witesoxfan Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Financially it made sense because we had Koch locked up for three years without having to negotiate with someone in their free agent year. Baseball wise, do you remember how Foulke always seemed to choke in the big games? You have to remember I'm looking at this from a perspective of last off season. Koch was more of a sure thing at that point in time than Keith was. And how can you discount minor leaguers. We have page after page of analysis of our prospects on this board. Cotts vs. Valentine ... I still like that part of the deal. I do recall that Foulke blew it under pressure. IIRC, he blew a game in Seattle in the 2000 ALDS, he blew a pretty big game against the Yankees in 2002 that sent our season to the s***ter(that game was late May, Foulke tried to get a 2-inning save, gave up a GS to Giambi, we lost), and (fastforwarding from the point in time we are talking about)he blew a save in the ALDS this past year against Boston in Fenway that would have clinched the series for Oakland. However, you can't forget that Koch didn't help his own cause for having a reputation for blowing the big game when he gave up a 3-run homer to AJ Pierzynski in the 2002 ALDS in the top of the 9th in game 5 to give the Twins a 5-1 lead. He doesn't allow AJ to hit that homer, and maybe limits the hit to a double, the Twins only score 1, maybe 2 runs tops, go into the bottom of the 9th with a 4-1 lead, Ellis still hits the 3-run homer, game goes to extras, Oakland wins it in the 11th or something like that. That's total speculation right there, but is totally possible, so long as Koch does not allow the homer. So IMO, the pitching in clutch times evens out for both of them. And the stats still favored Foulke. And I still think that financially it is sometimes better to have a guy for a shorter time but maybe more money and then just don't resign him then it is to get someone else and pay them a little more the next year and then have the cycle continue. It has to end somewhere, does it not? Why not end it as soon as you can? That is my point. Anyways, I don't think this is going anywhere, so I think we'll just agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 And I still think that financially it is sometimes better to have a guy for a shorter time but maybe more money and then just don't resign him then it is to get someone else and pay them a little more the next year and then have the cycle continue. It has to end somewhere, does it not? Why not end it as soon as you can? That is my point. That's one of my points too: Don't hire a life-less rookie manager for a 6-year tenure. Don't go after Ritchie because he will cost 2 Mill less. Don't get rid of Foulke because he makes 2 Mill too much. Don't go after Rick White if Urbina costs only a few mill more. Don't get rid of Thomas to save 1 Mill. Why? Because you end up saving only 3-4 Mill per season. But that season is f***ED in no small part thanks to the "bargain replacements" and you as an owner end up losing MUCH more in revenue and fans' good will.....the damage that only gets compounded year after year after year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 That's one of my points too: Don't go after Ritchie because he will cost 2 Mill less. Don't get rid of Foulke because he makes 2 Mill too much. Don't go after Rick White if Urbina costs only a few mill. Don't get rid of Thomas to save 1 Mill. Why? Because you end up saving only 3-4 Mill per season. But that season get f***ED in no small part thanks to the "bargain replacements" and you as an owner end up losing MUCH more in revenue and fans' good will.....the damage that only gets compounded year after year after year. Which is why we are constantly an 80-85 win team instead of 90-100 win team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Which is why we are constantly an 80-85 win team instead of 90-100 win team. ....and potential customers grow up to be Cubs fans or just follow other sports. Bring on Shoenweiss, Uribe and Shingo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillieHarris2 Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Algright for starters why the hell are you guys talking about the twins in the first place. Signing Urbina would be just so amazing and who needs rick white anyways but hey then you wake up in realize you got KW and JR. 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.