PDA

View Full Version : Trader Kenny...Biggest Sucker GM in Baseball


chisoxt
07-05-2003, 05:33 PM
There has been a lot of Kudos to KW for his recent 'deals', but what has been obscured is that the guy has been pants time and time again. A lot of his fault in these failed deals is that he always goes after high-profile names....never mind if the guy is a club house pain, never mind if he is on the down-side of his career, never mind if he is a one-dimensional player, never mind if the guy is injured.....And, in return, the players he gives up are always young prospects who invariably excel with their new teams.

If this genius never made one trade and instead focused on middle shelf free agents that would have cost the team nothing in return, this club would be much better off than it is today, and the future would look a whole lot brighter, too.

There are many on this board who cry out "the hell with the future, we haven't won a pennant in 43 years"......With this goof in charge, this will not change any time soon.

Hello, Baltimore and Milwaukee

voodoochile
07-05-2003, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
There has been a lot of Kudos to KW for his recent 'deals', but what has been obscured is that the guy has been pants time and time again. A lot of his fault in these failed deals is that he always goes after high-profile names....never mind if the guy is a club house pain, never mind if he is on the down-side of his career, never mind if he is a one-dimensional player, never mind if the guy is injured.....And, in return, the players he gives up are always young prospects who invariably excel with their new teams.

If this genius never made one trade and instead focused on middle shelf free agents that would have cost the team nothing in return, this club would be much better off than it is today, and the future would look a whole lot brighter, too.

There are many on this board who cry out "the hell with the future, we haven't won a pennant in 43 years"......With this goof in charge, this will not change any time soon.

Hello, Baltimore and Milwaukee

So, you honestly expect the guys the Sox gave away to SOME DAY do more for the Sox than the current guys will do this year.

Since you clearly are convinced these guys they acquired won't help the Sox immediately (or not enough), would you care to get into specifics on the players who got traded and why you feel they are sure-fire future studs? Or, did you just feel like ranting?

ilsox7
07-05-2003, 05:42 PM
Trading one "top" prospect who was a relief pitcher doesn't seem to be mortaging the future to me. KW has not given up any of the top flight prospects, yet has put the Sox in a position to win the division and hopefuly more. What's wrong with that?

DonkeyKongerko
07-05-2003, 05:50 PM
The day he trades Neil Cotts for someone like Weaver or Ponson will be the day I join the Fire KW bandwagon.

Fridaythe13thJason
07-05-2003, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
There has been a lot of Kudos to KW for his recent 'deals', but what has been obscured is that the guy has been pants time and time again. A lot of his fault in these failed deals is that he always goes after high-profile names....never mind if the guy is a club house pain, never mind if he is on the down-side of his career, never mind if he is a one-dimensional player, never mind if the guy is injured.....And, in return, the players he gives up are always young prospects who invariably excel with their new teams.

If this genius never made one trade and instead focused on middle shelf free agents that would have cost the team nothing in return, this club would be much better off than it is today, and the future would look a whole lot brighter, too.

There are many on this board who cry out "the hell with the future, we haven't won a pennant in 43 years"......With this goof in charge, this will not change any time soon.

Hello, Baltimore and Milwaukee

When you make a totally ridiculous claim, you should at least try to back it up.

JRIG
07-05-2003, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by DonkeyKongerko
The day he trades Neil Cotts for someone like Weaver or Ponson will be the day I join the Fire KW bandwagon.

I'd be more upset if Honel or Reed found his way out of town.

doublem23
07-05-2003, 06:19 PM
There's always one who has to ruin the party.

chisoxt
07-05-2003, 08:15 PM
Since you clearly are convinced these guys they acquired won't help the Sox immediately (or not enough), would you care to get into specifics on the players who got traded and why you feel they are sure-fire future studs? Or, did you just feel like ranting ?

My post was an overview off all trades Kenny has made, not just the ones that were made last week. As for the players who were traded, Let's see now.... Kip Wells, Josh Fogg, Chad Bradford, Keith Foulke, Rocky Biddle. Plus we gave away Ray Durham for a sack of potatoes, which nessitated the Alomar trade.

chisoxt
07-05-2003, 08:16 PM
There's always one who has to ruin the party.

Ya sure, and you'll be the one pissing and groaning next year when were the Milwaukee Brewers.

voodoochile
07-05-2003, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
?

My post was an overview off all trades Kenny has made, not just the ones that were made last week. As for the players who were traded, Let's see now.... Kip Wells, Josh Fogg, Chad Bradford, Keith Foulke, Rocky Biddle. Plus we gave away Ray Durham for a sack of potatoes, which nessitated the Alomar trade.

Well, we also got Bartolo Colon, Roberto Alomar, Miguel Olivo and Carl Everett. So, it isn't like they got completely cleaned out.

The Koch trade and Ritchie trades were clearly busts, but Bradford brought Olivo and Biddle brought Colon. The other two guys were acquired for peanuts. This team is clearly the strongest Sox squad in the last decade and has excellent post-season potential. That says something for KW, IMO.

voodoochile
07-05-2003, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
Ya sure, and you'll be the one pissing and groaning next year when were the Milwaukee Brewers.

Exactly how many replacement players that will probably start next year get traded recently? You are really reaching...

Isn't Harris both back with the team at present? Isn't Joe Borchard still in AAA? Don't they have at least 4 starters returning for the staff?

You really can't believe the Sox will be a last place team next year, do you?

chisoxt
07-05-2003, 08:58 PM
You really can't believe the Sox will be a last place team next year, do you?

Not with the talent coming back...but, if they can't sign Buehrle, if Frank walks, if Magg's salary becomes cumbersome, etc. they may want to to think about reloading, which would mean trading some of these guys with vale. Face it, JR has never been know to give pitchers, like Mark and Colon, long term deals.

If the trades happen, then yes I would anticipate a down year.

Lip Man 1
07-05-2003, 09:02 PM
Just weighing in on a few things...

I am not a Kenny supporter but facts are facts...

Part of the reason that Kenny has to "reach" in his deals is because of the financial limitations placed upon him and the team by ownership. You can only do so much on a 53 million dollar payroll..period! Williams has to "gamble" on guys who may be over the hill or coming off the first good year they ever had because he's not allowed to go out and get a "superstar" in his prime. I'd love to get a Vlad Guerrero or a Jim Edmonds or I don't know Derek Jeter, but that's never going to happen under current financial restraints. Now if the Sox were to raise the payroll to something like the Cubs (75 million) that's different.

Secondly the Sox are probably going to be bad / mediocre next year anyway. They are NOT going to resign Colon and probably are going to let valentin walk. There is also a possibility the lee will be dealt because he's eligible for arbitration after this season.

I see no problem with trying to win now given the above restrictions and limitations.

Just my opinion.

Lip

chisoxt
07-05-2003, 09:09 PM
I see no problem with trying to win now given the above restrictions and limitations .

Agree, but we still have a gas-can for a closer (which came in that great deal for Foulke), and when you have this problem, forget about post-season.

voodoochile
07-05-2003, 09:16 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
.

Agree, but we still have a gas-can for a closer (which came in that great deal for Foulke), and when you have this problem, forget about post-season.

Um, so they need to make another trade, is what you are saying...

Okay, so which is it? Trades good or trades bad?

:D:

chisoxt
07-05-2003, 09:23 PM
Okay, so which is it? Trades good or trades bad?

Trades bad., and that's my point. if KW wouldn't have made any trades, we would have had a closer. But once you make a few bad trades and open wounds, it sets off a chain reaction of other bad trades to cover up the others.

B. Diddy
07-05-2003, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
Trades bad., and that's my point. if KW wouldn't have made any trades, we would have had a closer. But once you make a few bad trades and open wounds, it sets off a chain reaction of other bad trades to cover up the others.

???

I'm not sure I'm following your logic here, but if KW wouldn't have made any trades, we wouldn't have the stud workhorse known as Colon. Nor would we have vets like Everett and Alomar to help out this team's pathetic offense.

I thought that the Wells/Sirotka trade was genius. Unfortunately, they allowed him to get excessively fat, lazy, and undisciplined. It's interesting how the management in New York and Toronto were able to get so much out of him, but not us. That was Wells' only bad season in the past what... five years? Sounds more like poor player management than a poor trade.

I'm not a KW apologist. The deal for Royce Clayton was idiotic and he could've found a better free agent pitcher than Ritchie last year. But, as was posted earlier in this thread, it's like like JR is giving KW a huge bankroll to work with. He doesn't have the funds to pick up a "can't miss" guy like Johnson or Schilling. He's not sly like Billy Beane, but he doesn't have Cashman's cash flow (no pun intended) either.

jeremyb1
07-05-2003, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by B. Diddy
I thought that the Wells/Sirotka trade was genius. Unfortunately, they allowed him to get excessively fat, lazy, and undisciplined. It's interesting how the management in New York and Toronto were able to get so much out of him, but not us. That was Wells' only bad season in the past what... five years? Sounds more like poor player management than a poor trade.

david wells was 38 and in less than incredible shape when we traded for him. he also had not pitched as well as mike sirotka the previous situation. i fail to see how anyone could ever consider that deal to be good outside of the fact that we either got incredibly lucky or behaved incredibly unethically with siro's health.

TornLabrum
07-05-2003, 10:28 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
Not with the talent coming back...but, if they can't sign Buehrle, if Frank walks, if Magg's salary becomes cumbersome, etc. they may want to to think about reloading, which would mean trading some of these guys with vale. Face it, JR has never been know to give pitchers, like Mark and Colon, long term deals.

If the trades happen, then yes I would anticipate a down year.

They have to sign Buehrle. They can sign Frank for as little as $6 million if he takes his option. If not they can let him go. Maggs already is under contract for next year.

ilsox7
07-05-2003, 10:49 PM
david wells was 38 and in less than incredible shape when we traded for him. he also had not pitched as well as mike sirotka the previous situation. i fail to see how anyone could ever consider that deal to be good outside of the fact that we either got incredibly lucky or behaved incredibly unethically with siro's health.

Look at what David Wells has done the last 5 years. As mentioned, that trade looked incredible for us when it was made. A proven pitcher who has big time game experience? That's as good as it gets. Unfortunately, it didn't work out.

The point about Wells thriving in Toronto and NY, but not here is a good one. Something is obviously not being done correctly when we are dealing with players. Wells apparently was motivated in Toronto and NY, but not here. Hmmm, sounds like we have someone who doesn't know how to push their players' buttons properly. Good job JM.

NC_sox_fan
07-05-2003, 11:44 PM
For some reason, whatever..... When KW trades for GOOD players on other teams.... When they get to Chicago......they aren't good anymore. Know what I mean? It's like when they join the Sox, they just quit trying or something. It's weird. We'll see what happens with Robbie Alomar and Carl Everett. Who knows?????

Lip Man 1
07-06-2003, 01:33 AM
N.C. fan:

I brought up that same point a few weeks ago and jokingly called it "The black sox curse."

The reality is (in my opinion) that the Sox have been down so much since the strike, that their problems have been so publicized (correctly) that players DON'T want to play here.

How many times have we seen reports about "Cliff Floyd a South Side native who grew up a Sox fan, has the team on his no trade list..." or Curt Schilling telling the Arizona Republic he'd never play for the Sox because of a comment made to him by Jerry Reinsdorf
during the strike.

It's been bad PR moves, a crappy stadium, the White Flag Trade, a bunch of losing or mediocre seasons and an owner disliked by a number of players that has all contributed.

The Sox didn't seem to have this problem BEFORE the strike when a bunch of different guys all wanted to play here. Guys as diverse as Julio Franco to Scott Sanderson. They thought the Sox were a 'coming" franchise in the early 90's. My impression is that players don't think that way anymore and they simply don't produce here.

Lip

WinningUgly!
07-06-2003, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
N.C. fan:

I brought up that same point a few weeks ago and jokingly called it "The black sox curse."

The reality is (in my opinion) that the Sox have been down so much since the strike, that their problems have been so publicized (correctly) that players DON'T want to play here.

How many times have we seen reports about "Cliff Floyd a South Side native who grew up a Sox fan, has the team on his no trade list..." or Curt Schilling telling the Arizona Republic he'd never play for the Sox because of a comment made to him by Jerry Reinsdorf
during the strike.

It's been bad PR moves, a crappy stadium, the White Flag Trade, a bunch of losing or mediocre seasons and an owner disliked by a number of players that has all contributed.

The Sox didn't seem to have this problem BEFORE the strike when a bunch of different guys all wanted to play here. Guys as diverse as Julio Franco to Scott Sanderson. They thought the Sox were a 'coming" franchise in the early 90's. My impression is that players don't think that way anymore and they simply don't produce here.

Lip

Carl Everett did waive his no trade clause to come to the Sox, for whatever that's worth.

VeeckAsInWreck
07-06-2003, 02:11 AM
Here are my two-cents.

Sure Kenny got fleeced by the Pirates in the Ritchie for Fogg/Wells/Lowe/ and a kitchen sink. But no one mentions the steal he got in a separate deal when he unloaded Damaso Marte off of the Pirates hand's.

Kenny Williams, although many may not believe it, knows what he is doing. Unfortunately Uncle Reinsy hasn't given KW much money to play with. That of course is the fan's fault!

Chisoxfn
07-06-2003, 04:20 AM
Originally posted by chisoxt
?

My post was an overview off all trades Kenny has made, not just the ones that were made last week. As for the players who were traded, Let's see now.... Kip Wells, Josh Fogg, Chad Bradford, Keith Foulke, Rocky Biddle. Plus we gave away Ray Durham for a sack of potatoes, which nessitated the Alomar trade.

Sorry but Rocky Biddle was worth Bartolo Colon. Wells and Fogg sucked to lose, and in regards to Foulke, how were the Sox supposed to know Koch's velocity would fall 6-7 MPH. They did get Cotts out of the deal and Foulke would never of closed with the Sox and would of walked at the end of the year.

The points were made and the Sox went out thinking they'd have a guy that wanted to close and would be here for the next few years, instead of just leaving.

With Koch struggling the move kind of back fired, but still, Koch is far from horrible and I guarantee he is hurt, but he is too much of a battler to give up. Foulke never wanted nor was he happy closing. Also, to get the point out, I was always a Keith Foulke fan and I also backed this deal cause it made sense in many ways.

If you talk about Bradford, lets not forget who the Sox got in Miguel Olivo. He may not be great right now, but he will shutdown a teams running game and win a few gold gloves by the time he retires. I expect him to make great strides at the plate in the next few years. I have been dissapionted with his plate discipline. In the past I always thought he had fair discipline, but lately he's really been swinging at crap.

Also, where's the mentoin of the Jimenez trade which is still a very good one in my opinion. To this time I dont' know why we designated him for assignment when someone like Harris had options. Jimenez has value and at 25 he will have a good career, unfortunately it won't be with the Sox. Lets also forget to mention the acquisition of Colon, Marte (And Ruddy Yan for a fringe guy in Guerrier), Alomar as well as Everett (To be fair it will take time to see how these trades turn out) but his moves have always made sense.

The Sox needed an ace pitcher with playoff experience, so he gets Boomer. Ya it blew up, but you knew it made sense. Sox need a defensive shortstop, they get Roids. Blew up in his face, he admitted and said he underestimated chemistry and seemed to really focus on that this year. Then he signs Elo, Daubbie, Tom and White. Other then Tom, all were class guys and good clubhouse guys as was Colon.

People always point to the negative with Kenny, but you know what, he has made some damn good moves and he has this team feeling like they can win it all and he's doing something that I've never witnessed in my tenure as a Sox fan, trying to WIN IT ALL and he's not afraid of what the media or the fans will think. Any GM that worries what the fans will think is weak, and I don't want him running the show.

harwar
07-06-2003, 10:30 AM
I recently have been stuck in a wheelchair and since its easier to stay home and i have MLB extra innings,i watch A LOT of different games from around both leagues and i have yet to hear anyone,nationwide,say anything negative about the 2 recent KW deals.Alomar looks like he going to be a great pickup,the jury is still out on Everett.Hes' a bad CF but if he can just start hitting like he did in the spring no one will care.I think the Colon trade was more Steinbrenner/Reinsdorf than KW.But picking up Loaiza was genious and lucky,i mean NO ONE else wanted the guy.Also the trade for Olivo will,i believe,go down as one of the best in recent years as i think that guy is going to be the best catcher in baseball in a few years.

cornball
07-06-2003, 10:53 AM
I totally disagree with the opinion that KW gave away the future with these two deals.

Secondly, we have been on a failed youth movement for over 20 straight years, and several more times prior to that.


What do you think the farm system is there for? Do you ever go for it all, when your constantly building for the future?

It has been 3 games since the trades, the sky is not falling!

By the end of the month, we will know exactly where we stand and they should be in first by then with the schedule the way it is.

We have a long way to go, patience.

B. Diddy
07-06-2003, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
david wells was 38 and in less than incredible shape when we traded for him. he also had not pitched as well as mike sirotka the previous situation. i fail to see how anyone could ever consider that deal to be good outside of the fact that we either got incredibly lucky or behaved incredibly unethically with siro's health.

David Wells is 40 right now and is 10-3 with a 3.85 ERA. He should be pitching the in All Star game. He was 19-7 with a 3.75 ERA the previous year. Obviously, his age isn't slowing him down.

The genius of the deal was KW's realization that our rotation needed a workhorse and that Siro either couldn't handle enough innings (Jim Parque syndrome) or that has was injured. Of course, the latter scenario would've been an unethical move by KW, but if the Jays' doctors missed the torn labrum in the MRI, his problems were at least not medically obvious.

RichH55
07-06-2003, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
N.C. fan:

I brought up that same point a few weeks ago and jokingly called it "The black sox curse."

The reality is (in my opinion) that the Sox have been down so much since the strike, that their problems have been so publicized (correctly) that players DON'T want to play here.

How many times have we seen reports about "Cliff Floyd a South Side native who grew up a Sox fan, has the team on his no trade list..." or Curt Schilling telling the Arizona Republic he'd never play for the Sox because of a comment made to him by Jerry Reinsdorf
during the strike.

It's been bad PR moves, a crappy stadium, the White Flag Trade, a bunch of losing or mediocre seasons and an owner disliked by a number of players that has all contributed.

The Sox didn't seem to have this problem BEFORE the strike when a bunch of different guys all wanted to play here. Guys as diverse as Julio Franco to Scott Sanderson. They thought the Sox were a 'coming" franchise in the early 90's. My impression is that players don't think that way anymore and they simply don't produce here.

Lip

Lip, you are always saying the Floyd one, that's why I hear it so much:) However, I think it is interesting to note that Everett waived his no trade to come here, and plenty of people won't go certain places. I seem to recall Juan Gonzalez refusing to go to the Yankees, whom I seem to recall you saying many times is an organization we should strive to be more like. Does a player not wanting to go there somehow devalue them as an organization?

With the Floyd and Schilling stuff it's purely antecdotal(sic). I'm not even saying if I agree with your premise or not, I'm just saying that use of that as evidence does really go to prove whatever point you are making, whether I agree with it or not.

And on a side note: This is the defense that Paulie contributes that makes him so much better than Frank out there? Ugh

B. Diddy
07-06-2003, 03:27 PM
Speaking of GMs and trading, did anyone read the short article on Billy Bean in the new issue of ESPN The Magazine? Apparently his book has pissed off a number of GMs, and the author indicates that it's going to come back and bit him in the ass this month. He went on to talk about certain GMs who tend not to trade with certain other GMs, simply because they don't like them. I found that to be a little surprising (not to mention unprofessoinal), given how small of a market they operate in.

Craptastic
07-07-2003, 06:29 AM
Originally posted by chisoxt
Trades bad., and that's my point. if KW wouldn't have made any trades, we would have had a closer. But once you make a few bad trades and open wounds, it sets off a chain reaction of other bad trades to cover up the others.

The Sox got Keith Foulke in a trade. Trades still bad?

chisoxt
07-07-2003, 08:10 AM
The Sox got Keith Foulke in a trade. Trades still bad?

That was Schu's deal.

maurice
07-07-2003, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by Craptastic
The Sox got Keith Foulke in a trade. Trades still bad?

I never thought someone would cite the White Flag Trade as an example of a good deal.

MarkEdward
07-07-2003, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by maurice
I never thought someone would cite the White Flag Trade as an example of a good deal.

The White Flag Trade was a deadline deal, right? Most of the time, prospects acquired at the trade deadline turn out to be nothing (Baseball Prospectus did a study on this topic). So, in my opinion, the WFT turned out great for the Sox. Look at who they got:
Mike Caruso- Could have been something, but Schuler rushed him into the majors.
Brian Manning- Nothing.
Lorenzo Barcelo- Injuries have held him back, but he did put up good numbers in the majors (only 114 innings though) and OK numbers in the minors.
Bob Howry- Had some very good years (163 ERA+ in 2000), but injuries have set him back.
Keith Foulke- Since 1999, best reliever in major league baseball.
Ken Vining- AAA fodder, may become a LOOGY in the bigs.

If we only got Foulke in the WFT, it would've been a success. Adding Barcelo and Howry (who both helped us in 2000) was just gravy.

B. Diddy
07-07-2003, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by maurice
I never thought someone would cite the White Flag Trade as an example of a good deal.

From a PR perspective, it was a terrible deal. The response from fans was overwhelmingly very negative.

From the an organizational perspective, it made sense. They were well over budget and Alvarez and Hernandez were going to have to look elsewhere for employment the following season. Even if they did make it into the playoffs that season, it would've taken a miracle for them to get past the first round. The starting pitching, aside from Alvarez, was terrible. Barring a miracle, you can't get to the WS with that type of pitching. White Flag Trade or not, '97 wasn't their year.

I'm not a JR apologist, nor a fan of the trade. My problem with the '97 season wasn't the White Flag trade, but the spending of free agent dollars on Lamie and Albert Belle. And, just think... Clemens wanted to play in Chicago!

hold2dibber
07-07-2003, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by B. Diddy
From a PR perspective, it was a terrible deal. The response from fans was overwhelmingly very negative.

From the an organizational perspective, it made sense. They were well over budget and Alvarez and Hernandez were going to have to look elsewhere for employment the following season. Even if they did make it into the playoffs that season, it would've taken a miracle for them to get past the first round. The starting pitching, aside from Alvarez, was terrible. Barring a miracle, you can't get to the WS with that type of pitching. White Flag Trade or not, '97 wasn't their year.

I'm not a JR apologist, nor a fan of the trade. My problem with the '97 season wasn't the White Flag trade, but the spending of free agent dollars on Lamie and Albert Belle. And, just think... Clemens wanted to play in Chicago!

The problem with the WFT was that the Sox were only 3.5 games out. Although I agreed with JR's belief that that team as then-constituted, would not catch Cleveland, when you're 3.5 games out in July, you ADD players to get you over the hump, you don't dump players. They could have had made a few deadline deals to improve the team and had a chance to catch Cleveland. If not, they would have had multiple extra draft picks as compensation for the departures of Alvarez, Hernandez and Darwin via free agency the next winter. It was an idiotic move that has haunted the organization for 6 years.

B. Diddy
07-07-2003, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
The problem with the WFT was that the Sox were only 3.5 games out. Although I agreed with JR's belief that that team as then-constituted, would not catch Cleveland, when you're 3.5 games out in July, you ADD players to get you over the hump, you don't dump players. They could have had made a few deadline deals to improve the team and had a chance to catch Cleveland. If not, they would have had multiple extra draft picks as compensation for the departures of Alvarez, Hernandez and Darwin via free agency the next winter. It was an idiotic move that has haunted the organization for 6 years.

If they were far enough over budget, adding a stud starter and absorbing his salary may not have been possible. I've never seen their books, so I don't know exactly what the financial situation was. But, if it's financially feasable, you're correct.

I don't think what they would've gotten out of extra draft picks would have the talent level of or the ability to be ready for the majors as quickly as Foulke, Howry, and Barcelo.

maurice
07-07-2003, 05:19 PM
The WFT was extraordinarily bad from a PR standpoint and disappointing prospect-wise. The Sox intial spin was that the deal was all about Caruso ("top notch SS and lead-off hitter for years to come") and Barcelo ("top-of-the-rotation starter"). The rest of the guys were throw ins. Foulke was a marginal starting prospect at the time.

As such, the Sox abandoned a penant race (IIRC, Cleveland struggled through the rest of the regular season but won the penant), and dealt two starters and an All Star closer for two "blue chip" prospects who became busts (Caruso and Barcelo), one All Star closer (Foulke), one relief pitcher who was pretty good for a short amount of time (Howry), and a couple of used jockstraps.

I'll take the penant race and the draft picks.

D'Angelo F Death
07-08-2003, 11:31 AM
Yeah Cleveland stumbled into a division title that year (86 wins) but caught fire in the playoffs and damn near won the Series. It was a helluva talented team and thanks to clutch-hitting by guys like Sandy Alomar were able to beat the 95+ win Yanks and Orioles in the playoffs.

Sox mngmt saw this talent disparity and made the bold WFT. I think time has shown it was a good move.

Foulke rocks, and always has. He's younger & better than Roberto Hernandez. No question.

Bobby Howry was really good for awhile. Even last year, he still gave us some good innings.

Barcelo of course, never panned out. He tantalized us for a bit, and has now faded into oblivion. And the less said about Caruso, the better.

But Alvarez has gone 21-29 in the intervening six years. Danny Darwin was 41 years old at the time of the trade. Hernandez is a good pitcher, but come on now, Foulke is better.

The '97 Sox were not going to win anything...

voodoochile
07-08-2003, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by D'Angelo F Death
Yeah Cleveland stumbled into a division title that year (86 wins) but caught fire in the playoffs and damn near won the Series. It was a helluva talented team and thanks to clutch-hitting by guys like Sandy Alomar were able to beat the 95+ win Yanks and Orioles in the playoffs.

Sox mngmt saw this talent disparity and made the bold WFT. I think time has shown it was a good move.

Foulke rocks, and always has. He's younger & better than Roberto Hernandez. No question.

Bobby Howry was really good for awhile. Even last year, he still gave us some good innings.

Barcelo of course, never panned out. He tantalized us for a bit, and has now faded into oblivion.

But Alvarez has gone 21-29 in the intervening six years. Danny Darwin was 41 years old at the time of the trade. Hernandez is a good pitcher, but come on now, Foulke is better.

The '97 Sox were not going to win anything...

Welcome Aboard! :D:

B. Diddy
07-08-2003, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by maurice
I'll take the penant race and the draft picks.

FWIW, I would've stood pat and gone with the team we had if I were too far over budget to trade for another starter. I may have not made the playoffs, but I wouldn't have alienated the fans and decreased attendance that dramatically either.

maurice
07-08-2003, 11:46 AM
It's pointless to compare the players at this point in their careers. The Sox didn't just give up players, they gave up an opportunity to win a penant. Cleveland did it, and the Sox had a chance to do it also. The inverse has happened this year, a tacit admission that the WFT was a huge mistake. In fact, KW's recent comments are close to an explicit acknowledgement. The Sox current approach is the correct one, even though Royce Ring will be a much more valuable player than a 42-year-old Robbie Alomar in 2010.

D'Angelo F Death
07-08-2003, 12:05 PM
I would say WFT was the right approach for the '97 sox, and the Let's Win Now approach is the right one for this year's squad. Namely because this year's team has the potential for greatness...while in '97 let's remember the team was Jorge Fabregas and Norberto Martin and Chris Snopek and Lyle Mouton and Jamie Navarro as your ace and Drabek and Eyre....ugh. That team couldn't have made a dent in the playoffs.

MarkEdward
07-08-2003, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by maurice
It's pointless to compare the players at this point in their careers. The Sox didn't just give up players, they gave up an opportunity to win a penant. Cleveland did it, and the Sox had a chance to do it also.

So would you trade a chance (and not a very good one) for a '97 division title for the 2000 division title? Because if we don't make the WFT, we don't win the division in 2000.

34 Inch Stick
07-08-2003, 12:35 PM
3 and out either way. I am over the WFT as are most of the careers of the players involved.

maurice
07-08-2003, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
So would you trade a chance (and not a very good one) for a '97 division title for the 2000 division title? Because if we don't make the WFT, we don't win the division in 2000.

There's no way of knowing what hypothetically would have happened in 1997 or the repercussions (if any) for 2000. We won the division handily in 2000 but fell short in the playoffs because our offense stalled. Hindsight indicates that we would have had an excellent chance at the '97 division title, as Cleveland didn't exactly play lights out in the second half. Cleveland's advance to the WS shows that anything can happen in a short series.