PDA

View Full Version : KW's Trade History


jabrch
08-09-2009, 01:02 PM
Here it is up until 2008...Discuss

Date Traded Received GM Team 11/7/2000 Scott Eyre Gary Glover Ash Blue Jays
11/27/2000 PTBNL: Mark Roberts Amaury Garcia Dombrowski Marlins
12/7/2000 Chad Bradford PTBNL: Miguel Olivo Beane A's
12/9/2000 Jeff Abbott Julio Ramirez Dombrowski Marlins
12/14/2000 Aaron Myette and Brian Schmack Royce Clayton Melvin Rangers
1/14/2001 Kevin Beirne, Brian Simmons, Mike Sirotka and Mike Williams Matt DeWitt and David Wells Ash Blue Jays
3/17/2001 Gary Majewski, Orlando Rodriguez and Andre Simpson Antonio Osuna and Carlos Ortega Malone Dodgers
3/20/2001 Matt DeWitt Mike Williams Ash Blue Jays
6/29/2001 Derek Hasselhoff Alan Embree and cash Sabean Giants
7/13/2001 McKay Christensen Wade Parrish Malone Dodgers
7/26/2001 James Baldwin and cash Jeff Barry, Anan Masaoka and Gary Majewski Malone Dodgers
11/27/2001 Herbert Perry PTBNL: Corey Lee Hart Rangers
12/13/2001 Kip Wells, Sean Lowe and Josh Fogg Todd Ritchie and Lee Evans Littlefield Pirates
1/29/2002 Chris Singleton Willie Harris Flanagan Orioles
3/27/2002 Matt Guerrier Damaso Marte and Edwin Yan Littlefield Pirates
5/15/2002 Future Considerations Anthony Sanders Bowden Reds
7/12/2002 Humberto Quintero and Alex Fernandez D'Angelo Jimenez Towers Padres
7/25/2002 Ray Durham and cash Jon Adkins Beane A's
7/28/2002 Kenny Lofton Felix Diaz and Ryan Meaux Sabean Giants
7/29/2002 Sandy Alomar, Jr. Enemencio Pacheco O'Dowd Rockies
7/31/2002 Bob Howry Frank Francisco and Byeong Hak An Port Red Sox
12/3/2002 Keith Foulke, Mark Johnson, Joe Valentine and cash Billy Koch and 2 PTBNL: Neal Cotts and Daylon Holt Beane A's
1/15/2003 Antonio Osuna and Delvis Lantigua Orlando Hernandez Cashman Yankees
1/15/2003 Rocky Biddle, Orlando Hernandez, Jeff Liefer and cash Bartolo Colon and Jorge Nunez Minaya Expos
3/27/2003 Wade Parrish Ross Gload O'Dowd Rockies
7/1/2003 Edwin Almonte, Royce Ring and Andrew Salvo Roberto Alomar and cash Phillips Mets
7/1/2003 3 PTBNL: Frank Francisco, Josh Rupe and Anthony Webster Carl Everett Hart Rangers
7/6/2003 D'Angelo Jimenez Scott Dunn Bowden Reds
7/30/2003 Gary Glover, Scott Dunn and Tim Bittner Scott Schoeneweis and Doug Nickle Stoneman Angels
8/21/2003 Tim Hummel and cash Scott Sullivan Bowden Reds
12/2/2003 Aaron Miles Juan Uribe O'Dowd Rockies
3/27/2004 Matt Ginter Timo Perez Duquette Mets
6/17/2004 Billy Koch Wilson Valdez and cash Beinfest Marlins
6/27/2004 Jeremy Reed, Miguel Olivo and Mike Morse Freddy Garcia and Ben Davis Bavasi Mariners
7/18/2004 Gary Majewski and Jon Rauch Carl Everett Minaya Expos
7/31/2004 Estaban Loaiza Jose Contreras and cash Cashman Yankees
8/5/2004 PTBNL: Brad Murray Roberto Alomar Garagiola Diamondbacks
12/13/2004 Carlos Lee Scott Podsesnik, Luis Vizcaino and a PTBNL: Travis Hinton Melvin Brewers
2/13/2005 Alex Escobar Jerry Owens Bowden Nationals
6/29/2005 Cash Wilton Guerrero Jocketty Cardinals
7/31/2005 Ryan Meaux Geoff Blum Towers Padres
11/26/2005 Aaron Rowand, Daniel Haigwood and a PTBNL: Gio Gonzalez Jim Thome and cash Gillick Phillies
12/13/2005 Damaso Marte Rob Mackowiak Littlefield Pirates
12/20/2005 Orlando Hernandez, Luis Vizcaino and Chris Young Javier Vazquez Byrnes Diamondbacks
3/8/2006 Jeff Bajenaru Alex Cintron Byrnes Diamondbacks
3/20/2006 Joe Borchard Matt Thornton Bavasi Mariners
6/15/2006 Javier Lopez David Riske Epstein Red Sox
7/23/2006 B.J. LaMura Sandy Alomar, Jr. Colletti Dodgers
7/24/2006 Tyler Lumsden and Daniel Cortes Mike MacDougal Baird Royals
11/16/2006 Neal Cotts David Aardsma and Carlos Vazquez Hendry Cubs
12/6/2006 Freddy Garcia Gavin Floyd and Gio Gonzalez Gillick Phillies
12/16/2006 Ross Gload Andy Sisco Baird Royals
12/23/2006 Brandon McCarthy and David Paisano Nick Masset, John Danks and Jacob Rasner Daniels Rangers
1/12/2007 Chris Stewart John Lujan Daniels Rangers
5/26/2007 Dwayne Pollok Tomas Perez Colletti Dodgers
6/16/2007 Aaron Cunningham Danny Richar Byrnes Diamondbacks
7/27/2007 Tadahito Iguchi Michael Dubee Gillick Phillies
7/31/2007 Rob Mackowiak Jon link Towers Padres
11/19/2007 Jon Garland Orlando Cabrera Reagins Angels
12/3/2007 Chris Carter Carlos Quentin Byrnes Diamondbacks
1/3/2008 Gio Gonzalez, Fautino De Los Santos and Ryan Sweeney Nick Swisher Beane A's
1/28/2008 David Aardsma Willy Mota and Miguel Socolovich Epstein Red Sox
7/31/2008 Nick Masset and Danny Richar Ken Griffey Jr. Jocketty Reds
8/9/2008 Paulo Orlando Horacio Ramirez Moore Royals
8/10/2008 PTBNL Franklyn German Huntington Pirates

Chrisaway
08-09-2009, 01:49 PM
That is quite hard to read.

beasly213
08-09-2009, 01:57 PM
That is quite hard to read.

Agreed. Although looking up and down, Kenny has never really gotten burnt on a trade.

BadBobbyJenks
08-09-2009, 02:10 PM
Some way of breaking up what we traded and what we got back would be a big help.

soxfanreggie
08-09-2009, 02:30 PM
Thanks for the information. Is there a site you got this from that may be easier to read?

jabrch
08-09-2009, 04:07 PM
A friend of mine emailed me a speadsheet - I can't attach it.

SoxGirl4Life
08-09-2009, 04:21 PM
A friend of mine emailed me a speadsheet - I can't attach it.

If you can send it to me, I can do some spreadsheet magic

MtGrnwdSoxFan
08-09-2009, 05:03 PM
Agreed. Although looking up and down, Kenny has never really gotten burnt on a trade.

The closest thing to KW striking out on a trade would be the Ritchie trade...although it made sense at the time, no one expected Ritchie to just fall in the toilet like he did, and we gave up 3 decent arms for him.

JB98
08-09-2009, 05:04 PM
Alex Escobar for Jerry Owens -- the classic trade that sucked for both sides. I had forgotten about that one.

Domeshot17
08-09-2009, 05:06 PM
Kenny wins more than he loses, but he lost both Swisher deals.

JB98
08-09-2009, 05:08 PM
I'd say LTP-for-Thornton is the biggest heist in KW's career. I see other trades on that list where he was a victor, but none more lopsided in the Sox favor than that one.

Rockabilly
08-09-2009, 05:53 PM
IMO KW is the 3rd best GM in the last 20 years.. He's just behind Terry Ryan and John Schuerholz

mantis1212
08-09-2009, 06:23 PM
The trades where we received Garcia, Contreras, Colon, Thornton, Quentin, Floyd, and Danks were all excellent deals for the Sox.

The only bad deals I really see here are Richie, getting Vazquez, and both Swisher deals. The rest are basically insignificant.

Domeshot17
08-09-2009, 08:05 PM
IMO KW is the 3rd best GM in the last 20 years.. He's just behind Terry Ryan and John Schuerholz
`
No way. I like Kenny and all, but 1 world series, 2 career trips to the playoffs, its all about the end results.

Rockabilly
08-09-2009, 08:07 PM
`
No way. I like Kenny and all, but 1 world series, 2 career trips to the playoffs, its all about the end results.


who do you think has been better than Kenny

BadBobbyJenks
08-09-2009, 08:09 PM
The trades where we received Garcia, Contreras, Colon, Thornton, Quentin, Floyd, and Danks were all excellent deals for the Sox.

The only bad deals I really see here are Richie, getting Vazquez, and both Swisher deals. The rest are basically insignificant.

How was getting Vazquez a bad deal? Because we lost Chris Mendoza Young?

DumpJerry
08-09-2009, 08:35 PM
IMO KW is the 3rd best GM in the last 20 years.. He's just behind Terry Ryan and John Schuerholz

`
No way. I like Kenny and all, but 1 world series, 2 career trips to the playoffs, its all about the end results.

who do you think has been better than Kenny
You have to take into account what resources he has to work with. I'm talking $$ and minor league system. KW has more financial constraints than many other GMs. Until they gutted the scouting and coaching staff in the minors, he was stuck with what they gave him. Now that the staff has improved, we're getting more Gordon Beckham and less Lance Broadway.

Domeshot17
08-09-2009, 08:43 PM
You have to take into account what resources he has to work with. I'm talking $$ and minor league system. KW has more financial constraints than many other GMs. Until they gutted the scouting and coaching staff in the minors, he was stuck with what they gave him. Now that the staff has improved, we're getting more Gordon Beckham and less Lance Broadway.

No, the reason we got Gordon was because Kenny built one of the worst White Sox teams in recent history in 2007. The fact Kenny finally admitted he can't scout/draft well and brought in Buddy Bell was a fantastic move for the team. Kenny is a great wheeler and dealer, and He knows when to get rid of a guy, but when it comes to the draft there is not much good to say about Kenny. Buddy Bell, not Kenny, is the reason for the overhaul in the minors.

And the Money spent, well thats all relative. You get into a grey area. I have always been against how cheap we are the draft. We don't spend a lot of money scouting and we do not alot much money to signing bonuses. We tend to spend more like the Royals in the draft then a team with a 100 mil payroll. I do not think that makes us cheap, because we do spend on payroll.

The Red Sox, Yankees, Angels, they always seem to do well in the drafts and scouting. Now they spend more, but they don't blow first round picks.

I just hate general statements like Kenny is the 3rd best GM in the last however many years. Its an extreme, and you are forced to argue why Kenny isn't a top 3 gm. The guy has his pros and cons, hes a good negotiator, he doesn't seem to give out many bad contracts, he usually knows when to trade prospects. However, he is loyal, sometimes to a fault,when he ran the draft he did terrible.

We have 1 world title and 2 playoff appearances under Kenny. Good, with 1 crown jewel, but other teams in that period have a better track record. So how do you judge this? Is Kenny the best at building a team on paper? Is he the best because he trades a lot? What criteria is there to judge this?

Edit: Also, come on now Dump. Do you really think the White Sox staff did ANYTHING for Gordon Beckham? The kid was there for about 2 cups of coffee and a jelly donut. Beckham is just a special kid who came out really close to mlb ready. I will give you guys who are thriving in our system, Jordan Danks, Hudson, but Beckham would be doing this on any team I believe.

Daver
08-09-2009, 08:44 PM
You have to take into account what resources he has to work with. I'm talking $$ and minor league system. KW has more financial constraints than many other GMs. Until they gutted the scouting and coaching staff in the minors, he was stuck with what they gave him. Now that the staff has improved, we're getting more Gordon Beckham and less Lance Broadway.

He was stuck with what he built, he was the director of minor league operations for a number of years before becoming the GM.

ode to veeck
08-09-2009, 09:15 PM
didn't we just have this thread a week or two ago?

let's start a chicago pizza thread

Lip Man 1
08-09-2009, 09:17 PM
Some excellent points. Daver's is dead on, Kenny in essence was trying to blow up what he created before he became G.M. He was in complete control of the minor league system which was starting to slide by the late 90's.

Dump is also correct in that resources that Kenny is allowed to spend play a big part. But it also has to be noted that Kenny knew what he was getting into when he took the job. His statement at his introductory press conference about a dollar and fifty cents proves this.

I'd like to see Kenny once or twice be allowed to do what he wants to do. To not be confined by payroll, not have to be "creative," not have to "think outside the box" in order to get a deal done or acquire talent.

I think he'd blow everybody's socks off under those circumstances but it's probably never going to happen.

All things considered he's done very well in his time but I do wish there were one or two more playoff appearances under his belt. 2003 and 2006 were golden opportunities that the Sox basically gave away.

Lip

slavko
08-09-2009, 09:25 PM
We could use a man like Delvis Lantigua right about now.

palehozenychicty
08-09-2009, 10:16 PM
Some excellent points. Daver's is dead on, Kenny in essence what trying to blow up what he created before he became G.M. He was in complete control of the minor league system which was starting to slide by the late 90's.

Dump is also correct in that resources that Kenny is allowed to spend play a big part. But it also has to be noted that Kenny knew what he was getting into when he took the job. His statement at his introductory press conference about a dollar and fifty cents proves this.

I'd like to see Kenny once or twice be allowed to do what he wants to do. To not be confined by payroll, not have to be "creative," not have to "think outside the box" in order to get a deal done or acquire talent.

I think he'd blow everybody's socks off under those circumstances but it's probably never going to happen.

All things considered he's done very well in his time but I do wish there were one or two more playoff appearances under his belt. 2003 and 2006 were golden opportunities that the Sox basically gave away.

Lip

Indeed. I still think if those teams had gotten into the postseason they would have been World Series threats.

mantis1212
08-10-2009, 09:39 AM
How was getting Vazquez a bad deal? Because we lost Chris Mendoza Young?

We gave up El Duque, Vizcaino, and Chris Young. Both Vazquez and El Duque won 11 games in 2006, and El Duque had a slightly lower ERA.

Vizcaino was a decent relief pitcher in 2006 with a 3.58 ERA in 70 games.

Vazquez is the definition of a loser who cannot win when it counts. In my opinion we wasted valuable resources bringing him to the Sox.

voodoochile
08-10-2009, 09:54 AM
We gave up El Duque, Vizcaino, and Chris Young. Both Vazquez and El Duque won 11 games in 2006, and El Duque had a slightly lower ERA.

Vizcaino was a decent relief pitcher in 2006 with a 3.58 ERA in 70 games.

Vazquez is the definition of a loser who cannot win when it counts. In my opinion we wasted valuable resources bringing him to the Sox.

Hindsight. At the time it was a solid deal.

mantis1212
08-10-2009, 10:09 AM
Hindsight. At the time it was a solid deal.

Only potentially. All deals are only potential until the players who come and go continue to play.

The only way to judge a deal in through hindsight.

voodoochile
08-10-2009, 10:20 AM
Only potentially. All deals are only potential until the players who come and go continue to play.

The only way to judge a deal in through hindsight.

I take the opposite viewpoint. I think you have to evaluate any trade in the context it was made.

It's why I don't hate the Swisher trades nearly as much as some do.

jabrch
08-10-2009, 10:25 AM
We gave up El Duque, Vizcaino, and Chris Young. Both Vazquez and El Duque won 11 games in 2006, and El Duque had a slightly lower ERA.

Vizcaino was a decent relief pitcher in 2006 with a 3.58 ERA in 70 games.

Vazquez is the definition of a loser who cannot win when it counts. In my opinion we wasted valuable resources bringing him to the Sox.

We turned Javy into Tyler Flowers - who may end up the best in that bundle.

Duque would not likely have won 11 games in the AL in USCF. He barely did it in the NL, and that was with an ERA over 4.5. Had he been here, he'd have been well into the 5s. As evidence, just a year later he was out of baseball. Viz was fine - but a 3.58 in the NL as a reliever, while nice, isn't amazing either. Look at his numbers after that season - continually worse and worse.

And I will never understand all the Javy hate. Calling him a "loser" makes no sense to me.

I'm not sure we gave up "valuable resources" with the exception of Chris Young - and he ended up a liability to them - not an asset. I don't think MLB GMs put value in those guys like you seem to do. Sox fans seem to put a lot more value into ex-Sox players once they are gone. Kinda odd.

Javy, for all the pissing and moaning, throws 200 IP per year every year (this will be his 10th year in a row over 198) with an ERA in the mid 4s in the AL. I'd take that in the middle to back of my rotation.

munchman33
08-10-2009, 10:47 AM
No, the reason we got Gordon was because Kenny built one of the worst White Sox teams in recent history in 2007. The fact Kenny finally admitted he can't scout/draft well and brought in Buddy Bell was a fantastic move for the team. Kenny is a great wheeler and dealer, and He knows when to get rid of a guy, but when it comes to the draft there is not much good to say about Kenny. Buddy Bell, not Kenny, is the reason for the overhaul in the minors.

And the Money spent, well thats all relative. You get into a grey area. I have always been against how cheap we are the draft. We don't spend a lot of money scouting and we do not alot much money to signing bonuses. We tend to spend more like the Royals in the draft then a team with a 100 mil payroll. I do not think that makes us cheap, because we do spend on payroll.

The Red Sox, Yankees, Angels, they always seem to do well in the drafts and scouting. Now they spend more, but they don't blow first round picks.

I just hate general statements like Kenny is the 3rd best GM in the last however many years. Its an extreme, and you are forced to argue why Kenny isn't a top 3 gm. The guy has his pros and cons, hes a good negotiator, he doesn't seem to give out many bad contracts, he usually knows when to trade prospects. However, he is loyal, sometimes to a fault,when he ran the draft he did terrible.

We have 1 world title and 2 playoff appearances under Kenny. Good, with 1 crown jewel, but other teams in that period have a better track record. So how do you judge this? Is Kenny the best at building a team on paper? Is he the best because he trades a lot? What criteria is there to judge this?

Edit: Also, come on now Dump. Do you really think the White Sox staff did ANYTHING for Gordon Beckham? The kid was there for about 2 cups of coffee and a jelly donut. Beckham is just a special kid who came out really close to mlb ready. I will give you guys who are thriving in our system, Jordan Danks, Hudson, but Beckham would be doing this on any team I believe.

Good post! :thumbsup:

Craig Grebeck
08-10-2009, 10:53 AM
Richar for Cunningham was pretty terrible. Aaron blossomed (and I think that was a matter of his tools coming together, not the Diamondbacks staff helping) and could turn into a decent major leaguer -- something Richar couldn't.

And please don't say Richar turned into Griffey. We could have given up any number of middling to terrible middle infielders in our system to get Jr.

mantis1212
08-10-2009, 11:24 AM
We turned Javy into Tyler Flowers - who may end up the best in that bundle.

Duque would not likely have won 11 games in the AL in USCF. He barely did it in the NL, and that was with an ERA over 4.5. Had he been here, he'd have been well into the 5s. As evidence, just a year later he was out of baseball. Viz was fine - but a 3.58 in the NL as a reliever, while nice, isn't amazing either. Look at his numbers after that season - continually worse and worse.

And I will never understand all the Javy hate. Calling him a "loser" makes no sense to me.

I'm not sure we gave up "valuable resources" with the exception of Chris Young - and he ended up a liability to them - not an asset. I don't think MLB GMs put value in those guys like you seem to do. Sox fans seem to put a lot more value into ex-Sox players once they are gone. Kinda odd.

Javy, for all the pissing and moaning, throws 200 IP per year every year (this will be his 10th year in a row over 198) with an ERA in the mid 4s in the AL. I'd take that in the middle to back of my rotation.

I don't overvalue guys after they've been gone. In general that list of trades is an excellent resume for KW. This is one of the only deals KW made that I do not agree with.

Javy may have value as an innings eater in the back of your rotation, but that not what's he's sold as, and that's not what he's paid as.

The truth is Ozzie was right about Javy- he can't take the pressure of important games. When you really need him, he's not there for you. That kind of thing doesn't always show up in the stats, which is why he's been traded so much. I use the word "loser" not as a personal attack, but to describe a what a pitcher does when the important game is played. He "loses".

jabrch
08-10-2009, 12:07 PM
The truth is Ozzie was right about Javy- he can't take the pressure of important games. When you really need him, he's not there for you. That kind of thing doesn't always show up in the stats, which is why he's been traded so much. I use the word "loser" not as a personal attack, but to describe a what a pitcher does when the important game is played. He "loses".

That feels awful fluffy to me. How do you prove something like that?

ode to veeck
08-10-2009, 12:39 PM
That feels awful fluffy to me. How do you prove something like that?

watch the games would be suffient, but it's disappointing to me for a pither like Javy to not figure out how to improve his mental game, cause he clearly had the pitches to be successful, like Ozzie did to help Garland who had similar mental gaps (but unfortunately is one of Ozzzie's few successes in this regard)

jabrch
08-10-2009, 12:58 PM
watch the games would be suffient, but it's disappointing to me for a pither like Javy to not figure out how to improve his mental game, cause he clearly had the pitches to be successful, like Ozzie did to help Garland who had similar mental gaps (but unfortunately is one of Ozzzie's few successes in this regard)

I watch games. I've seen him throw well in games. The whole notion of him not throwing well in "big" games is hard for me to digest.

Was last August not "big"? He allowed 15 ER in 6 starts in August. Was last September not "big"? 22 ER in 6 starts Maybe that's a bad example. How about 2006 - Was August not big? 14 ER in 6 starts. Sept? 19 ER in 6 starts.

I don't get it.

BadBobbyJenks
08-10-2009, 01:16 PM
I watch games. I've seen him throw well in games. The whole notion of him not throwing well in "big" games is hard for me to digest.

Was last August not "big"? He allowed 15 ER in 6 starts in August. Was last September not "big"? 22 ER in 6 starts Maybe that's a bad example. How about 2006 - Was August not big? 14 ER in 6 starts. Sept? 19 ER in 6 starts.

I don't get it.

Shhhhhhhh! He is a loser!

mantis1212
08-10-2009, 02:04 PM
I watch games. I've seen him throw well in games. The whole notion of him not throwing well in "big" games is hard for me to digest.

Was last August not "big"? He allowed 15 ER in 6 starts in August. Was last September not "big"? 22 ER in 6 starts Maybe that's a bad example. How about 2006 - Was August not big? 14 ER in 6 starts. Sept? 19 ER in 6 starts.

I don't get it.

I admit, it's hard to prove, it's really a feeling I got watching many Sox games. Some W-L stats I was able to find however:

Sept 06: 0-3
Sept 07: 4-1
Sept 08: 2-4

Games that mattered: 2-7
Games that didn't matter:4-1

jabrch
08-10-2009, 02:36 PM
I admit, it's hard to prove, it's really a feeling I got watching many Sox games. Some W-L stats I was able to find however:

Sept 06: 0-3
Sept 07: 4-1
Sept 08: 2-4

Games that mattered: 2-7
Games that didn't matter:4-1

Wins are a very bad way to measure a pitcher. Come on. He had 41 ER in the 12 sept starts that "matter". That's not a loser in my book. And in such a small sample size, it is also relevant to not that in the season that it "didn't matter", in September, Cleveland had an 8 game lead vs Det, 17 vs Minny, 24 vs Sox and 27 vs KC. So, Javy had a good september against.... (twice) a cleveland team that already had it locked up and was likely resting players, and then (four times) teams that were so far out of it that they had crap on the field for sure. So...

I think your use of one good month vs 2 bad months is very flimsy, has major sample size issues, and relies on wins to measure a pitcher.

I don't buy it - sorry.

I saw Javy in two septembers that mattered. In 06, his starts were as follows
CG, 1 ER vs Boston
7IP, 2ER vs Cleveland
6IP, 3 ER vs Oakland
7IP, 3 ER vs Seattle
7IP, 6 ER vs Clev
5IP, 4 ER vs Min

Ya know what the offense did for him? 7 runs in 6 games. Seriously...you are evaluating a picher who got 1 freaking run per game based on wins in one month?


He threw well in 08 in Sept also. Is it his fault the team only scored 20 runs in 6 games?

munchman33
08-10-2009, 03:23 PM
That feels awful fluffy to me. How do you prove something like that?

Are you kidding jabrch? How many times do I have to post his contending team vs. non-contending team splits? How many times do I have to post his contending Septembers vs. non-contending Septembers? It's across the board. He's never had a good year on a contending team. He's never had a bad year on a non-contending team. He's never had a good September on a contending team. He's never had a bad September on a non-contending team. He's been in the league more than a decade. And he's never not followed that trend. Not once. He's the epitome of a guy that can't perform under pressure but can when none is on. He's the extreme case. And that's being as literal as possible.

I don't understand how you could logically make an argument otherwise. Because the case has been made against Javy. With the evidence 100% against him. Clear cut and final. Absolutely no derivation. Nothing to offer to contradict it. Nothing. Nothing.

Stop making this contention. It's baseless and annoying.

Ranger
08-10-2009, 03:57 PM
Are you kidding jabrch? How many times do I have to post his contending team vs. non-contending team splits? How many times do I have to post his contending Septembers vs. non-contending Septembers? It's across the board. He's never had a good year on a contending team. He's never had a bad year on a non-contending team. He's never had a good September on a contending team. He's never had a bad September on a non-contending team. He's been in the league more than a decade. And he's never not followed that trend. Not once. He's the epitome of a guy that can't perform under pressure but can when none is on. He's the extreme case. And that's being as literal as possible.

I don't understand how you could logically make an argument otherwise. Because the case has been made against Javy. With the evidence 100% against him. Clear cut and final. Absolutely no derivation. Nothing to offer to contradict it. Nothing. Nothing.

Stop making this contention. It's baseless and annoying.


While his numbers have not been stellar in the months of August and September in contending seasons with the Sox, he still had plenty of quality starts and put his team in position to win many of those games. It's true that many times he didn't get support from the offense. And no matter how well you pitch, you're probably not going to win games where your team doesn't hit.

I think what people remember are the last 3 starts of the regular season last year where he was terrible, and his one start in the postseason. And rightfully so. That was when they needed him the most and he was awful.

However, Vazquez is an incredibly valuable starter in a rotation and the 200+ innings and 170-200 K's per season is nothing to sneeze at. For this season alone, the Sox miss him in the rotation. I think "loser" is a little strong.

asindc
08-10-2009, 04:08 PM
While his numbers have not been stellar in the months of August and September in contending seasons with the Sox, he still had plenty of quality starts and put his team in position to win many of those games. It's true that many times he didn't get support from the offense. And no matter how well you pitch, you're probably not going to win games where your team doesn't hit.

I think what people remember are the last 3 starts of the regular season last year where he was terrible, and his one start in the postseason. And rightfully so. That was when they needed him the most and he was awful.

However, Vazquez is an incredibly valuable starter in a rotation and the 200+ innings and 170-200 K's per season is nothing to sneeze at. For this season alone, the Sox miss him in the rotation. I think "loser" is a little strong.

While I agree that "loser" is probably under-stating his value, I do agree with those who say he is not a big-game pitcher. He is not. That's why the Yanks traded him, and that's why KW traded him. I think an earlier poster summed it up best: He is fine as a back end of rotation guy, but he is being paid like a #2 guy. I would have been fine keeping him for no more than 6-7 million. It was the same with Garland. He wanted to be paid like #2 but pitched like a #4.

mantis1212
08-10-2009, 04:10 PM
Wins are a very bad way to measure a pitcher. Come on. He had 41 ER in the 12 sept starts that "matter". That's not a loser in my book. And in such a small sample size, it is also relevant to not that in the season that it "didn't matter", in September, Cleveland had an 8 game lead vs Det, 17 vs Minny, 24 vs Sox and 27 vs KC. So, Javy had a good september against.... (twice) a cleveland team that already had it locked up and was likely resting players, and then (four times) teams that were so far out of it that they had crap on the field for sure. So...

I think your use of one good month vs 2 bad months is very flimsy, has major sample size issues, and relies on wins to measure a pitcher.

I don't buy it - sorry.

I saw Javy in two septembers that mattered. In 06, his starts were as follows
CG, 1 ER vs Boston
7IP, 2ER vs Cleveland
6IP, 3 ER vs Oakland
7IP, 3 ER vs Seattle
7IP, 6 ER vs Clev
5IP, 4 ER vs Min

Ya know what the offense did for him? 7 runs in 6 games. Seriously...you are evaluating a picher who got 1 freaking run per game based on wins in one month?


He threw well in 08 in Sept also. Is it his fault the team only scored 20 runs in 6 games?

I was supporting the claim that he loses when it matters- which he does. You may have some basis with the run support argument, but sample size is not relevent- you only have so many examples to work with in sports. You don't hear World Series winners being diminished because they only won four games.

jabrch
08-10-2009, 04:41 PM
While I agree that "loser" is probably under-stating his value, I do agree with those who say he is not a big-game pitcher. He is not. That's why the Yanks traded him, and that's why KW traded him. I think an earlier poster summed it up best: He is fine as a back end of rotation guy, but he is being paid like a #2 guy. I would have been fine keeping him for no more than 6-7 million. It was the same with Garland. He wanted to be paid like #2 but pitched like a #4.

The Yanks traded him to get... RANDY JOHNSON. That's a guy who had won 4 of the 6 prev. Cy Youngs, and finished 2nd in another. KW traded him because, of his 5 starters, the was the one closest to FA who he could get a good prospect for, and cut his payroll down.

I'd say he's a fine #3. 12mm isn't a bad price in todays market for 200 IP and 175-200Ks with a serviceable ERA in USCF in the AL.

To call him a loser; to say he doesn't pitch well in big games...all of that is silly stuff that can't be supported with real facts. It's negative fluff. I don't subscribe to that stuff. People can if they want to - that's cool. Look at his performance in Aug/Sept in 2006 and 2008. I don't see a guy who can't pitch when it matters.

MisterB
08-10-2009, 04:48 PM
No, the reason we got Gordon was because Kenny built one of the worst White Sox teams in recent history in 2007. The fact Kenny finally admitted he can't scout/draft well and brought in Buddy Bell was a fantastic move for the team. Kenny is a great wheeler and dealer, and He knows when to get rid of a guy, but when it comes to the draft there is not much good to say about Kenny. Buddy Bell, not Kenny, is the reason for the overhaul in the minors.

And the Money spent, well thats all relative. You get into a grey area. I have always been against how cheap we are the draft. We don't spend a lot of money scouting and we do not alot much money to signing bonuses. We tend to spend more like the Royals in the draft then a team with a 100 mil payroll. I do not think that makes us cheap, because we do spend on payroll.

The Red Sox, Yankees, Angels, they always seem to do well in the drafts and scouting. Now they spend more, but they don't blow first round picks.

I just hate general statements like Kenny is the 3rd best GM in the last however many years. Its an extreme, and you are forced to argue why Kenny isn't a top 3 gm. The guy has his pros and cons, hes a good negotiator, he doesn't seem to give out many bad contracts, he usually knows when to trade prospects. However, he is loyal, sometimes to a fault,when he ran the draft he did terrible.

We have 1 world title and 2 playoff appearances under Kenny. Good, with 1 crown jewel, but other teams in that period have a better track record. So how do you judge this? Is Kenny the best at building a team on paper? Is he the best because he trades a lot? What criteria is there to judge this?

Edit: Also, come on now Dump. Do you really think the White Sox staff did ANYTHING for Gordon Beckham? The kid was there for about 2 cups of coffee and a jelly donut. Beckham is just a special kid who came out really close to mlb ready. I will give you guys who are thriving in our system, Jordan Danks, Hudson, but Beckham would be doing this on any team I believe.

One thing that should be pointed out is that Kenny has never run a draft. Last year's draft was the first since 1990 that wasn't run by Duane Shaffer. I'm sure Kenny had input, but just how much sway he held is open to debate. The fact that Shaffer is no longer in that position might imply that it wasn't enough for Kenny's liking.

jabrch
08-10-2009, 04:49 PM
I was supporting the claim that he loses when it matters- which he does.

Not really. His team may lose - but you are really going to call him a loser because his team only gave him 1.15 runs per game in Sept?

You may have some basis with the run support argument, but sample size is not relevent- you only have so many examples to work with in sports. You don't hear World Series winners being diminished because they only won four games.

Actually - all the time it happens. How many times have we heard about the crappy Cards team that won a WS? TONS The bad Marlins team that got lucky...the awful 87 win Yankee team... WS winners... And we all know that in a short series ANYTHING can happen. The winner of the WS is not the best baseball team that year. That's not in doubt - is it?

If you are calling someone a loser based on that small a sample size, then I have every right to disagree with your opinion. That is not a matter of fact at that point. That's pure opinion. It's the same as people who call A-Rod not clutch because 3 bad post season serieses in a row. They disregard the three serieses prior to that. They disregard his career #s in August. They disregard his impact to team wins...bases loaded...RISP...etc.

Had Javy not been the most expensive starter not named Buehrle on this roster, he very well might still be here. And that would have been a good thing for the Sox.

asindc
08-10-2009, 05:03 PM
The Yanks traded him to get... RANDY JOHNSON. That's a guy who had won 4 of the 6 prev. Cy Youngs, and finished 2nd in another. KW traded him because, of his 5 starters, the was the one closest to FA who he could get a good prospect for, and cut his payroll down.

I'd say he's a fine #3. 12mm isn't a bad price in todays market for 200 IP and 175-200Ks with a serviceable ERA in USCF in the AL.

To call him a loser; to say he doesn't pitch well in big games...all of that is silly stuff that can't be supported with real facts. It's negative fluff. I don't subscribe to that stuff. People can if they want to - that's cool. Look at his performance in Aug/Sept in 2006 and 2008. I don't see a guy who can't pitch when it matters.

Yes, and AZ traded for him because he was the younger pitcher in that deal. I'm not subscribing to labels in my assessment. The real facts are that he pitched his best during the Sox worse season while he was here. He pitched his worse in a Sox uniform during his most high-profile starts here. Whether you call him a loser or not is irrelevant to me (for the record, I would not). He didn't get it done for the Sox when it mattered most, but he was being paid like someone who does. That's why trading him made sense to me.

jabrch
08-10-2009, 05:06 PM
He didn't get it done for the Sox when it mattered most, but he was being paid like someone who does. That's why trading him made sense to me.

I just don't feel like we can conclude that was anything more than one good season that happened to be when the rest of the team was hurt and fell apart (that 07 team shouldn't have been as bad as their record was) and then a less good season on a better team. I just don't see correlation to him not being able to pitch when it counts.

This Braves team is only a few games out. And Javy is pitching lights out.

mantis1212
08-10-2009, 05:15 PM
Actually - all the time it happens. How many times have we heard about the crappy Cards team that won a WS? TONS The bad Marlins team that got lucky...the awful 87 win Yankee team... WS winners... And we all know that in a short series ANYTHING can happen. The winner of the WS is not the best baseball team that year. That's not in doubt - is it?

Fair enough - but if I had to choose between the "best" baseball team and the team that won the World Series, I choose the World Series winner. In other words, give me the "crappy" '06 Cards over any Indians team in the 90s.

Getting it done when it counts is what I'm cheering for, not statistical measurements.

mantis1212
08-10-2009, 05:22 PM
This Braves team is only a few games out. And Javy is pitching lights out.

I did notice that - it will be interesting to see how the rest of the year plays out for him. But yes, he is having a great year so far.

jabrch
08-10-2009, 05:33 PM
Fair enough - but if I had to choose between the "best" baseball team and the team that won the World Series, I choose the World Series winner. In other words, give me the "crappy" '06 Cards over any Indians team in the 90s.

Getting it done when it counts is what I'm cheering for, not statistical measurements.

That's fine - but you don't get to select a team after the somewhat random and arbitrary post season. You build the best team you can in the winter and spring. You build it years in advance. And you build it to win 90+ games. You don't (smartly) build a team for the playoffs (unless you are the Cubs and you break down your 97 win team to improve so you might win more playoff games....see how that's working for them?)

The sample size you are discussing is VERY relevant. You are picking one month, where he threw well, and criticizing him for not winning more games - when his team scored less than 1.15 rpg for him.

Come on Mantis...

gobears1987
08-10-2009, 06:02 PM
After this latest move, what happened to all of the "Kenny is cheap" talk? I recall a lot of those threads in July.