PDA

View Full Version : I really hate to say this but I will anyways


MRKARNO
08-22-2003, 05:13 PM
Kenny Williams is a genius

He singlehandedly put the white sox in contention by trading away B level prospects for great players. Not all of his trades worked out but most of them havent gone horribly wrong. At least we got half a years' work out of david wells. Ritchie was terrible, but so is Sean Lowe and kip well and Josh fogg arent exactly great pitchers. We had to give up biddle, osuna and leifer for Bartolo colon. Biddle does have 30 saves, but also 6 losses and a 4.43 ERA. KW acquired him for relatively nothing when teams such as Boston and the Yankees were looking for him.

KW got everett, alomar and sullivan for B level prospects and got each of their respective teams to pay their salaries. The Billy Koch trade isnt looking super-great unless Koch can get better down the stretch, but we also got neal cotts, who may end up being the best player involved in the trade. Foulke did blow many key saves already this year.

Last year when he dumped all the players, he had to anyways because we weren't gonna win anything and he restocked our depleted farm system with pitching talent. He has taken criticism well, even when we thought he had to go. Hats off to Kenny Williams!

jabrch
08-22-2003, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
Kenny Williams is a genius.

I wouldn't go that far....

Originally posted by MRKARNO
Hats off to Kenny Williams!


But I will certainly tip my cap to him!


Getting Almoar was the best of the bunch...We needed a guy like him both as the captain of the IF and as a stabilizer at the top of the order.

oheeoh...magglio
08-22-2003, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
Kenny Williams is a genius

He singlehandedly put the white sox in contention by trading away B level prospects for great players. Not all of his trades worked out but most of them havent gone horribly wrong. At least we got half a years' work out of david wells. Ritchie was terrible, but so is Sean Lowe and kip well and Josh fogg arent exactly great pitchers. We had to give up biddle, osuna and leifer for Bartolo colon. Biddle does have 30 saves, but also 6 losses and a 4.43 ERA. KW acquired him for relatively nothing when teams such as Boston and the Yankees were looking for him.

KW got everett, alomar and sullivan for B level prospects and got each of their respective teams to pay their salaries. The Billy Koch trade isnt looking super-great unless Koch can get better down the stretch, but we also got neal cotts, who may end up being the best player involved in the trade. Foulke did blow many key saves already this year.

Last year when he dumped all the players, he had to anyways because we weren't gonna win anything and he restocked our depleted farm system with pitching talent. He has taken criticism well, even when we thought he had to go. Hats off to Kenny Williams!

AMEN!! Sure, the todd ritchie and david wells trades didn't work out, but hey it least he was trying to WIN!!! And he's worked some magic this year to get alomar, everett, and now sullivan (i didn't really like giving up glover for schoenweiss) but i hafta give kenny props, he's got us in 1st in mid august!

34rancher
08-22-2003, 05:22 PM
To KW defense, he has gotten a lot better. He has learned from mistakes and is getting better the longer he is in the job. He is becoming a veteran who produces in key situations. Go Kenny, Go!

:)

Jurr
08-22-2003, 05:33 PM
About damn time someone else thinks so!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've been tooting his horn to no avail since I joined this site. Every time a player goes into a little slump, I hear more people yell, "OH GOD....KW SUCKS..HE GOT HIS PANTS PULLED DOWN ON THAT DEAL"..
The bottom line is this:
E-Lo: As Hawk would say----Mercy!
Marte: Picked up for Guerrier.
Colon: Not as sharp as last year, but if we get to the playoffs, watch him shine
Koch: sucks so far, but the season's not over.
Sullivan: watch this one!
Alomar: solidified this defense and does the little things well.
S.Alomar: traded him away for prospects and then got him right back!
Everett: Another bat to put in the lineup, making it tougher to pitch around other guys.
Schoney: He's going to help this club out.

He's made every move with the intention of winning. He's a fiery guy, and that's what we need. When I was in Pittsburgh this summer, I kept hearing from Pirates fans about the Todd Ritchie deal. They were shocked that Ritchie wasn't solid with the Sox. They really loved him and thought he was a stud. It just didn't work out. The intentions were good, but these things happen.
David Wells was another example. Look what he's done for the Yankees this year! Just because you have bad luck with a player, doesn't make you a bad GM.
The bad GMs are the guys that are afraid to put their necks out there to make something happen. Case in point: Pittsburgh. Yeah, they do have financial issues, but who doesn't??? The Sox have a small market salary as well, but they don't curl up into a ball and cry poor. KW knows that if he gets a team out there with a shot, the people will come.
Pittsburgh can fill a stadium.....the waiting list for season tickets for the Steelers runs around 11 years. But, the Pirates' GM (Littlefield) is afraid to make moves that may backfire, and he ends up patching a roster up with guys like Kenny Lofton, Reggie Sanders, Jeff Suppan, and Jeff D'Amico. You have to come out and spend some money to end up making money. Pirates ownership has a little to spend, yet Littlefield watches and waits, biding his time for the team to blossom into a powerhouse. All this, without adding major talent.
The Sox could have done the same thing: Let Rauch, Buehrle, Garland, and others run the show! We don't need Colon! We can get by with our offensive talent! We don't need a guy like Robbie Alomar or Carl Everett! But this guy knows that those names will help him get his team on the winning side of things, possibly endear more people to the Sox, and fill that damn stadium!
A fall of baseball on the southside would do it, and it's because we have a great GM.

jeremyb1
08-22-2003, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
KW got everett, alomar and sullivan for B level prospects and got each of their respective teams to pay their salaries. The Billy Koch trade isnt looking super-great unless Koch can get better down the stretch, but we also got neal cotts, who may end up being the best player involved in the trade. Foulke did blow many key saves already this year.

I think Kenny did a good job with the deals this year for the most part but I think you may be undervaluing some of the players we gave up a little bit and overestimating the difficulty of acquiring some of the players we received.

First of all, Ring, Webster, and Rupe are all good prospects. None of them are great prospects by any means but guys like Buehrle and Maggs were never top prospects either so there's certainly potential to regret not having these players a few years down the line. Webster was rated our 3rd best prospect by Baseball America during the offseason and both Webster and Rupe valted onto the Rangers' top ten prospects list after the deal. Ring is fairly close to the majors and has the potential to be a very good middle reliever in the future and most likely won't be anything less than an above average lefty out of the pen.

Additionally, there wasn't a gigantic market for Everett, Alomar, and Sullivan. Compared to say acquiring Colon, Kenny didn't have to outbid numerous other GMs. Neither Everett nor Alomar were wanted on their former teams any longer and there were only a few contending teams willing to spend the money to acquire the players. If you look there were a lot of other high paid relievers such as Scott Williamson, Benitez, and Mike Williams that were dealt for very little providing teams would take on a good portion of their salary. Kenny did well, but he was helped greatly by market forces.

Finally, while I like all the deals you mentioned, I strongly disagree with two moves KW made this season. The first which most seem to disagree with me on, and has now been discussed numerous times is the decision to trade Jimenez instead of demoting Harris to AAA. Say what you want about Jimenez's perceived attitude problems but he had a higher OBP and a higher SLG percentage than Alomar before we made the deal and he's had a higher OBP and SLG percentage than Alomar since the deal was made. I'm not necessarily arguing I'd rather have him over Jimenez but, I would certainly rather have Jimenez as a pinch hitting option off the bench than Harris as a pinch runner/pinch hitter, I would rather have Jimenez over Harris as the starting 2B next season if we don't resign Alomar, and I'd rather have Jimenez starting at 2B next season for little money than Alomar for 4 or 5 million that could be spent elsewhere, possibly on Colon or a starter to replace Colon in the rotation.

In addition to that move, I think the deal of Glover for Schoenweis was a mistake. I don't think we need two lefty specialists in addition to a left handed setup man. You already have the 8th and the 9th taken care of if you need to get a lefty out and if you need to retire one before then, Wunsch is more than qualified. Schoenweis doesn't get out righties and he'll be a terrible starter if we try him there next season. Glover is much better at retiring righties which was more of a need prior to the Sullivan deal at least and has the potential to be a quality set up man as he demonstrated when he was used regularly out of the pen last season. He's already lowered his ERA to below 4 in Anaheim where he's pitched very well while Schoenweis has struggled for us without a valuable role behind Wunsch and Marte.

SoxFan76
08-22-2003, 05:46 PM
i agree with everybody. when kennys deals dont work out, you just have to remember that he tried. examples, wells, colon (who should be doing alot better than he is), ritchie, koch, those are big names. its not kenny's fault they havent, or didnt, perform to their capabilities. cal edlred is another one.

lowesox
08-22-2003, 06:05 PM
Hold on a second here. I agree that lately, Kenny has made some smart moves. But he's also made some horrible ones. If he looks like a good GM now, that's because compared to what he used to be he is. But who wouldn't be? He got skinned on virtually every trade he used to make. If anything, he's become an average GM.

I like his aggressiveness lately, but lets remember that he's in a pretty good position to look good. He's trading away players few fans have even heard of for established players. Who wouldn't look good doing that?

TornLabrum
08-22-2003, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by SoxFan76
i agree with everybody. when kennys deals dont work out, you just have to remember that he tried. examples, wells, colon (who should be doing alot better than he is), ritchie, koch, those are big names. its not kenny's fault they havent, or didnt, perform to their capabilities. cal edlred is another one.

Trying doesn't bring championships unfortunately. It's the results that count, and for the first two years, the results frankly stunk.

But, as was said in the initial post, Williams learned from his mistakes, and for that we need to give him credit. He has put together a team that is capable of winning the AL Central, which means it is also capable of winning the NL Central.

Beyond that, it's a matter of which teams are capable of winning short series against the best teams in baseball. Are we that far along? I don't know. But we're getting there. We're cerainly in better shape than we were at the start of the 2002 season.

soxtalker
08-22-2003, 06:22 PM
Originally posted by lowesox
Hold on a second here. I agree that lately, Kenny has made some smart moves. But he's also made some horrible ones. If he looks like a good GM now, that's because compared to what he used to be he is. But who wouldn't be? He got skinned on virtually every trade he used to make. If anything, he's become an average GM.

I like his aggressiveness lately, but lets remember that he's in a pretty good position to look good. He's trading away players few fans have even heard of for established players. Who wouldn't look good doing that?

I agree. And that aggressiveness that so many fans seem to like now is a trait that KW has displayed since he first took over as GM. If you just want aggressiveness, I'm sure that there are plenty of bad deals that other GM's would be willing to help KW make.

I do hope that KW is truly turning into great GM, but let's not canonize him just yet.

doublem23
08-22-2003, 06:34 PM
I am only willing to give Kenny the props that his results have rightfully deserved. You can place anything under a nice, cozy blanket statement like, "I'm trying to win," but when in two years you take a young, talented, exciting 95-win team and turn it into an absymal, boring, and, at times, frightfully bad 81-win you deserve to get flamed.

With that: Kenny Williams did a terrible job his first two years.

Granted, I was always anti-Kenny, I will give him his props for this year. Starting with the Colon deal (which I still don't believe was his grand idea, but I'm willing to toast to anyway), but he has made some moves and they have paid off because, he's no longer making obviously bad moves (except for the Keith Foulke/Billy Koch deal where everyone with a brain cell saw that was an explosion waiting to happen).

Still, the Sox have not yet won anything, and at the rate they are playing (.523, which doesn't really take into account the recent hot surge, but who cares? I'm in the middle of packing anyway, so I'm not looking for exact statistics), the Sox are only in line to win 85 games this year. That still means that under Williams, the team is 10 wins worse than it was when he took over. Chalk as much of that up to a "fluke 2000," if you will but that's what the numbers say (and they tell a lot more truth than just what people 'think').

So, Williams is still, by my account, a failure as a GM who is now finally on the rise. Being as generous as possible, I can only give him a D for the job he has done managing the White Sox the last 2 3/4 of the year. Sorry if that's pessimistic or what, but GMs are brought into win, not just "try."

Lip Man 1
08-22-2003, 06:38 PM
With respect Jeremy...

Glover is nothing, Jimenez is nothing. Both are journeyman players... a dime a dozen.

As far as overvaluing Alomar and Everett. If Williams waited until July 31st to get them he would have had to pay a hell of a lot more for them if he wasn't beaten out by the Yankees or Braves etc. for them.

That's the way the smart teams do business...identify the real core group of talented youngsters that you honestly feel will make the majors and contribute and dump the rest on the unsuspecting loser clubs (of which the Sox have been a part of for many years.)

You restock in the draft every year and keep the cycle going. Trade the chaf and get veterans in return while keeping your top minor league players. How many minor league players are in the average MLB team's system? Maybe 150? How many make the majors? Maybe 15 out of that group.

There's a lot of chaf you can dump every year.

Maybe just maybe Kenny finally gets it.

Lip

alohafri
08-22-2003, 06:59 PM
AMEN
to doublem's comments.

Until we WIN something, I withhold judgment.



(Mrs. Aloha)

PaleHoseGeorge
08-22-2003, 07:07 PM
I gave Kenny his props in a post I made earlier this morning. I also acknowledged myself as historically one of his harshest critics.

I didn't see much difference in the incompetence of Manuel vs. Williams until last January when Kenny pulled off that steal of a trade to get Colon for hardly more than navel lint. (BTW, how is "Maple" Leifer doing these days? :smile: ) In the subsequent months Williams has shown a commitment to improving the team I can't recall from the Sox front office since the days of Roland Hemond. While I wish he could get a fifth starter, he has brought in two relievers including one to fill the hole left by Koch. Frankly it's so late in the season, the value of the relievers will probably exceed whatever a fifth starter could deliver in the handful of remaining games the Sox need to use one.

My new viewpoint of Williams is in complete contrast to that of Jerry Manuel, who I still firmly believe is doing more to harm this ballclub than help it. I'll concede that there isn't much the Sox can do to fix the problems in the manager's chair, but I really hate the idea that Manuel could still have his job next season.

jeremyb1
08-22-2003, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
With respect Jeremy...

Glover is nothing, Jimenez is nothing. Both are journeyman players... a dime a dozen.

As far as overvaluing Alomar and Everett. If Williams waited until July 31st to get them he would have had to pay a hell of a lot more for them if he wasn't beaten out by the Yankees or Braves etc. for them.

That's the way the smart teams do business...identify the real core group of talented youngsters that you honestly feel will make the majors and contribute and dump the rest on the unsuspecting loser clubs (of which the Sox have been a part of for many years.)

You restock in the draft every year and keep the cycle going. Trade the chaf and get veterans in return while keeping your top minor league players. How many minor league players are in the average MLB team's system? Maybe 150? How many make the majors? Maybe 15 out of that group.

There's a lot of chaf you can dump every year.

Maybe just maybe Kenny finally gets it.

Lip

Why are Glover and Jimenez journeyman players? I consider journeyman players to be guys that are at least in their late 20s that bounce between many different teams in the minors and the majors. Jimenez is 25 and Glover is 26 and they'd only played for three and two teams respectively before we dealt them. Labeling them journeymen without any support or explanation of how they're bad doesn't really mean anything to me. Also, even if they are just journeymen, if they're more valuable to the team than Schoenweis and Harris, I'd like to have them.

As for dealing for Alomar and Everett early, I think that was somewhat helpful that KW made deals before bidding wars escalated but at the same time I still don't think there would've been huge bidding wars for those players later on. Do you really think that the Yankees wait until the deadline to decide who they want or waste time waiting to pull the trigger on a deal for a player they feel they need? If teams like the Yanks or even Boston had their sights set on Everett and Alomar, we would've most likley lost out regardless of when the dealing took place.

As for your analysis of minor leaguers, I think the problem is that you're assuming that teams know which minor leaguers will succeed and which won't which is a flawed assumption. If you only keep the top guys you'll end up keeping guys that are injured like Malone and Rauch or guys that simply tail off like Borchard or Ginter while you trade players everyone undervalued such as Buehrle or Maggs.

Jurr
08-22-2003, 09:51 PM
To say that KW was horrible in his first couple years is a shortsided statement. He laid his nuts on the table to make something happen, and it wasn't his fault that David Wells couldn't put it together or that Ritchie was a dud. You can't blame him for that.
If you're a boss at a business and you've seen someone that is great at their job, you hire them and bring them on. You don't question that. If, for some reason, the person doesn't do their job, that's not necessarily a bad reflection on you.
He went down on those deals swinging. Would you rather have watched them go with an injured Cal Eldred or Kent Hill???
Get real!
If you told me that we were bringing in David Wells, Billy Koch, or Todd Ritchie to add to this ball club, I would be ecstatic. The fact that those guys didn't pan out doesn't make KW a moron.

doublem23
08-22-2003, 09:54 PM
I can damn sure blame him for Ritchie... I didn't like that trade at all from the get-go. Wells is a toss.

But yes, I can say that he did a terrible job. I am a fan. I pay. I expect Kenny Williams to turn my money into a winner on the field and in 2 years under his reign, the Sox dropped 14 wins. In a bad division.

Terrible.

lowesox
08-22-2003, 10:16 PM
Originally posted by Jurr
To say that KW was horrible in his first couple years is a shortsided statement. He laid his nuts on the table to make something happen, and it wasn't his fault that David Wells couldn't put it together or that Ritchie was a dud. You can't blame him for that.
If you're a boss at a business and you've seen someone that is great at their job, you hire them and bring them on. You don't question that. If, for some reason, the person doesn't do their job, that's not necessarily a bad reflection on you.
He went down on those deals swinging. Would you rather have watched them go with an injured Cal Eldred or Kent Hill???
Get real!
If you told me that we were bringing in David Wells, Billy Koch, or Todd Ritchie to add to this ball club, I would be ecstatic. The fact that those guys didn't pan out doesn't make KW a moron.

How do you figure that isn't his fault. That's what being a GM is all about: scouting players to make sure you get the possible result. Wells was hurt much of that season. Williams should have known that. As for Ritchie, that's a GM buying into hype other teams are selling.

And you're forgetting the worst trade he made in my opinion. The Foulke trade. How good would this team be with Keith Foulke on it instead of Billy Koch, who everybody knew was a bomb waiting to explode - the exact kind of player a good GM knows to avoid.

Tragg
08-22-2003, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge

My new viewpoint of Williams is in complete contrast to that of Jerry Manuel, who I still firmly believe is doing more to harm this ballclub than help it. I'll concede that there isn't much the Sox can do to fix the problems in the manager's chair, but I really hate the idea that Manuel could still have his job next season.

Well, Kenny Williams has had the full power to address the manager situation, and he hasn't. So that's a legitimate criticism. I think the best compliment is that he hasn't sat on his rear- he has tried to win.
I still think, in most cases, he gives up more than he demands in return when he is in that position.

I don't know about his drafting - but it needs to be good for the reason the poster said above - so you can keep slouging off "prospects" for ready talent when you need it, while keeping the ones you like best.

Two of last year's prospects are starters this year - I hope we can find one more next year for second, short or cf.
Frankly, I don't care whether or not we keep the alomars - neither one does much for me, although roberto has been an upgrade over what we did have and we needed him (just don't see him as long-term solution) and I think there are other players out there who can serve sandy's purpose. Maybe with the nice latin connection we have - maggs, 2 alomars, we might be able to keep colon - don't know his price, but it can't be that outrageous.

It's also nice seeing KW getting something on billy beane - i'll take olivo over chad bradford and, as for neil cotts, who knows - we'll see if oakland can sign foulke.

gosox41
08-22-2003, 10:33 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
I wouldn't go that far....




But I will certainly tip my cap to him!


Getting Almoar was the best of the bunch...We needed a guy like him both as the captain of the IF and as a stabilizer at the top of the order.

He's getting better.

Bob

Lip Man 1
08-22-2003, 10:34 PM
With respect Tragg, Kenny does NOT have full power in the Manuel situation.

He has to consult with the owner for final approval. Uncle Jerry has final approval on the hiring of field managers and general mangers.

Lip

gosox41
08-22-2003, 10:36 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
With respect Jeremy...

Glover is nothing, Jimenez is nothing. Both are journeyman players... a dime a dozen.

As far as overvaluing Alomar and Everett. If Williams waited until July 31st to get them he would have had to pay a hell of a lot more for them if he wasn't beaten out by the Yankees or Braves etc. for them.

That's the way the smart teams do business...identify the real core group of talented youngsters that you honestly feel will make the majors and contribute and dump the rest on the unsuspecting loser clubs (of which the Sox have been a part of for many years.)

You restock in the draft every year and keep the cycle going. Trade the chaf and get veterans in return while keeping your top minor league players. How many minor league players are in the average MLB team's system? Maybe 150? How many make the majors? Maybe 15 out of that group.

There's a lot of chaf you can dump every year.

Maybe just maybe Kenny finally gets it.

Lip

Glover meay be nothing but a journeyman, but he is a better option at his rolef or trying to help the team win today then Schoeneweis.

Bob

Tragg
08-22-2003, 10:40 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Glover meay be nothing but a journeyman, but he is a better option at his rolef or trying to help the team win today then Schoeneweis.

Bob

Well, we could take this back to Scott Eyre - would you rather have Eyre than Schoenwiess or Glover?
Getting riled up over the Glover/Scho or Jiminez/prospects trade is pointless - none of the principals make much difference.

gosox41
08-22-2003, 10:40 PM
Originally posted by Jurr
To say that KW was horrible in his first couple years is a shortsided statement. He laid his nuts on the table to make something happen, and it wasn't his fault that David Wells couldn't put it together or that Ritchie was a dud. You can't blame him for that.
If you're a boss at a business and you've seen someone that is great at their job, you hire them and bring them on. You don't question that. If, for some reason, the person doesn't do their job, that's not necessarily a bad reflection on you.
He went down on those deals swinging. Would you rather have watched them go with an injured Cal Eldred or Kent Hill???
Get real!
If you told me that we were bringing in David Wells, Billy Koch, or Todd Ritchie to add to this ball club, I would be ecstatic. The fact that those guys didn't pan out doesn't make KW a moron.

Outside of David Wells, yes it does for 2 reasons:

1. Koch and Ritchie were never that good to begin with. Koch was highly overrated.
2. In order to be aggressive and get these 2 so-called talents he gave up way too much. He is a moron in the sense he didn't use good judgement with the numbers.

When people like me who think they know something about the game go on posting in this thread the day the move was made that it was beyond stupid, then it's a sign that KW should probably figure the same thing out. All I do is look at the numbers.

He didn't do his job in that he overpaid for assets that weren't that strong to begin with. Not too many bosses are going to like that.

Bob

Tragg
08-22-2003, 10:41 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
With respect Tragg, Kenny does NOT have full power in the Manuel situation.

He has to consult with the owner for final approval. Uncle Jerry has final approval on the hiring of field managers and general mangers.

Lip
Well, okay, but manuel still reports to him and i would think that if kw wanted to change, a change would be made - just my speculation.
But I will say that Manuel's f%$^ing with Frank is something Reinsdorf would approve of. His management has had a habit of messing with hall of fame quality players, from Fisk to Michael Jordan to Frank.

Lip Man 1
08-22-2003, 10:42 PM
Journeyman does not mean "bad," it means mediocre somebody to fill out a roster who's never going to become an impact player regardless of position.

Glover has been with Toronto the Sox and Anaheim. D'Angelo with the Yankees, San Diego, Sox and now Cincy.

As young as both of those guys are that says something. Those guys are roster fillers not starters not guys you can count on for the long haul. Doesn't mean they are bad people it just means they don't have the tools or makeup to start and produce on a regular basis.

Schoenweis is going to be in the rotation next year replacing Colon (as least in theory)... to get a solid starter for a journeyman middle reliever who was awful as a starter, is a steal. Well worth the "gamble."

Having never been a scout I don't know exactly how hard it is to judge talent but I do know you can spot quality top players who have the tools and can succeed in MLB as opposed to guys who won't be going anywhere fast (i.e. Valentine who was so highly regarded by some...)

I don't think it's as hard as quantum physics or sabermetrics (LOL).

You keep your top five or six minor league talents and pawn off the other 100 or so. And since you draft every year if you have a good scouting department you can replace two or three of the kids that you deal every year.

I just don't place the same value as you with minor league players. I saw a figure somewhere (sorry I can't recall where) that said only one out of every ten minor league guys get to the big leagues. Those are very long odds. If I can trade a kid, who the odds say decisively won't make the majors for a guy who has already shown himself to BE a major leaguer, I'll do it every time. 90% of all minor league players never even see the inside of a MLB stadium unless they buy a ticket.

Lip

Tragg
08-22-2003, 10:45 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Outside of David Wells, yes it does for 2 reasons:

1. Koch and Ritchie were never that good to begin with. Koch was highly overrated.
2. In order to be aggressive and get these 2 so-called talents he gave up way too much. He is a moron in the sense he didn't use good judgement with the numbers.

When people like me who think they know something about the game go on posting in this thread the day the move was made that it was beyond stupid, then it's a sign that KW should probably figure the same thing out. All I do is look at the numbers.

He didn't do his job in that he overpaid for assets that weren't that strong to begin with. Not too many bosses are going to like that.

Bob

I think the Clayton deal belongs on that list - he didn't give anything up, but Clayton was a big negative (and i did say so at the time) because the last thing this team needed was another automatic out in the lineup and because he wasn't that great a SS anyway. And then he paid that clown $5 mill a year.

ONe thing about the Foulke deal was the contractual situations and the fact that he was in manuel's doghouse (which brings up the strange kenny/jerry thing - does jerry take orders from kenny on who to play)? Regardless of who puts them in the doghouse, once there, it's almost impossible to remove thyself under this regime.

gosox41
08-22-2003, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by Tragg
I think the Clayton deal belongs on that list - he didn't give anything up, but Clayton was a big negative (and i did say so at the time) because the last thing this team needed was another automatic out in the lineup and because he wasn't that great a SS anyway. And then he paid that clown $5 mill a year.

ONe thing about the Foulke deal was the contractual situations and the fact that he was in manuel's doghouse (which brings up the strange kenny/jerry thing - does jerry take orders from kenny on who to play)? Regardless of who puts them in the doghouse, once there, it's almost impossible to remove thyself under this regime.

But I still don't get the logic of trading a good pitcher for a worse one, then signing the worse one to a contract extension that pays him the same amount that the good pitcher was already making.

If the Sox wanted to trade Foulke, they could've gotten a lot better for him then they did. Personally, I wouldn't have traded him at all let aone for Koch.

Bob

Tragg
08-22-2003, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
But I still don't get the logic of trading a good pitcher for a worse one, then signing the worse one to a contract extension that pays him the same amount that the good pitcher was already making.

If the Sox wanted to trade Foulke, they could've gotten a lot better for him then they did. Personally, I wouldn't have traded him at all let aone for Koch.

Bob

Well I certainly agree it was a bad trade - the real problem was that he way overrated Koch who wasn't all that great at his best. If we could have gotten Koch's best, it would have been tolerable and a little cheaper and more long term AND....Cotts (well, we can hope).

TornLabrum
08-22-2003, 11:32 PM
Originally posted by Jurr
To say that KW was horrible in his first couple years is a shortsided statement. He laid his nuts on the table to make something happen, and it wasn't his fault that David Wells couldn't put it together or that Ritchie was a dud. You can't blame him for that.
If you're a boss at a business and you've seen someone that is great at their job, you hire them and bring them on. You don't question that. If, for some reason, the person doesn't do their job, that's not necessarily a bad reflection on you.
He went down on those deals swinging. Would you rather have watched them go with an injured Cal Eldred or Kent Hill???
Get real!
If you told me that we were bringing in David Wells, Billy Koch, or Todd Ritchie to add to this ball club, I would be ecstatic. The fact that those guys didn't pan out doesn't make KW a moron.

Here's a clue for you on the Ritchie trade. It was bad because you don't trade three arms for Todd Ritchie. You trade three arms for Randy Johnson or Curt Schilling.

TornLabrum
08-22-2003, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
I just don't place the same value as you with minor league players. I saw a figure somewhere (sorry I can't recall where) that said only one out of every ten minor league guys get to the big leagues. Those are very long odds. If I can trade a kid, who the odds say decisively won't make the majors for a guy who has already shown himself to BE a major leaguer, I'll do it every time. 90% of all minor league players never even see the inside of a MLB stadium unless they buy a ticket.

I saw the 10% figure in Baseball America several years ago.

OEO Magglio
08-23-2003, 12:47 AM
KW is definitely getting better, he's alway's tried, now he seems to get it a little more. Jeremyb1, yes Jimenez had a good obp, but he's just a very dumb baseball player, and makes to many dumb mistakes, I know Willie has not hit in the major leagues yet, but I'd rather have him as the sox starting 2b then d'angelo, d'angelo will make more dumb plays in the field or running the bases to hurt the sox chances of winning a game, then he would do with a good obp to help them win games, if I had to pick a starting 2b between d'angelo and willie I'm taking Willie, KW did nothing wrong by getting rid of him(addition by subtraction).

voodoochile
08-23-2003, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Glover meay be nothing but a journeyman, but he is a better option at his rolef or trying to help the team win today then Schoeneweis.

Bob

Not if JM wouldn't use him. You have to have players the manager will actually ALLOW to do their job for them to be effective.

Glover didn't fit that category, Scott and Scott do...

OEO Magglio
08-23-2003, 01:06 AM
Not if JM wouldn't use him. You have to have players the manager will actually ALLOW to do their job for them to be effective.
Exactly I've always really like Glover as a reliever, but the problem is he was pretty much pitching once every week and a half or 2 weeks, Manuel just refused to use him, that's why Glover almost needed to be traded or Jerry Manuel fired(which would have been so much nicer), but we all know that's impossible.

jeremyb1
08-23-2003, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Journeyman does not mean "bad," it means mediocre somebody to fill out a roster who's never going to become an impact player regardless of position.

Glover has been with Toronto the Sox and Anaheim. D'Angelo with the Yankees, San Diego, Sox and now Cincy.

As young as both of those guys are that says something. Those guys are roster fillers not starters not guys you can count on for the long haul. Doesn't mean they are bad people it just means they don't have the tools or makeup to start and produce on a regular basis.

Schoenweis is going to be in the rotation next year replacing Colon (as least in theory)... to get a solid starter for a journeyman middle reliever who was awful as a starter, is a steal. Well worth the "gamble."

Having never been a scout I don't know exactly how hard it is to judge talent but I do know you can spot quality top players who have the tools and can succeed in MLB as opposed to guys who won't be going anywhere fast (i.e. Valentine who was so highly regarded by some...)

I don't think it's as hard as quantum physics or sabermetrics (LOL).

You keep your top five or six minor league talents and pawn off the other 100 or so. And since you draft every year if you have a good scouting department you can replace two or three of the kids that you deal every year.

I just don't place the same value as you with minor league players. I saw a figure somewhere (sorry I can't recall where) that said only one out of every ten minor league guys get to the big leagues. Those are very long odds. If I can trade a kid, who the odds say decisively won't make the majors for a guy who has already shown himself to BE a major leaguer, I'll do it every time. 90% of all minor league players never even see the inside of a MLB stadium unless they buy a ticket.

Hold on a sec, Lip. You can't include the fact that we traded them as proof that they're journeymen. That's circular logic. "Its okay we traded them because they're journeymen. Glover is a journeyman because now that we traded him he's with his third team." Certainly being on two teams doesn't make a player a journeyman so the fact that we traded Glover can't also be the reason it was okay to trade him.

Maybe you have a point with the number of times Jimenez was dealt but I'm not sure you can really count the fact that he was traded from the Yankees. His career was derailed somewhat by a serious car accident and its not like he was about to unseat Jeter or Soriano.

Regardless, good players are traded sometimes because other teams want them. I don't think the fact that other GMs were willing to trade players ever means they're bad that's a copout and assumes that any analysis on our part is completely worthless because we'll never be as smart as GMs in baseball when in fact GMs make poor decisions all the time. Look at Loaiza.

As far as Schoenweis goes, I don't understand how he's a solid starter. Since you don't like statistics I won't support my answers with numbers. I'll just say that Schoenweis is 30 years old has been given numerous chances as a starter at the big league level and has never succeeded before.

Regarding minor league players, obviously scouts aren't able to do all that good of a job seeing into the future and predicting the success of minor leaguers or good minor leaguers were never be traded. We wouldn't have Cotts as a throw in in the Koch deal or Garland in return for Karchner and we wouldn't have traded Fogg and Wells. The problem with your argument about receiving proven major league talent in return for unproven minor league players is that GMs don't always make good decisions even when they have "proven" MLB veterans in front of them. Sometimes guys that have been in the league a long time such as D Wells or Clayton end up being collasal busts and sometimes "unproven players" become superstars (Pedro was traded three times).

inta
08-23-2003, 05:25 AM
i'm completely late on this thread, but i want to join in on the kenny williams appreciation.

this guy showed more confidence in this sox team than any fan in chicago.
unfortunately the only that may diminish from the brilliant GM work he's done this year is maneuls constant managerial blunders.

gosox41
08-23-2003, 06:59 AM
Originally posted by Tragg
Well I certainly agree it was a bad trade - the real problem was that he way overrated Koch who wasn't all that great at his best. If we could have gotten Koch's best, it would have been tolerable and a little cheaper and more long term AND....Cotts (well, we can hope).

It'll be interesting to see how much $$$ Foulke gets in the off season. The bottom fell out of the free agent market last season, something KW misjudged when he traded for Koch. He also misjudged it when he re-signed Konerko for $8 mill. per. I metnioned it being a bad move at the time and Konerko has performed even worse then I could have imagined. That's another move that I rank as a mistake for KW. Why pay so much fro a guy who is average at best when compared to other AL first basemen?

Bob

gosox41
08-23-2003, 07:04 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Not if JM wouldn't use him. You have to have players the manager will actually ALLOW to do their job for them to be effective.

Glover didn't fit that category, Scott and Scott do...

Then JM is made another huge mistake. JM has a way with players he doesn't seem to like for some reason. He didn't like Cameron (I remember him questioning him in the media) so he was traded for a slow footed first baseman. He doesn't like Frank so he won't play him at 1B even though it would clearly help the team win more. He doesn't like Glover so he refuses to use him, even though he has pitched very well in the middle releif role previosuly for JM. JM didn't like Foulke (this whole crisis of confidnece thing was brought on by JM) so first he promises to give him his closer's job back which he never did only to see him traded and having great success in Oakland.

JM isn't the best talent evaluator. This team should still have Glover and Foulke. Picking up Sullivan would make the bullpen one of the best in baseball. Cameron might possible be the CF, so the first 50-60 games of the season odds are we would have had more production (and maybe a few more wins) out of that spot.

Bob

Hangar18
08-23-2003, 11:20 AM
Jeremy, DoubleM, Lip ...... all of your points were Excellent
and well explained, so :gulp:

You are all right to some extent, but to add a log to the fire here,
I think we shouldve KEPT Fat Wells, and called his Bluff (saying he'd play cheap/made him lose the weight) We really didnt have anything to LOSE signing him cheap, and everything to gain by keeping him. It made the trade to get him, a wash because we just let him go. oh well, I think he saw that Sox Fans are a very Loyal, fired up bunch, and felt bad that he didnt do enough for us. It still wasnt enough to stop me from remove his "33 Wells" from my grey road jersey out of anger, but i'll give him a little credit.

RichH55
08-23-2003, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Jeremy, DoubleM, Lip ...... all of your points were Excellent
and well explained, so :gulp:

You are all right to some extent, but to add a log to the fire here,
I think we shouldve KEPT Fat Wells, and called his Bluff (saying he'd play cheap/made him lose the weight) We really didnt have anything to LOSE signing him cheap, and everything to gain by keeping him. It made the trade to get him, a wash because we just let him go. oh well, I think he saw that Sox Fans are a very Loyal, fired up bunch, and felt bad that he didnt do enough for us. It still wasnt enough to stop me from remove his "33 Wells" from my grey road jersey out of anger, but i'll give him a little credit.


That whole I'll sign cheap and earn it back wasn't worth the hot air Wells pumped into it. He was going to sign with Arizona for decent money, whom he didn't "owe" like he did the Sox, and then he pulled out of an agreement, classy, to sign with more money to be with the Yankees, a team he never wanted to leave in the first place.

THe only way we could have kept Wells would have be to vest that option year. One statement made before FA, doesnt counteract the actions he actually took

RichH55
08-23-2003, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by Tragg
Well, we could take this back to Scott Eyre - would you rather have Eyre than Schoenwiess or Glover?
Getting riled up over the Glover/Scho or Jiminez/prospects trade is pointless - none of the principals make much difference.

Agreed whole heartedly......People complain about losing the likes of Gary Glover.....Who was just a newer version of Sean Lowe, and there are hundreds of guys who can do that role for a year or two, gain a place in certain peoples hearts and then get moved to do nothing again.

I remember when people were angry we didn't get enough back for Herbert Perry./.......Herbert "friggin" Perry......Its just bitching to bitch at a certain point

The same reason you see: "Well why was Loiza put on waivers this year??!?!? Hang KW" and crap like that.

He has made his share of bad moves, and I know, because honestly half my posts have been on how terrible Royce Clayton was, but he has made good moves as well, and tried to keep the core together and work within the budget which everyteam, sans the Yankees has.

KW simply gets a bad wrap.....He pulls Marte out of nowhere, but people are upset Josh Fogg is gone....The Alomar move was a small move, but masterful. Ray Durham would have been nicer as a pick, true. Not every move is great, but I also hate reading stuff like Foulke for Koch was TERRIBLE....and there being no mention of contracts status or Neil Cotts...OR people who bad mouth that deal, but when it is mentioned well the Sox are seemingly playoff bound, they say "I'll reserve judgement on that," which is all well and good except I don't remember the A's having already clinched a playoff spot, nor do I remember Foulke(whom I like) saving Game 7 of the World Series, nor do I remember Neil Cotts not panning out or Koch being terrible for his whole contract, when Foulke is gone essentially after one year in Oakland(that is just an assumption).

In some regards we are like Boston fans. The old adage, what would Red Sox fans have to talk about if they actually won the Series? Same thing here......I swear if we win the Title, and the first post I see after it is "We should have been doing this for years"....I will probably go off on that person

voodoochile
08-23-2003, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Then JM is made another huge mistake. JM has a way with players he doesn't seem to like for some reason. He didn't like Cameron (I remember him questioning him in the media) so he was traded for a slow footed first baseman. He doesn't like Frank so he won't play him at 1B even though it would clearly help the team win more. He doesn't like Glover so he refuses to use him, even though he has pitched very well in the middle releif role previosuly for JM. JM didn't like Foulke (this whole crisis of confidnece thing was brought on by JM) so first he promises to give him his closer's job back which he never did only to see him traded and having great success in Oakland.

JM isn't the best talent evaluator. This team should still have Glover and Foulke. Picking up Sullivan would make the bullpen one of the best in baseball. Cameron might possible be the CF, so the first 50-60 games of the season odds are we would have had more production (and maybe a few more wins) out of that spot.

Bob

No arguments here... I think JM is a blooming idiot and that the team wins in spite of his moves for the most part...

MRKARNO
08-23-2003, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by RichH55

The same reason you see: "Well why was Loiza put on waivers this year??!?!? Hang KW" and crap like that.


For the record, I was the one who praised KW and who asked why Loaiza was put on waivers. Just curious as to why only him and Bartolo made the list, but not everyone else like some people have said, but I guess that Jayson Stark isnt gonna release the entire list to the public because he doesnt really know all of the players

soxtalker
08-23-2003, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by Jurr
To say that KW was horrible in his first couple years is a shortsided statement. He laid his nuts on the table to make something happen, and it wasn't his fault that David Wells couldn't put it together or that Ritchie was a dud. You can't blame him for that.
If you're a boss at a business and you've seen someone that is great at their job, you hire them and bring them on. You don't question that. If, for some reason, the person doesn't do their job, that's not necessarily a bad reflection on you.
He went down on those deals swinging. Would you rather have watched them go with an injured Cal Eldred or Kent Hill???
Get real!
If you told me that we were bringing in David Wells, Billy Koch, or Todd Ritchie to add to this ball club, I would be ecstatic. The fact that those guys didn't pan out doesn't make KW a moron.

Set aside the discussion of the individual deals for the moment, and let's focus on the issue of accountability. You seem to be saying that if a player doesn't work out, KW isn't responsible. Well, what is he accountable for? Just being aggressive? No, he has to produce results. If his decisions lead to poor results -- for whatever reason -- he's held accountable. Sure, the player has responsibility, but each level of management -- in this case, JM, KW, and, finally, JR -- should be held accountable.

I like your use of an analogy in the business world, but your conclusion is incorrect. If you are a boss in a business and you hire someone, it is a very bad reflection on you (i.e., your boss will care) if they don't work out. Are you allowed to make mistakes -- probably, though it depends on the business.

jeremyb1
08-23-2003, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
KW is definitely getting better, he's alway's tried, now he seems to get it a little more. Jeremyb1, yes Jimenez had a good obp, but he's just a very dumb baseball player, and makes to many dumb mistakes, I know Willie has not hit in the major leagues yet, but I'd rather have him as the sox starting 2b then d'angelo, d'angelo will make more dumb plays in the field or running the bases to hurt the sox chances of winning a game, then he would do with a good obp to help them win games, if I had to pick a starting 2b between d'angelo and willie I'm taking Willie, KW did nothing wrong by getting rid of him(addition by subtraction).

This has been discussed before so I don't know how much sense it makes to rehash the whole thing, but the bottom line is that there's no reason occasional blunders by Jimenez would cancel out the fact that he's an above average hitter especially at 2B and Harris would be the worst hitting regular in baseball if he had enough at bats to qualify. You personally may not like Jimenez's "dumb mistakes" but that doesn't mean he isn't a more valuable piece on this team than Harris. Also, if Jimenez wasn't getting the job done next season, we could always trade him and promote Harris there. We can't have Jimenez back now without giving something significant up.

jeremyb1
08-23-2003, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Agreed whole heartedly......People complain about losing the likes of Gary Glover.....Who was just a newer version of Sean Lowe, and there are hundreds of guys who can do that role for a year or two, gain a place in certain peoples hearts and then get moved to do nothing again.

KW simply gets a bad wrap.....He pulls Marte out of nowhere, but people are upset Josh Fogg is gone....The Alomar move was a small move, but masterful. Ray Durham would have been nicer as a pick, true. Not every move is great, but I also hate reading stuff like Foulke for Koch was TERRIBLE....and there being no mention of contracts status or Neil Cotts...OR people who bad mouth that deal, but when it is mentioned well the Sox are seemingly playoff bound, they say "I'll reserve judgement on that," which is all well and good except I don't remember the A's having already clinched a playoff spot, nor do I remember Foulke(whom I like) saving Game 7 of the World Series, nor do I remember Neil Cotts not panning out or Koch being terrible for his whole contract, when Foulke is gone essentially after one year in Oakland(that is just an assumption).

Why should anyone simply dismiss Glover because you label him "a newer version of Sean Lowe". First of all I completely disagree with that assessment. Lowe was 28 or 29 when he came over in a minor deal and he was a player who had never stuck in the majors that late into his career. Glover was something like the 8th best prospect in the Jay's system, has good stuff and reached the big leagues at 23 (not 28). Second of all, I don't see why Sean Lowe is worthless. We're talking about a player that was extremely valuable to this club in '00 and '01. This bullpen would certainly be much better with a pitcher as good as he was those years right now. So if Glover has years left like Lowe's 01-02, I'd love to see them in a Sox uniform and if you're arguing Glover is a minor league journeyman who peaked at 25, you're being ridiculous.

As for the Koch/Foulke deal, it was a bad move plain and simple. KW gave up the better closer and was burned. Sure Cotts is a good pickup but I'm guessing KW could've easily acquired him for Valentine and MJ if he wanted to. Clearly Beane didn't value Cotts particularly highly to make him a throw in. As for the length of the deals, how could you possibly imply that Koch being signed for two more years after this one at 5 million a year might be a good thing?! Considering the current market even if Koch was as good as he was last season with the A's the next two seasons, we'd still be overpaying him to give him over 15 million for these three seasons. Clearly other guys like Gordon and Marte that came relatively cheap are capable of closing for a fraction of the price and we're really going to be hurting for money to resign Colon with all the raises coming to our players next season.

TornLabrum
08-23-2003, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
This has been discussed before so I don't know how much sense it makes to rehash the whole thing, but the bottom line is that there's no reason occasional blunders by Jimenez would cancel out the fact that he's an above average hitter especially at 2B and Harris would be the worst hitting regular in baseball if he had enough at bats to qualify. You personally may not like Jimenez's "dumb mistakes" but that doesn't mean he isn't a more valuable piece on this team than Harris. Also, if Jimenez wasn't getting the job done next season, we could always trade him and promote Harris there. We can't have Jimenez back now without giving something significant up.

Here's one reason those "occasional blunders" by Jimenez negate his hitting: He gets thrown out on the bases. This prevents him from scoring runs, something a team has to do in order to win ball games. It also adds to the total of outs, of which you get 27 except in case of a tie.

pudge
08-23-2003, 04:46 PM
Very interesting thread. I'm going to chime in with: Garland for Erstad????? Remember this deal that didn't happen? I think it's fair to say Kenny was off his rocker during his first couple of years. The David Wells attempt was decent, but only because Sirotka wound up having a career-ending injury. Kip Wells would be a dang nice pitcher to have right now. Also, Kenny is the GM, and I think he needed to use his cojones to get in JR's face and fire Manuel.

But I will say I have always liked his energy. I've never hated him like a grew to hate Schu. Back in '97, I think KW would have gone after Clemens, unlike Schu the moron. I hope KW's great moves this year lead us somewhere!

RichH55
08-23-2003, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
For the record, I was the one who praised KW and who asked why Loaiza was put on waivers. Just curious as to why only him and Bartolo made the list, but not everyone else like some people have said, but I guess that Jayson Stark isnt gonna release the entire list to the public because he doesnt really know all of the players

I wasn't specifically calling you out....its just I'm sick of the negativism where it isn't warranted....If you notice some did agree with you in that post, and I've been reading the sky is falling because we traded Sean Lowe and Herbert Perry type stuff for a long time now....so sorry if you thought I was going after you

RichH55
08-23-2003, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
Why should anyone simply dismiss Glover because you label him "a newer version of Sean Lowe". First of all I completely disagree with that assessment. Lowe was 28 or 29 when he came over in a minor deal and he was a player who had never stuck in the majors that late into his career. Glover was something like the 8th best prospect in the Jay's system, has good stuff and reached the big leagues at 23 (not 28). Second of all, I don't see why Sean Lowe is worthless. We're talking about a player that was extremely valuable to this club in '00 and '01. This bullpen would certainly be much better with a pitcher as good as he was those years right now. So if Glover has years left like Lowe's 01-02, I'd love to see them in a Sox uniform and if you're arguing Glover is a minor league journeyman who peaked at 25, you're being ridiculous.

As for the Koch/Foulke deal, it was a bad move plain and simple. KW gave up the better closer and was burned. Sure Cotts is a good pickup but I'm guessing KW could've easily acquired him for Valentine and MJ if he wanted to. Clearly Beane didn't value Cotts particularly highly to make him a throw in. As for the length of the deals, how could you possibly imply that Koch being signed for two more years after this one at 5 million a year might be a good thing?! Considering the current market even if Koch was as good as he was last season with the A's the next two seasons, we'd still be overpaying him to give him over 15 million for these three seasons. Clearly other guys like Gordon and Marte that came relatively cheap are capable of closing for a fraction of the price and we're really going to be hurting for money to resign Colon with all the raises coming to our players next season.


He's a middle reliever, who occasionally gets a spot start.....Should I call Cooperstown now? Or wait for my weekend minutes to kick in?

The whole point is the MR in the mold of Glover/Lowe can perform for a year or two...AND you can get them for nothing. They are a dime a dozen....there is not a more replaceable commodity in baseball then a middle reliever, and generally you only get them after they fail at being a starter. He is decently young, but the fact that two orgs have dealt him for next to nothing says something as well. Its not like the guy was traded for Colon, he was traded for Scott Eyre and Scott Schoneweis for God's sake.

Lowe couldnt stick with the Pirates, and is he even in the majors now?

None of this is to suggest it wasnt nice to have Lowe pitching here or that Glover can't fill that role. All it means is that they are easily replaceable, and that is the reason they are considered replaceable.

And that reasoning as to why Cotts isnt nice to have? What? Beane wasnt high on him, so he's garbage? Who are you, Michael Lewis? And that assumption that we could have gotten him for MJ and Valentine is based on what exactly? Hyperbole and wishes?

And with Beane....it doesnt matter how he values the guy, it matters to him what he can get for him. His main concern is contracts and he didn't want Koch for 3 years because he doesn't particularly value closers. Did he think Foulke was better than Koch, no doubt. But we got a good young pitcher in the deal too, and say what you will, thats an important part oif it as well.

Koch has been bad this year, and alot of that stems from the fall in velocity. If the velocity returns, you have a good player and 5 million isnt crazy, especially considered we would have lost Foulke after this year. Alot of the deal depends on Cotts(duh) and Koch's final two years. Two good years of Koch would change perceptions IMO.

And how about some credit for KW there too....He got Koch, but he still got Marte too, and then when he dealt Osuna, he got Flash for nothing. He tried Rick White, that didnt work, he reconigzed that(which is a very underplayed management strength:The ability to cut your losses, rather than insisting they will work)...and now he added Sullivan. That is a damn fine bullpen we are putting out there, and isn't that whats important? And the top 3 guys in that pen are all KW boys.

I know we can't win without Gary Glover, but I think it takes courage for the team to even keep playing with that knowledge inside of them

Tragg
08-23-2003, 09:13 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Koch has been bad this year, and alot of that stems from the fall in velocity. If the velocity returns, you have a good player and 5 million isnt crazy, especially considered we would have lost Foulke after this year. Alot of the deal depends on Cotts(duh) and Koch's final two years. Two good years of Koch would change perceptions IMO.



I agree with most of your post and fretting about average at best players is pointless (jiminez, glover). However, $5 mill for Koch, even at his best, IS CRAZY.

RichH55
08-23-2003, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by Tragg
I agree with most of your post and fretting about average at best players is pointless (jiminez, glover). However, $5 mill for Koch, even at his best, IS CRAZY.

Well...its not the most cost effective method, yes, but IIRC Foulke was making similar money and the contract was before the bottom fell out of the market....if KW can show similar skill in bullpen making like this year, then we should be fine