PDA

View Full Version : "The Trade"



kaldaniels
02-12-2007, 11:15 PM
I completely understand the negativity towards the trade with Washington. On paper, and based on the results so far, it was not a good trade for the Reds. (I'm not nearly as upset as the majority of the posters on here though, as I think Kearns and Lopez will never be outstanding major leaguers...not wanting to argue that here, but just wanted to let everyone know where I stand).

However...why can't this place be a little more positive. If you ask me, "The Trade" last year that will have the most lasting effect on the Reds, positive or negative, was the Arroyo for Wily Mo deal. Just as in the Washington trade seems overwhelmingly in the Nats favor, the Arroyo trade seems overwhemingly in the Reds favor.

Why do I bring this up.....just read through all the recent threads....it seems like people can't get over the Washington trade. Was it a trade made out of desparation...absolutely. However...when looking at the results of the trade and the long term consequences, I'm going to go out on a limb and say the Arroyo trade evens that other one out. When we look back at this trade in a few years, I firmly think the Nats trade is going to look like a swap of average major leaguers between 2 clubs, nothing more, nothing less. However, the Arroyo/Wily Mo trade will be the one discussed 5 years from now as having the bigger impact on the Reds positive, or, admittedly negative (who knows, maybe Wily Mo has a 60 HR season in him).

So I ask...am I alone in being sick of hearing about the Nats deal??? I realize that in the scheme of this forum I'm a nobody, but is it too much to ask to just let it go. I'm tired of it. Like I said, I just think it is much ado about nothing.

Thanks for reading my rant. It's time to get excited people...can anyone say pitchers and catchers report???? :thumbup:

paintmered
02-12-2007, 11:27 PM
http://www.bjacked.net/LuvToHunt/forums/phpBB2/modules/gallery/albums/album01/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg

kaldaniels
02-12-2007, 11:29 PM
http://www.bjacked.net/LuvToHunt/forums/phpBB2/modules/gallery/albums/album01/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg

My point exactly.

jojo
02-12-2007, 11:32 PM
http://www.bjacked.net/LuvToHunt/forums/phpBB2/modules/gallery/albums/album01/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg

Now I know for a fact that horses can talk (see Mr. Ed) but I didn't know dead ones could...

:bowrofl:

dougdirt
02-12-2007, 11:40 PM
It wont happen. People still bring up the Frank Robinson trade, and that one happened 40 years ago.

dsmith421
02-12-2007, 11:49 PM
asking people to stop talking about it is one thing, i'm all for it. at the end of the day you can't unring a bell.

asking me to be positive about it is another thing altogether.

i suspect, just as i did with roberto kelly, i'll possess unreasonable man-hate for gary majewski for as long as he's a red, and probably forever.

paulrichjr
02-13-2007, 08:58 AM
The only reason that you play a season is to win a championship. To do so requires you to get to the playoffs. I see trades like the Arroyo trade as being good moves that were getting us to the playoffs. You are right in saying that Krivs deserves credit for getting Arroyo BUT when the time was right to make a trade to shore up an obvious weakness and put us over the top he blew it plain and simple. I am still in shock that the guy made the move since it was so obviously one sided and created new weaknesses. Krivs had a chance to take us to the promise land. He teased us with good trades that put us on the cusp. He then jerked the punch away. I can't completely forget until he puts us over the top.

If you are married complement your wife all day and buy her a diamond necklace and maybe a new car and then tell her you are having an affair at the end of the day. Well that's how I feel about "The trade"....

redsmetz
02-13-2007, 09:16 AM
It wont happen. People still bring up the Frank Robinson trade, and that one happened 40 years ago.

Well to be exact, as of today (February 13, 2007), it's been 41 years, two months and four days since that ignominous day, but who's counting? Hey, they made my grandma cry - I'll never forgive that!

[okay, i found a cool site: http://www.timeanddate.com/date/duration.html]

redsmetz
02-13-2007, 09:23 AM
The only reason that you play a season is to win a championship. To do so requires you to get to the playoffs.

Yikes! That means there have been tens of thousands of worthless baseball games played throughout all of history.

How about playing games (and watching them) just for the sheer joy of them, the absolutely beauty. If you're only in it for the championships, you're in for a sad day indeed.

Yes, you always want the brass ring. The truth is, it doesn't come around that often. Of course, I'm looking to be in the hunt, but only time will tell if any given move helps with that goal.

But I'll still take the game to enjoy. That said, this club was imploding left and right and it was directly rated to the bullpen and the absolute uglieness that it was. He took a shot and missed the mark. We'll see how time judges it over all.

paulrichjr
02-13-2007, 10:21 AM
Yikes! That means there have been tens of thousands of worthless baseball games played throughout all of history.

How about playing games (and watching them) just for the sheer joy of them, the absolutely beauty. If you're only in it for the championships, you're in for a sad day indeed.

Yes, you always want the brass ring. The truth is, it doesn't come around that often. Of course, I'm looking to be in the hunt, but only time will tell if any given move helps with that goal.

But I'll still take the game to enjoy. That said, this club was imploding left and right and it was directly rated to the bullpen and the absolute uglieness that it was. He took a shot and missed the mark. We'll see how time judges it over all.

OK maybe I was a little over the top there. :) (Most of my comments were meant to be a little over the edge - Hey I'm a fan) I guess there are other reasons to play such as to entertain fans, to have a job, to make billionaires worth millions more... JK

There truly can be other reasons to play but the ultimate and number 1 goal should be to win a championship.

RedEye
02-13-2007, 11:44 AM
So I ask...am I alone in being sick of hearing about the Nats deal??? I realize that in the scheme of this forum I'm a nobody, but is it too much to ask to just let it go. I'm tired of it. Like I said, I just think it is much ado about nothing.


The more you post threads entitled 'The Trade,' the more I want to rail against Krivsky. It's a losing battle, I tell you.

I've got it! Why don't we just say anyone who mentions anything about 'The Trade' loses 50 rep points automatically! That should do it... :laugh:

TheBigLebowski
02-13-2007, 12:13 PM
asking people to stop talking about it is one thing, i'm all for it. at the end of the day you can't unring a bell.

asking me to be positive about it is another thing altogether.

i suspect, just as i did with roberto kelly, i'll possess unreasonable man-hate for gary majewski for as long as he's a red, and probably forever.

I know the diff between "love" and "man-love," but can you explain the difference between "hate" and "man-hate?"

I only ask because Majewski causes me to feel something that I suspect may actually be "man hate."

dsmith421
02-13-2007, 12:37 PM
I know the diff between "love" and "man-love," but can you explain the difference between "hate" and "man-hate?"

As we learned from the educational film "Deuce Bigalow", the prefix "man-" makes virtually any word funnier.

Highlifeman21
02-13-2007, 12:45 PM
The first rule of "The Trade" is you don't talk about "The Trade"

The second rule of "The Trade" is you don't talk about "The Trade"

Kc61
02-13-2007, 12:47 PM
Funny, the trade doesn't bother me. I think Krivsky would have dumped off Lopez and Kearns eventually anyway -- they weren't his type. It was tough that Majewski was unable to perform well last year, and I wish the Reds got a better pitcher, but maybe he will come around.

On the other hand, I get furious to this day when I think of the failure to draft Kazmir. It upsets me every time it gets mentioned. To me, it was an obvious blunder with major long-term ramifications.

I guess it's just how things hit you.

Spitball
02-13-2007, 03:35 PM
It wont happen. People still bring up the Frank Robinson trade, and that one happened 40 years ago.

Every time someone referes to "The Trade" I think of the Robinson trade because that really was a much worse trade. The Reds traded a Hall of Famer and their team leader. In the Washington trade, the Reds dumped Lopez who will be a journeyman second baseman and Kearns who will be a journeyman outfielder. Both will make too much money to be worth their shortcomings.

There really is no comparison of the magnitude of the two trades...IMO.

Hoosier Red
02-13-2007, 03:45 PM
Every time someone referes to "The Trade" I think of the Robinson trade because that really was a much worse trade. The Reds traded a Hall of Famer and their team leader. In the Washington trade, the Reds dumped Lopez who will be a journeyman second baseman and Kearns who will be a journeyman outfielder. Both will make too much money to be worth their shortcomings.

There really is no comparison of the magnitude of the two trades...IMO.

And it was so debilitating it took all of two years to get to the World Series.

Dom Heffner
02-13-2007, 03:56 PM
I think Kearns and Lopez will never be outstanding major leaguers

At least they are major leaguers.

redsmetz
02-13-2007, 04:10 PM
And it was so debilitating it took all of two years to get to the World Series.

??? - the Orioles went to the Series that season (1966) with Robinson winning the Triple Crown and his second MVP award. The Reds didn't turn up in the World Series until 1970, losing to Robinson's O's that year.

Puffy
02-13-2007, 04:25 PM
Funny, the trade doesn't bother me. I think Krivsky would have dumped off Lopez and Kearns eventually anyway -- they weren't his type.

Which would have been fine with the lionshare of people who "hate" this trade.

The point of contention was the return. I am all for trading anyone on the roster if the return is right. Here, it was not, IMO.

Even if Bray and Majewski turn out to be average to slightly above average middle relievers that does not change the fact that Krivsky lost two trade assets that could have gotten him more. Its all about assets and returns.

westofyou
02-13-2007, 04:28 PM
Neil Allen liked the trade.

Roy Tucker
02-13-2007, 04:52 PM
The trouble is, it gets brought up in any transaction that Krivsky makes.

Evaluation of a trade turns to what trades WK has made and if he has "won" or "lost" them and how this trade affects the ledger.

And then someone says 'well, there is alway "the trade" which heavily slants it to the positive/negative' side which seems to light the fuse.

I'm OK with it being talked about in the context of other discussions. And if someone wants to yet-again talk about it solo, I'll just hit "next unseen".

remdog
02-13-2007, 05:27 PM
...why can't this place be a little more positive.

Someone else might just as easily ask, 'why can't this place be more realistic.'

Rem

remdog
02-13-2007, 05:28 PM
My point exactly.

If that was your point you shouldn't have started this thread. :p:

Rem

remdog
02-13-2007, 05:37 PM
It was tough that Majewski was unable to perform well last year

Actually, it was negligence on Krivsky's part that he didn't do his due diligence by checking the medicals. Had he done that, this trade probably would have never been made or would have gone forward in some altered state. There is no sugar coating it, no waiting for next year, no making excuses....Wayne screwed up that part of the deal and he should be held accountable for it.

Rem

westofyou
02-13-2007, 05:43 PM
Actually, it was negligence on Krivsky's part that he didn't do his due diligence by checking the medicals.

Hard to do due diligence on hidden information


To recap, the Reds allege that the Nationals did not tell them prior to the July 13 trade that Majewski had been taking anti-inflammatory medicine for a sore shoulder throughout the season or that he had received a cortisone shot in the shoulder just days before the trade. Majewski posted a 12.54 ERA in his first 11 appearances for the Reds, then spent three weeks on the disabled list after revealing his shoulder had been bothering him. He returned from the DL to post a 1.59 ERA in his final eight appearances.

http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061202/SPT05/612020399/1027/SPT05

remdog
02-13-2007, 05:48 PM
The record of the injections should be in Majewski's medical records. But Wayne never checked them prior to finalizing the deal.

Rem

westofyou
02-13-2007, 05:53 PM
The record of the injections should be in Majewski's medical records. But Wayne never checked them prior to finalizing the deal.

Rem

You'd think, but obviously those who have actually seen them are saying otherwise.




Reds general manager Wayne Krivsky said the club still plans to file a grievance against the Washington Nationals over the July trade between the two teams.

The Reds insist that the Nats did not share all the details of Gary Majewski’s shoulder problems before the trade.

“It’s in the hands of the lawyers,” Krivsky said. “It’s very close. Every time they’re ready to file, they find some new information.”


Incidentally, the Washington trainer at the time of the trade, Tim Abraham, resigned in December.

The Nationals have said Abraham was the one who passed along the information on Majewski. At the time of Abraham’s resignation, the Nats said it had nothing to do with the Reds situation.

Majewski received a cortisone shot just before the July 13 trade. He had a 12.54 ERA with the Reds in 11 appearances before going on the disabled list.

Cedric
02-13-2007, 06:30 PM
You'd think, but obviously those who have actually seen them are saying otherwise.

Wayne might make bad trades, but I doubt he is the type of GM to not follow through on every aspect of his job.

I doubt very much he didn't get swindled by Jim Bowden here. It's in character that's for sure.

Spitball
02-13-2007, 08:23 PM
And it was so debilitating it took all of two years to get to the World Series.

Whoa! There was the 1966, '67, '68, and '69 seasons between the trade and the Reds getting to the World Series. That also begs the question as to why the trade with Washington can't get the same benefit of time.


...that does not change the fact that Krivsky lost two trade assets that could have gotten him more. Its all about assets and returns.

That is really just an opinion. Lopez, a poor fielder, was destined for arbitration. Todd Walker, also a poor fielding second baseman, brought the Reds a mere take of Josh Thigpen and Tony Blanco when he was on the verge of a raise. Kearns is an over-weight, injury prone player, a year removed from a demotion to the minor leagues, with fairly pedestrian numbers for a corner outfielder, who was also destined for arbitration. What evidence do we have that an outfielder with similar baggage has much trade value at all???

redsrule2500
02-13-2007, 09:07 PM
http://www.bjacked.net/LuvToHunt/forums/phpBB2/modules/gallery/albums/album01/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg

Well we must not be beating a dead horse if he's still alive :rolleyes: :)

Spitball
02-13-2007, 11:54 PM
Well we must not be beating a dead horse if he's still alive :rolleyes: :)

I don't mind beating the horse a few more times as long as people keep refering to it. It will not die if there is a perceived/acknowledged belief on this board that the trade was a big mistake. I, for one, believe it was a trade of players of little demand (terrible fielding middle infielders/corner outfielders) for something of high demand (pitching). Majewski didn't pitch well, but the jury is still out on what he can do. There is now depth on the pitching staff which is more important than holding onto overpriced middle infielders (BTW, where is Belliard?) and over-weight, often injured corner outfielders?

Does anyone have a definite scenerio where the Reds get more for Lopez and/or Kearns?

kaldaniels
02-14-2007, 12:05 AM
If that was your point you shouldn't have started this thread. :p:

Rem

How clever. I was just saying that it is time to stop talking about the trade in regards to evaluting unrelated personnel moves or anything else. My thread despite the irony that you must see was saying it is time to stop talking about the trade. Of course I have to bring up the trade to say it is time to stop talking about it, quite the dilemma.

RedEye
02-14-2007, 01:53 PM
I doubt very much he didn't get swindled by Jim Bowden here. It's in character that's for sure.

I'm confused... are you saying you think he did get swindled? And whose character, Bowden's or Krivsky's?

Heath
02-14-2007, 01:55 PM
I don't mind beating the horse a few more times as long as people keep refering to it. It will not die if there is a perceived/acknowledged belief on this board that the trade was a big mistake. I, for one, believe it was a trade of players of little demand (terrible fielding middle infielders/corner outfielders) for something of high demand (pitching). Majewski didn't pitch well, but the jury is still out on what he can do. There is now depth on the pitching staff which is more important than holding onto overpriced middle infielders (BTW, where is Belliard?) and over-weight, often injured corner outfielders?

Does anyone have a definite scenerio where the Reds get more for Lopez and/or Kearns?



Whoa! There was the 1966, '67, '68, and '69 seasons between the trade and the Reds getting to the World Series. That also begs the question as to why the trade with Washington can't get the same benefit of time.

That is really just an opinion. Lopez, a poor fielder, was destined for arbitration. Todd Walker, also a poor fielding second baseman, brought the Reds a mere take of Josh Thigpen and Tony Blanco when he was on the verge of a raise. Kearns is an over-weight, injury prone player, a year removed from a demotion to the minor leagues, with fairly pedestrian numbers for a corner outfielder, who was also destined for arbitration. What evidence do we have that an outfielder with similar baggage has much trade value at all???

Quit making sense, spitball. It'll ruin you.

:D

westofyou
02-14-2007, 01:58 PM
I'm confused... are you saying you think he did get swindled? And whose character, Bowden's or Krivsky's?

Let us go and ask Walt Jocketty about the injured player he received from the Reds and see what he has to say about character.

harangatang
02-14-2007, 02:13 PM
Someone else might just as easily ask, 'why can't this place be more realistic.'

RemExactly the truth is the truth. Some people try to bend it and call themselves optimists when really they should be sensationalists.

Heath
02-14-2007, 02:15 PM
Exactly the truth is the truth. Some people try to bend it and call themselves optimists when really they should be sensationalists.

We call those people "meterologists".


:D