PDA

View Full Version : The Reason why KW is a loser


Gumshoe
06-07-2004, 09:01 AM
Gentlemen:

Look ---> He's not willing to truly do what it takes to put a winner out there, namely, he's not willing to let go of his ego. Any other team in the majors would have sent Koch to Mars after last year. Now, I don't "hate Billy Koch". Don't get me wrong. But I do know this. He was ATROCIOUS last year, and he is marginal at best this year (read: ERA), and I don't see him getting any better any time soon.

We don't deserve to win NOW or in the PLAYOFFS if we can't freakin' see that this guy is washed up.

KW makes moves, and he makes some good moves, to his credit. But when it comes down to it, if you can't see some of the most obvious crap in the world (letting BK go), I don't care how many other "good moves" you make, you aren't going to win.

For this reason, I've always chided KW. Do what is proper, Kenny. It's so easy to see! You brought in a guy who is a real closer and you don't give him a chance, instead you keep trotting out a guy who is not reliable. What's wrong? Oh, I know what's wrong ... he throws a nasty change and gets people out . Oh yeah, that's not what a closer "should do" ... hmmm

You messed up on the Foulke deal. Please finally admit it.
Oh wait,

Neal Cotts is going to save us from that deal ...

Waiting ...

G

batmanZoSo
06-07-2004, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Gentlemen:

Look ---> He's not willing to truly do what it takes to put a winner out there, namely, he's not willing to let go of his ego. Any other team in the majors would have sent Koch to Mars after last year. Now, I don't "hate Billy Koch". Don't get me wrong. But I do know this. He was ATROCIOUS last year, and he is marginal at best this year (read: ERA), and I don't see him getting any better any time soon.

We don't deserve to win NOW or in the PLAYOFFS if we can't freakin' see that this guy is washed up.

KW makes moves, and he makes some good moves, to his credit. But when it comes down to it, if you can't see some of the most obvious crap in the world (letting BK go), I don't care how many other "good moves" you make, you aren't going to win.

For this reason, I've always chided KW. Do what is proper, Kenny. It's so easy to see! You brought in a guy who is a real closer and you don't give him a chance, instead you keep trotting out a guy who is not reliable. What's wrong? Oh, I know what's wrong ... he throws a nasty change and gets people out . Oh yeah, that's not what a closer "should do" ... hmmm

You messed up on the Foulke deal. Please finally admit it.
Oh wait,

Neal Cotts is going to save us from that deal ...

Waiting ...

G

Up until yesterday, there still was some hope that Koch might be able to squeak by as our closer. And there is no really good option on the team. KW is far from perfect, but he's doing a good job with the money he's alloted.

bennyw41
06-07-2004, 09:18 AM
Come on Gumshoe. You are going to base your judgement on this guy because he is stuck with a bad contract and a unexpected bad closer? If that's the case, then 25 GM's in the MLB are horrible. I think you need to remove yourself from yesterday's game, and look at the whole pic.

SoxOnTop
06-07-2004, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
Up until yesterday, there still was some hope that Koch might be able to squeak by as our closer. And there is no really good option on the team . KW is far from perfect, but he's doing a good job with the money he's alloted.


No good option!!?? We've got the all time saves leader from Japan on our roster with an ERA under 1.5!! Plus we've got a nails lefty with an ERA of 2.8 who showed us last year that he could close games out. How can you say we don't have any other options!!!!

batmanZoSo
06-07-2004, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by SoxOnTop
No good option!!?? We've got the all time saves leader from Japan on our roster with an ERA under 1.5!! Plus we've got a nails lefty with an ERA of 2.8 who showed us last year that he could close games out. How can you say we don't have any other options!!!!

We never had someone that we could say Okay if Koch doesn't work out we can just plug in this guy. Marte is NOT a closer and he's badly needed at setup. Shingo right now is our best option, but I was talking about the whole year...it's taken a lot of good outings for him to prove his worth. Now you give him a shot. And it's only because we're desperate.

Gumshoe
06-07-2004, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by bennyw41
Come on Gumshoe. You are going to base your judgement on this guy because he is stuck with a bad contract and a unexpected bad closer? If that's the case, then 25 GM's in the MLB are horrible. I think you need to remove yourself from yesterday's game, and look at the whole pic.

I've been looking at the whole picture since KW stepped in! We've had so much talent (some of it due to KW, yes), but what costed us the most last year? Relief pitching! What did we have in Foulke? The game's best closer! What do we need NOW?

RELIEF pitching!

What am I not seeing? That is the big picture that is costing us, and it can be remedied SO EASILY! Why isn't it? Because we'd rather hope a guy who sucks can do something we KNOW he can't because of one of two things, OR BOTH

1) Pride
2) Money

Please tell me what I haven't been watching. This is ridiculous.

Gumshoe

bennyw41
06-07-2004, 10:05 AM
At the time, the same anti-koch sentiments were going on with Foulke. At the time, Koch was a good pitcher. The deals are now done, and there is a guy making an obscene amount of money, and sucking it up. The GM can't just cut his loses, or make a miracle trade. What you haven't been looking at is the business of sports, you are only looking at the fan side. Its hard to seperate the two.

Gumshoe
06-07-2004, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by bennyw41
At the time, the same anti-koch sentiments were going on with Foulke. At the time, Koch was a good pitcher. The deals are now done, and there is a guy making an obscene amount of money, and sucking it up. The GM can't just cut his loses, or make a miracle trade. What you haven't been looking at is the business of sports, you are only looking at the fan side. Its hard to seperate the two.

This is total insolence. Last time I checked, the business side and fan side were interested in WINNING. Stop saying ridiculous crap. You've got me believing if Koch had no arm they'd still run him out there~!!!!!!

That's how idiotic you sound right now!

G

SoxOnTop
06-07-2004, 10:08 AM
While I agree that Botch needs to be relegated to non-save 3+/- run differential innings, I don't think you can blame his usage this year on KW. Yes, Prof Chaos made the move and signed him to that terrible deal, but who the heck was going to take him off of our hands last year for 6 Mil?? I would definitely suggest that it was a better option to keep him on the roster and hope he could regain some of his stuff and contribute as a reliever (not necessarily a closer) rather than cut him. We definitely couldn't afford to spend 6 mil on someone not playing for the Sox.

Secondly, Ozzie is making the moves out there. He knows Boch is a head case, so he's been standing behind him to make sure that if Koch can no longer handle the closer role, it is not because he is looking over his shoulder and wondering what Ozzie's going to do. Ozzie runs his ship the way he's going to run it so I don't think that its was KW's call to use him as the closer up until now. I only hope that Oz has lost faith in him and will only use him in situations that aren't tight and game threatening.

poorme
06-07-2004, 10:10 AM
Players with a lot more money on their contracts have been released.

bennyw41
06-07-2004, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
This is total insolence. Last time I checked, the business side and fan side were interested in WINNING. Stop saying ridiculous crap. You've got me believing if Koch had no arm they'd still run him out there~!!!!!!

That's how idiotic you sound right now!

G

Huh? You are making no sense now. Koch was a good pick up at the time. Now we're stuck with him, no one wants a crappy 6 million dollar player. Is that insolence(I don't even think this word works in this context, but okay...)?

The point is, you can't look at a GM and blame him everytime Koch Blows a save. I don't think he got Koch to blow saves.

SSN721
06-07-2004, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
What did we have in Foulke? The game's best closer!

Gumshoe

You have to be kidding, the games best closer? I cant argue with Koch being totally worthless and a marginal at best closer that seems like he would be lucky to have 60-70% save percentage if he closed th rest of the year. But you cant tell me that Foulke is better then Gagne or Rivera or is in that class. I dont think so. He is good but he has blown his share of games too. That being said, it would be nice to still have him but I think the way events were at the time he was traded it would have been nearly impossible for the White Sox to keep him and use him properly with the way everything else was set up in the organization at the time.

sas1974
06-07-2004, 10:42 AM
Without getting into whether or not the Foulke/Koch trade was good or bad, NO GM is going to come out and say that he made a mistake in trading for a guy that is still on his team.

And yes, he has an ego. I would venture to guess that all GMs have egos. They have to in order to succeed. They have to make HUGE(in baseball terms; I know he's not curing cancer) decisions that most of those that critize will never have to make. He doesn't have the luxury of sitting on his fat ass on his couch, using hindsight to evaluate the success/failure of a trade.

poorme
06-07-2004, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by sas1974
Without getting into whether or not the Foulke/Koch trade was good or bad, NO GM is going to come out and say that he made a mistake in trading for a guy that is still on his team.

And yes, he has an ego. I would venture to guess that all GMs have egos. They have to in order to succeed. They have to make HUGE(in baseball terms; I know he's not curing cancer) decisions that most of those that critize will never have to make. He doesn't have the luxury of sitting on his fat ass on his couch, using hindsight to evaluate the success/failure of a trade.

1. Good "managers" admit mistakes, cut their loses and move on.

2. I'm sure KW has a very luxurious couch where he rests his large posterior.

sas1974
06-07-2004, 10:49 AM
Originally posted by poorme
1. Good "managers" admit mistakes, cut their loses and move on.

2. I'm sure KW has a very luxurious couch where he rests his large posterior.

1. True. My general point was that he's not going to bad mouth Koch, by saying he shouldn't have traded for him. KW is big on chemistry and that would not be very good for chemistry. And while it might be the best option at this point, I think most of us would agree that THIS team isn't going to pay a guy $6MM to sit home and watch soap operas all day.

2. And yes, I am quite certain that KW can afford a very nice sofa as well. :D:

mdep524
06-07-2004, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by SoxOnTop
While I agree that Botch needs to be relegated to non-save 3+/- run differential innings, I don't think you can blame his usage this year on KW. Yes, Prof Chaos made the move and signed him to that terrible deal, but who the heck was going to take him off of our hands last year for 6 Mil?? I would definitely suggest that it was a better option to keep him on the roster and hope he could regain some of his stuff and contribute as a reliever (not necessarily a closer) rather than cut him. We definitely couldn't afford to spend 6 mil on someone not playing for the Sox.

See, the thing that everyone seems to miss when considering releasing Koch is that there is absolutely NO difference in money in keeping hiim on the team or releasing him: his contract is a SUNK COST. Since the money is exactly the same, it shouldn't factor into the baseball decision at all.

It boils down to this: If the Sox can win more games with Koch off the team, and the payrolls for the two options are identical, why WOULDN'T you pick the option that produces more wins?

The only reasons you wouldn't would be because you are too damn stubborn and have too big of an ego. Terrible.

FarWestChicago
06-07-2004, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by SSN721
You have to be kidding, the games best closer?Classic FOBB behavior. We can all agree BB won the Foulke/Krotch trade. But the devout FOBB's can't settle for what's realistic. They have to claim Keith "I've blown almost every big game I've ever pitched in but the sample size is small so the statheads can protect me" Foulke is the best reliever in the game. Sheesh, just leave well enough alone. Your idol won that trade. You don't need to elevate it to worship. :smile:

JRIG
06-07-2004, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Classic FOBB behavior. We can all agree BB won the Foulke/Krotch trade. But the devout FOBB's can't settle for what's realistic. They have to claim Keith "I've blown almost every big game I've ever pitched in but the sample size is small so the statheads can protect me" Foulke is the best reliever in the game. Sheesh, just leave well enough alone. Your idol won that trade. You don't need to elevate it to worship. :smile:

Well, if you don't want to trust the FOBB on this board, how about a study from ESPN and Baseball Prospectus? (http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/bp/1375627.html)

SoxOnTop
06-07-2004, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by mdep524
See, the thing that everyone seems to miss when considering releasing Koch is that there is absolutely NO difference in money in keeping hiim on the team or releasing him: his contract is a SUNK COST. Since the money is exactly the same, it shouldn't factor into the baseball decision at all.

It boils down to this: If the Sox can win more games with Koch off the team, and the payrolls for the two options are identical, why WOULDN'T you pick the option that produces more wins?

The only reasons you wouldn't would be because you are too damn stubborn and have too big of an ego. Terrible.

Yes, his $6 MIL salary is a sunk cost, but who would you have replace him? He is still a veteran reliever and even if he doesn't have it in him to close, he still has value as a veteran reliever. If you go out on the market to get a reliever with his experience level what would it cost you? Money and prospects. So unless you see a righty reliever in our system ready to replace him that won't cost us jack squat there is still a cost involved. This is not about KW's ego, this is about the reality of the Sox situation.

FarWestChicago
06-07-2004, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by JRIG
Well, if you don't want to trust the FOBB on this board, how about a study from ESPN and Baseball Prospectus? (http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/bp/1375627.html) Flawed methodology. Ignore his performance under pressure all you want. It doesn't make it go away. BTW, ESPN the Tabloid? Well, at least the statheads at BP have some credibility. But ESPN? :?:

jlh0023
06-07-2004, 01:05 PM
:threadsucks

mdep524
06-07-2004, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by SoxOnTop
Yes, his $6 MIL salary is a sunk cost, but who would you have replace him? He is still a veteran reliever and even if he doesn't have it in him to close, he still has value as a veteran reliever. If you go out on the market to get a reliever with his experience level what would it cost you? Money and prospects. So unless you see a righty reliever in our system ready to replace him that won't cost us jack squat there is still a cost involved. This is not about KW's ego, this is about the reality of the Sox situation.

What inherent value does he have as a veteran reliever? I would say none. He's not mentoring anyone, he certainly isn't clutch, what does he bring to the table?

About acquiring a reliever for prospects and cash, the Sox would have to do that anyway, regardless of Koch's status on the team (unless Koch was still the close, which is ridiculous by all accounts).

Also, Livan Hernandez and K-Rod are two relatively recent examples of rookie pitchers coming up and having a huge impact on the playoffs. I would rather have Felix Diaz or Arnie Munoz up here than Koch.

gosox41
06-07-2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by bennyw41
Come on Gumshoe. You are going to base your judgement on this guy because he is stuck with a bad contract and a unexpected bad closer? If that's the case, then 25 GM's in the MLB are horrible. I think you need to remove yourself from yesterday's game, and look at the whole pic.


I assume you mean Koch's contract is the bad one because there are a couple of them out there.

So making that assumption:

1. Koch was never a 'good' closer. Look at his WHIP, and # of BB's as two examples. He certainly was never better then Foulke.

2. KW signed Koch to this contract. So I guess I will blame KW for trading for an inferior closer and paying him a big contract.


Bob

gosox41
06-07-2004, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by JRIG
Well, if you don't want to trust the FOBB on this board, how about a study from ESPN and Baseball Prospectus? (http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/bp/1375627.html)



There we go with those confusing stats again. You can make them say whatever you want. I have something to say. 44 Saves!!! Yeah Billy. He's sooooo much better the Foulke. Why are you even talking to me about 'Runs Prevented'' WHIP and 'Inherited Runners'????


Bob

hold2dibber
06-07-2004, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by mdep524
It boils down to this: If the Sox can win more games with Koch off the team, and the payrolls for the two options are identical, why WOULDN'T you pick the option that produces more wins?

The only reasons you wouldn't would be because you are too damn stubborn and have too big of an ego. Terrible.

Um, isn't it also possible that another reason is that they think Koch may return to form and be successful? That he has shown a few flashes of being a good pitcher this year? There are a BUNCH of pitchers on MLB rosters that have been far worse than Koch (as hard to believe as that is) this year; KC hasn't released Brian Anderson. Minnesota hasn't released Johann Santana. The D'Backs haven't released Mantei. The Expos haven't released Biddle. Anaheim is still holding onto John Lackey and Bartolo Colon. I could go on and on (and on). Are ALL of those teams holding onto ALL of those players only because of stubborness or ego? Of course not. To attribute the Sox "failure" to cut Koch to those reasons is absurd.

Lip Man 1
06-07-2004, 05:29 PM
Folks:

I'm not defending nor condemming anyone in regards to the Koch / Foulke deal but an important point is being missed here.

It's the reasoning behind the deal in the first place.

The Sox were NOT going to re-sign Foulke probably because he wanted more money being an elite closer. This forced Williams into making a deal on the grounds that he had a chance to keep Koch for a longer period of time.

The philosophy of ownership is what causes these types of deals to be made in the first place. With ownership all that matters is how much they have to pay a player and how to avoid doing it.

Until that philosophy is changed you could easily see more deals like this in the future, based not on talent but on cost.

That is not the way to win in baseball.

Lip

FarWestChicago
06-07-2004, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Folks:

I'm not defending nor condemming anyone in regards to the Koch / Foulke deal but an important point is being missed here.Nothing is being missed, Lip. Everybody knows Reinsy is cheap. Every last single person who visits this board. And if they didn't, I'm certain one of your dozen remnders per day would enlighten them.

dpbyron
06-07-2004, 05:38 PM
Agreed!

Keith Foulke blew more BIG saves than I can even remember. OVERATED

:threadsucks

maurice
06-07-2004, 07:03 PM
There's no question that Foulke is one of the best closers in baseball and has been for several years. He's not Gagne or Rivera, but he's one step behind them and light years ahead of Koch (even pre-Sox Koch) and just about every other closer out there. Anybody who can't see that deserves the agony of every Koch appearance.

gosox41
06-07-2004, 09:25 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Folks:

I'm not defending nor condemming anyone in regards to the Koch / Foulke deal but an important point is being missed here.

It's the reasoning behind the deal in the first place.

The Sox were NOT going to re-sign Foulke probably because he wanted more money being an elite closer. This forced Williams into making a deal on the grounds that he had a chance to keep Koch for a longer period of time.

The philosophy of ownership is what causes these types of deals to be made in the first place. With ownership all that matters is how much they have to pay a player and how to avoid doing it.

Until that philosophy is changed you could easily see more deals like this in the future, based not on talent but on cost.

That is not the way to win in baseball.

Lip

But here's somethinh else to consider regarding the trade:

1. Why did KW have to trade a closer for a closer? It's too easy to compare the two. If KW had made the trade for a young proven decent SS plus pitching or something I can see it.

2. THis leads to my next point of how grossly KW has mismanaged the FA market. He overpaid to keep PK around. He overpaid for Koch. Remember when he made that ill fated trade, KW also split the diffrences in salary so the trade saved the team $1 mill. But then he promptly gave Koch an extenstion to avoid arbitration giving him about $4 mill in '03 and $6 mill this year. As a FA, Foulke received a back loaded 4 year $24 mill contract. According to ESPN.com Foulke is only making $3.5 mill this year.


The nerve of some owners to offer back loaded contracts

While we don't know what else was offered to Foulke we do know that he is getting an average of $6 mill per and that odds are no team had a significantly better offer on the table.


Bob

Randar68
06-07-2004, 09:32 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Nothing is being missed, Lip. Everybody knows Reinsy is cheap. Every last single person who visits this board. And if they didn't, I'm certain one of your dozen remnders per day would enlighten them.

At least you know what Lip is going to say. Bob (gosox) is so ridiculous, each post is a new measure of lunacy, incoherent negativity, and a general lack of a grasp on reality...

voodoochile
06-07-2004, 10:12 PM
You know what this message board really and truly needs to make it complete? It needs one more anti-KW rant based on the Foulke/Koch trade. Lord knows that topic hasn't been thoroughly beaten into the ground yet. Please someone anyone start one more I hate KW thread. Heck, if this trade isn't enough for you, feel free to bring up Ritchie, Clayton or whatever else tickles your fancy. It isn't enough that the Sox are in first place and two games up in the loss column in June, no no no. It is clearly entirely KW's fault that the Sox aren't 10 games up with the best record in baseball and 20 games better than last year to date. Come on and rant. You can do it. Together you can turn this entire message board into one long whine session about how KW killed your sister's, boyfriends, Uncle's, second-Cousin twice removed's puppy. It must be true, after all, I read it on the Internet...

Screw teal. If you can't tell I was being sarcastic, then you really need to look up the word in the dictionary...

GET OVER IT PEOPLE!

Thanks, I feel so much better... :D:

Gumshoe
06-07-2004, 11:27 PM
"Hi guys, my name is Randar and I call other people lunatics because I don't understand subjective analysis or statistical analysis, for that matter. Therefore, Bob must be crazy"

Randar, argue the points. Sometimes it makes me wonder what you do for a living --- does someone actually PAY YOU to do something?

Bob, how can these people exist? He can't be serious

G

Randar68
06-07-2004, 11:29 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
"Hi guys, my name is Randar and I call other people lunatics because I don't understand subjective analysis or statistical analysis, for that matter. Therefore, Bob must be crazy"

Randar, argue the points. Sometimes it makes me wonder what you do for a living --- does someone actually PAY YOU to do something?

Bob, how can these people exist? He can't be serious

G

:troll

basilesox
06-08-2004, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
We never had someone that we could say Okay if Koch doesn't work out we can just plug in this guy. Marte is NOT a closer and he's badly needed at setup. Shingo right now is our best option, but I was talking about the whole year...it's taken a lot of good outings for him to prove his worth. Now you give him a shot. And it's only because we're desperate.


What makes you think that Marte Is NOT A CLOSER. He has better stuff than everybody else in the bullpen. Why can't Adkins, Cotts, and Takatsu set up.

I can never understand how Left handed pitchers are rarely closers and instead used in special lefty-lefty situations only. If your best bullpen pitcher is a lefty then he should be the closer, Period.

Our situation could definitely merit the use of Marte as a closer, when we have lefties Cotts and Wunsch available to be so called "lefty to lefty" specialists.