LDF Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 http://msn.espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove2003/whitesox.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggio202 Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 looks like they have us penciled in for 2nd place Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 looks like they have us penciled in for 2nd place f*** them.........The Whitesox are going to win the central........ this guy is a queer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggio202 Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 looks like they have us penciled in for 2nd place f*** them.........The Whitesox are going to win the central........ this guy is a queer. the guy makes some good points..especially about the koch trade..he nailed that one..foulke is the better closer between the two..at best we tread water on that trade...but it weakened us at catcher..as unherlded as mark johnson is..we needed him... up the middle, the sox have 3 rookies or first year starters...we have no proven lead off man...if rowand isnt ready (he still cant hit or throw) and borchard hasnt developed we could end up with willie harris or armando rios in cf... you cant blame this guy for picking us 2nd...it was a fair report on us right now...sox gotta prove it first Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 looks like they have us penciled in for 2nd place f*** them.........The Whitesox are going to win the central........ this guy is a queer. the guy makes some good points..especially about the koch trade..he nailed that one..foulke is the better closer between the two..at best we tread water on that trade...but it weakened us at catcher..as unherlded as mark johnson is..we needed him... up the middle, the sox have 3 rookies or first year starters...we have no proven lead off man...if rowand isnt ready (he still cant hit or throw) and borchard hasnt developed we could end up with willie harris or armando rios in cf... you cant blame this guy for picking us 2nd...it was a fair report on us right now...sox gotta prove it first He also forgot to add how Foulke blew big games against teams we needed to beat................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleM23 Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 He also forgot to add how Foulke blew big games against teams we needed to beat................. Kinda like Koch handing the Twins Game 5 of the ALDS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan420 Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 it was a fair report i like this article about our sping everything he says is true http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/rogers_phil...il/1496899.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleM23 Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 Phil Rogers = mega-idiot How many times is he going to mention that 30/190 thing and who doesn't know everything he said? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 Phil Rogers = mega-idiot How many times is he going to mention that 30/190 thing and who doesn't know everything he said? Phil Rogers is anything but a "mega-idiot" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan420 Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 i know but the injury part is very true (knock on wood) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleM23 Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 Phil Rogers = mega-idiot How many times is he going to mention that 30/190 thing and who doesn't know everything he said? Phil Rogers is anything but a "mega-idiot" You're right.... Colossal idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 23, 2003 Share Posted January 23, 2003 Goddamn....this Koch for Foulke thing is starting to piss me off....I don't care about the stats anymore....they are both closers, and they are both good closers....what does 1 K per inning less or an ERA .3 points higher than the others really matter? That the one gives up 1 more earned run? How about the fact that Foulke totally blew ass last year while closing and that for most of the year he was setting up? At best, this trade is a wash...and at worst, this trade is a wash....we traded a closer for a closer....and there were a few throw-ins here and there. Maybe this guy is an idiot who doesn't realize that even if Colon puts up an ERA of 3.70(which he said) that he still couldn't win 18-20 games....last year, he was on two very mediocre teams and won 20 games....even if he regresses this year, he could still win 20 games easily, pitching for a great offense and the fact that he has a great bullpen to back him up....and if he does duplicate last year's results, I could easily see him winning 23-25...and Dan Wright taking a big step towards becoming a better pitcher as well. Has he even seen Colon? He doesn't look like he's overweight by much, if at all, considering the type of pitcher he is...and he's got the incredible ability to go deep into games and get stronger as the game goes on. I guess I wouldn't be so mad except for the fact that he MAKES IT SOUND LIKE THE COLON TRADE WAS A BAD MOVE FOR THE WHITE SOX. Is this guy insane? Who cares if Colon regresses? Colon has been a great pitcher in the past and could be this year...I bet if he got traded to the Red Sox or Yankees he would be the messiah that would give either team a World Series birth for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 23, 2003 Author Share Posted January 23, 2003 the thing about the koch vs foulke for me is, was it really a trade that needed to be done. i am a foulke fan but if koch is better then so be it, if not i sure hope that cotts pans out. if not we got screwed again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 the thing about the koch vs foulke for me is, was it really a trade that needed to be done. i am a foulke fan but if koch is better then so be it, if not i sure hope that cotts pans out. if not we got screwed again. It seems like this never gets done, though he should....I think this trade happened about 2 months ago. Anyways....breaking it down, it looks like this... Koch for Foulke - wash....Foulke was probably gone after this year, Koch will be with us 3 years....regardless of the stats they put up....however, we'll probably end up paying Koch more than we would have ended up paying Foulke....which is the reason it is a wash. MJ for Daylon Holt - wash....it is hard to say which team got the better end of this deal....with the trading of MJ, we then signed Alomar and Olivo became the #1 catcher for us....which isn't a bad thing....but it does leave us weak at the catcher position. Had we kept MJ, we could have had Olivo start the year in AAA and then as soon as Sandy got hurt, have Miguel come up and possibly take the starting duties. Regardless, MJ is not an incredible catcher, though he is a good backup...and Daylon Holt will probably put up decent numbers off the bench for us someday....maybe .275 10 40....something like that....I'd take that and that would be good from off the bench. Cotts for Valentine - wash.....Valentine was a great pitcher in the minor leagues and will probably be a great pitcher in the majors as well....however, when we were dealing him, KW realized that he was dealing from a strength, though the pitcher he was trading may have been the best relief pitcher in our system...regardless, we still have plenty of minor league relief talent, and we got a lefty with good stuff in Cotts who could be a good starter someday....and the fact that he's from ISU makes it quite special. From the looks of it, I'd say the deal is a complete wash...which is why I said, at best, it is a wash, and at worst, it is a wash...because quite simply, this deal was a wash....we traded a closer for a closer and in the end that was the bulk of the deal....regardless of the stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 the thing about the koch vs foulke for me is, was it really a trade that needed to be done. i am a foulke fan but if koch is better then so be it, if not i sure hope that cotts pans out. if not we got screwed again. It seems like this never gets done, though he should....I think this trade happened about 2 months ago. Anyways....breaking it down, it looks like this... Koch for Foulke - wash....Foulke was probably gone after this year, Koch will be with us 3 years....regardless of the stats they put up....however, we'll probably end up paying Koch more than we would have ended up paying Foulke....which is the reason it is a wash. MJ for Daylon Holt - wash....it is hard to say which team got the better end of this deal....with the trading of MJ, we then signed Alomar and Olivo became the #1 catcher for us....which isn't a bad thing....but it does leave us weak at the catcher position. Had we kept MJ, we could have had Olivo start the year in AAA and then as soon as Sandy got hurt, have Miguel come up and possibly take the starting duties. Regardless, MJ is not an incredible catcher, though he is a good backup...and Daylon Holt will probably put up decent numbers off the bench for us someday....maybe .275 10 40....something like that....I'd take that and that would be good from off the bench. Cotts for Valentine - wash.....Valentine was a great pitcher in the minor leagues and will probably be a great pitcher in the majors as well....however, when we were dealing him, KW realized that he was dealing from a strength, though the pitcher he was trading may have been the best relief pitcher in our system...regardless, we still have plenty of minor league relief talent, and we got a lefty with good stuff in Cotts who could be a good starter someday....and the fact that he's from ISU makes it quite special. From the looks of it, I'd say the deal is a complete wash...which is why I said, at best, it is a wash, and at worst, it is a wash...because quite simply, this deal was a wash....we traded a closer for a closer and in the end that was the bulk of the deal....regardless of the stats. ok i will accept your reasoning, but here is mine. koch performance during the playoff continues. do we really have him for 3 yrs now? cat and mj vs d holt who cares, but as you said its a wash and i will agree with you on this. valentin vs cotts is where it get tough for me. joe v potential is great and i think is worth more than some may think. however, cotts potential is where the chips fall on. if he develops as expected then its a wash or more in our favor, if he does not develop then we got screwed in the trade. i am basing this on the prospect that came with the trade and not that much with koch vs foulke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Koch had no right to be in when he was....the A's were DOWN 2-1....normally, pitchers are brought in when their team is UP. I don't base anything on that....had the A's been winning, Pierzynski's homer would have been a fly-ball to the middle of the outfield. Closers have the attitude to come in and shut the game down and finish the ballgame for their team....not come in down and then have your team pulls off some magic and wins it. I think his confidence may have been down right then....and this year, he'll be ready to come out perform well....save 45 or so games for us. When the game is on the line and his team is winning....Koch wants the ball. From what I've heard and seen, Foulke doesn't seem to always want the ball. Koch truly does have a closers mentality. I think he's going to like it in Chicago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 Koch had no right to be in when he was....the A's were DOWN 2-1....normally, pitchers are brought in when their team is UP. I don't base anything on that....had the A's been winning, Pierzynski's homer would have been a fly-ball to the middle of the outfield. Closers have the attitude to come in and shut the game down and finish the ballgame for their team....not come in down and then have your team pulls off some magic and wins it. I think his confidence may have been down right then....and this year, he'll be ready to come out perform well....save 45 or so games for us. When the game is on the line and his team is winning....Koch wants the ball. From what I've heard and seen, Foulke doesn't seem to always want the ball. Koch truly does have a closers mentality. I think he's going to like it in Chicago. i will go with you on this and as you said a wash. its the prospect that has me on this trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 i will go with you on this and as you said a wash. its the prospect that has me on this trade. Agreed....the prospects make or break this deal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 i will go with you on this and as you said a wash. its the prospect that has me on this trade. Agreed....the prospects make or break this deal and that is why i am concerned and stoke about this trade. this kid cotts is very intriguing and hopes that he pans out. a very promising # 2 or at worst a 3 pit. but on the other hand, valentin being a another koch is also intriguing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 I don't see this trade as a wash .... We DO have Koch for 3 years, if he's not traded. We would only have Foulke for 2003. That right there is beauty of this deal. As for the MJ part of the deal ... Basically, keeping MJ as a starter to give Olivo 2 more months of minor league experience is no reason not to make this deal. Since it will benefit us for 3 years. And that is assuming Olivo does need the AAA time. He may be ready, and they may know it. Crede was, that's for sure. Dealing Valentin off was dealing from a position of strength, so why not do it to make this deal. Foulke was good, but he proved not to be mentally tough ... losing big games for us. Koch blew a save against a championship quality team... big deal, it happens. Even Mariano Rivera blows a save occasionally... Gossage did it, Sutter did it, Eckersly did it .... You can't say Koch is a bum because he happened to blow a save in a big game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggio202 Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 two things..we really dont have koch for three years...its more like he has us...he probably gets 7 million this year in arbitration..or whatever he asked for...next year he will , if he is as good as advertised , probably get closer to 10 million...could you imagine the sox paying koch 10 million...the only hope we have is if he likes it here and takes less than market value...but thats up to billy and not us..so like i said...he has us..not the other way around also..in the playoffs when you are called upon you better come through..i dont care if it wasnt the classic closer situation...randy johnson closed out the series two years ago..if he failed could you imagine the stink he would have started if he said well i shouldnt have been in there because i wasnt starting?? nobody gave kieth foulke a break last year when he went almost a month w/o a save opportunity and had to pitch in all different situations..when koch is called on to pitch he better come through...save situation or not..he is supposed to be the best pitcher in the pen... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 We do, in fact, control Koch's contract for 3 years or until traded. If he's traded, that is still an asset we would not have had available in Foulke's case. In the playoffs... in any at bat, sometimes the pitcher wins, sometimes the hitter... in the case it was the hitter. No one can "come through" every single time. As for Foulke, the fact remains, that over a 2 year period, he lost the team some big games. Games that if we had one could have turned either of those seasons around for us. I like Kieth and had confidence in him. But that doesn't change that history of losing those games the Sox really needed. Enjoying the discussion, even if we do disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggio202 Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 We do, in fact, control Koch's contract for 3 years or until traded. If he's traded, that is still an asset we would not have had available in Foulke's case. In the playoffs... in any at bat, sometimes the pitcher wins, sometimes the hitter... in the case it was the hitter. No one can "come through" every single time. As for Foulke, the fact remains, that over a 2 year period, he lost the team some big games. Games that if we had one could have turned either of those seasons around for us. I like Kieth and had confidence in him. But that doesn't change that history of losing those games the Sox really needed. Enjoying the discussion, even if we do disagree. when your in a pennant race what game isnt big that a closer blows....i agree that foulke wasnt perfect...the area he suffered most in was pitching in non saves situations....but the arguement here for defending koch was he shouldnt have been out there because it wasnt the classic closer situation...leading by 3 runs or less in the 9th...thats what i was argueing...you cant use as a defense that billy koch shouldnt have been out there because it wasnt a classic closer situation and then say kieth foulke blew chunks last year when the sox went a whole month w/o having a save opportunity for him... im not saying you said that but that was the arguement above... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 I don't agree with everything said above .... I'll stand behind my own points, thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 I am pretty new here(been reading for a while but just started posting) but, I have to agree with LDF. He makes some great points. Also, I have to root for Cotts, I go to the same school he did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.