PDA

View Full Version : Hal's KW article


gosox41
02-08-2004, 09:23 PM
Good article. Except KW isn't snakebitten, he's just a terrible GM. Bad luck happens when an occasional trade of two blows up. But for KW it's a continuing process of awful trades.

I don't think any study has been done, but a good GM should not get fleeced year in and year out. He'll make some good trades and some so-so trades. There might also be a couple of bad trades. But what percent of trades do you think a GM would make that just continually blow up before he is considered a bad GM.

This is KW's fourth year. He's made 3 one sided deals that killed this team.

1. Koch/Foullke
2. Ritchie/Fogg and Wells
3. Durham/Adkins

That's not bad luck it's bad management. And to continue with Hal's theme of back loading contracts. Who extended Koch? Who extended PK?

Colon was the one great trade KW made. And even he couldn't keep him around. Alomar and Everett were both good trades, but neither one of those guys is back even though the Sox have holes in their respective positions. Why? Because KW tied himself down with lousy contracts for overrated players. Who do we got to blame for pciking up Valentin at $5 mill? KW again. Sure the Sox had no alternatives, but for a GM who likes to be aggressive, it would be well worth the risk to try to find a cheap replacement for Jose and sign a starting pitcher then it would be to do what the Sox have done this offseason.

And let's not even go into how KW made himself and the franchise look stupid with 'Shouldergate' and getting the names of the players wrong in the Dodgers trade.

This may be repetitive, but wait until I rip into KW for the latest rumor...if it holds true. Trading Frank is a mistake, and I'll be really pissed if that happens. Sports radio is saying the talks are getting hotter. Take it for what it's worth. But KW has made comments over the years about Frank and has hinted that he doesn't want him here. Hopefully these rumors are false but it looks like he is doing a good job of forcing Frank out by making his life miserable.

Looks like another bad deal in the KW 'Reign of Terror' You can blame JR, but KW worked for JR for 10 years before being made GM. Surely he knew in that time frame that JR was cheap and wasn't going to change his ways. And if he didn't then he's really stupid.

Bob

TornLabrum
02-08-2004, 09:56 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Good article. Except KW isn't snakebitten, he's just a terrible GM. Bad luck happens when an occasional trade of two blows up. But for KW it's a continuing process of awful trades.

I don't think any study has been done, but a good GM should not get fleeced year in and year out. He'll make some good trades and some so-so trades. There might also be a couple of bad trades. But what percent of trades do you think a GM would make that just continually blow up before he is considered a bad GM.

This is KW's fourth year. He's made 3 one sided deals that killed this team.

1. Koch/Foullke
2. Ritchie/Fogg and Wells
3. Durham/Adkins

That's not bad luck it's bad management. And to continue with Hal's theme of back loading contracts. Who extended Koch? Who extended PK?

Colon was the one great trade KW made. And even he couldn't keep him around. Alomar and Everett were both good trades, but neither one of those guys is back even though the Sox have holes in their respective positions. Why? Because KW tied himself down with lousy contracts for overrated players. Who do we got to blame for pciking up Valentin at $5 mill? KW again. Sure the Sox had no alternatives, but for a GM who likes to be aggressive, it would be well worth the risk to try to find a cheap replacement for Jose and sign a starting pitcher then it would be to do what the Sox have done this offseason.

And let's not even go into how KW made himself and the franchise look stupid with 'Shouldergate' and getting the names of the players wrong in the Dodgers trade.

This may be repetitive, but wait until I rip into KW for the latest rumor...if it holds true. Trading Frank is a mistake, and I'll be really pissed if that happens. Sports radio is saying the talks are getting hotter. Take it for what it's worth. But KW has made comments over the years about Frank and has hinted that he doesn't want him here. Hopefully these rumors are false but it looks like he is doing a good job of forcing Frank out by making his life miserable.

Looks like another bad deal in the KW 'Reign of Terror' You can blame JR, but KW worked for JR for 10 years before being made GM. Surely he knew in that time frame that JR was cheap and wasn't going to change his ways. And if he didn't then he's really stupid.

Bob

On the other hand, a lot of KW's trades, signings worked out pretty well. Osuna did a nice job here for a couple of years. Marte hasn't been too bad either. Tom Gordon did a nice job, too, last year.

No matter what happened afterwards, which I still maintain is Uncle Jer's fault, Alomar, Everett, and the others he brought during the second half were pretty good deals. They would have been a whole lot better IF Uncle Jer had given KW a reasonable budget for a contending team. He didn't and all but Schoeneweis are gone.

And that's where I say KW's judgment failed him. He completely misread Uncle Jer and really thought he meant it when he said he'd rather trade in all those NBA championships for a World Series ring.

Let's look at the trades you brought up, while I'm thinking about it. I already mentioned the problem with Sirotka for Wells in my column. But it was the right idea. Ditto Ritchie for Fogg, K. Wells, and Lowe. Somebody brought up something somewhere not long after I wrote this column (about a week and a half ago, before SoxFest) that Williams always trades pitchers for pitchers, and often does it head for head. This basically just keeps you treading water.

Durham for Adkins is a deal you can look at in two ways. If the Sox didn't want Durham around in 2003, they waited too long to get much else for him. He turned out to be a rent-a-player for the A's. The thing is, I've had at least two sources who know Ray tell me that he wanted to stay in Chicago. I've had people tell me that Wilson Alvarez and Roberto Hernandez wanted to stay in Chicago, too. What were we told by Sox management? "They weren't going to stay here anyway."

We're now hearing the same thing about Maggs. But I digress.

When you get right down to it, Williams has done what he should to try to build a winner. His big deals haven't panned out. A couple have been downright disasters, and that's why I hung the collar "Prof. Chaos" around him. But with the Colon deal, and the moves he made after June, he did do the right thing. He was betrayed by Uncle Jer.

A. Cavatica
02-08-2004, 10:02 PM
Foulke/Koch was our comeuppance for Sirotka/Wells. If Koch still had the 100 mph fastball, we'd have made the playoffs last year. I don't blame KW for that as much as for Wells/Fogg/Ritchie and Durham/Adkins, where he just got robbed.

His best trade (Colon) only happened because the Yankees wanted to screw Boston. But Guerrier/Marte was an absolute steal for us. Some of KW's other minor league acquisitions (Cotts, Pacheco, Diaz, Meaux) are among our better prospects. We've had two good drafts in a row. And Loaiza was the best low-profile acquisition in baseball last year.

So all things considered, he's doing a better job than Schu.

joecrede
02-08-2004, 10:07 PM
Konerko, Koch, and now Lee account for about $22M of this year's payroll and the best we have to show for it is an average offensive LF'er. Off the top of my head I can only think of the Rangers as a team who has managed their financial resources worse.

gosox41
02-08-2004, 10:29 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
On the other hand, a lot of KW's trades, signings worked out pretty well. Osuna did a nice job here for a couple of years. Marte hasn't been too bad either. Tom Gordon did a nice job, too, last year.

No matter what happened afterwards, which I still maintain is Uncle Jer's fault, Alomar, Everett, and the others he brought during the second half were pretty good deals. They would have been a whole lot better IF Uncle Jer had given KW a reasonable budget for a contending team. He didn't and all but Schoeneweis are gone.

And that's where I say KW's judgment failed him. He completely misread Uncle Jer and really thought he meant it when he said he'd rather trade in all those NBA championships for a World Series ring.

Let's look at the trades you brought up, while I'm thinking about it. I already mentioned the problem with Sirotka for Wells in my column. But it was the right idea. Ditto Ritchie for Fogg, K. Wells, and Lowe. Somebody brought up something somewhere not long after I wrote this column (about a week and a half ago, before SoxFest) that Williams always trades pitchers for pitchers, and often does it head for head. This basically just keeps you treading water.

Durham for Adkins is a deal you can look at in two ways. If the Sox didn't want Durham around in 2003, they waited too long to get much else for him. He turned out to be a rent-a-player for the A's. The thing is, I've had at least two sources who know Ray tell me that he wanted to stay in Chicago. I've had people tell me that Wilson Alvarez and Roberto Hernandez wanted to stay in Chicago, too. What were we told by Sox management? "They weren't going to stay here anyway."

We're now hearing the same thing about Maggs. But I digress.

When you get right down to it, Williams has done what he should to try to build a winner. His big deals haven't panned out. A couple have been downright disasters, and that's why I hung the collar "Prof. Chaos" around him. But with the Colon deal, and the moves he made after June, he did do the right thing. He was betrayed by Uncle Jer.

I gave KW his due for Colon, Everett, and Alomar. But he's made more then enough stupid moves to make up for that. While Marte was a great trade, he is only a reliever. Same with Gordon and he was here for 1 year.

When KW became GM after the 2000 season, the Sox had holes in CF and starting pitching. Now add 2B and possible 1B to the list. What has he accomplished here? I maintain that if KW didn't do a single trade the last 3 years (and just drafted players and kept what was already here) this team would have been more successful then it's been.

KW has run 4 drafts with nothing to show for it in the major leagues. I admit I'm high on Reed and Honel. But all those guys KW has traded for in the minors are unproven. We're hoping it works out but for a team that's trying to win in the present I'm not too impressed with second place.

Bob

gosox41
02-08-2004, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Konerko, Koch, and now Lee account for about $22M of this year's payroll and the best we have to show for it is an average offensive LF'er. Off the top of my head I can only think of the Rangers as a team who has managed their financial resources worse.

Son't for get about the $5 mill were paying to the .230 hitting SS who insists on hitting right handed even though he hits in the low .100's there.

Bob

fuzzy_patters
02-08-2004, 10:38 PM
While KW has made as many bad moves as good ones, we should not forget to include Miguel Olivo with the good aquisitions.

JRIG
02-08-2004, 11:12 PM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters
While KW has made as many bad moves as good ones, we should not forget to include Miguel Olivo with the good aquisitions.

Giving up one up ther best relievers in baseball over the past 3 years for a guy with a .287 OBP is a good move?

By those standards KW must be one of the best GMs in baseball.

fuzzy_patters
02-09-2004, 07:30 AM
Originally posted by JRIG
Giving up one up ther best relievers in baseball over the past 3 years for a guy with a .287 OBP is a good move?

By those standards KW must be one of the best GMs in baseball.

That's a rookie catcher with a rocket for an arm. Offense is secondary with catchers. Do you watch baseball?

Also, I never said KW was a good GM.

gosox41
02-09-2004, 07:32 AM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters
While KW has made as many bad moves as good ones, we should not forget to include Miguel Olivo with the good aquisitions.

It should pay off in the long run, but Miguel needs to get his OBP up to at least .325-.335. Remember when the Sox made that trade they were trying to wi now. They didn't like Bradford because he didn't throw hard. Kind of ironic how now they're so interested in Shingo when he's a similar type pitcher to Bradford. Of course having Bradford for 2001-2003 and not Olivo ight have meant a few extra wins and maybe a chance last year at going to the playoffs.

Bob

gosox41
02-09-2004, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters
That's a rookie catcher with a rocket for an arm. Offense is secondary with catchers. Do you watch baseball?

Also, I never said KW was a good GM.

I do. A .287 OBP is unacceptable.

Bob

poorme
02-09-2004, 08:29 AM
All you have to do is look at the standing to verify that he sucks.

hold2dibber
02-09-2004, 09:39 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Good article. Except KW isn't snakebitten, he's just a terrible GM. Bad luck happens when an occasional trade of two blows up. But for KW it's a continuing process of awful trades.

I don't think any study has been done, but a good GM should not get fleeced year in and year out. He'll make some good trades and some so-so trades. There might also be a couple of bad trades. But what percent of trades do you think a GM would make that just continually blow up before he is considered a bad GM.

This is KW's fourth year. He's made 3 one sided deals that killed this team.

1. Koch/Foullke
2. Ritchie/Fogg and Wells
3. Durham/Adkins

That's not bad luck it's bad management. And to continue with Hal's theme of back loading contracts. Who extended Koch? Who extended PK?



C'mon. Durham/Adkins was not a one sided deal that "killed this team". It wasn't a very good trade, but if Durham was going to leave in free agency anyway, you can't really call trading him, even for a bucket of balls, a deal that "killed the team."

So that leaves 2 very bad trades. But he's made some great ones, as others have pointed out (including acquiring Colon for spare parts, Marte for a career minor leaguer, and getting actual prospects for Lofton and Alomar in '02). You say that he shouldn't get "fleeced" so often, but IMHO, he's done as much fleecing as vice versa. And every GM makes mistakes - Billy Beane is going to be paying Jermane Dye about $12 million this year, John Schuerholz mis-played and mis-managed his payroll to the extent that he had to trade Kevin Milwood for a non-prospect minor league catcher, Pat Gillick was hampered for years by the huge money he was paying to Jeff Cirillo, etc., etc., etc. Last year, KW assembled by far the most talented team in the AL Central. The GM's primary job is to assemble the best players he possibly can. I think he did that last year.

But I think KW has had 2 major failings as a GM. First, he let JM stick around too long. Although I think Manuel is a decent manager and a good guy, he clearly was all wrong for this team. Everyone else seemed to recognize this fact about a year before KW. And KW has not managed the payroll particularly well, declining to try to extend Foulke and overpaying for Koch and Konerko (and, IMHO, Lee).

thepaulbowski
02-09-2004, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
But I think KW has had 2 major failings as a GM. First, he let JM stick around too long. Although I think Manuel is a decent manager and a good guy, he clearly was all wrong for this team. Everyone else seemed to recognize this fact about a year before KW. And KW has not managed the payroll particularly well, declining to try to extend Foulke and overpaying for Koch and Konerko (and, IMHO, Lee).

I think it was JR who was holding the strings on JM. As for the contracts of the others...hindsight is 20/20. Many people applauded the moves when they happened (not everybody) but at the time they didn't seem like bad deals.

hold2dibber
02-09-2004, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by thepaulbowski
As for the contracts of the others...hindsight is 20/20. Many people applauded the moves when they happened (not everybody) but at the time they didn't seem like bad deals.

Well, that's true, but if you're going to evaluate a GM's performance, there's nothing wrong with doing is in hindsight. It is his job is to properly manage the payroll and no matter what people thought at the time, the fact of the matter is that he vastly overpaid for 2 guys (Koch and Konerko) who have not done squat to help the team since signing and have created severe payroll constraints that have hampered the team's ability to obtain other good players. That's a simple fact and that's what (among other things) KW should be judged on.

JRIG
02-09-2004, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by thepaulbowski
I think it was JR who was holding the strings on JM. As for the contracts of the others...hindsight is 20/20. Many people applauded the moves when they happened (not everybody) but at the time they didn't seem like bad deals.

But the point is the GM needs to be a better manager of personnel and contracts than the majority of fans. I hated the Foulke trade. I said Konerko's extension was terrible the day it was signed. I said we overpaid Lee and time will tell on that one. I'm not the only one either -- there are others.

So why should we judge a GM's performance on how the fans react to his moves? Just because Sox fans liked the extensions doesn't mean they were good decisions.

gosox41
02-09-2004, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
C'mon. Durham/Adkins was not a one sided deal that "killed this team". It wasn't a very good trade, but if Durham was going to leave in free agency anyway, you can't really call trading him, even for a bucket of balls, a deal that "killed the team."

So that leaves 2 very bad trades. But he's made some great ones, as others have pointed out (including acquiring Colon for spare parts, Marte for a career minor leaguer, and getting actual prospects for Lofton and Alomar in '02). You say that he shouldn't get "fleeced" so often, but IMHO, he's done as much fleecing as vice versa. And every GM makes mistakes - Billy Beane is going to be paying Jermane Dye about $12 million this year, John Schuerholz mis-played and mis-managed his payroll to the extent that he had to trade Kevin Milwood for a non-prospect minor league catcher, Pat Gillick was hampered for years by the huge money he was paying to Jeff Cirillo, etc., etc., etc. Last year, KW assembled by far the most talented team in the AL Central. The GM's primary job is to assemble the best players he possibly can. I think he did that last year.

But I think KW has had 2 major failings as a GM. First, he let JM stick around too long. Although I think Manuel is a decent manager and a good guy, he clearly was all wrong for this team. Everyone else seemed to recognize this fact about a year before KW. And KW has not managed the payroll particularly well, declining to try to extend Foulke and overpaying for Koch and Konerko (and, IMHO, Lee).

Trading the second best offensive second basemen in the AL for a AAA pticher with a 6.00ERA constitutes really stupid. Especially considering that Durham was a lead off hitter and the Sox had no adequate replacement for him. Even further add to the fact that Durham signs a 3 year $18 mil contract for being more productive at his position while at the same time the Sox extend Konerko's contract at 3 eyars $24 mill.

It's a mess all the way around. KW should have taken the draft picks for Durham if he didn't want him.

Bob

Daver
02-09-2004, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by gosox41


It's a mess all the way around. KW should have taken the draft picks for Durham if he didn't want him.

Bob

At the time he was traded what were the odds that there was going to be a draft pick as compensation? It had already been agreed on in the labor dispute to discard that practice.

thepaulbowski
02-09-2004, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by JRIG
Giving up one up ther best relievers in baseball over the past 3 years for a guy with a .287 OBP is a good move?

By those standards KW must be one of the best GMs in baseball.

I wouldn't call Bradford one of the best relievers in baseball. He's effective, but not one of the best. A young catcher with the skills to become a great player is a lot harder to come by than an effective reliever. Olivo didn't get to spend any time outside of AA to learn how to hit, he's doing it at the major league level.

A. Cavatica
02-09-2004, 08:28 PM
Was Bradford-for-Olivo really a KW trade? It seems like it happened a long time ago.

Daver
02-09-2004, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Was Bradford-for-Olivo really a KW trade? It seems like it happened a long time ago.

One of his first.

doublem23
02-09-2004, 09:57 PM
KW's biggest problem is the guy that signs the checks.

doublem23
02-09-2004, 09:59 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Was Bradford-for-Olivo really a KW trade? It seems like it happened a long time ago.

from Miguel Olivo's page at baseball-reference.com (http://www.baseball-reference.com/o/olivomi01.shtml)
December 13, 2000: Sent by the Oakland Athletics to the Chicago White Sox to complete an earlier deal made on December 7, 2000. The Oakland Athletics sent a player to be named later to the Chicago White Sox for Chad Bradford. The Oakland Athletics sent Miguel Olivo (December 13, 2000) to the Chicago White Sox to complete the trade.

Yeah, that would have to be a Williams move. Schu resigned like right after the postseason.

gosox41
02-10-2004, 07:18 AM
Originally posted by Daver
At the time he was traded what were the odds that there was going to be a draft pick as compensation? It had already been agreed on in the labor dispute to discard that practice.

I would have taken my chances. Billy Beane had the right theory. The owner's were going to be so thrilled getting a luxury tax they wouldn't focus on anything else.

And if the Sox were that concerned about losing Durham for nothing then they should have moved him earlier in the year. They were basically out of the pennant race before July 28 when Durham was traded.

Lastly, I know the Sox wanted to say they got a player for Durham. But Adkins is a joke. Daver, even you have to admit this guy has not had an impressive minor league career. It doesn't matter why, but the point is that trade was basically an insult to any Sox fan with any intelligence and KW went for it.

Bob

hold2dibber
02-10-2004, 07:55 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
I would have taken my chances. Billy Beane had the right theory. The owner's were going to be so thrilled getting a luxury tax they wouldn't focus on anything else.

And if the Sox were that concerned about losing Durham for nothing then they should have moved him earlier in the year. They were basically out of the pennant race before July 28 when Durham was traded.

Lastly, I know the Sox wanted to say they got a player for Durham. But Adkins is a joke. Daver, even you have to admit this guy has not had an impressive minor league career. It doesn't matter why, but the point is that trade was basically an insult to any Sox fan with any intelligence and KW went for it.

Bob

It was a lousy trade, but to say it killed the team is just wrong. For whatever reason, the Sox were resigned to the fact that Durham was leaving. Even if they had kept it for the remainder of the year and gotten a draft pick instead of Adkins, that draft pick wouldn't be doing a thing for the Sox now - so to say that getting Adkins instead of the draft pick is killing the team is inaccurate.

With respect to your point about Durham signging elsewhere for less than the Sox signed PK, you're absolutely right - Durham is a better player than PK and if the choice was one or the other, Durham was the wrong one to let go. But PK wasn't a free agent - he was arbitration eligible when signed. Plus, for all you or I know, Durham may have been dead set on leaving Chicago. Also, at the time, the Sox had a surplus of 2B prospects (Miles, Hummel, Harris) plus Graffinino. Taking all those factors into consideration, I think it is overly simplistic and unrealistic to just say "they could have signed Durham for less than Konerko, what a bonehead".

poorme
02-10-2004, 08:22 AM
But why trade him for a guy like Adkins? How about some 16 year old from Venezuela or something? Someone who has a chance, however small, of eventually doing something in the majors.

hold2dibber
02-10-2004, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by poorme
But why trade him for a guy like Adkins? How about some 16 year old from Venezuela or something? Someone who has a chance, however small, of eventually doing something in the majors.

I agree it was a horrible trade - KW got more for Lofton and for Alomar Jr. that season than he did for Durham. It makes no sense to me. I just think, as bad as the return on that deal was, that people have a tendency to overstate its impact.

poorme
02-10-2004, 09:56 AM
Well, the impact has been minimal, and odds are it won't have much of an effect. But these little things add up over time....

Correct me if I am wrong here, but didn't signing Sandy Alomar a couple of years ago cost us a 1st round draft pick? That, I believe, is inexcusable.

MisterB
02-10-2004, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by poorme
Correct me if I am wrong here, but didn't signing Sandy Alomar a couple of years ago cost us a 1st round draft pick? That, I believe, is inexcusable.

Yes. Cleveland got our #27 overall pick for Alomar. We in turn got the #16 pick from the Marlins for losing Charles Johnson. (BTW, Kris Honel was drafted with said pick)

hold2dibber
02-10-2004, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by MisterB
Yes. Cleveland got our #27 overall pick for Alomar. We in turn got the #16 pick from the Marlins for losing Charles Johnson. (BTW, Kris Honel was drafted with said pick)

I didn't realize that. Good thing I'm not the GM - I was really hoping the Sox re-signed CJ after '00. That would have been a disaster in capital letters.

Randar68
02-10-2004, 10:48 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
1. Koch/Foullke
2. Ritchie/Fogg and Wells
3. Durham/Adkins


OK, so 2 out of the 3 were because there were players that financially, the team couldn't afford to keep??? Also, it's good to see how you can conveniently ignore all the good things he's done like Miguel Olivo and Marte. I'm sorry, but Fogg hasn't done diddly, and Wells was never going to amount to anything in his situation in Chicago (although he admittedly had more value than what the Sox got in return)...

Colon was one of the most creativce deals I had ever seen and almost to a man people thought the Wells trade was a good deal for us. He acquired Alomar and Carl Everett despite being cash-strapped and did it without giving up real top prospects and those 2 were the last reasons why they failed ot make the playoffs.

What on earth do you want, folks? If you make deals, some bite you in the rear for one reason or another, it's the nature of the beast. You want Ron Schueler sitting on his hands while his teams tanked? KW tries. He's overseen some terrific drafts the past 4 years or so.

Does he interact with the players perfectly? No way. Everyone has their faults, but if the only leg you have to stand on is the Ritchie trade (Koch/Foulke and Durham/adkins when the compensation picks were reportedly being removed), then you have nothing. Konerko and Koch contracts were mistakes in retrospect, but come on.

People just love to complain about others... How many GM's could compete on KW's payroll?

Randar68
02-10-2004, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
I agree it was a horrible trade - KW got more for Lofton and for Alomar Jr. that season than he did for Durham. It makes no sense to me. I just think, as bad as the return on that deal was, that people have a tendency to overstate its impact.

The Sox would not pay the rest of his salary that year (close to 3 out of 6 million), which limits the teams willing to trade. Most teams aren't looking to get second basemen, they want leadoff hitters and spark-plugs or starters and back-end of the bullpen players.

In today's baseball, if you aren't going to eat money when you make a deal for a bigger $$$ player, you are going to get far less value in return. It's the current state of the game. Ignore it if you will, but it's simple fact.

pearso66
02-10-2004, 11:06 AM
I have this to say for the Koch/Foulke trade, while it was a bad trade in hindsite, I really liked Foulke, but they didn't think they could resign him, but they gave up minimal talent with him, In return we got Cotts who is one of our top pitchers in the minors. If I'm not mistaken, Oakland has none of the players left that were in that trade, and if they do its Mark Johnson.

I think Koch can turn it around this year, He had a bad year, for some reason if you have 1 bad year, around here it means you're done. People are ready to give Konerko up for Perez, but Perez just came off a bad year too, and Konerko has more good years than Perez. Id rather keep Konerko

Randar68
02-10-2004, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by pearso66
I have this to say for the Koch/Foulke trade, while it was a bad trade in hindsite, I really liked Foulke, but they didn't think they could resign him, but they gave up minimal talent with him, In return we got Cotts who is one of our top pitchers in the minors. If I'm not mistaken, Oakland has none of the players left that were in that trade, and if they do its Mark Johnson.

I think Koch can turn it around this year, He had a bad year, for some reason if you have 1 bad year, around here it means you're done. People are ready to give Konerko up for Perez, but Perez just came off a bad year too, and Konerko has more good years than Perez. Id rather keep Konerko

Konerko might have more good "half" years...

Correct about the above, but Oakland trades for players to help them down the stretch for guys they think are expendable based on their situation and stock-pile draft picks. They got 2 draft picks when Durham left, and 2 more when Foulke signed with Boston. They draft guys who are closer to the majors (college typically) and they have a high turnover rate, but by doing so, they see many more prospects through their system and are able to filter the ones they deem the best or the most needed by position and trade the rest...

It's an actual functioning plan that works on limited payrolls. I'm not the biggest Billy Bean fan, but you have to admire people that have a plan and are able to execute it effectively.

PaulDrake
02-10-2004, 11:23 AM
In return we got Cotts who is one of our top pitchers in the minors. Cotts was placed in a most difficult situation last year. The best thing I can say about him is that he was not ready yet. Actually, I'm in not in any way sold on the guy. I think he was rushed to the bigs last year in an attempt to save face for KW because of another disastrous trade. Kris Honel remains the Sox minor league pitcher in whom I have the most faith.

JasonC23
02-10-2004, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
How many GM's could compete on KW's payroll?

Let's see...Billy Beane, J. P. Ricchardi, Terry Ryan, Larry Benifest, Bill Stoneman...and those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

KW is no longer one of the worst GMs in the game (as evidenced by the Colon and Everett trades), but to think he's anything more than mediocre is silly. He's traded away young talent that the Sox would love to have right now (most obviously Kip Wells). He's given stupid-money contracts to overrated players at positions where finding value ain't that hard (Koch and Konerko), thereby tying his own hands behind his back in terms of payroll. No Sox team with KW as GM has made the playoffs, despite the fact that the AL Central blows. And he's worked tirelessly since being named GM to drive the single best hitter in Sox history out of town.

At best, he's mediocre.

hold2dibber
02-10-2004, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
The Sox would not pay the rest of his salary that year (close to 3 out of 6 million), which limits the teams willing to trade. Most teams aren't looking to get second basemen, they want leadoff hitters and spark-plugs or starters and back-end of the bullpen players.

In today's baseball, if you aren't going to eat money when you make a deal for a bigger $$$ player, you are going to get far less value in return. It's the current state of the game. Ignore it if you will, but it's simple fact.

Good point. It's easy for people to say we didn't get enough for Durham, but without knowing who else was interested in obtaining Durham or what they were willing to offer for him (and his big salary), it's kind of silly to criticize. I also note that the $3 million that the Sox did not have to pay Durham in the 2nd half of 2002 may have been money that was critical in allowing them to obtain Colon and/or Gordon, etc. for the 2003 campaign. If the Sox had kept Durham and paid the $3 million they still owed him for '02 and then gotten a draft pick who they would have had to pay out a bunch of money to as a signing bonus, the team we saw on the field last year might have been a lot weaker.

poorme
02-10-2004, 05:13 PM
Jon Adkins is a joke, OK?

hold2dibber
02-10-2004, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Jon Adkins is a joke, OK?

I'm not sure if you're directing this comment to me, but I completely agree. But that's not relevant to the point I'm making.

Randar68
02-10-2004, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Jon Adkins is a joke, OK?

So the options were:

1) Lose him for nothing and eat the last 3 million on his contract (hind-sight is 20/20 and there was no compensation picks slated for the next draft, Billy Beane was willing to take the risk and help his team simultaneously)
2) Trade him and eat the 3 million for a marginal prospect
3) Trade him and pay a small portion of his remaining salary and receive a pretty marginal prospect and hope he can some day help in a minor role while saving ~2 million dollars, IIRC.

Hmmm...

Armchair and monday-morning quarterbacks are a dime a dozen pal, it takes a little more effort to actually step back and put yourself in someone else's position. They were cutting payroll and had the choice of $$$ or prospects...

poorme
02-10-2004, 05:46 PM
We can criticize him then. I'd rather have Jeff Barry.

gosox41
02-10-2004, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
I agree it was a horrible trade - KW got more for Lofton and for Alomar Jr. that season than he did for Durham. It makes no sense to me. I just think, as bad as the return on that deal was, that people have a tendency to overstate its impact.

If you're going to be a team that relies on the farm system so much then the team needs to do well in 2 main areas:

1. Drafting
2. Trading what they have to set themselves up for the future.

They did not to #2 right in the case of trading an a player like Ray for nothing.

Bob

gosox41
02-10-2004, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
OK, so 2 out of the 3 were because there were players that financially, the team couldn't afford to keep??? Also, it's good to see how you can conveniently ignore all the good things he's done like Miguel Olivo and Marte. I'm sorry, but Fogg hasn't done diddly, and Wells was never going to amount to anything in his situation in Chicago (although he admittedly had more value than what the Sox got in return)...

Colon was one of the most creativce deals I had ever seen and almost to a man people thought the Wells trade was a good deal for us. He acquired Alomar and Carl Everett despite being cash-strapped and did it without giving up real top prospects and those 2 were the last reasons why they failed ot make the playoffs.

What on earth do you want, folks? If you make deals, some bite you in the rear for one reason or another, it's the nature of the beast. You want Ron Schueler sitting on his hands while his teams tanked? KW tries. He's overseen some terrific drafts the past 4 years or so.

Does he interact with the players perfectly? No way. Everyone has their faults, but if the only leg you have to stand on is the Ritchie trade (Koch/Foulke and Durham/adkins when the compensation picks were reportedly being removed), then you have nothing. Konerko and Koch contracts were mistakes in retrospect, but come on.

People just love to complain about others... How many GM's could compete on KW's payroll?

The 2002 Angels GM, the Marlins GM, and the A's come to mind right off the top of my head. The Blue Jays are also up there even though they have to face the Red Sox and Yankees 38 times a year.

I can live with bad trades. But I can't live with trades that are soooooo stupid that even the time they are made they sound lopsided.

While Marte and Olivo were good pick ups, that's not a legacy to be proud of. A cathcer with a .287 OPS and a relief pitcher while giving a ton of stronger talent.

Bob

gosox41
02-10-2004, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by pearso66
I have this to say for the Koch/Foulke trade, while it was a bad trade in hindsite, I really liked Foulke, but they didn't think they could resign him, but they gave up minimal talent with him, In return we got Cotts who is one of our top pitchers in the minors. If I'm not mistaken, Oakland has none of the players left that were in that trade, and if they do its Mark Johnson.

I think Koch can turn it around this year, He had a bad year, for some reason if you have 1 bad year, around here it means you're done. People are ready to give Konerko up for Perez, but Perez just came off a bad year too, and Konerko has more good years than Perez. Id rather keep Konerko

Koch sucks. Cotts hasn't proven he can find the strike zone consistently.

I love it when people say that 'once Cotts learns his control or gets better mechanics....watch out'

I'm waiting. Also, for a team trying to win last season, it is not a good idea to give up one great player for a much lesser player at the same position to save a million bucks (they split the difference on the two salaries.)

Also, the Sox immediately extended Koch so in 2004 he's making more then Foulke ever made with the Sox. How much more is Foulke making in '04 then Koch? Not that much. Sure Foulke has a 3 year contract, but I bet he's still a much better pitcher then Koch in 3 years.

Bob

Lip Man 1
02-11-2004, 12:02 AM
The interview that I did today for the next installment here at WSI brought up an interesting point on this off season. This former Sox player said what bugged him the most about Williams and the organization was that if you totaled up the free agents lost AND the minor leaguers traded to get them in the first place it adds up to 14 players. He said that's a lot of players. He felt that if you're going to trade prospects for proven players then re-sign the vets or don't trade for them in the first place and keep the kids.

Lip

chisoxt
02-11-2004, 06:55 AM
The thing that surprises me the most about how KW does his business, is that if you are a team with limited means, like the Sox are, it is essential that you have a team with younger, less expensive players. (Note that this does not necessarily mean ionferior players.) But what has happened is that this team has gotten progressively older while KW trades away our better prospects for more older players. THis makes no sense.

The blame for this mess falls as much if not more at the feet of the guy who hired KW as it does with KW himself.

gosox41
02-11-2004, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
The interview that I did today for the next installment here at WSI brought up an interesting point on this off season. This former Sox player said what bugged him the most about Williams and the organization was that if you totaled up the free agents lost AND the minor leaguers traded to get them in the first place it adds up to 14 players. He said that's a lot of players. He felt that if you're going to trade prospects for proven players then re-sign the vets or don't trade for them in the first place and keep the kids.

Lip

I have no problem wiht some of the minor league players he's traded away. Most will become nothing. It does put KW between a rock and hard place because if he doesn't trade them and they don't pan out he loses. If he does trade them to try to win and some of those guys have good/great careers he's an idiot.

Two of the top trades KW has made has been for Alomar and Everett. While he should have resigned both because the Sox still have gaping holes there, I don' tthink the trade killed the Sox farm system. As long as KW doesn't trade any top rated prospects for a veteran who leaves after a year I'm OK with it.

KW always seems to get burned on the bigger trades. ML talent for ML talent. That's where he needs to improve. If he's going to trade good talent he needs to get equal or greater value in return. Instead his trades tend to be so lopsided in the other direction.

And while the Colon trade was great. I think the Yankees helped hold KW's hand a lot to make sure Boston didn't get him.

Bob