PDA

View Full Version : Foulke or Shingo?


konerko1413
01-04-2005, 06:32 PM
Alot of people hate kenny williams for losing foulke, but i wonderde if anyone doesnt care as much becuz it allowed us to get shingo, cuz if we still had foulke we probably would not have looked into shingo

Anyone feel this way, i liked foulke alot and was mad that we got rid of him, i still wish we had him over shingo, even though shingo is great with the frisbee

How many people liked foulke in the bull pen of the world series, when he was throwin the ball up and down before the ninth inning, i loved it, it was great to see a major leaguer acting like a kid (in a good way) thats how baseball should be

HomeFish
01-04-2005, 06:33 PM
Foulke has had multiple good seasons in the American League. Shingo has not.

For all we know, Shingo's 2004 numbers are as fortelling of greatness as Loaiza's 2003 was.

konerko1413
01-04-2005, 06:35 PM
im not disagreeing but shingo is the all time saves leader in japan, that should qualify for something, but its not in the major leagues, we have to see what happens this year

BRDSR
01-04-2005, 06:37 PM
Alot of people hate kenny williams for losing foulke, but i wonderde if anyone doesnt care as much becuz it allowed us to get shingo, cuz if we still had foulke we probably would not have looked into shingo

Anyone feel this way, i liked foulke alot and was mad that we got rid of him, i still wish we had him over shingo, even though shingo is great with the frisbee

How many people liked foulke in the bull pen of the world series, when he was throwin the ball up and down before the ninth inning, i loved it, it was great to see a major leaguer acting like a kid (in a good way) thats how baseball should be
Foulke was on the team back when I still played baseball competitively, and at the time he was by far my favorite player. His changeup was to die for. When he threw it the way he wanted to throw it, it was a picture perfect changeup. I believe I actually drooled over it on multiple occasions.

The other thing I liked about Foulke is that he always acted cool and collected. When he got a save, he acted like he'd done it before and he'd do it again. No showboating. This is the biggest problem that I have with the NFL. Guy scores a touchdown and he just has to perform some elaborate, preconceived little dance to celebrate. Whatever happened to Barry Sanders. He used to cross that line and toss the ball to the ref just like he did when he was getting up from underneath a pile of lineman. Barry Sanders was awesome. I'd give a lot to see him play again.

MUsoxfan
01-04-2005, 06:39 PM
I don't disagree with trading Foulke. Foulke was not getting it done at the time while Billy Koch was getting it done at the time. They seemed to flip-flop when they switched teams. I believe the Sox were just as likely to get Shingo regardless of Foulke being on the team. He was brought in as a setup guy and not a closer. He became a closer, and a pretty good closer

zach074
01-04-2005, 06:41 PM
I would rather have Foulke only because he has proven himself more than Shingo. But Shingo does have a cool entrance, hopefully we will see alot of him this year.

gosox41
01-04-2005, 10:57 PM
im not disagreeing but shingo is the all time saves leader in japan, that should qualify for something, but its not in the major leagues, we have to see what happens this year
I'd take Foulke over Shingo. Foulke has previous success in the majrs and is younger then Shingo.



Bob

gobears1987
01-04-2005, 10:58 PM
To those who think we shouldn't have traded Foulke, I refer you to a recent Buehrle interview on WMVP where he rhetorically asked where Foulke's good numbers he had this year were when he was on the Sox.

Shingo hasn't fully proved himself, but I love him and the frisbee. IT'S SHINGOTIME!!!!

sircaffey1
01-04-2005, 11:02 PM
I think we still would have gotten Shingo even if we had Foulke. KW was looking for a bargain and Shingo provided it. A low risk, high reward type signing. Our bullpen would be unbelievable if we still have Foulkey...

Foulke
Shingo
Marte
Hermanson
Vizacaino
Polittle/Cotts

konerko1413
01-04-2005, 11:12 PM
i agree with pretty much what u guys said, he was my favorite pitcher with the sox but after we traded him and i was kinda young and was only following the sox, i lost interest in him, after i saw him in the bullpen though, about to go to pitch in the biggest game of his life, and he was doing something as simple as just throwing the ball up and catching it, he jumped right back onto my top 5 list, that reminded me of myself playing baseball, u dont see that too often, a major leaguer who takes u back to the memories of playin as a little kid

my top 5: konerko, rose, robinson, foulke, and clemens:)

Foulke29
01-04-2005, 11:23 PM
Foulke --- .

ChiWhiteSox1337
01-04-2005, 11:25 PM
I don't disagree with trading Foulke. Foulke was not getting it done at the time while Billy Koch was getting it done at the time. They seemed to flip-flop when they switched teams. I believe the Sox were just as likely to get Shingo regardless of Foulke being on the team. He was brought in as a setup guy and not a closer. He became a closer, and a pretty good closer Exactly, at the time it looked like a great trade for the Sox. Foulke whined about wanting to get a shot at the rotation and was going to be an FA in a year. Jerry Manuel, not Kenny Williams, ran Foulke out of town by using him as mop up for the entire second half of the 2002 season, a role in which he excelled at with an ERA under 1. As for Foulke still being on this team, would I like him to be on this team after his 2003 and 2004 performances? Definitely, but a closer making that much money wouldn't fit into our budget, which is one of the reasons why the Sox got rid of Foulke back in 2002.

FarWestChicago
01-04-2005, 11:29 PM
Definitely, but a closer making that much money wouldn't fit into our budget, which is one of the reasons why the Sox got rid of Foulke back in 2002.:fobbgod:

Hey, I dumped Foulke, too.

ChiWhiteSox1337
01-04-2005, 11:38 PM
:fobbgod:

Hey, I dumped Foulke, too. For the great arthur rhodes! Of course, FOBBs could go on for days why it was a great move to sign Rhodes to a 3 year deal worth $9 million before the 2004 season started. It was funny to watch them praise BB a year later for dumping Rhodes because his contract was an albatross along with Mark Redmond to the Pirates for a highly overpaid catcher.

doublem23
01-04-2005, 11:43 PM
The Foulke/Koch deal was awful from the start? Keith not getting it done? In his last half-season with the Sox his ERA was like 1 and change.

MUsoxfan
01-04-2005, 11:48 PM
Keith not getting it done? In his last half-season with the Sox his ERA was like 1 and change.
He certainly wasn't getting it done as a closer....that's why he was mopping up. I'm not saying he was complete garbage, because if he was there was no way we would have recieved a really good Billy Koch for him

ChiWhiteSox1337
01-04-2005, 11:49 PM
The Foulke/Koch deal was awful from the start? Keith not getting it done? In his last half-season with the Sox his ERA was like 1 and change. Foulke had that great ERA in mop up duty, although it's not all his fault because JM was the one who refused to let him earn his closer spot back. Sox should've dumped JM after 2002 instead of Foulke, but it was cheaper to keep JM for 2 more years than it would be to keep foulke for one more year! Thankfully, the sox decided to bite the bullet and keep him for only 1 of the 2 years he had left on his contract. :smile:

doublem23
01-04-2005, 11:54 PM
there was no way we would have recieved a really good Billy Koch for him
We didn't. :D:

MUsoxfan
01-04-2005, 11:55 PM
We didn't. :D:
Got me there

Jamieboy
01-05-2005, 12:13 AM
Foulke had that great ERA in mop up duty, although it's not all his fault because JM was the one who refused to let him earn his closer spot back. Sox should've dumped JM after 2002 instead of Foulke, but it was cheaper to keep JM for 2 more years than it would be to keep foulke for one more year! Thankfully, the sox decided to bite the bullet and keep him for only 1 of the 2 years he had left on his contract. :smile:
Foulke did not get it done period in the first half of that season. There were several games he blew late in his final season with the Sox. Not to say that it was so much being that Foulke was ineffectivfe, but that he blew several big games. He blew one if not 2 games against Seattle we had early in that season. Most I recall when the Sox were 3 runs in the top of the 9th against the Yanks, and Foulke folded. Not to say a closer won't blow games, but Foulke blew mainly the big ones. Also when Manuel demoted Foulke, his era I remember was well over 5. Not saying Foulke isn't a great closer, but his last season with Boston was clearly his best. He's blown critical playoff games for the WhiteSox in 2000, and he did it again with Oakland in 2003. Recall he blew their lead in game 3 vs ... who would of guessed it, Boston.

StillMissOzzie
01-05-2005, 12:47 AM
Wasn't Foulke himself the one talking in public about losing his confidence after a couple of bad outings?

I reluctantly admit that I was happy with the Koch/Foulke trade when it was first announced. Sometimes they don't play out like you think they oughtta.

SMO
:gulp:

jabrch
01-05-2005, 12:50 AM
2004 Foulke for 9mm or 2004 Shingo for 2mm? Given our payroll, I'll take the latter. If I had Boston's payroll, I'd take the former.

stillz
01-05-2005, 12:58 AM
Foulke just left a bad taste in sox fans' mouthes too many times.. Billy Koch was coming off a great year, while he too left A's fans disappointed in the playoffs. A bummer that Koch was worn out when we got him - seemed a decent trade at the time. I agree that Shingo probably would've likely been pursued regardless.

I'm happy for Keith and the Bosox.. Keith had some advice for me once. I was in Seattle, August 2001, down by the visitors' bullpen at Safeco, just as Edgar Martinez hit a homer to put the Mariners up early. Keith was against the fence, chatting with a fan he obviously knew as the ball plunked down in the middle of the sox pen. I shouted, "Hey Keith, I'm here with my girlfriend, I was thinking of proposing to her tonight, and that ball would really help my chances."

He gave me a square look and said "If she loves you, she'll marry you anyway." Then he tucked the ball in his back pocket and continued to chit-chat. In any case, she did marry me, and Kip Wells ended up giving us a ball and being very cool. I'm glad it's Shingotime on the Southside!

:D:

johnny_mostil
01-05-2005, 07:38 AM
I don't disagree with trading Foulke. Foulke was not getting it done at the time while Billy Koch was getting it done at the time.
I always suspected that Jerry Manuel hated Foulke and the trade was to make him happy. After all, demoting a guy to mop-up man after three outings and then never letting him close again was just bizarre. Just Reason #425 why Jerry Manuel fit the Blind Squirrel model.

johnny_mostil
01-05-2005, 07:43 AM
2004 Foulke for 9mm or 2004 Shingo for 2mm? Given our payroll, I'll take the latter. If I had Boston's payroll, I'd take the former.
Gee, since Boston sells out the entire season because their fanatical fans drive for hours to go to every game, I guess they have twice as much money to spend. Fans usually get what they pay for. They should have stayed home and whined that they hadn't won since 1918 and shouldn't have bothered to even go to the park until ownership straightened up and proved they loved them by going into bankruptcy and, I guess, robbing a few casinos to buy them a couple of titles first. Isn't there a football team to go watch? (After all, we all know that ownership money falls from the sky, all baseball owners are hiding hundreds of millions in income, it's just a matter of spending all that hidden money on a few free agents to win it all, and 17,000 half-price-assisted on a Monday night is enough to sustain a championship caliber team.)

gosox41
01-05-2005, 07:55 AM
Definitely, but a closer making that much money wouldn't fit into our budget, which is one of the reasons why the Sox got rid of Foulke back in 2002.

The sox paid Koch roughly $4 mill in '02. Foulke made $6 mill. When the trade was made the Sox sent $1 mill over help make up some of the difference in salary.

Of course right when the Sox got Koch, they innediately extended his contract. In '02 they paid him $4 mill. In '03 he was due to make $6 mill, the same amount Foulke was to make in '02.

The trade saved the Sox $1 mill in salaries but cost them a ton of games and potential millions more in not possibly making the playoffs in '03.


Bob

eastchicagosoxfan
01-05-2005, 08:00 AM
As I recall the Foulke/Koch trade, both teams were moving stars that each felt could regain their old form in new scenery. One guy did, one didn't. Foulke was maddening at times. Effective, but scary. I realize Shingo was effective last season, and I have suggested the extremely unpopular idea of using El Duque as closer, but I'd prefer Foulke right now. Shingo just doesn't instill confidence in me. Just a thought, Foulke, as a change-up artist is an unconventional closer, so is Shingo an precusor to Foulke or a descendant?

Hangar18
01-05-2005, 09:40 AM
I wish the SOX and Jerry Rein$dorf werent so CHEAP. They knew
Keith was due some big money and Thought they could do the old
Slip-out-thru-the-Kitchen Routine when it was time to pay him,
and try to "Trade" him. Well, as Usually is the Case, the SOX
got Burned .......BADLY. Keith Foulke on the SOX in 2003, and
We Win the Division easily, We march Past The Yankees and there
was a Very Very Good Possibility that team, with Lee, Konerko, Maggs
and our Bullpen setting him up Sullivan and Gordon, were moving
to the World Series. Instead, because we want to save a
Couple million bucks ........ Reason #1,293 why I hate Jerry.

Hangar18
01-05-2005, 09:47 AM
The sox paid Koch roughly $4 mill in '02. Foulke made $6 mill. When the trade was made the Sox sent $1 mill over help make up some of the difference in salary.

Of course right when the Sox got Koch, they innediately extended his contract. In '02 they paid him $4 mill. In '03 he was due to make $6 mill, the same amount Foulke was to make in '02.

The trade saved the Sox $1 mill in salaries but cost them a ton of games and potential millions more in not possibly making the playoffs in '03.


Bob
:reinsy Yes, But BOB, look at the $1 Million I Saved!
Im all about SAVING MONEY KIDS!!! Even if it means
Costing us a Possible World Series !!!! (see 1994, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004)

twsoxfan5
01-05-2005, 10:07 AM
I would agree with MU soxfan. I seem to remember how bad Foulke was getting in his final season here. He saved a bunch of games, but the image that I always have in my head is Foulke punching his glove as he watched another one of his lackluster fastballs go over the fence. I think he has improved a lot since leaving the White Sox and learned how to use his change a little better. Also I was exicited when we got Koch, he was great when he was at Oakland and no one could touch his fastball. How could Kenny expect him to lose about 6 mph off his fastball. At the beginning of last year he reminded me of a little league pitcher just going up there and throwing the ball as fast as he can, but I couldnt help feeling bad for the guy. He was a good guy who always blammed himself for the loss and never put it on anyone else, but I am damn happy he is gone.

PaulDrake
01-05-2005, 10:13 AM
To those who think we shouldn't have traded Foulke, I refer you to a recent Buehrle interview on WMVP where he rhetorically asked where Foulke's good numbers he had this year were when he was on the Sox.

Shingo hasn't fully proved himself, but I love him and the frisbee. IT'S SHINGOTIME!!!! Excuse me but MB was not the least bit cool in saying that. That was a very cheap shot. I didn't care for it one damn bit and MB has been one of my favorites. Foulke had a rough spell, like all closers do and Manuel gave up on him. Then KW traded him. I don't like the Bosox but it did my heart good to see Keith Foulke close out a very historic WS.

PaulDrake
01-05-2005, 10:23 AM
I don't disagree with trading Foulke. Foulke was not getting it done at the time while Billy Koch was getting it done at the time. They seemed to flip-flop when they switched teams. I believe the Sox were just as likely to get Shingo regardless of Foulke being on the team. He was brought in as a setup guy and not a closer. He became a closer, and a pretty good closer Koch was never ever on the same level as Foulke. When the trade was made more than a few A's fans came on White Sox boards to warn us. That was after his "good" year in Oakland.

gosox41
01-05-2005, 10:58 AM
Koch was never ever on the same level as Foulke. When the trade was made more than a few A's fans came on White Sox boards to warn us. That was after his "good" year in Oakland.

What's funny is that this trade is still being tlaked about 2 1/2 years after the deal. I said it was a lousy deal at the time and the truth came out.

Statistically, before 2002 Foulke was a better pitcher then Koch. And all this stuff about how Foulke blew this save or that save, well outside of Gagne no one is automatic. Selective memory says that Foulke blew all these big games, but realistically he had a good save percentage.

And for those who say he can't pitch in the clutch, that's another load. He just had an awesome post season pitching in a lot more pressure then he ever did with the Sox.


The Sox made a huge mistake by trading Foulke. Manuel screwed around with him too much undermining his confidence. KW didn't get anywhere near fair value for him in the trade and it cost the Sox a shot at the 2003 playoffs.


Bob

JKryl
01-05-2005, 11:55 AM
What's funny is that this trade is still being tlaked about 2 1/2 years after the deal. I said it was a lousy deal at the time and the truth came out.
Bob
Exactly. What's the point of rehashing something that happened years ago? Shingo is our guy, and as much as I liked Foulke, he no longer has anything to do with my team. At least not until we play the Red Sox.

OurBitchinMinny
01-05-2005, 12:45 PM
ummm....foulke

maurice
01-05-2005, 01:00 PM
Some faulty memories floating around here. Koch's best year was bracketed by two very bad years. Foulke was good with the Sox, he's good now, and probably will remain good for the next several years. He hasn't had a bad year since his rookie campaign. He was okay in his second year (1998) but hasn't posted an ERA over 3 since then . . . all the while pitching in the AL during the juiced ball / batter era. That's really good.

During his last year with the Sox, Foulke experienced one bad month -- May 2002. This caused an incompetent manager to permanently remove him from the closer's role. Over the second half of the year, he posted a 0.74 ERA and gave up only one earned run in the last two months of the season. (He finished the year with an excellent overall 2.90 ERA.) He blew three saves the entire year and was 42 of 45 in save opportunities the previous year.

Say what you want about his few-and-far-between comments off the field, but Foulke has been among the best on the field for a very long time. Also, keep in mind when your listening to Buehrle criticize former teammates that you're listening to the guy who famously told Cardinals fans that he'd like to leave the Sox and play closer to home.

Flight #24
01-05-2005, 01:18 PM
The sox paid Koch roughly $4 mill in '02. Foulke made $6 mill. When the trade was made the Sox sent $1 mill over help make up some of the difference in salary.

Of course right when the Sox got Koch, they innediately extended his contract. In '02 they paid him $4 mill. In '03 he was due to make $6 mill, the same amount Foulke was to make in '02.

The trade saved the Sox $1 mill in salaries but cost them a ton of games and potential millions more in not possibly making the playoffs in '03.


Bob
IMO the $$ issue was primarily that keeping Foulke beyond 2003 would have entailed a large, long-term deal. He's making an average of IIRC 7.5mil from Boston over the 3 or 4 years of that deal, whereas the Sox, even with the resigning of Koch, freed up that $$$ right at the time they theoretically were resigning Maggs.

Had they gotten the Koch of 2002, or even one slightly worse, they would have been fine. They'd have had a solid closer (albiet not as good as Foulke), they'd have saved some $$$, and they'd have structured their long-term budget to better enable them to retain their homegrown superstar. Of course, Koch didn't just decline a bit, he fell off the table. Not to mention that in any case, the whole Maggs-contract demand-knee-Boras saga would have rendered the plan moot.