PDA

View Full Version : Question about the Kearns 3rd Base Experiment Last Year...



WMR
02-21-2006, 02:15 AM
I was just wondering if this apparent contradiction was ever publicly addressed or explained or if it was just another dumb decision by the previous administration...

Since it was widely acknowledged that E.E. was the Reds top prospect who had an excellent chance of a late-season call-up, presumably for good, why in the heck was so much time and effort spent trying to convert AK to a 3rd baseman when our top prospect, a 3rd baseman, was less than a season away???

It seems completely illogical ... not that we saw much of anything else over the last few years...

TOBTTReds
02-21-2006, 02:31 AM
I think they felt EE was atleast a Sept call-up away from the majors and they were trying to get all 4 OF'ers in the lineup. No it didn't make too much sense to block your only prospect, but it would have been a killer lineup and they could have flipped EE for a pitcher if it came down to it.

KronoRed
02-21-2006, 02:51 AM
They didn't want to wait on EE, and if Kearns was a 3B his trade value would be way higher.

wheels
02-21-2006, 09:33 AM
Most people were against the move.....I was all for it.

I was wrong.

Blimpie
02-21-2006, 09:40 AM
Larson was gone, EE was unproven at the MLB level, and--if I am not mistaken--there was no Joe Randa sighting at that point of the off-season either. It could have been an authentic 3B tryout (wink, wink)--but it could have also been the first shot across the bow for Austin regarding his off-season conditioning. My thoughts at the time were that they were trying to make Austin more palatable for a trade prior to ST.

I don't know how much "time and effort" was actually expended on the experiment. From what I recall, Austin worked out for about 3-4 weeks in January at Champions in Nicholasville. Once the coaches paid him a visit, the mission was scrubbed rather quickly I thought.

M2
02-21-2006, 11:04 AM
It was mad science.

westofyou
02-21-2006, 11:05 AM
it was just another dumb decision by the previous administration...

That was determined the minute it was announced.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28866

Redsland
02-21-2006, 11:10 AM
It was no worse an idea than moving Dave Parker to first to make room in the lineup for Tracy Jones.

(Who played the game, btw.) ;)

westofyou
02-21-2006, 11:20 AM
It was no worse an idea than moving Dave Parker to first to make room in the lineup for Tracy Jones.Infinitely worst.

It was as an informed decision as the Bay of Pigs was.

Redsland
02-21-2006, 11:49 AM
One needs to remember that Parker proved incapable of keeping his foot on the bag.

KronoRed
02-21-2006, 01:28 PM
That was determined the minute it was announced.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28866
I said I liked it at the time..I stand by that..but it didn't work out..and we got SUPER RANDA! ;)

Topcat
02-22-2006, 04:29 AM
I said I liked it at the time..I stand by that..but it didn't work out..and we got SUPER RANDA! ;)


Who did resonably well and netted us Travis Chick and another player.:beerme:

KearnsyEars
02-22-2006, 09:35 AM
I was just wondering if this apparent contradiction was ever publicly addressed or explained or if it was just another dumb decision by the previous administration...

Since it was widely acknowledged that E.E. was the Reds top prospect who had an excellent chance of a late-season call-up, presumably for good, why in the heck was so much time and effort spent trying to convert AK to a 3rd baseman when our top prospect, a 3rd baseman, was less than a season away???

It seems completely illogical ... not that we saw much of anything else over the last few years...

Morons at the controls