PDA

View Full Version : interesting stat


gosox41
04-08-2003, 11:44 AM
I got this from a Gammons' article on ESPN.com.

They looked at different closers save percentages in 1 run games from the years 2000-2002:

Billy Koch is 32-47 68%
Keith Foulke is 35-41 85%

Another reason I don't make that trade.

Bob

czalgosz
04-08-2003, 11:56 AM
Hey, Neal Cotts looked wild but good in his first outing for AA Birmingham. (5 IP, 2 H, 0 R, 4 BB, 6 K)

Other than that, I agree that Foulke is the better pitcher, but the fact that the Sox have Koch for 2004 and Foulke will almost definitely be a Yankee next year makes it a good deal.

thecell
04-08-2003, 12:35 PM
We have a helluva closer in Koch. What's with the Foulke love fest? Koch is guaranteed to be here and Foulke wouldn't have been. WHen/if Foulke loses his pitch, it takes him months to get it back. Koch throws gas and can't lose that. GO KOCH!

gosox41
04-08-2003, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by thecell
We have a helluva closer in Koch. What's with the Foulke love fest? Koch is guaranteed to be here and Foulke wouldn't have been. WHen/if Foulke loses his pitch, it takes him months to get it back. Koch throws gas and can't lose that. GO KOCH!

Remember Bobby Thigpen. Losing just a few miles off his fastball and hurt a power pitcher a lot.

Bob

MHOUSE
04-08-2003, 12:52 PM
Foulke has that funky delivery that I think hitters pick up on. Koch has the gas and I'll take that over the change any day. Koch has had 30 or more saves his first 3 years. Foulke had a good 2000, but last two years he has been inconsistent with those costly blow-ups. One-run games aren't most important, it's ALL save situations. The trade was a really good one. I'm glad to pickup a guaranteed stud in Koch than an iffy Foulke who was gonna leave.

moochpuppy
04-08-2003, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by thecell
Koch throws gas and can't lose that. GO KOCH!

Hell, even I can throw gas....... :o: .......damn Taco Bell.

WinningUgly!
04-08-2003, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
I got this from a Gammons' article on ESPN.com.

They looked at different closers save percentages in 1 run games from the years 2000-2002:

Billy Koch is 32-47 68%
Keith Foulke is 35-41 85%

Another reason I don't make that trade.

Bob

This just in: The trade has already been made!
Please tell me that you're not gonna cry "I told you so" everytime Koch has a bad outing over the next few years. :D:

WinningUgly!
04-08-2003, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by moochpuppy
Hell, even I can throw gas....... :o: .......damn Taco Bell.

I hear ya! That Fire sauce doesn't help either. :D:

maurice
04-08-2003, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by MHOUSE
One-run games aren't most important, it's ALL save situations.

Um, okay. Save percentages in all save situations since the start of 2000:

Foulke - 89.0%

Koch - 85.1%

Bonus stat (for fans of the stike-em-out closer), career strikeouts per nine innings:

Foulke - 8.39

Koch - 7.88

Koch has been real good. Foulke has been better. The trade was sound, but its purpose was not to get us a better closer.

thecell
04-08-2003, 01:22 PM
The trade was sound, but its purpose was not to get us a better closer.

That says it all...

WinningUgly!
04-08-2003, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by maurice


Bonus stat (for fans of the stike-em-out closer), career strikeouts per nine innings:

Foulke - 8.39

Koch - 7.88

Koch has been real good. Foulke has been better. The trade was sound, but its purpose was not to get us a better closer.

Bonus-bonus stat...
K/9 innings (2002)
Foulke - 6.72
Koch - 8.94

(Remember, Foulke pitched most of '02 in low pressure, non-save situations)

T Dog
04-08-2003, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by maurice

Koch has been real good. Foulke has been better. The trade was sound, but its purpose was not to get us a better closer.

You're writing in the past tense. The question should be which pitcher would be better in the future, particularly for the White Sox. I like Koch's chances.

maurice
04-08-2003, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by T Dog
You're writing in the past tense. The question should be which pitcher would be better in the future....

Well, the topic of the thread is past stats (2000-2002), hence the past tense. As for who will be better, while past performance is no guarantee of future success, it's a pretty good clue. The available data indicate that Foulke should be at least marginally better than Koch. IMHO, there is a good chance that Koch will be almost a good as Foulke (which is fine), a small chance that Koch will be better than Foulke (even better), and a small chance that Koch will be significantly worse than Foulke ( :(: ).

T Dog
04-08-2003, 08:35 PM
If the topic of this thread is limited to the past tense, the point isn't terribly significant.

On the topic of past tense, I wasn't impressed with Foulke's character last year. I also think it is odd how Gammons and most of the national media were claiming that the league had caught up to Foulke, until he became a member of the A's. A year ago at this time, Gammons was right (an example of the blind pig and the acorn, perhaps) when he wrote that hitters would have more success against Foulke in 2002, despite all the saves in 2000 and 2001. Even if by accident, Gammons was right that those years wouldn't lead to success in 2002.

My point, in the future tense, is that I like Koch. I don't expect I will miss Foulke in 2003.

gosox41
04-08-2003, 09:37 PM
Originally posted by WinningUgly!
This just in: The trade has already been made!
Please tell me that you're not gonna cry "I told you so" everytime Koch has a bad outing over the next few years. :D:

No, I'm certainly not going to cry. I was against the trade the day it was made and still feel as strong. I just wanted to point it out because I am officially on the anti-Kenny Williams bandwagon. Sure he made a good trade in getting Colon, but it seems like for every good move he makes I can find 3 bad moves. The Koch trade falls into that category. When the Sox dump Williams I'll stop showing facts that indicate Williams' stupidity.

Bob

Daver
04-08-2003, 09:56 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
No, I'm certainly not going to cry. I was against the trade the day it was made and still feel as strong. I just wanted to point it out because I am officially on the anti-Kenny Williams bandwagon. Sure he made a good trade in getting Colon, but it seems like for every good move he makes I can find 3 bad moves. The Koch trade falls into that category. When the Sox dump Williams I'll stop showing facts that indicate Williams' stupidity.

Bob

What is your opinion of the Bradford for Olivo trade?

What is your opinion on leaving Gary Majewski unprotected in the rule 5 draft,where he was drafted by the Blue Jays?

What is your opinion of signing Esteban Loaiza and Brian Daubach to minor league contracts?

baggio202
04-08-2003, 10:02 PM
since we are revisiting trades what about the gary glover - scott eyre trade???

scott eyre has been unbelievable since arriving in san francisco

in 21 games last season for the giants he had a 1.79 era and was 6 for 6 in holds

in 4 games this year he already has 2 holds and a save and has yet to be scored on and is sharing the closing role with tim worrell while nen is out...

TimChamp
04-08-2003, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
No, I'm certainly not going to cry. I was against the trade the day it was made and still feel as strong. I just wanted to point it out because I am officially on the anti-Kenny Williams bandwagon. Sure he made a good trade in getting Colon, but it seems like for every good move he makes I can find 3 bad moves. The Koch trade falls into that category. When the Sox dump Williams I'll stop showing facts that indicate Williams' stupidity.

Bob


You know I don't understand some of you guys, it's like you guys are never happy...how can you say that for every good move he's made, you can find 3 bad ones...can you please provide me examples???

I don't know, the only really bad trade that I have seen him make was Todd Ritchie...now that one was TERRIBLE!!! Unless that counts as 50 of his trades, then I don't really see that ratio...

Get off Kenny's case and if you call the David Wells trade bad, at the time, I thought it was great, Toronto didn't even get anything out of it! That was a risky move, the only reason why that didn't work was because Wells was fat, lazy and didn't feel like playing for the Sox...I mean come on, he pitches for the Yankees THE NEXT YEAR and he loses weight, "fixes" his back problem, and pitches pretty darn good for them...THAT WAS WELLS'S FAULT...NOT KENNY'S...

Now please, enlighten me on this issue, considering I don't see Kenny to be not that bad of a GM...granted he's not a Billy Beane, but who is? And don't forget, the players and the managers have to do their jobs too, you know! Don't blame it all on the GM, I mean Wells was a 20-game winner when we got him, so how can that be a bad trade???

Anyway, I HAD done a good job of staying off this issue until now, it's just gone to a point where people are just picking on him for not too many obvious reasons...


Champ out to drink some coffee... :gulp:

Daver
04-08-2003, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by baggio202
since we are revisiting trades what about the gary glover - scott eyre trade???

scott eyre has been unbelievable since arriving in san francisco

in 21 games last season for the giants he had a 1.79 era and was 6 for 6 in holds

in 4 games this year he already has 2 holds and a save and has yet to be scored on and is sharing the closing role with tim worrell while nen is out...

And was acquried by the Giants via the waiver wire........

TimChamp
04-08-2003, 10:12 PM
Originally posted by baggio202
since we are revisiting trades what about the gary glover - scott eyre trade???

scott eyre has been unbelievable since arriving in san francisco

in 21 games last season for the giants he had a 1.79 era and was 6 for 6 in holds

in 4 games this year he already has 2 holds and a save and has yet to be scored on and is sharing the closing role with tim worrell while nen is out...


THAT"S JUST HILLARIOUS!!! Come on, Eyre hadn't done jack crap since that trade up until now, and don't tell me that during that time he was better than Glover! Now that Glover is in his proper role, look for a break-out year of him putting up stellar numbers in the bullpen...


Champ out...

MHOUSE
04-08-2003, 10:17 PM
Glover's role is out of the pen. Period. Jerry's experiment starting him didn't work out. He had some decent performances but in the long run he's not a starter and every time he has worked from the pen he has had success. It's nice to have a guy who can basically pitch in any situation. I think getting Glover was a good deal. He's going to have a breakout year. He's our only pitcher (except for Wunsch's 0.1 IP) to not be scored on yet.

gosox41
04-09-2003, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by TimChamp
You know I don't understand some of you guys, it's like you guys are never happy...how can you say that for every good move he's made, you can find 3 bad ones...can you please provide me examples???

I don't know, the only really bad trade that I have seen him make was Todd Ritchie...now that one was TERRIBLE!!! Unless that counts as 50 of his trades, then I don't really see that ratio...

Get off Kenny's case and if you call the David Wells trade bad, at the time, I thought it was great, Toronto didn't even get anything out of it! That was a risky move, the only reason why that didn't work was because Wells was fat, lazy and didn't feel like playing for the Sox...I mean come on, he pitches for the Yankees THE NEXT YEAR and he loses weight, "fixes" his back problem, and pitches pretty darn good for them...THAT WAS WELLS'S FAULT...NOT KENNY'S...

Now please, enlighten me on this issue, considering I don't see Kenny to be not that bad of a GM...granted he's not a Billy Beane, but who is? And don't forget, the players and the managers have to do their jobs too, you know! Don't blame it all on the GM, I mean Wells was a 20-game winner when we got him, so how can that be a bad trade???

Anyway, I HAD done a good job of staying off this issue until now, it's just gone to a point where people are just picking on him for not too many obvious reasons...


Champ out to drink some coffee... :gulp:

Last year's Sox media guide (which I am unable to locate as of now) had a list of all of Kenny's trades. It's conveniently left out of this years.

So for the record, I loved the Colon deal. While the David Wells deal was a decent deal, it was highly overrted at the time because the Sox traded their best pitcher for a slightly better one who had age against them. I was excited when the trade was made, but no where near as ecstatic as the Colon trade. I liked the Marte trade and it was a low risk play to go after D'Angelo Jiminez.

The signings of Daubach, White and Gordon were brought up so I'll respond to those. Getting Daubach is a great move. White was a solid move because his numbers were bad due to the Rockies effect. I think Tom Gordon is a great pitcher...when healthy. Unfortunately he gets hurt just about every year and I expect the same this season. The Sox are relying on him to be a vital part of the bullpen and because of this I don't like that deal as much. If he gets hurt, how does that mess up the bullpen. You can never have too much pitching, though.

Now on to deals and moves that I don't like under the KW era. Keep in mind that I don't recall every move he has made.

1. Todd Ritchie trade. I said it was stupid at the time and I was proven right. Sox gave up way too much for a journeyman at best who got injured.

2. Ray Durham trade. Getting a 24 year old AAA pitcher who is injured and has crappy minor league numbers for the second best offensive 2B in the AL.

3. Keith Foulke/Billy Koch trade. It's early and I may be proven wrong but I think the Sox screwed themselves here. It's not just because Foulke is better then Koch statistically either. It's losing Johnson and Joe Valentine.

4. Royce Clayon trade. Even with all his errors (which are not a great way to measure how good a fielder one is) it's obvious that Jose still was more productive overall at the SS position.

5. Signing Sandy Alomar in 2001.

6. Signing Sandy Alomar in 2003.

7. Bobby Howry. While the Sox got some talent for him, this was far from a stellar deal.

8. Julio Ramirez. How long were we forced to watch this guy be overpowered when he clearly wasn't ready for the majors only to see the Sox give him up for nothing.

9. Overpaying for Paul Konerko. I mentioned this at the time, but the Sox overpaid for a first basemen who offensively is average at best when compared to other first basemen. Remember this is a team with limited resources and need to spend money wisely.

10. Signing Kenny Lofton. Who doesn't know he's been washed up for the last 4 seasons? I mean besides Kenny. He took a job from a younger player and had one great month. By the time he left here he was hitting .250. I think Rowand can do that and more.

This is all I could think of for now. If I think of anything more I'll post them. I may be a little to critical of Kenny. I will say that he has shown improvement the past off season but he couldn't hold Billy Beane's jock strap.

Bob

czalgosz
04-09-2003, 06:47 PM
Billy Beane's had a few bad moves - giving a long-term contract to Terrence Long sticks out in my mind.

Anyway, the Sox got a really nice young prospect from the Giants for Lofton, so he wasn't a total waste, and it's not like Lofton was holding back someone from a roster spot.

Losing Joe Valentine was made up for by getting Neal Cotts. I liked Mark Johnson, but I can live with losing him.

Getting Julio Ramirez was a good idea, but the execution was bad. Him making the team out of Spring Training was a terrible idea. He should have been in AAA getting his ABs instead of collecting splinters.

ode to veeck
04-09-2003, 06:49 PM
Remember Bobby Thigpen. Losing just a few miles off his fastball and hurt a power pitcher a lot.

Like when we needed it last May and Foulkee lost a few MPH on his gas and everyone started teeing off on his funky changeup because it was not so much slower than his other pitch anymore

works just as badly for the guy with the control and the change-up (when they loses those mph)

even worse example was butter pitching BP speeds for gopher balls when KW brought his whining ass up before he was anywhere near recovered from his surgery last spring

Unregistered
04-09-2003, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by ode to veeck
even worse example was butter pitching BP speeds for gopher balls when KW brought his whining ass up before he was anywhere near recovered from his surgery last spring Speaking of which, Jimmy is back on the DL after giving up 13 runs, 12 hits and nine walks over 6 2/3 innings for the D-Rays. I know we have some butter fans here, but can we finally say that he is OFFICIALLY done now?

TimChamp
04-09-2003, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Last year's Sox media guide (which I am unable to locate as of now) had a list of all of Kenny's trades. It's conveniently left out of this years.

So for the record, I loved the Colon deal. While the David Wells deal was a decent deal, it was highly overrted at the time because the Sox traded their best pitcher for a slightly better one who had age against them. I was excited when the trade was made, but no where near as ecstatic as the Colon trade. I liked the Marte trade and it was a low risk play to go after D'Angelo Jiminez.

The signings of Daubach, White and Gordon were brought up so I'll respond to those. Getting Daubach is a great move. White was a solid move because his numbers were bad due to the Rockies effect. I think Tom Gordon is a great pitcher...when healthy. Unfortunately he gets hurt just about every year and I expect the same this season. The Sox are relying on him to be a vital part of the bullpen and because of this I don't like that deal as much. If he gets hurt, how does that mess up the bullpen. You can never have too much pitching, though.

Now on to deals and moves that I don't like under the KW era. Keep in mind that I don't recall every move he has made.

1. Todd Ritchie trade. I said it was stupid at the time and I was proven right. Sox gave up way too much for a journeyman at best who got injured.

2. Ray Durham trade. Getting a 24 year old AAA pitcher who is injured and has crappy minor league numbers for the second best offensive 2B in the AL.

3. Keith Foulke/Billy Koch trade. It's early and I may be proven wrong but I think the Sox screwed themselves here. It's not just because Foulke is better then Koch statistically either. It's losing Johnson and Joe Valentine.

4. Royce Clayon trade. Even with all his errors (which are not a great way to measure how good a fielder one is) it's obvious that Jose still was more productive overall at the SS position.

5. Signing Sandy Alomar in 2001.

6. Signing Sandy Alomar in 2003.

7. Bobby Howry. While the Sox got some talent for him, this was far from a stellar deal.

8. Julio Ramirez. How long were we forced to watch this guy be overpowered when he clearly wasn't ready for the majors only to see the Sox give him up for nothing.

9. Overpaying for Paul Konerko. I mentioned this at the time, but the Sox overpaid for a first basemen who offensively is average at best when compared to other first basemen. Remember this is a team with limited resources and need to spend money wisely.

10. Signing Kenny Lofton. Who doesn't know he's been washed up for the last 4 seasons? I mean besides Kenny. He took a job from a younger player and had one great month. By the time he left here he was hitting .250. I think Rowand can do that and more.

This is all I could think of for now. If I think of anything more I'll post them. I may be a little to critical of Kenny. I will say that he has shown improvement the past off season but he couldn't hold Billy Beane's jock strap.

Bob

Response:

-Todd Ritchie trade: TERRIBLE - Agreement there.

-Ray Durham trade: He's not even on the team anymore and I really doubt we could have gotten more for him...disagree

-Keith Foulke/Billy Koch trade: OK trade, I thought that we could have gotten more for Foulke, but we would have lost him anyway, so I can deal with Koch for two more years, plus that Jorge Nunez seemed pretty good in ST...neutral...

-Royce Clayton trade: I thought it was OK, but it did put Jose out of position...the thing is though, this guy hit about the same as Jose, but just didn't have the offensive power numbers...didn't lose anything for the trade, provided MUCH BETTER defense than Jose...neutral...

-Signing Alomar twice...no way can that be bad...he puts up much better numbers than any of our past catchers in the last...5 years...disagree...

-Howry - neutral...don't know enough about players involved, but then again, Howry was way too inconsistent and I doubt he would have been around this year...

-Julio Ramirez - NOT KENNY...JERRY MANUEL...enough said...disagree...

-Kenny Lofton: how can you say this was bad, after-the-fact? No way, it was a great move at the time and we got some value for him too...disagree...

So that's maybe 3 moves there that could be considered bad, but you are not even putting down some of his good moves...enuff said...


Champ out...

Daver
04-09-2003, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by gosox41


2. Ray Durham trade. Getting a 24 year old AAA pitcher who is injured and has crappy minor league numbers for the second best offensive 2B in the AL.


Ray was going to be gone at the end of the season,and at the time it appeared there would be no compensary draft pick,so Kenny got a starter for the Charlotte Knights for 3 months of Ray's service.If there was any way Ray was going to be re-signed I could agree thinking this was a bad deal,in reality it wasn't.

3. Keith Foulke/Billy Koch trade. It's early and I may be proven wrong but I think the Sox screwed themselves here. It's not just because Foulke is better then Koch statistically either. It's losing Johnson and Joe Valentine.

That was done for two reasons,the manager of the team had 0 confidence in Keith Foulke,and Foulke was dur for a big payday that the Sox did not feel he was worth.I can agree with you on the Johnson angle,but I would rather have Neal Cotts,the starter we got in return for Valentine,who will never be more than a closer,and had never played above AA.

6. Signing Sandy Alomar in 2003.

It's a damn good thing he signed someone,going into the season with Miguel and Josh would be a nightmare,and Sandy has the patience to be a good instructor for a young catcher.

8. Julio Ramirez. How long were we forced to watch this guy be overpowered when he clearly wasn't ready for the majors only to see the Sox give him up for nothing.

They didn't give up much to acquire him,it was a wash as far as that is concerned,and it was a reasonable gamble for a team that had little in the way of depth at CF.Why do you think he signed Kenny Lofton? Because he knows that Aaron Rowand is not an MLB CF'er.

9. Overpaying for Paul Konerko. I mentioned this at the time, but the Sox overpaid for a first basemen who offensively is average at best when compared to other first basemen. Remember this is a team with limited resources and need to spend money wisely.

But were the Sox awarding him a contract based on his numbers or based on his value to the team? It is not all that uncommon to overpay a bit for a guy that is good for the team all the way around,especially if it helps out at all in putting fannies in the seats.

gosox41
04-10-2003, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Billy Beane's had a few bad moves - giving a long-term contract to Terrence Long sticks out in my mind.

Anyway, the Sox got a really nice young prospect from the Giants for Lofton, so he wasn't a total waste, and it's not like Lofton was holding back someone from a roster spot.

Losing Joe Valentine was made up for by getting Neal Cotts. I liked Mark Johnson, but I can live with losing him.

Getting Julio Ramirez was a good idea, but the execution was bad. Him making the team out of Spring Training was a terrible idea. He should have been in AAA getting his ABs instead of collecting splinters.

IMHO, the Sox would have been a better team with Rowand in CF then with Lofton over the course of a season.

As for getting Neal Cotts, what concerns me about him is he was dominating A ball as a 23 year old in a league for 19-20 year olds. He's old for an A ball pitcher and people analyzing last seasons numbers should keep that in mind. I hated losing Mark Johnson for the reason that it kept Josh Paul and Sandy Alomar on the team. I would've made MJ back up to Olivo. There's more upside on offense and the defense is much better. Instead the Sox are wasting a valuable roster spot on Josh Paul as an insurance police for WHEN Sandy gets hurt. It's not helping the team win now.

I liked the idea of getting Ramirez, but it was like Williams forced him down our throats by making Manuel play him. Just like starting Rauch in the majors last season after missing a year due to shoulder surgery was very stupid, so was this.

Bob

gosox41
04-10-2003, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by daver
Ray was going to be gone at the end of the season,and at the time it appeared there would be no compensary draft pick,so Kenny got a starter for the Charlotte Knights for 3 months of Ray's service.If there was any way Ray was going to be re-signed I could agree thinking this was a bad deal,in reality it wasn't.



That was done for two reasons,the manager of the team had 0 confidence in Keith Foulke,and Foulke was dur for a big payday that the Sox did not feel he was worth.I can agree with you on the Johnson angle,but I would rather have Neal Cotts,the starter we got in return for Valentine,who will never be more than a closer,and had never played above AA.



It's a damn good thing he signed someone,going into the season with Miguel and Josh would be a nightmare,and Sandy has the patience to be a good instructor for a young catcher.



They didn't give up much to acquire him,it was a wash as far as that is concerned,and it was a reasonable gamble for a team that had little in the way of depth at CF.Why do you think he signed Kenny Lofton? Because he knows that Aaron Rowand is not an MLB CF'er.



But were the Sox awarding him a contract based on his numbers or based on his value to the team? It is not all that uncommon to overpay a bit for a guy that is good for the team all the way around,especially if it helps out at all in putting fannies in the seats.

If Williams knows that Rowand is not a ML CF'er, then why didn't he fill the void this off season? WHile Rowand may not be an ideal CF'er, he is a much better option then Kenny Lofton. Lofton is clearly on the dowside of his career, numbers which Rowand can equal and probably exceed (other then the SB's). Also, Lofton cost the Sox a first round pick.

If KW never traded MJ (who is a more thenadequate back up) then I wouldn't be stuck watching Sandy and Josh try to play catcher this season.


I like Paulie, but he is more then just a little overpaid. Look at the career numbers of Daubach and Paul. Paul's are better, but not by much. Daubach is a left. Daubach if probably underpaid in the current market, but then again he was a free agent who could have found a better deal elsewhere.

Bob