PDA

View Full Version : Where are all the Koch supporters now? (Another rant)


gosox41
07-05-2003, 10:06 AM
Did everyone jump off the band wagon and join the anti-Billy Koch club? I should have formally started one the day he was traded here.

Anyway for all you Billy Koch supporters, here are some numbers for you to swallow. I'm going to list two sets of numbers for 2 different pitchers i the 2003 season, I'm sure you could figure out who they are.

Pitcher 1:

IP 46.1
SO 50
BB 11
BAA .207
WHIP 0.99
ERA 2.53

Pitcher 2:

IP 37.1
SO 29
BB 18
BAA .262
WHIP 1.50
ERA 5.30

Here are two more sets of numbers because some like looking at this number to determine if a pitcher is good or bad. Pitcher 1 is 22-25 in save opportunities. Pitcher 2 is 11-15. Did I mention that at least 2 of Pitcher 2's saves came when he was asked to come into the game with 2 out and no one on in the 9th inning? Unfortunately, I don't have the all important statistic: scoreless appearances.

Koch is worse then even I expected, and I've been against him since the day the Sox traded for him. Foulke, as I predicted, can pitch circles around this guy and will be fun to watch at the All Star game. Koch constantly puts 2 guys on base and can't throw his bread and butter pitch anymore (.

It makes it very difficult to like KW when he makes stupid trades like this. It's killing the team. Isn't it just like him to trade a good pitcher for a worse pitcher and then sign the worse pitcher to a 2 year contract. To compound matters, the Sox are paying Koch $4 mil. this year and picked up $1 mill. of Foulke's salary to split the difference between the two.

Closers are highly overrated. It's pretty much an excuse to have an overpaid pitcher on the team. If I were GM, I would never have traded Foulke for another high priced closer. I would have either kept a damn good releiver, or else filled one of the many holes the Sox have by selling off an overrated stat and getting quality in return.

Bob

hose
07-05-2003, 11:11 AM
Koch has been a big bust for the Sox so far this season.

It took a while for Manuel to stop going to Konerko and when Daubach got his chance he delivered.

Marte or Gordon will have to do the same.

Koch and Konerko still could end up playing key roles on this team before the season is over. They both have a lot of talent.

Mark Buehrle was given up for dead and he bounced back pretty strong. The Sox have a good team and this loss will not set them back.

gosox41
07-05-2003, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by hose
Koch has been a big bust for the Sox so far this season.

It took a while for Manuel to stop going to Konerko and when Daubach got his chance he delivered.

Marte or Gordon will have to do the same.

Koch and Konerko still could end up playing key roles on this team before the season is over. They both have a lot of talent.

Mark Buehrle was given up for dead and he bounced back pretty strong. The Sox have a good team and this loss will not set them back.

I hope this loss doesn't set them back, but the need to prove to me they can beat the weak teams and not just the Cubs and Twins. Show some fire.

Koch is highly overrated talent wise. I see no reason to think he'll bounce back to last years higher (though still average) level. His fastball is gone. It's been over half a season and I think I've seen his famed heater in two games. He was an average pitcher at best when he did have it, now he's dogs*** with out it.

He should be traded, released, or relegated to pitching garbage innings. He has nothing. His best pitch is gone. As I mentioned when the Sox first made this awful trade, he might as well be Bobby Thigpen after his 57 save season.

Bob

joecrede
07-05-2003, 01:08 PM
How does a pitcher lose 6-7 MPH off their fastball from one year to the next and not have something wrong with their arm?

If Koch brought the same velocity with him that he had in Oakland it would have been a good trade for both teams.

JRIG
07-05-2003, 01:20 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
How does a pitcher lose 6-7 MPH off their fastball from one year to the next and not have something wrong with their arm?

If Koch brought the same velocity with him that he had in Oakland it would have been a good trade for both teams.


Koch threw almost 97 innings last year in the regular season and the playoffs. This from a guy who has never thrown a lot of innings because he was never a starter in the minors. There were a lot of people concerned about his workload last year. KW was obviously not one of them. He handed Koch a contract extension the second he got here.

voodoochile
07-05-2003, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
How does a pitcher lose 6-7 MPH off their fastball from one year to the next and not have something wrong with their arm?

If Koch brought the same velocity with him that he had in Oakland it would have been a good trade for both teams.

Supposedly they changed his mechanics to preserve his arm, and in the process he lost the extra pop that made him special.

Fridaythe13thJason
07-05-2003, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by gosox41

Koch is worse then even I expected, and I've been against him since the day the Sox traded for him. Foulke, as I predicted, can pitch circles around this guy and will be fun to watch at the All Star game. Koch constantly puts 2 guys on base and can't throw his bread and butter pitch anymore (.

It makes it very difficult to like KW when he makes stupid trades like this. It's killing the team. Isn't it just like him to trade a good pitcher for a worse pitcher and then sign the worse pitcher to a 2 year contract. To compound matters, the Sox are paying Koch $4 mil. this year and picked up $1 mill. of Foulke's salary to split the difference between the two.


Is it just like him to trade a good pitcher for a worse one? Not sure that I can name another time he did that. People need to stop naming Ritchie because none of those players were anything here, and they weren't magically going to become good pitchers here. It's one of those change in sceneries things.

For God's sake, the guy made a trade for a more traditional closer with strong velocity...partly because we had some clear issues with Keith last year. The trade didn't work...it happens. Even Beane got a fairly ineffective Bradford for a great catcher to be...OOOOH, is Billy Beane a bad GM now?

This is also the GM who is making moves and trying to fill holes...not much more can be asked for in my opinion. I'm glad that some people were so smart to be able to see that the Koch trade was bad...you turned out to be right...but in all honesty, you could've just as easily been completely wrong.

JRIG
07-05-2003, 04:04 PM
Originally posted by SoCalUIC

For God's sake, the guy made a trade for a more traditional closer with strong velocity...partly because we had some clear issues with Keith last year. The trade didn't work...it happens. Even Beane got a fairly ineffective Bradford for a great catcher to be...OOOOH, is Billy Beane a bad GM now?



Are we thinking of the same Chad Bradford? The Chad Bradford the A's got has been one of the most effective middle relivers in baseball the past 3 years. Yes, Beane gave up Olivo, who I really like, but they already had Ramon Hernandez. They needed relief pitching and filled that void trading from a strength.

Fridaythe13thJason
07-05-2003, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by JRIG
Are we thinking of the same Chad Bradford? The Chad Bradford the A's got has been one of the most effective middle relivers in baseball the past 3 years. Yes, Beane gave up Olivo, who I really like, but they already had Ramon Hernandez. They needed relief pitching and filled that void trading from a strength.

Hmm, I see a successful first year in Oakland, a fine second year, and this year his ERA is 4. To me, while that is a fine reliever and good contributor, it is not near the importance of a quality catcher.

JRIG
07-05-2003, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by SoCalUIC


Hmm, I see a successful first year in Oakland, a fine second year, and this year his ERA is 4. To me, while that is a fine reliever and good contributor, it is not near the importance of a quality catcher.

I do agree that a quality catcher is worth more. But the A's had no use for Olivo. I obviously think Bradford is a better pitcher than you. I think Beane got a highly effective reliever that he needed for, in his eyes, a spare part he couldn't use.

ilsox7
07-05-2003, 06:03 PM
I do agree that a quality catcher is worth more. But the A's had no use for Olivo. I obviously think Bradford is a better pitcher than you. I think Beane got a highly effective reliever that he needed for, in his eyes, a spare part he couldn't use.

Isn't that the point of trades though? The A's didn't have as much of a need for a quality catcher as the Sox did. The Sox meanwhile valued that quality catcher more than a bullpen guy. A's get someone who helps them, Sox get someone who helps them. Good trade if you ask me.