PDA

View Full Version : Brendan Harris to the Devil Rays



reds44
01-02-2007, 05:09 PM
. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) The Tampa Bay Devil Rays obtained infielder Brendan Harris from the Cincinnati Reds on Tuesday for a player to be named later or cash.

The 26-year-old Harris has 110 at-bats in 52 major league games over portions of the last three seasons with the Reds, Chicago Cubs and Montreal Expos/Washington Nationals. He batted .238 in 25 games last season while splitting time between the Washington and Cincinnati organizations.

Harris was part of the four-team deal that sent Nomar Garciaparra to the Cubs and Orlando Cabrera to the Boston Red Sox in 2004. He was acquired by Cincinnati last year in an eight-player deal with Washington.

There you go.

Reds1
01-02-2007, 05:32 PM
That deal keeps looking better and better all the time. :(

Kc61
01-02-2007, 06:34 PM
If we can take a step back from our annoyance with this off-season, one thing is clear: Krivsky's infielders (other than first basemen) must be athletic and strong defenders.

Look at the major league roster as transformed by WK: Phillips, EE, Gonzalez, Gil, Olmedo, Castro. Notice how Bergolla (apparently a poor defensive year in '06) was dropped. Notice how WK didn't spend for Aurilia. Now Harris, apparently more of an offensive type player, is gone as well.

I have to think that, with this approach, it is inconceivable that Griffey will be in center field next year.

TheBigLebowski
01-02-2007, 07:52 PM
If we can take a step back from our annoyance with this off-season, one thing is clear: Krivsky's infielders (other than first basemen) must be athletic and strong defenders.

Look at the major league roster as transformed by WK: Phillips, EE, Gonzalez, Gil, Olmedo, Castro. Notice how Bergolla (apparently a poor defensive year in '06) was dropped. Notice how WK didn't spend for Aurilia. Now Harris, apparently more of an offensive type player, is gone as well.

I have to think that, with this approach, it is inconceivable that Griffey will be in center field next year.

Then why did he trade for him in the first place??? Recall that he did not inherit Harris.

Kc61
01-02-2007, 08:12 PM
Then why the F did he trade for him in the first place??? Recall that he did not inherit Harris.

I've said consistently that the trade was all about Majewski. Bray was a prospect who had advanced to the major league level. Thompson was a raw prospect. Clayton was a stop-gap. Harris was a AAAA type who could fill in.

This trade rises or falls with Majewski's performance. The Harris part of it doesn't bother me.

Gallen5862
01-02-2007, 08:17 PM
Hopefully the trade is to keep the rights to Hamilton. This would allow the reds to keep him on 40 man roster but put him in minors.

TheBigLebowski
01-02-2007, 08:20 PM
I've said consistently that the trade was all about Majewski. Bray was a prospect who had advanced to the major league level. Thompson was a raw prospect. Clayton was a stop-gap. Harris was a AAAA type who could fill in.

This trade rises or falls with Majewski's performance. The Harris part of it doesn't bother me.

Oh, I know the centerpiece of the deal was Majewski (still gives me chills to type that) and Bray was the other major piece. My point in my prior post was, why, if Krivsky knew Harris was not his type of player, did he have him included in the deal?

Just another facet of The Trade that we will never understand.

WVRedsFan
01-02-2007, 08:26 PM
Then why the F did he trade for him in the first place??? Recall that he did not inherit Harris.

You beat me to it. A young second baseman with an average BA and OBP who projects to get 15 HRs a season for 41-year old Jeff Conine? ( or so it seems) Didn't make much sense then, but giving him to Tampa? Now, you've got to be kidding. Please?

Kc61
01-02-2007, 08:33 PM
Oh, I know the centerpiece of the deal was Majewski (still gives me chills to type that) and Bray was the other major piece. My point in my prior post was, why, if Krivsky knew Harris was not his type of player, did he have him included in the deal?

Just another facet of The Trade that we will never understand.

Probably just wanted an extra infield player for the depth chart in '06. Or, maybe Kriv was disappointed in Harris once he got him.

I just wouldn't sweat this one, Big. If Maj and Bray don't perform in '07, that's worth a little aggravation.

RedLegSuperStar
01-02-2007, 08:46 PM
Edwin Jackson?

George Foster
01-02-2007, 11:06 PM
I've said consistently that the trade was all about Majewski. Bray was a prospect who had advanced to the major league level. Thompson was a raw prospect. Clayton was a stop-gap. Harris was a AAAA type who could fill in.

This trade rises or falls with Majewski's performance. The Harris part of it doesn't bother me.

I agree. We will know by mid May. If Magic turns into a Charlton, in the 7th or 8th inning, it was an OK trade.

George Foster
01-02-2007, 11:09 PM
Probably just wanted an extra infield player for the depth chart in '06. Or, maybe Kriv was disappointed in Harris once he got him.

I just wouldn't sweat this one, Big. If Maj and Bray don't perform in '07, that's worth a little aggravation.


It would be more than aggravation, if they don't perform, it would put Kriv on double secret probation. He's already on regular probation.:D

Jpup
01-03-2007, 02:46 AM
Hopefully the trade is to keep the rights to Hamilton. This would allow the reds to keep him on 40 man roster but put him in minors.

that sounds about right to me.:thumbup:

TRF
01-03-2007, 09:33 AM
Hopefully the trade is to keep the rights to Hamilton. This would allow the reds to keep him on 40 man roster but put him in minors.

ding ding ding!

puca
01-03-2007, 11:40 AM
I think you are seriously overestimating the value of Brendan Harris. He is basically waiver wire level talent. He lost the last semblance of prospect status about 3 years ago. He may stick somewhere for a few years as a utility infielder, but no way would the Rays take him as compensation for Hamilton.

TRF
01-03-2007, 12:37 PM
Why not? If the word from Tampa is that they honestly care about the kid, then they want him to have stability. Having a shot at the 25 man roster builds his confidence, and allows for better monitoring. If he were to go back to TB now he might never do anything. but being in another organization, one that acquired you whatever the means can be the turning point. Maybe he doesn't stick on the 25 man roster. Maybe he ends up in Louisville. but it's better for his long term stability for him to be out of the org. that so many of his demons are familiar with. Maybe TB realizes this and Harris is insurance.

Harris plus 50K might be enough.

redsfan4445
01-03-2007, 02:14 PM
Hey Team Clark, give us aheads up on this deal.. were you involved?

smith288
01-03-2007, 03:29 PM
This has to be THE most boring off season EVER. Thank GOD for the Buckeyes or I would be bored out of my skull.

Reds Nd2
01-03-2007, 03:32 PM
Didn't make much sense then, but giving him to Tampa? Now, you've got to be kidding. Please?

I like this move. IIRC, Tampa has a pretty deep farm system, especially when it comes to pitching. It will be interesting to see what Krivsky can mine from those prospects.

gm
01-03-2007, 05:58 PM
Why not? If the word from Tampa is that they honestly care about the kid, then they want him to have stability. Having a shot at the 25 man roster builds his confidence, and allows for better monitoring. If he were to go back to TB now he might never do anything. but being in another organization, one that acquired you whatever the means can be the turning point. Maybe he doesn't stick on the 25 man roster. Maybe he ends up in Louisville. but it's better for his long term stability for him to be out of the org. that so many of his demons are familiar with. Maybe TB realizes this and Harris is insurance.

Harris plus 50K might be enough.

Here's Lancaster's take on that


1/02/2007 6:00 PM Marc said...
The Rays' GM was pretty adamant that Tampa intended to take Hamilton back if he didn't stick with the Reds. Even if they would trade him, it'd be for more than Harris.

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/spring/2007/01/reds-trade-harris-to-tampa.asp#comments

TRF
01-03-2007, 06:00 PM
Yeah I read that. I also read somewhere that the Rays GM wanted stability for Josh more than anything else.

Heath
01-03-2007, 08:58 PM
Yeah I read that. I also read somewhere that the Rays GM wanted stability for Josh more than anything else.

Good. Let him stay in Cincinnati.

Gallen5862
01-05-2007, 10:49 AM
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/majors/news/print263067.html

Harris Joins Third Team In Seven Months
By Jim Callis
January 2, 2007

The Deal
Designated for assignment after the Reds traded for Jeff Conine, Brendan Harris found a new home Tuesday. The Devil Rays acquired him for a player to be named later or cash considerations.
The Big Leaguers
Harris, 26, was the Cubs' fifth-round pick in 2004 out of William & Mary. He was one of Chicago's top position prospects when he went to the Expos in the Nomar Garciaparra/Orlando Cabrera four-team trade in July 2004. Harris was traded again last July, as part of an eight-player deal that sent Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez to Washington. Harris hits for average with gap power, batting .300/.381/.463 with 10 homers and 60 RBIs in 102 Triple-A games in 2006. He hasn't had as much success in limited big league duty over the last three years, hitting .209/.275/.345 with three homers and nine RBIs in 110 at-bats over 52 games. Harris played all four infield positions and even a game at catcher in 2006. His best defensive positions are second or third base, as he has arm strength but limited range.
Quick Take
Harris could make the Rays in 2007 as a utilityman with some offensive prowess. But once Evan Longoria and Reid Brignac join the Tampa Bay infield, Ben Zobrist probably becomes the utilityman and Harris once again will be looking for a job.


Go to Trade Central 2007

Danny Serafini
03-29-2007, 04:13 PM
And the return is........

Cash, according to today's press notes.

Joseph
03-29-2007, 04:27 PM
And the return is........

Cash, according to today's press notes.

Nothing worse than getting back cash. Well maybe there is, but blah.

reds44
03-29-2007, 04:28 PM
Nothing worse than getting back cash. Well maybe there is, but blah.
Getting Eric Milton back? ;)

Redsland
03-29-2007, 04:30 PM
Any chance they gave us $9 million? ;)

Joseph
03-29-2007, 04:31 PM
Getting Eric Milton back? ;)

touche! :)

KronoRed
03-29-2007, 07:52 PM
Sweet, Pile-o-Cash is back :D

Eric_Davis
04-30-2007, 04:38 PM
I always liked Harris as part of this deal. I didn't like them trading him away. Thought he could put up some good years in the next few years.....certainly a lot more serviceable than Juan Castro.

This is the first time I've ever criticized Wayne for anything. I think he made a mistake here.

flyer85
04-30-2007, 04:44 PM
it is a bit ironic that he has been the most effective player of "the trade" and is doing it for someone else.

Eric_Davis
04-30-2007, 04:46 PM
I think you are seriously overestimating the value of Brendan Harris. He is basically waiver wire level talent. He lost the last semblance of prospect status about 3 years ago. He may stick somewhere for a few years as a utility infielder, but no way would the Rays take him as compensation for Hamilton.

So, is this issue clear, yet? Did we owe Tampa Bay something for Hamilton? I thought we got him from Chicago.

TRF
04-30-2007, 04:49 PM
If he doesn't stick with the Reds (doubtful at this point) He has to be offered back to TB, not Chicago.

Eric_Davis
04-30-2007, 04:52 PM
OK....thanks.

Anyone ever find out how much cash and who the PTBL was in the Harris deal?

Eric_Davis
04-30-2007, 04:56 PM
TRF...this is where it really gets confusing.

I thought that Chicago picked him up on waivers off of Tampa Bay and then sold him or traded him to us.

But, when the Phillies tried to get Livingston off waivers from Seattle by having someon lower than us pick him up and then dealing for him, that got vetoed by the commish.

I'm obviously missing some information here.

Hoosier Red
04-30-2007, 07:00 PM
ED,

It wasn't waivers. Chicago drafted him in the Rule V draft. They then traded him to the Reds.

When a player is drafted in the Rule V, he needs to stay on the 25 man roster all year.

redsmetz
04-30-2007, 07:17 PM
ED,

It wasn't waivers. Chicago drafted him in the Rule V draft. They then traded him to the Reds.

When a player is drafted in the Rule V, he needs to stay on the 25 man roster all year.

And Rule V guys are allowed to be traded, but the team receiving them has to leave them on their roster the whole season (as we're doing with Hamilton).

Eric_Davis
05-01-2007, 01:25 AM
Thank you all very much.

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 12:52 AM
I always liked Harris as part of this deal. I didn't like them trading him away. Thought he could put up some good years in the next few years.....certainly a lot more serviceable than Juan Castro.

This is the first time I've ever criticized Wayne for anything. I think he made a mistake here.

I'm getting more and more disappointed with Krivsky because I don't understand how he could do something like this. I thought he was better than this.

I don't understand how Narron can still be manager.

Harris is hitting .330 vs LH and .309 vs. RH and has an OPS of 1.030 for June.

WVRedsFan
06-19-2007, 01:00 AM
I'm getting more and more disappointed with Krivsky because I don't understand how he could do something like this. I thought he was better than this.

I don't understand how Narron can still be manager.

Harris is hitting .330 vs LH and .309 vs. RH and has an OPS of 1.030 for June.

ED:

Of all the moves he has made, this one just stands out. His signings of junk relief pitchers and his extention of Narron not withstanding, he's just a train wreck and will continue to be for the long term.

You look at where the club is in comparison to when he came. It's certainly not better, but most certainly is worse. It may not be enough time to judge him, but what evidence that is there is damning.

Time to right this club with a new GM, manager and maybe team.

RedEye
06-19-2007, 01:08 AM
At best, this move makes the Hamilton pickup a wash. Krivsky looks like an idiot for letting Harris go (just like I look like an idiot for benching him in favor of Phillips on my fantasy team this week).

membengal
06-19-2007, 02:40 AM
Phillips at SS, Harris at 2b, money spent on Alex G plowed back into the budget for help elsewhere...that would have been okay.

Then again, they refused to consider Phillips at SS, so perhaps moot in the face of that refusal.

Incompetence is as incompetence does and all that.

DoogMinAmo
06-19-2007, 03:02 AM
As silly as this move seems, two things are crystal clear. We do not know what Wayne is getting back, and no one, short of maybe the immediate Harris family, expected him to break out like he has in Tampa.

Maybe Wayne just liked Keppinger more? I don't know.

But an intriguing hypothetical. If Harris is doing as well as he is now, but in Cincinnati, is the trade still a bust?

membengal
06-19-2007, 03:07 AM
No. That would have salvaged that deal.

Aronchis
06-19-2007, 03:20 AM
Then Harris swoons with a 0-27er and he faded away into the mist. You people have nowitis worse than the Reds.

mth123
06-19-2007, 04:19 AM
As silly as this move seems, two things are crystal clear. We do not know what Wayne is getting back, and no one, short of maybe the immediate Harris family, expected him to break out like he has in Tampa.



I believe this trade was completed for cash in lieu of the PTBNL.

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 05:52 AM
Phillips at SS, Harris at 2b, money spent on Alex G plowed back into the budget for help elsewhere...that would have been okay.

Then again, they refused to consider Phillips at SS, so perhaps moot in the face of that refusal.

Incompetence is as incompetence does and all that.

Or Felipe Lopez at 2B where he seems to be doing pretty well now at Washington.

As far as immediate family knowing what Harris would be doing now, I think he'll end up at the end of the year to be where I thought he would...an average defender with an OPS from .790-.825 for the season, and will stay that way as he goes through his 26-29 years of age and at a very cheap price.

membengal
06-19-2007, 08:29 AM
Then Harris swoons with a 0-27er and he faded away into the mist. You people have nowitis worse than the Reds.

Or, "gosh, I was wrong to slag on Harris and he's better than I thought".

You could go that direction too...

lollipopcurve
06-19-2007, 08:33 AM
Obviously the DRays had a better read on Harris than the Reds, Nats or Cubs. It's a little perplexing -- and annoying -- that the Reds would seem to like the player one minute and then given him away the next, only to see him excel -- but, small consolation, they aren't the only ones.

Aronchis
06-19-2007, 08:40 AM
Or, "gosh, I was wrong to slag on Harris and he's better than I thought".

You could go that direction too...

or you could go "he is what he is". Is he really better, or is he just a fluke? That is what planning is. Instead we hear how Wayne blew it on this scrub nobody else wanted. That is reaction.

The problem with "nowitis" is that it clouds the mind and show more reaction than planning. I think we saw that with the Bronson Arroyo extension and his clearly career year in 2006. Even though he wasn't a bulldog(like Harang) and was worked VERY hard last year(into this year) and extended him to his 34th birthday. To me, that was the Reds reacting to his career year and not planning ahead on what Bronson's contributions will be in the future as the type of pitcher he is. Maybe, the big problem with the Reds organization and their fans is, they react more than plan, thus have nothing in the future to own.

To me, getting rid of Harris means little unless he can consistantly yry produce. If he is getting released from Tampa a year from now, this thread is a DOA. Extending Arroyo after working him hard, on a body that may not be able to take that pounding and probably reduced workloads into the future then paying him multi-millions, is worse. Krivsky may have just thrown millions down the drain for the Reds in the future, much like Bowden did with Griffey.

Highlifeman21
06-19-2007, 09:55 AM
Phillips at SS, Harris at 2b, money spent on Alex G plowed back into the budget for help elsewhere...that would have been okay.

Then again, they refused to consider Phillips at SS, so perhaps moot in the face of that refusal.

Incompetence is as incompetence does and all that.

Not considering Phillips at SS is on par with not having Adam Dunn play 1B.

membengal
06-19-2007, 09:57 AM
Highlife, I am in 100% agreement on that.

Their refusal to do so (or explain WHY they would not consider it) has made no sense for a year now. Same with the prematurely ended Dunn to 1b stuff.

At first WK seemed communicative as far as GMs go, but in hindsight, that was perhaps only so in relation to how uncommunicative Dan O'Brien was...

PuffyPig
06-19-2007, 10:24 AM
Or Felipe Lopez at 2B where he seems to be doing pretty well now at Washington.



Lopez making $3.9M playing a .631 OPS second base.

It's not the trading of Kearns and Lopez which was bad, it was the return.

PuffyPig
06-19-2007, 10:27 AM
Not considering Phillips at SS is on par with not having Adam Dunn play 1B.


My guess is that each was considered for their other position, but management felt it would not make the team stronger.

Do you really think that management should come out and say "We consideed Phillips at SS but most felt that he would stink there, so we went another direction"?

registerthis
06-19-2007, 10:27 AM
It's not the trading of Kearns and Lopez which was bad, it was the return.

I've given up even saying that. If there are people here who *still* can't comprehend that not-so-subtle point, I don't think it will ever be understood.

Jaycint
06-19-2007, 10:27 AM
Lopez making $3.9M playing a .631 OPS second base.

It's not the trading of Kearns and Lopez which was bad, it was the return.

Agreed, we do not at all miss Kearns and Lopez the ballplayers. What we miss is the return that could have been.

Highlifeman21
06-19-2007, 10:45 AM
My guess is that each was considered for their other position, but management felt it would not make the team stronger.

Do you really think that management should come out and say "We consideed Phillips at SS but most felt that he would stink there, so we went another direction"?

Yeah, I actually do.

In years past, they auditioned Kearns and WMP at 3B in ST. After those experiments failed, they came out and said neither were viable options at the hot corner.

Why can't they make a similar statement about Phillips if he's not a viable everyday option at SS? It makes no commentary about him as a 2B, only as a SS.

bucksfan2
06-19-2007, 11:02 AM
Guys Harris really didn't have a place to play in cincy. Hes gone and just let him go. Would you rather have Phillips or Harris? Harris is playing every day now and his numbers are good. But no one could tell if his numbers would be good as a reserve or not. If he was down in AAA he would be of no help as well.

membengal
06-19-2007, 11:04 AM
I think I would like to have Phillips at SS, Harris at 2b raking like he is for the league minimum, and all that money spent on Alex G plowed back into a real starting pitcher...

PuffyPig
06-19-2007, 11:15 AM
I think I would like to have Phillips at SS, Harris at 2b raking like he is for the league minimum, and all that money spent on Alex G plowed back into a real starting pitcher...

And the $3.5M spent on Gonzalez would get you about 25% of a Meche or a Lilly or 33% of a Marquis.

$4M gets you a Lohse prior to FA. Which is actually better value than the above.

registerthis
06-19-2007, 11:17 AM
I think I would like to have Phillips at SS, Harris at 2b raking like he is for the league minimum, and all that money spent on Alex G plowed back into a real starting pitcher...

Such as...?

The cup wasn't exactly overflowing with starting pitching talent this offseason.

membengal
06-19-2007, 11:17 AM
Well, $3.5 million plus, maybe NOT doing the Stanton contract gets you a LOT closer to a Meche or Lilly. It goes back to the complaint about how WK has allocated the resources he had to work with. I think he failed and failed miserably in the collection of signings this last off-season. The way it has played out has underscored that.

bucksfan2
06-19-2007, 11:18 AM
And the $3.5M spent on Gonzalez would get you about 25% of a Meche or a Lilly or 33% of a Marquis.

$4M gets you a Lohse prior to FA. Which is actually better value than the above.

Thats the thing. Gonzalez is not making that much money when you take the free agent market as a whole. $4M doesn't buy you much if you are dealing with non arb eligable free agents.

membengal
06-19-2007, 11:20 AM
Dunno register, against all odds, Meche has been really good. Lilly has been fine.

My point is, for the Reds to compete, they have to be able to identify and sign guys and who might make a difference and make it work. And freeing up as much money as possible to do so. And that was a place where money could have been saved...

RedEye
06-19-2007, 11:43 AM
I think I would like to have Phillips at SS, Harris at 2b raking like he is for the league minimum, and all that money spent on Alex G plowed back into a real starting pitcher...

Amen.

Worst case scenario, if we keep Harris we could have a MI of Phillips and Freel to start the season with Harris as a low-cost 3rd SS-2B. Even if Freel doesn't get injured, Harris provides a spell for both players every week--plus he'd be better off the bench than anything we've got right now. And, if Freel does get injured, we have a capable backup waiting in the wings.

Instead, we've got a pile of cash. Chump change if you ask me.

KoryMac5
06-19-2007, 11:51 AM
I believe this trade was completed for cash in lieu of the PTBNL.

According to SI.com you would be right:
Traded from Cincinnati Reds to Tampa Bay Devil Rays; for cash considerations

gonelong
06-19-2007, 12:03 PM
Why can't they make a similar statement about Phillips if he's not a viable everyday option at SS? It makes no commentary about him as a 2B, only as a SS.

How do you ever move the guy back to SS if you have publicly said he can't play there?

There is no reason for the Reds to make a statement one way or another. They have made the only statement they need to by penning the guy in a 2B each day. He is our current 2nd baseman.

GL

flyer85
06-19-2007, 12:15 PM
of note Harris has .878 OPS versus .800 for Phillips

westofyou
06-19-2007, 12:19 PM
How do you ever move the guy back to SS if you have publicly said he can't play there?

There is no reason for the Reds to make a statement one way or another. They have made the only statement they need to by penning the guy in a 2B each day. He is our current 2nd baseman.

GL

If the man could play passable ML SS then he likely would, trying to pin the Reds as being moronic for not doing just that simply avoids the obvious. Some folks sitting at field level day in and day out made a decision with way more data then we have access to. IMO nothing is harder to discern in this game via TV and small live samples then defense.

KronoRed
06-19-2007, 12:21 PM
But an intriguing hypothetical. If Harris is doing as well as he is now, but in Cincinnati, is the trade still a bust?
Not as much so, but even if Thompson shows up in 3 years and wins 20 games it was still a bad deal for the near future.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 12:27 PM
A smart GM would have kept Harris and sent Castro packing but ...

BRM
06-19-2007, 12:28 PM
A smart GM would have kept Harris and sent Castro packing but ...

You can't put a price on quality middle infield defense...

flyer85
06-19-2007, 12:30 PM
You can't put a price on quality middle infield defense...or even on perceived quality

KronoRed
06-19-2007, 12:30 PM
A smart GM would have kept Harris and sent Castro packing but ...

Castro = Safe, reliable, you know what he's bringing (not much)
Harris = Unknown, scary!!

pedro
06-19-2007, 12:33 PM
I'd just like to remind everyone that from what I can remember none of the folks panning the trade thought Harris was worth anything last year when the Reds acquired him. It think it's pretty funny now that the same people who were panning Krivsky for acquiring the guy are panning him for letting him go too.

Heath
06-19-2007, 12:33 PM
How many of you think at the beginning of the year that Brendan Harris would .OPS close to 9? If your hand is up, you are lying.

Brendan Harris is not the answer. 5 pages of updates is absurd. The guy will revert to his usual AAAA player sometime after the all-star break.

pedro
06-19-2007, 12:35 PM
How many of you think at the beginning of the year that Brendan Harris would .OPS close to 9? If your hand is up, you are lying.

Brendan Harris is not the answer. 5 pages of updates is absurd. The guy will revert to his usual AAAA player sometime after the all-star break.

At the time of the trade I wanted to put Harris at 2B and Phillips at SS. I win. ;)

flyer85
06-19-2007, 12:36 PM
I'd just like to remind everyone that from what I can remember none of the folks panning the trade thought Harris was worth anything last year when the Reds acquired him. It think it's pretty funny now that the same people who were panning Krivsky for acquiring the guy are panning him for letting him go too.I don't recall people panning him for Harris(he was seemingly a throw in), it was the acquisition of Clayton and Majewski that got people worked up.

The argument is a strawman anyway. Just because people may not have wanted him in the first place is not an excuse to give him away so they could keep a clearly inferior option.

westofyou
06-19-2007, 12:36 PM
I'd just like to remind everyone that from what I can remember none of the folks panning the trade thought Harris was worth anything last year when the Reds acquired him. It think it's pretty funny now that the same people who were panning Krivsky for acquiring the guy are panning him for letting him go too.

Yep can't win for losing.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 12:37 PM
How many of you think at the beginning of the year that Brendan Harris would .OPS close to 9? If your hand is up, you are lying.
My hand is down.

Now raise your hand if you thought he would OPS higher than Juan Castro.

KoryMac5
06-19-2007, 12:38 PM
How many of you think at the beginning of the year that Brendan Harris would .OPS close to 9? If your hand is up, you are lying.

Brendan Harris is not the answer. 5 pages of updates is absurd. The guy will revert to his usual AAAA player sometime after the all-star break.

The only players that usually do any reverting are Reds players, must be something in the air at GABP. Mosely, Germano, and Harris all seem to have been cured with trades. ;)

pedro
06-19-2007, 12:39 PM
I don't recall people panning him for Harris(he was seemingly a throw in), it was the acquisition of Clayton and Majewski that got people worked up.

The argument is a strawman anyway. Just because people may not have wanted him in the first place is not an excuse to give him away.

Sorry, as high and mighty as a lot of folks here act in terms of talent evaluation it certainly is relevant.

Personally I'd have preferred the Reds kept him, but I wasn't the guy saying he was junk from the get go.

Heath
06-19-2007, 12:39 PM
My hand is down.

Now raise your hand if you thought he would OPS higher than Juan Castro.

Your hand should be down as well on that statement.

Nobody knew what Harris could do.

pedro
06-19-2007, 12:41 PM
I thought he could OPS around .775 myself.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 12:42 PM
Your hand should be down as well on that statement.

Nobody knew what Harris could do.I thought he had a bit of a minor league track record that showed he could hit(the question on him was more where to play him) and even if he didn't Castro had established himself as one of the worst(if not the worst) offensive players in baseball.

Cyclone792
06-19-2007, 12:55 PM
Your hand should be down as well on that statement.

Nobody knew what Harris could do.

Eh, I was supportive of giving Harris a nice look, especially if it meant the Reds could save themselves from a bad contract. My feeling regard the Gonzalez contract was that I could tolerate it. Whether or not the Gonzalez contract turns out completely bad remains to be seen, but so far his defense has been disappointing, and his on-base percentage is skinny (Gonzalez has provided nice power though).

I was flat out disappointed when the Reds gave Harris away for cash considerations, whatever that fully means.

As far as what Harris could do ...

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48542


Brendan Harris: 25-years-old (26 in August, 2006)


Minors BA ....... .293
Minors OBP ...... .361
Minors SLG ...... .465
Minors OPS ...... .826

Minors PA/BB .... 11.45
Minors PA/HR .... 39.58
Minors PA/2B .... 16.56

Minors SB/CS .... 40/23

Minor league projections over 600 PAs ... 30-35 doubles, 50 walks and 15 home runs.

Harris' plate discipline in the minors wasn't abysmal, but it's not looking promising that he'll be able to draw walks with a great frequency at the big league level. That could pose serious problems since he could very well become an out machine without the ability to hit for much power. He looks to be primarily a singles and doubles hitter, and the key questions for Harris are how many walks will he take at the major league level, and how good is his defense. If both questions provide good news for the Reds, he could be a useful player for us. If one is lacking, then he could become a source of frustation for fans.

Harris' projections over 600 PAs this season ... 33 doubles, 45 walks and 20 home runs.

A few more home runs and a handful fewer walks this season in the majors compared to his minor league history as of the trade last season, but really very similar.

Harris had a PA/BB ratio of 11.45 in the minor leagues, and my observations have shown me that a PA/BB of 12 is right around the cutoff of whether or not a player is usually successful at drawing walks and maintaining plate discipline in the bigs. Some players with those minor league walk rates figure it out on the big league level; others don't. This season, Harris' PA/BB ratio is 13, which means so far he's been able to maintain that walk rate. It's not a great walk rate (it's the same as Sean Casey's), but it's not poor like a Brandon Phillips either.

My take all along was if Harris could sustain or improve that walk rate, he could be a useful player for us. He's sustained that walk rate, and he's a useful player ... for the Devil Rays, unfortunately.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1193675


He [Harris] tore it up in Louisville after coming over in the trade. What the Reds need to do is distinguish whether or not that was a fluke or if Harris at least moved himself up to the serviceable level.

No matter which side people are on in the "Freel playing every day" debate, I think two things can easily be predicted in regards to Ryan Freel even if he is slotted to play second base this season (which I don't think is likely, honestly). 1) He's probably only going to play in 130 games, and 2) some of those games will be in the outfield when Griffey decides he wants to make a DL visit. Considering those two caveats and what Harris did last season, I'm fine with Harris getting time at second base if it prevents the Reds from handing out a bad contract.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1193660


There's no need to scrounge around for the Craig Counsells and Cristian Guzmans of the world. The Reds already have a serviceable in-house solution, which involves moving Phillips to shortstop and allowing Ryan Freel and Brendan Harris to split time at second base. Sure, the defensive value is worse this season and next than it'd be if we signed Gonzalez, but the offensive value is better. I'd be very much satisfied with that in-house solution if the only other option is Alex Gonzalez at four years.

registerthis
06-19-2007, 01:37 PM
Well, $3.5 million plus, maybe NOT doing the Stanton contract gets you a LOT closer to a Meche or Lilly.

Meche is going to get $11 million per for the next 5 years. Even at the respectable rate he has been pitching, people here would be crying mutiny if the Reds had done a deal like that.

M2
06-19-2007, 01:45 PM
I thought he could OPS around .775 myself.

Me too.

For the record, I panned the trade though I thought Harris could be a useful bench player/10th man (just didn't recommend trading a starter to get him).

flyer85
06-19-2007, 01:46 PM
Meche is going to get $11 million per for the next 5 years. Even at the respectable rate he has been pitching, people here would be crying mutiny if the Reds had done a deal like that.having a sizeable chunk of money to spend in the short term free agent market is really meaningless because the high dollar per year free agents are not looking for one or two year deals.

Might be nice to have Meche for $11M in 2007, trouble is he wanted a 4 or 5 year deal and it will continue to be like that for the forseeable future.

membengal
06-19-2007, 01:51 PM
Meche is going to get $11 million per for the next 5 years. Even at the respectable rate he has been pitching, people here would be crying mutiny if the Reds had done a deal like that.

No question on that. And no question I would have been among them.

And, no question I would have been wrong (to date). Meche has been really good.

Doc. Scott
06-19-2007, 01:54 PM
Harris was a pretty solid prospect when he was with the Cubs. His pedigree is/was better than a lot of other guys that come through here.

I do think the Reds were incredibly hasty in ditching the guy for nothing after he got ten big-league at-bats, but I also don't think one could have expected that he'd become a starting big-league shortstop.

I really doubt he's going to ever frequently start at SS for a good major-league team; he's really just playing there now for TB because a) he's hitting well, b) Ben Zobrist has tanked, c) BJ Upton keeps getting moved around, and d) there's no one else from the non-journeyman division to do it until Reid Brignac gets to town anywhere from this September to next year.

I do think he'll have a career as a part-time player with a couple of very solid seasons, and so the Reds are likely indeed guilty of flushing some continued production.

membengal
06-19-2007, 01:55 PM
I think he's playing at 2b in Tampa, right?

pedro
06-19-2007, 01:57 PM
The Harris situation is, however, another example of how the mirage of potential success last year and the 40 man roster crunch it created caused the Reds to lose a player that had potential value moving forward. Obviously Krivsky must have thought he some value as he acquired him, but it appears that the dream of a division title last year caused Krivsky to make a short term roster decision that caused the Reds to lose Harris.

Doc. Scott
06-19-2007, 01:58 PM
I think he's playing at 2b in Tampa, right?

Nope. 54 games at SS, 4 at 3B, 1 at 2B.

membengal
06-19-2007, 02:11 PM
Huh. Even more frustrating then. He could have played SS here for a fraction of what Gonzalez cost, and Phillips could have stayed put at 2b, as the team apparently requires.

pedro
06-19-2007, 02:20 PM
Huh. Even more frustrating then. He could have played SS here for a fraction of what Gonzalez cost, and Phillips could have stayed put at 2b, as the team apparently requires.

He's pretty range limited at SS. (down near the bottom of all qualified players in ZR and RF) But he has only had 6 errors.

membengal
06-19-2007, 02:22 PM
Trade-offs and all that Pedro. The $$$ savings given his production would have been nice.

Ah well. Water over and under the dam and all that.

I just wish WK had identified Harris as a potential asset regardless. At the very least, however else he was viewed, he should have been seen as a more useful part than Juan Castro...

pedro
06-19-2007, 02:30 PM
I just wish WK had identified Harris as a potential asset regardless. At the very least, however else he was viewed, he should have been seen as a more useful part than Juan Castro...

I think he did view him as an asset. I just think they figured he was expendable vs. the chance to win the division. I do agree though that that was a mistake, then and now, and that he's certainly more valuable than Castro.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 02:33 PM
I do agree though that that was a mistake, then and now, and that he's certainly more valuable than Castro.It seemingly doesn't take much analysis to see just about everyone as more valuable than Castro.

That being said what does it say about a GM that sees Castro as a more valuable asset?

pedro
06-19-2007, 02:34 PM
It seemingly doesn't take much analysis to see just about everyone as more valuable than Castro.

That being said what does it say about a GM that sees Castro as a more valuable asset?

I can only assume that they brought in Castro as a mentor for EE. Other than that I've got nothing.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 02:36 PM
I can only assume that they brought in Castro as a mentor for EE. Other than that I've got nothing.The current GM has had a bit of a pattern of keeping the less valuable assets, which is troubling because it seems to show a fundamental flaw in the ability to evaluate talent.

pedro
06-19-2007, 02:39 PM
The current GM has had a bit of a pattern of keeping the less valuable assets, which is troubling because it seems to show a fundamental flaw in the ability to evaluate talent.

Personally I think it's more the case of trying to keep the 40 man deep at the expense of the 25 man roster. That's why Stanton is around anyway.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 02:41 PM
Personally I think it's more the case of trying to keep the 40 man deep at the expense of the 25 man roster. That's why Stanton is around anyway.My take on Stanton is that the GM thought
1) the Reds had a team that could likely compete
2) that Stanton was actually a valuable commodity

pedro
06-19-2007, 02:44 PM
My take on Stanton is that the GM thought
1) the Reds had a team that could likely compete
2) that Stanton was actually a valuable commodity

Correct. But now that the "contention ship" has sailed IMO he's still around at the seeming expense of the 25 man roster b/c Krivsky intends to try and build his value up and trade him.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 02:47 PM
Correct. But now that the "contention ship" has sailed IMO he's still around at the seeming expense of the 25 man roster b/c Krivsky intends to try and build his value up and trade him.I gave up a long time ago trying to figure out the intentions of the current GM. Certainly your explanation makes sense but the GM has made enough decisions that don't that my thought is he is really rather clueless about how to put the puzzle together. Instead he just tries one piece at a time to see if it fits.

pedro
06-19-2007, 02:52 PM
I gave up a long time ago trying to figure out the intentions of the current GM. Certainly your explanation makes sense but the GM has made enough decisions that don't that my thought is he is really rather clueless about how to put the puzzle together. Instead he just tries one piece at a time to see if it fits.

I don't think he's clueless. I just think that his bullpen choices have blown up in his face to an extent that implies excessive bad luck IMO. Either way lots of folks were calling for the reds to sign Joel Piniero or Octavio Dotel, neither of whom are doing anything of note either. I think his choice in everyday players has been pretty darn good so far.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 02:58 PM
I don't think he's clueless. I just think that his bullpen choices have blown up in his face to an extent that implies excessive bad luck IMO. Either way lots of folks were calling for the reds to sign Joel Piniero or Octavio Dotel, neither of whom are doing anything of note either. I think his choice in everyday players has been pretty darn good so far.To succeed long term as an organization the Reds cannot afford to have an average GM, they need a stellar one. I see no evidence that Krisky is that.

pedro
06-19-2007, 03:04 PM
To succeed long term as an organization the Reds cannot afford to have an average GM, they need a stellar one. I see no evidence that Krisky is that.

And I see no evidence that hes' done any serious damage to the long term chances of the reds either. he's certainly blown some cash this year but he hasn't traded any of the teams best prospects and he hasn't signed anyone to expensive long term contracts either. His major sin was trying to win last year and attempting to filed a moderately competitive team this year, neither of which are the death sentence for the Reds that many here portray it as.

One thing is for sure IMO though and that is that this team needs to trade either Dunn or Griffey as I do not believe they can have both those guys in the OF at the same time.

pedro
06-19-2007, 03:09 PM
To succeed long term as an organization the Reds cannot afford to have an average GM, they need a stellar one. I see no evidence that Krisky is that.

I also think that firing a GM after 18 months because you see no evidence that he is "stellar" is a great way to further insure that the Reds never go anywhere.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 03:09 PM
One thing is for sure IMO though and that is that this team needs to trade either Dunn or Griffey as I do not believe they can have both those guys in the OF at the same time.They won't in 2009 and seeing as the odds of the Reds being competetive before then are very small it is really a non-issue.

They need to do with Dunn and Jr whatever it is that maximizes their return, which may or may not involve a trade.

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 04:48 PM
Lopez making $3.9M playing a .631 OPS second base.

It's not the trading of Kearns and Lopez which was bad, it was the return.

Actually it's worse than that. I was going by what I was remembering seeing from a month ago and he's tanked it at 2B since then. He's a total flop this year and not worthy of being traded for an injured Majewski straight up.

So, the return starts to look better as Lopez looks more horrible every day. He wouldn't start for any other team in the league other than the Nationals, or sit on anyone's bench at that salary. If he wasn't so expensive, he would make a great bench player. He's been tremendouse in the clutch with 24 RBI's with RISP, hitting .267/.364/.489.

His overall numbers at 2B this year: .202/.243/.340.

His fielding defense has been tremendous so far this year at 2nd Base though committing only 1 error in 184 chances (.995) with a zone rating of 4.88 and Range Factor of .817.

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 04:51 PM
My guess is that each was considered for their other position, but management felt it would not make the team stronger.

Do you really think that management should come out and say "We consideed Phillips at SS but most felt that he would stink there, so we went another direction"?

You're right there. Phillips is one of the top 2B in the league. They've been right about that. Dunn is tolerable in LF as long as CF and SS and 3B improved defensively around him.

flyer85
06-19-2007, 04:52 PM
Lance Berkman is not worth anywhere near what the Astros are paying him based on this years offensive stats as a 1B. (this is in no way comapring Lopez to Berkman)

I wonder if they are considering releasing him?

pedro
06-19-2007, 04:56 PM
Lance Berkman is not worth anywhere near what the Astros are paying him based on this years offensive stats as a 1B. (this is in no way comapring Lopez to Berkman)

I wonder if they are considering releasing him?

he makes 14 million dollars a year. That would be absurd.

Heath
06-19-2007, 04:57 PM
he makes 14 million dollars a year. That would be absurd.

Is it as absurd as reading an 8 page Brendan Harris thread?

Chip R
06-19-2007, 04:57 PM
Lance Berkman is not worth anywhere near what the Astros are paying him based on this years offensive stats as a 1B. (this is in no way comapring Lopez to Berkman)

I wonder if they are considering releasing him?


He'd be worth every penny of it if he played the Reds all the time.

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 04:58 PM
I'd just like to remind everyone that from what I can remember none of the folks panning the trade thought Harris was worth anything last year when the Reds acquired him. It think it's pretty funny now that the same people who were panning Krivsky for acquiring the guy are panning him for letting him go too.


I did.

pedro
06-19-2007, 04:59 PM
I did.

I recall that.

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 05:00 PM
I don't recall people panning him for Harris(he was seemingly a throw in), it was the acquisition of Clayton and Majewski that got people worked up.

The argument is a strawman anyway. Just because people may not have wanted him in the first place is not an excuse to give him away so they could keep a clearly inferior option.

It goes along the same principle as "giving away Kearns, Lopez, and Wagner".

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 05:11 PM
From the date of the trade from MLB.com:

"Brendan Harris, INF

Harris is no stranger to being traded. Originally a fifth-round pick of the Chicago Cubs in 2001, he was part of the three-team trade involving the Cubs, Expos and Red Sox that sent Nomar Garciaparra to the Cubs and Orlando Cabrera to the Red Sox.

He's always been able to hit for average, carrying a .293 career Minor League average into this season. At the time of the trade, Harris was hitting .283 in his second year with Triple-A New Orleans, slumping lately, after breaking out of the gate with a .306 average in April and .330 in May.

His big-league callups have been both brief and relatively uneventful. He's never received more than 59 at-bats in any season since his debut with the Cubs in 2004. In 100 Major League at-bats, including 32 this season, Harris is hitting .210 with a pair of homers and eight RBIs. He had hit .333 in 32 at-bats this year.

Among scouts, the 25-year-old Harris often gets the ultimate compliment in being called "a baseball player." He can do the little things well and is a very good situational hitter. But his best tool may be his glove, and he can tote it all over the infield. He's logged a lot of time at third, short and second base and is able to handle all three at the highest level. It's unclear where he'll fit into the Reds' depth chart, but he's ready to contribute, at least as a utility man, in the big leagues."

mlb.com's own analysis says he's ready to contribute NOW in the big leagues, and at 25, he's got 3 years of improvement ahead of him, which he has displayed this year in Tampa Bay. They say that he's a good situational hitter, something the REDS sorely lack. Wow, to have a guy like that on the team would be great. ....they go on to say that as a career .293 hitter, he'll continue to hit in the Majors, but that his best aspect is his glove.

It's this past evidence that has me befuddled that Wayne could let him go for cash. The perplexing part is that Harris hasn't shown any reason not to have expected this from him.

He's not going anywhere in TampaBay and he has a starting job in the Majors for the next 3-4 years. He should be on our bench at the minimum.

After Krivsky let him go for cash while keeping Castro around made me believe that Krivsky has some holes in his ability to evaluate talent, even when it's staring him in the face, such as the Germano for Cormier trade.

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 05:12 PM
The guy will revert to his usual AAAA player sometime after the all-star break.

There's absolutely no evidence to suggest this unless you are looking at things through the eyes of Krivsky.

KronoRed
06-19-2007, 05:12 PM
I did.

I didn't and I have no trouble saying so, I thought he would be bench fodder, well now I wish he was on our bench :D

Eric_Davis
06-19-2007, 05:14 PM
Your hand should be down as well on that statement.

Nobody knew what Harris could do.

mlb.com did. Scouts from around the league did. I did. Tampa Bay did.

Mario-Rijo
06-19-2007, 05:15 PM
Lance Berkman is not worth anywhere near what the Astros are paying him based on this years offensive stats as a 1B. (this is in no way comapring Lopez to Berkman)

I wonder if they are considering releasing him?

I doubt it as Berkman actually has a strong track record of success.

Ltlabner
06-19-2007, 05:19 PM
It think it's pretty funny now that the same people who were panning Krivsky for acquiring the guy are panning him for letting him go too.

Equally funny that most players that Wayne acquirers who start off hot and cools is quickly panned as having a "carear year".

Harris has been strong for less than 1/2 a season and zero calls of "carear year" and plenty of calls for "Wayne's an idiot for letting this big one get away".

Of course it would be great having him hear raking away, or at the very least being a strong bench player.

KronoRed
06-19-2007, 05:20 PM
The guy will revert to his usual AAAA player sometime after the all-star break.

Even if he does that's still a lot better then some of the guys currently inhabiting the bench

Chip R
06-19-2007, 05:24 PM
After Krivsky let him go for cash while keeping Castro around made me believe that Krivsky has some holes in his ability to evaluate talent, even when it's staring him in the face, such as the Germano for Cormier trade.


I can see why you wouldn't want to keep Harris around if you had Castro signed to a multi-year deal. Of course why even sign him to such an extention much less acquire him in the first place?

M2
06-19-2007, 05:28 PM
Equally funny that any player who starts off hot and cools is quickly panned as having a "carear year".

Harris has been strong for less than 1/2 a season and zero calls of "carear year" and plenty of calls for "Wayne's an idiot for letting this big one get away".

Even if it wasn't a career year for him, he still profiled as a solid bench player. Juan Castro profiled as a flop. The larger question is why would you let a young guy with some talent slip away so that you could throw cash at a thoroughly awful veteran?

flyer85
06-19-2007, 05:39 PM
Even if it wasn't a career year for him, he still profiled as a solid bench player. Juan Castro profiled as a flop. The larger question is why would you let a young guy with some talent slip away so that you could throw cash at a thoroughly awful veteran?
which is exactly the point. taking it further shouldn't it cause people to question the evaluation skills of the GM? Afterall he held up player A and Castro and was able to come to the conclusion that Castro was more valuable. Same was true of Chad Moeller. The GMs player evaluation skills were able to look and see value where everyone else sees none. It leads me to question his evaluation ability on a fundamental level and causes me to believe that he relies on intangibles and secret knowledge in making his assessments.

Mario-Rijo
06-19-2007, 06:32 PM
which is exactly the point. taking it further shouldn't it cause people to question the evaluation skills of the GM? Afterall he held up player A and Castro and was able to come to the conclusion that Castro was more valuable. Same was true of Chad Moeller. The GMs player evaluation skills were able to look and see value where everyone else sees none. It leads me to question his evaluation ability on a fundamental level and causes me to believe that he relies on intangibles and secret knowledge in making his assessments.

Well wasn't one of the reasons Castro was acquired in the 1st place was to help EE along with his fielding, sort of a mentor? I mean let's face it not everything is a black and white issue, some things have layers of reasons for doing things. Perhaps he decided that Harris was a guy that he could slip through the waiver process in order to add Conine. Once he made this move and Conine was added he could not go back and pull him back off waivers and then realized that Harris had generated more interest than 1st thought and couldn't do anything at that point except deal him for the best offer before he lost him for nothing.

Perhaps a foolish risk, but not the end all be all. I also recall when Cody Ross was dealt it had the makings of a bad deal too me. I couldn't fathom why he would trade this kid away who seemed to be killing the ball with Florida for some time. And then wham he hit a wall and has yet to recover.

Time will tell!

Heath
06-19-2007, 06:57 PM
mlb.com did. Scouts from around the league did. I did. Tampa Bay did.
Oh, so you are a major league scout? Wow. Sorry, I didn't know or mean to insult your intelligence. My apologies.


There's absolutely no evidence to suggest this unless you are looking at things through the eyes of Krivsky.

There's no evidence that he will continue. Aren't there corrections to career norms? Small sample size?


Even if he does that's still a lot better then some of the guys currently inhabiting the bench

But what if Harris was hitting .190 sitting on the bench? My whole point is the Reds didn't know what he would do. If he was playing in Durham or hitting .150 in Tampa Bay this thread is long forgotten in the bowels of RedsZone. It's just another opportunity to slam front office personnel, which is beating a dead horse.

Patrick Bateman
06-19-2007, 07:33 PM
9 pages on Brendan Harris?

Ya, Krivsky should have kept him since he would have been a useful bench player, but Harris is not as good as he has shown and is probably at best a fringe regular. He would be nice to have, but guys like him are relatively easy to find. I question how much better he is over the long run than a Jeff Keppinger type (who is being wasted in the minors anyway).

I don't think Krivsky is great at making up benches (hello Juan Castro), but I can't see the big fuss here. The only thing that bothers me about giving away Harris is that it further signals that Krivsky isn't great at finding role players rather than actually missing out on Harris.

Eric_Davis
06-20-2007, 06:02 AM
I can see why you wouldn't want to keep Harris around if you had Castro signed to a multi-year deal. Of course why even sign him to such an extention much less acquire him in the first place?

That was so perplexing as he signed Castro to that extension while he had Harris as a RED. I am disappointed that Krivsky has missed on what seems to me to be some obvious talent evaluations. I do like his aggressiveness and his philosophy of defense and pitching, so I hope his good decisions outweigh his bad ones while he's in charge.

Eric_Davis
06-20-2007, 06:16 AM
"Oh, so you are a major league scout? Wow. Sorry, I didn't know or mean to insult your intelligence. My apologies."

There were two types of reports circling around the internet on Harris when we obtained him. Wrong ones made up by fantasy leaugue websites who had never seen the guy play before and right ones made up by Major League scouts who had seen him play who said that he was a solid player, a good defender at 2nd, SS, or 3B, a player that will hit line drives and add a little pop if given "the chance" in the bigs.
"There's no evidence that he will continue. Aren't there corrections to career norms? Small sample size?"

He's currently creating his career norms as we speak. You never know how a player will hit in the bigs until he gets there. But if you want to use his minor league numbers, they all suggested that he'd do exactly what he's doing...hit at a .310 clip with a little pop. But, I prefer a Major League scout's take over minor league numbers when trying to assess what a player will do when he reaches the Majors.
"But what if Harris was hitting .190 sitting on the bench? My whole point is the Reds didn't know what he would do. If he was playing in Durham or hitting .150 in Tampa Bay this thread is long forgotten in the bowels of RedsZone. It's just another opportunity to slam front office personnel, which is beating a dead horse." I inserted my answers in the bold type between your questions.

It's a better time to bring it up then saying Harris is minor league fodder at the time of the trade. When is the best time to evaluate a trade? Certainly, a trade can be better evaluated after a year has passed so that the players involved can show if it was worth it. No one is slamming front office personnel here or beating a dead horse, nor is it long forgotten as Harris is finally getting his chance to see how his end of the trade worked out.

Eric_Davis
06-20-2007, 06:20 AM
Ya, Krivsky should have kept him since he would have been a useful bench player, but Harris is not as good as he has shown and is probably at best a fringe regular. He would be nice to have, but guys like him are relatively easy to find. I question how much better he is over the long run than a Jeff Keppinger type (who is being wasted in the minors anyway).

I don't think Krivsky is great at making up benches (hello Juan Castro), but I can't see the big fuss here. The only thing that bothers me about giving away Harris is that it further signals that Krivsky isn't great at finding role players rather than actually missing out on Harris.

I read everyone's opinions at the time of the trade and yours was the most accurate one of them all. You really stated it for what it was and could see the future potential of all that were involved.

Redsland
06-20-2007, 10:44 AM
Well wasn't one of the reasons Castro was acquired in the 1st place was to help EE along with his fielding, sort of a mentor?
I can recall no one from the Reds saying anything of the kind. As far as I remember, that idea is original to RedsZone, and sure smells like a rationalization.

Here are some things that were said at the time.

"What goes around, comes around," Reds general manager Wayne Krivsky said. "He's a defensive specialist, but he offers something with the bat as well."

Told that the Reds inquired about re-acquiring him because they coveted versatility, Castro said: "Maybe that is a good thing for me."

"Usually when you think of Juan Castro, the first thing you think of is defence," Krivsky said. "He's improved the last three or four years on offence, too."

That Castro ended up in Cincinnati is far from surprising. Reds General Manager Wayne Krivsky was previously Ryan's assistant, and he pushed for the Twins to sign Castro before the 2005 season.

Sounds like Wayne sees Juan as a well-rounded player with value.

BRM
06-20-2007, 10:58 AM
Sounds like Wayne sees Juan as a well-rounded player with value.

That's scary.

Big Klu
06-20-2007, 11:54 AM
9 pages on Brendan Harris?

Ya, Krivsky should have kept him since he would have been a useful bench player, but Harris is not as good as he has shown and is probably at best a fringe regular. He would be nice to have, but guys like him are relatively easy to find. I question how much better he is over the long run than a Jeff Keppinger type (who is being wasted in the minors anyway).

I don't think Krivsky is great at making up benches (hello Juan Castro), but I can't see the big fuss here. The only thing that bothers me about giving away Harris is that it further signals that Krivsky isn't great at finding role players rather than actually missing out on Harris.

Not to change the subject, but when the Reds first acquired Jeff Keppinger, I thought to myself, "Who the hell is Jeff Keppinger?" But I have really liked what I have seen from him in his brief stints in Cincinnati, and what I have read about him in Louisville. I can see him as being a serviceable Jeff Branson-type player on the bench (I also thought that Harris could be a Branson-type player), and I agree that he is being wasted at AAA.

Everyone blames the poor bench on Juan Castro (and I admit that he brings little to the club on the field), but the real culprit is Narron and Krivsky's insistence at carrying a five-man bench. If the Reds had a "normal" (IMO) six- or seven-man bench, then there would be room for a "decent glove/no hit" player like Castro (as there has been on MLB benches for time immemorial). Kepp would then be the backup INF expected to provide a little more offense.

Chip R
06-20-2007, 12:25 PM
That was so perplexing as he signed Castro to that extension while he had Harris as a RED. I am disappointed that Krivsky has missed on what seems to me to be some obvious talent evaluations. I do like his aggressiveness and his philosophy of defense and pitching, so I hope his good decisions outweigh his bad ones while he's in charge.

When was Castro signed to that extention? :confused:


I can recall no one from the Reds saying anything of the kind. As far as I remember, that idea is original to RedsZone, and sure smells like a rationalization.


Yeah, I don't know either. I do know that when Castro was signed to his extention, he expressed the desire to play on a more regular basis. Not necessarily every day but quite a bit more than a utility player usually plays. What I wonder - and this is just speculation - if Castro is not being a mentor to EE. We don't know if he is any more than we don't know he isn't. But with Castro's statement about wanting to play more and the rumors that some of the players thought Castro should have been playing more earlier this year makes me think that Castro may have not gone out of his way to help EE.

M2
06-20-2007, 12:27 PM
Keppinger is the classic empty BA guy. No power, no speed, no defense, no plate patience.

The real question is can he hit for average in the majors. I suspect he'd be more like a .260-.280 hitter than a .300-.320 hitter, which wouldn't make him terribly useful.

BRM
06-20-2007, 12:28 PM
Per MLB4U, regarding Castro's extension.



later signed 2-year EXTENSION thru 2008 worth $2M on 9/25/06- + he receives salaries of $925K in 2007 and $975K in 2008- + the deal includes a Team Option for 2009 worth $1.1M or a $100K buyout- + he can earn performance bonuses annually: $50K each for 400, 450 and 500PA

paulrichjr
06-20-2007, 12:37 PM
Is it time for some (Including myself) to admit that "THE TRADE" wasn't a bad trade at all and that Krivs may have won the deal...only to lose when he "gave away" Brendan Harris?

It appears that the people that are mad about "The Trade" should start being mad about the giveaway of Harris. Harris is easily better than Lopez and two cheap bullpen guys would probably be a good idea (for a horrible bullpen) for Kearns. A really high potential guy like Thompson is better than a dud like Wagner... Oh my for the first time I can justify "The Trade", only I'm not sure that Krivs realized what he had when he threw away Harris.

westofyou
06-20-2007, 12:38 PM
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/chat/chat.php?chatId=317


Rays fan (Tampa): When/how will the Devil Rays make room for Longoria and Brignac? Do they have another year in the minors to look forward to in 2008?

Rany Jazayerli: If Brignac can stay at SS, there won't be any roadblocks; Brendan Harris is a stopgap, and Ben Zobrist had his opportunity. I see Longoria at 3B, with Iwamura moving to 2B (or a utility role) and Upton to the OF.

What. A. Loaded. Offense. (And the young pitching ain't bad either.)

KronoRed
06-20-2007, 01:23 PM
That's scary.
1.1 million in 2009, OH YEAH!

M2
06-20-2007, 04:49 PM
I'd be stunned if Brignac is ready by next year. He's only 21 and struggling mightily in AA.

Though the Rays may have found a catcher in John Jaso.

registerthis
06-20-2007, 04:49 PM
Is it time for some (Including myself) to admit that "THE TRADE" wasn't a bad trade at all and that Krivs may have won the deal...only to lose when he "gave away" Brendan Harris?

No, "the trade" is still crap. Having Brendan Harris performing respectably for the Reds would have made it more palateable. But it's still a clunker of a deal.

pedro
06-20-2007, 04:50 PM
No, "the trade" is still crap. Having Brendan Harris performing respectably for the Reds would have made it more palateable. But it's still a clunker of a deal.

Can't say it's working out that well for either team.

registerthis
06-20-2007, 04:57 PM
Can't say it's working out that well for either team.

Proof that both teams can lose a trade. It does look like the Reds got the best years of Mr. Lopez. Kearns is an enigma.

MWM
06-20-2007, 05:05 PM
There's been a lot of debate about whether the acquisitions of Phillips and Hamilton are the result of Krivsky seeing something others didn't (i.e. a superior talent evaluation skill) or simply making no risk moves that turned out WAY better than anyone imagined. A lot of the people who are consistent in their praise of Krivsky have wanted to give him "credit" for these moves. Fair enough. I'm in the camp that deals like tend to be on the lucky side rather than something indicative of superior GM'ing.

If you're in the camp that wants to attribute credit for those two acquisitions, then letting Harris go for nothing has to be a strike against. If he acquired those players because of his talent evaluation skills, then discarding Harris is a mark against his talent evaluation skills. If Harris turns out to be a good ball player consistently, then giving him away is a pretty big indictment on a GM. If he would have surfaced several years from now, it would be different. But the fact that he's doing it just months later makes it worse, IMO.

pedro
06-20-2007, 05:09 PM
There's been a lot of debate about whether the acquisitions of Phillips and Hamilton are the result of Krivsky seeing something others didn't (i.e. a superior talent evaluation skill) or simply making no risk moves that turned out WAY better than anyone imagined. A lot of the people who are consistent in their praise of Krivsky have wanted to give him "credit" for these moves. Fair enough. I'm in the camp that deals like tend to be on the lucky side rather than something indicative of superior GM'ing.

If you're in the camp that wants to attribute credit for those two acquisitions, then letting Harris go for nothing has to be a strike against. If he acquired those players because of his talent evaluation skills, then discarding Harris is a mark against his talent evaluation skills. If Harris turns out to be a good ball player consistently, then giving him away is a pretty big indictment on a GM. If he would have surfaced several years from now, it would be different. But the fact that he's doing it just months later makes it worse, IMO.

True. I find it disappointing b/c at the time I viewed Harris pretty favorably. He didn't do poorly at Louisville either.

Chip R
06-20-2007, 06:11 PM
I take it Harris ran out of options this year.

Patrick Bateman
06-20-2007, 06:51 PM
There's been a lot of debate about whether the acquisitions of Phillips and Hamilton are the result of Krivsky seeing something others didn't (i.e. a superior talent evaluation skill) or simply making no risk moves that turned out WAY better than anyone imagined. A lot of the people who are consistent in their praise of Krivsky have wanted to give him "credit" for these moves. Fair enough. I'm in the camp that deals like tend to be on the lucky side rather than something indicative of superior GM'ing.

If you're in the camp that wants to attribute credit for those two acquisitions, then letting Harris go for nothing has to be a strike against. If he acquired those players because of his talent evaluation skills, then discarding Harris is a mark against his talent evaluation skills. If Harris turns out to be a good ball player consistently, then giving him away is a pretty big indictment on a GM. If he would have surfaced several years from now, it would be different. But the fact that he's doing it just months later makes it worse, IMO.


That's all tue, but I doubt Harris is likely to be a guy that Reds fans will be crying over.

I didn't really understand the point of Harris' involvment anyways. Krivsky got him included in the trade, he produced in the minors, wasn't given a chance in the makors, and was traded for nothing. If Krivsky wasn't going to give him a chance if he did the best he possibly could have done in AAA, then what was the point in getting him?

Patrick Bateman
06-20-2007, 06:52 PM
I read everyone's opinions at the time of the trade and yours was the most accurate one of them all. You really stated it for what it was and could see the future potential of all that were involved.

Duely noted. Thanks!

Mario-Rijo
06-20-2007, 06:57 PM
There's been a lot of debate about whether the acquisitions of Phillips and Hamilton are the result of Krivsky seeing something others didn't (i.e. a superior talent evaluation skill) or simply making no risk moves that turned out WAY better than anyone imagined. A lot of the people who are consistent in their praise of Krivsky have wanted to give him "credit" for these moves. Fair enough. I'm in the camp that deals like tend to be on the lucky side rather than something indicative of superior GM'ing.

If you're in the camp that wants to attribute credit for those two acquisitions, then letting Harris go for nothing has to be a strike against. If he acquired those players because of his talent evaluation skills, then discarding Harris is a mark against his talent evaluation skills. If Harris turns out to be a good ball player consistently, then giving him away is a pretty big indictment on a GM. If he would have surfaced several years from now, it would be different. But the fact that he's doing it just months later makes it worse, IMO.

I can agree with that, no question. As could Cody Ross (starting look unlikely though), Zach Ward and Justin Germano.