You heard it from me first. Beane is going downhill. It starts with the Lidle trade, progresses with the Koch trade, and then really starts with the Durazo trade. Although the Durazo trade could turn out great.

And the Koch trade could be good for either us or them...right now, I still think it is a wash. Dependant on how Cotts and what's-his-face do, and how Valentine does....I would have to think that Foulke is out of Oakland after this year(probably to SF...lol) and that Valentine will take over their closing duties...Koch will be with us for 3-years, Cotts will probably be a decent lefty for us in the future and what's-his-face could be a pretty good backup OF/pinch hitter. Hell, maybe he could be a starter for us....if Borchard is a pretty good CFer, Maggs remains in RF, Lee leaves, Liefer is traded, and they use what's-his-face over Rowand, he could start with us.

 

Now if only I could remember his name

I'm looking at this deal like so ... Foulke/Valentine for Koch .... Foulke was good, not great, for 2 seasons, and somewhat less than that last season. Still, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt as a proven closer. However, he is only signed for 2003. Valentine is a prospect, but unproven. And wasn't he picked up in as a minor league rule 5 draftee? If so, that's not much of an investment. Now, looking at Koch ... consistant proven closer, younger than Foulke, obligated to the Sox for 3 years as compared to Foulke's 1 year. I think this was an excellent deal by KW... before taking the 2 minor leaguers that came with Koch into consideration. I hope all of KW's trades "wash" out this way.

The question is whether you'd want Foulke for one year then Valentine closing for 2 years or Koch closing for 3 yrs.

 

If we are going to compete we need a good closer, so I'll take Koch for the next 3 years.

Originally posted by YASNY

I'm looking at this deal like so ... Foulke/Valentine for Koch .... Foulke was good, not great, for 2 seasons, and somewhat less than that last season.  Still, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt as a proven closer.  However, he is only signed for 2003.  Valentine is a prospect, but unproven.  And wasn't he picked up in as a minor league rule 5 draftee?  If so, that's not much of an investment.  Now, looking at Koch ... consistant proven closer, younger than Foulke, obligated to the Sox for 3 years as compared to Foulke's 1 year.  I think this was an excellent deal by KW... before taking the 2 minor leaguers that came with Koch into consideration.  I hope all of KW's trades "wash" out this way.

 

I wouldn't exactly call Billy consistent...in 2000, his ERA was under 3.00....in 2001, his ERA was just under 5.00 at 4.80...this past year it was just over 3.00 at around 3.24.

 

He's consistently inconsistent. Not exactly the kind of consistent I want.

Who cares what Billy Koch's ERA is if he's winning and saving games while not losing?

The sox have to pick up another pitcher now that Ritchie is gone.

Options.......

 

Omar Daal

Robert Person

Sidney Ponson(trade)

James Baldwin

 

Any other ideas?

Originally posted by WSFAN35

Who cares what Billy Koch's ERA is if he's winning and saving games while not losing?

 

I was just saying he wasn't consistent....he was good, just not consistent. That's all.

Originally posted by Chisoxfn

You heard it from me first.  Beane is going downhill.  It starts with the Lidle trade, progresses with the Koch trade, and then really starts with the Durazo trade.  Although the Durazo trade could turn out great.

 

The original trade of Koch, for Hinske? Or the Sox trade?

Originally posted by Mr. Showtime

Originally posted by Chisoxfn

You heard it from me first.  Beane is going downhill.  It starts with the Lidle trade, progresses with the Koch trade, and then really starts with the Durazo trade.  Although the Durazo trade could turn out great.

 

The original trade of Koch, for Hinske? Or the Sox trade?

 

Maybe he means both....but I doubt that. I'm thinking he thinks the Koch for Foulke deal...he wrote a commentary story on it that was on how well the Sox got off.

Originally posted by Murcielago

Options.......

 

Omar Daal

Robert Person

Sidney Ponson(trade)

James Baldwin

 

Any other ideas?

 

 

SUPAN????? he was not offered contract by kc............as i recall he used to kick on us a bit when he was on the mound here.....he would make a nice addition....

Originally posted by hotsoxchick1

Originally posted by Murcielago

Options.......

 

Omar Daal

Robert Person

Sidney Ponson(trade)

James Baldwin

 

Any other ideas?

 

 

SUPAN????? he was not offered contract by kc............as i recall he used to kick on us a bit when he was on the mound here.....he would make a nice addition....

 

I'd take Supan or JB..... that's about it from what's left out there. Slim pickings when your owner is CHEAP AS f***!!!!! :mad:

Suppan? JB? King of the gopher balls right there. I'd take Person, Valdes, or Daal.

I really don't think JB was that bad with the sox. He was a decent pitcher in our rotation and he also was a clubhouse leader. He was the guy that was up standing in the dugout cheering on our guys nomatter if we were losing by ten or winnng by ten. I wouldn't pay him no 5 million a year or anything maybe 2 or 3.

Originally posted by spataro51

I really don't think JB was that bad with the sox. He was a decent pitcher in our rotation and he also was a clubhouse leader. He was the guy that was up standing in the dugout cheering on our guys nomatter if we were losing by ten or winnng by ten. I wouldn't pay him no 5 million a year or anything maybe 2 or 3.

 

We could probably sign him for around $500,000-$1,000,000. If he put up decent numbers and was a clubhouse leader, it would be well worth it.

JB's career 5 ERA thinks otherwise. He blows, I hope he goes to Japan or something.

thing about Baldwin, which is both bad and good, is that he is very inconsistent. He can only have one good half, but when he does get on, he is one of the more dominant guys in the league.

 

I would think about signing him for about 500K to $1 mil, but not much more.

JB is a great guy, but he's very inconsistent and has never proved a thing at the majors. This guy had one decent season, everything else has been pretty bad.

Everybody, forget Brian Anderson...he sign with Cleveland

Originally posted by Chisoxfn

JB is a great guy, but he's very inconsistent and has never proved a thing at the majors.  This guy had one decent season, everything else has been pretty bad.

 

Why don't you say the same thing about K-layton?

you still don't get it.

 

Clayton was acquired following 2001 to supply defense on a team stacked with offense. as bad as Clayton was offensively, he was NOT here to drive in runs. he was brought here to play defense.

 

Baldwin is a PITCHER. he is great at times, bad at others. If clayton goes 0-4 on offense, he still will play a great "D", not the same for a pitcher.

Originally posted by Molto

you still don't get it. 

 

Clayton was acquired following 2001 to supply defense on a team stacked with offense.  as bad as Clayton was offensively, he was NOT here to drive in runs.  he was brought here to play defense.

 

Baldwin is a PITCHER.  he is great at times, bad at others.  If clayton goes 0-4 on offense, he still will play a great "D", not the same for a pitcher.

 

You don't get it. I don't care what K-layton was brought in here for, if he's "going to the dish" with a bat in his hand, he's supposed to get on base..... either through a hit, BB, 2b, etc. Hell..... K-layton couldn't even get on when he'd K and the catcher dropped the ball on the third strike with nobody on. K-layton couldn't even "Dorn" his way onto the basepaths. Acquiring K-layton "to supply defense on a team stacked with offense" is a pretty sad argument even for the K-layton supporters and doesn't address the fact that the "stacked offense" became non-existent where K-layton was concerned..... until, of course, the second half of both 2001 and 2002 when it was too late.

Originally posted by Molto

you still don't get it. 

 

Clayton was acquired following 2001 to supply defense on a team stacked with offense.  as bad as Clayton was offensively, he was NOT here to drive in runs.  he was brought here to play defense.

 

Baldwin is a PITCHER.  he is great at times, bad at others.  If clayton goes 0-4 on offense, he still will play a great "D", not the same for a pitcher.

 

And a big part of K-layton's Clubhouse cancer moves was the fact that right when he got here, he started f***ing frank's x-wife! That just shows what kind of an asshole he really is. and he is so fundamentally stupid, he hurt the sox. O yeah, and he throws like a girl. f*** royce!

once again, not saying Clayton is this great guy. a clubhouse cancer, as much as a dickhead someone can be, CANNOT EFFECT AN ENTIRE CLUBHOUSE. if one guy is going to change the course of a clubhouse, you got a bunch of babies on the team.

 

do you think they found out Clayton was messing with Thomas' Ex and all of htem said, "oh man, he's such an ass, let's play like crap the rest of the season, jsut to show him".

 

Clayton was here for defense. and about his arm. would you rather have a pussy arm that will throw the ball where it is meant to go? or an arm like Valentin, who has no direction that you wonder whether he is really trying to throw to first.