Wedge

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 10:57 AM) I clearly don't think Conteras contract is as unmoveable as some of you all think it is. Freddy was abl eto get moved, Javier Vazquez was moved multiple times, Chan Ho Park, etc....you can bet your ass the club could move Contreras and get something if they wanted to (although it would be nice if he had a couple good starts). He's unmoveable because he has a NTC. That's as unmoveable as it gets. If the point of these contracts is that they are affordable and moveable, then don't go giving the player a NTC.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 10:13 AM) And those people that have paid attention should also realize that the policy that was implemented has worked out fairly well. If there is ONE thing KW has done extremely well is avoiding untradeable contracts. With all the horrible long-term deals given to pitchers over the past 10-12 years, I'm not quite sure how you can fault this particular policy of JR's. Untradeable contracts like the one they gave Contreras which makes him... untradeable?

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 09:02 AM) Sign him. Absolutely. I love Buehrle and he's the one Sox player I'm having trouble letting go. Anybody else, fine. But he's worth it. NOTE TO BOARD: if we resign him I will, that week, go and buy a Buehrle jersey (which I've wanted for a long time)--the vest one (the only one I'm missing). So they can put that $150 towards his payroll, LOL. Yeah, same here.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 08:51 AM) I would of rather have thrown bags and bags of money at Buerhle for 5 years than pay Javy a cent. Those Javy and Jose extensions look really dumb right now.

I can't add anything other than get it done.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 18, 2007 -> 11:14 AM) San Diego has a real ace. You might say Two. Also: you've got San Diego listed twice. That's true, but you can always use more. I think I put San Diego twice because I like their alternate jerseys so much.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jun 18, 2007 -> 09:49 AM) nice! hopefully my prize is milledge+pelfrey, lol. I would be happy to give that to you!

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jun 18, 2007 -> 09:47 AM) hmmm, ill give it a while 14 abs... Joe Crede? reg position player... Paul Konerko 28 games, started 3... mark buehrle 13 starts... garland?? seem to be the only fits. Winner!

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Jun 18, 2007 -> 09:41 AM) while i am not a fan of trading buehrle, i'd advocate dealing him if you get a really killer deal that includes multiple prospects. however, to get this i think there needs to be a competitive market that could drive up the cost. with this in mind, who would be other potential suitors for buehrle? the only one i've seen mentioned is the cardinals, and they really don't have much in terms of prospects we'd be interested in. outside of them, who else could be interested? to me, the key to this whole thing is making sure that there are three or four legitimate suitors who can be pitted against each other. Teams that could use an Ace level starting pitcher: Yankees Mets Dodgers Padres San Diego Arizona St. Louis Milwaukee Philadelphia Seattle

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 18, 2007 -> 09:33 AM) My heart would sink because a Buehrle trade would be irrefutable proof that we have given up on this season, and we're in rebuild mode for at least a few years. I still have a sliver of hope that this team can turn it around this year; of course the balancing act is not holding on to that hope where the window passes to get the most for people like Buehrle. But "rebuilding" does not encourage me with current management. When you cannot even get to the playoffs with your WS team (finishing third) and you are going to tie for dead last the year after that and white-flag it with most of that core team intact.... do you really think there's any glory in the future after it took us 88 years to get to the big one? When Kenny has gotten us into the playoffs, what, once? In other words, I think we're in for another loooooong stretch of being has-beens in the Central. And I'm not looking forward to that. Hey, at least tix will be easier to get. I understand your frustration, but holding onto the relics of the 2005 team will get us nowhere. But consider this, from the 2000 Division winner only four players logging MLB time were on the 2005 World Series roster. As trivia, name the players: One logged 14 ABs. One was a regular position player (logging 500+ ABs). One pitched in 28 games, started 3, logging 51.1 IP with a 4-1 record and 4.21 ERA One pitched in 15 games, started 13, logging 69.2 IP, with a 4-8 record and 6.46 ERA Anyway, the point is that it looks like the roster needs to go through significant turnover before we contend again. Believing anything else at this point is to deny reality.

Having actually lived through the original "White Flag Trade", let me tell you that this situation is not a White Flag Trade. In 1997, I want to say we were 3.5 games behind the Tribe when the deal was made. Even the team was mad about the trades, I believe all the players wore shirts saying "We may be stupid enough to screw this up" under their uniforms. In the middle of a division race, everybody associated with the organization was rightly mad as hell. In this case, unless we reel off ten of twelve or something to that effect starting today, I (and man Sox fans) will be mad as hell if we DON'T make a move. We are in a unique position, having many good players with solid reputations and production that will be Free Agents in the offseason (i.e. Dye and Buehrle). The team is currently third worst in MLB and should sell players, unless we really, honestly feel a miracle Astros/Marlins run coming on (personally, I don't). It's like a triage at this point: sacrifice what remains of an already terrible 2007 by trading two or three players (Mark, Dye, Iguchi) and get back anywhere from four to nine players that set-up a strong run for 2008 and beyond.

If we could convince Contreras to be traded, would he be the #2 pitcher on the market?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jun 17, 2007 -> 12:54 PM) DIdn't he or isn't he getting moved back to the rotation. I thought the move was temporary and they were working on a couple things than moving him back to the rotation. He moved to the bullpen so he could get more chances to try to work on some other pitches. Additionally, he loses $10,000,000 if he leaves the Cubs for football.

damn

this just isn't our year

I hope that Fields fielding improves with time, but otherwise it was a very nice game!

What the hell did Young say to Lee? I wish I could read lips...

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jun 16, 2007 -> 11:48 AM) I just said they can only do 2 things - sign him - or get as much as they can for him. So if they can't sign him they have to get as much as they can for him, right? Sorry, I guess I misread what you were saying. If we could resign the guy, I would be happy with that. I just have the feeling like that is not going to happen. Even if we offer $75/5, I see some team giving him $90/6 or more. I think Reinsdorf could be convinced on a 75/5 deal, but I think anything more than that is just going to break the bank. Which team would make that offer? I have no idea. But if the Schmidt and Zito (and to a lesser degree Lilly and Marquis and Meche) deals taught us anything last offseason, it's that teams in MLB are willing to vastly overpay for starting pitching. Hell, the closest deal to reasonable was Maddux for 10/1...

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 16, 2007 -> 11:40 AM) Why not get excited, these are young, talented players we're talking about here. The team on the field certainly isn't providing any entertainment, speculating about which prospects the Sox could receive in a deal and how they could help the team out over the next few seasons is pretty exciting. If Buehrle qualifies as a Type A free agent (which he will if he finishes off the season with a sub 4 ERA) then the Sox would have to offer Buehrle arbitration meaning the two sides would go to an arbitrator and submit a figure as to how much they feel Mark should make next season and whichever side the arbitrator picks, that's how much Buehrle would make for a 1 year contract. Since there ain't a chance in hell he would ever accept arbitration that means the Sox would receive compensation for the loss of their Type A free Agent which is the 1st round pick of the team that signs him (unless the pick is one of the first 15 in the draft then the Sox get a 2nd round pick which would be somewhere in the 50's or 60's) as well as a Sandwich pick between the first and second rounds. Thanks for the clarification on the rights. I agree with your point, that trading him should net at a minimum 2 Top 100 prospects. Even with an extra first round pick and a sandwich pick, you'd be hard pressed to get assurances that you could draft that same quality. QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jun 16, 2007 -> 11:44 AM) Get excited and be prepared - as you told me - to be VERY disappointed. Weren't the Sox players going to Seattle supposed to be good to great players? Where are they now? That could be VERY disappointing. The Sox can only do 2 things - get as much as they can for him - or sign him. That is it. You would rather want the prospects - and that is fine. I am just not very fond of prospects. I would rather trade my prospects away and get proven MLB players in return. That's just me. I am not suggesting that we can do that at this point in time. I am just stating what I would rather have. If you keep Mark and lose him in FA, then be prepared for disappointment as well. Even if these prospects don't work out, I think they have a better chance of working out than somebody we'd draft 1st round/sandwich. Plus, they would ideally be much closer to MLB ready than somebody we would draft.

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jun 16, 2007 -> 11:26 AM) How often do the Indians and Mariner trades work out that way? Carlos Guillen was ok, but wasn't as good as he is now until he went to the Tigers. Brandon Phillips (franchise) was the main piece in the Colon trade and that didn't work out well. Prospects are just that. We could end up being VERY disappointed - you are VERY right on that one. All I am saying is some of you people pine over and love prospects. Some of you want this whole team to go young. I think that could be VERY disappointing, as Kalapse put it, for everyone. Supposedly that was a hell of a lot that the Sox gave up for Garcia - yet none of it panned out. VERY dissappointing indeed. The two Schilling trades (which moved a total of 8 prospects) have been pretty disappointing as well. That said, I think if you can get Milledge, Pelfrey, and Martinez that's a great trade. I have a lot more faith in those players than 1) our organization's chances in resigning Buehrle and 2) the two players we would draft if Mark leaves via FA (if we even qualify, don't forget we have to make the same offer, right?). If we get those three, that's about as good of talent as we are going to get in return.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jun 14, 2007 -> 11:29 PM) Didn't Garcia have some off the field problems involving women? Wasn't his off the field problem that he was involved with men? Or is that just an urban legend from being the SF QB?

Assumptions: Contreras is getting progressive less and less effective due to high wear on his arm (read lots of innings pitched). We have a young gun in AA or AAA that can at least pitch at the level Danks is pitching. If we had another serious set-up arm, our bullpen might go from horrifc to tenable. Depending on the quality of said arm, it might even make the leap to outstanding. Conclusion: Move Contreras to the bullpen, send somebody bad (Day, Prinz, you pick) back to the minors and bring up one of our ready starters into the rotation. Rate this idea on a scale of 1 to bad.

THEY SWORE IN FRONT OF BOWSER FROM MARIO I

We have Danks and Masset, they have McCarthy

Death... as long as it is quick and clean.