PDA

View Full Version : Koch to the mets?


MRKARNO
10-28-2003, 10:57 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-031028soxnotes,1,7212751.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
trib registration required

The mets might be interested in Koch and his 6.375 million dollar salary

This is the best news I've heard all offseason

JRIG
10-28-2003, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-031028soxnotes,1,7212751.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
trib registration required

The mets might be interested in Koch and his 6.375 million dollar salary

This is the best news I've heard all offseason

Only thing better would be if they were interesed in GIDPaul Konerko (don't know who coined that, but I love it). His contract is two years longer than Koch's. But hey, you take what you can get.

Bisco Stu
10-28-2003, 11:09 PM
Makes sense. Rick Peterson, arguably the best pitching coach in MLB is going from the A's to the Amazings, and Koch did well under his tutelage.

MRKARNO
10-28-2003, 11:10 PM
Koch for Trachsel anyone?

Brian26
10-28-2003, 11:30 PM
It's called a salary dump. I hope we can get a bucket of baseballs for him as long as we don't have to pay the salary anymore.

faneidde
10-28-2003, 11:57 PM
Why is everyone so eager to get rid of Koch and Konerko. Yes, they both had bad years last year and yes they are both over-paid, but right now their trade value is about as low as possible. The object is buy low and sell high.

Gumshoe
10-29-2003, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by faneidde
Why is everyone so eager to get rid of Koch and Konerko. Yes, they both had bad years last year and yes they are both over-paid, but right now their trade value is about as low as possible. The object is buy low and sell high.

Right. But focus in on Paul more in that statement. At least he had a GOOD STRETCH during last year. If Paulie was bad, and I'll admit he was, then Koch was downright awful (making the Foulke move the worst trade in modern history).

I wouldn't move Konerko. I think I would move Koch, because methinks he is beyond repair, and his salary certainly [for a RP] is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY to high.

Gumshoe

SoxxoS
10-29-2003, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Right. But focus in on Paul more in that statement. At least he had a GOOD STRETCH during last year. If Paulie was bad, and I'll admit he was, then Koch was downright awful (making the Foulke move the worst trade in modern history).

I wouldn't move Konerko. I think I would move Koch, because methinks he is beyond repair, and his salary certainly [for a RP] is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY to high.

Gumshoe

I would agree with that setiment BUT...

Pitchers are always at a premium. Yes, even righty relievers that had horrible years or were injured. Especially if they were good before.

1st baseman with a sub 800 OPS with a average glove aren't at a premium, they are a dime a dozen. David Ortiz, arguably the MVP this year, was available to anyone who wanted him last offseason. I think with regular time, Daubach could put up similar numbers to Konerko, at 1/7th the price.

That is why I don't want to get rid of Koch. Konerko can get traded for a pile of seeds.

jeremyb1
10-29-2003, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
I would agree with that setiment BUT...

Pitchers are always at a premium. Yes, even righty relievers that had horrible years or were injured. Especially if they were good before.

1st baseman with a sub 800 OPS with a average glove aren't at a premium, they are a dime a dozen. David Ortiz, arguably the MVP this year, was available to anyone who wanted him last offseason. I think with regular time, Daubach could put up similar numbers to Konerko, at 1/7th the price.

That is why I don't want to get rid of Koch. Konerko can get traded for a pile of seeds.

I disagree. There's absolutely no benefit to having a player on your roster that eats 6 million but doesn't produce. 6 million is a huge amount of money. Add that to the money we were willing to give Colon and we can sign any free agent on the market or at least worry less about keeping this club together. We might have one opportunity to dump Koch's salary so if we get one, we really need to take it.

SoxxoS
10-29-2003, 12:37 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I disagree. There's absolutely no benefit to having a player on your roster that eats 6 million but doesn't produce. 6 million is a huge amount of money. Add that to the money we were willing to give Colon and we can sign any free agent on the market or at least worry less about keeping this club together. We might have one opportunity to dump Koch's salary so if we get one, we really need to take it.

I should have clarified...

If I had the CHOICE, I would rather get rid of Konerko.

But I agree with you jeremy, I would also want to rid of Koch's salary if we had the opportunity.

Doesn't mention the Sox, but...Billy Wagner? (http://proxy.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=1647724)

gosox41
10-29-2003, 07:22 AM
Originally posted by faneidde
Why is everyone so eager to get rid of Koch and Konerko. Yes, they both had bad years last year and yes they are both over-paid, but right now their trade value is about as low as possible. The object is buy low and sell high.

Based on your logic, the Sox should be trading Loiaza, Magglio, and Lee.

Seriously, the Sox are trying to win next season. These contracts are holding the Sox back in two ways 1. they eat up a lot of payroll and 2. both players underperformed. The thing you need to remember is when both players are having their best years, they're still not great players, just over hyped.

I can easily find a substitue on the FA mkt to substitute for Koch's best year. As for Konerko, Brad Fullmer is the poor man's version of him.

Bob

faneidde
10-29-2003, 07:43 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Based on your logic, the Sox should be trading Loiaza, Magglio, and Lee.

Seriously, the Sox are trying to win next season. These contracts are holding the Sox back in two ways 1. they eat up a lot of payroll and 2. both players underperformed. The thing you need to remember is when both players are having their best years, they're still not great players, just over hyped.

I can easily find a substitue on the FA mkt to substitute for Koch's best year. As for Konerko, Brad Fullmer is the poor man's version of him.

Bob
Yes, that is exactly who they should trade if they are looking to move payroll. The Sox can either get rid of payroll or totally commit to winning next year. Its impossible to do both. Koch had injury problems this past year, so maybe if the organization feels he will not recover and someone is willing to take on his salary the Sox should dump him for nothing, but trading Konerko right now would be the worst thing the Sox could do. Konerko had a terrible first half and a poor end to the seaon, but he has had a couple very solid years and he is a leader in the clubhouse. For all PK did bad last year, he only struck out 50 times. He's also only one year removed from a seaons where he hit .300 and drove in 100 runs.

I also question that you could easily find a replacement on the free agent market to replace Koch's best year. I'd like to know where'd you find this guy to replace the season that Koch had last year. 11 wins, 44 saves, a 3.27 ERA, 1 K/inning, and a .214 BAA. I know he had a bad year last year, but unless you're willing to shell out some serious cash (like say the 6 mil a year Koch is due) there is no way you are going to find a player to put up those kind of numbers.

I agree that Konerko is not a great player, but up until last year he had been a very good player for 4 years. Take his worst numbers of the previous 4 years in all offensive categories and he still bats .282 with 21 HR and 81 RBI. I know he's slow and has developed a tendacy for the GIDP, but so has Mags and he is due to make a lot more money this season and might walk for nothing after the year.

Gumshoe
10-29-2003, 08:06 AM
Originally posted by faneidde
Yes, that is exactly who they should trade if they are looking to move payroll. The Sox can either get rid of payroll or totally commit to winning next year. Its impossible to do both. Koch had injury problems this past year, so maybe if the organization feels he will not recover and someone is willing to take on his salary the Sox should dump him for nothing, but trading Konerko right now would be the worst thing the Sox could do. Konerko had a terrible first half and a poor end to the seaon, but he has had a couple very solid years and he is a leader in the clubhouse. For all PK did bad last year, he only struck out 50 times. He's also only one year removed from a seaons where he hit .300 and drove in 100 runs.

I also question that you could easily find a replacement on the free agent market to replace Koch's best year. I'd like to know where'd you find this guy to replace the season that Koch had last year. 11 wins, 44 saves, a 3.27 ERA, 1 K/inning, and a .214 BAA. I know he had a bad year last year, but unless you're willing to shell out some serious cash (like say the 6 mil a year Koch is due) there is no way you are going to find a player to put up those kind of numbers.

I agree that Konerko is not a great player, but up until last year he had been a very good player for 4 years. Take his worst numbers of the previous 4 years in all offensive categories and he still bats .282 with 21 HR and 81 RBI. I know he's slow and has developed a tendacy for the GIDP, but so has Mags and he is due to make a lot more money this season and might walk for nothing after the year.

Well said. I believe fully that we can win a lot easier without Koch, because even if he has a decent year next year, it won't be up to what we want of him (esp. when we have other relievers who are paid nothing that do SO MUCH BETTER).

The real point is that Paul has been solid and contrary to Jeremy's belief that Paul will be totally unproductive next year (and eat 6 MIL), the team needs him and he has a chance to be MUCH MORE INFLUENTIAL to our winning success than Koch ever has. Why can't Paul return to form? There is way more to suggest that he'll contribute to our overall winning, is my point.

Furthermore, yes, other guys are cheaper, but Paul isn't AVERAGE only at 1B. He's better than Daubach, he's better than Fullmer, and he's better than Kevin Millar, Ortiz, Randall Simon, etc. Yes, it's opinion, but he can play 1B above average AND HE CAN THROW.

I'm done for now
Respect.

Gumshoe

soxtalker
10-29-2003, 08:08 AM
Originally posted by faneidde
Yes, that is exactly who they should trade if they are looking to move payroll. The Sox can either get rid of payroll or totally commit to winning next year. Its impossible to do both. Koch had injury problems this past year, so maybe if the organization feels he will not recover and someone is willing to take on his salary the Sox should dump him for nothing, but trading Konerko right now would be the worst thing the Sox could do. Konerko had a terrible first half and a poor end to the seaon, but he has had a couple very solid years and he is a leader in the clubhouse. For all PK did bad last year, he only struck out 50 times. He's also only one year removed from a seaons where he hit .300 and drove in 100 runs.

I also question that you could easily find a replacement on the free agent market to replace Koch's best year. I'd like to know where'd you find this guy to replace the season that Koch had last year. 11 wins, 44 saves, a 3.27 ERA, 1 K/inning, and a .214 BAA. I know he had a bad year last year, but unless you're willing to shell out some serious cash (like say the 6 mil a year Koch is due) there is no way you are going to find a player to put up those kind of numbers.

I agree that Konerko is not a great player, but up until last year he had been a very good player for 4 years. Take his worst numbers of the previous 4 years in all offensive categories and he still bats .282 with 21 HR and 81 RBI. I know he's slow and has developed a tendacy for the GIDP, but so has Mags and he is due to make a lot more money this season and might walk for nothing after the year.

I hope that KW takes much of your attitude into his discussions with other teams. If many of us on this board went into a negotiation with a team like the Mets who might want Koch, we'd lose out in the negotiation big time.

ssang
10-29-2003, 09:53 AM
For anyone who actually wants to keep Konerko and thinks he can still service the Sox in a positive way.............WAKE UP! Konerko flat-out sucks. Let's look at his positives first :

1) He can occasionaly hit a homerun
2) Every now and then he gets a basehit

Okay, and here are the negatives for Konerko.

1) He is THE double play machine
2) He strikes out too often (especailly with men on-base)
3) If he isn't striking out or grounding into a DP then you can be
sure he is POPPING OUT (Stop popping out....you suck!)
4) He is slower than Ron Santo with no legs!
5) He is a below average defender
6) He is killing our payroll by having 6 mil a season wasted on a
guy who should be relagated to platooning or pinch-hitting

Clearly, Paul Konerko is the type of player who hurts your team A LOT more than he helps it. Successful teams do not play players like Konerko on a regular basis. He clearly needs to go

AsInWreck
10-29-2003, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by faneidde

I also question that you could easily find a replacement on the free agent market to replace Koch's best year. I'd like to know where'd you find this guy to replace the season that Koch had last year. 11 wins, 44 saves, a 3.27 ERA, 1 K/inning, and a .214 BAA. I know he had a bad year last year, but unless you're willing to shell out some serious cash (like say the 6 mil a year Koch is due) there is no way you are going to find a player to put up those kind of numbers.

.

Foulke, Guardado, Hawkins, Nelson, Hasegawa all could most likely be had for less than 6.375 mil per, and I'd rather have any of them. I'm guessing they could probably be had for at 5 mil or less, in fact. I'd rather keep Gordon at an overpaid 5 mil than keep Koch as well.

Get a better reliever, save a little money, and pick up a couple prospects or a spare part, sounds good to me.

MHOUSE
10-29-2003, 12:05 PM
Koch for Royce Ring anyone? Who was mentioned coming our way in this NYM deal?

RichH55
10-29-2003, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by faneidde
Yes, that is exactly who they should trade if they are looking to move payroll. The Sox can either get rid of payroll or totally commit to winning next year. Its impossible to do both. Koch had injury problems this past year, so maybe if the organization feels he will not recover and someone is willing to take on his salary the Sox should dump him for nothing, but trading Konerko right now would be the worst thing the Sox could do. Konerko had a terrible first half and a poor end to the seaon, but he has had a couple very solid years and he is a leader in the clubhouse. For all PK did bad last year, he only struck out 50 times. He's also only one year removed from a seaons where he hit .300 and drove in 100 runs.

I also question that you could easily find a replacement on the free agent market to replace Koch's best year. I'd like to know where'd you find this guy to replace the season that Koch had last year. 11 wins, 44 saves, a 3.27 ERA, 1 K/inning, and a .214 BAA. I know he had a bad year last year, but unless you're willing to shell out some serious cash (like say the 6 mil a year Koch is due) there is no way you are going to find a player to put up those kind of numbers.

I agree that Konerko is not a great player, but up until last year he had been a very good player for 4 years. Take his worst numbers of the previous 4 years in all offensive categories and he still bats .282 with 21 HR and 81 RBI. I know he's slow and has developed a tendacy for the GIDP, but so has Mags and he is due to make a lot more money this season and might walk for nothing after the year.

And when will Koch's value rise? Both are overpaid for their production, even assuming it goes back up

With Koch...he is on a one year deal at this point, if his value rises we might get a prospect at the trade deadline....with Marte looking great Koch is superflous anyway, so that 6.35 can be spent elsewhere....I understand the point about buy low, sell high...but you have to worry about the big picture too, and there is also an old financial maxim that you have to know when to cut your losses

faneidde
10-29-2003, 07:18 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
And when will Koch's value rise? Both are overpaid for their production, even assuming it goes back up

With Koch...he is on a one year deal at this point, if his value rises we might get a prospect at the trade deadline....with Marte looking great Koch is superflous anyway, so that 6.35 can be spent elsewhere....I understand the point about buy low, sell high...but you have to worry about the big picture too, and there is also an old financial maxim that you have to know when to cut your losses
I don't totally disagree that Koch should be traded. I think if the Sox get anything in return then they should go for it, but I also have the feeling he'll pitch well next year. My main objection is to people yelling to dump Konerko for nothing.

duke of dorwood
10-29-2003, 09:59 PM
With Gordon sure to leave, he has to stay

MRKARNO
10-29-2003, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
With Gordon sure to leave, he has to stay

Well If Koch is gone then Gordon isnt sure to leave by any means

RichH55
10-29-2003, 10:19 PM
Originally posted by faneidde
I don't totally disagree that Koch should be traded. I think if the Sox get anything in return then they should go for it, but I also have the feeling he'll pitch well next year. My main objection is to people yelling to dump Konerko for nothing.
Actually if I had to chose who to dump it would be Konerko in a second over Koch

What A) makes you think Konerko will come back strong? That one good month?

B) Since I think you can make a case PK will rebound at least somewhat, rebound to what? He wasn't an 8 million a year guy when he put up an 857 OPS and when the market was better for players....he certainly is not now

C) If you dump him now then his contract is gone, which is different than being a sunk cost

D) IF Konerko rebounds how much would his numbers beat a Fullmer or a Daubauch(sic) by(very important question here)

E) Depending on your answer from D, would that mean 7 million? I think you could spend that 7 million more efficiently and help the team more, even if PK was back to his average numbers



If we could dump Konerko in apure salary dump..that would be great....If we have to take on a salary (ala Jeff Weaver) then it becomes a ?

If KW can dump Koch and PK in the offseason...that would help a ton, and maybe quiet down some of his critics

34 Inch Stick
10-30-2003, 10:30 AM
How about the three previous years where he improved in just about every category each year. Out of the 2 the best choice to rebound is Paully. When Paul was on the offense was incredible

maurice
10-30-2003, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
How about the three previous years where he improved in just about every category each year. Out of the 2 the best choice to rebound is Paully.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but your reasoning is wrong. If anything, PK performed at a relatively consistent level over those three years. He was not improving.

PK always has been a streaky hitter. Unfortunately, his cold streaks got MUCH longer and his hot streaks came less frequently. Given his career performance, he will bounce back ext season, IMHO. Unfortunately, he never was worth the money they gave him.

I have very little confidence that Koch ever will approach his 2002 numbers but hope very much that the Mets disagree with me.

Paulwny
10-30-2003, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by maurice


I have very little confidence that Koch ever will approach his 2002 numbers but hope very much that the Mets disagree with me.

Talk about trading a player when his value is high, kudos to Toronto, they guessed right on Wild Bill.

Foulke You
10-30-2003, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by Paulwny
Talk about trading a player when his value is high, kudos to Toronto, they guessed right on Wild Bill.

It is worrisome to keep a guy like Koch. The Blue Jays and A's seemed to know something we didn't. If you can move him do it. The bottom line is he is too much of a wild (no pun intended) card right now to depend on as your closer or setup man.

This is a guy who went from throwing an "effectively wild" 99-100mph to an "ineffectively wild" 92mph. A salary at 6.5 million is a ton of money to spend on a reliever you aren't even sure can find that extra 7 mph that was missing on his fastball. If you can find a team willing to take on that salary then it is smarter to let us spend the money on a more reliable pitcher like Latroy Hawkins or Hasegawa. You want to enter the season with as few question marks as possible. Koch would be a HUGE question mark if he stays.

gosox41
10-30-2003, 07:49 PM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
How about the three previous years where he improved in just about every category each year. Out of the 2 the best choice to rebound is Paully. When Paul was on the offense was incredible

You can say that about any major league hitter that has been 'on' in their career. The fact is Konerko isn't 'on' all that much and his lows are way too low.

His OPS has been relatively consistent from 2000-2002.

Bob

faneidde
10-31-2003, 12:38 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
You can say that about any major league hitter that has been 'on' in their career. The fact is Konerko isn't 'on' all that much and his lows are way too low.

His OPS has been relatively consistent from 2000-2002.

Bob
He had one bad year, why does everyone want to get rid of him?

RichH55
10-31-2003, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by faneidde
He had one bad year, why does everyone want to get rid of him?

Quote:
Originally posted by faneidde
I don't totally disagree that Koch should be traded. I think if the Sox get anything in return then they should go for it, but I also have the feeling he'll pitch well next year. My main objection is to people yelling to dump Konerko for nothing.


Actually if I had to chose who to dump it would be Konerko in a second over Koch

What A) makes you think Konerko will come back strong? That one good month?

B) Since I think you can make a case PK will rebound at least somewhat, rebound to what? He wasn't an 8 million a year guy when he put up an 857 OPS and when the market was better for players....he certainly is not now

C) If you dump him now then his contract is gone, which is different than being a sunk cost

D) IF Konerko rebounds how much would his numbers beat a Fullmer or a Daubauch(sic) by(very important question here)

E) Depending on your answer from D, would that mean 7 million? I think you could spend that 7 million more efficiently and help the team more, even if PK was back to his average numbers



If we could dump Konerko in apure salary dump..that would be great....If we have to take on a salary (ala Jeff Weaver) then it becomes a ?

If KW can dump Koch and PK in the offseason...that would help a ton, and maybe quiet down some of his critics



PLEASE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS

gosox41
11-01-2003, 08:45 AM
Originally posted by faneidde
He had one bad year, why does everyone want to get rid of him?

Because even at his best, PK is a statistically average offensive first basemen. He is overpaid for those numbers he put up in 2000-2002 when comapred to other first basemen.

If PK played SS or catcher, I wouldn't complain about the slary as much. But finding a good hitting first baseman is easy. Even if the Sox signed Fullmer, who is slightly worse then PK 2000-2002 it would still be a good move because he would be a lot cheaper and the Sox can apply money elsewhere. I say that assuming PK is moved.

For example, would you rather have PK at $8 mill. per year if he hits like he did in 2002. Or Brad Fullmer for about $1 mill. and a sign a Sidney Ponson type starter for $6-7 mill? Which makes the team better?

Bob

rmusacch
11-01-2003, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Because even at his best, PK is a statistically average offensive first basemen. He is overpaid for those numbers he put up in 2000-2002 when comapred to other first basemen.

If PK played SS or catcher, I wouldn't complain about the slary as much. But finding a good hitting first baseman is easy. Even if the Sox signed Fullmer, who is slightly worse then PK 2000-2002 it would still be a good move because he would be a lot cheaper and the Sox can apply money elsewhere. I say that assuming PK is moved.

For example, would you rather have PK at $8 mill. per year if he hits like he did in 2002. Or Brad Fullmer for about $1 mill. and a sign a Sidney Ponson type starter for $6-7 mill? Which makes the team better?

Bob

I think that you are dreaming if you think that you are going to get Ponson for that cheap.

faneidde
11-01-2003, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by RichH55
Quote:
Originally posted by faneidde
I don't totally disagree that Koch should be traded. I think if the Sox get anything in return then they should go for it, but I also have the feeling he'll pitch well next year. My main objection is to people yelling to dump Konerko for nothing.


Actually if I had to chose who to dump it would be Konerko in a second over Koch

What A) makes you think Konerko will come back strong? That one good month?

B) Since I think you can make a case PK will rebound at least somewhat, rebound to what? He wasn't an 8 million a year guy when he put up an 857 OPS and when the market was better for players....he certainly is not now

C) If you dump him now then his contract is gone, which is different than being a sunk cost

D) IF Konerko rebounds how much would his numbers beat a Fullmer or a Daubauch(sic) by(very important question here)

E) Depending on your answer from D, would that mean 7 million? I think you could spend that 7 million more efficiently and help the team more, even if PK was back to his average numbers



If we could dump Konerko in apure salary dump..that would be great....If we have to take on a salary (ala Jeff Weaver) then it becomes a ?

If KW can dump Koch and PK in the offseason...that would help a ton, and maybe quiet down some of his critics



PLEASE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS

A) The fact that he was on a gradually upward trend until last year. Frank had a couple bad years in the late 90s early 00s, good thing we didn't get rid of him.

B) I agree. Hes a 4 mil per year guy at least though.

C) That is a statement, not a question.

D) Daubach, are you kidding me? As bad as Paulie was the first half, the reason he played is because Daubach was worse, a lot worse. Also, as slow as PK is running the bases, at least he covers more than the spot he is standing in at first base, unlike Daubach. Fullmer is ok, but very injury prone and he has benefitted from some help behind him in the line-up over his career (ie Delgado).

E) Yes, but the Sox have already paid him, and giving away players just to get rid of contracts is not how to build a contender. Here's a question for you, do you honestly believe the Sox would take that 6 mil extra and use it effectively? Or do you think they'd bring back both Jaime Navaro and Todd Ritchie.

Jeff Weaver's contract is a lot bigger than Konerko's I believe, plus if you think PK was bad last year Weaver was just brutal.

Dumping those two guys would only help
A) If the Sox get some players in return or
B) If they use the money wisely and not waste it.

RichH55
11-01-2003, 07:56 PM
Originally posted by faneidde
A) The fact that he was on a gradually upward trend until last year. Frank had a couple bad years in the late 90s early 00s, good thing we didn't get rid of him.

B) I agree. Hes a 4 mil per year guy at least though.

C) That is a statement, not a question.

D) Daubach, are you kidding me? As bad as Paulie was the first half, the reason he played is because Daubach was worse, a lot worse. Also, as slow as PK is running the bases, at least he covers more than the spot he is standing in at first base, unlike Daubach. Fullmer is ok, but very injury prone and he has benefitted from some help behind him in the line-up over his career (ie Delgado).

E) Yes, but the Sox have already paid him, and giving away players just to get rid of contracts is not how to build a contender. Here's a question for you, do you honestly believe the Sox would take that 6 mil extra and use it effectively? Or do you think they'd bring back both Jaime Navaro and Todd Ritchie.

Jeff Weaver's contract is a lot bigger than Konerko's I believe, plus if you think PK was bad last year Weaver was just brutal.

Dumping those two guys would only help
A) If the Sox get some players in return or
B) If they use the money wisely and not waste it.

Regarding E ---> See my C --> It is NOT a sunk cost...they have not already paid him, thats the whole point in trading him...If PK is gone, you don't have to pay him

I don't think you can help but spend that 6 million between PK and a Fullmer type more efficiently...even if it only means being about to keep Mags or sign a 5th starter

For a team that a 70 million payroll is the upper limit of what we can reasonably hope....8 million is alot...and whats with the Navarro mention?

I understand because you have the money, doesnt mean you will spend it wisely, but how is spending good money after bad, when you can get similar results for a lesser price good business?

RichH55
11-01-2003, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by faneidde
A) The fact that he was on a gradually upward trend until last year. Frank had a couple bad years in the late 90s early 00s, good thing we didn't get rid of him.

B) I agree. Hes a 4 mil per year guy at least though.

C) That is a statement, not a question.

D) Daubach, are you kidding me? As bad as Paulie was the first half, the reason he played is because Daubach was worse, a lot worse. Also, as slow as PK is running the bases, at least he covers more than the spot he is standing in at first base, unlike Daubach. Fullmer is ok, but very injury prone and he has benefitted from some help behind him in the line-up over his career (ie Delgado).

E) Yes, but the Sox have already paid him, and giving away players just to get rid of contracts is not how to build a contender. Here's a question for you, do you honestly believe the Sox would take that 6 mil extra and use it effectively? Or do you think they'd bring back both Jaime Navaro and Todd Ritchie.

Jeff Weaver's contract is a lot bigger than Konerko's I believe, plus if you think PK was bad last year Weaver was just brutal.

Dumping those two guys would only help
A) If the Sox get some players in return or
B) If they use the money wisely and not waste it.

Another thing: Besides the fact that I don't want to debate how important 1b Defense is(it isnt)...PK is not a good defensive 1B, and that isnt going to get better as his hip gets worse and he gets older


I'm glad PK gives a good soundbyte, because he's counterproductive in almost any capacity

naprvllesoxfan
11-02-2003, 11:51 AM
What's wrong with PK's hip? I thought he was just slow from all the years he was a catcher.

crector
11-02-2003, 02:47 PM
Konerko was originally a catcher? I didn't know that. If thats the case, perhaps we could put him in that position again and in that way make maximum use of his strong arm.

StepsInSC
11-02-2003, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by crector
Konerko was originally a catcher? I didn't know that. If thats the case, perhaps we could put him in that position again and in that way make maximum use of his strong arm.

With the Dodgers yes. The thought of him playing there now makes me shudder.

TDog
11-02-2003, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by crector
Konerko was originally a catcher? I didn't know that. If thats the case, perhaps we could put him in that position again and in that way make maximum use of his strong arm.

When LaMarr Hoyt was being drafted back in the 1970s, each of the five teams looking at him considered him for a different position. Only the Yankees considered him a pitcher. Most amateur players played a lot of positions before making baseball a career. Many played everywhere when they were growing up. That doesn't mean you would want to put Hoyt in at shortstop on a Sunday that he wasn't pitching to give the regular guys as refreshing day off.

gosox41
11-02-2003, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by rmusacch
I think that you are dreaming if you think that you are going to get Ponson for that cheap.

We'll see. What do you think he'd cost?

Bob

maurice
11-03-2003, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by faneidde (in page two of this thread)
A) The fact that he was on a gradually upward trend until last year.

Originally posted by maurice (in page one of this thread)
PK performed at a relatively consistent level over those three years. He was not improving.