PDA

View Full Version : Rumors that Mets are interested in Koch


DirtySouthsider
11-06-2003, 08:09 AM
According to the N.Y. Post the Mets are very interested in aquiring Koch. Koch's ex-pitching coach with the A's is currently working with the Mets. Koch had his best year with this guy so I guess they think they can recapture that form.
It doesn't even matter what we would get in return......just get rid of him!

Fisk Fan
11-06-2003, 08:14 AM
I say.........Good riddance to bad rubbish!

thepaulbowski
11-06-2003, 08:38 AM
We'll trade them Koch for bag of used baseballs, sounds like a good deal to me. :)

Gumshoe
11-06-2003, 09:23 AM
I'd trade Koch for all the brains that defended KW in that Foulke trade ... surely, I'd try him for ****e for brains

MRKARNO
11-06-2003, 10:05 AM
What if we could get Trachsel in return?

I think he would be a very serviceable back of the rotation starter. He's coming off 2 straight years with a sub 4.00 ERA. He does make 3 mil, but that's 3.375 mil less than Koch and we have a reliable back of the rotation starter. If we could also get Ponson I think we'd have a solid rotations

Buehrle
Ponson
Loaiza
Trachsel
Garland

Not hugely impressive, but I bet this rotation would have close to the most quality starts in the majors.

hold2dibber
11-06-2003, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
What if we could get Trachsel in return?

I think he would be a very serviceable back of the rotation starter. He's coming off 2 straight years with a sub 4.00 ERA. He does make 3 mil, but that's 3.375 mil less than Koch and we have a reliable back of the rotation starter. If we could also get Ponson I think we'd have a solid rotations

Buehrle
Ponson
Loaiza
Trachsel
Garland

Not hugely impressive, but I bet this rotation would have close to the most quality starts in the majors.

That would be absolutely perfect. The only problem is that if the Sox deal Koch, they really need to re-sign Gordon (or Foulke) because they'll be a dearth of late inning right handers in the pen. I feel pretty comfortable with Wright, Rauch, and/or Ginter taking middle relief duties, but they'll need a right hander for the end of games, be it a closer or a set-up man for Marte. If they can't deal Koch, they just have to cross their fingers and hope Koch returns to form.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-06-2003, 10:13 AM
TRADE HIM!

TRADE HIM!

TRADE HIM!

Toss in Paul Konerko as a freebie, too!

This is the best news I've heard in days!

:gulp:

soxtalker
11-06-2003, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by DirtySouthsider
According to the N.Y. Post the Mets are very interested in aquiring Koch. Koch's ex-pitching coach with the A's is currently working with the Mets. Koch had his best year with this guy so I guess they think they can recapture that form.
It doesn't even matter what we would get in return......just get rid of him!

If the ex-pitching coach thinks that he can recapture the form that Koch had, that represents considerable value to the Mets. It also means that KW should look at it in a similar manner. Now, I do want us to trade him. However, I also care about getting something in return. If Koch does turn it around, we'll all be furious. I'd be quite happy to take prospects as well as salary. Perhaps it would even be possible to work out one of those player-to-be-named-later trades in which the compensation is dependent on Koch's performance. Question is -- what are the Mets willing / able to give up?

santo=dorf
11-06-2003, 10:26 AM
Why do they want this guy and his contract so badly? Did they not learn anything from Benitez? As much as I would like to see us dump him and sign Hasegawa, I would hate to see him have a break out year. These kinda things usually blow up in our faces. Any other thoughts on this?

cheeses_h_rice
11-06-2003, 10:27 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
TRADE HIM!

TRADE HIM!

TRADE HIM!

Toss in Paul Konerko as a freebie, too!

This is the best news I've heard in days!

:gulp:

This past weekend, I was travelling around Death Valley with a friend from NYC who's a huge Mets fan, and when I told him this rumor, he just about had a stroke. The doom in his voice reminded me of a certain team's fans.

:ohno

You mean us?

StepsInSC
11-06-2003, 11:40 AM
I'm definitely on the "get rid of Koch" bandwagon, because of his high salary. But say he did perform the way he did in 2002 with Oakland, next year. Would he be worth that money as a closer?

I think its just that after being a Sox fan for so long, you assume the worst is going to happen with every little move. I.E., we'll get rid of Koch and then he'll become a bonafide closer again, ala Foulke.

soxtalker
11-06-2003, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by StepsInSC
I'm definitely on the "get rid of Koch" bandwagon, because of his high salary. But say he did perform the way he did in 2002 with Oakland, next year. Would he be worth that money as a closer?

I think its just that after being a Sox fan for so long, you assume the worst is going to happen with every little move. I.E., we'll get rid of Koch and then he'll become a bonafide closer again, ala Foulke.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, I think that the Sox and Mets can work around such issues by making the compensation somewhat dependent on Koch's performance. I've noticed that a lot of fans tend to react almost exclusively to a player's recent performance. Dumping Koch and Konerko for "buckets of balls" may express and relieve some of the frustration we feel over their recent performances, but it also ignores the potential value they may have if they rebound.

CubKilla
11-06-2003, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by santo=dorf
As much as I would like to see us dump him and sign Hasegawa, I would hate to see him have a break out year. These kinda things usually blow up in our faces. Any other thoughts on this?

Koch is done. His arm is dead and his 91-93 MPH fastball has no movement. KW should deal this mistake ASAP if possible, free up some salary, and let the chips fall where they may.

kraut83
11-06-2003, 11:50 AM
Would this be a salary swap, and if so, who are some of their overpaid dead weight (Besides fat Mo)?

SoxxoS
11-06-2003, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by CubKilla
Koch is done. His arm is dead and his 91-93 MPH fastball has no movement. KW should deal this mistake ASAP if possible, free up some salary, and let the chips fall where they may.

That doesn't mean he can't EVER get his velosity back. He didn't have surgery recently, like Parque.

That being said he can get out. If we can get Trachsel, that would just be phenomenal. Can't have enough starting pitching.

MRKARNO
11-06-2003, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by kraut83
Would this be a salary swap, and if so, who are some of their overpaid dead weight (Besides fat Mo)?

Cedeno: 2 more years 10 mil
Floyd: 3 more year 19.5 mil
Glavine: 2 or 3 years 24 mil or 27.5 mil
Leiter: 1 or 2 years 10 or 18 mil
Piazza: 2 years 30 mil
Stanton: 2 years 7 mil (no trade clause)
Trachsel: 1 or 2 years 5 or 10 mil
Vaughn: 1 or 2 years 17 or 29 mil

Trachsel would be the best option for us, though a little pricey at 5 mil a year, but that's probably only a little over what he'd get on the open market. Worse comes to worse, we take a prospect package, and I'm sure we wouldnt mind that in exchange for Koch


just a funny line from the article: "The plan is to make a run at White Sox reliever Billy Koch"

As if someone else wanted him

thepaulbowski
11-06-2003, 12:20 PM
I would prefer to have the Koch of old and not trade him, but I don't have confidence he can regain his old form. There's no reason to keep bashing KW over the trade, it's done-get over it. At the time we were trading for the Rolaids Relief Man of the Year, and most people were excited. If we can get something in return from the Mets, I think we should trade him & use that money to sign Flash & Sullivan.

MisterB
11-06-2003, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by kraut83
Would this be a salary swap, and if so, who are some of their overpaid dead weight (Besides fat Mo)?

If Boston Gammons is to be belived (yeah, I know) they might be trying to dump Roger Cedeno. He's due $5M for each of the next 2 years, is capable of playing CF better than Rowand or Harris, has always been a good basestealer, and (since it looks like we're not getting a leadoff-type hitter at SS or 2B) can fill the leadoff spot until someone better can be found.

Trachsel is a possibility, he's definitely making more than a middle-of-the-road picther should ($5M for '04 and a $5M option for '05 that vests if he throws 160 ip in '04). If Kenny gets a legitimate top half of the rotation guy as well that means the likes of Wright, Rauch, or Adkins can fill some bullpen spots.

MarkEdward
11-06-2003, 12:41 PM
Mr. Karno already pointed out the Mets' large contracts. Out of these, I think Cedeno and Vaughn would be available for Koch. Wilpon (Mets' owner) loves Leiter, Duquette (Mets' GM) loves Trachsel, Floyd and Pizza are too valuable, Stanton has a no-trade clause, and Glavine is too expensive.

Getting Cedeno for Koch may not be that bad. We can then platoon Cedeno with Rowand, although it won't be a very good platoon.

I'd go after Trachsel, except I don't want to see five hour baseball games.

SoxFan78
11-06-2003, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by thepaulbowski
We'll trade them Koch for bag of used baseballs, sounds like a good deal to me. :)

I say hell with the baseballs. Just have the sox drop him off at Shea and leave him there. His place off this team is good enough compensation for me!

voodoochile
11-06-2003, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by StepsInSC
I'm definitely on the "get rid of Koch" bandwagon, because of his high salary. But say he did perform the way he did in 2002 with Oakland, next year. Would he be worth that money as a closer?

I think its just that after being a Sox fan for so long, you assume the worst is going to happen with every little move. I.E., we'll get rid of Koch and then he'll become a bonafide closer again, ala Foulke.

No closer is worth that kind of money, period.

jeremyb1
11-06-2003, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
If Boston Gammons is to be belived (yeah, I know) they might be trying to dump Roger Cedeno. He's due $5M for each of the next 2 years, is capable of playing CF better than Rowand or Harris, has always been a good basestealer, and (since it looks like we're not getting a leadoff-type hitter at SS or 2B) can fill the leadoff spot until someone better can be found.

Trachsel is a possibility, he's definitely making more than a middle-of-the-road picther should ($5M for '04 and a $5M option for '05 that vests if he throws 160 ip in '04). If Kenny gets a legitimate top half of the rotation guy as well that means the likes of Wright, Rauch, or Adkins can fill some bullpen spots.

Cedeno is actually one of the worst outfielders in baseball in leftfield. He routinely misplays balls. There's no way he's better at CF than anyone we have at this position in the organization.

KW, has to be begging the Mets to take Koch off his hands after commiting 5 million to Valentin. Unless JR is raising the payroll a good 10 million dollars we're looking at having to move major salary in a few deals this offseason. Trading Koch for Cedeno who has more money left on his deal wouldn't make any sense unless the Mets are willing to take on another player or pay a significant part of the remainder of Cedeno's deal.

hold2dibber
11-06-2003, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
Getting Cedeno for Koch may not be that bad. We can then platoon Cedeno with Rowand, although it won't be a very good platoon.

Ick. I'd rather keep Koch and hope he rebounds than have Cedeno on the team. He's absolutely horrid - and he is owed more than Koch.

KingXerxes
11-06-2003, 01:21 PM
I can't believe anybody would want Koch straight up, he washed up and way overpaid. My bet would be that he would go over to the Mets - along with either our best prospect(s), or with another high priced player (Ordonez/Lee) and I don't suspect the White Sox would get too much in return. That is the only way Williams is ever going to free up any salary for the White Sox.

MRKARNO
11-06-2003, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
Mr. Karno already pointed out the Mets' large contracts. Out of these, I think Cedeno and Vaughn would be available for Koch. Wilpon (Mets' owner) loves Leiter, Duquette (Mets' GM) loves Trachsel, Floyd and Pizza are too valuable, Stanton has a no-trade clause, and Glavine is too expensive.

Getting Cedeno for Koch may not be that bad. We can then platoon Cedeno with Rowand, although it won't be a very good platoon.

I'd go after Trachsel, except I don't want to see five hour baseball games.

If we're not getting starting pitching in return, I'd rather just get a prospect package in return

RichH55
11-06-2003, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
If Boston Gammons is to be belived (yeah, I know) they might be trying to dump Roger Cedeno. He's due $5M for each of the next 2 years, is capable of playing CF better than Rowand or Harris, has always been a good basestealer, and (since it looks like we're not getting a leadoff-type hitter at SS or 2B) can fill the leadoff spot until someone better can be found.

Trachsel is a possibility, he's definitely making more than a middle-of-the-road picther should ($5M for '04 and a $5M option for '05 that vests if he throws 160 ip in '04). If Kenny gets a legitimate top half of the rotation guy as well that means the likes of Wright, Rauch, or Adkins can fill some bullpen spots.

I'f rather have have Koch than Cedeno....at least if Koch is terrible, you can hide it....Cedeno is the worst OF who wasn't playing in Oakland last year.....They have a saying about his speed "He runs until they tag him out"


Just terrible.....

Koch for Trachsel is a 3 minute conversation...deal done

soxtalker
11-06-2003, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
I can't believe anybody would want Koch straight up, he washed up and way overpaid. My bet would be that he would go over to the Mets - along with either our best prospect(s), or with another high priced player (Ordonez/Lee) and I don't suspect the White Sox would get too much in return. That is the only way Williams is ever going to free up any salary for the White Sox.

You're looking at it from the perspective of a frustrated Sox fan. From what we know of the Mets situation, the pitching coach had great success with Koch in the past. So, they do not necessarily look at it with anything close to the same perspective.

thepaulbowski
11-06-2003, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
If we're not getting starting pitching in return, I'd rather just get a prospect package in return

I would think the Mets are trying unload some salary in return, so I don't think they would just give up prospects. I think the only prospects they have are the ones the Sox sent them anyways.

SoxxoS
11-06-2003, 01:59 PM
You know, this whole thing would be a lot easier if...

:sellreinsy

ChiSoxBobette
11-06-2003, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by DirtySouthsider
According to the N.Y. Post the Mets are very interested in aquiring Koch. Koch's ex-pitching coach with the A's is currently working with the Mets. Koch had his best year with this guy so I guess they think they can recapture that form.
It doesn't even matter what we would get in return......just get rid of him!

How about trading him to the mets saving whatever money they do on that then trading Konerko or C.Lee saving whatever money from that and then we bring back Foulke.

batmanZoSo
11-06-2003, 02:46 PM
The Mets want Koch?

Halle-freakin-luja!

Today is the beginning of the rest of my life.

From now on, things are going to be different.

But don't just give him away. Take the Mets to the cleaners...relatively that is, all factors considered. We gave up Foulke to get him, so the way to run a team smart is to get something, anything of value in return. If they offer C- prospects and we have to pick up salary, I'd just as soon keep him and avoid the additional insult of watching him succeed for another team. And don't say that can't happen...this is the Sox we're talkin about.

soxtalker
11-06-2003, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
The Mets want Koch?

Halle-freakin-luja!

Today is the beginning of the rest of my life.

From now on, things are going to be different.

But don't just give him away. Take the Mets to the cleaners...relatively that is, all factors considered. We gave up Foulke to get him, so the way to run a team smart is to get something, anything of value in return. If they offer C- prospects and we have to pick up salary, I'd just as soon keep him and avoid the additional insult of watching him succeed for another team. And don't say that can't happen...this is the Sox we're talkin about.

I know that this may sound strange, but, I guess that I'd just as soon not be perceived as "taking the Mets to the cleaners". KW is going to have to make a lot of smart trades in the future, and I'd rather that the other GM's view it that they aren't getting snookered. If the Mets want Koch, I hope that KW can work a deal in which we get something we value in return. From the postings on this thread, I'm guessing that he may have to try something more complex (e.g., a 3-way like he did with Colon).

voodoochile
11-06-2003, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
I know that this may sound strange, but, I guess that I'd just as soon not be perceived as "taking the Mets to the cleaners". KW is going to have to make a lot of smart trades in the future, and I'd rather that the other GM's view it that they aren't getting snookered. If the Mets want Koch, I hope that KW can work a deal in which we get something we value in return. From the postings on this thread, I'm guessing that he may have to try something more complex (e.g., a 3-way like he did with Colon).

If KW takes the Mets to the cleaners it won't be a problem for KW but for the Mets GM.

Every GM tries to get the better of every trade they make. It would have exactly zero impact on future trades unless KW could be proven to be lying about a player's health.

batmanZoSo
11-06-2003, 03:05 PM
soxtalker,

What he said /\.

I don't mean "screw them over," yeah, that wouldn't help our image, but just get the most you can. Try to get more than the norm for this kind of trade.

SoxxoS
11-06-2003, 03:05 PM
Can we get Royce Ring back?

voodoochile
11-06-2003, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Can we get Royce Ring back?

Was that supposed to be in teal?

Why do you want to trade for a minor league reliever?

ondafarm
11-06-2003, 03:10 PM
Folks,
trading Koch not is not a good idea at all. Like most relievers Koch has up and down season, as in up one year, down the next. His down year was exacerbated by a bone head manager (Manuel.) I know it is not a popular opinion but leave Koch alone and let him pitch this year. He should be back to his old form. Howe severely over-used Koch in 2002 and the 2003 season was the result. If he is traded now, then that would mean we've bought high and sold low on a normally solid reliever (when propoerly managed.)

Gumshoe
11-06-2003, 04:05 PM
of the matter is that we need to dump salary and closers are WAY overrated, especially ones that throw their arms out. Get rid of Koch for ONLY his salary, I don't care. Keep Sullivan, go with Marte to close, and we are fine. No need to waste money on Gordon. Way to big a risk.

Gumshoe

maurice
11-06-2003, 04:39 PM
One way of interpreting it is that Koch had a good year followed by a bad year followed by a good year followed by a bad year, and can be expected to return to form in 2004. A second way of interpreting it is that Koch had one good year out of the past three years, and probably will suck again in 2004. Finally, a third way of interpreting it is that he blew out his arm in 2002 and will never pitch well again.

I'd rather the Mets take the risk, and the Sox take the $$$ savings and whatever cheap players they can get in return. Then again, I didn't want Koch to begin with.

StepsInSC
11-06-2003, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by ondafarm
Folks,
trading Koch not is not a good idea at all. Like most relievers Koch has up and down season, as in up one year, down the next. His down year was exacerbated by a bone head manager (Manuel.) I know it is not a popular opinion but leave Koch alone and let him pitch this year. He should be back to his old form. Howe severely over-used Koch in 2002 and the 2003 season was the result. If he is traded now, then that would mean we've bought high and sold low on a normally solid reliever (when propoerly managed.)

I'm pretty much with you on this one. He's got nowhere to go but up.

voodoochile
11-06-2003, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by StepsInSC
I'm pretty much with you on this one. He's got nowhere to go but up.

Yes, but pitching one out of every 2 innings scoreless would be a step up for him. He is NOT worth the money he is getting paid and never will be. Dump him...

poorme
11-06-2003, 05:59 PM
IMO this guy's arm is shot.

Paulwny
11-06-2003, 06:20 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
If Boston Gammons is to be belived (yeah, I know) they might be trying to dump Roger Cedeno. .



The rumor made the Mike+ The Mad Dog Show on the YES network. They also say it's Koch for Cedeno and a bad deal for the Mets.

Randar68
11-06-2003, 06:24 PM
Originally posted by Paulwny
The rumor made the Mike+ The Mad Dog Show on the YES network. They also say it's Koch for Cedeno and a bad deal for the Mets.

As much as I dislike Cedeno, maybe there's a guy Ozzie could light a fire under...

Can't be any worse than Koch...

hold2dibber
11-06-2003, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
As much as I dislike Cedeno, maybe there's a guy Ozzie could light a fire under...

Can't be any worse than Koch...

Cedeno is owed $10 million over the next 2 years. Koch is owed $6.35 million this year. So adding him would actually make the already screwed up payroll situation worse. Plus, he's not very good. (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?statsId=5428) His .318 OBP and 14 SBs last year were not exactly the kind of numbers that would help the top of the Sox' order. Plus he's absolutely horrible defensively (the ESPN scouting report (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/scouting?statsId=5428) says "He's an awful glove man who has more errors than assists in his career. He overruns balls to both his left and right, and the accuracy of his throws ranks among the worst in the game."). Plus, unlike Koch, he is not a "grinder". Koch is known as being a stand up guy and a great teammate. Cedeno is known as being a sulking selfish baby. So I would say that yes, he could be a lot worse than Koch. If this deal goes through, KW will be 0-for-3 this off season.

Gumshoe
11-06-2003, 06:54 PM
yes, give Rowand a shot for gosh sakes!

He costs nothing and is a good, dependable player. Ozzie will play him. You'll see.

Gumshoe

Daver
11-06-2003, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
yes, give Rowand a shot for gosh sakes!

He costs nothing and is a good, dependable player. Ozzie will play him. You'll see.

Gumshoe

And Ozzie will probably let him keep playing long after he has proven that he is not a MLB caliber ballclub.

Or at least proven it to some,most people realized he was not an everyday ballplayer a long time ago.

Randar68
11-06-2003, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Cedeno is owed $10 million over the next 2 years. Koch is owed $6.35 million this year. So adding him would actually make the already screwed up payroll situation worse. Plus, he's not very good. (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?statsId=5428) His .318 OBP and 14 SBs last year were not exactly the kind of numbers that would help the top of the Sox' order. Plus he's absolutely horrible defensively (the ESPN scouting report (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/scouting?statsId=5428) says "He's an awful glove man who has more errors than assists in his career. He overruns balls to both his left and right, and the accuracy of his throws ranks among the worst in the game."). Plus, unlike Koch, he is not a "grinder". Koch is known as being a stand up guy and a great teammate. Cedeno is known as being a sulking selfish baby. So I would say that yes, he could be a lot worse than Koch. If this deal goes through, KW will be 0-for-3 this off season.

90% of Cedeno's problem is motivation and laziness. Thus, the Ozzie lighting fire comment.

poorme
11-06-2003, 07:22 PM
I'd rather take my chances with Koch than get Cedeno. How many teams have gotten rid of him? He's bad news.

RichH55
11-06-2003, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
90% of Cedeno's problem is motivation and laziness. Thus, the Ozzie lighting fire comment.


To an extent....but he doesnt take a walk.,...i dont know if you can just flip a switch on that...and he doesnt have much in the way of baseball smarts....Running hard doesnt mean you will magically read the ball coming off the bat properly

MRKARNO
11-06-2003, 08:11 PM
If we dont get Trachsel, we are best served by taking a prospect package in return. No one ever said they have to be very good, just something so we can say we didnt come away emptyhanded

Daver
11-06-2003, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
If we dont get Trachsel, we are best served by taking a prospect package in return. No one ever said they have to be very good, just something so we can say we didnt come away emptyhanded

I'm not sure the south side of Chicago really needs the human rain delay that is Steve Trachsel.

RichH55
11-06-2003, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by Daver
I'm not sure the south side of Chicago really needs the human rain delay that is Steve Trachsel.


You'd rather have the 6.5 million dollar blown save?

Brian26
11-06-2003, 08:44 PM
I'd take Cesar Cedeno over Rowand at this point.

Daver
11-06-2003, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
You'd rather have the 6.5 million dollar blown save?

I'm holding out for a ballgirl and a broken fungo bat.

ondafarm
11-06-2003, 08:56 PM
White Sox fans we have seen one season of Koch. He stunk the place up this past season, but he clearly has the ability to be a top-notch closer. Its not worth dumping him now.

MRKARNO
11-06-2003, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by Daver
I'm not sure the south side of Chicago really needs the human rain delay that is Steve Trachsel.

If you'd combine Buehrle and Trachsel, you'd come out even

duke of dorwood
11-06-2003, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by Daver
I'm not sure the south side of Chicago really needs the human rain delay that is Steve Trachsel.

And isnt next year Traschel's "every other year" BAD year?

Gumshoe
11-06-2003, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by Daver
And Ozzie will probably let him keep playing long after he has proven that he is not a MLB caliber ballclub.

Or at least proven it to some,most people realized he was not an everyday ballplayer a long time ago.

Daver, he has NEVER gotten a LEGIT shot at proving he can be an everday player. Last year he showed me a LOT. Almost every game he played in he came up with a big hit, and he made playing CF look like duck duck goose compared to Carl "I have no knees" Everett. Oh, but I guess Everett has "intuition" as other posters have said in the past. Intuition doesn't help when it takes you at least double time to get to a given spot.

I think in EVERY aspect AR is a better CF, hands down. He's solid. Given he COSTS NOTHING, this makes the argument go even FURTHER my way. He is more than adequate to win with. We need pitching.

G

crector
11-07-2003, 04:59 AM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Daver, he has NEVER gotten a LEGIT shot at proving he can be an everday player. Last year he showed me a LOT. Almost every game he played in he came up with a big hit, and he made playing CF look like duck duck goose compared to Carl "I have no knees" Everett. Oh, but I guess Everett has "intuition" as other posters have said in the past. Intuition doesn't help when it takes you at least double time to get to a given spot.

I think in EVERY aspect AR is a better CF, hands down. He's solid. Given he COSTS NOTHING, this makes the argument go even FURTHER my way. He is more than adequate to win with. We need pitching.

G

Everett was/is a much better hitter than Rowand is presently. However, he should have been placed at DH since Rowand was/is a much better fielder than Everett. If Rowand becomes a better hitter by Spring Training, then he should be a starter next year.

ondafarm
11-07-2003, 07:53 AM
White Sox fans,

Aaron Rowand is a decent guy. I've had the pleasure of meeting him, his wife, his kids and friends. I talked to him about playing baseball in Japan both with and without Japanese baseball people present.

Truth is this. He is not a major league caliber center fielder, and he has had repeated shots to demonstrate it. He just can't hit the top flight guys well and his respectable numbers have come as a defensive replacement and against mop-up pitchers. He is decent defensively and hits lefties with a certain degree of confidence.

Next year he may get more playing time. Most likely he will be platooning in center with Willie Harris. Expect Harris to be getting more and more of the time there, the Sox face more good righties than lefties and Harris was starting to show signs of adjusting to major league pitching.

When Harris first came to the Sox system I was able to watch him closely as he floundered then adjusted to AAA pitching. When he was called up he was DHing and owning the pitchers. He stunk with the Sox for awhile, but his September at bats were very similiar to his time adjusting to AAA pitching. I expect him to be hitting closer to his potential. (Although he won't be DHing anytime soon.)

hold2dibber
11-07-2003, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
And isnt next year Traschel's "every other year" BAD year?

I don't think anyone is going to argue that Trachsel would make anyone forget Billy Pierce around here, but he is a pretty good option (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?statsId=5172) for the back end of the rotation. I think he would put up Garland-like numbers in the AL; ERA between 4.25 and 4.50, 10 to 12 wins. They'd still need a top of the rotation guy, but if, for example, they are able to land Ponson, this would be a pretty nice looking rotation:

Buehrle
Ponson
Loaiza
Garland
Trachsell

That would be the best rotation in the AL Central.

Gumshoe
11-07-2003, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by crector
Everett was/is a much better hitter than Rowand is presently. However, he should have been placed at DH since Rowand was/is a much better fielder than Everett. If Rowand becomes a better hitter by Spring Training, then he should be a starter next year.

Finally someone who is not far fetched. I agree with this. The money aspect then makes AR the no brainer. This is what I've been saying all along.

Also, I must be watching a different game. Every year I see teams win with guys that "aren't good enough" for a particular position on a championship team. I JUST DON'T buy that line of thought. Ondafarm, I feel like you are patronizing Aaron. Please. Willie Harris has an outside chance to be good. He has speed, but the fact remains that KW traded for him, and therefore I'm really skeptical (He's ALL SPEED).

Aaron makes everything look easy compared to every single guy we've put out there since Singleton. Play him.

Gumshoe

Randar68
11-07-2003, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Finally someone who is not far fetched. I

Gum, please read ondafarm's post just above. Any time you want to start blabbering about Rowand's merits, please pull out that post and read it to yourself 10 times before posting your Rowand love-fest.

He's a great guy and plays balls-to-the-wall. But he's just not a major league player.

Randar68
11-07-2003, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Aaron makes everything look easy compared to every single guy we've put out there since Singleton. Play him.

Gumshoe

BTW, I don't think I've EVER seen Aaron Rowand make ANY play "look easy".

Lofton was able to do that, Harris can actually read a ball off the bat and Do that. Heck, Borchard does EVERYTHING better than Rowand in the field. I would like to know what solar system you've been watching games in.

poorme
11-07-2003, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
But he's just not a major league player.

You lose credibility when making such statements. Without doubt he's good enough to be on major league roster. I agree he'd be a pretty poor option as a starting CF.

Randar68
11-07-2003, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by poorme
You lose credibility when making such statements. Without doubt he's good enough to be on major league roster. I agree he'd be a pretty poor option as a starting CF.

*****. I lose credibility with that? Pulease. I don't lose any credibility with anyone who knows anything about the game of professional baseball, so I guess I don't care if I lose credibility with the rest of ya.

He's not good enough to be a starter and he's not even 4th OF'er material on a team expecting to win their division. If I lose credibility with you because of that statement, good, because you're not worth wasting my time with, then.

poorme
11-07-2003, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
If I lose credibility with you because of that statement, good, because you're not worth wasting my time with, then.

If you know everything there is to know, why are you here?

Randar68
11-07-2003, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by poorme
If you know everything there is to know, why are you here?

That's not what was said, maybe you need a lesson in reading comprehension as well?

poorme
11-07-2003, 12:55 PM
Definitely. Maybe you could tutor me sometime.

MHOUSE
11-07-2003, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by santo=dorf
Why do they want this guy and his contract so badly? Did they not learn anything from Benitez? As much as I would like to see us dump him and sign Hasegawa, I would hate to see him have a break out year. These kinda things usually blow up in our faces. Any other thoughts on this?

His salary and terrible 2003 numbers are more than enough evidence to trade him. If we could get a nobody and a prospect or Trachsel as suggested before then that would be a GREAT deal IMO. Koch sucks and if he returns to form well then that really bites, but we did what we had to do. If they want him then they can have him for anything.

Gumshoe
11-07-2003, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
BTW, I don't think I've EVER seen Aaron Rowand make ANY play "look easy".

Lofton was able to do that, Harris can actually read a ball off the bat and Do that. Heck, Borchard does EVERYTHING better than Rowand in the field. I would like to know what solar system you've been watching games in.

Randar, I think we are just on opposite pages when judging D. Lofton was really really bad for the White Sox defensively in CF. You said at one time that Everett had good instinct and therefore should be playing over Rowand. Get over your hate for Rowand ---- he is SO much better than anyone we've had in the recent past, it's ridiculous. Didn't you see that one game where Everett was at least 40 feet from a ball in Right CENTER field at the track that magglio ran all the way from RF to catch in CF???????????? (honestly it was atrocious)

Please someone tell me they saw this. I believe it was against the A's. Randar, dude, please, with all respect, I think you are just in your own world with these comments.

maurice
11-07-2003, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
he's not even 4th OF'er material on a team expecting to win their division

This is greatly overstated. AVE, OBP, SLG of 4th OFs on 2003 division winners:

.266, .304, .468
.287, .342, .490
.172, .261, .253
.241, .305, .284
.218, .275, .356
.277, .370, .479

Most of these guys are corner OFs. Only two did clearly better than what you can expect from Rowand, and one had fewer than 100 ABs. You're really overestimating (again) the impact of a 4th OF, or even a 3rd OF, on an otherwise solid team.

Rowand is not the Sox big problem. Having no IFs with an above-average OBP is the Sox problem.

Foulke You
11-07-2003, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by Daver
I'm not sure the south side of Chicago really needs the human rain delay that is Steve Trachsel.

Amen. 4 hour game guaranteed with Trachsel. Although, I might be willing to endure it if he got us 12 wins and rid us of 6.5 million dollars of the human question mark Billy Koch.

I'm always very leary of picking up an ex-Cub like Trachsel. They always seem to go bust for us. *cough*Jaime Navarro*cough* Can't we be happy that we got lucky with ex-Cub Gordon last year? Why tempt the fates again? :D:

Randar68
11-07-2003, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by maurice
This is greatly overstated. AVE, OBP, SLG of 4th OFs on 2003 division winners:

.266, .304, .468
.287, .342, .490
.172, .261, .253
.241, .305, .284
.218, .275, .356
.277, .370, .479

Most of these guys are corner OFs. Only two did clearly better than what you can expect from Rowand, and one had fewer than 100 ABs. You're really overestimating (again) the impact of a 4th OF, or even a 3rd OF, on an otherwise solid team.

Rowand is not the Sox big problem. Having no IFs with an above-average OBP is the Sox problem.

CF is one of the few positions you should EXPECT to get speed and OBP out of. Rowand is neither, and is below average there defensively.

Randar68
11-07-2003, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Randar, I think we are just on opposite pages when judging D. Lofton was really really bad for the White Sox defensively in CF. You said at one time that Everett had good instinct and therefore should be playing over Rowand. Get over your hate for Rowand ---- he is SO much better than anyone we've had in the recent past, it's ridiculous. Didn't you see that one game where Everett was at least 40 feet from a ball in Right CENTER field at the track that magglio ran all the way from RF to catch in CF???????????? (honestly it was atrocious)

Please someone tell me they saw this. I believe it was against the A's. Randar, dude, please, with all respect, I think you are just in your own world with these comments.

I said Everett had better "Instincts" Please tell me what that has to do with speed and range.

Lofton and Singleton were light-years better. Everett, for all his lack of speed, went over the wall to take a HR away down the stretch. How many times has Rowand EVER done that? None. He runs full-bore into the wall as the ball sails 3 inches over.

When was the last time Rowand had to go to the gap on a high fly ball and actually was waiting under it???

He drifts, he can't read the ball off the bat, and he has the worst footwork and throwing accuracy of ANYONE on the team.

Sorry, I don't judge OF defensive abilities based on a couple plays where he ran into the wall because he had no clue where he was on the field. There is a lot more to being a good defensive player than running into walls.

In my own world? There hasn't been a single person on this board who'd I consider to be a knowledgeable baseball person say Rowand is starting material. Platoon? Maybe. 4th OF'er? Fine. Starter??? No way in Hell.

.280 OBP doesn't impress me when that player can't even play average CF defense.

ondafarm
11-07-2003, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Definitely. Maybe you could tutor me sometime.

Guys,
come on bury this hatchet.

Oddly, I actually agree with both of you (about Rowand.)

He is a respectable player and I wish the Sox would trade him to someone not able to win their division. San Diego would be great considering he went to Cal State Disneyland.

He is adequate and can hit at a fair level with little power. Unfortunately, the White Sox are contenders, in spite of their ownership group, and need more production out of CF or a really great defender there. Wish it was both but Tori Hunter looks tied up with the Twinkies.

SoxxoS
11-07-2003, 03:47 PM
On the subject of Trachsel-

I don't care how long the game would be, it is worth it to not go through the:

Josh Stewart/Danny Wright/Adkins/Cotts experiment. That, along with JM, cost us the division.

Trachsel would be a fine addition as a 5th starter.

gosox41
11-07-2003, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
If the ex-pitching coach thinks that he can recapture the form that Koch had, that represents considerable value to the Mets. It also means that KW should look at it in a similar manner. Now, I do want us to trade him. However, I also care about getting something in return. If Koch does turn it around, we'll all be furious. I'd be quite happy to take prospects as well as salary. Perhaps it would even be possible to work out one of those player-to-be-named-later trades in which the compensation is dependent on Koch's performance. Question is -- what are the Mets willing / able to give up?

If Koch turns it around to his old self with the Mets and all the Sox get is Cedeno, then I'd be mad...at Sox coaches for messing with him to begin with. Only they could ruin a veteran pitcher..assuming it does happen.

But Koch at his best is still no Foulke and I wouldn't mid seeing him go. I'd just be mad that bad coaching (if that's the case) helped to cost the Sox the division (and possible more) in 2003.

Bob

Randar68
11-07-2003, 07:22 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
If Koch turns it around to his old self with the Mets and all the Sox get is Cedeno, then I'd be mad...at Sox coaches for messing with him to begin with. Only they could ruin a veteran pitcher..assuming it does happen.

But Koch at his best is still no Foulke and I wouldn't mid seeing him go. I'd just be mad that bad coaching (if that's the case) helped to cost the Sox the division (and possible more) in 2003.

Bob

Koch was meesed up because he's been overused for the 2 years prior to 2003 and his arm was shot. Rest and more rest and hopefully he can come back. He had a couple mechanical things going on, but most of it was him trying to compensate for his lack of velocity.

Win1ForMe
11-07-2003, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Lofton and Singleton were light-years better. Everett, for all his lack of speed, went over the wall to take a HR away down the stretch. How many times has Rowand EVER done that?


I think he did that in a game against Anaheim. IIRC, he threw someone out at the plate as well. Not that I think Rowand is any good, just sayin'.

santo=dorf
11-07-2003, 08:35 PM
Thank you ROWAND! (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/video/daily.jsp?ymd=20030628)

Click on "play of the game."


"That ball HIT DEEP TO LEFT!"

need realplayer

RichH55
11-07-2003, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
If Koch turns it around to his old self with the Mets and all the Sox get is Cedeno, then I'd be mad...at Sox coaches for messing with him to begin with. Only they could ruin a veteran pitcher..assuming it does happen.

But Koch at his best is still no Foulke and I wouldn't mid seeing him go. I'd just be mad that bad coaching (if that's the case) helped to cost the Sox the division (and possible more) in 2003.

Bob


Even if he doesnt make it to the ballpark...i want no part of cedeno

Randar68
11-08-2003, 03:23 AM
Originally posted by Win1ForMe
I think he did that in a game against Anaheim. IIRC, he threw someone out at the plate as well. Not that I think Rowand is any good, just sayin'.

I must have missed that one, because I think RF in Fenway is about the only place Rowand even has a chance of touching the top of the fence with a step-ladder and Michael Jordan's hops circa 1984.

StillMissOzzie
11-08-2003, 03:52 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
No closer is worth that kind of money, period.

It will be very interesting to see what Foulke gets this year.

SMO
:gulp:

voodoochile
11-08-2003, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by StillMissOzzie
It will be very interesting to see what Foulke gets this year.

SMO
:gulp:

Just to be clear, I didn't say that no closer would GET that kind of money merely that they weren't WORTH it.

BTW, time for a new user name... :D: or at least a new tag line...

joecrede
11-11-2003, 12:59 PM
According to today's NY Post, Koch is Mets first choice for closer.
Article (http://www.nypost.com/sports/mets/42540.htm)

soxtalker
11-11-2003, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
According to today's NY Post, Koch is Mets first choice for closer.
Article (http://www.nypost.com/sports/mets/42540.htm)

So, according to the article, they have to get someone else to take on the salary (probably by taking Cedeno). If the Sox don't buy that, I wonder if the Mets have an alternate way of doing that.

RichH55
11-11-2003, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
So, according to the article, they have to get someone else to take on the salary (probably by taking Cedeno). If the Sox don't buy that, I wonder if the Mets have an alternate way of doing that.



I want no part of Cedeno....none

hold2dibber
11-11-2003, 02:20 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
So, according to the article, they have to get someone else to take on the salary (probably by taking Cedeno). If the Sox don't buy that, I wonder if the Mets have an alternate way of doing that.

Koch is owed $6.35 million in '04 and becomes a FA after '04. Here are some Mets with big contracts that could be moved to make room for Koch:

Al Leiter is owed $8 mm in '04 with a $10 mm mutual option/$2 mm buyout for '05 (not gonna happen)

Trachsel is owed $5 mm in '04 with a $5 mm team option for '05 (seems doable)

Mike Stanton is owed $7 mm through '05 (possible; he wasn't very good last year and Koch has a higher upside, so they might be willing to deal Stanton for Koch)

Roger Cedeno is owed $10 mm through '05 (possible, but I think (hope) KW is too smart to pull the deal on that trade)

If I were KW, I think Trachsel is the guy I'd hold out for. I'd love to have Leiter, but I can't imagine the Mets would deal him for Koch. Cedeno is a lousy hitter, an atrocious fielder, a lousy teammate and makes more than Koch. There's no way I'd make that trade. Stanton has been a damn good pitcher over his career, but he was not so good last year (4.57 ERA), he's 36 and I think I'd rather take my chances that Koch will rebound than take on Stanton, whose production can probably be replaced for a lot less than he's making. Even if Koch fails again, he's gone after '04, whereas Stanton would still be on the payroll in '05.

jabrch
11-11-2003, 02:49 PM
There is something very appropriate about the thought of Billy Koch pitching in FLUSHING, NY. It seemed like he pitched in Flushing, IL last season. Every time he got on the mound with a lead, we were Flushing it away.

Seriously, I wish nothing but the best for Billy. I'd love to see him rebound and have a great season for the Sox this year. But if we are able to unload him without being stuck with a worthless contract like Cedeno, I'd happily do it. I'd happily do it if we could get a productive player like Leiter. I guess, despite my dislike for his pace, I'd even take Crapsel. In this case, the devil that you don't know may be better than the devil that you do know.

CubKilla
11-11-2003, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
In this case, the devil that you don't know may be better than the devil that you do know.

Billy Botch w/his goatee, devil talk, your 666th post..... WWWWWOOOOOoooooooooo..... :o:

jabrch
11-11-2003, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by CubKilla
Billy Botch w/his goatee, devil talk, your 666th post..... WWWWWOOOOOoooooooooo..... :o:


Nice catch!

soxtalker
11-11-2003, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
I want no part of Cedeno....none

You missed the point of my interpretation of the article, which is that the Mets can't take on the salary of Koch. Yes, they'd like to trade Cedeno to us to accomplish that, and this has been the focus of much of this thread. However, my take on the article is that we have to help them figure out some way to take on that salary. KW has shown that he is pretty creative in this regard as demonstrated by the Colon deal last year. So, let's take this to another level. Is there another team who would have something we'd want and be willing to take Cedeno?

RichH55
11-12-2003, 03:29 AM
Originally posted by soxtalker
You missed the point of my interpretation of the article, which is that the Mets can't take on the salary of Koch. Yes, they'd like to trade Cedeno to us to accomplish that, and this has been the focus of much of this thread. However, my take on the article is that we have to help them figure out some way to take on that salary. KW has shown that he is pretty creative in this regard as demonstrated by the Colon deal last year. So, let's take this to another level. Is there another team who would have something we'd want and be willing to take Cedeno?


Occam's Razor....we would take Traschel instead...simplest solution


A) The Mets can take on the salary of Koch...their option B is Foulke who costs at least as much as Koch
B) Taking Cedeno is their wishful thinking
C) Creative...I would love to see KW get Trachsel, leaving the Mets with a need for a SP (Colon?) and maybe getting the 3 spot in the draft to boot...would give the Mets an incentive to screw over the Yankees as well(Losing both Pettite and Colon might have to be seen as a failure for the Yanks)

lasvegasdave
11-13-2003, 12:40 AM
First of all I'd like to respectfully present myself....I am Dave from Las Vegas and the MOFO....and a Met fan (no smirks please) and definitely NOT a White Sox hater....I am a baseball fan and am respectfully knocking on your doors to hear what the other side had to say about the rumor trade of Koch to the Mets...

I am amazed at how many people DO NOT want him back...I know he had a bad year but does anyone think he could help another team? Is he really that bad? Would he be a good set up man? Can Peterson help him get back on track?

As to getting Cedeno for him...I understand the concerns....we more than agree with you.....

My biggest surprise is some of you requesting Trax for Koch. How can any of you justify trading a pitcher who had a good year for someone who nobody wants in Chicago?

Any other names being thrown out there in the Chicago press for Koch?

Forget Trax...it will never happen (I think...lol)...who else would it take to get Koch? Remember, Chicago is trading someone who had a bad year and nobody wants back...

Thanks for having me here and I hope I am accepted as a baseball fan who enjoys listening to baseball talk...

voodoochile
11-13-2003, 12:45 AM
Originally posted by lasvegasdave
First of all I'd like to respectfully present myself....I am Dave from Las Vegas and the MOFO....and a Met fan (no smirks please) and definitely NOT a White Sox hater....I am a baseball fan and am respectfully knocking on your doors to hear what the other side had to say about the rumor trade of Koch to the Mets...

I am amazed at how many people DO NOT want him back...I know he had a bad year but does anyone think he could help another team? Is he really that bad? Would he be a good set up man? Can Peterson help him get back on track?

As to getting Cedeno for him...I understand the concerns....we more than agree with you.....

My biggest surprise is some of you requesting Trax for Koch. How can any of you justify trading a pitcher who had a good year for someone who nobody wants in Chicago?

Any other names being thrown out there in the Chicago press for Koch?

Forget Trax...it will never happen (I think...lol)...who else would it take to get Koch? Remember, Chicago is trading someone who had a bad year and nobody wants back...

Thanks for having me here and I hope I am accepted as a baseball fan who enjoys listening to baseball talk...

No Problem and welcome aboard. :D: Heck not like you NL fans have a reason to troll the White Sox anyway and you can probably fit right in with the flubbie bashing that gets a little carried away here at times.

I don't think Koch is worth his salary. Of course I don't think any closer is worth $6M+. Can he bounce back? I don't know. He wasn't breaking 95 MPH last year very often. Koch has to be fast to be effective. Will his arm recover with rest? It might. It's a crap shoot, IMO.

Maybe other people disagree, but Koch isn't exactly a fan favorite. He blew way too many games last year in the first half and seemed to give up at least a run per appearance, if not per inning at times.

RichH55
11-13-2003, 02:40 AM
Originally posted by lasvegasdave
First of all I'd like to respectfully present myself....I am Dave from Las Vegas and the MOFO....and a Met fan (no smirks please) and definitely NOT a White Sox hater....I am a baseball fan and am respectfully knocking on your doors to hear what the other side had to say about the rumor trade of Koch to the Mets...

I am amazed at how many people DO NOT want him back...I know he had a bad year but does anyone think he could help another team? Is he really that bad? Would he be a good set up man? Can Peterson help him get back on track?

As to getting Cedeno for him...I understand the concerns....we more than agree with you.....

My biggest surprise is some of you requesting Trax for Koch. How can any of you justify trading a pitcher who had a good year for someone who nobody wants in Chicago?

Any other names being thrown out there in the Chicago press for Koch?

Forget Trax...it will never happen (I think...lol)...who else would it take to get Koch? Remember, Chicago is trading someone who had a bad year and nobody wants back...

Thanks for having me here and I hope I am accepted as a baseball fan who enjoys listening to baseball talk...

I don't think people would be estactic to get Trachsel either.....He's just light years beyond Cedeno

Trachsel is due for his bad year anyway....but Koch is a bit superflocous(sic) on a team with Marte and Gordon(though he probably won't be back)....

If Koch has his velocity back he should rebound to what he was before this last season, and the Mets seem to like him, so why not make a deal?


I like Traschel for another reason: I'm hoping it would cause the Mets to get into the Colon sweepstakes and get us that #3 pick.

Koch to the Mets makes alot of sense though

Man Soo Lee
11-13-2003, 03:21 AM
Why would the Mets trade a decent starting pitcher for a more expensive reliever coming off a bad year? That's just as unlikely as the Sox taking on Cedeno.

Koch and cash for a B-level prospect seems more reasonable to me. We benefit just by dumping a good portion of his salary.

RichH55
11-13-2003, 03:32 AM
Originally posted by Man Soo Lee
Why would the Mets trade a decent starting pitcher for a more expensive reliever coming off a bad year? That's just as unlikely as the Sox taking on Cedeno.

Koch and cash for a B-level prospect seems more reasonable to me. We benefit just by dumping a good portion of his salary.

All depends on how a team values a closer....and the Mets happen to think Koch can be an "elite" closer.


Trachsel is a decent starting pitcher, who is coming off a good year.....He is by no means Great, and by no means consistent year in year out, he is not a difference maker

If they deal for Koch to probably want to unload some salary....If the Sox won't touch Cedeno(as they shouldn't), then the Mets need to give up a decent sized salary that isnt great for them(I think they do want to not take on too much salary, or else they could just sign Foulke for additional payroll)

Closers get good value (Wagner brought in a great deal, though he was leaps and bounds better than Koch last year, if you factor in the Mets thinking they can get Koch back to where he was two years ago, then Koch has more value and Trachsel is making a ton more than Duckworth or the prospects)


If I'm the Mets I look at a few things: There are SPs on the Market too...If you deal Trachsel, get the closer you want, hope the Astros land Petitte --> then you put yourself in a position to take a run at Colon, who is leaps and bounds better than Trachsel

AND you steal some of the Yankees thunder in the process

Alomar's deal is no longer on the books for them, and they have good SPs in Leiter and Glavine ---> Colon could make that rotation dangerous(if obsencely expensive)

The choice would thus be having Trachsel(5) and Foulke(7?) or Koch(6.25) and Colon(12) ---> more expensive? Definately
Higher Return--> probably with the nice little ancilliary benefit of sticking it to the Yankees

Its in the White Sox interests to facilitate the Mets getting in on Colon as well(maybe the Sox take the difference between Trachsel's and Koch's contracts) since the Yankees landing Colon gets you a mid 20s pick, while the Mets landing Colon gets you a # 3

Just somethings to think about

Mets bs
11-13-2003, 11:03 AM
Hi, I'm a Met fan as well. I was just reading the thread and wanted to make some comments on some things I read.

If we sign Colon, you get a supplemental pick, not our 3rd draft pick. You can't lose a top 15 draft pick to another team for compensation. So you would probably be better off having the Yanks sign him, take their 20's pick, and hope Colon is a bust and eats his way out of baseball.

I really don't think Trax is much of an option, unless you're paying all of Koch's salary as well. He had an ERA in the 3's and 15+ wins, it would take a lot more than Billy Koch straight-up.

voodoochile
11-13-2003, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by Mets bs
Hi, I'm a Met fan as well. I was just reading the thread and wanted to make some comments on some things I read.

If we sign Colon, you get a supplemental pick, not our 3rd draft pick. You can't lose a top 15 draft pick to another team for compensation. So you would probably be better off having the Yanks sign him, take their 20's pick, and hope Colon is a bust and eats his way out of baseball.

I really don't think Trax is much of an option, unless you're paying all of Koch's salary as well. He had an ERA in the 3's and 15+ wins, it would take a lot more than Billy Koch straight-up.

Hey, Welcome Aboard! :D:

poorme
11-16-2003, 11:37 AM
Gammons reports that the Sox wanted money back in the Koch-Cedeno deal, and the Mets refused. Good.