PDA

View Full Version : KW's Career


NardiWasHere
12-15-2004, 08:43 PM
I didn't like KW when he first was hired, but i have grown to like the moves he's made... can anyone think of a horrible trade the guy has made? everyone points to the Ritchie deal, but i couldnt stand little kip at the end of his sox career and fogg had a good two weeks in the begining of that season, after that he has been fairly brutal... The marte trade was very good as well as the colon trade... Boomer deal was a draw, neither team got what they expected... thoughts?

santo=dorf
12-15-2004, 08:47 PM
I didn't like KW when he first was hired, but i have grown to like the moves he's made... can anyone think of a horrible trade the guy has made? everyone points to the Ritchie deal, but i couldnt stand little kip at the end of his sox career and fogg had a good two weeks in the begining of that season, after that he has been fairly brutal... The marte trade was very good as well as the colon trade... Boomer deal was a draw, neither team got what they expected... thoughts?
Koch was a bad trade, but this oganization didn't want Foulke around for 2003.
Getting Clayton was stupid.
Ron Schueler takes "Credit" for the Ritchie trade with the exception of giving up Fogg.

KW won me over with the Colon trade.

nodiggity59
12-15-2004, 08:52 PM
I like Uribe, Gload, Loaiza, Takatsu, Marte... The only bad ones are Ritchie, Koch, and the 2nd coming of Alomar. Don't forget about Sullivan and Scoeny. Didn't work out but solid pick ups.

IMO, this year is crucial. The team has changed so much, if we don't have a winning record KW might get fired. He'll get kept around if we do tho.

SoxxoS
12-15-2004, 08:54 PM
KW makes moves to get better and wants a World Series really bad...and it's hard b/c he has Uncle Jerry's payroll contraints...All the bad moves he has made weren't deal breakers on a possible World Series appearance...I would like to have Kip back (without Nardi) and Fogg shouldn't be able to crack our staff at the start of spring training...

NardiWasHere
12-15-2004, 08:54 PM
Koch was a bad trade.

How could i just forget that? I think its safe to say that the koch era has been erased from my memory like a bad car accident or Godfather III.

DickAllen72
12-15-2004, 08:56 PM
I didn't like KW when he first was hired, but i have grown to like the moves he's made... can anyone think of a horrible trade the guy has made? everyone points to the Ritchie deal, but i couldnt stand little kip at the end of his sox career and fogg had a good two weeks in the begining of that season, after that he has been fairly brutal... The marte trade was very good as well as the colon trade... Boomer deal was a draw, neither team got what they expected... thoughts?

Everyone should realize that when Kenny was first hired as GM he was very young and was inexperienced. I think he was in a little over his head.

But I think he has improved every year and I think he's a good GM. Remember, Tony LaRussa was not a very good manager at all when the Sox first gave him the job, but he became a good manager on the Sox' watch.

Anyway, I like KW a lot. I love his attitude and it's nice to have a GM that wants to win as badly as the fans. That's rare, especially in Chicago.

MRKARNO
12-15-2004, 09:16 PM
I think Koch was the really bad trade, though the rationale behind it wasnt completely awful. A lot of his other trades that have been trumpeted as awful werent that bad. The Ritchie trade was bad, but not god awful. Fogg hasnt turned into anything. The only player in the deal we lost was Wells, who I really doubt could have been a major force in our rotation. He probably would have been a good 5th starter behind Garland. Uribe, Takatsu, Harris for Singleton, Loaiza, Gordon, Colon, Marte for Gurrier....He's had his fair share of good trades and moves as well. A lot of the KW haters like to ignore the good things he's done. Speaking as a KW defender, I defend him not because i think he's a great GM, but because I think he's an above average GM who's doing his damndest to make this team as good as possible.

oeo
12-15-2004, 09:28 PM
Koch was a bad trade, but this oganization didn't want Foulke around for 2003.
Getting Clayton was stupid.
Ron Schueler takes "Credit" for the Ritchie trade with the exception of giving up Fogg.

KW won me over with the Colon trade. Sorry for being stupid, and I'm probably going to get slaughtered for this, but...everyone talks about the "Ritchie" trade and I have never known what it was to be so angry about.

JRIG
12-15-2004, 09:29 PM
The Koch trade
The Ritchie trade
Both Alomar trades
The 2nd Everett trade
The Clayton trade
The Durham trade
The Lee trade
The Garcia trade (yes, I know I'm in the minority on this)
And, quite possibly before the end of this season...the Contreras trade

MRKARNO
12-15-2004, 09:37 PM
The Koch trade
The Ritchie trade
Both Alomar trades
The 2nd Everett trade
The Clayton trade
The Durham trade
The Lee trade
The Garcia trade (yes, I know I'm in the minority on this)
And, quite possibly before the end of this season...the Contreras trade
Can you explain why the Durham and Clayton trades were "horrible?" I dont see how they were. They might not have been beneficial ones, but how can you argue that they harmed the team?

Daver
12-15-2004, 09:39 PM
Can someone tell me why we are having this discussion again?

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/daver/deadhorse.gif

JRIG
12-15-2004, 09:43 PM
Can you explain why the Durham and Clayton trades were "horrible?" I dont see how they were. They might not have been beneficial ones, but how can you argue that they harmed the team?
Clayton acquisition was awful. It forced the merry-go-round of positions for Valentin and subjecting Clayton's sub-.100 hitting for the first 3 months each season. Not to mention it underscores a KW weakness, not addressing the team's weaknesses. After 2000, SS was one of the least of the team's problems.

The Durham trade was terrible in that we hardly got anything close to market value. And yes, I know KW was planning on draft pick compensation being eliminated. I think he should hjave known better. Just look at what the Sox paid to get Roberto Alomar just one year later. The deal underscores one of KW's other weaknesses, the inability to correctly value his team's assets.

Flight #24
12-15-2004, 09:47 PM
Can someone tell me why we are having this discussion again?

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/daver/deadhorse.gif:worship:

MRKARNO
12-15-2004, 09:50 PM
Can someone tell me why we are having this discussion again?

No

JRIG
12-15-2004, 09:53 PM
No
Sorry, I should know better. Especially because the offseason isn't even over.

NardiWasHere
12-16-2004, 12:04 AM
i just figured after a deal that changes the look of the team and a deal that could be the defining moment of his stay here, it was a good time to reflect on his preformance.... i don't believe its beating a dead horse given the current circumstances... but maybe thats just me

santo=dorf
12-16-2004, 12:08 AM
The Koch trade
The Ritchie trade
Both Alomar trades
The 2nd Everett trade
The Clayton trade
The Durham trade
The Lee trade
The Garcia trade (yes, I know I'm in the minority on this)
And, quite possibly before the end of this season...the Contreras trade
Alomar trades?
Andrew Salvo is in the independent league, Royce Ring was demoted from AAA to AA and was available in the rule 5 draft, and Edwin Almonte was released by the Mets and Red Sox!

:reinsy
"And don't forget the cash, which is just as good as money."

The Lee trade isn't over as KW has yet to spend the money, and the season hasn't even ****ing started yet. :kukoo:

Baines2Raines
12-16-2004, 02:30 AM
Clayton acquisition was awful. It forced the merry-go-round of positions for Valentin and subjecting Clayton's sub-.100 hitting for the first 3 months each season. Not to mention it underscores a KW weakness, not addressing the team's weaknesses. After 2000, SS was one of the least of the team's problems.

The Durham trade was terrible in that we hardly got anything close to market value. And yes, I know KW was planning on draft pick compensation being eliminated. I think he should hjave known better. Just look at what the Sox paid to get Roberto Alomar just one year later. The deal underscores one of KW's other weaknesses, the inability to correctly value his team's assets.What market valve was there for Durham? Was a top level prospect coming the White Sox way? Not for a player who was going to be a free agent after the season.

The Sox gave up Royce Ring, Edwin Almonte, and Andrew Salvo to get Robbie Alomar. Any major leaguers there? Oh who did the White Sox give to Arizona to get Robbie back last year? When the trade was made it was the PTBNL.

I think KW actually places the correct valve on his team's assests. The Jon Rauch's, Kip Well's, Josh Fogg's, Aaron Myette's haven't done much.

Some of the players acquired haven't worked out and the White Sox haven't made the playoffs. But does that blame go all to KW? Jerry or Ozzie doesn't get any of the blame?

gosox41
12-16-2004, 09:53 AM
I didn't like KW when he first was hired, but i have grown to like the moves he's made... can anyone think of a horrible trade the guy has made? everyone points to the Ritchie deal, but i couldnt stand little kip at the end of his sox career and fogg had a good two weeks in the begining of that season, after that he has been fairly brutal... The marte trade was very good as well as the colon trade... Boomer deal was a draw, neither team got what they expected... thoughts?
He's getting better, but the jury is still out with me. As far as I'm concerned this is his make or break offseason. If he fails to get a fifth starting pitcherr that is more then decent then I see him as a failure because that was clearly the team's biggest hole.


Bob

CubKilla
12-16-2004, 11:26 AM
A lot of his other trades that have been trumpeted as awful werent that bad. The Ritchie trade was bad, but not god awful. Fogg hasnt turned into anything. The only player in the deal we lost was Wells, who I really doubt could have been a major force in our rotation. He probably would have been a good 5th starter behind Garland.
You could make an argument that Fogg's or Well's 5-7 somewhat dominant outings a year each since the Ritchie Trade have been what have kept the White Sox out of the playoff's the last 2 years since we haven't had a 5th starter worth spit.

Wasn't it late July of '04 before Rauch finally won a game for the Sox out of the 5th spot? How many games were won in the 5th spot in '03?

mcfish
12-16-2004, 11:57 AM
You could make an argument that Fogg's or Well's 5-7 somewhat dominant outings a year each since the Ritchie Trade have been what have kept the White Sox out of the playoff's the last 2 years since we haven't had a 5th starter worth spit.

Wasn't it late July of '04 before Rauch finally won a game for the Sox out of the 5th spot? How many games were won in the 5th spot in '03?The Sox won their first game with a fifth starter on May 13 in Diaz's debut against Baltimore, but Diaz did not get the win. It was raining and Paulie hit a miracle 3 run homer to take the lead before a very long rain delay and then Koch came out and didn't blow it. What a fun night that was...

June 24th Rauch won at home against Cleveland and then on June 26th, Felix Diaz beat the Chicago national squad at home. Those 2 wins got us excited that maybe one of them could win a few games, but it didn't happen again until Sept 6 and Sept 11, when Grilli won back to back games to get us excited again, but not really because who really cared about the 5th starter at that point?

My point is, you're right. Our 5th starters did suck.

Baines2Raines
12-16-2004, 03:42 PM
You could make an argument that Fogg's or Well's 5-7 somewhat dominant outings a year each since the Ritchie Trade have been what have kept the White Sox out of the playoff's the last 2 years since we haven't had a 5th starter worth spit.

Wasn't it late July of '04 before Rauch finally won a game for the Sox out of the 5th spot? How many games were won in the 5th spot in '03?
You have to remember why the trade was made at that time. The White Sox were coming off a disappointing season, 2001. The were going to lose David Wells. And as this board proves, everybody is impatient. So the trade was made. It was a very bad trade. Ritchie was terrible. He couldn't handle the pressure of being the #1 starter on a team that was suppose to contend.

Wells and Fogg can pitch during August and Sept with no pressure with the Pirates and they aren't setting the world on fire. High ERA's. No more than 200 innings. So during a pennant race or at least during a time when the team has a shot at winning the division, can those two guys handle the pressure?

Last year, Fogg was 11-10. 4.64 ERA in 179 innings. Wells went 5-7. 4.55 ERA in 139 innings. Both in the NL and the almost automatic out. Would either of those helped the White Sox win the division?

I remember something a friend of mine who is confused Cub fan told me. He said he wouldn't trade 84 and 89 for anything. He still would have made the trade of Joe Carter for Sutcliffe. Even though the Cubs choked in 84 and got blown out in 89 and Carter won two World Series.