Okay, I really don't understand this:

Buehrle was Boston-bound last weekend before the organization had a midweek change of heart and decided to work on a contract extension. A deal appeared just hours from being completed after assistant general manager Rick Hahn met with Buehrle's agent, Jeff Berry, on Wednesday in St. Petersburg, Fla.

The sides agreed on the years (four) and dollar amount ($56 million), even though it likely was less than what Buehrle could make on the free-agent market this offseason. But the Sun-Times learned late Friday that the deal was dead because the Sox would not give Buehrle a no-trade clause.

General manager Ken Williams reiterated that in a Daily Herald story Sunday, stating via e-mail: ''I cannot build a championship team if I do. The short-term and long-term ramifications are just too great.''

What? You can't build a championship team around a staff ace who is playing for at least $3 million a year below his market value? Consider that Buehrle has no injury history. His career winning percentage is close to .600. His ERA is under 4.00 despite playing in a launching pad of a ball park. He's a lefty!

What does Williams want? If Buehrle leaves in four years, Kenny gets draft compensation. It's not a perfect world. The White Sox are getting a bargain if they simply agree to give Buehrle the right to veto a trade. That seems to me like a good deal.

U.S.S Mariner looks at what it would take for Seattle to land Mark.

The main sticking point for most people is the contract. He's a free agent at years-end, and numerous reports have him stating a strong desire to pitch in St. Louis, where he grew up. Odds are pretty good that Mark Buehrle would simply be a three month rental, bolting for another team this winter. You know what? Not only am I okay with that, but I actually prefer that. As I showed a few weeks ago, the rate of return from players taken with compensatory draft picks is essentially equal to that of players traded in rent-a-player deals, while the rate of return of pitchers given long term contracts is disastrously horrible.

The Mariners wouldn't be trading a package of prospects for three months of Mark Buehrle. The Mariners would be trading a package of prospects for three months of Mark Buehrle and another package of prospects. Yes, you push the timetable for the return back a year or two, as no one the Mariners would draft next summer will be major league ready as quickly as a guy like Balentien or Feierabend. But you cannot ignore the significant value returned by the compensation picks. Deals like this are not mortgaging the future - it's more like a home equity line of credit. You're borrowing from the future, but you're paying the debt off very quickly.

Williams is making a mistake here.