elrockinMT Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 06:41 PM) My prediction was 4/58 from Washington. I'm sticking with that until further notice. No reason we can't match that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 06:22 PM) what is this crap? you are the one telling us we need to keep the car because the front right cv joint was recently replaced, and the rear passenger side tire is kind of new, and the steering wheel isnt so bad. Crap? I beg your pardon. I didn't say it was my position just my interpretation of others opinions. I do think trading away our best players is extreme. I am not a flip flopper. Apology accepted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 12:30 PM) No reason we can't match that By your logic, there's no reason the Sox can't match an offer of 10 years and $300,000,000. They could match just about anything, but it doesn't make sense to do so depending on the money and years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 12:29 PM) I think the Sox should offer 4 with a no trade clause, or three with options. There is no reason we can't match what others might put out there moneywise and we can offer the years and no trade clause others might not If the Sox resign him, he automatically has a no trade because of 10-5 rights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 07:37 PM) By your logic, there's no reason the Sox can't match an offer of 10 years and $300,000,000. They could match just about anything, but it doesn't make sense to do so depending on the money and years. 10 years. That is a bit extreme. But, $14-$16M is not out of the question. Do you think he will get more from someone? I suppose that is possible too right? Edited December 4, 2011 by elrockinMT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 07:39 PM) If the Sox resign him, he automatically has a no trade because of 10-5 rights That is true now that I think about it. Doesn't he have that now with the Sox? Most likely then it will boil down to years and money. I wonder which is more important to MB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 (edited) Rosenthal Q & A with KW As usual, not tipping hand. Most interesting quote from him: The first domino that falls for us will kind of give you an indication one way or another, which way we’re going. But we’re not sure just yet. Edited December 4, 2011 by Marty34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 12:43 PM) That is true now that I think about it. Doesn't he have that now with the Sox? Most likely then it will boil down to years and money. I wonder which is more important to MB? Yes he does Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 SI_JonHeyman Jon Heyman buehrle a very popular free agent w/ 14 teams in mix. minn, az among surprise entrants, but $14M salary target steep for them 3 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (DirtySox @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 07:16 PM) SI_JonHeyman Jon Heyman buehrle a very popular free agent w/ 14 teams in mix. minn, az among surprise entrants, but $14M salary target steep for them 3 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply If he goes to Minnesota it'll will be really hard to follow the Sox any more. That would be a kick in the gut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Ken_Rosenthal Ken Rosenthal Sources: #Rangers, #Nationals, #Marlins most aggressive on Buehrle. Nats prefer shorter deal on Buehrle to longer one with Wilson. #MLB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 12:41 PM) 10 years. That is a bit extreme. But, $14-$16M is not out of the question. Do you think he will get more from someone? I suppose that is possible too right? With the number of teams in on him, anything in the high teens would not surprise me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 02:07 PM) With the number of teams in on him, anything in the high teens would not surprise me. With the numbers of teams in on him, we have to be nearing 4 year territory soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 • John Danks: It's even tough for Kenny Williams' fellow GMs to get a good feel for what he's really up to. But one of them says the White Sox are sending out the vibe they're "looking to dump guys making $6-9 million." So that means Gavin Floyd and Carlos Quentin are also in this mix, both because they fit inside those price points and because, like Danks, they're a year away from free agency. But Williams has been especially active in trying to shop Danks, whose numbers slipped across the board this season. So far, though, the asking price has been "ridiculous," said an official of one club that checked in. The Yankees, for example, have told other clubs they were asked for both Jesus Montero and their top pitching prospect, Manny Banuelos. And that price will need to drop if the White Sox sincerely want to move this fellow. http://espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove11/story/_/...-meetings-big-d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 02:07 PM) With the number of teams in on him, anything in the high teens would not surprise me. With the amount of teams that are in.. some one is going to get stupid and really over pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 12:21 PM) With the amount of teams that are in.. some one is going to get stupid and really over pay. If all he's asking is 3/14 why didn't we sign him to an extension? Rios, Dunn, and Peavy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 02:26 PM) If all he's asking is 3/14 why didn't we sign him to an extension? Rios, Dunn, and Peavy? Yes, yes and yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 12:30 PM) Yes, yes and yes. I could see the sox signing Mark for 4/56 - trading Q to help with Mark's salary for 2012... this does three things... 1.) allows KW to drive up prices on Danks / Floyd and trade one of them 2.) adds no payroll this year 3.) would give the PR department something to spin towards ticket sales Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (DirtySox @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 02:17 PM) http://espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove11/story/_/...-meetings-big-d I'm glad they're starting the bidding so high. But, I thought Floyd had more than a year left on his contract? QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 02:21 PM) With the amount of teams that are in.. some one is going to get stupid and really over pay. Indeed. QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 02:30 PM) Yes, yes and yes. Well, plus the fact that Buehrle seems to want to test free agency. And he's not going to come back here for 3/14 when some other team might do 4/16. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 It makes no sense for the Sox to trade upwards of 3 or 4 guys in order to gather the funds to re-sign Buehrle. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face. If they trade all of those guys, it's almost certainly a rebuild. So, what's the point of bring Buehrle back in that scenario? Because we don't want to see him in another uniform? That's childish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Per Rosenthal: Buehrle, 32, has spent his entire 12-year career with the White Sox, but is intrigued by the National League, sources said. He might thrive in the less offensively oriented NL, and one scout says it would be “a good career move.” I actually think him wanting to go to the NL is a factor in all this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 02:38 PM) I actually think him wanting to go to the NL is a factor in all this. I agree. It would actually make me happy for him if the Cardinals could somehow swing it, but it's not going to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 02:41 PM) I agree. It would actually make me happy for him if the Cardinals could somehow swing it, but it's not going to happen. You look back at last year and the Sox kind of did him a solid by going with the 6-man rotation and sort of managing his starts to keep him away from the better offenses as best they could. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 12:35 PM) And he's not going to come back here for 3/14 when some other team might do 4/16. Didn't mean to suggest that... was wondering why we didn't give him 3/14 earlier before he hit FA. Oh, because he wanted to test the water. Duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 I think signing Mark would be the start of the meeting. 3 yrs/ $48 mill. With Peavy, Sale, Stewart, and Humber question marks, having Mark solidify the rotation makes sound baseball sense. A case be made for it making financial sense, as well, even if Danks, Thornton and Quentin are traded. Say you get eventually get 5 young players for those guys. Those guys under team control for 5 years, + Mark's $45 mill, for 3 yrs, may be a better deal than the $28 mill. or so spent on 1 yr of both Danks and Q, and 2 for Matt. With Mark taking a spot in the rotation, the sox have room for error in adding the young guys in. 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.