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 0.6828 seconds
54 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.
1. 3Com Park Posted: July 13, 2006 at 10:39 PM (#2098053)The one Reds player they interviewed (Freel) seemed to love the deal. Obviously there was a lot of internal discontent over the state of the bullpen. That's the only way this deal makes any sense at all.
I wonder who's gonna call him and tell him it's great. Maybe it'll just be Krivsky calling himself and leaving messages using different voices a la Mrs. Doubtfire.
There is a saying in poker that you should always stop when you're ahead, and you know you've really gotten lucky on a couple of hands (Phillips, Arroyo). Krivsky should've really just packed it in and called it a year.
What a mess.
In other news, I have Denorfia on my NL only keeper team :) Ditto for Felipe Lopez :(
Oh, and I never ever thought I'd live to see the day in which Royce Clayton gets traded mid-season to a "contender". This trade is so funny because it's so painfully real.
And then I saw the entire deal.
Maybe somebody can help me out, but this is the most awful deal I can remember a MLB team making since the Kazmir trade by a wide margin. I wouldn't have traded Kearns for Bray and Majewski straight up. In fact, I would have laughed and asked Bowden for his keys.
Royce Clayton? Brendan Harris?
I suppose there is a reason Bowden asks for the sun, moon, and stars. Sometimes you might have Krivsky on the phone.
And Ryan Wagner? No more chances for him in that fragile bullpen?
All they got in return are some fungible middle relievers and clayton. the only way this trade makes sense is if they believe in Philips and Freel and are moving Philips to SS. why not trade aurilia??
If you are making a trade and you are the one who's losing the two best players involved it's probably not a good idea to make it.
Yeah, that's how I found out about it and I thought the same. Not so much that he was dealt, but that the Nationals, a team I thought was going to be selling, got him. I doubt they get the WC, but I like their chances a lot more with this trade.
Assistant GM: Uh, Mr. Krivsky? I've been getting a lot of messages on my voice mail about this trade: a lot of "suck my" this, and "your mother's a" that, and I just wanted to know--how should I respond to them?
Wayne Krivsky: Well, you see, son, this is all about how much more dominant the AL has been than the NL this year. Look at what a great deal we got with Arroyo: how much better he's been in the NL than he was in the AL. And, I figure that, if Majewski and Bray were that good in the AL with the Senators, they should be Cy Young candidates in the NL.
Assistant GM: Uh, sir, you're thinking of the old Washington Senators. These are the Washington Nationals. They play in the National League.
Wayne Krivsky: Damn Bowden's genius! I should have known he was just pretending to be drunk at 9 in the morning! Well, at least my deal with the Brewers went through, sending Adam Dunn and Edwin Encarnacion to Milwaukee for Jose Capellan. Now, the Brewers, there's a team with a strong AL history. I remember them playing the Cardinals in the '82 Series.
Assistant GM: Uh, sir, I'm afraid I have some bad news for you...
Other than that, it looks pretty awful. If the stats are right about Kearns's d, he's an awesome player. Then again, those same stats make Felipe into a bit of a bum.
In terms of talent in and talent out, the Reds got hosed. Kearns and Lopez for two relievers and Royce Clayton is a bad trade.
But when you look at the Red's roster, it's probably a better team now. They really needed the bullpen help, and Denofria is capable of stepping up and providing Kearns-like performance. Clayton's a downgrade on Lopez, but scoring runs hasn't really been the Reds' problem.
It's certainly possible that the 25-man they have today is better than what they had, even as they gave away more talent than they took in.
Kearns, as an adequate OF, has value to somebody. You can realize that value if you're that team or by matching the player with that team. In this case the Reds did neither because they received immaterial value.
As for Lopez, 2nd full year in the bigs, adequate offense this season. In his other year he was the best offensive SS in the league. And he's pre-prime, so while your comment about neither being at an age where you'd expect them to improve much isn't way off base, it's misleading. Lopez, at age 26, at least has to be given credit for the potential to match 2005 multiple times in the next 4-5 years. Arguing that this has no active value is simply misguided.
This is only a saying amongst moronic poker players.
A good organization sees that he can't play an adequate shortstop and finds a way to get his .355 OPB in the line-up (at second base, ideally). Or it deals him for something other than relatively fungible middle relievers.
Kearns has an adequate .281 EQA in a corner outfield spot, is making $3.6 million and is due up for arbitration.
Come on, Tim. Nice cherry-picking. If you're going to rip Lopez for his bad defense as undermining his value, then acknowledge that Kearns is an excellent defensive player, which has to enhance his value. You're in a position to ask the question of other GMs that people asked after the Kazmir deal: did Duquette let it be known Kazmir was available, and see what others might offer? The answer was no. I bet that the answer here was that Krivsy got much too single-minded in pursuit of one thing, just as Duquette did, and didn't think in terms of assets and value. He thus didn't get enough for these two assets.
Your argument is reasonable ONLY when you build in a huge assumption about the dollars, which is that Kearns and Lopez are on the cusp of making way too much money for the value of their contributions. If that is so, and I'm not at all sure I agree with it, then the argument contains an implicit criticism of Krivsy for waiting too long to deal them, when this problem with their value/dollar ratio is (or should be) now obvious to rival GMs. Because if a couple of good but not great set-up relievers and Royce Clayton is all that a slugging corner OFer with fine defense, and one of the best offensive SSs in the NL can bring, then either (a) you have NOT dealt those assets at the right time, or (b) you have not dealt them for the right package. One of those two things MUST be true.
Gee, an off-topic racist remark about Minaya. You've reached a new low.
"The addition of Lopez jeopardizes the future of injured shortstop Cristian Guzman, who is owed $4.2 million in each of the next seasons."
Lopez can't field. Guzman can't field, hit, run the bases, or stay in shape. Granted, Guzman is sunk cost on the ocean floor, but still.
I just think at times, there is this expectation that teams should develop Pujolsian talent, play said Pujolsian talent until they become arbitration eligible, and then trade them for more Pujolsian talent.
Kearns is a good player, a nice piece on a good team, under team control. I do not see how the trade significantly improves the Reds this year, and I don't see Kearns as an "averagish former prospect". Its a nice salary dump, true, if one where to assume that was the intention, but as a supposed upgrade, I don't think it holds water.
I don't intend the post to come off snarky Marchman, I respect your opinions. Your position is likely similar to the Reds' view, and may prove to be true. But for the time being, I don't see it.
He's running out of time in his quest to play for every team.
Clayton's not getting any younger, and he's not a LOOGY.
The Reds have been trying to trade Kearns for a long time. There hasn't been much interest because he's fragile, overpaid, and not when healthy isn't exactly a star. He's essentially Xavier Nady— the fragility cancels out Kearn's better defense and hitting—but making 9 times as much money. He had potential years ago to be better than that, got hurt a lot, added weight, and there you have it. I'm not saying he's not deserving of a major league job, but he doesn't have much value as an asset.
Lopez is an execrable shortstop, to the point where a contender probably can't play him there. He had what was almost certainly a peak year last year, and has returned to his career norms this year. I doubt he's even an average player unless he hits like he did last year, which he won't.
Getting anything of use for these two seems to me a coup given the money involved and that both have bad reputations. I think people have dramatically inflated views of how these two players are valued and are underestimating the value of the pitching the Reds got. Just my two cents.
Exactly Sam. There are maybe 2-3 RFers I'd take over him defensively in the majors. Getting Denorfia into the majors is a good thing for the Reds, but when you have Griffey and Dunn in the OF the last thing you should do is trade a good hitting OF that's a stud in the field.
Wondered if Bill Bray had more potential than just a loogy - he was drafted just 2 years ago in the first round - but it looks like he is, he was a reliever in college and the minors too.
Majewski has been a decent reliever, but is he really durable or just overworked and headed for a breakdown? I've seen a lot of young pitchers come up and handle his type of workload, sometimes you get a Scott Shields out of it but most of the time its an injury waiting to happen.
I have no idea if Ryan Wagner still has potential. He's been awful in Louisville this year. Clayton is a serious downgrade at SS from Lopez, no matter how bad the glove is.
Kearns is not the future superstar he looked like in his rookie year. He hit .315 as a 22 year old, but that was a fluke. He's better than the .230 hitter he was 2 years later though. He seems to have settled into the .260-.270 range, that's where he's hitting now and that where his career average has settled. He strikes out too much to hit more than that, but walks enough for a .350-.370 OBP, plays good defense, great UZR in past years and +2 so far this year by Dial's latest numbers. The power is where he has a chance to improve. I think Kearns could turn into a 40 homer guy, though maybe not in RFK.
Denorfia is a good prospect, but he's a major downgrade from Kearns. Looks like the Reds just tried to get cheaper, and I don't know if they have a longterm solution at shortstop. Maybe Phillips plays there with Freel or Aurilia at 2B?
You're excluding the part where he's been healthy this year, hitting much better than Nady ever has while playing everyday, and is still a great defender. He's still only 26 too, so it's not like he's peaked or is doomed to be injury prone his entire career.
Lopez is an execrable shortstop, to the point where a contender probably can't play him there. He had what was almost certainly a peak year last year, and has returned to his career norms this year. I doubt he's even an average player unless he hits like he did last year, which he won't.
So a guy gets to play everyday for the fist time at 25. He hits like the scouts always thought he could after some disappointing years earlier in his career when he was used sporadically. This is obviously his best hitting season ever? This doesn't even begin to pass the sniff test.
Narron and Krivsky indicated today that Clayton would be the everyday SS for the rest of the year, at least...
I mean, when you have two young good right fielders, you can't play them both. Would you rather have one playing and one on the bench, or one playing and some bullpen pitchers who are also playing?
I would rather have Dunn at first base and Hatteberg on the bench. =)
Fair enough. But judging by that quote from the GM, I can't find a way to justify the trade they ended up making, especially not when they have Griffey still in CF and Dunn in LF.
I would rather have one playing and have gotten value in a deal for the other......
The problem is NOT moving Kearns. Or Lopez for that matter. The problem is thinking that players with the skill set and past performance of Majewski and Bray provide equal let alone increased value.
This, and your other posts, are simply delusional. Kearns is the Reds best player and it's not really that close. Only Dunn is a better hitter and Kearns is a superior (15 runs above average) defender. He also isn't expensive. Paying the arbitration years on your best player is a good thing.
Now it's true if Austin Kearns is your best player then you don't have a great team. But the solution to that problem isn't to trade your best player for middle relievers it's to go get better players.
This is the worst trade involving complete information (ie without the uncertainty of prospects) in my lifetime.
The Reds also got an intriguing, if often injured, pitching prospect; and Brendan Harris, who has minimal service time and a minor league track record indicating he'd be one of the better pinch hitters in the game.
There's also the fact that these players fit the Reds' current needs, that major league general managers don't value Kearns and Lopez as highly as BTF members, and that given the current trade environment a better deal could probably only have been consummated in three weeks, by which time an atrocious bullpen could well have knocked the Reds out of the race.
I realize I'm tilting at a windmill here, but player values are fluid, depending on circumstances, and executives don't work in a context-free neutral environment. This isn't an obviously great or obviously horrible trade for either team. If the Reds make the playoffs, Kearns remains injury plagued and expensive, and Lopez ends up a utility player, Krivsky will look great; the opposite is also certainly possible. I'm just interested in the universal negative reaction from all quarters to a deal that makes a fair amount of sense for both sides given all the factors at play.
(For what it's worth I would laughed at this proposal were I in charge of the Reds; but then I'd be a spectacularly awful GM.)
This might also be a bad thing for the Nationals and Bowden long term. Now he thinks that this is what the market offers and he'll avoid making the small trades he needs to make while holding out for another rip off. This clearly happened to Lamar after the Kazmir trade.
For some reason, CIN has been trying to get rid of Kearns for a long time.
This is one of the worst trades I have heard of recently.
So much for Krivsky being a "genius." Of course, trading for one good player (Arroyo) that is having a career year does not a great GM make.
Kearns has averaged around +5 in UZR consistently since in the majors and around +10 in offensive lwts. In addition, he is above average in baserunning and has an above average arm. On the FA market, he is worth over 7 mil. At his salary and as a pre-FA player, he is gold.
Lopez' UZR at SS has not been horrible, around -5 per year. Even at -10, he has lots of value because of his hitting, which is probably not a fluke. He could probably be turned into a 2B or even 3B if he is that bad defensively at SS. Again, because of his salary status, he is gold as well. Clayton is a replacement player and I don't know much about the other players that CIN got. Ryan Wagner is not good at all, but who cares.
Majewski is nothing special. For a reliever, pitching in the NL, in a real good pitchers' park, a 3.58 ERA doesn't look special. On top of that, his K/BB ratio isn't even 2-to-1, which is pretty bad for a reliever. He's not even in BP's top 60 for WXRL (Win Expectancy Above Replacement). Really, he's a fungible reliever who, if your scouts are good enough, are available for minor league deals in the offseason.
and Brendan Harris, who has minimal service time and a minor league track record indicating he'd be one of the better pinch hitters in the game.
World's tallest midget. Essentially he's a guy who shouldn't be starting for a team that wants to compete for the playoffs.
Lopez is an execrable shortstop, to the point where a contender probably can't play him there. He had what was almost certainly a peak year last year, and has returned to his career norms this year. I doubt he's even an average player unless he hits like he did last year, which he won't.
Well now, instead of a player who can't field, you'll have a player who can't field OR hit. Best of both worlds, I guess.
Tim,
From all indications the Indians were willing to give you Jake Westbrook, a better than average starting pitcher worth a lot more than Bill Bray, this offseason straight up for Kearns, and the Reds turned it down. It's one thing to say that they haven't found the right trading partner as they were looking for the moon and the stars for Kearns, but its simply not true that Kearns ddidn't have much value and that their was no interest. And that was before he was able to prove that he was healthy this year. I know that you're trying to justify this trade but the Reds got absolutely hosed. As an Indians fan, this is as close to a Giles for Ricard Rincon deal as I've seen. You just don't trade young, entering their prime everday players for relievers. You're going to get burned every time, and the Reds dealt two.
And a GIDP machine to boot. If the Reds hate Dunn's strikeouts so much then they're going to be ecstatic about a guy who likes to put the ball in play with runners on.
No kidding. If I'm the Cubs and I get wind of this I'm on the phone in an instant offering Eyre and Howry for Kearns and Lopez. Oh, I'll throw in Dempster, too. Lopez moves to 2nd and Kearns plays somewhere in the OF every day.
I think Kearns is only making $1.85 million in this, his second arbitration season. He might be in line for $3.6 next year, and we won't be up for free agency until after 2008, I think.
That's what ESPN has listed, as well.
mgl is an awfully smart fellow but there is no way Kearns would earn a $7 million contract as a free agent. Being reliable is the single most undervalued attribute among ballplayers. When you spend serious money and give important roster positions to players with bad injury histories people call you the Chicago Cubs and laugh at you.
Unless your name is J.D. Drew, of course.
:P
Of course, the Cubs may have learned their lesson, shelling out big bucks to a player with a history of extreme durability, Derrek Lee. How's that looking so far? I'm starting to think that "reliability" might be the most overvalued attribute among ballplayers.
Hold on a second. They got it because they had done a heck of a lot more than Kearns has, so far, and because of when they hit free agency. Cliff Floyd ($6.5M), for a counter-example, isn't making a hell of a lot more than $7M, because he hit the market at the wrong time.
As for arbitration, Kearns wouldn't be in line to get to $7M in 2007, that's for sure -- not from $1.85M this season. I think Spycake makes a pretty good stab at it in # 55 (somewhere south of $4M), and maybe, if he continues to put on to a strong 2006 and an equally good 2007, he'd get to (or near) $7M in 2007 on his way to 2008. But all that depends on staying healthy and productive. If he does that, then he answers all those doubts Tim says GMs have and he'd get a heck of a contract as a FA. But then, that's one heck of an "if."
I certainly buy that the doubts Tim describes make him a dubious buy as a FA at that price (or higher) for a long-term deal. But that is a very different proposition from trading for a guy and keeping him for the next 2+ seasons during his arb years -- a different financial commitment, a different risk proposition for the franchise. His value as a player is commensurate with the salary; his value as a risk for a multi-year commitment certainly might not bel.
Duh. What I meant to write there was, "if he continues on to a strong 2006 and an equally good 2007, he'd get to (or near) $7M in 2008 on his way to free agency."
Where were the Tigers? They could have come up with good relief pitchers. Kearns may not be left-handed, but he fill a huge hole for them if Magglio would move to left.
If he is it opens up an intrguing series of options for the Nats...
1) Trade Jose Vidro to a contending team looking for a 2B (Hello, Walt, this is Bodes... wait, I have Omar on Line 2).
2) Move Lopez to 2B.
3) Move Zimmerman off 3B to SS... he was more than passable there in a brief period last year
4) Give current Double-A 3B Kory Casto a shot at the job. Then in the 2006 offseason you can shop for either a fulltime SS or 3B to fill your infield gap.
5) By shedding Vidro bloated salary (and perhaps the salaries of Guillen and Livan), Bodes and Co. might, might be able to retain Alfonso Soriano.
I said to some co-workers today that this is a great time to be a Nats fan... absolutely anything, ANYTHING can happen with this team right now... it's totally out of control.
I know that if I'm the Indians, I give you Wickman and Rafael Betancourt (and I love Betancourt) and pay Wick's salary. Not the same, sure, but I would argue that those two are certainly better for this year, and that Betancourt is a better bet for the future than Bray. Hell, I'll do that for one of Lopez or Kearns, especially if you throw in Wagner for my pitching coaches to attempt to get back to where he was.
Howry has been mentioned, as well as Dempster and Eyre. Those guys may be more expensive than what Krivsky wanted, but I'm sure something could have been worked out. Hell, the Cubs could ahve thrown in any number of 2B so that BP could move to SS.
I'd have to believe that some teams in the race even would give up their Middle Relievers to get Lopez or Kearns or both back. Would Seattle give up Putz or Soriano? Would the A's give up Duchscherer?
This is akin to the guy in your fantasy league who trades Ben Roethlisberger for Nick Goings because he needs a RB and he's already got Tom Brady. Meanwhile you're sitting there with Thomas Jones on your bench every week, starting Kyle Boller at QB. It's not so much that it's a bad trade (although it is) as it is that Krivsky could/should have gotten more if he had made it known what he was gonna do.
Hell, if I rip you off less than the other guy, you're better off!
If you have a real shot, you always have to take it.
They had a big weakness on their team (their pen) and addressed it by giving up two, valuble, but flawed and overrated players.
Are there any other availbe relivers out there who are as good? as young and cheap?
Of course the problem is that the Reds stink, they're probably the third best team in their division, they have no playoff rotation etc etc etc.
This is a spin job worthy of Plaschke. Okay, no one is that bad. But in this instance, no amount of spinning would make this an even trade. What you're trying to do is take the worst possible traits of Kearns and Lopez to characterize them, ignoring the qualities that they do bring to the table, imagine the worst possible paths for them, and then state that this will be the set course.
Others have mentioned that Kearns does everything pretty well. Even if you're that hung up on his injury history, he has managed to scrape together 300-500 ABs every year. And if you think 1.6 million (or even 3.6 million) is too much to pay for a corner OFer, then I think you might as well declare to the fans that you don't have the financial resources to compete.
Your criticism of Lopez only makes sense if you have a viable alternate. As others have noted, both Castro and Clayton are considerably worse than Lopez. Middle infielders who can get on base, hit for power, and run don't grow on trees. Intelligent organizations find ways of using these talents. Poor evaluators get hung up on the weak glove.
Even if the Reds make the playoffs, it doesn't mean that this was a good move. Lots of decisions determine a playoff run. But as many in this thread and the others have explained, this trade sets them two steps back towards that goal.
Perhaps other GMs don't value Kearns or Lopez as highly as the BTF factory does, but nearly everyone would agree that relievers at the level of Majewski and Bay are easy to find. Those are the type of players you trade B level prospects for. A half-way intelligent GM wouldn't let the market context determine the value of his trading assets. Krivsky had to know that Kearn/Lopez is worth more than that, and that he should wait or explore other options rather than pull the trigger. Instead he acted at the lowest possible exchange value for his assets. That level of incompetence is Duquettesque.
4) Give current Double-A 3B Kory Casto a shot at the job. Then in the 2006 offseason you can shop for either a fulltime SS or 3B to fill your infield gap.
"
For whatever its worth they moved Casto back to LF (he started his pro career there) a few weeks ago. Now of course they could move him back but its worthwhile to point out that hes no longer a 3b for now
My 7 mil fig for Kearns was simply based on his Superlwts projection for a corner outfielder and 2.5 mil per marginal win which is what teams pay on the average for FA.
Krisky is an idiot. Then again, at least half the GM's (and 80% of the managers) are.
You simply don't trade good, pre-FA (let alone pre-arb) players for anything but good, young players in return. And trading anything for Clayton, a replacement player, is a joke.
Well then, I stink... I thought I had kept up enough in the boxes that he was still at third.
Talent?
Besides being better, younger, and cheaper? Not much.
As said, I wouldn't make this deal. However— and this would be my basic premise— there's more to be learned from assuming a minimal level of intelligence on the part of MLB decisionmakers than there is from assuming they're morons who know nothing about how to evaluate players, their finances, or their playoff chances. Your takeaway here can either be that that guy on your corner muttering obscenities would be a better GM than Wayne Krivsky, that certain sorts of players are less valuable on the open market than you might think, or something in between, along the lines of Kearns and Lopez being less valuable than one might think but more valuable than Wayne Krivsky apparently thinks. Whatever players' objective merits might be, thinking inside other peoples' heads and understanding why they might be acting in good faith is usually more valuable than assuming they're missing vital chromosomes. I
I agree with this. At the same time this certainly looks like one of those cases where somebody's missing vital chromosomes. If it's not Krivsky, then it's Kearns and Lopez.
They probably feel that in Clayton they got proven veteran talent in case they make the post-season this year, they do not like Kearns for whatever reasons, they hate Lopez' defense, and they trimmed a little payroll (I think). That is probably their thought process. They have no idea that Clayton is a replacement player (they don't even know what that means), and they don't know that Kearns, albeit when healthy, is 3 wins above replacement.
And yes, "reliability" is an overrated concept (in some circles). It has to be. At best, all the research that has been done in this area, and it should be intuitively obvious as well, indicates that past injury is at best a mild predictor of future injury. Given that some significant portion of all injuries are basically "fluke" (to some degree), whether a player has a history of injury or not simply CANNOT affect his future value all that much.
But yes, sometimes a person's behavior and/or decision-making leaves no possibility but that the person is monsterously stupid. That is often the case with MLB GMs.
Yes, that is one of MGL's rules. We can sometimes infer someone's "IQ" within a certain discipline by observing one one or two of their behaviors or decisions regardless what their thought process was. If I see a blackjack player stand on 16 versus a dealer 7, I don't have to watch any other hands or ask him what his "reasoning" was to know that he is not a card counter or even a basic strategy player (unless he mis-read the dealer's upcard or was employing some costly cameflauge of course).
This is not a constructive attitude.
Now the Nats could use a manager who is not stupid (Robinson is one of the worst, IMO).
And how many other teams are looking for outfield/offense help?
Yankees, Cubs, Angels, Indians.
How does J. Brent Cox compare to Majewski? I've gotta think the Yankees would have loved to get involved in a Kearns deal, and the Reds probably could have gotten more from them for just Kearns than they got from the Nats for both Kearns and Lopez. Some combination of Cox, cash(so they don't need to deal Lopez and replace him with Clayton), and oh, lets say Gardner, would probably have provided the Reds with a better overall team, as well a younger and more cost controlled team. Along with giving them an interesting prospect in Garder. The Yankees meanwhile don't move Hughes or Tabata, get to plug in Kearns for this year, and get to tell Sheffield to take a hike next year...
I don't know, but even if you're determined to move Kearns, there are teams that are looking for a good fielding, good hitting outfielder, right?
I know that you Yankees fans get a little overzealous sometimes, but J. Brent Cox is a minor league reliever and not even a particularly great one. You would take that trade from ugly to Carrot-Top ugly. The Yankees only seem to have about 5 or 6 players worth realistically trading for and most of them are unlikely to be traded (Wang, Cano, Hughes and Tabata)
No, I don't think GMs are morons. They, like everyone else, make foolish decisions, but usually decisions which are guided by a web of reasoning very different from the impassioned fan with nothing tangible at stake. I'm sure their point of view is very different from our positions.
But it also doesn't mean that they're above criticism. This deal is lopsided. One side should have gotten much more from the exchange, if they had worked or thought a little harder. The deal has all the elements of a bad trade (not a disaster, but a bad trade nonetheless). And unless more information comes out over the coming days, the public has every reason is give Krivsky the label of fool.
That isn't a rationalization, but rather an observation...
There are literally tons of excellent relievers available for next to nothing. Trading valuable position players for non-star or super-star relievers is the dalliance of a fool.
Worth noting I'm a Red Sox fan, not a Yankee fan. Don't let me stop you from randomly assuming fanboyism or anything however.
It's not that Cox is a great middle reliever, it's that Majewski isn't anything special either. If there was a premium player being sent to the Reds, then it would be another story. Right now, it's a so-so middle reliever, a bad shortstop, a utility player, and a not very interesting prospect.
Tell that to Theo Epstein.
In the NL there are three rightfielders better than Kearns. I'm not sure how many middle relievers are better than Majewski but the list is a hell of a lot longer than three.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main