PDA

View Full Version : Question about the Majewski deal...



FlyingPig
12-02-2006, 07:34 PM
According to Marc's blog, the Reds are going to file a grievance over the unhealthy status of Gary Majewski before and after the trade with Washington.

The blog offers the chance that the Reds would ask for another player, but Wayne K also says "there are other remedies."

What other remedies might be out there? Void the trade? Would you even want that?

How would you like to see MLB square things up with the Reds?

Highlifeman21
12-02-2006, 07:39 PM
According to Marc's blog, the Reds are going to file a grievance over the unhealthy status of Gary Majewski before and after the trade with Washington.

The blog offers the chance that the Reds would ask for another player, but Wayne K also says "there are other remedies."

What other remedies might be out there? Void the trade? Would you even want that?

How would you like to see MLB square things up with the Reds?

1. Ban Bowden from wearing leather pants ever again.

2. Tell Bowden he was a bad boy, and make him sit in the corner.

3. Offer Cincinnati a draft pick as compensation via Washington.

Patrick Bateman
12-02-2006, 07:44 PM
Majewski back for Kearns :thumbup:

FlyingPig
12-02-2006, 07:47 PM
Majewski back for Kearns :thumbup:

That squares it up in my book..

Majeski might have cost the Reds a playoff spot..

:nono:

Chip R
12-02-2006, 07:56 PM
They asked about that today. Wayne said that he doesn't feel they were dealt with fairly by the Nats and they are pursuing their case and it's possible this will be out of their hands soon.

reds44
12-02-2006, 08:09 PM
rotoworld reports: (as per the cincy post)

****Reds GM Wayne Krivsky said his club will file a grievance that claims the Nationals misled them about Gary Majewski's health before including him an eight-player deal in July.*****

"We don’t feel like we were dealt with fairly, and you can go to the bank that we’re not going to take it sitting down," Krivsky said. The Reds knew Majewski had shoulder issues before they dealt for him, and unless there's some real damage in his shoulder that they've yet to disclose, it figures to be tough to win a grievance. When Majewski went on the DL in August, his problem was described as inflammation, and he was able to resume pitching within three weeks.

reds44
12-02-2006, 08:09 PM
Majewski back for Kearns :thumbup:
+1

Falls City Beer
12-02-2006, 08:11 PM
Good luck with that grievance. :rolleyes:

westofyou
12-02-2006, 08:18 PM
Good luck with that grievance. :rolleyes:

Freddie Sanchez sez hey.

Falls City Beer
12-02-2006, 08:23 PM
Freddie Sanchez sez hey.

Red Sox are one thing, they don't want to look like shady dealers; Jim Bowden's another story..

reds44
12-02-2006, 08:23 PM
Red Sox are one thing, they don't want to look like shady dealers; Jim Bowden's another story..
What does that matter?

Falls City Beer
12-02-2006, 08:24 PM
What does that matter?

It matters because the Sox didn't the dispute the matter--they just sent along Sanchez to make the situation go away.

Bowden will fight it tooth and nail: and he'll win.

westofyou
12-02-2006, 08:25 PM
Red Sox are one thing, they don't want to look like shady dealers; Jim Bowden's another story..
Yeah, he's a real wizard... we should be quaking.

mth123
12-02-2006, 08:27 PM
I think there will be some remedy, but nothing that really matters.

blumj
12-02-2006, 08:38 PM
It matters because the Sox didn't the dispute the matter--they just sent along Sanchez to make the situation go away.

But they got YOUR favorite pitcher for giving up Sanchez and returning Mike Gonzalez. Seems like that should have been more than fair. :bang:

IslandRed
12-02-2006, 09:33 PM
If they're just now getting to it after all this time, it makes me wonder if a smoking gun of sorts has come to their attention.

Always Red
12-02-2006, 10:13 PM
The Reds knew Majewski had shoulder issues before they dealt for him, and unless there's some real damage in his shoulder that they've yet to disclose, it figures to be tough to win a grievance.

If Kriv knew about the shoulder, it's just his bad luck (and ours) that it (the shoulder) went south after the trade.

If he knew, shame on him for trading so much offense away, as a lot of folks on here have been saying for a long time now.

I have to think that this is going nowhere, fast.

George Foster
12-02-2006, 10:55 PM
"If the shoulder is in first-aid......you MUST nullify the trade.":laugh:

LoganBuck
12-02-2006, 11:14 PM
If they're just now getting to it after all this time, it makes me wonder if a smoking gun of sorts has come to their attention.

That and/or the fact that Winter Meetings are coming up and all the parties plus the commish will be in one location.

Falls City Beer
12-02-2006, 11:18 PM
Personally I think it's a sour grapes smear campaign revenge act against Bowden timed to coincide with the Winter Meetings. You go, Wayne.

westofyou
12-02-2006, 11:39 PM
Personally I think it's a sour grapes smear campaign revenge act against Bowden timed to coincide with the Winter Meetings. You go, Wayne.

Real Occams Razor approach FCB. :laugh:

WVRedsFan
12-03-2006, 02:31 AM
Majewski back for Kearns :thumbup:

Now you're talking.

The more I remember this stupid trade, the madder I get. How in the name of all that good can anyone justify that trade? Even if you do not care for Lopez or Kearns and even if you love Clayton and the two (and one minor league) pitcher, why would you think this was good?

Ugh!

WVRedsFan
12-03-2006, 02:35 AM
That squares it up in my book..

Majeski might have cost the Reds a playoff spot..

:nono:

Just to beat a dead horse. No. It was the Krivsky, rookie GM factor. He screwed up. Plain and simple. Majewski was injured. Wayne and staff didn't delve into it enough so they traded a stud outfielder and a promising shortstop for a dud and a promising pitcher--relief pitcher btw.

I can't get over this.

I keep hearing the name Milt Pappas in my sleep. :bang:

FlyingPig
12-03-2006, 06:48 PM
Just to beat a dead horse. No. It was the Krivsky, rookie GM factor. He screwed up. Plain and simple. Majewski was injured. Wayne and staff didn't delve into it enough so they traded a stud outfielder and a promising shortstop for a dud and a promising pitcher--relief pitcher btw.

I can't get over this.

I keep hearing the name Milt Pappas in my sleep. :bang:


You're absolutely right..I should have worded by comment differently by saying what you did..

The entire way the Majewski deal was handled might have cost the Reds a playoff spot...

...among other things..

:)

Cedric
12-03-2006, 06:56 PM
Milt Pappas got traded for Frank Robinson.

Ya know Frank? One of the ten best players of all time maybe. I don't see where we are heading here.

Jpup
12-03-2006, 08:08 PM
Milt Pappas got traded for Frank Robinson.

Ya know Frank? One of the ten best players of all time maybe. I don't see where we are heading here.

It's the same over the top nonsense we have been hearing for months.

redsmetz
12-03-2006, 08:43 PM
Just to beat a dead horse. No. It was the Krivsky, rookie GM factor. He screwed up. Plain and simple. Majewski was injured. Wayne and staff didn't delve into it enough so they traded a stud outfielder and a promising shortstop for a dud and a promising pitcher--relief pitcher btw

Krivsky says they were aware of the injury history with Majewski and among the questions asked were about shots. He's saying, from what I've read recently, that the Nats were not forthcoming about the shot near the trade date. I think if there's a lesson learned, it's that Jim Bowden doesn't play by the rules. The grievance is that the Reds asked the questions and were misled. It's got nothing to do with rookie GM except to find out what other GM's have found out - that Jim Bowden is not trustworthy.

WVRedsFan
12-03-2006, 09:07 PM
I agree. That was not a job at Krivsky, only a statement of fact. I assume he'd never dealt with JimBo before and Bowden took advantage. What do you expect from scum like him?

To answer the "over the top" accusation. Frank Robinson, who was a great player, was traded to the Baltimore Orioles for Milt Pappas, a good pitcher. Robinson won the MVP the next year and Pappas never did much for the Reds. Austin Kearns was a good player who gave the Reds some pop in the outfield and Felipe Lopez was a good player with some shortcomings as a fielder. Robinson was an "old 30," and we gave up on him. Lopez and Kearns were good players and we gave up on them. We received Gary Majewski, a pitcher with a history of arm problems and Bill Bray, a youngster that had no track record.

Lots of similarities, I think. And with what I said, i expect Kearns and Lopez to go on to good major league careers with Kearns having the most upside. I fully expect Majewski and Bray to not do much to generate runs or keep runs from scoring.

Over the top? Let's see how this turns out. My guess is that we rue this trade for many years, if not as much as the Robby-Miltie trade, but substansial, none the less.

IslandRed
12-03-2006, 09:18 PM
The only similarity is that we got the bad end of each trade. The Robinson deal amounted to a Hall of Famer traded for effectively nothing. It was a historically bad trade, which is why it's still talked about 40 years later. Last summer's trade doesn't involve anyone resembling a Hall of Famer or even a perennial All-Star, which is why it doesn't meet even the most basic requirements for being discussed as a historically bad trade and why it shouldn't be considered an unrecoverable disaster. 40 years from now, only the most diehard of old-time Reds fans will even remember that Kearns and Lopez ever existed... and if Krivsky can't come back from it and build a good team, he wasn't going to get it done anyway.

Dang, broke my own rule. I'd gone months without posting on That Subject.

WVRedsFan
12-03-2006, 09:25 PM
The only similarity is that we got the bad end of each trade. The Robinson deal amounted to a Hall of Famer traded for effectively nothing. It was a historically bad trade, which is why it's still talked about 40 years later. Last summer's trade doesn't involve anyone resembling a Hall of Famer or even a perennial All-Star, which is why it doesn't meet even the most basic requirements for being discussed as a historically bad trade and why it shouldn't be considered an unrecoverable disaster. 40 years from now, only the most diehard of old-time Reds fans will even remember that Kearns and Lopez ever existed... and if Krivsky can't come back from it and build a good team, he wasn't going to get it done anyway.

Dang, broke my own rule. I'd gone months without posting on That Subject.

Even if both Kearns and Lopez go on to great things, which many think they will?

I think we can both agree that we got nothing in return. At least, I see nothing there. Majewski was horrible and is likely to remain so and Bray just does not impress me at all.

Cedric
12-03-2006, 09:30 PM
Even if both Kearns and Lopez go on to great things, which many think they will?

I think we can both agree that we got nothing in return. At least, I see nothing there. Majewski was horrible and is likely to remain so and Bray just does not impress me at all.

Many great things? I'd be very surprised if either makes multiple All Star games. I'd be mildly surprised if Austin even got close to one.

max venable
12-03-2006, 09:32 PM
I can't believe other GMs still deal with JimBo. The guy's proven to be, how should I say it?..."shifty," "less-than-honest." Man, I wouldn't trust the guy any further than I could throw him. Then again, maybe the leather pants would give me a better grip.

Falls City Beer
12-03-2006, 09:33 PM
I can't believe other GMs still deal with JimBo. The guy's proven to be, how should I say it?..."shifty," "less-than-honest." Man, I wouldn't trust the guy any further than I could throw him. Then again, maybe the leather pants would give me a better grip.

GMs deal with him because other GMs want his players. GMs will continue to deal with him until he's fired.

IslandRed
12-03-2006, 09:51 PM
Even if both Kearns and Lopez go on to great things, which many think they will?

*I* don't think they will. I'm not saying they don't have value. Kearns will probably remain an above-average right fielder for awhile, but not All-Star level. I think Lopez' value has peaked just because I don't think he'll stick at shortstop much longer and his bat (which I really like) will have less relative value at another position. Good players, players we'll miss, but good teams (which I hope we will become) replace guys that good or better all the time and keep on truckin'.

Hey, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

Back to not talking about That Subject if I can. :cool:

mth123
12-03-2006, 10:08 PM
The only similarity is that we got the bad end of each trade. The Robinson deal amounted to a Hall of Famer traded for effectively nothing. It was a historically bad trade, which is why it's still talked about 40 years later. Last summer's trade doesn't involve anyone resembling a Hall of Famer or even a perennial All-Star, which is why it doesn't meet even the most basic requirements for being discussed as a historically bad trade and why it shouldn't be considered an unrecoverable disaster. 40 years from now, only the most diehard of old-time Reds fans will even remember that Kearns and Lopez ever existed... and if Krivsky can't come back from it and build a good team, he wasn't going to get it done anyway.

Dang, broke my own rule. I'd gone months without posting on That Subject.

I know you didn't want to post on it, but you just gave the best post I've seen on the trade. Not really much else to say now.:clap: :clap: :clap:

TRF
12-04-2006, 10:31 AM
FCB has this dead on. plus Krivsky hasn't helped himself by trading for other players with known health issues. Guardado, Schoenweiss.

Yeah, he'll stroll in and say, yeah, we had info that the arm was damaged, but we didn't know that meant "damaged".

Winner: Reds! the Nats will be forced to return Kearns and FeLo, and throw in Jon Rauch!

Even Selig isn't this dumb.

lollipopcurve
12-04-2006, 10:40 AM
Krivsky hasn't helped himself by trading for other players with known health issues. Guardado, Schoenweiss.

Gave up next to nothing for two pitchers who were very good out of the bullpen for the Reds in 06. Plus, Schoeneweis showed little, if any, sign of injury. Don't see how you can give demerits to these acquisitions.

dfs
12-04-2006, 11:11 AM
Islandred wrote

The Robinson deal amounted to a Hall of Famer traded for effectively nothing. It was a historically bad trade, which is why it's still talked about 40 years later.

What's weird about the Robinson trade is that while the trade was uneven and didn't help the reds...It also didn't really hurt them either. The reds system was so deep with hitting talent that sending away an MVP calibre corner outfielder (one of the 10 best at his position all time) didn't really hurt the franchise. That's a talent pipeline.

Put yourself in the reds GM seat in 1965 and look at what your franchise has and what you need and you will do that trade every time. Look at the reds system in the late 60's and even with Robbie gone, they have more hitters than spots in the lineup.

It's crazy. Follow the arc of the trade...
Dick Simpson got flipped for Alex Johnson who was plugged in to replace Robbie and then got flipped for Pedro Borbon and Jim McGlothlin.
Pappas is viewed as a failure but he pitched two 200 inning league average seasons for the reds and then got flipped for Clay Carrol, Tony Cloniger and Woody Woodward.

That's rougly 500 innings from the pennant winning 1970 staff that is a second order side effect of the Robinson trade including the heart of the bullpen during the BRM era (Borbon and Carrol)

The odd thing was that I suspect the centerpiece of the Robinson trade was Jack Baldschun who looked like a young Steve Bedrosian when he came over. His major league career was pretty much done at that point. Frankly if Majewski were to retire today, his career would be a decent enough comparable to Baldschun's.

westofyou
12-04-2006, 11:25 AM
Islandred wrote


What's weird about the Robinson trade is that while the trade was uneven and didn't help the reds...It also didn't really hurt them either. The reds system was so deep with hitting talent that sending away an MVP calibre corner outfielder (one of the 10 best at his position all time) didn't really hurt the franchise. That's a talent pipeline.

Put yourself in the reds GM seat in 1965 and look at what your franchise has and what you need and you will do that trade every time. Look at the reds system in the late 60's and even with Robbie gone, they have more hitters than spots in the lineup.

It's crazy. Follow the arc of the trade...
Dick Simpson got flipped for Alex Johnson who was plugged in to replace Robbie and then got flipped for Pedro Borbon and Jim McGlothlin.
Pappas is viewed as a failure but he pitcher two 200 inning league average seasons for the reds and then got flipped for Clay Carrol, Tony Cloniger and Woody Woodward.

That's rougly 500 innings from the pennant winning 1970 staff that is a second order side effect of the Robinson trade including the heart of the bullpen during the BRM era (Borbon and Carrol)

The odd thing was that I suspect the centerpiece of the Robinson trade was Jack Baldschun who looked like a young Steve Bedrosian when he came over. His major league career was pretty much done at that point. Frankly if Majewski were to retire today, his career would be a decent enough comparable to Baldscun's.
I wrote a piece about this as well.

http://baseballminutia.com/blog/2006/09/13/revisiting-the-past-1966/



It is with the third player that we can find a even more apt correlation with the 2006 season, for the third player was a right handed middle reliever who was neither famous nor a dog, Jack Baldschun. Baldschun was a 28-year-old middle reliever who had logged four 100-inning seasons and one 99-inning season for the Phillies. He was traded to the Orioles on 12-6-66 and 3 days later he was traded to the Reds, his role was to solidify a bullpen that had received average to sub average innings from Roger Craig, Bobby Locke, Don Zanni and Jim Duffalo.


ERA DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE
Bobby Locke -2.28 5.82 3.54
Roger Craig -.12 3.66 3.54
Jim Duffalo 0.09 3.45 3.54
Dom Zanni 2.16 1.38 3.54


In fact Duffalo and Don Zanni were acquired to do what Craig was doing and their future on the team was eclipsed by the acquisition of Baldschum. The Reds were confident that Baldschun’s screwball/fastball approach to pitching would translate into success at Crosley and around the league. Instead the Reds received the worst of Jack Baldschum, the Reds received a 5.53 era vs. the league average of 3.60. His first three appearances as a Red were horrendous and soon confidence in his work was obviously being questioned by the Reds, he never found a groove and spent the next two years mostly in the minors.

His performance was so poor that the Reds picked up Ted Abernathy of the waiver wire the following winter to try and stop the bleeding from the relievers on the team (Which worked out well, Abernathy led the Reds in Win Shares the following year, since then the only reliever to accomplish that feat was Jeff Shaw has led the team in Win Shares in 1997.

Baldschum never found his game again, his early workload was Scott Sullivanesque and he like Simpson ended up playing out his career on an expansion team (the Padres).

TRF
12-04-2006, 05:42 PM
Gave up next to nothing for two pitchers who were very good out of the bullpen for the Reds in 06. Plus, Schoeneweis showed little, if any, sign of injury. Don't see how you can give demerits to these acquisitions.

two reasons.

1 Guardado pitched all of two weeks.

2 it goes to pattern. He acquired three injured players. Schoenweiss did pitch well, as did Gguardado when he was in there, but both were a known injury coming to Cincinnati. As was Majewski.

I don't see Kriv winning this. And yes, you can bet JimBo will fight it.

jimbo
12-04-2006, 06:09 PM
two reasons.

1 Guardado pitched all of two weeks.

2 it goes to pattern. He acquired three injured players. Schoenweiss did pitch well, as did Gguardado when he was in there, but both were a known injury coming to Cincinnati. As was Majewski.

I don't see Kriv winning this. And yes, you can bet JimBo will fight it.

Guardado pitched his first game for the Reds on July 7th and his last on August 19th, that's 6 weeks, not 2.

There aren't too many players anymore that don't come with some kind of injury baggage. The difference with Majewski, it appears, is that JimBo was not honest about treatment that the pitcher had received just prior to the trade. It's a valid complaint.

TRF
12-04-2006, 06:20 PM
Guardado pitched his first game for the Reds on July 7th and his last on August 19th, that's 6 weeks, not 2.

There aren't too many players anymore that don't come with some kind of injury baggage. The difference with Majewski, it appears, is that JimBo was not honest about treatment that the pitcher had received just prior to the trade. It's a valid complaint.

He missed SIGNIFICANT time during that 6 week stretch.

15 games, 14 IP.

for a closer, that's roughly 2-3 weeks worth of work. Considering when the Reds got him, I'd say that wasn't quite what they were hoping for.

Notice I didn't type "what they had in mind."

Buckeye33
12-04-2006, 08:10 PM
He missed SIGNIFICANT time during that 6 week stretch.

15 games, 14 IP.

for a closer, that's roughly 2-3 weeks worth of work. Considering when the Reds got him, I'd say that wasn't quite what they were hoping for.

Notice I didn't type "what they had in mind."

Hmmm....pitching 14 innings in 2 weeks seems to come out to pitching 1 inning every game for 2 straight weeks. Don't know to many closers who do that.

14 IP is at minimum 3 weeks, more like a months work for a closer.

TRF
12-04-2006, 08:47 PM
Hmmm....pitching 14 innings in 2 weeks seems to come out to pitching 1 inning every game for 2 straight weeks. Don't know to many closers who do that.

14 IP is at minimum 3 weeks, more like a months work for a closer.

I'll concede three weeks.

wow. three weeks of production. yippee.

again this goes to pattern of acquiring guys with known injury issues.

pedro
12-04-2006, 08:57 PM
I'll concede three weeks.

wow. three weeks of production. yippee.

again this goes to pattern of acquiring guys with known injury issues.

The Reds also gave up exactly nothing for him.

TRF
12-04-2006, 09:01 PM
The Reds also gave up exactly nothing for him.

wrong.

They had to fill the hole he left with Franklin. and more innings for Maj and Bray, who was obviously overmatched

The Reds gave up wins.

pedro
12-04-2006, 09:05 PM
wrong.

They had to fill the hole he left with Franklin. and more innings for Maj and Bray, who was obviously overmatched

The Reds gave up wins.


The Reds traded a minor leaguer for him who got cut after the season. Those innings would have gone where they went anyway. the Reds did not give up wins by trading for Eddie G.

TRF
12-04-2006, 09:31 PM
right. trading for guys with bum arms always works out.

And yes trading for him did cost the reds wins. It wasn't a matter of if he'd go down, it was when. So instead of acquiring a HEALTHY pitcher, the Reds sign an ambulatory one. great plan. maybe that works in the offseason, but not in the middle of the season. And no, I doubt Franklin is even acquired had the Reds traded for a healthy closer.

cincyinco
12-05-2006, 05:59 PM
Wierd tidbit..


Nationals trainer Tim Abraham has resigned, according to a source, and his departure could be related to an expected grievance by the Reds over right-hander Gary Majewski.
The Nationals sent Majewski to the Reds in an eight-player deal on July 13. The Reds say they were unaware that Majewski had a sore shoulder at the time of the trade.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6241678

Not sure what the significance of this is, but why would he resign in regards to the grievance filed by the Reds?!?!??

pedro
12-05-2006, 06:05 PM
Wierd tidbit..



http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6241678

Not sure what the significance of this is, but why would he resign in regards to the grievance filed by the Reds?!?!??


b/c maybe he lied to the Reds.

Redny
12-05-2006, 06:08 PM
b/c maybe he lied to the Reds.

or maybe someone else did and he didn't back it up.

cincyinco
12-05-2006, 06:09 PM
b/c maybe he lied to the Reds.

I guess my question was more rhetorical in nature.. I think this lends some credence to the nats having some kind of misconduct... Interesting to say the least..

pedro
12-05-2006, 06:10 PM
I guess my question was more rhetorical in nature.. I think this lends some credence to the nats having some kind of misconduct... Interesting to say the least..


I'm dense.

cincyinco
12-05-2006, 06:17 PM
I'm dense.

And I often fail at expressing what I try to... don't worry about it :P

Topcat
12-05-2006, 06:49 PM
right. trading for guys with bum arms always works out.

And yes trading for him did cost the reds wins. It wasn't a matter of if he'd go down, it was when. So instead of acquiring a HEALTHY pitcher, the Reds sign an ambulatory one. great plan. maybe that works in the offseason, but not in the middle of the season. And no, I doubt Franklin is even acquired had the Reds traded for a healthy closer.


Adam Dunn's Bat had no part in the collapse?

cincyinco
12-05-2006, 06:55 PM
Adam Dunn's Bat had no part in the collapse?

None whatsoever... :rolleyes:

I am a Dunn fan, but his collapse was pretty putrid. You can't lay the blame squarley on his shoulders though, there is plenty of that to go around..

Redsland
12-05-2006, 07:55 PM
Not sure what the significance of this is, but why would he resign in regards to the grievance filed by the Reds?!?!??
MLB: Nats, you guys really screwed up here.

Nats: You know, you may be right about that. But the guy who did it is gone. Friends?

edabbs44
12-05-2006, 08:17 PM
Wierd tidbit..



http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6241678

Not sure what the significance of this is, but why would he resign in regards to the grievance filed by the Reds?!?!??

Even better in this article is this:


The Red Sox, Reds, Braves, Indians, Giants and Phillies are among the teams that continue to pursue bullpen help.

How many pitchers is WK going with next year? 14? 15?

Topcat
12-05-2006, 09:43 PM
None whatsoever... :rolleyes:

I am a Dunn fan, but his collapse was pretty putrid. You can't lay the blame squarley on his shoulders though, there is plenty of that to go around..


Exactly the whole team floundered.

RFS62
12-06-2006, 06:33 AM
I find it hard to believe that Krivsky would bring this all up again now if he didn't have a good case.

Why would he open an old wound that did him a lot of PR harm if not?

redsmetz
12-06-2006, 07:43 AM
I find it hard to believe that Krivsky would bring this all up again now if he didn't have a good case.

Why would he open an old wound that did him a lot of PR harm if not?

I think the Reds made it clear they were going to investigate the matter and left open the possibility of filing the grievance. I think Krivsky is right about not wanting much out of this, but that it's the principle of candor that must be upheld.

Given what he said Saturday about the question of injections being on their checklist, I wonder if our line of questioning might have been slightly flawed, leaving Bowden the chance to be less than forthright - e.g. Q: Hasn't the player recently been given an injection? A: Not recently. As opposed to: Q: Has the player been given any injections? If so, when? Now the questioning may, in fact, go that way, but I hope we review procedures to see this doesn't happen again. That said, I still think Bowden was probably slimy on this matter. But that's just my bias against the Wunderkind.

TRF
12-06-2006, 02:39 PM
Adam Dunn's Bat had no part in the collapse?


Never said it didn't.

But then I never saw him blow a save either.

Falls City Beer
12-06-2006, 06:02 PM
I find it hard to believe that Krivsky would bring this all up again now if he didn't have a good case.

Why would he open an old wound that did him a lot of PR harm if not?

To smear Bowden.

Let's face it; all these GMS are competitive, petty, egotistical jobbers. They wouldn't be in this rarefied air of a business if they weren't.

Your question is a good one, and the above is my only possible answer--because even if Washington is found to be in the wrong, the most the Reds will get out of it is single A catching prospect or something.

GAC
12-06-2006, 08:35 PM
1. Ban Bowden from wearing leather pants ever again.

2. Tell Bowden he was a bad boy, and make him sit in the corner.

3. Offer Cincinnati a draft pick as compensation via Washington.

Have his ex pay him another visit. ;)

RBA
12-06-2006, 10:44 PM
Krivsky screwed up. He should admit he got owned and move on. No other GM trades Lopez and Kearns for the crap he got in returned.