll still have a lot of pieces in place (or rather, immovable contracts) for next year. I imagine whoever is in charge will sell off some pieces while trying to bring in others to fill holes to try and patch the team up as they go into rebuilding mode. I have a feeling that next year is going to be a lot like 2007 or 2008 with no real in between. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Does he have a no trade clause? It would be nice to let him go pitch for a playoff team if he wants to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 He has full 10 and 5 rights. He would have to agree to any trade, or it would become part of the negotiation. Not sure he would agree to go to DET, but NY and Boston would be tough decisions for him and his family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 He has an automatic option picked up if traded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 11:48 PM) Because the Tigers don't have a second starter if the playoffs were to start tomorrow, it'd probably be Scherzer. (They are five deep through 2014, so they could easily afford to just "rent" Buehrle for the final five weeks and post-season). The Yankees clearly don't have defined 2nd or 3rd starters. We're going to need to save every penny we can payroll-wise the next 2-3 seasons, might as well start now. It already began with Teahen and Jackson being shed. Then the Tigers would be putting in a claim to actually try and swing a trade, not do it as a block against other teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 01:23 AM) Then the Tigers would be putting in a claim to actually try and swing a trade, not do it as a block against other teams. And the White Sox would not trade him to the Tigers. Thus, a waiver claim block. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balfanman Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 12:03 AM) He has an automatic option picked up if traded. Hasn't this been proven false on numerous occasions? I believe that option expired in 2009. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (balfanman @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 04:17 AM) Hasn't this been proven false on numerous occasions? I believe that option expired in 2009. This is true. And you're not going to get anything worthwhile for one month of Mark Buehrle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 04:22 AM) This is true. And you're not going to get anything worthwhile for one month of Mark Buehrle. Without seeing the specific literature of the contract, I don't think anybody can be sure. There was a no-trade clause put in place during like years 8 and 9 of Buehrle's contract, but nothing beyond that, and anytime he was traded during those times, he was awarded an extra million per year left on his contract along with an additional $15 million guaranteed for the following season. That's all the general public knows. I saw reported this year, which could have simply been a reporter rehashing something from 2008 (and I personally believe that to be the case) that Buehrle did gain the extra year if he were to be traded. I don't believe that is true, and I think the reason Buehrle wanted the no-trade clause was because he did not want to be traded. -- These "trade everybody" threads really need to stop. Start them in October...I don't give a f***. They are pointless at this point in time. Honestly, what are you going to get for Mark Buehrle right now? Joe Smith? Sorry, he's relieving for the Indians. John Johnson? Sorry, the one you're looking for is dead. Steve Smith? Sorry, think the Dodgers are going to hold on to him...as well as the Panthers...and I suppose the Eagles...and I don't know why the Sox would want my old neighbor. At this point in time, you don't do a goddamn thing. Trading anybody is stupid, trading for anybody is stupid. Let this ship, with it's captain and co-captain, sink or swim on its own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) 2008: full no-trade clause 2009 - July 15, 2010: limited no-trade protection allowing Buehrle to block trades to certain unspecified clubs. A trade triggers an escalator paying $1M raise to $15M annually, plus a guaranteed fifth year paying $15M for 2012. July 16, 2010-2011: Buehrle may not be traded without his permission, under right as 10-and-5 player Fine, but it's stupid if they're going to lose Buehrle anyway just to hold on to him until the end of the season and not get anything back in return. And it's not about "trading everybody," this is one specific player, perhaps the only one in this particular situation on the roster that's needed for a specific purpose on another playoff team. If nothing else, they could save $3+ million dollars, if they're so deperate not to lose money this year. What are they going to do, offer arbritation and play the same game they played before with Cabrera to get a draft pick? Then you end up with Mark Buehrle at $15+ million plus for 2012 instead of a 2-3 year deal at a much more reasonable number they actually might be willing to pay to keep him in the fold. Why did we trade some of our veterans at the end of 2009 then during the same time period? This ship has already sunk. It's now simply about rearranging the deck chairs and saving as many people (or as much money) as possible. Same rationale went into giving up Ray Durham for Jon Adkins. They wanted to look at Willie Harris then and save money. We need to start assessing every aspect of this team for next year...if Buehrle's not going to be around, what's the point? You're telling me the Yankees would prefer to start Ivan Nova and Phil Hughes over Buehrle? I don't think so. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...0,5482496.story Edited August 24, 2011 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Has Mark ever shown any interest in going to Boston or New York? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 The time to trade anybody was before the deadline. But we were 'in it,' ya know. Our sparkling second-half record under Ozzie over the years was proof enough that a run was imminent. Whoops! This is the most clueless/directionless organization in baseball right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) Well, we still have to rank ahead of the Astros, Cubs, Dodgers, Orioles, Mariners and probably the Mets. Although that's not saying much. And the sleeping giant on the northside could quickly reawaken with the right GM and manager in place and "stats-first" players like Ramirez and Soriano gone (yes, he has the same number of years as Dunn/Rios but the Cubs' new GM will be more likely to have the freedom dumping him than anyone the Sox have in that position vis a via Rios/Dunn/Peavy). After today, there's about a 90% probability we'll be 7 1/2 GB. Story on Billy Beane/Moneyball/current state of the game for "small market" teams http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/24/sports/b...&ref=sports Edited August 24, 2011 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 07:52 AM) Well, we still have to rank ahead of the Astros, Cubs, Dodgers, Orioles, Mariners and probably the Mets. Although that's not saying much. And the sleeping giant on the northside could quickly reawaken with the right GM and manager in place and "stats-first" players like Ramirez and Soriano gone (yes, he has the same number of years as Dunn/Rios but the Cubs' new GM will be more likely to have the freedom dumping him than anyone the Sox have in that position vis a via Rios/Dunn/Peavy). After today, there's about a 90% probability we'll be 7 1/2 GB. There might be teams more clueless. There might be teams more directionless. But NO team, IMO, is more clueless AND directionless than the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AvIc...ndidates_082211 We could only dream about one of these guys. Instead, it will be Rick Hahn, Kim Ng or someone totally off the radar. Probably Josh Byrnes would be the best pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I'd off myself if they got Friedman. A dynasty (within the division) would be on the horizon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 http://www.csnchicago.com/08/23/11/Rays-wr...&feedID=661 http://www.businessinsider.com/andrew-frie...t-pujols-2011-8 Friedman to the Astros still seems the most likeliest... And we know JR isn't going to reverse course and pay his GM among the Top 3-5 in the game...although with how much money they've wasted the last 3 seasons, it's almost unfathomable why they wouldn't want to spend more money on management/scouting/development/drafting/international free agents and LESS on the payroll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pants Rowland Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 07:38 AM) Has Mark ever shown any interest in going to Boston or New York? Well, I do recall he wanted to pitch in Yankee Stadium but Jerry Manuel started Cotts instead. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share Posted August 24, 2011 Coming into that series, we had a legit chance to get a three game sweep, too. I remember Jim Kaat saying that the Sox were the best team in baseball (at that time). And, of course, Cotts wet the bed. Thankfully, he did something positive 2 years later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 05:08 AM) Does he have a no trade clause? It would be nice to let him go pitch for a playoff team if he wants to do so. He should have been pitching for a World Series contender this year. The Chisox! If we don't get it this year there is next year and you need pitchers like Mark Buerhle to lead your pitching staff. This idea of tearing the whole team apart isn't anything more than emotions. I don't blame folks for being frustarted and all but think long term Edited August 24, 2011 by elrockinMT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 09:26 AM) He should have been pitching for a World Series contender this year. The Chisox! If we don't get it this year there is next year and you need pitchers like Mark Buerhle to lead your pitching staff. This idea of tearing the whole team apart isn't anything more than emotions. I don't blame folks for being frustarted and all but think long term Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.webp.29cc6c9fee0f01ceeb4f722593e5e3ba.webp)
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.