From Buster Olney:
Mark Buehrle was willing to go forward and make a deal with the Chicago White Sox that didn't include a no-trade clause, but his overture was rejected.
Now it appears that his contract talks have broken down for good, and he may soon be traded.
The White Sox had offered Buehrle a four-year, $56 million deal, and Buehrle had insisted on a full no-trade clause. According to a source familiar with negotiations, the White Sox asked for possible solutions to the impasse. Buehrle's side suggested a new structure, without a blanket no-trade clause -- a four-year, $56 million deal, and if Buehrle was traded, then a $17 million player option for 2012 would kick in. This way, if Buehrle were traded, then his deal would get closer to his current market value; five years and $73 million is equal to what Roy Oswalt got with the Astros last fall.
First thought: If the Sox tipped the Sun-Times about the negotiations, they sure misread Buehrle.
At first I guessed
Joe Cowley's source(s) came from the team, because a good-faith effort to extend Buehrle might soften the bad PR in trading him or letting him walk. Four years for $56 million is a lowballing effort by most standards, but it does break some set procedures and indicates a special effort. Thus, the Sox could say to the fans, "Hey, we tried, but we can only go so far to bend a rule that has benefited us in the past."
Now I'm not so sure, because all signs point to Buehrle wanting to sign for those years and dollars, well under what he would receive if he hit the free agent market right now. If the Sox were truly interested in acquiring the services of a top-notch starter over the next four years, well, they have an exclusive opportunity right here.
On the other hand, Buehrle and his agent, Jeff Berry, knew from the start that they would be willing to accept less for immediate security in Chicago, and with the way the negotiations have played out, he has the entire city of Chicago on his side. He's bypassing a chance at Barry Zito money even though his recent track record is superior by comparison, and has just about caved in to every Sox demand.
The public understands his desire for a safeguard -- he would be receiving less money to stay in Chicago, so he wants to make sure he stays in Chicago. Add in the fact that he's immensely liked by everybody, and he'd be absolved of almost all blame if the deal does fall through.
Public sentiment has shifted so far in Buehrle's favor that it almost seems like it was a ploy on his side. Then again, considering the "only" obstacle is protection against a trade, I have to think the Sox weren't all that interested in extending him in the first place. Otherwise, it makes no sense that Jerry Reinsdorf and Kenny Williams would
focus more on retaining the ability to trade a No. 1 starter rather than enjoying the fact that they still have a No. 1 starter.
I'm confused. More later, after a Dunkin' Donuts run.
Second thought: Why wouldn't the Sox want him back?Initially, it's an easy question to answer. Here's a list of Sox pitchers who the Sox were criticized for not attempting to keep in the fold:
| |
With
Sox |
After
Sox |
| Wilson Alvarez |
67-50 |
3.76 |
31-38 |
4.20 |
| Alex Fernandez |
79-63 |
3.78 |
28-24 |
3.59 |
| Jack McDowell |
91-58 |
3.50 |
36-29 |
4.74 |
| Bartolo Colon |
15-13 |
3.87 |
46-29 |
4.62 |
None of these decisions have exactly come back to bite the Sox in the butt. Bartolo Colon is probably the closest, but even he has his share of problems. Alvarez, Fernandez and McDowell broke down.
With Colon, if my memory serves me right, Kenny Williams actually offered him four years to stay with the Sox, although he may have done that knowing full well somebody would top the dollar amount he offered ($42 million?). Colon went on to win a Cy Young he didn't deserve, but has been plagued with injury woes the past year and a half.
That's why it may be smart to let another team pay Buehrle for the next four years, even though Buehrle hasn't shown any signs of suffering. But that leads to another question that is a lot harder to answer:
Third thought: Why did the Sox spend so much to bolster the back end of the rotation?Jose Contreras will be making $10 million in 2008 and 2009. Jon Garland is set to make $11 million next year. Javier Vazquez signed an extension that will pay him $11.5 million annually through 2010.
Contreras and Vazquez are older than Buehrle. Contreras has injury issues. Vazquez is trying to recreate his Montreal days for a third team. Garland is young and a recent revelation, but
as Friday's game showed, he can be prone to beatdowns because of his worrisome strikeout rate.
Buehrle is better than all of them, and outside of an awful second half in 2006, the numbers consistently illustrate this. This brings up a slew of questions -- for starters:
- Isn't $14 million an acceptable annual salary by comparison?
- If teams don't want a rental, wouldn't Garland or Vazquez bring back as much as Buehrle in a trade, if not more?
- Why are there plans to replace the best pitcher with a rookie instead of the worst?
As of now, it appears the combination of answers to these questions will lead to the Sox shortchanging themselves in order to stick to hard-and-fast rules, and punting the 2008 season in the process.
Worse yet, there are no easy defenses.
Rob Mackowiak and Alex Cintron's salaries, both of which the Sox shouldn't be paying next year, would make up the difference between Buehrle's salary and Contreras'. Every other starter has more question marks.
The precedent issue is pretty flimsy.
The Sox front office is no stranger to criticism, but if it gives Buehrle the boot, it better be prepared for a sh-tstorm of controversy and also have a heck of a backup plan in the wings. The small-market excuses worked before, but with the increased attendance, recent World Series title and $100 million payroll, crying poor only looks cheap now.
All I can hope is that he hangs around for at least one more week. I'm going to Baltimore next weekend, and it'd give me
one more chance to see him in person.