I’ll Believe It When I See It

The Herald reports the Sox are "out of the running" for Buehrle. Yeah, right.

10 comments… add one
  • yeah, I don’t buy it either. For the first time in a long time, the Red Sox have a chance to really solidify a rotation from front to back with above average quality. They know it, and the White Sox know it. If anything has caused it to halt, my guess it is Buehrle has made it clear that he’s not interested in staying in Boston.

    Regular_Brad. June 26, 2007, 4:45 pm
  • “A baseball source” is the source. This could be anyone, including (likely!) people in the Sox’ organization, who, though still interested, may feel that the White Sox are asking too much and are negotiating through the media as well as through other methods. The only time we will know that the Sox are truly “out of the running” (which they may be, who knows!) is not when Masarotti reports it, but when Buehrle is traded elsewhere.

    SF June 26, 2007, 4:52 pm
  • If anything, this makes me more confident that a deal for him will get done.

    LocklandSF June 26, 2007, 4:59 pm
  • White Sox Planted Buehrle To Boston Rumor
    Keith Law, on ESPNEWS yesterday, reported that the Mark Buehrle-to-Boston rumor is bogus and almost certainly planted by the White Sox front office. Couldn’t hurt to try, unless the plant damages relations with the Red Sox in the future. This type of practice is probably more common than we realize, though.

    John - YF (Trisk) June 26, 2007, 5:15 pm
  • Is Law reporting this or speculating this, Trisk? If it was “almost certainly” planted, that sounds like Law speculating, so it’s not “reporting”.
    Interesting speculation, regardless.

    SF June 26, 2007, 5:20 pm
  • Not sure, I copied and pasted it directly. I should have put it in quotes. I will provide a link.
    In other news it seems as if the Marlins have acquired Jacque Jones, if anyone cares, LOL.

    John - YF (Trisk) June 26, 2007, 5:23 pm
  • If the White Sox planted it, why did Massarotti’s Red Sox sources confirm it? Likewise, how does Law explain the Sun-Times’ citation of Allard Baird’s presence in Chicago and the reporter’s assertion that he has multiple sources?
    Sounds like Law’s talking out of his butt, and considering his previous “analysis” of Buehre, that seems like it’s par for the course.

    Paul SF June 26, 2007, 5:46 pm
  • Hey listen, I don’t care one way or the other. Last year when there were Peavy rumors and Sheets rumors (before the extension) I was nervous. But this move just doesn’t scare me. Now we have bigger fish to fry like righting our own ship, but I don’t want you to think I am providing the link and comment because I am worried that it’s true.

    John - YF (Trisk) June 26, 2007, 5:52 pm
  • I say the above after reading the following at SOSH:
    “Keith Law of ESPN said yesterday that Buehrle wouldn’t help the Sox much, as he’s a NL type pitcher that needs the #9 spot in the order to be successful. Kind of an odd thing to say considering he’s had pretty nice success in the AL his entire career.”

    Paul SF June 26, 2007, 5:53 pm
  • No, I understand Trisk. I’m just aggravated at Law’s lousy “reporting” and “analysis.”

    Paul SF June 26, 2007, 5:59 pm

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.