User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 2.2179 seconds
38 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
I will say one thing. I am going to watch Baseball Tonight for the first time since Valentine left, just because I know these guys will say the Reds are making a push and you have to have a strong bullpen down the stretch. They will love this trade. It will be classic.
Perhaps you didn't mean what you said, but it's not like we misinterpreted you. It's okay to admit you're wrong.
Zimm/Lopez might be better than Chip/Renteria in 3 years (we'll see - Chip probably won't be at 3rd by then anyway) but that's hardly the issue that I or anyone took with your comment.
That is one very very strange compromise.
As a trade, I know it doesn't compare in historical importance, but the feeling in the pit of my stoumach right now is probably similar to how you felt when the Mets traded Tom Seaver to the Reds...
If that's what you are feeling, VoD, then you have my profound sympathy. Because that was the worst feeling of my baseball fan life -- and my love for the game and the Mets didn't recover for years. Literally, years.
I'm sure it won't take me that long to feel better, but right now, I feel horrible. This season was the first time this decade I had felt excited rooting for the Reds for any length of time. There was hope - not only in the way they were playing, but the possibility of a new front office who actually seemed to know what they were doing. Now, in one day, they seem to have dashed all of that hope...
But while the Reds had "some" offense to give it really isn't as much as folks think. The Hatteberg/Aurilia platoon has wildly exceeded expectations as has Brandon Phillips AND David Ross. That's FOUR guys playing way over what anyone anticipated. As much as I want to think otherwise Junior is an injury waiting to happen. That's five. Kearns and Lopez are now gone. That's seven.
So four players are likely to regress, one will be lucky to maintain based on previous history, and two have been eliminated. The kid from Triple A looks good but will have an adjustment period. Clayton is cipher. So that dumps it on Dunn, Encarnacion, and Freel to hold the fort on CREATING runs. That's a lot to ask.
I have been a Kearns believer since I first saw him in Dayton. Injuries, the Reds jerking him around, and being stupid about his weight have cost him. But if he drops 15 and maintains his health Kearns is a .290/.370/.550 season waiting to happen. Lopez ain't the greatest out there with the glove but he sure does do a lot of GOOD things elsewhere. Mike nailed it on Wager. Kid's fallen down and can't get up. But it being the Reds organization maybe he finds himself. Maybe.
Between Krivsky's acquisition of Castro and Steady Eddie and now this Reds fans have to wonder.
As a Brewers fan, I will just hush and be d*mn glad for Doug Melvin....................
Talk about highs and lows though - Good trade for the Nats then the Yanks go out and sign Ponson.
*sigh*
Yeah, but everyone knew that was nonsense--didn't the Bucs spend all year kvetching about Ramirez and his salary?
I mean, did they really think justifying the trade strictly based on exchange of talent would make them look *better*?
Perhaps Bowden and Krivsky swapped some 5-way, with Bowden spiking something in the Hard Times chili he sent Wayne for the Skyline stuff.
Whatever, from a D.C. perspective this is sort of the Denny McLain trade in reverse. Nice karma.
On the other hand, I now know where Kyle Lohse will be pitching next season. And that's a nice feeling.
Not so much, no.
"I mean, did they really think justifying the trade strictly based on exchange of talent would make them look *better*?"
Who the hell knows?
In that Jim Bowden had compromising photos of Wayne Krivsky?
Nonetheless, Bowden won this deal handily. Even with the service time issues, Kearns and Lopez are much more important building blocks than anything he gave up. Congrats, Jim. Between this and the bad risk you took with Soriano that luckily turned out great, you just won the right to be a #*&$* used-car salesman in charge of some baseball team or another for a long, long time.
Royce Clayton as defensive upgrade is laughable. Lopez might be terrible by many metrics, but it's like choosing the firing range over being burned at the stake.
Wow, that is just snarky enough to have been a BPro comment.
I'm having a tough time thinking of a trade LESS defensible than this one...
AJ Piersumbitch for Francisco Liriano, Joe Nathan and whoever? That one is going to sting forever.
Immediately after the trade, Pirate management issued statements denying that the deal was a salary dump.
Proving conclusively that it was a salary dump
He was horribly overused (especially down the stretch last season), and it hasn't let up this year. He had reported some rotator cuff tendinitis earlier this year, so his arm's liable to come off at any time.
In retrospect, sure. At the time? Not a chance.
Then why not switch positions -- Lopez at 2nd and Phillips st SS?
AJ Piersumbitch for Francisco Liriano, Joe Nathan and whoever? That one is going to sting forever.
No, I'd say that Kip Wells, Josh Fogg, and Sean Lowe for Todd F. Ritchie was way worse. At least Pierzynski wasn't a total disaster.
Also, Ray Durham (+ cash!) for Jon Adkins.
Are you suggesting that there is any reason for a team to actually want AJ Piersumbitch? I mean, other than as a tackling dummy?
That is what made the trade so horrible. Giving up Nathan and Liriano may hurt, but getting AJ Piersumbitch is like volunteering to take a colonoscopy without anaesthesia.
I think the general belief (at least around BBTF) is that Bowden makes good deals in isolation, but doesn't ever appear to have an overall plan. Maybe he'll show in DC that he's learned something new.
That would move him from average to good, in my opinion. Bowden has tended to build decent teams with big holes in them. If he can get from there to good teams with small holes in them, he's a fine GM.
And he's certainly not afraid to make a deal. Never has been, either.
Or, to keep with the theme the other day, Hubert H. Humphrey consolidated the Democratic and Farmer-Labor parties in Minnesota and then destroyed all the other fringe leftists within the state.
--No, I'd say that Kip Wells, Josh Fogg, and Sean Lowe for Todd F. Ritchie was way worse.
Not even close. While still early in their careers, Liriano and Nathan have already come close to outperforming what Wells, Fogg, and Lowe have done in their entire careers.
Ok, that's hyperbole, but my point stands.
I now feel Bowden is a good, but not great GM when given adult (Kasten) supervision. I think we might see some good work out of this group.
Catchers that can hit a little bit are few and far between.
Thus, this trade is nothing like that one.
Wait, are we looking with the advantage of hindsight, or as it looked at the time?
The Ritchie trade was horrible either way, of course, but the Pieryznski trade was viewed as pretty even at the time. Pierzynski was coming off two very good offensive seasons, while Joe Nathan was coming off a good season following a pretty mediocre career. Liriano and Bonser were pitching prospects, with all the attendant codicils about that.
Sure Cincinnati didn't get a lot from this deal and having Royce Clayton on your team always seemed like an awful proposition but they got some good bullpen arms and for at least this season, they shouldn't be that much worse if at all. The Reds future meanwhile does look good with Homer Bailey, Travis Wood on the prospect pitching side and Jay Bruce and Joey Votto on the positional prospect side.
The part that is still confusing to me and everyone else is, why didn't Krivsky shop around to get a better return? There is absolutely no way that some other team wouldn't have slapped together a better package. Heck, Beane or Byrnes would probably scraped together a proposal just for the principle of picking up a free lunch.
Good point. I assumed the former, but it's probably not what you meant.
(Ok, I don't believe it, but thought that someone should say it.)
Should've waited for Ziffbot.
Tell that to Stan Conte.
Yeah, I'm surprised the Ziffbot hasn't chimed in by now. Something like "Nice deal for the Reds. I'm not sure what Jim Bowden will do with Austin Kearns."
Kearns -> Denorfia projects as a downgrade, but they improve the bullpen somewhat and given Lopez' defensive shortcomings, they don't lose too much at SS.
The problem with the trade is that Kearns ought to have a lot more value than this. Just because you have a good prospect sitting in the wings doesn't mean you throw away an above-average young player.
Did we ever get a confirmation from either Conte or Pieryznski on that story?
I'd just say that this trade in no way amounts to "tanking the 2006 season" - the Reds are probably more treading water than anything.
Maybe. Still, though Kearns, Lopez, and Wagner are not meeting the expectations most had of them, I believe that they are better than the package the Reds got for them, with a substantially greater upside to boot (unless Bray and Majewski are much better than I believe them to be).
Even if you don't think it's a disaster for the Reds, it's a tremendous trade for the Nationals.
Or, to keep with the theme the other day, Hubert H. Humphrey consolidated the Democratic and Farmer-Labor parties in Minnesota and then destroyed all the other fringe leftists within the state.
Two things - 1) I'm the only one here who probably knows what you're talking about, and 2) you really need to make it an Ohio or DC reference.
This is the most embaressing thing to happen to Cincinnati since Jerry Springer. It's the ugliest thing to hit Ohio since Pete Rose's hair cut.
Or: Bowden just pulled off the biggest turn around DC's seen since Marion Barry. It's the biggest scam since the heydey of Lt. Colonel Oliver North.
Random note Will - no one ever got in a reference to Garrison Keillor or the Mall of America in that thread.
Ferpetesake, even the throw in of Wagner has more upside than anyone the Nats dumped.
Krivsky... nice moves, buddy.
Good point. I assumed the former, but it's probably not what you meant.
When I posed the initial question - I was strictly thinking "at the time" - there are plenty of vet for prospect deals that blew up in someone's face - and yes, many of them may have been forseen as disasters... but for a trade based mainly in established major leaguers - I really can't think of one worse. Hell - any trade in which you acquire Royce Clayton almost has to be in the "worst all time" trade picture, doesn't it?
I'm probably overrating Kearns and Lopez hasn't built on last year to the extent one would like... but this is a couple decent-to-almost good relievers, an awful SS, and chaff for a starting corner OF and a SS - both with established big league bats and the potential to get even better.
Maybe Brendan Harris shows he's not a tweener.... and strangely enough, I can see the possibility of this "bad" trade not actually sinking the Reds and maybe even getting credit if Grif stays healthy, Dunn picks it up, and the bullpen does a 180... but strictly in terms of major league proven talent changing hands, the Reds got hosed better than anyone I can remember.
playing the roll of John Mabry - Royce Clayton
see if the remake turns out differently.
Rather missing the point I'd say.
The White Sox got David Riske, who's at least as good as Majewski, for a AAAA LOOGY.
Either Theo Epstein got ripped off, or Krivsky did.
The White Sox got David Riske, who's at least as good as Majewski, for a AAAA LOOGY.
Christ, just think what Jason Grilli might get us ...
A ham sandwich?
Jason Grilli pitched for the Sox a couple years ago. He was one of the worst pitchers I've ever seen.
I wasn't planning on trading him to the White Sox. At this exchange rate, though, he, Todd Jones and Zach Miner should nab us Bobby Abreu with Philadelphia picking up a lot of the contract.
Where's Ed Wade when you need him?
Or both.
Wayne Krivsky seems to be the most overwhelmed executive since William Howard Taft was elected President.
I don't understand this...I'd think Lopez would have a good deal of trade value- a .355 OB%, power potential and great speed. If it works for Soriano...Kearns is a very nice hitter, again I think there are teams who would've given more for him. Too bad the Reds didn't just say "lets give in and see who we can get for Kearns and Lopez", because it probably would've netted them some nice prospects. Looking for a non-contender with bullpen "help" to spare limited their trading partners.
I always pulled for Bowden's Reds because they always seemed to take a chance on fringe guys, which made the team interesting. When Krivisky got Phillips, it was more of the same. Now this is just sad.
Yes. Besides mentioning it to Jenkins in the Chronicle article, Conte also said that it did happen on KNBR. Conte seems like a really nice guy who holds no grudge, and wanted to see the whole thing dropped, so it is unlikely he will answer any interviews about it in the future.
This is the worst idea in Cincinnati sports since Art Long met up with that police horse.
I would defend the Chris Young deal this way.... Getting Adam Eaton is probably better than gettting Matt Herges.
Even if he doesn't improve at all Kearns is already the Reds best player. He's their second best hitter and their best defensive player. Defensive statistics aren't precise enough to say with absolute confidence that he's the best rightfielder in the league but he might as well be. Obviously the Reds don't agree but that just proves they don't know what they are doing. He's seriously underated in both GM and primate circles. The lame defenses of this trade that describe Kearns as an average player don't know what they're talking about.
I also think this trade of Kearns and the Huff trade tend to show that Soriano is not going to bring back great pitching prospects from the high minors.
As God is my witness, I thought Bill Bray could fly.
True, the deal seemingly goes against Kasten's philosophy of stocking up on young pitching, but the Nationals have so many holes it would have been foolish for them to pass up picking up a shortstop and outfielder who are only 26, probably upgrade their positions, and have a good chance to be in the starting lineup when the new ballpark opens in mid-season '08 (that date's my guess). While you see a chance, you take it, as the song goes. (No, I don't think it's much of a song, either.)
1. Focusing on what players can't do, rather than on what they can. Yes, Lopez and Kearns have some big weaknesses, but if you look at the overall picture of the two of them--age, collection of abilities, salary status--the pros outweigh the cons.
2. Not understanding how talent is distributed. A good organization can improve a weak bullpen without surrendering good young players.
3. Focusing on the short-term when the team does not have a championship-ready talent base.
I really like Kearns, in spite of his faults, so I don't like the trade emotionally or intellectually. The funny part is I bought Denorfia is roto for a buck because I thought either (duh) Griffey and/or Kearns would get hurt or they would make a dumb trade involving Kearns, or both. I bet a lot of other Reds' fans (as well as others) did, too.
The offensive difference between Lopez and Clayton ain't very much this year. Park illusions play a role.
But getting rid of Kearns makes all those defensive improvements for naught because they weaken their defense where it's worst - in the outfield with the awful tandem of Griffey and Dunn. Because of the GAB's extreme home run tendencies, the extra singles that Dunn and Griffey give up hurt the Reds more than the average team, and yet they don't seem to see it.
This is generally the right idea for the Reds, and they got back the right type of players (right type, just not enough quality), and they got two of the traded players right (Wagner needs a change of scenery and remains attractive, and Lopez's good season with the stick last year makes his trade value higher than his value to a contender). They just went off the rails with Kearns.
The Reds' pitching is going to continue to look awful until they can get some players who can play defense behind them. They had two - Phillips and Kearns. Now they might only have one if Clayton's 36-year-old legs have seen better days...
Now I agree with this, especially as far as Kearns goes, but the problem with that is, the Reds are in the pennant race and they don't have the kind of team that can support Lopez going out there every day and watching the ground balls roll by him. It's demoralizing to the entire ballclub.
Can you use Lopez effectively? I don't think he has a position, although surely he could play some second and some third - maybe not well but enough to use his bat. But as a shortstop he's useful enough... he hits righties well and righthanded hitting shortstops with good gloves who are hopeless against righties but can hit lefties a bit are a dime a dozen. That allows you both an offense/defense AND a left/right platoon, which can be very effective. (Weaver and Stengel both used this structure often at short where all-around stars were once hard to come by). Is Narron sharp enough to try something like that? Hard to say for me.
Not understanding how talent is distributed. A good organization can improve a weak bullpen without surrendering good young players.
Sure it can. A good organization can improve a weak bullpen in any of three ways:
(1) giving opportunities to its good young pitchers, have them work with a good pitching coach, reduce their repetoire to what they do best and get them to trust their talent
(2) spending money wisely in the off-season, since relief help is always available in quantity and depth
(3) inviting everyone under the sun to take a shot at winning a bullpen job, and handing out spots to the winners
Now I think we can all agree that there is no way on Earth that the Reds, the worst franchise in the majors at developing pitching talent into something useful, will successfully be able to do (1). (2) is an off-season activity; once the bell rings, relief help isn't just available anywhere, you have to pay for it dearly. And (3)... well, (3) is what bad teams often do to sort out a bullpen, and sometimes it works and more often it doesn't. It's hard to do in a pennant race, because all the while that you're running retreads and AAA lifers and waiver wire pickups out there, you're giving up runs and losing ballgames, waiting for Mr. Right to pop up.
I really don't get why this is a disaster for Cincinnati or a swindle of genius by Bowden. Bowden got two bad players--and Ryan Wagner is bad to the tune of allowing 12.9 hits/9 at triple-a. And the good one is good on the level of Juan Rivera. I'm not knocking Rivera but he wouldn't be viewed as a prize acquisition like Kearns is.
I guess if Krivsky did wrong it's for not maxing out Kearns' value. Reports constantly say that few good hitters are available and it seems like Kearns could of brought more than bench guys and two decent relievers. If it was bullpen help that Krivsky wanted, I wonder if Seattle would've done a Soriano for Kearns deal.
That was a classic Pirate "salary dump" maneuver. They later dumped a then-servicable Randall Simon to the Cubbies, also.
Well Rivera is having the best season of his career with the bat and it's still not as good as the one Kearns is having. That's without taking into consideration that Kearns has been a ++ defensive player ever since he came into the league.
This is a horrible trade because the Reds traded their best player for middle relievers. It's horrible that they didn't know that Kearns was their best player. And even if they don't know that and think he's just Juan Rivera it's still horrible because an outfielder who can hit is worth more than two average middle relievers. And that's without considering the Lopez for Clayton swap.
The Reds have subtracted about six wins the rest of the way with the subtraction of Kearns and Lopez. Moreover they traded players without a lot of variability in their performance so the we can be pretty sure they'll meet those projections.
In return if we give everyone the best possible projection they get five wins back. They've added Clayton, who is basically a replacement player but we'll give him one win; Majewski two wins (best case scenario) and Bill Bray, another two wins. In addition they can replace Kearns playing time with Denofrio which might be worth another two wins. So at the end of the day they might be up one win. However that's only if all of the guys they acquired do as good as can be reasonably expected. The confidence level that Majewski and Bray will be able to maintain their performance to date is much lower than the confidence level that Kearns and Lopez will be able to. Moreover they don't have anyone left to trade because they've already used all of their trade chips.
So, at best they break even this year while wasting their trade chips and becoming worse long term.
I'll give you the worst trade in Reds history.
And, yes, the DC area was involved once again: it was 40+ years ago when the Reds traded Frank Robbie to Baltimore for Milt Pappas and two guys named Moe.
According to the Reds front office Frank was "an old 30" and had lost a lot of speed with the bat and in the field.
We all know what happened next, don't we kiddies.......Frank hits 49 dingers and 122 RBIs, wins the triple crown/MVP, leads Baltimore to a 4 to zip sweep of the Dodgers in the 1966 WS!
Now that's a bad trade! You need to put these things into perspective.
Bull. Clayton sucks. The difference in VORP is 13, and while that's not a gigantic gap, it's enough. Plus, Lopez showed last year that he has hitting talent, Clayton has never once shown that in his career. Clayton has this reputation that he's a defensive star, but he's an average SS at best.
Plus, Clayton's an #######.
Not even close. Pappas performed. I give you 12/15/1900: Amos Rusie to the Reds for Christy Mathewson. Not only the worst Reds trade ever, but the worst trade ever.
Umm....
Oh the humanity!
Well he was avearge to good when he was perceived of as being a star- he's actually quite bad now- close to FLopez actually.
The Reds have a chance to steal a division title this year, and their chances of grabbing another one in the near term are not nearly as good as their shot at this one. The Reds' young core of talent is two-three years away from being ready to contribute in the majors, and they'll likely be patching and filling over that time frame. The Redsare highly likely to be behind the Brewers, quite probably will still be behind the Cardinals - whose primary weakness, the pitching, is likely to be fillable from within in the next year or two, and while they may remain ahead of the Cubs and Astros, both of those teams have monetary resources that the Reds do not. In any reasonable scenario, it's hard to imagine that the Reds' chances of landing a postseason berth over the next two-three seasons are going to be any better than they are right now - and getting into the postseason would give Reds' fans something to hang their hats on while the team restructures over the next couple of years.
In a limited-resource market like Cincinnati, getting into the postseason has quite a bit of value, both in terms of marginal revenue and in terms of community goodwill. The local media - and the broadcasters, especially King Marty - have been flogging the bullpen hard (justifiably so - the bleeding was approaching critical condition). For Krivsky to sit back and do nothing to address an obvious sinkhole would have been horrible, both from a PR standpoint and from the team's standpoint, as well - the players have to be thinking postseason opp.
So I think that Krivsky absolutely had to focus on the short-term, even acknowledging (as I do) that the Reds don't have a championship-ready core. The market conditions, and the competitive conditions in the NL Central, IMO are compelling reasons for Krivsky to try to restructure the team's talent to facilitate a championship run this year. I don't know that he had to do this particular trade - he did IMO clearly overpay for what he got in return - but the Reds would have been far worse off, IMO, had he done nothing. At least he protected the longer-term future by not dipping into the real future (Bailey, Bruce) to get relief help now.
-- MWE
This trade, to me, shines a spotlight on the true cost of bad relief pitching: the willingness, or even eagerness, to overpay to fix the problem. Sheehan and others have banged this drum more than once, but it's tough to see, just watching the games, the runs you give up by giving Neifi Perez 550 at bats (sometimes you have to get your head out of the ball park and read a spreadsheet from time to time to see that). It's easy, distressingly easy, to see the runs you give up by having a crummy bullpen. Visible problems are the ones that get solved first, and really visible problems are the ones likeliest to be fixed at the cost of overpaying.
This strikes me as a deal in which Krivsky, who really has done some astute things this year, got fed up with the highly-visible problem that was his bullpen, and decided that he was going to do anything to fix it, cost be damned.
Then along came Bowden ...
Happy Base Ball
My understanding via local contacts is Dunn is legitimately upset on two fronts. One, that Kearns wasn't just a teammate but a real friend and will be missed. Two, that Dunn felt the club owed him a heads up.
Do you have any concerns over someone employing their version of "Operation Shutdown"?
I listened to the Reds broadcast last night and Krivsky really didn't sound that excited about the trade. He sounded like someone who had had their appendix removed. Relieved was the operative word.
The real question about Dunn is when he's gone. He has "DH" written all over him.
After the Casey deal, I thought he had "1B" written all over him. But, when you have a chance to land a Hatteberg, you damn well better land a Hatteberg.
I've been watching the Cubs for all my life. It's not that difficult at all for me to see the runs the Cubs are giving up by giving time to Neifi Perez.
Other than that, I agree with the rest of the post.
That's an interesting point, Mike, but here's my problem -- why deal Kearns, Lopez, and Wagner in an 8-player deal? I see no real reason for them to get Clayton, Harris, et al. other than the fact that they are dealing Lopez and Wagner.
Why couldn't they have done something like Kearns for Bray/Majewski? That would seem a lot more fair to me and still address the Reds needs.
Or even better, Krivsky exercises his eye for talent and gets someone out of someone else's minor league system for peanuts, or sees who's just sitting at home who might still be able to get guys out, or checks the indy leagues, or picks up someone who is perceived to be struggling but has good periphs and just needs a change of scenery. <u>Somewhere</u> there's somebody who can pitch. It's hard to find them, but after all, it's his job.
That's it in a nut shell- and when you point out that a Neifi doesn't do anything- it;'s not quite true, he does stuff, he'll get a hit every now and then, he'll move a runner over, he'll even hit a home run every now and then- you just don't see that he does less of that than someone else would.
I mean- take superjoe- on stathead sites Joe McEwing is a running joke- to causual fans he's a useful role player- on any given day he doesn't look bad- otoh someone like Craig Wilson looks pretty bad when he's not homering
pitching's a different thing, other than strectches when a good pitcher gets hit unlucky opr a bad pitcher (Hendrickson) gets hit lucky, what you see is pretty much what's there- (oddly enough where traditional fans go wrong on pitchers is when they take there head OUT of the game and look at the W-L-SV on the spreadsheet... I mean, if anyone watched Eric Milton pitch and ignored his flukish W-L records- or if W-L records were not credited to pitchers- he'd be a lot less wealthy today...)
A neighbor of mine was one of the dead
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main