PDA

View Full Version : Anyone missing Kenny Lofton?


jabrch
05-13-2004, 05:04 PM
another bad deal by KW - letting Lofton go and getting, amongst others, Diaz.

hold2dibber
05-13-2004, 05:13 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
another bad deal by KW - letting Lofton go and getting, amongst others, Diaz.

Even if Diaz doesn't work out (and I am hopeful that he will) that deal was an absolute STEAL - to get a legitimate prospect in return for 1/2 year of Kenny Lofton? Outsanding trade.

poorme
05-13-2004, 05:16 PM
I like this kind of deal. Unfortunately KW is usually the one dealing prospects for washed up bums.

fquaye149
05-13-2004, 05:17 PM
Originally posted by poorme
I like this kind of deal. Unfortunately KW is usually the one dealing prospects for washed up bums.

are you referring to roberto alomar? because i can't really think of anyone else about whom you could be referring. . .refresh my memory

jabrch
05-13-2004, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by poorme
I like this kind of deal. Unfortunately KW is usually the one dealing prospects for washed up bums.


can you give me a single example of a "washed up bum" that he acquired for prospects?

Richie? maybe - but that's about it. Alomar did exactly what we expected him to do - and he didn't cost us much. I don't understand what facts that statement is founded on. To say he USUALLY trades prospects for washed up bums is nuts. Of all his deals, only a few could even be arguably that type of deal.

poorme
05-13-2004, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by fquaye149
are you referring to roberto alomar? because i can't really think of anyone else about whom you could be referring. . .refresh my memory

alomar, clayton, wells, richie, everett (though he somehow managed to delay his being washed up until this year).

jabrch
05-13-2004, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by poorme
alomar, clayton, wells, richie, everett (though he somehow managed to delay his being washed up until this year).

Alomar - maybe - but maybe not. I think he did exactly what we expected from him

Clayton - We traded Mayette and Schmack - Are you seriously calling them prospects? Clayton was the same player with us that he had been for 5 years or so - not at all washed up.

David Wells - Bierne, Simmons, Sirotka, Williams - such wonderful prospects - and Wells went on to pitch 2 good seasons after leaving us - by no means was he a washed up bum.

Richie - ok - you can have that one

Everett - BULL - he has been hurt a bit this season, but he isn't washed up, isn't a bum, and I don't recall him costing us a great deal of prospects either.

Get your facts straight.

poorme
05-13-2004, 05:29 PM
You know, these are opinions, not facts. My opinion is that those guys were washed up bums. I know the facts of who was dealt for what. He's going to deal prospects again this year for some veteran guys. Maybe it will work out this time and we can actually win the division.

jackbrohamer
05-13-2004, 05:30 PM
I missed him in June and July 2002, when he gave up breaking a sweat on the field.

jabrch
05-13-2004, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by poorme
You know, these are opinions, not facts. My opinion is that those guys were washed up bums. I know the facts of who was dealt for what. He's going to deal prospects again this year for some veteran guys. Maybe it will work out this time and we can actually win the division.

you think all those guys were "washed up bums" and all the guys he gave up were "prospects"? Are you serious?

And you think that it is his fault that after adding Alomar, Everett, Sullivan, Schoenweiss that it was his fault we didn't win the division? Are you kidding?

poorme
05-13-2004, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
you think all those guys were "washed up bums" and all the guys he gave up were "prospects"? Are you serious?

And you think that it is his fault that after adding Alomar, Everett, Sullivan, Schoenweiss that it was his fault we didn't win the division? Are you kidding?

My definition of a prospect is anyone in the minors, so yes they were prospects.

And I don't think those moves, taken in isolation, were bad moves. I just disagree with his "rent a player" philosophy. One of these days he's going to pull a Jeff Bagwell for Larry Andersen or John Smoltz for Doyle Alexander.

jabrch
05-13-2004, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by poorme
My definition of a prospect is anyone in the minors, so yes they were prospects.

And I don't think those moves, taken in isolation, were bad moves. I just disagree with his "rent a player" philosophy. One of these days he's going to pull a Jeff Bagwell for Larry Andersen or John Smoltz for Doyle Alexander.

So you wouldn't trade a prospect for a veteran down the stretch to help the team improve and have a chance to win? If we play it that way, given our total team salary, we will never win anything. I'd rather give up prospects and have a chance to win, but risk that the guys we give up could be great (we have been very successful under KW not guessing wrong) than be stuck just missing the playoffs, or getting beaten in 3 games each year. I want to win a WS - and it would take a good trade like some of the ones KW has made to make that work. As far as calling those guys prospects goes - there are a lot of players who a good GM knows are not prospects. They can be in your system, and never have a CHANCE to make the mlb team. That's not a prospect, that is a career minor leaguer. For the most part, these are the guys KW has given to get players to help the team. He has yet to trade a Smoltz or a Bagwell.

Lip Man 1
05-13-2004, 05:52 PM
When you haven't been to a World Series in 44 years, those 'prospects' better be the second coming of guys like Ruth, Williams, Musial and Feller.

If not I have no problem with dealing every single one of them for a chance to win something now.

Lip

fquaye149
05-13-2004, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by poorme
My definition of a prospect is anyone in the minors, so yes they were prospects.

And I don't think those moves, taken in isolation, were bad moves. I just disagree with his "rent a player" philosophy. One of these days he's going to pull a Jeff Bagwell for Larry Andersen or John Smoltz for Doyle Alexander.

he has had very few rent-a-player moves so how can we say that's his "philosophy"

yes last year he tried to rent 2 players but it has hardly been a trend

colon we tried to resign

and wells we didn't resign not because he was a rent-a-player, but rather because he SUCKED

rent a player! once again, am i forgetting something? not too many of the players you cited as washed up bums (although ritchie was in his 20's when we acquired him) were pursued as "rent-a-players". . .with the exception of everett. . .even robbie we tried to resign.

SoxxoS
05-13-2004, 06:04 PM
:beatdeadhorse

poorme
05-13-2004, 07:38 PM
Anyway, the washed up bum was a reference to Lofton. And I would say trading for guys who will be a free agent in one year is "rent a player." If you don't agree fine. Semantics. How about we trade for a bona fide superstar and sign them immediately, like the Red Sox did with Pedro?

jabrch
05-14-2004, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by poorme
Anyway, the washed up bum was a reference to Lofton. And I would say trading for guys who will be a free agent in one year is "rent a player." If you don't agree fine. Semantics. How about we trade for a bona fide superstar and sign them immediately, like the Red Sox did with Pedro?

Lofton was hardly a washed up bum. He was a drillrod in Chicago, but he went on to have good seasons in SF, Pitt and iwth the Cubs. The Yanks signed him to be their every day CF until he got hurt. How can that be washed up if he is the starting CF for the Yanks 3 years later? As far as the Kenny Lofton deal, we didn't give up ANY prospects for him - by any definition - since we signed him as a FA for just over $1mm. When we got rid of him, we got Diaz and Meaux. How is that ruining the farm system by getting a washed up bum for prospects? He actually built the farm system by trading a decent CF whom he signed cheaply for two legit prospects! Shouldn't that be considered a good thing?

poorme
05-14-2004, 09:39 AM
Jesus, that was the point. He dealt a washed up Lofton for Diaz. Nice deal. Like I said at the beginning, "that's the kind of deal I like."

Another "washed up bum" was Sandy Alomar who we wasted a number one pick to acquire.