PDA

View Full Version : what is kw problem?


cwsgrl17
12-04-2002, 04:05 PM
What does kenny williams think he is doing. he is out to ruin the sox. he has made bad trades one after another. usually general managers learn from their mistakes but of course not kenny williams.

he traded sirotka for wells....that was smart..not
he traded wells, fogg, and lowe for richie...again STUPID
then there was durham, lofton, alomar, and howry for minor leaguers that will never come to the majors
now he traded foulke, johnson, and valentin...will turn out to be bad once again. don't get me wrong kock might be good but we gave up so much more than we needed to.

just about with every trade he is giving the other team money like it is growing on trees. then he has the nerve to complain saying the white sox do not have enough money. well how could they if he is giving it out all the time.

williams doesn't know the rules to make good trades. all the other teams are taking advantage of him, and why not. if they could get more than the deal is worth why not.

seriously, we need to get rid of him. he is out to destroy the sox. i feel like he is a conspiracy (coming from the north siders of course). the guy just makes me sick.

chicago needs to trade williams immediately! should i saw once again, all the sox fans should get together and sign a petition to ban him from coming close to the sox or chicago.

voodoochile
12-04-2002, 04:10 PM
Welcome aboard! :)

Not sure I agree about everything you said, but I do agree that KW sucks and most of the posters around these parts do too. Looks like you'll fit right in...

pearso66
12-04-2002, 04:46 PM
i agree that most of those trades were bad. i have to say when i heard david wells was comin to town, i was quite pleased, sure we had to go through the shouldergate thing, but he was a high quality pitcher. The only problem was he didnt see fit to work out, and he was wrong about what he said about thomas. but other than the fact he was over weight, he should have been a good pick up, the only problem was we kept him for 1 year, and then threw him to the curb. didn't let him rehab and see him come back thinner and in better shape than the year he was with us

HawkDJ
12-04-2002, 05:46 PM
Why do you consider the Wells-Sirotka trade stupid? We had just came off a loss in the division championship where our worst enemy was youth. So we trade for a proven veteran pitcher to try to get farther in the playoffs. Of course it doesn't work but what has Sirotka done for the Blue Jays (or Cubs) lately. This trade has done absolutely nothing for both teams.

KW has made some nice smaller trades. I would consider Singleton for Harris, Guerrier for Marte and Lofton for the Giants prospects good trades. I'm not sure if KW did the Bradford-Olivo trade but that is another good small level trade.

Not to say there hasn't been bad trades. The Ritchie trade was terrible. The Durham trade was awful. I'm sure there are plenty more. I wouldn't consider the Koch trade bad since there are people on both sides of the issue, making it more of a debatable trade than bad.

RKMeibalane
12-04-2002, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by HawkDJ2k2
Why do you consider the Wells-Sirotka trade stupid? We had just came off a loss in the division championship where our worst enemy was youth. So we trade for a proven veteran pitcher to try to get farther in the playoffs. Of course it doesn't work but what has Sirotka done for the Blue Jays (or Cubs) lately. This trade has done absolutely nothing for both teams.

KW has made some nice smaller trades. I would consider Singleton for Harris, Guerrier for Marte and Lofton for the Giants prospects good trades. I'm not sure if KW did the Bradford-Olivo trade but that is another good small level trade.

Not to say there hasn't been bad trades. The Ritchie trade was terrible. The Durham trade was awful. I'm sure there are plenty more. I wouldn't consider the Koch trade bad since there are people on both sides of the issue, making it more of a debatable trade than bad.

KW has made his share of both good and bad trades. The jury is still out on his latest deal. If Koch can produce for the Sox, then I'll have no complaints about the trade. The only negatives surrounding this latest development have to do with the fact that Sox still have several holes to fill before next season. The starting rotation lacks an experienced starter. Perhaps Ritchie will have a more productive season, though it isn't likely.

DrCrawdad
12-04-2002, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by HawkDJ2k2
Why do you consider the Wells-Sirotka trade stupid? We had just came off a loss in the division championship where our worst enemy was youth. So we trade for a proven veteran pitcher to try to get farther in the playoffs. Of course it doesn't work but what has Sirotka done for the Blue Jays (or Cubs) lately. This trade has done absolutely nothing for both teams.

KW has made some nice smaller trades. I would consider Singleton for Harris, Guerrier for Marte and Lofton for the Giants prospects good trades. I'm not sure if KW did the Bradford-Olivo trade but that is another good small level trade.

Not to say there hasn't been bad trades. The Ritchie trade was terrible. The Durham trade was awful. I'm sure there are plenty more. I wouldn't consider the Koch trade bad since there are people on both sides of the issue, making it more of a debatable trade than bad.

Bradford for Olivo was a KW deal among his first IIRC. I believe KW's first trade was Eyre for Glover. I'd say that was a good deal, even though Eyre seems to have turned his career around somewhat.

hose
12-04-2002, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by HawkDJ2k2
Why do you consider the Wells-Sirotka trade stupid? We had just came off a loss in the division championship where our worst enemy was youth. So we trade for a proven veteran pitcher to try to get farther in the playoffs. Of course it doesn't work but what has Sirotka done for the Blue Jays (or Cubs) lately. This trade has done absolutely nothing for both teams.

KW has made some nice smaller trades. I would consider Singleton for Harris, Guerrier for Marte and Lofton for the Giants prospects good trades. I'm not sure if KW did the Bradford-Olivo trade but that is another good small level trade.

Not to say there hasn't been bad trades. The Ritchie trade was terrible. The Durham trade was awful. I'm sure there are plenty more. I wouldn't consider the Koch trade bad since there are people on both sides of the issue, making it more of a debatable trade than bad.


Add Jimenez to KW's list

RichH55
12-04-2002, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by hose
Add Jimenez to KW's list

And getting a prospect of any sort(jury is still out on Willie Harris I know) for Singleton and Marte and Yan for minor leaguers

doublem23
12-04-2002, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
KW has made his share of both good and bad trades. The jury is still out on his latest deal. If Koch can produce for the Sox, then I'll have no complaints about the trade. The only negatives surrounding this latest development have to do with the fact that Sox still have several holes to fill before next season. The starting rotation lacks an experienced starter. Perhaps Ritchie will have a more productive season, though it isn't likely.

Williams shines most when he deals specifically for minor leaguers (i.e... Guerrier/Marte); but he is completely incapable of a decent trade at the MLB level. Regardless of how well Koch performs, this trade hurts the Sox because we lose our #1 catcher (a position that this entire organization is pathetically weak at). I agree swapping Koch for Foulke alone isn't all that bad, hell, its arguably an upgrade for the Sox, but the loss of Johnson will hurt this team significantly.

BTW, welcome aboard, cwsgrl17. With a 'tude like that, you'll fit right in 'round these parts (as long as your not Marxist :smile:.)

voodoochile
12-04-2002, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
Williams shines most when he deals specifically for minor leaguers (i.e... Guerrier/Marte); but he is completely incapable of a decent trade at the MLB level. Regardless of how well Koch performs, this trade hurts the Sox because we lose our #1 catcher (a position that this entire organization is pathetically weak at). I agree swapping Koch for Foulke alone isn't all that bad, hell, its arguably an upgrade for the Sox, but the loss of Johnson will hurt this team significantly.

BTW, welcome aboard, cwsgrl17. With a 'tude like that, you'll fit right in 'round these parts (as long as your not Marxist :smile:.)

I don't necessarily agree about the loss of Johnson. I agree he was the best backup option, but he wasn't going to be the starter and didn't deserve to be. The Sox were clearly ready to part ways with him. Olivo is going to start barring a pickup in the off-season. It isn't like MJ instead of Paul or Olivo was going to make the Sox pennant contenders anyway.

Losing a guy like Johnson means nothing in the long run. He was at best a backup catcher by anyone's standards. He had plenty of time to prove he deserved to be the every day starter and he failed regularly for a long time. It was time to move on and maybe this will encourage the Sox to go get a veteran to tutor Olivo. Paul will bring a stronger bat off the bench and can occasionally pinch run (Lord help us, I said it).

The loss of MJ was meaningless in the grander scheme of things, IMO...

baggio202
12-05-2002, 12:45 AM
Originally posted by HawkDJ2k2
Why do you consider the Wells-Sirotka trade stupid?


i consider it stupid for two reasons...one..i now believe KW knew he was trading damaged goods...i believed that after he said that mike williams was injured during the time of the trade and he offered to recind that part of the deal but not the sirotka part....i cant buy the fact that he didnt know mike williams was hurt...we did to williams the same thing we did to valentine...shut him down in AFL and sent him home...KW had to know that yet he still traded mike williams...if he did that then i have no doubt he knew sirotka was hurting too...

trading damaged goods = stupid

plus it made absolutely no sense to trade sirotka (if kw really delieved he was healthy) for wells...we needed a number 1 or 2 starter to add to our staff...so we trade an ace for an ace..still left us needing a number 1 or 2..therefore stupid..

RichH55
12-05-2002, 03:18 AM
Originally posted by baggio202
i consider it stupid for two reasons...one..i now believe KW knew he was trading damaged goods...i believed that after he said that mike williams was injured during the time of the trade and he offered to recind that part of the deal but not the sirotka part....i cant buy the fact that he didnt know mike williams was hurt...we did to williams the same thing we did to valentine...shut him down in AFL and sent him home...KW had to know that yet he still traded mike williams...if he did that then i have no doubt he knew sirotka was hurting too...

trading damaged goods = stupid

plus it made absolutely no sense to trade sirotka (if kw really delieved he was healthy) for wells...we needed a number 1 or 2 starter to add to our staff...so we trade an ace for an ace..still left us needing a number 1 or 2..therefore stupid..

Not to sound too Machiavellian(sic)..but wouldnt trading damaged goods, especially for a viable commodity at the time, be a good thing?

RichH55
12-05-2002, 03:20 AM
Originally posted by doublem23
Williams shines most when he deals specifically for minor leaguers (i.e... Guerrier/Marte); but he is completely incapable of a decent trade at the MLB level. Regardless of how well Koch performs, this trade hurts the Sox because we lose our #1 catcher (a position that this entire organization is pathetically weak at). I agree swapping Koch for Foulke alone isn't all that bad, hell, its arguably an upgrade for the Sox, but the loss of Johnson will hurt this team significantly.

BTW, welcome aboard, cwsgrl17. With a 'tude like that, you'll fit right in 'round these parts (as long as your not Marxist :smile:.)

I agree about the minor leaguers....but the Johnson stuff is typical internet hyperbole....I remember when folks were up in arms that Sean Lowe was dealt, and I remember when people said we were "fleeced" when we lost Herbert Perry(the deal was basically a favor to the milkman).....Is Mark Johnson a decent backup option for a team devoid of catching depth: probably....will he ever be a good major leaguer? No.,.....He is a dime a dozen for the most part and didnt actually seem to be getting better....He's better than Lee Evans, but he is still very replaceable

cwsgrl17
12-05-2002, 11:19 AM
Okay listen up, i just want to clearify myself... the wells siratka trade was horrible at the time, maybe because i was a sirotka fan. besides the point, williams released him from the team too early. if we had kept him one more year to see how he would be.....you get the drift.

now, this trade i don't have a problem at all with getting koch. i really love that guy. my problem is that we gave up TOO much for him. that is where i begin to hate williams. he always does that.

oh, someone said that williams made a good trade with getting bradford out of chicago. look at him now. i have watched a lot of baseball and he is awesome. look at what he did against us last year. this guy is awesome, especially because of the way he throws. nobody can get used to that. we could of gotten great years out of him.

one last thing, the other reason why i hate this trade is because i love mark johnson. we should of gotten rid of paul and kept olivo. johnson is great with the pitching staff, now i have no catcher. the first time in years, i have no favorite catcher on the sox (fordyce, alomar,johnson, now nobody).

voodoochile
12-05-2002, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by cwsgrl17
Okay listen up, i just want to clearify myself... the wells siratka trade was horrible at the time, maybe because i was a sirotka fan. besides the point, williams released him from the team too early. if we had kept him one more year to see how he would be.....you get the drift.

now, this trade i don't have a problem at all with getting koch. i really love that guy. my problem is that we gave up TOO much for him. that is where i begin to hate williams. he always does that.

oh, someone said that williams made a good trade with getting bradford out of chicago. look at him now. i have watched a lot of baseball and he is awesome. look at what he did against us last year. this guy is awesome, especially because of the way he throws. nobody can get used to that. we could of gotten great years out of him.

one last thing, the other reason why i hate this trade is because i love mark johnson. we should of gotten rid of paul and kept olivo. johnson is great with the pitching staff, now i have no catcher. the first time in years, i have no favorite catcher on the sox (fordyce, alomar,johnson, now nobody).

Wells brought something to the table that Sirotka did not - confidence that they would win every game he started. Most fans that I know were in favor of the trade. A genuine Ace is hard to come by in MLB and Wells brought that commodity to the table.

Trading Bradford brought Olivo to the team. Trading a middle reliever for a starting catcher is something you always do if you need a starting catcher.

Mark Johnson may be a team favorite, but he is a career backup. He is not starting material on any team with a chance to make and succeed in the post-season.

doublem23
12-05-2002, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
I agree about the minor leaguers....but the Johnson stuff is typical internet hyperbole....I remember when folks were up in arms that Sean Lowe was dealt, and I remember when people said we were "fleeced" when we lost Herbert Perry(the deal was basically a favor to the milkman).....Is Mark Johnson a decent backup option for a team devoid of catching depth: probably....will he ever be a good major leaguer? No.,.....He is a dime a dozen for the most part and didnt actually seem to be getting better....He's better than Lee Evans, but he is still very replaceable

No one's saying MJ will be in the Hall of Fame, but now we're forced to platoon Olivio and Paul (Wow, that's horrible). Paul sucks and Olivio desperately needs another season in the minors. You cannot rush catchers. I'd have liked to see the Sox get another "rent-a-catcher" and platoon him with MJ and allow Olivio to develop in AAA.

Olivio's development is going to be hurt because of this deal. All this deal does is downgrade the Sox at a position the entire organization is extremely weak at, anyways.

cwsgrl17
12-05-2002, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Wells brought something to the table that Sirotka did not - confidence that they would win every game he started. Most fans that I know were in favor of the trade. A genuine Ace is hard to come by in MLB and Wells brought that commodity to the table.

Trading Bradford brought Olivo to the team. Trading a middle reliever for a starting catcher is something you always do if you need a starting catcher.

Mark Johnson may be a team favorite, but he is a career backup. He is not starting material on any team with a chance to make and succeed in the post-season.

pitching is an area that is most important in baseball. there was no need for olivo if you had johnson and alomoar. they were great and alomar could of taught a lot to these other catchers. yeah i agree with johnson not being the best but he is still young.
my point being, williams keeps trading our pitchers for other position players. we don't need position players because they will eventually develop...we need our young pitchers. he has to learn to give them time and an opportunity.

bc2k
12-05-2002, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by cwsgrl17
pitching is an area that is the most important in baseball. there was no need for olivo if you had johnson and alomoar. they were great and alomar could of taught a lot to these other catchers. yeah i agree with johnson not being the best but he is still young. my point being, williams keeps trading our pitchers for other position players. we don't need position players because they will eventually develop...we need our young pitchers. he has to learn to give them time and an opportunity.

The Sox organization likes to heavily draft pitching so they can make the trades for position players. The Sox are banking on the idea that good pitching is a commodity that teams will overpay for. This theory only makes sense when you don't have an overpaying GM like KW. The reason I'm not upset about the loss of Valentine is because we don't trade our top pitching prospects and next years draft will again be pitching dominated. I can't say I miss Aaron Myette.

RichH55
12-05-2002, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
No one's saying MJ will be in the Hall of Fame, but now we're forced to platoon Olivio and Paul (Wow, that's horrible). Paul sucks and Olivio desperately needs another season in the minors. You cannot rush catchers. I'd have liked to see the Sox get another "rent-a-catcher" and platoon him with MJ and allow Olivio to develop in AAA.

Olivio's development is going to be hurt because of this deal. All this deal does is downgrade the Sox at a position the entire organization is extremely weak at, anyways.

A platoon with Paul and MJ or Olivo and MJ(using your logic, i happen to think Olivo will put up decent numbers, especially considering what we are used to) are both terrible as well. MJ seemed to regress last year as it was.....and this isnt a midseason deal, plenty of time to still get a rent a catcher or a decent veteran out there(buyers market and all)..........Bottomline is that MJ is a very very replaceable commodity, so I still think when posts start saying he is the best thing since sliced bread that it is just internet hyperbole

Soxheads
12-05-2002, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
A platoon with Paul and MJ or Olivo and MJ(using your logic, i happen to think Olivo will put up decent numbers, especially considering what we are used to) are both terrible as well. MJ seemed to regress last year as it was.....and this isnt a midseason deal, plenty of time to still get a rent a catcher or a decent veteran out there(buyers market and all)..........Bottomline is that MJ is a very very replaceable commodity, so I still think when posts start saying he is the best thing since sliced bread that it is just internet hyperbole

IMHO, I think what people are more worried about is having Paul as our backup catcher, not MJ's skills being lost.

FarmerAndy
12-05-2002, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by cwsgrl17

one last thing, the other reason why i hate this trade is because i love mark johnson. we should of gotten rid of paul and kept olivo. johnson is great with the pitching staff, now i have no catcher. the first time in years, i have no favorite catcher on the sox (fordyce, alomar,johnson, now nobody).

I feel your pain. I think everybody from time to time has a player that they really like, even though that player isn't all that good. For me, it was Greg Norton. Every time I was at a game, the guy would be knocking the ball out of the park, but when you looked at his numbers day after day, they weren't that good. He just happened to perform well when I was there, so I liked the guy. BUT, you can't let the fact that you like a player, for whatever reason, cloud your vision. Mark Johnson, like Greg Norton, is not Major League starter material. His abscence will not hurt the team.

Give Miguel Olivo a chance, I'm sure he'll do just fine.

Daver
12-05-2002, 05:47 PM
Originally posted by FarmerAndy
Mark Johnson, like Greg Norton, is not Major League starter material. His abscence will not hurt the team.



If the pitching staff is not considered part of the team you would be correct,but since it is I have to disagree with this statement.

cwsgrl17
12-05-2002, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by FarmerAndy
I feel your pain. I think everybody from time to time has a player that they really like, even though that player isn't all that good. For me, it was Greg Norton. Every time I was at a game, the guy would be knocking the ball out of the park, but when you looked at his numbers day after day, they weren't that good. He just happened to perform well when I was there, so I liked the guy. BUT, you can't let the fact that you like a player, for whatever reason, cloud your vision. Mark Johnson, like Greg Norton, is not Major League starter material. His abscence will not hurt the team.

Give Miguel Olivo a chance, I'm sure he'll do just fine.

i totally agree with you on that. you are right. my all time favorite player is mike caruso and we all know he is not the best shortstop/infielder.

doublem23
12-05-2002, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
A platoon with Paul and MJ or Olivo and MJ(using your logic, i happen to think Olivo will put up decent numbers, especially considering what we are used to) are both terrible as well. MJ seemed to regress last year as it was.....and this isnt a midseason deal, plenty of time to still get a rent a catcher or a decent veteran out there(buyers market and all)..........Bottomline is that MJ is a very very replaceable commodity, so I still think when posts start saying he is the best thing since sliced bread that it is just internet hyperbole

OK, you're still missing the point. A) No one's said he's great, so if there's anyone using hyperboles right now, it's you. And B), Johnson is far better defensively than both Olivio (who probably still needs a year in the minors). By dealing Johnson, he's made Olivio the #1, meaning that unless Williams gets two catchers, Olivio will be in Chicago (or Josh Paul... shudder), so either we have to rush Olivio and stunt his development or deal with Paul. Not good options.

That, and why would you trade players away from a position in which your entire organization is extremely thin at? It makes no sense.

doublem23
12-05-2002, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by FarmerAndy
IMark Johnson, like Greg Norton, is not Major League starter material. His abscence will not hurt the team.

If the Sox were deep with serviceable catchers, and I'd agree with you. Given the fact that we now only feature Miguel Olivio and Josh Paul as our only two catchers even remotely ready to play day in and day out at the MLB level is why I'm upset that Johnson (the best of the three defensively) was dealt.

It has nothing to do with my like/dislike of MJ, Paul, or Olivio. Every time I look at this deal, I just can't fathom why KW would trade away a catcher, especially our #1.

Jerry_Manuel
12-05-2002, 07:19 PM
I have a feeling they'll sign a Chad Kruter or someone like that.

baggio202
12-05-2002, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by bc2k
The Sox are banking on the idea that good pitching is a commodity that teams will overpay for.

lol..thanx for the laugh...you did say that that theory only works when KW is not the GM..but still...that sentence in conjuction with the white sox is a real knee slapper :smile:

RichH55
12-05-2002, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel
I have a feeling they'll sign a Chad Kruter or someone like that.

Most likely....there are plenty of Kruter/MJ/veteran whatever --> backup catchers out there....he is replaceable

Daver
12-05-2002, 07:40 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Most likely....there are plenty of Kruter/MJ/veteran whatever --> backup catchers out there....he is replaceable

Chad Kreuter would be a big upgrade over Josh Paul,at least he can call his own game.

RichH55
12-05-2002, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
OK, you're still missing the point. A) No one's said he's great, so if there's anyone using hyperboles right now, it's you. And B), Johnson is far better defensively than both Olivio (who probably still needs a year in the minors). By dealing Johnson, he's made Olivio the #1, meaning that unless Williams gets two catchers, Olivio will be in Chicago (or Josh Paul... shudder), so either we have to rush Olivio and stunt his development or deal with Paul. Not good options.

That, and why would you trade players away from a position in which your entire organization is extremely thin at? It makes no sense.

I'm not missing any point......I'm not only saying he's not great, but that he isnt good either....easily replaceable. Granted if we go into the season with Olivo and Paul as our only options at C, then you have a point. However I do not expect that to happen.

I was also working under the assumption that Olivo would be on the big league club with or without MJ on the Sox. Hell even with MJ here I still think Olivo would be our number 1. You will see some growing pains, no doubt, but Olivo's growing pains are better than MJ's seasoned pains, so I wasn't worried. That is where I'm coming from

You don't see Olivo as being ready, so anything that puts him closer to Chicago is a bad move in your opinion. Also, if the season were to start today(which it doesnt) we would have next to no depth at C. I get the point, I just happen to disagree...is that so hard to understand?


As far as the hyperbole comments....they were in regards to some of the reactions to losing MJ, who I feel is quite replaceable. I then compared it to reactions when we dealt Perry and Lowe, both of whom I also thought to be very replaceable.....Yet people still made a big deal out of losing them. That is the nature of the offseason and the internet beast. That's all I was saying...I think on MJ we might have to agree to disagree

RichH55
12-05-2002, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by daver
Chad Kreuter would be a big upgrade over Josh Paul,at least he can call his own game.

We need to depth either way.....Well I don't think losing MJ is all that big of a deal, it does mean we need another major league type catcher(backup variety most likely) if for no other reason than organizational depth

Daver
12-05-2002, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
if for no other reason than organizational depth

C'mon,the Sox have Ryan Sienko under contract........

RichH55
12-05-2002, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by daver
C'mon,the Sox have Ryan Sienko under contract........

Is Lee Evans still under contract?

Daver
12-05-2002, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Is Lee Evans still under contract?

No,minor league free agent.

RichH55
12-05-2002, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by daver
No,minor league free agent.

Well then we are definately screwed:)

Daver
12-05-2002, 08:01 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Well then we are definately screwed:)

Especially when you add in the fact that Mark Dellasandro is also a minor league FA.

cwsgrl17
12-06-2002, 09:39 AM
regardless who our catcher is next season the point is that kenny williams screwed up the sox. he has given us more questions then answers for next year. am i right?

voodoochile
12-06-2002, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by cwsgrl17
regardless who our catcher is next season the point is that kenny williams screwed up the sox. he has given us more questions then answers for next year. am i right?

I don't think the number of questions has increased, but there haven't been any answers supplied either. Either way, they are probably counting on Olivo as their starter and probably didn't care who backed him up. Paul's better bat and speed makes him a better commodity for the bench. MJ was strictly a defensive replacement.

Barring a trade for or a FA signing of a veteran catcher this changes very little of the teams structure...

Iwritecode
12-06-2002, 10:37 AM
Originally posted by RichH55
I was also working under the assumption that Olivo would be on the big league club with or without MJ on the Sox. Hell even with MJ here I still think Olivo would be our number 1. You will see some growing pains, no doubt, but Olivo's growing pains are better than MJ's seasoned pains, so I wasn't worried. That is where I'm coming from.

Actually, I have been waiting for a trade like this (getting rid of one of the catchers) for a little while now. Both MJ and Paul are out of options so neither can be sent back to the minors. I believe they have every intention of putting Olivo on the opening day roster consequences be damned. I really wish he could have gotten rid of Paul instead of MJ but I think Beane wanted MJ because he's left-handed.

doublem23
12-06-2002, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by Iwritecode
I really wish he could have gotten rid of Paul instead of MJ but I think Beane wanted MJ because he's left-handed.

Or because no matter how bad Johnson is, Paul is a hundred times worse.

cwsgrl17
12-06-2002, 12:24 PM
i totally agree with that!!!!!!!!
Yeah!!!!

Iwritecode
12-06-2002, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
Or because no matter how bad Johnson is, Paul is a hundred times worse.

But JP is so versatile!

cwsgrl17
12-06-2002, 03:54 PM
do you know what makes this all worse...that jim henry (the cubs gm) is doing a good job up north. he actually got rid of hundley and we are just sinking ourselves more and more. and to make it all worse, thomas is returning to the team. what a week!

Iwritecode
12-06-2002, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by cwsgrl17
do you know what makes this all worse...that jim henry (the cubs gm) is doing a good job up north. he actually got rid of hundley and we are just sinking ourselves more and more. and to make it all worse, thomas is returning to the team. what a week!

Yea, I hate it when I guy cabable of putting up .300/30/100 with about 100 walks and under 100 K's comes back to the Sox...

chisox06
12-06-2002, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by pearso66
i agree that most of those trades were bad. i have to say when i heard david wells was comin to town, i was quite pleased, sure we had to go through the shouldergate thing, but he was a high quality pitcher. The only problem was he didnt see fit to work out, and he was wrong about what he said about thomas. but other than the fact he was over weight, he should have been a good pick up, the only problem was we kept him for 1 year, and then threw him to the curb. didn't let him rehab and see him come back thinner and in better shape than the year he was with us

Although I dislike KW too you cant blame the sox for throwin his as* to the curb. He was overweight, well whos fault is that? If Wells doesnt find it necessary to be in proper shape for the start of a baseball season well its obvious hes not going to work out in any organization. Why pay a pitcher more money out of your payroll for him to rehab after it was obvious all he wanted to do was not pitch well, get fat and disrupt team chemistry?

ode to veeck
12-06-2002, 04:43 PM
But JP is so versatile!

You got that right, he sucks in some many departments, running through the signs, keeping pitches out of the strike zone from hitting the backstop, writing for the cubune ...