PDA

View Full Version : Keith Foulke


Dadawg_77
04-16-2003, 11:40 AM
Whip .079
ERA 2.84
ER 2
K 7
IP 6.1
S 3
BS 0


Our guy, Koch

Whip 1.77
ERA 7.36
ER 6
K 9
IP 7.1
S 2
BS 2


So far a great trade.

Rocky Soprano
04-16-2003, 11:41 AM
Damn, another great move. :angry: :(: :whiner:

CHISOXFAN13
04-16-2003, 11:43 AM
You guys crack me up. Foulke blew key saves for us too last year. Yankees series ring a bell?

StepsInSC
04-16-2003, 11:47 AM
Ya and two weeks into the season those stats are pretty much cemented. We're waaaay to far into the season for the rest of the games to really be able to lower that ERA any.

hold2dibber
04-16-2003, 11:51 AM
I for one have said from the get go that Foulke is a better closer than Koch. But Koch is still pretty damn good. It is way too early in the year to be making any determinations about whether or not it was a good trade. All closers blow games and it always sucks when they do. Of course, Koch gives up a lot more baserunners than Foulke, so he lives on the edge more and makes it more scary for the fans, but he should still be pretty good.

THE_HOOTER
04-16-2003, 12:06 PM
How many inherited runners did Koch let in too?

I know the first blown save he was only charged with 2 earned runs, six crossed the plate while he was out there!

His era should be well over 10.

SuperGrover
04-16-2003, 02:44 PM
Foulke
2002
------
2.90 ERA
1.004 WHIP

Koch
2002
--------
3.27 ERA
1.271 WHIP

Foulke
1999-2001
--------------
2.49 ERA
o.948 WHIP

Koch
1999-2001
--------------
3.57 ERA
1.337 WHIP

Foulke has been the better pitcher in every year since Koch has entered the league. Why are you people surprised he's performing better this season?

jeremyb1
04-16-2003, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by CHISOXFAN13
You guys crack me up. Foulke blew key saves for us too last year. Yankees series ring a bell?

i've said it a million times but i'll say it again. they all look the same in the standings. i'll take the guy who converts his save opportunities more often every time. maybe koch will convert more than foulke yet, its still early, but i have my doubts.

doublem23
04-16-2003, 04:22 PM
What are you talking about? Koch has more strikeouts than Keith, so obviously he's been better.

Tavarin
04-16-2003, 04:23 PM
For most of 2002, Foulke pitched in much less strenuous circumstances, those stats mean nothing.

Jerry_Manuel
04-16-2003, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
So far a great trade.

Yeah, should I get the Biddle vs. Colon stats out to? :o:

oldcomiskey
04-16-2003, 05:18 PM
hey yall are the ones who wanted a more modernized closer

JUGGERNAUT
04-16-2003, 05:44 PM
Look at the details when you're talking the closer position.

In Koch's 2K3 season, 24 of his 34 er's came against TOR & TEX in less than 10 gms. With over 70 appearances & 93ip, that's less than 10% of the time.

All the numbers say is that when Koch blows he blows way more than Foulke & managers so far have been too stupid to yank him at the first sign of trouble.

Wait until the season's over. If Koch has 70+ appearances, he'll give up fewer runs over more games than Foulke will.
That's the true measure of a closer.

Dadawg_77
04-16-2003, 07:05 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel
Yeah, should I get the Biddle vs. Colon stats out to? :o:

No, Foulke is a better pitcher then Koch any day of the week. Koch is a overrated by many. I don't want a guy who walks 25% of the batters he faces closing games for me. They can get lucky once in while but when with that walk rate you will get killed. Foulke for Koch was bad trade.

Dadawg_77
04-16-2003, 07:05 PM
Originally posted by espnjohn1
Look at the details when you're talking the closer position.

In Koch's 2K3 season, 24 of his 34 er's came against TOR & TEX in less than 10 gms. With over 70 appearances & 93ip, that's less than 10% of the time.

All the numbers say is that when Koch blows he blows way more than Foulke & managers so far have been too stupid to yank him at the first sign of trouble.

Wait until the season's over. If Koch has 70+ appearances, he'll give up fewer runs over more games than Foulke will.
That's the true measure of a closer.

Your assumtion is dead wrong.

czalgosz
04-16-2003, 07:12 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Foulke for Koch was bad trade.

If that's all it was, I would totally agree with you. But there was more to the trade. The Sox have Koch for two years, whereas Foulke will be either with the Yankees or the Red Sox in 2004. (And yes, Koch is worth having on your team.)

Secondly, I was as pissed as anyone until I found out that the Sox got an outstanding starting pitching prospect and a decent outfield prospect in that trade, giving up a mediocre catcher and a good relief pitcher. The Sox might not have gotten the better end of the bargain, but they didn't get robbed, either. I'd say the trade was about equal for both teams.

I'd say the trade works out pretty well for the Sox, all things considered.

Dadawg_77
04-16-2003, 07:18 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
If that's all it was, I would totally agree with you. But there was more to the trade. The Sox have Koch for two years, whereas Foulke will be either with the Yankees or the Red Sox in 2004. (And yes, Koch is worth having on your team.)

Secondly, I was as pissed as anyone until I found out that the Sox got an outstanding starting pitching prospect and a decent outfield prospect in that trade, giving up a mediocre catcher and a good relief pitcher. The Sox might not have gotten the better end of the bargain, but they didn't get robbed, either. I'd say the trade was about equal for both teams.

I'd say the trade works out pretty well for the Sox, all things considered.

Honestly I completely disagree with that view. First with changes in Market conditions, there is a chance Foulke will be cheaper the Koch next year. Secondly, this team needs to make a push now, thus you need the best pieces now.

Also anyone who believe Koch is a better pitcher then Foulke is completely off base. If you are going to make a run at it all, don't trade for inferior players.

Daver
04-16-2003, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77


Also anyone who believe Koch is a better pitcher then Foulke is completely off base. If you are going to make a run at it all, don't trade for inferior players.

It makes no difference what we,as fans, think about who is the better pitcher,the plain simple truth is that JM lost all his confidence in Foulke as a closer.If he was not going to be used as a closer he was expendable,and therefore got moved.

Dadawg_77
04-16-2003, 07:34 PM
Originally posted by daver
It makes no difference what we,as fans, think about who is the better pitcher,the plain simple truth is that JM lost all his confidence in Foulke as a closer.If he was not going to be used as a closer he was expendable,and therefore got moved.

True, and thats why JM and KW should be expendable.

JUGGERNAUT
04-16-2003, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Your assumtion is dead wrong.

And of course you have something to back that up. Look it up my friend. Koch has more saves, more K's, a slightly better save %, more scoreless ip, & more scoreless games pitched than Foulke over the last 3 yrs.

JUGGERNAUT
04-16-2003, 07:56 PM
Foulke cost 6mil this year. Koch will cost a little over 10mil the next 2 yrs. Foulke is not going to resign for 2yr in FA. He is definitely going for a Wagner or Percival type deal worth 30mil.

The SOX have a stop-gap solution at closer for the next 2 yrs at roughly 5mil/yr. Considering he won the Rolaids Relief Award & was instrumental in the A's 21 gm win streak, it was a good deal for the SOX.

SuperGrover
04-17-2003, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by Tavarin
For most of 2002, Foulke pitched in much less strenuous circumstances, those stats mean nothing.

Okay, how about the numbers from 2001? 2000? 1999?

Give me a freaking break. Foulke has outperformed Koch every year since Koch came into the league. He's doing it again this year. Why is it so hard to admit that our GM made a bad trade? It's not like it hasn't been a common theme since KW took over.

gosox41
04-17-2003, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by espnjohn1
Foulke cost 6mil this year. Koch will cost a little over 10mil the next 2 yrs. Foulke is not going to resign for 2yr in FA. He is definitely going for a Wagner or Percival type deal worth 30mil.

The SOX have a stop-gap solution at closer for the next 2 yrs at roughly 5mil/yr. Considering he won the Rolaids Relief Award & was instrumental in the A's 21 gm win streak, it was a good deal for the SOX.


If Koch continues to pitch the way he has for us, then I don't want him at all next year. He is a worse pitcher the Foulke and the Sox get an extra year to keep a worse pitcher. What's wrong with this picuture?

Bob

T Dog
04-17-2003, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by daver
... the plain simple truth is that JM lost all his confidence in Foulke as a closer

Foulke lost all confidence in Foulke as a closer. He told his manager he couldn't close anymore, but had no problem with collecting a closer paycheck in a bullpen with young hungry pitchers who believed that they could do the job if given the chance. Marte showed last year he could do Foulke's job better than Foulke had done. Look at what Biddle is doing in Montreal and you might complain that we didn't keep him as a closer.

Foulke's biggest problem is character. Koch has had two bad games against the Royals, but after the first, he had no problem coming in the next day against the Tigers and striking out the side for a save.

Ventura23Fan
04-18-2003, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by T Dog
Look at what Biddle is doing in Montreal and you might complain that we didn't keep him as a closer.


Rock got knocked around pretty good today.

doublem23
04-18-2003, 03:22 AM
Originally posted by Tavarin
For most of 2002, Foulke pitched in much less strenuous circumstances, those stats mean nothing.

Worst. Logic. Ever.

JUGGERNAUT
04-18-2003, 11:17 AM
There is no one I think on this board that doesn't think that Foulke is the better pitcher. His control is better than Koch's.
If Koch had Foulke's control this would be no contest.

But Koch is clearly the better closer. You can make all the excuses for Foulke that you want but it won't change these facts:
1) Koch has 144 saves over 4 yrs. Foulke is far below that.
2) Koch has a better save % over 4 yrs.
3) Koch has more scoreless appearances than Foulke over that time
4) Koch has more scoreless ip than Foulke over that time

The best closer is the pitcher who gets damaged the most in the fewest # of games. That isn't Foulke.

JasonC23
04-18-2003, 11:50 AM
So, being a better pitcher doesn't make Foulke a better closer? But isn't a closer...a pitcher? My head hurts... :cool:

In all seriousness, this illustrates where the disconnect is between a lot of the Foulke/Koch supporters. The "closer" is a mythic beast that's been built up by the media and some baseball insiders as being a special breed of pitcher that only select few can possibly aspire to be because of all the special qualities a closer must have. Koch has these qualities (throws hard, looks intimidating, what have you), so even though it's been freely admitted that Foulke is the better pitcher, Koch is the better "closer."

Meanwhile, the Foulke supporters look at the numbers (which nearly all say he's the better pitcher), realize that pitchers like Matt Karchner and Antonio Alfonseca are racking or have racked up enough saves to be "proven closers" even though they're at best average pitchers, and watch teams like the San Francisco Giants not have their "key proven closer" and still do just fine (13-2 right now), and come to the conclusion that a good "closer" is a good pitcher who just happens to be allowed to pitch in save situations.

Bottom line? The Sox have Koch, so I hope he kicks ass as a closer. But which would you rather have...the better pitcher or the mythic beast?

czalgosz
04-18-2003, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
If Koch continues to pitch the way he has for us, then I don't want him at all next year. He is a worse pitcher the Foulke and the Sox get an extra year to keep a worse pitcher. What's wrong with this picuture?

Bob

Koch won't pitch this way all year. He'll be fine.

czalgosz
04-18-2003, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by JasonC23
Bottom line? The Sox have Koch, so I hope he kicks ass as a closer. But which would you rather have...the better pitcher or the mythic beast?

I'd rather have Foulke than Koch, but the difference between the two isn't worth the several million more for several more years it would take to keep Foulke.

And yes, Foulke is going to be expensive this winter. All you have to do is look around at all the rich teams that have serious bullpen issues to realize that.

TheBigHurt
04-18-2003, 11:59 AM
:angry: :whiner: :angry: :whiner: :angry: :whiner:

IT'LL be fine :)

fuzzy_patters
04-18-2003, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by JasonC23
So, being a better pitcher doesn't make Foulke a better closer? But isn't a closer...a pitcher? My head hurts... :cool:

In all seriousness, this illustrates where the disconnect is between a lot of the Foulke/Koch supporters. The "closer" is a mythic beast that's been built up by the media and some baseball insiders as being a special breed of pitcher that only select few can possibly aspire to be because of all the special qualities a closer must have. Koch has these qualities (throws hard, looks intimidating, what have you), so even though it's been freely admitted that Foulke is the better pitcher, Koch is the better "closer."

Meanwhile, the Foulke supporters look at the numbers (which nearly all say he's the better pitcher), realize that pitchers like Matt Karchner and Antonio Alfonseca are racking or have racked up enough saves to be "proven closers" even though they're at best average pitchers, and watch teams like the San Francisco Giants not have their "key proven closer" and still do just fine (13-2 right now), and come to the conclusion that a good "closer" is a good pitcher who just happens to be allowed to pitch in save situations.

Bottom line? The Sox have Koch, so I hope he kicks ass as a closer. But which would you rather have...the better pitcher or the mythic beast?

How many Koch supporters haved asked for the "mythic beast" you mentioned? I don't believe it has been very many. The fact is that Koch has more appearances every year in which no runs or scored than does Foulke. I could care less what their ERAs are. That's an overrated stat. Who cares if the guy blows the save allowing 6ER in 1 IP or 1 ER in 1 IP? When Koch blows a save, he really, really blows it, big deal. I want the guy who is going to not allow a run the higher percentage of the time. That's the guy that gives you a better chance of winning.

Bottom line? Koch has a higher save percentage over four years and has had a higher percentage of appearances in which no runs were scored. The second part of the last sentence is the key there. It has nothing to do with who throws harder. Koch is the better closer. Case closed.

PaleHoseGeorge
04-18-2003, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Koch won't pitch this way all year. He'll be fine.

I agree. In fact, everything else being equal, I would rather have a fireballer pitching the ninth inning than somebody with an off-speed pitch. That's because the opposing team will be putting baserunners in motion in the do-or-die ninth. A fastball reaches homeplate quicker and maximizes your chances of getting the runners out.

On yet another philosophical note, I would also note that it is a scientific fact that the grass always appears greener on the other side of the fence. We hated Foulke because we knew him up-close. Now that Koch is here, we wish we had Foulke back. It was inevitable...

Daver
04-18-2003, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


On yet another philosophical note, I would also note that it is a scientific fact that the grass always appears greener on the other side of the fence. We hated Foulke because we knew him up-close. Now that Koch is here, we wish we had Foulke back. It was inevitable...

I always thought that it went "The grass is always greener over the septic tank",shows you what I know.


:redneck

gosox41
04-18-2003, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by JasonC23
So, being a better pitcher doesn't make Foulke a better closer? But isn't a closer...a pitcher? My head hurts... :cool:

In all seriousness, this illustrates where the disconnect is between a lot of the Foulke/Koch supporters. The "closer" is a mythic beast that's been built up by the media and some baseball insiders as being a special breed of pitcher that only select few can possibly aspire to be because of all the special qualities a closer must have. Koch has these qualities (throws hard, looks intimidating, what have you), so even though it's been freely admitted that Foulke is the better pitcher, Koch is the better "closer."

Meanwhile, the Foulke supporters look at the numbers (which nearly all say he's the better pitcher), realize that pitchers like Matt Karchner and Antonio Alfonseca are racking or have racked up enough saves to be "proven closers" even though they're at best average pitchers, and watch teams like the San Francisco Giants not have their "key proven closer" and still do just fine (13-2 right now), and come to the conclusion that a good "closer" is a good pitcher who just happens to be allowed to pitch in save situations.

Bottom line? The Sox have Koch, so I hope he kicks ass as a closer. But which would you rather have...the better pitcher or the mythic beast?


Pretty much sums up my feelings.

Bob

gosox41
04-18-2003, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters
How many Koch supporters haved asked for the "mythic beast" you mentioned? I don't believe it has been very many. The fact is that Koch has more appearances every year in which no runs or scored than does Foulke. I could care less what their ERAs are. That's an overrated stat. Who cares if the guy blows the save allowing 6ER in 1 IP or 1 ER in 1 IP? When Koch blows a save, he really, really blows it, big deal. I want the guy who is going to not allow a run the higher percentage of the time. That's the guy that gives you a better chance of winning.

Bottom line? Koch has a higher save percentage over four years and has had a higher percentage of appearances in which no runs were scored. The second part of the last sentence is the key there. It has nothing to do with who throws harder. Koch is the better closer. Case closed.


If my closer is going to blow a save opportunity, I'd rather have it by ginvign up the fewest runs possible so in case the Sox bat again they can make it up.

Second, Koch is 32-49 in save opprtunites in 1 run games since 2000. This is not good at all.

Bob

baggio202
04-18-2003, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
If my closer is going to blow a save opportunity, I'd rather have it by ginvign up the fewest runs possible so in case the Sox bat again they can make it up.

Second, Koch is 32-49 in save opprtunites in 1 run games since 2000. This is not good at all.

Bob

i was gonna say the same thing...look at tuesday game with KC..if koch limited the damage to just the two run homer in the top of the 9th when macdougal walked the lead off man jerry probably tries to bunt him over with wasnt it olivo up??...we saw the next night what can happen when he bunts...rios probably doesnt get thrown out at 3rd either

the whole bottom of the 9th would have been different if it was a 1 run game instead of a 3 run..i really believe if it was only a one run game we would have came back and won..macdougal was aching to give that game away..he was wild all over the place

harwar
04-19-2003, 10:40 AM
Theres' no way Koch will be this bad all season.However;Even at his best he's not a good pitcher,just a fireballer.I don't think it was a bad trade because Foulke DID look lost last year.I have seen Keith several times tho and he had great movement and control.He looked like he did when we all had confidence in him to get the job done.Frankly,i don't trust Koch or Foulke with the game on the line.Koch seems to think that ..if i throw it down the middle at 95 and they hit me hard,then i'll just throw 98...I haven't seen ANY movement on his out pitch YET.I think he will save a lot of games but i think he'll blow some leads where our offense will have to pick him up like the A's offense(11 wins) did last year.I believe we will win this division hands down,but how will our closer look in the postseason? I wonder...

JUGGERNAUT
04-19-2003, 04:59 PM
Lousy stat.

Koch has less ML yrs of service than Foulke & yet look at his workload it's nearly the same.

Rather than go back to 2000, why don't you look at the improvement he's made in that stat over each of those yrs?

gosox41
04-19-2003, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by espnjohn1
Lousy stat.

Koch has less ML yrs of service than Foulke & yet look at his workload it's nearly the same.

Rather than go back to 2000, why don't you look at the improvement he's made in that stat over each of those yrs?

Isn't he 0-2 this year in one run games. Maybe he has improved over the last couple of years in 1 run games, but I haven't seen any #'s to indicate this. Feel free to show me how he has improved in 1 run games.

He pitched garbage time in today's game and still gave up a home run. Luckily it wasn't a 1 run game when he came in.

Bob

Whitesox029
04-19-2003, 05:06 PM
Can it be said by now that whoever the Sox acquire to close will not be effective? Be it Mariano Rivera, Trevor Hoffman, Derek Lowe, Troy Percival....Have I made myself clear? The last consistently decent Sox closer was Roberto Hernandez and Bobby Thigpen before him, yet both of these guys caused half the city a migraine before they got the job done. :angry:

calebhatesyou
04-19-2003, 05:17 PM
Worst. Logic. Ever.

Worst. Grammar. Ever.

now seriously, lets just back the huyplay for the palehose...........
:threadsucks

doublem23
04-19-2003, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by calebhatesyou
Worst. Grammar. Ever.

Simpsons quote.

Whitesox029
04-19-2003, 05:33 PM
Boy now we're really off topic....Simpsons? I'm goin with Caleb..let's stop dweilling on it...not much can be done now.

calebhatesyou
04-19-2003, 09:17 PM
good call doublem23

Tavarin
04-19-2003, 10:24 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
Worst. Logic. Ever.

Don't get me wrong, Foulke is the better closer. I was just noting that because the 2002 stats don't really matter, and there is no reason to separate the 1999-2001 and the 2002 stats.

doublem23
04-19-2003, 10:28 PM
Originally posted by Tavarin
Don't get me wrong, Foulke is the better closer. I was just noting that because the 2002 stats don't really matter, and there is no reason to separate the 1999-2001 and the 2002 stats.

I still don't see "why they don't matter."

By the way, Koch gave up a dinger "when it didn't matter," should we erase that from his stats?

Daver
04-19-2003, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by Tavarin
Don't get me wrong, Foulke is the better closer. I was just noting that because the 2002 stats don't really matter, and there is no reason to separate the 1999-2001 and the 2002 stats.

By the overall stats your still wrong,but I base nothing on stats.


All numbers lie.

1951Campbell
04-19-2003, 10:38 PM
I'm inclined to give Koch the benefit of the doubt and let him work himself out of his Derek Lowe-type reliever's slump. However, I do have to wonder why the A's traded a Rolaids Relief Man for Foulke...does Koch have a sort of Carl Everett presence in the clubhouse that we don't know about?

And I know a 12-2 game is not really going to capture a closer's imagination...but given the year for Koch so far, maybe I am a littl emore worried than I want to be.

Daver
04-19-2003, 10:44 PM
Originally posted by 1951Campbell
I'm inclined to give Koch the benefit of the doubt and let him work himself out of his Derek Lowe-type reliever's slump. However, I do have to wonder why the A's traded a Rolaids Relief Man for Foulke...does Koch have a sort of Carl Everett presence in the clubhouse that we don't know about?

And I know a 12-2 game is not really going to capture a closer's imagination...but given the year for Koch so far, maybe I am a littl emore worried than I want to be.

The A's traded him because they could not pay him.

Nothing more,nothing less,if Billy Beane had the budget to re-sign him he would still be wearing an A's uni.

Joe valentine is struggling at the AAA level,Billy may have lost on this deal.

1951Campbell
04-19-2003, 10:51 PM
Well Daver, if that's true, I feel better.

Daver
04-19-2003, 10:56 PM
Originally posted by 1951Campbell
Well Daver, if that's true, I feel better.

I know nothing about baseball.

:)

1951Campbell
04-19-2003, 11:02 PM
Daver, I know less!

(So says my wife, the Red Sox/Mets fan..feh.)

Whitesox029
04-19-2003, 11:09 PM
In no way does the following express my opinion about this trade, but if you ask me, anyone called "Billy Beane" is better off milking cows somewhere in Nebraska than acting as a Major League GM. He should at least change his name. It's kind of like Milton Bradley and Co-co Crisp only a little less stupid----why? :D:

Ventura23Fan
04-20-2003, 04:05 AM
Originally posted by daver
The A's traded him because they could not pay him.

Nothing more,nothing less,if Billy Beane had the budget to re-sign him he would still be wearing an A's uni.

Joe valentine is struggling at the AAA level,Billy may have lost on this deal.

I've heard Beane say this himself, but yet Foulke's salary this year is more than Koch's. I know we sent $ to Oakland in the deal and I believe KW said that it was a cash neutral deal. So I don't think Beane is saving any money this season with that trade. However, next season, if (most likely when) they don't re-sign Foulke, and Valentine or another cheap alternative to Koch becomes Oakland's closer, then Beane will be saving money. So he could have kept Koch for this season and then moved him next off-season, but he chose not to. So I disagree that this trade was solely about money.

kermittheefrog
04-20-2003, 04:18 AM
Originally posted by 1951Campbell
I'm inclined to give Koch the benefit of the doubt and let him work himself out of his Derek Lowe-type reliever's slump. However, I do have to wonder why the A's traded a Rolaids Relief Man for Foulke...does Koch have a sort of Carl Everett presence in the clubhouse that we don't know about?

And I know a 12-2 game is not really going to capture a closer's imagination...but given the year for Koch so far, maybe I am a littl emore worried than I want to be.

They traded Koch because Beane knows Foulke is a better reliever. I don't understand why people just magically believed that Koch wouldn't go through any struggles like Foulke did just because Koch has a harder fastball. Every closer is going to have his moments of failure. If you judge the overall performance of the two Foulke comes out on top.

Dadawg_77
04-20-2003, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by daver
The A's traded him because they could not pay him.

Nothing more,nothing less,if Billy Beane had the budget to re-sign him he would still be wearing an A's uni.

Joe valentine is struggling at the AAA level,Billy may have lost on this deal.

No Beane upgraded his pen. If the trade was sumed to zeroed, then why trade him. Oakland is trying to win a World Series and you don't downgrade and not save any money when you are making a run.

For 2002 adjusted for park and league effect runs allowed per nine innings (ARA), Foulke 2.83, Koch 3.50. Adjusted Runs prevented over an average reliever, Foulke 17.5, Koch 12.4. 2001 - Foulke 2.26 and 20.0, Koch 4.89 and -2.0, 2000 - Foulke 3.04 and 23.2, Koch 3.07 and 16.5.

Foulke save avg % since 1999; 99-69% out of 13, 00 - 87% out of 40, 01- 93% out of 45, 02 - 78% out of 14.
Koch's 88% of 35, 86% of 38, 82% of 44, 88% of 50.

The only thing Koch can do is throw a heaters, which fools people into thinking he is a better pitcher.