Two Reasons …

… to trade for Mark Buehrle:

  1. Monday’s game.
  2. Tuesday’s game.

24 comments… add one

  • I one million percent agree. Not that the Red Sox are bound to fall apart if they don’t, but it would just make things sooo much better.
    How wrong is Eckersly in his Gabbard/Buehrle comparison? Jeeez.
    On another note, if Buehrle does in fact get traded to Boston, and we’re always having to write that name, can we find a nickname for him. Buehrle doesn’t exactly roll off the mind into the fingers. But, I never thought I’d get used to typing “Matsuzaka”, but I have..
    Please, please Theo. Just get it done. Make Schilling the fourth starter and Wakefield the fifth, and Tavarez to the pen.
    Please.

    Regular_Brad. June 27, 2007, 9:51 am
  • And on yet another note entirely, LoHud comments from last night and this morning are some of the funniest, on the ledge, off the wall moronic stuff I’ve read in a long, long time. It’s good for a great laugh if anyone has a few minutes to spare this morning!

    Regular_Brad. June 27, 2007, 10:06 am
  • Regular_Brad, I think it’s kind of funny that you point us to the hysteria at LoHud — which is, you know, hysterical — while agreeing with this somewhat overanxious post. It’s been a long road trip and for whatever reason, the Sox have been brutal at Safeco. So long as they win tonight, things’ll be fine. At least they were hitting a bit more last night.

    stuck working June 27, 2007, 10:19 am
  • stuck working,
    I cannot agree that this thread is in any way hysterical. It calls for a trade that would help the team on a realistic level. It does not call for the trade of Cano, Proctor, and every other memeber of the active roster for bullpen help, a first baseman from Texas, or any other crazy idea. Those guys have the coach(s!) getting fired, Steinbrenner playing dead, and conspiracy theories from Don Mattingly and Pena. They are, by definition, the epitome of hysterical over there. Here – not so much.
    Yes, I do agree that it may be a bit rash, but nothing close to what’s going on at LoHud, which I’m sure would be exactly how Sox fans would be reacting if the Sox were down under .500 and looking eleven games up at the Yankees.
    Also, tonight will mark the first time that seven (7!) pitchers over the age of 40 years old will take the mound on the same night in MLB. To me, that’s funny too.

    Regular_Brad. June 27, 2007, 10:41 am
  • Also, after the Yankees lose a game like yesterday’s, I prefer to get my yank-enfreude via Bronx Banter, where the sweet, sweet howls of despair come with conjugated verbs.

    stuck working June 27, 2007, 10:42 am
  • I didn’t call this thread “hysterical,” just “somewhat overanxious.” So I think we’re on the same page, Regular_Brad — “a bit rash” sounds just about right.

    stuck working June 27, 2007, 10:44 am
  • If we were below .500 and 11 games out, we would probably be worse than LoHud because it would be a continuation of the end of last season.
    This post, trust me, is not overanxious. Byt as SF said in his post below, we can’t expect to realistically compete in the second half/playoffs with a rotation of Beckett, Matsuzaka and pray for rain. Wakefield’s a great 4 starter and Tavarez is a great 5. But Gabbard’s not really that great (I think we were all wondering when a performance like last night’s would arrive), and we can’t have Wakefield/Tavarez as our 3-4. They’re both .500 pitchers. Buehrle is indeed a realistic option to shore up our staff tremendously, and I think the last two games were illustrations that starting pitching is always a necessity, never a luxury.

    Paul SF June 27, 2007, 10:51 am
  • Yankee fans certainly know a thing or two when it comes to bridge jumping hysterics when their team is losing.

    SoxFan June 27, 2007, 11:18 am
  • Brad, I don’t read any other sites so I don’t know what they are calling for, but I can certainly understand the anger they are feeling. This has been the most frustrating season I have ever experienced. Torre has lost any and all baseball knowledge he once had. He continually mismanages games and it’s out of control at this point. Why did he stick with Proctor??? Why was Abreu batting Eighth??? When is Cashman going to understand Cairo is not our 1st baseman??? Go out and get a Hatteberg , Huff or a Klesko, someone to fill the gap until next season. Please release Wil Nieves, please. He’s the worst all around catcher on any ML roster. Finally please find some bench players, please. I don’t care at this point about the playoffs, just play some decent ball, some sound ball and solidify this team. Please.
    As for Beurhle, does anyone know what they are asking for from the Sox, everything seems to be speculation?

    John - YF (Trisk) June 27, 2007, 11:44 am
  • White Sox Buehrle Extension Close?
    UPDATE: Readers are writing in saying 670 AM The Score in Chicago is reporting that Buehrle has signed an extension for four years and only $50MM.
    In a surprising turnabout, White Sox starter Mark Buehrle is off the trading block. Joe Cowley of the Chicago Sun-Times has the exclusive – the two sides might agree on a contract extension by week’s end. It’s possible that Buehrle has reduced his demand from five years to four. Would 4/60 get it done? Cowley says the White Sox remain Buehrle’s #1 choice for the future, by a long shot. Even over the Cardinals, apparently.
    While the White Sox may lock up Buehrle, they’re still looking to trade Tadahito Iguchi and Jermaine Dye. Additionally, Jose Contreras or Javier Vazquez may be shopped. In Vazquez, the Sox would still probably own the best starter on the trading block. The Astros and Braves were known to be scouting last night’s White Sox-Devil Rays game.

    John - YF (Trisk) June 27, 2007, 12:26 pm
  • Jose Contreras or Javier Vazquez may be shopped. In Vazquez, the Sox would still probably own the best starter on the trading block…
    No thanks.

    Regular_Brad. June 27, 2007, 12:39 pm
  • I don’t doubt the story, but I’ll believe it when I see it. I can’t imagine he signs for that kind of dough when he knows what’s waiting for him in a few months…
    I mean, who gives the hometown discount anymore? I find it hard to swallow, for now at least.

    Regular_Brad. June 27, 2007, 12:41 pm
  • By all accoutns, he’s a great guy, so who knows?
    But yeah, I’ll pass on Vasquez also.

    Paul SF June 27, 2007, 1:22 pm
  • “we can’t expect to realistically compete in the second half/playoffs with a rotation of Beckett, Matsuzaka and pray for rain.”
    Did I miss the news that Schilling is done for the season?
    C’mon people, get off the ledge – a couple of bad games isn’t the end of the world.

    Zulu.as.SF June 27, 2007, 1:53 pm
  • Did you miss the first half of the season? I do hope that Schilling returns better than he was before he went down. But what assurance do we have of that? Before he was DLed, Schilling was slightly better than Julian Tavarez. That won’t work.

    Paul SF June 27, 2007, 1:57 pm
  • You mean the first half of the season when the Sox earned the 5th-best team ERA in MLB? The first half of the season where the pitching helped lead the Sox to the best record in the AL?
    Yeah, I saw that.
    I also saw that Tavarez had a bad game Monday, and looks like he might be hurt, and Gabbard had a bad game last night.
    I looked out the window this morning, and the sky isn’t falling.

    Zulu.as.SF June 27, 2007, 2:10 pm
  • Well, there is always Jon Lester, not that I necessarily disagree with getting a good proven #3 starter.

    Tom sf June 27, 2007, 2:10 pm
  • Beckett – Daisuke – Schilling – Wakefield in my eyes would be pretty darn tough to face in the playoffs. I honestly think that’s enough pitching to win. Plus you add in Paps, with or without MB I think it’s enough. Think of who you would face the Angels? Indians? Tigers? Other then the Tigers, you would still have a better rotation for the playoffs then all of them. Angels are the only one of the 3 with a lights out closer. Just my opinion though.
    Anyone believe this rumor about Hillenbrand coming to the Yankees? I know he is a douche in the clubhouse, but he can’t be worse then Phillips or Cairo.

    John - YF (Trisk) June 27, 2007, 2:14 pm
  • “Well, there is always Jon Lester, not that I necessarily disagree with getting a good proven #3 starter.”
    Again, I have to ask: is Schilling out for the season?
    I’d say he’d qualify as a proven #3, even with his inconsistency this year.

    Zulu.as.SF June 27, 2007, 2:18 pm
  • Right now, we have a 1, 3, 4, and 5 starter (Beckett, Matsuzaka, Wakefield, Tavarez). I don’t think a starter is a true necessity unless Schilling comes back and really stinks. When he comes back, though…it’s more likely we have another #3 pitcher, so I dunno, maybe they’d be better off trying to get one more guy. Would it be a lot cheaper to get another starter now rather than at the deadline? Can we get three starts from Schilling in July to evaluate the need there before considering a deal? Is Lester moving up this year ever or are they going to take it slow, slow, slow, and wait for Tavarez to fall apart? Even if he does, is that enough?
    These are the worries one wishes to have, of course, worrying about one injured starting pitcher with a double-digit lead. But starting pitching can’t ever be called a luxury…particularly when the Yankees are in your division, waiting to jump back in at the first sign of weakness.
    PS How effin’ sweet is Beckett’s resurgence this year so far? It’s effin’ sweet, is what it is.

    Devine June 27, 2007, 2:24 pm
  • Let me revise:
    I’m not sure why I feel this down about the Sox’ pitching today. Probably a combination of seeing three terrific performances in a row (well, kinda for Peavy) from San Diego, and in the midst of and right after that, seeing our bottom three starters (Wake-Gabbard-Tavarez) all get rocked. I do think Schilling isn’t as bad as he was these last two starts, and as such, will be a fine No. 3. Lester has gotten rocked his last two starts in Pawtucket, and his rate stats are not going in the right direction from where they were in the minors before his callup. He was nerve-wracking enough when got the call after dominating the minors. How will he do getting the call after getting by in the minors?
    At any rate, if Tavarez is hurt, this seems to strengthen the position that the Sox need some help, doesn’t it? If Tavarez and Schilling are on the DL at the same time, are we truly comfortable with a Beckett-Daisuke-Wakefield-Lester-Gabbard rotation? I know I’m not. And that’s really all I’m saying. We’ve gotten a great deal out of our rotation in the first half. Right now, we’re getting a lot less, and I wonder if that means it’s time to get a reinforcement.

    Paul SF June 27, 2007, 2:24 pm
  • Matsuzaka’s next few outings should tell a lot. He’s a slow starter and when the weather starts to heat up so does he. Do these proclivities translate across the Pacific? Don’t know. But if yes, the Sox have two starters who will win twenty or more games. Picking up a legitimate no.3 would be a good idea regardless. Schilling, Wakefield, Tavarez-Lester-Gabbard fighting it out over the remaining thirty or so games that need to be won is a good position to be in, and if Schilling gets healthy you have the strongest rotation in the Majors.

    kyotofan June 27, 2007, 3:19 pm
  • Yes, but can he throw this:
    http://coolpicturesworld.blogspot.com/2007/06/off-speed-pitch.html
    Sorry, couldn’t resist! =)

    Lar June 27, 2007, 7:08 pm
  • our bottom three starters (Wake-Gabbard-Tavarez) all get rocked
    Get used to it if this stays our bottom three. Color me worried about the long-term possibilities for this team with pitchers like this being trotted out on a regular basis.

    SF June 27, 2007, 7:40 pm

Leave a Comment