PDA

View Full Version : Don't worry, KW is in control.


SoxxoS
12-17-2003, 01:10 PM
Contrary to popular belief, I believe KW knows exactly what he is doing:

SS is in far greater demand than a right fielder, correct? OK. We know this.

L.A. REALLY wants Nomar. When somebody REALLY wants something, what do you do? Jack up the price. What is the price they are going to have to pay to get what they want??? Paul Konerko.

If they don't want Konerko, fine. We will keep Nomar and ship Valentin off to Seattle. We will have to figure out another way to sign a pitcher, because Nomar doesn't free up much payroll. KW will get it done. He knows what he is doing, people.

Tekijawa
12-17-2003, 01:15 PM
If you're saying all we will get in return for Magglio and Konerko Scott williamson and Odalis Perez then this might be his worst trade yet... A pouting Frank all year backed up by ... NO ONE! wow this will get uglier than anything we've ever seen! I just hope Frank kills Ozzie on the field Durring a game that I'm at!

SoxxoS
12-17-2003, 01:18 PM
Originally posted by Tekijawa
If you're saying all we will get in return for Magglio and Konerko Scott williamson and Odalis Perez then this might be his worst trade yet... A pouting Frank all year backed up by ... NO ONE! wow this will get uglier than anything we've ever seen! I just hope Frank kills Ozzie on the field Durring a game that I'm at!

Let's say we go ahead and ship Konerko and Nomar to L.A. for Mota, Perez and Miller. Then we already have Williamson from Boston. Our bullpen would go from one of the worst to one of the best overnight. Not to mention getting rid of Konerko/Nomar frees up about 17 million in salary to sign Ponson and to take on another contract for another position. So it won't just be Nomar/Konerko for Williamson, Miller, Perez and Mota.

Hokiesox
12-17-2003, 02:11 PM
KEEP NOMAR

GET GUILLEN!

Bobby Thigpen
12-17-2003, 02:14 PM
KEEP NOMAR

AMEN!!!

pudge
12-17-2003, 02:16 PM
Go KW! IF we dump Nomar, it better have Konerko with it, otherwise we might as well keep Nomar and trade Valentin for Garcia and/or Guillen.

That just seems like a TON of salary dump - Maggs & Konerko's salary would be off the books. Are there even enough good players left on the market to use with that extra $18-20 million??

Frank the Tank
12-17-2003, 02:18 PM
"Don't worry, KW is in control"

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA X INFINITY

bobj4400
12-17-2003, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Are there even enough good players left on the market to use with that extra $18-20 million??

Of course not, Uncle Jerry is buying a few more Mercedes this Christmas with that money...

fquaye149
12-17-2003, 02:37 PM
why do you guys want to keep nomar AND get guillen? it is not automatic that a ss will be a good 2b man(soriano)

PaulDrake
12-17-2003, 02:39 PM
KW will get it done. He knows what he is doing, people. I'm beyond speechless.

thecell
12-17-2003, 04:33 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Let's say we go ahead and ship Konerko and Nomar to L.A. for Mota, Perez and Miller. Then we already have Williamson from Boston. Our bullpen would go from one of the worst to one of the best overnight. Not to mention getting rid of Konerko/Nomar frees up about 17 million in salary to sign Ponson and to take on another contract for another position. So it won't just be Nomar/Konerko for Williamson, Miller, Perez and Mota.

I agree with you completely. A lot of people are not taking into consideration the payroll that will be available. If this deal goes through, it will truly be the greatest Festivus miracle ever!

doublem23
12-17-2003, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by Frank the Tank
"Don't worry, KW is in control"

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA X INFINITY

If Nomar-Williamson for Ordonez goes down, this is a fabulous move. Maybe one of the best for the Sox in a long time.

SoxxoS
12-17-2003, 06:55 PM
KW does an excellent job with the payroll limitations he has. If he had even a 70 million dollar payroll I think our team would be very, very good.

RedPinStripes
12-17-2003, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
If he had even a 70 million dollar payroll I think our team would be very, very good.

:reinsy
"Yeah Ok"!

chisoxt
12-17-2003, 08:10 PM
KW does an excellent job with the payroll limitations he has. If he had even a 70 million dollar payroll I think our team would be very, very good


AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! I can't take this anymore! Just about every trade that this dope has made has exchanged lower priced and not necessarily less talent for higher paid, not necessarily better talent. If you want to watch how limited market teams like the Sox should function, please see oakland and minnesota. You buidl a strong farm system and you maintain it, not piss it away llike Williams has done.

jabrch
12-17-2003, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
You buidl a strong farm system and you maintain it, not piss it away llike Williams has done.


That's a pile of crap. When KW made the moves he made this year, trading prospects for all-stars, everyone was thrilled, myself included. KW did the right thing. When we had a shot to go for it, we did. I still think we have a reasonable shot of winning the central this year despite that.

You can't blame KW for having a 56mm payroll. That is the ownership's decision alone.

SoxxoS
12-17-2003, 08:17 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! I can't take this anymore! Just about every trade that this dope has made has exchanged lower priced and not necessarily less talent for higher paid, not necessarily better talent. If you want to watch how limited market teams like the Sox should function, please see oakland and minnesota. You buidl a strong farm system and you maintain it, not piss it away llike Williams has done.

What jabrch said.

You're right. Oakland and Minnesota have won a lot of World Series in Williams' tenure.

If you don't think hes done a good job as GM, you don't know baseball.

Daver
12-17-2003, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! I can't take this anymore! Just about every trade that this dope has made has exchanged lower priced and not necessarily less talent for higher paid, not necessarily better talent. If you want to watch how limited market teams like the Sox should function, please see oakland and minnesota. You buidl a strong farm system and you maintain it, not piss it away llike Williams has done.

Exactly what has he pissed away?

SoxOnTop
12-17-2003, 08:27 PM
Yeah, because I see all the great talent that was produced by the "well stocked" farm system that Schuler pumped up.

Maggs, Buerle um , um... ...give me a minute.....

chisoxt
12-17-2003, 08:47 PM
That's a pile of crap. When KW made the moves he made this year, trading prospects for all-stars, everyone was thrilled, myself included.

BS, everyone was not thrilled. While the Alomar deal made sense, the Everett deal did not, Nor did the ones for Ritchie or Olivio.

Daver
12-17-2003, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
BS, everyone was not thrilled. While the Alomar deal made sense, the Everett deal did not, Nor did the ones for Ritchie or Olivio.

You have yet to answer my question.

dickallen15
12-17-2003, 09:03 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! I can't take this anymore! Just about every trade that this dope has made has exchanged lower priced and not necessarily less talent for higher paid, not necessarily better talent. If you want to watch how limited market teams like the Sox should function, please see oakland and minnesota. You buidl a strong farm system and you maintain it, not piss it away llike Williams has done.

Don't believe the Schueler hype. The farm system was never as good as he claimed it was. The only young guys Williams may have "pissed away" at this point are Fogg, and Wells, and neither one of those guys is headed to Cooperstown. He got Marte for a guy who may never pitch in the majors, who supposedly was the second coming of Greg Maddux. The guys he gave up for Wells are out of baseball, or close to it. The guys he gave up for Colon,Leifer was released by Montreal, designated for assignment with Tampa, Biddle is going to be non-tendered Saturday, and Osuna is a free agent that doesn't appear to be attracting much interest. In that same time, he has had a couple of pretty good drafts.

jabrch
12-17-2003, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
BS, everyone was not thrilled. While the Alomar deal made sense, the Everett deal did not, Nor did the ones for Ritchie or Olivio.

Well, I loved the Everett deal. We needed another OF and we got one who cost us nothing. I don't remember anyone griping about the Ritchie deal. And Olivo cost us very little - considering we were bailing on it - and is now our starting catcher.

I have faith in KW.

chisoxt
12-17-2003, 09:19 PM
Exactly what has he pissed away?

You know the answer. Wells, Fogg, Bradford, Foulke. The jury is still out on the guys he gave up for Alomar and Everett.

chisoxt
12-17-2003, 09:22 PM
If you don't think hes done a good job as GM, you don't know baseball.

How in the hell can you say that he has done a good job as GM when his team, with the core of talent that it has, failed to reach the playoffs ?

Daver
12-17-2003, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
How in the hell can you say that he has done a good job as GM when his team, with the core of talent that it has, failed to reach the playoffs ?

Did he put the talent to win there?

Did the feild manager use that talent well?

Take your case elsewhere,you have no chance proving your point until you can debate the issue with a little more intelligence than you have shown so far.

chisoxt
12-17-2003, 09:48 PM
Take your case elsewhere,you have no chance proving your point until you can debate the issue with a little more intelligence than you have shown so far.

What is ther to debate. Division winning team in 2000, and then three years without a playoff appearance in a horrible division. You're right Daver, Kenny has done a great job!

RedPinStripes
12-17-2003, 09:49 PM
Sounds like a battle in the making . :)

:millslane

Gumshoe
12-17-2003, 09:58 PM
Originally posted by chisoxt
What is ther to debate. Division winning team in 2000, and then three years without a playoff appearance in a horrible division. You're right Daver, Kenny has done a great job!

I'm with ChiSoxt ... Daver, YOU are the one that is pointing fingers and making excuses. All we base KW on is one simple criterion:

Did we win the division/get to the playoffs? If he had made NO bad moves (ummm Royce Clayton, Julio Ramirez, Wells, Ritchie, FOULKE --> cost us the division alone last year), then I can see you blaming other factors (ie cheap owner, bad organization inherited)

Z , zzhhhhz, zhhii zip it

It's an easy answer. Deal in results. KW obviously doesn't. I'm willing to give him a fresh start if he can pull Garcia and this new deal -- but it has to work, too.

Gumshoe

pearso66
12-17-2003, 10:17 PM
KW has tried to get a winning team out there. Is it his fault that players didnt pan out like they were supposed to? You say you'll give him a fresh start if these trades go through, but they'll have to work. So if they dont pan out like they are predicting, you'll blame kenny? he has made a couple of bad trades, but doesnt someone. Especially when you can only spend so much money. You have to be creative, he is.

SoxOnTop
12-17-2003, 10:33 PM
Pearso, I agree with you to a certain extent, but at what point do you hold the GM responsible. Has he been creative? Yes, but so would anyone with a will to win who had a restricted budget. The question is whether or not his creativity is successful or not. The GM chooses the players and now he has chosen his coach. If you cannot hold him accountable for the results on the field now, then when will you?

pearso66
12-17-2003, 11:47 PM
when the time to hold him resposible comes, I will. I'm just saying, so far he really hasn't done anything "horrible" in my mind. He did get robbed in the Ritchie deal, but to me it wasn't as bad as some people make it out to be. Sean Lowe is the only one I really missed after that deal. People complain about the David Wells trade. I loved that trade, he was a 20 game winner that we got for Sirotka. Sure he turned out to be injured, but Sirotka has yet to play since the trade. Royce Clayton was a waste, but Myette hasn't turned out to be anything special. I was upset about the Foulke deal, but he had no way in knowing Koch would blow up the way he did. He did bring us Colon, and it wasn't his fault he couldnt resign him, personally, im glad he didnt for the pricetag. And now he was trying to get us a top notch prospect, a 3rd starter, and 2 pitchers in our bullpen, all for Magglio. To me, those are some decent trades. There are GM's out there who do worse.
Now if Guillen stinks as manager, and KW sticks by him, while he sucks, now granted give him at least one year, then he may have to go too. But as long as Reinsdorf is owner, KW might be our best option at GM

Gumshoe
12-18-2003, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by pearso66
when the time to hold him resposible comes, I will. I'm just saying, so far he really hasn't done anything "horrible" in my mind. He did get robbed in the Ritchie deal, but to me it wasn't as bad as some people make it out to be. Sean Lowe is the only one I really missed after that deal. People complain about the David Wells trade. I loved that trade, he was a 20 game winner that we got for Sirotka. Sure he turned out to be injured, but Sirotka has yet to play since the trade. Royce Clayton was a waste, but Myette hasn't turned out to be anything special. I was upset about the Foulke deal, but he had no way in knowing Koch would blow up the way he did. He did bring us Colon, and it wasn't his fault he couldnt resign him, personally, im glad he didnt for the pricetag. And now he was trying to get us a top notch prospect, a 3rd starter, and 2 pitchers in our bullpen, all for Magglio. To me, those are some decent trades. There are GM's out there who do worse.
Now if Guillen stinks as manager, and KW sticks by him, while he sucks, now granted give him at least one year, then he may have to go too. But as long as Reinsdorf is owner, KW might be our best option at GM

Pearso, I don't want this to get too ridiculous, but my main point is that there have been a FAIR share of bad to really bad moves made by KW, in fact more bad moves than good ones. That is why i hold him responsible, because he HAS to have moves that end up working. He can't afford to have moves blow up, that's my whole point.

Just to point out a quick thing, Clayton and Wells moves were UTTER disasters, and they were both KW's "boys", remember that. So was Gary Pettis who was "spying" on players (Durham and Thomas were aware of this chicken scratch behavior). It reminds me of Wanny when he was coach of the Bears.

And if you don't see that Foulke trade was the worst trade in probably the last 10 years in major league baseball, you probably think also that Keith Foulke is "just an average closer" nor did you see that Koch threw millions of pitches over millions of innings (somehow KW missed that too). The real reason he moved Foulke, though, was because he didn't like him. I know that is true for certain. And that tells me what kind of operation a guy runs ... all a guy does is be an unhittable closer for 3 years, he has a bad month where's he is mismanaged, goes with a sub 1 ERA the rest of the year, and we trade him. Whoops, that might have costed us the division or World Series, you never know.

I'm done. If you asked me if I like the Nomar deal, I would say, "Yes, I like it if he stays. I agree with the position of SS being hard to find a superstar at. I hate it if he ships Nomar for bullcrap NL pitching, which is untrustworthy. This trade aside, I think if he can pull a guy like Freddy Garcia, I think we'd have a legit shot at the division, and I would praise KW for that move, unless he gave up a TON for him ( I think we can get him as a FA). In any case, just show me the results. I hated the Ritchie deal and the Koch deal from the BEGINNING. Of course, I liked the Colon deal, but Colon wasn't quite as good as we hoped, although he could have been a playoff HORSE. Too bad we didn't keep Foulke. Whoops again. I just want the Sox to win, NO EXCUSES!

What GM does NOT TRY???????? Please!

Gumshoe

anewman35
12-18-2003, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
And if you don't see that Foulke trade was the worst trade in probably the last 10 years in major league baseball, you probably think also that Keith Foulke is "just an average closer" nor did you see that Koch threw millions of pitches over millions of innings (somehow KW missed that too).

Koch had a horrible year, no doubt. But what happens if he goes out and gets 40 saves this year? Foulke would have been gone by now, so we wouldn't be getting anything out of him. I don't think it's fair to call it "the worst trade in probably the last 10 years in major league baseball" until we have a bit more perspective on the thing.

TaylorStSox
12-18-2003, 12:09 PM
One thing that I love about Williams is that he has the heart to make ANY move at any time if he feels it improves our team. Trades are a risk. The only trade that I really didn't like at the time of it was for Everett. I felt that it was unnecassary because Rowand was really coming on.

If anything. KW makes things interesting. I like that. :D:

miker
12-18-2003, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by dickallen15
Don't believe the Schueler hype. The farm system was never as good as he claimed it was. The only young guys Williams may have "pissed away" at this point are Fogg, and Wells, and neither one of those guys is headed to Cooperstown. He got Marte for a guy who may never pitch in the majors, who supposedly was the second coming of Greg Maddux. The guys he gave up for Wells are out of baseball, or close to it. The guys he gave up for Colon,Leifer was released by Montreal, designated for assignment with Tampa, Biddle is going to be non-tendered Saturday, and Osuna is a free agent that doesn't appear to be attracting much interest. In that same time, he has had a couple of pretty good drafts.

So is KW that good, or just lucky?

SpringfldFan
12-18-2003, 12:37 PM
So far most of KWs moves have made sense at the time they were made (even the trade of 1 year from a "great" closer for 3 years from a "good" one, which is what was assumed about Koch at deal time).

So for those upset at him for making deals that only look good at the time, let me ask: what exactly do you *want* him to do - make deals that DON'T look good at the time?

Gumshoe
12-18-2003, 03:11 PM
I don't think a majority of his deals "look good at the time"!!!!!! I think a few have (Colon). When he brought HIS guys in (Clayton, Wells, Lofton, etc.) disasters happened in one way or another (Clayton, nothing needs to be said, Wells causing trouble for Thomas and not wanting to be here).

ANewman, just please notice how you use the word IF. That's the whole problem! Why trade a guy that is unhittable for an IF!!!!!!

IF we had Foulke, we might have won the World Series. That was far more likely than Koch having even an above average season last year. Furthermore, think about it, we had NO right handed relievers.

Oh, I forgot to mention that no one else mentions how bad the right handers were. First off, we didn't use Glover for 2/3 of the season because Gordon and White seemed so busy SUCKING for the first half, and they were KW's "guys"

You HAVE TO SEE that Foulke would have been INTEGRAL. I loved it when he came in and got the SAVE in COMISKEY at the All Star game. It was a classy "UP your ASS KW", and he didn't even have to verbalize it. I love the guy. All he does is produce and he still has detractors. Just look at his stats and weep, Koch defenders.

anewman35
12-18-2003, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe


ANewman, just please notice how you use the word IF. That's the whole problem! Why trade a guy that is unhittable for an IF!!!!!!

IF we had Foulke, we might have won the World Series. That was far more likely than Koch having even an above average season last year.

I know these stats don't mean everything, but in 2002, Foulke was 2-4 with 11 saves and a 2.90 ERA. He gave up 65 hits in 77.2 innings. Also in 2002, Koch was 11-4 with 44 saves, a 3.27 ERA, and 73 hits in 93.2 innings. You have to agree that those are comparable stats. I don't think anybody could have possibly seen that he'd implode as badly as he did. And like I said, at this point Foulke would be gone anyway. If Koch goes and has another 2002, that goes a long way towards evening the trade - and that's not even bringing up Neal Cotts, who (if he can settle down) will become a solid Major League pitcher.

rahulsekhar
12-18-2003, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
I don't think a majority of his deals "look good at the time"!!!!!! I think a few have (Colon). When he brought HIS guys in (Clayton, Wells, Lofton, etc.) disasters happened in one way or another (Clayton, nothing needs to be said, Wells causing trouble for Thomas and not wanting to be here).



OK, the same Lofton who was pretty damn good for the Giants and the Cubs? The same Wells who was a 20-game winner before coming to Chicago and who was a pretty damn good pitcher the year after coming?

There are good decisions and good outcomes, the 2 aren't always linked. Example: If the ARod deal goes through and he promptly has a career-threatening injury, he ends up as an albatross on their team for years to come. Does that make it a bad decision? No. When guys perform at higher levels before and after being here, that tells me that there's something about the Sox (i.e. the coaching) that's involved in them sucking. I.e. the GM went out and got talent, but it was pissed away & misused by the manager.

I for one have generally liked KWs moves and thought they were the right thing to do at the time with the exception being Ritchie (and as was noted, it's not like Fogg/Wells would make this team a WS contender).

You continually cite the Foulke deal as the example, even if you include that, 2 bad deals more than 2 good ones (getting Marte, Olivo, Everett being the 3 that come to mind immediately), and a number that were looked like the right thing to do at the time but didn't work out make him a decent GM and given the Sox payroll constraints, I'd argue an above average one.

SoxxoS
12-18-2003, 04:15 PM
Foulke stats are always good, but he is not a big game pitcher.

KingXerxes
12-18-2003, 05:05 PM
Why does everybody - when judging Kenny Williams's trades always defend him by saying "Well it looked good at the time it was made............." What exactly is that supposed to prove?

I would imagine that it looked good to Cincinnati when they traded Frank Robinson to Baltimore for Milt Pappas and a couple of others. Equally good looking was when the Cubs acquired cagey veteran Ernie Broglio for perrenial underachiever Lou Brock. Let's not forget how good the Sosa for George Bell deal looked when it was made.

My point is that all deals "look good" - it's how they turn out that counts. The Colon deal "looked good" and yielded a .500 pitcher who flew the coup as soon as he could. The Ritchie deal is an unmitigated disaster that keeps getting worse as our ex-youngsters develop with Pittsburgh. Even in the Sirotka for Wells deal, the fact that KW unloaded an injured Sirotka doesn't even make this deal much more than a wash. The Koch deal - as of right now - could turn out to be the worst of all of them. I'm not too confident of how this offseason is going either.

Look at the Cubs, they just picked up Mercker today. No big deal everyone will say - guys like Mercker don't put you over the top. Well they do when they replace guys like Guthrie and Alfonseca. The White Sox aren't even close to this kind of "tweaking", we're sitting back hoping that AA pitchers are ready to win 17 games as fourth starters. KW better do more than pick some guys off the scrap heap this offseason, this team is running a very real risk of getting stale.

maurice
12-18-2003, 05:13 PM
Originally posted by anewman35
I know these stats don't mean everything, but in 2002, Foulke was 2-4 with 11 saves and a 2.90 ERA. He gave up 65 hits in 77.2 innings. Also in 2002, Koch was 11-4 with 44 saves, a 3.27 ERA, and 73 hits in 93.2 innings.

You're right. They certainly don't mean everything. You also have to consider that, in 2002, Foulke gave up only 13 walks to post a 1.00 WHIP, while Koch walked 46 (!) for a 1.27 WHIP. That means Foulke had a 0.37 lower ERA and a 0.27 lower WHIP in 2002. When you look at previous years, the statistical disparity is even worse. Foulke's 2002 stats were typical for him (ERA under 3 every year since 1999), while Koch had a worse and less consistent career (ERA under 3 only once ever and a 4.80 ERA as recently as 2001).

While Foulke-Koch wasn't one of the all-time worst trades, several posters here (including me) were against it from day one. It wasn't a sound baseball decision, but rather must have rested upon some financial issue or irrational belief about Foulke's closing ability.

rahulsekhar
12-18-2003, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Why does everybody - when judging Kenny Williams's trades always defend him by saying "Well it looked good at the time it was made............." What exactly is that supposed to prove?

I would imagine that it looked good to Cincinnati when they traded Frank Robinson to Baltimore for Milt Pappas and a couple of others. Equally good looking was when the Cubs acquired cagey veteran Ernie Broglio for perrenial underachiever Lou Brock. Let's not forget how good the Sosa for George Bell deal looked when it was made.

My point is that all deals "look good" - it's how they turn out that counts. The Colon deal "looked good" and yielded a .500 pitcher who flew the coup as soon as he could. The Ritchie deal is an unmitigated disaster that keeps getting worse as our ex-youngsters develop with Pittsburgh. Even in the Sirotka for Wells deal, the fact that KW unloaded an injured Sirotka doesn't even make this deal much more than a wash. The Koch deal - as of right now - could turn out to be the worst of all of them. I'm not too confident of how this offseason is going either.

Look at the Cubs, they just picked up Mercker today. No big deal everyone will say - guys like Mercker don't put you over the top. Well they do when they replace guys like Guthrie and Alfonseca. The White Sox aren't even close to this kind of "tweaking", we're sitting back hoping that AA pitchers are ready to win 17 games as fourth starters. KW better do more than pick some guys off the scrap heap this offseason, this team is running a very real risk of getting stale.

The question is: at what point is a GM responsible or not for the outcome. If a player gets hurt does that become their fault? if the manager misuses the player - is that their fault? If the player simply has a down year which could not be predicted, is that their fault? By your reasoning, 1 GM a year has a good year, the one who wins the ring. everyone else made bad moves.

And again - which of those deals would you like to have back outside of Ritchie or Foulke? Would you rather have had Sirotka than Wells? Would you rather have kept Liefer/Biddle than had Colon? Would you rather have had whoever we dealt for Everett (Myette?)?

Personally, I thought the team was more talented and better with the guys we ended up with. That means Kenny did his job. At that point, the players & manager need to take over and do theirs.

KingXerxes
12-18-2003, 05:42 PM
It's a good question on the issue of Colon. Would we rather have Rocky Biddle right now or the compensatory draft pick? Would we have even needed Colon had we not traded for Ritchie? The point here is that a general manager is responsible for the overall talent level of his team getting better during his tenure. This team seems to be getting sapped of its talent as the years moan on under Kenny Williams. Does he make a big splashy deal every now and then - yes, but how does it work out for the White Sox in the long run?

gosox41
12-18-2003, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by TaylorStSox
One thing that I love about Williams is that he has the heart to make ANY move at any time if he feels it improves our team. Trades are a risk. The only trade that I really didn't like at the time of it was for Everett. I felt that it was unnecassary because Rowand was really coming on.

If anything. KW makes things interesting. I like that. :D:

No trade is to big or to stupid for KW.

Bob

gosox41
12-18-2003, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by maurice
You're right. They certainly don't mean everything. You also have to consider that, in 2002, Foulke gave up only 13 walks to post a 1.00 WHIP, while Koch walked 46 (!) for a 1.27 WHIP. That means Foulke had a 0.37 lower ERA and a 0.27 lower WHIP in 2002. When you look at previous years, the statistical disparity is even worse. Foulke's 2002 stats were typical for him (ERA under 3 every year since 1999), while Koch had a worse and less consistent career (ERA under 3 only once ever and a 4.80 ERA as recently as 2001).

While Foulke-Koch wasn't one of the all-time worst trades, several posters here (including me) were against it from day one. It wasn't a sound baseball decision, but rather must have rested upon some financial issue or irrational belief about Foulke's closing ability.

The Foulke trade was pure stupidity. I said so at the time, and sof ar I've been proven nothing but right,

Bob