PDA

View Full Version : So the myths are true


jlh0023
06-03-2004, 10:24 PM
Sox fans really are the most pessimistic fans in the world....i mean i knew that, but this board makes it quite obvious. The team can't make one move without getting criticized for it. We are playing great and lose two games and everyone goes crazy. KW brings up Burke, everybody criticizes him, i've heard it all year. Give em some credit. The team has played incredibly, KW not only hasn't done anything wrong, and more importantly, has never done anything wrong to earn the name Captain Chaos. Since he's been here his track record is great. All of his moves are to benefit the team, and though in hindsight, it's nice criticizing his few misjudgements, they weren't bad moves. Can't you just say, 'Bad Day' or 'We'll see what happens' before tearing the organization apart.

Jjav829
06-03-2004, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by jlh0023
Sox fans really are the most pessimistic fans in the world....i mean i knew that, but this board makes it quite obvious. The team can't make one move without getting criticized for it. We are playing great and lose two games and everyone goes crazy. KW brings up Burke, everybody criticizes him, i've heard it all year. Give em some credit. The team has played incredibly, KW not only hasn't done anything wrong, and more importantly, has never done anything wrong to earn the name Captain Chaos. Since he's been here his track record is great. All of his moves are to benefit the team, and though in hindsight, it's nice criticizing his few misjudgements, they weren't bad moves. Can't you just say, 'Bad Day' or 'We'll see what happens' before tearing the organization apart.

Let's clarify. It isn't the whole board ripping into KW for brining up Burke. It's a select few posters who have a bias against KW and simply cannot put that aside. The majority of posters here seem to understand the idea behind the Burke move and a large amount of posters have praised KW for some of his recent additions that have helped carry this team. But there are some people who don't like KW and will bash him regardless.

hose
06-03-2004, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by jlh0023
Sox fans really are the most pessimistic fans in the world....i mean i knew that, but this board makes it quite obvious. The team can't make one move without getting criticized for it. We are playing great and lose two games and everyone goes crazy. KW brings up Burke, everybody criticizes him, i've heard it all year. Give em some credit. The team has played incredibly, KW not only hasn't done anything wrong, and more importantly, has never done anything wrong to earn the name Captain Chaos. Since he's been here his track record is great. All of his moves are to benefit the team, and though in hindsight, it's nice criticizing his few misjudgements, they weren't bad moves. Can't you just say, 'Bad Day' or 'We'll see what happens' before tearing the organization apart.


Why do you assume that the few people that post here represent how all Sox fans feel?

A. Cavatica
06-03-2004, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by Jjav829
Let's clarify. It isn't the whole board ripping into KW for brining up Burke. It's a select few posters who have a bias against KW and simply cannot put that aside. The majority of posters here seem to understand the idea behind the Burke move and a large amount of posters have praised KW for some of his recent additions that have helped carry this team. But there are some people who don't like KW and will bash him regardless.

I'm not a KW apologist nor a KW basher. I'd give him a B+. But bringing up Burke to replace Maggs is just asinine.

fquaye149
06-03-2004, 11:32 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
I'm not a KW apologist nor a KW basher. I'd give him a B+. But bringing up Burke to replace Maggs is just asinine.

i'm not sure i agree that it's asinine

it's certainly questionable, especially since we have 2 catchers already

but if I were KW here would be my reasoning behind it:

if I am trying to shop borchard and reed I would like to keep their market value highest. little can be gained from bringing them up, since they are likely to struggle at first and KW appears to be continuously working on deals. Meanwhile there is the possibility of injury.

I know burke can get the job done to a degree and there is nothing to be gained or lost bringing him up. . .so i might as well promote the most qualified hitter not named borchard or reed.

rahulsekhar
06-03-2004, 11:37 PM
Originally posted by fquaye149


if I am trying to shop borchard and reed I would like to keep their market value highest. little can be gained from bringing them up, since they are likely to struggle at first and KW appears to be continuously working on deals. Meanwhile there is the possibility of injury.


Or it could just be a move they make until they know how long Maggs will be out. If it's only a few weeks, this may suffice. If it's longer, you might see Borchard/Reed.

Or it could even just be a VERY temporary move until they're satisfied that Joe's back in the groove after his short layoff.

A. Cavatica
06-03-2004, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by fquaye149
if I am trying to shop borchard and reed I would like to keep their market value highest. little can be gained from bringing them up, since they are likely to struggle at first and KW appears to be continuously working on deals. Meanwhile there is the possibility of injury.


I reject the assertion that little can be gained from bringing them up. Reed is certainly more likely to win games for us than Burke, and his trade value could actually go up with exposure (look what a spring training double off Colon did for Ryan Sweeney). The only reason to "hide" a prospect in AAA is if you don't have confidence in him, and any GM you're trying to deal with would pick up on that.

And the possibility of injury is the same whether they're in Chicago or Charlotte.

I know burke can get the job done to a degree and there is nothing to be gained or lost bringing him up. . .so i might as well promote the most qualified hitter not named borchard or reed.

Well, Burke is well down on that list. Bryant Nelson is currently the most qualified hitter not named Borchard or Reed, and he's way more versatile than Burke.

jeremyb1
06-04-2004, 12:55 AM
KW hasn't done anything wrong?! Come on. I'm not one of the pessimistic posters on this board, that sickens me too but to say that if you feel the GM has made mistakes you're pessimistic - that's ridiculous. KW is not the perfect GM. He certainly doesn't have the track record to suggest so as he inherited a 95 win team and has yet to make the playoff. I'm not saying that is his fault but his track record isn't so impressive that he deserves the benefit of the doubt in any situation. Some of KW's more egregious offenses have been:

- Dealing any kind of a prospect for Royce Clayton when he had a 5 million dollar salary and the Rangers needed to move him due to the ARod signing and then having to eat his contract and suffer through his playing time for way too long.

- Todd Ritchie for Kip Wells.

- Tipping over buffet tables in the clubhouse.

- Publicly ripping Rauch instead of keeping team discpline in house.

- Attempting to deal Jon Garland for Darrin Erstad

- Failing to properly leverage the fact that Marte was waiver wire bound when we acquired him.

- Dealing Foulke for Koch.

- Agreeing to a two year deal with Koch for close to what he'd figure to make in arbitration eliminating the option of non-tendering him if he struggled with little gain.

- Signing a good but not great 1B in Konerko to a deal that pays 8 million per season.

I'll be the first to admit that KW has made some great deals such as signing Loaiza and dealing for Uribe and Loaiza. However, to blindly insist he has done NOTHING wrong is ridiculous. In my opinion no GM is perfect and KW is significantly further from perfrection than some other GMs in the game. That's not being pessimistic that's being realistic.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 01:03 AM
Originally posted by Jjav829
Let's clarify. It isn't the whole board ripping into KW for brining up Burke. It's a select few posters who have a bias against KW and simply cannot put that aside. The majority of posters here seem to understand the idea behind the Burke move and a large amount of posters have praised KW for some of his recent additions that have helped carry this team. But there are some people who don't like KW and will bash him regardless.

Every think a selective few are biased in favor of Kenny, and will praise him no matter what he does?

A. Cavatica
06-04-2004, 01:05 AM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Bryant Nelson is currently the most qualified hitter not named Borchard or Reed, and he's way more versatile than Burke.

Just to add...Nelson played 22 games with the Red Sox in 2002 (11 2B, 7 LF, 2 CF, 2 RF). Those are the major league numbers, I believe he's played more positions in the minors.

pearso66
06-04-2004, 01:17 AM
I have to bite on the Marte was going on the waiver wire deal and say, Maybe he was, but then it wouldnt be guaranteed we get him. IIRC it goes in order of the draft that year, so we would have had what, the 15th shot at him? Why not give up little to make sure you get him?

jeremyb1
06-04-2004, 02:10 AM
Originally posted by pearso66
I have to bite on the Marte was going on the waiver wire deal and say, Maybe he was, but then it wouldnt be guaranteed we get him. IIRC it goes in order of the draft that year, so we would have had what, the 15th shot at him? Why not give up little to make sure you get him?

I don't feel Guerrier was considered to be "little" at the time of the deal. Baseball America rated him as the 5th best prospect in our system. Even if other teams were interested, the fact that it was ever considered that he would be placed on waivers means he had little value compared to a guy considered to be a legitimate prospect. KW and his staff tend to excel at discovering young and unrecognized talent for the most part but tend to overvalue "established" veterans and seem to fail to comprehend the notion of leverage in trades with the obvious exception of the Colon deal.

Jjav829
06-04-2004, 09:19 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Every think a selective few are biased in favor of Kenny, and will praise him no matter what he does?

I'm sure there are a few like that too though I hope your not implying I am one (because I certainly am not). But when the team is in first place and there are people picking out small things that KW did to try to bash him, well, it looks ridiculous.

alohafri
06-04-2004, 02:11 PM
Jjav, It is traditional for looooong-suffering Sox fans to be pessimistic even if we ARE in 1st place--things can (and often do)change quickly.

We are not like scrub fans who started making World Series plans long before this season started.

KW has a history of making some really awful moves so every time he does make a move, I cringe. Until the Sox get to the postseason under KW's watch, I will continue to be pessimistic about him.


-----Mrs. Aloha

jackbrohamer
06-04-2004, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by jlh0023
Sox fans really are the most pessimistic fans in the world....i mean i knew that, but this board makes it quite obvious. The team can't make one move without getting criticized for it.

And this is different from die-hard fans of every professional team in every major sport .... how?

TomParrish79
06-04-2004, 02:35 PM
I'm starvin, I want some Nachos

Jjav829
06-04-2004, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by alohafri
Jjav, It is traditional for looooong-suffering Sox fans to be pessimistic even if we ARE in 1st place--things can (and often do)change quickly.

We are not like scrub fans who started making World Series plans long before this season started.

KW has a history of making some really awful moves so every time he does make a move, I cringe. Until the Sox get to the postseason under KW's watch, I will continue to be pessimistic about him.


-----Mrs. Aloha

KW also has a history of making some really smart moves. So why only remember the bad ones?

jlh0023
06-04-2004, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
KW hasn't done anything wrong?! Come on. I'm not one of the pessimistic posters on this board, that sickens me too but to say that if you feel the GM has made mistakes you're pessimistic - that's ridiculous. KW is not the perfect GM. He certainly doesn't have the track record to suggest so as he inherited a 95 win team and has yet to make the playoff. I'm not saying that is his fault but his track record isn't so impressive that he deserves the benefit of the doubt in any situation. Some of KW's more egregious offenses have been:

- Dealing any kind of a prospect for Royce Clayton when he had a 5 million dollar salary and the Rangers needed to move him due to the ARod signing and then having to eat his contract and suffer through his playing time for way too long.

- Todd Ritchie for Kip Wells.

- Tipping over buffet tables in the clubhouse.

- Publicly ripping Rauch instead of keeping team discpline in house.

- Attempting to deal Jon Garland for Darrin Erstad

- Failing to properly leverage the fact that Marte was waiver wire bound when we acquired him.

- Dealing Foulke for Koch.

- Agreeing to a two year deal with Koch for close to what he'd figure to make in arbitration eliminating the option of non-tendering him if he struggled with little gain.

- Signing a good but not great 1B in Konerko to a deal that pays 8 million per season.

I'll be the first to admit that KW has made some great deals such as signing Loaiza and dealing for Uribe and Loaiza. However, to blindly insist he has done NOTHING wrong is ridiculous. In my opinion no GM is perfect and KW is significantly further from perfrection than some other GMs in the game. That's not being pessimistic that's being realistic.

Some of those were definately poor moves (i.e. Ritchie) but you have to consider that KW didn't have the advantage of hindsight when making those moves. I bet 90% of posters here liked the Koch trade at the time......and if Konerko did turn out to be great (which he could have based on his previous numbers) you would have praised KW as brilliant. Now he may not be the best in the business, but hes sufficient.

Also, bringing up Reed could easily hurt his trade value. I would not bet on him starting off great, it's not worth the risk, and Burke is suffiicient. In addition whoever does come up will not start anyway.

cpsoxfan
06-05-2004, 11:24 AM
Lots of them are, but I am not. My only b*tch is that the media wastes most of their time on the North side reporting about a FOURTH place team!

TornLabrum
06-05-2004, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by cpsoxfan
Lots of them are, but I am not. My only b*tch is that the media wastes most of their time on the North side reporting about a FOURTH place team!

Not any more! Now they're reporting about a fifth place team!

fquaye149
06-05-2004, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Every think a selective few are biased in favor of Kenny, and will praise him no matter what he does?

ha! ha ha ha. do you really think anyone has an emotional attachment to Kenny?


For the most part GM's are the kind of figures that are more likely to be irrationally hated than irrationally loved (with the exception of billy beane - soon to be played by that hunky george clooney)

will praise Kenny no matter what he does? Who here has ever said Kenny was a perfect GM in the way the FOBB say Moneyball man is?

johnny_mostil
06-05-2004, 03:59 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Well, Burke is well down on that list. Bryant Nelson is currently the most qualified hitter not named Borchard or Reed, and he's way more versatile than Burke.

But he's not a major league veteran like Jamie.

He's a flash in the pan and he can't catch.

A. Cavatica
06-05-2004, 04:54 PM
True about not catching, but I was responding to a post that said 'let's take the most qualified hitter not named Borchard or Reed'.

I maintain that we really don't need a catcher. We're replacing our starting right fielder and #3 hitter, not Alomar.

I don't know if Nelson is a flash in the pan. It took him a long time to reach the majors, but he was decent in his brief Red Sox trial, and I saw him play a couple of games this season and was impressed. Regardless, he's a switch hitter, he's batting .335 with 23 doubles, 2 triples, and 10 HR, has walked more than he's struck out, and can play multiple positions. He's been Charlotte's best hitter.

For comparison, Borchard is at .287 with 10 doubles, 0 triples, 10 HR, and almost three times as many strikeouts as walks; Burke was at .213 and his other numbers are no better.

Nelson is not on the 40-man roster, but he's a lot closer to being able to contribute to the ML team than several who are.

Whitesox029
06-05-2004, 11:25 PM
So the myths are true
haha....an oxymoron

jeremyb1
06-06-2004, 02:10 AM
Originally posted by jlh0023
Some of those were definately poor moves (i.e. Ritchie) but you have to consider that KW didn't have the advantage of hindsight when making those moves. I bet 90% of posters here liked the Koch trade at the time......and if Konerko did turn out to be great (which he could have based on his previous numbers) you would have praised KW as brilliant. Now he may not be the best in the business, but hes sufficient.

I couldn't agree with you more about the importance of not using hindsight to evaluate moves made by GMs. I've been emphatic about that in the past. The beauty of the internet is that we have records of what people said about the deals at the time they were completed. As was examined in another recent thread, a number of posters on this board myself included were outspoken against the Koch deal at the time it was completed as were sources such as Rob Neyer, Baseball Prospectus, and Baseball Primer. I'm not sure anyone knew that Koch was going to lose 5+ mph on his fastball but many agreed that Koch was overrated and Foulke was a far better pitcher. Personally, I didn't post on this board at the time of the Ritchie deal but I know I was quite apprehensive about dealing Wells.

TornLabrum
06-06-2004, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I couldn't agree with you more about the importance of not using hindsight to evaluate moves made by GMs. I've been emphatic about that in the past. The beauty of the internet is that we have records of what people said about the deals at the time they were completed. As was examined in another recent thread, a number of posters on this board myself included were outspoken against the Koch deal at the time it was completed as were sources such as Rob Neyer, Baseball Prospectus, and Baseball Primer. I'm not sure anyone knew that Koch was going to lose 5+ mph on his fastball but many agreed that Koch was overrated and Foulke was a far better pitcher. Personally, I didn't post on this board at the time of the Ritchie deal but I know I was quite apprehensive about dealing Wells.

I was on the record (and it's in the archives of my columns) as opposing the Ritchie deal because of one simple reason: you don't trade three pitchers for one unless that pitcher is a Randy Johnson/Roger Clemens/Curt Schilling type. It was a stupid trade for a .500 career pitcher with a straight fastball.

I also was on the record in the column that the Koch deal might be a problem based on the comments of Oakland writers who had seen him pitch every day. The main points were that he was always pitching on the edge, and that he was a one-trick pony (100 mph fastball that was laser straight). I didn't oppose the deal, but I was definitely quite apprehensive.

gosox41
06-06-2004, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
I was on the record (and it's in the archives of my columns) as opposing the Ritchie deal because of one simple reason: you don't trade three pitchers for one unless that pitcher is a Randy Johnson/Roger Clemens/Curt Schilling type. It was a stupid trade for a .500 career pitcher with a straight fastball.

I also was on the record in the column that the Koch deal might be a problem based on the comments of Oakland writers who had seen him pitch every day. The main points were that he was always pitching on the edge, and that he was a one-trick pony (100 mph fastball that was laser straight). I didn't oppose the deal, but I was definitely quite apprehensive.


And we all know I loved the Koch deal. I wasn't here when the Ritchie deal was made but I did attend SoxFest that year.

Can anyone remember KW comparing Ritchie to Job Lieber?

ROFLMAO. And people wonder why I bash KW.


Bob

SOXSINCE'70
06-06-2004, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by alohafri
Jjav, It is traditional for looooong-suffering Sox fans to be pessimistic even if we ARE in 1st place--things can (and often do)change quickly.

We are not like scrub fans who started making World Series plans long before this season started.

KW has a history of making some really awful moves so every time he does make a move, I cringe. Until the Sox get to the postseason under KW's watch, I will continue to be pessimistic about him.


-----Mrs. Aloha

As a 34 year veteran (and God knows many have suffered longer than I have) I agree with your post.There are too many blemishes standing in the way to be positive,positive,positive.
Sox fans are pessimists by nature.Thank management's stance on not paying for pitching (among other issues) for that.
You say you're a KW pessimist until the team makes the postseason.I am a KW pessimist until the team actually
WINS A WORLD FRIGGIN' SERIES !!
I turn 42 Saturday.I don't know how many "next years" any Sox fan has.WHY NOT THIS YEAR?!?!?!

Jjav829
06-06-2004, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
And we all know I loved the Koch deal. I wasn't here when the Ritchie deal was made but I did attend SoxFest that year.

Can anyone remember KW comparing Ritchie to Job Lieber?

ROFLMAO. And people wonder why I bash KW.


Bob

In fairness, there were PLENTY of people comparing Ritchie to Lieber from scouts to so-called baseball experts. There were a lot of people who felt that Ritchie just needed a chance of scenery to become a 15 game winner. Do you remember the Sox main competition for Ritchie? The Yankees. It wasn't like KW was the only person who felt Ritchie had everything there to become a good pitcher.

gosox41
06-06-2004, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by Jjav829
In fairness, there were PLENTY of people comparing Ritchie to Lieber from scouts to so-called baseball experts. There were a lot of people who felt that Ritchie just needed a chance of scenery to become a 15 game winner. Do you remember the Sox main competition for Ritchie? The Yankees. It wasn't like KW was the only person who felt Ritchie had everything there to become a good pitcher.

I do recall hearing something about the Yankees being interested in Ritchie. But I never understood the comparisons to Lieber. KW was the only one who I heard make them.

I excpect any NL pitcher coming to the AL is going to put up worse numbers

It looks like the Yankees would have been wrong about him to, but the Yankees were smart not to outbid the Sox for him. Also, the Yankees have a bigger margin of error where if Ritchie didn't work out they'd just buy some one else. The Sox gave up two young pitchers plus a veteran for for Ritchie thus making it that much more difficult to fill any holes created.


Bob