PDA

View Full Version : Kearns who?



acredsfan
04-03-2007, 05:02 PM
We've been without kearns for quite awhile now. The talk of missing him has subsided, and for good reason. Does anybody still miss him? I really don't. Hamilton has come and captured our hearts. Let's look at the outfield a season after the dreaded trade.

1. Griffey moving to right- Impossible without Kearns being dealt

2. Adam Dunn's new offensive and defensive approach - It was well documented that some people felt that Kearns and Dunn were lazy together, if it was true, then maybe this is a benefit of the seperation.

3. Josh Hamilton - Quite simply, do we make the deal for Josh with Kearns still around? If we do, then could we have offered him enough playing time to make it worth while?

Let me say, this isn't a thread to discuss "the deal", rather the absence of Kearns and what it means to the Reds. Is it true that Hamilton made most of us forget about kearns. Is power and offense still our weakness or is this the most well balanced team we have seen in years? I figured I'd get my one required optimistic post of the new season out of the way.

redsrule2500
04-03-2007, 05:03 PM
I don't miss Kearns, I miss what we could have gotten from Kearns. (Somewhat mentioning the deal..., but still)

I agree with your post overall. It was fun to have him though just because he came up in the Reds Org

redsfanmia
04-03-2007, 05:04 PM
I was never a big fan of Kearns and am glad he is gone. I think his trade value was overstated on Redszone.

paulrichjr
04-03-2007, 05:08 PM
I was never a big fan of Kearns and am glad he is gone. I think his trade value was overstated on Redszone.

Maybe but I don't think any GM would have passed up the deal that Bowden made while I would bet not one GM would have done what Wayne did.

I also could care less about Kearns and Lopez and Wagner. I just miss what they might have brought to this team if their value would have been properly realized.

westofyou
04-03-2007, 05:09 PM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=492946&postcount=71

MaineRed
04-03-2007, 05:37 PM
Maybe but I don't think any GM would have passed up the deal that Bowden made while I would bet not one GM would have done what Wayne did.

I also could care less about Kearns and Lopez and Wagner. I just miss what they might have brought to this team if their value would have been properly realized.

Really? You think the Yankees trade two promising arms for Felipe Lopez and Austin Kearns?

I don't think any decent team that isn't stocked with arms makes that trade from Bowden's POV. There aren't as many GMs out there interested in Felipe Lopez as their SS as people around here suggest, IMO.

Johnny Footstool
04-03-2007, 05:47 PM
Really? You think the Yankees trade two promising arms for Felipe Lopez and Austin Kearns?

I don't think any decent team that isn't stocked with arms makes that trade from Bowden's POV. There aren't as many GMs out there interested in Felipe Lopez as their SS as people around here suggest, IMO.

Promising *middle relievers* in exchange for two players who fill spots of need? Yes.

Any team needing a young RH OF bat and a leadoff hitter who (potentially) can play 2B would do that deal.

paulrichjr
04-03-2007, 06:32 PM
Really? You think the Yankees trade two promising arms for Felipe Lopez and Austin Kearns?

I don't think any decent team that isn't stocked with arms makes that trade from Bowden's POV. There aren't as many GMs out there interested in Felipe Lopez as their SS as people around here suggest, IMO.

And those promising arms are pitching where? We have not one of those players on our active roster right now. They have all 3.

I still can't understand why Wagner was included. Does anyone really think (no matter your opinion on Wagner) that Bowden doesn't do that deal with Kearns and Lopez only? I can see Bowden now....Well I don't knoooow.... I tell you what if you would throw in one more maybe Wagner I might do the deal but I still would have to think about it.

Bowden was about to pee on himself just thinking that Kearns was coming his way.

klw
04-03-2007, 06:37 PM
It's been a few years since the Knoblauch trade but...

February 6, 1998: Traded by the Minnesota Twins to the New York Yankees for Brian Buchanan, Cristian Guzman, Eric Milton, Danny Mota, and cash.

Last year's Abreau trade
July 30, 2006: Traded by the Philadelphia Phillies with Cory Lidle to the New York Yankees for Matt Smith, C.J. Henry (minors), Carlos Monastrios (minors), and Jesus Sanchez (minors).

I don't know how promising any of them are.

RedsManRick
04-03-2007, 06:39 PM
Chaos theory at its finest :)

top6
04-03-2007, 07:28 PM
This team would be better even if we gave back everyone we got in the trade, took back Kearns and let the Nationals keep Lopez. We could really use Kearns. Outside of Hamilton, who should be in AAA, this team has no offensive depth. We are an injury or two away (and, I might add, a pretty likely injury or two) from being pretty terrible. Kearns would be a huge help right now.

pedro
04-03-2007, 07:38 PM
This team would be better even if we gave back everyone we got in the trade, took back Kearns and let the Nationals keep Lopez. We could really use Kearns. Outside of Hamilton, who should be in AAA, this team has no offensive depth. We are an injury or two away (and, I might add, a pretty likely injury or two) from being pretty terrible. Kearns would be a huge help right now.

The problem with that is that if Kearns was still on the Reds either Dunn would have to play 1st (not the worst option IMO) or Kearns would have to sit on the bench as he can't play CF.

MaineRed
04-03-2007, 07:42 PM
And those promising arms are pitching where? We have not one of those players on our active roster right now. They have all 3.

Using this logic it wouldn't matter if we acquired Roy Halladay in this trade. Our trade partner got three big leaguers out of the deal so they win.

I was under the impression that Bray and Majewski were actually going to pitch again for the Reds. I had no idea their careers had been branded and frozen in time. I thought there was some chance they might help the Reds, perhaps even this year.

I don't want to sidetrack the thread so I want to say I agree with the original poster, no matter what you think of the trade it has allowed the Reds to do some things that aren't possible if Kearns is still here. The best thing might just be Dunn. PERHAPS he saw his buddy get traded, had time to reflect and it woke him up. Baseball should be fun but fun shouldn't be the number one priority. PERHAPS the Dunn-Kearns combo spent too much time joking around. I know Adam's performance had a lot to do with him rethinking some things but maybe it was losing AK that killed him last year but yet will be the very thing that awakens him for the long term.

Losing Kearns (making that trade) hurt the team last year. We didn't get what we wanted out of the pitchers we recieved and coupled with the rest of our bullpen it killed our chances. But long term I think it is going to prove to be the best thing for the club. Griff is now in right, we were able to upgrade at SS and in CF on the defensive side and the offense is looking pretty good. Forgeting about the trade, where would Felipe Lopez fit on this team and where would Austin Kearns fit?

IMO, the Reds look better without them. Sometimes you win for losing.

fisch11
04-03-2007, 07:46 PM
Hamilton is still an unknown when it comes to hitting in the majors. Austin Kearns' absence in right allows Freel to freely glide center field. If Hamilton proves he isn't Brandon Larson (AAAA hitter), than the loss of Kearns is greather than having Jeff Conine come in off the bench. Kearns is a heck of a defensive outfielder with a big arm, but Hamilton is just as strong defensively...if not better.

I'll try to avoid getting into "the trade", but I believe this club is much better defensively WITHOUT Kearns (and Lopez). And honestly, how much did Kearns really contribute offensively post Ray King?

Most importantly, time will tell with Hamilton if he is ready to play in the bigs. That's the largest factor in my opinion on the absence of Kearns today, without involving "the trade."

MaineRed
04-03-2007, 07:47 PM
This team would be better even if we gave back everyone we got in the trade, took back Kearns and let the Nationals keep Lopez. We could really use Kearns. Outside of Hamilton, who should be in AAA, this team has no offensive depth. We are an injury or two away (and, I might add, a pretty likely injury or two) from being pretty terrible. Kearns would be a huge help right now.

Kearns would be a huge help if we could afford to have him sitting on the bench. But Kearns himself would not live for that.

Kearns is here and all you are going to have is someone asking out, probably Austin himself if we keep the same OF we have now. Then he'd get traded for a reliever nobody likes or a kid that won't help the team for awhile (2-3 years).

Kearns, Freel nor Griff is going to deal with a platoon. If Deno was the fifth option or at the least in AAA where he was just a phone call away we'd have a pretty solid OF. Hamilton is looking pretty good as the a 4th OF as of TODAY.

dsmith421
04-03-2007, 07:51 PM
The problem with that is that if Kearns was still on the Reds either Dunn would have to play 1st (not the worst option IMO) or Kearns would have to sit on the bench as he can't play CF.

Kearns is an athletic guy, I see no reason why he couldn't become moderately proficient at first base--at least to Hatteberg levels--in an offseason.

Same goes for Lopez, incidentally.

pedro
04-03-2007, 07:55 PM
Kearns is an athletic guy, I see no reason why he couldn't become moderately proficient at first base--at least to Hatteberg levels--in an offseason.

Same goes for Lopez, incidentally.

Kearns at 1st would certainly have been an option.

Lopez doesn't hit enough to play first IMO (but neither does Hatteberg really)

jojo
04-03-2007, 07:59 PM
We've been without kearns for quite awhile now. The talk of missing him has subsided, and for good reason. Does anybody still miss him? I really don't. Hamilton has come and captured our hearts. Let's look at the outfield a season after the dreaded trade.

1. Griffey moving to right- Impossible without Kearns being dealt

2. Adam Dunn's new offensive and defensive approach - It was well documented that some people felt that Kearns and Dunn were lazy together, if it was true, then maybe this is a benefit of the seperation.

3. Josh Hamilton - Quite simply, do we make the deal for Josh with Kearns still around? If we do, then could we have offered him enough playing time to make it worth while?

Let me say, this isn't a thread to discuss "the deal", rather the absence of Kearns and what it means to the Reds. Is it true that Hamilton made most of us forget about kearns. Is power and offense still our weakness or is this the most well balanced team we have seen in years? I figured I'd get my one required optimistic post of the new season out of the way.


Just one word:

premature

TC81190
04-03-2007, 08:47 PM
Kearns at 1B would've been good. Hadn't that been discussed before, too?

Lopez, he's a MIF through and through. It's the only position he hits well enough to play, except maybe CF (and well, catcher, but you know.) 1B would be interesting, at the very least, though.

TC81190
04-03-2007, 08:49 PM
Just one word:

premature

I understand Hamilton has a lot left to prove (and please take no offense), but the bashing on the kid is becoming a bit old.

jojo
04-03-2007, 08:57 PM
I understand Hamilton has a lot left to prove (and please take no offense), but the bashing on the kid is becoming a bit old.

How did I bash Hamilton?

TC81190
04-03-2007, 09:05 PM
How did I bash Hamilton?

Bashing maybe a bit harsh word to use, but the criticism is certainly a tad heavy.

jojo
04-03-2007, 09:20 PM
Bashing maybe a bit harsh word to use, but the criticism is certainly a tad heavy.

Where was the criticism of Hamilton specifically?

It would seem that it's some of Joshes' supporters that are over the top....

The original post begged the question on so many levels before Hamilton's name was ever mentioned....

TC81190
04-03-2007, 09:27 PM
I think the "premature" comes to mind, to be exact.

remdog
04-03-2007, 09:27 PM
I don't want to sidetrack the thread so I want to say I agree with the original poster, no matter what you think of the trade it has allowed the Reds to do some things that aren't possible if Kearns is still here.

I'll look at that as the trade forced the Reds to do some things that they didn't have to do had Kearnes still been here.

Kearnes plays CF well enough to have flip-floped him with Jr. Or, as pointed out by others, you could look at moving him to first base----he's a good enough athlete that he could have handled it. Now there is no need for Conine. Maybe you still take a flyer on Hamilton, maybe not. (shrug)

Bottom line: there was no indication over the second half of the year in '06 that moving Kearnes was of benefit to the Reds and, after all of one game in '07, I'd say things remain the same. I would agree with a prognosis of premature.

(BTW MaineRed, I'm not taking issue with you particuallarly, I'm just useing your statement as a jumping off point.)

Rem

jojo
04-03-2007, 09:57 PM
I think the "premature" comes to mind, to be exact.

It's not premature to beg the question that Griffey in the outfield is more valubale than Kearns in the outfield?

It's not premature to beg the question that Dunn is a new man BOTH offensively and defensively?

It's not premature to beg the question that Hamilton is more valuable to the team than Kearns?

But somehow my post was about bashing Hamilton....

dsmith421
04-03-2007, 10:04 PM
I understand Hamilton has a lot left to prove (and please take no offense), but the bashing on the kid is becoming a bit old.

Who on the entire planet Earth, with the notable exception of Steve Phillips, is bashing Josh Hamilton? And how can it be becoming a "bit old"?

acredsfan
04-03-2007, 11:02 PM
Just one word:

prematureReally? It's premature to say that Hamilton has captured our hearts, Griffey's move to right is good because it gives us a leadoff hitter, and Dunn has a new attitude? Oh yeah, and that the pain of losing Kearns is diminishing? I don't think so. I didn't say these moves make us a world series team, just more balanced. It gives Freel more consistency when he just plays one position and focuses on it. I also said that maybe we wouldn't have made the deal for Hamilton if we had Kearns. I don't see anything premature, I just don't miss Kearns. Not that I don't enjoy your theories, but come on, don't try to sum it all into one word, this is a message board, not an IM chat. /End House Voice.

Cedric
04-03-2007, 11:03 PM
I'm glad I don't have to watch Austin Kearns play for the Reds ever again (hopefully).

He wasn't fun to watch and I don't think he cared enough about the game of baseball or the team. I wish him luck in Washington, but glad he's gone.

Great players like Adam Dunn handle criticism like men and they vow to get better because of it. Even if the criticism is somewhat dumb at times. Austin Kearns never seemed able to handle the pressure of it. IMO.

jojo
04-03-2007, 11:17 PM
Really? It's premature to say that Hamilton has captured our hearts, Griffey's move to right is good because it gives us a leadoff hitter, and Dunn has a new attitude?

Maybe Josh has captured alot of hearts. That's not what you said and even so, how does that make the Reds better? Freel could lead off regardless of where Griffey played. Dunn has a new attitude every year. So really, yes it is.


Oh yeah, and that the pain of losing Kearns is diminishing? I don't think so. I didn't say these moves make us a world series team, just more balanced. It gives Freel more consistency when he just plays one position and focuses on it. I also said that maybe we wouldn't have made the deal for Hamilton if we had Kearns. I don't see anything premature, I just don't miss Kearns. Not that I don't enjoy your theories, but come on, don't try to sum it all into one word, this is a message board, not an IM chat.

I've got a pounding headache so maybe my comments aren't being filtered like they should be but premature seems like an accurate word when premises assume things that have yet to come to pass...

TeamBoone
04-04-2007, 12:47 AM
I miss Austin. He was my second favorite.

Johnny Footstool
04-04-2007, 01:00 AM
Really? It's premature to say that Hamilton has captured our hearts, Griffey's move to right is good because it gives us a leadoff hitter, and Dunn has a new attitude? Oh yeah, and that the pain of losing Kearns is diminishing? I don't think so. I didn't say these moves make us a world series team, just more balanced. It gives Freel more consistency when he just plays one position and focuses on it. I also said that maybe we wouldn't have made the deal for Hamilton if we had Kearns. I don't see anything premature, I just don't miss Kearns. Not that I don't enjoy your theories, but come on, don't try to sum it all into one word, this is a message board, not an IM chat. /End House Voice.

Actually, I think Jojo's response was accurate and succinct. Sure, he could have written a 500 word essay, but why waste the time when one word says it all.

acredsfan
04-04-2007, 01:29 AM
Maybe Josh has captured alot of hearts. That's not what you said and even so, how does that make the Reds better? Freel could lead off regardless of where Griffey played. Dunn has a new attitude every year. So really, yes it is.



I've got a pounding headache so maybe my comments aren't being filtered like they should be but premature seems like an accurate word when premises assume things that have yet to come to pass...jojo, I wasn't trying to take personal shots at you or anything, I was just having a little fun, but anyway, I don't quite follow your first statement where that's not what I said, were you reffering about Josh capturing our hearts or something else? I guess we'll agree to disagree, but the point in my first post was the changes that have been made that possibly have been a direct result of Kearns being traded. I am saying you wouldn't see Griffey in right if he was still here so there is no way to call that premature. Second, I'm not sure if the Hamilton deal WITH THE CUBS still happens if Kearns is still occupying a spot on the roster. Hamilton is here because there wasn't a rock solid 4th outfielder on the roster and he would have a good chance of taking that spot. So that in my mind is not "premature". It is in the past and it may be circumstantial, but by saying premature you infer we will not find out until time passes, Griffey is already in right and Hamilton is already on the team. Adam Dunn's new approach is possibly a wait and see situation, but I'm just going on what he and the coaches have said.

Shaggy Sanchez
04-04-2007, 02:05 AM
I miss Kearns because I liked him and because I think this team could use him. The Reds have a CFer (Freel) that has to this point not really proven that he can play all year without struggling or getting hurt. Griffey has not proven that he can stay healthy all season and a move to RF isn't going to gaurantee his health by any means. Dunn is going to do what he always does get on base, hit HRs, strike out, and have some adventurous days in the filed. Then there is Josh Hamilton, a guy who has captured hearts but not really done anything else as far as major league baseball is concerned. I know it is a great story and I am glad that the kid has gotten his life back on track but how does that really help the Reds at all. I don't want to be the jerk here but I find it funny at times that everyone acts like he is going to be the savior of this team. At this point I think it will be a great accomplishment if he can make it through the season with respectable numbers and not let the pressure that people are putting on him oush him back down the wrong path. We then have the bench consists of Deno who is now out for the season, Hopper, Conine, and Crosby.

So I guess yeah, you could say I miss Kearns because as it looks right now we have a very thin OF. I would also rather have Kearns at 1st and Hatte on the bench with Griffey in right as opposed to Hatte at 1st and Conine on the bench.

Ron Madden
04-04-2007, 07:25 AM
Just my humble opinion, Like many others here I believe it was a bad trade. A trade made in desperation.

Nobody is saying that Kearns or Lopez should not have been traded. The problem is what we recieved in return. Two Middle Relievers and a washed up SS. Some other teams later aquired better middle relievers at a much lower price than Wayne paid.

I believe Kearns and Lopez could've been valuable trading chips during the off season but now we will never know.

The defenders of "The Trade" bring the subject up more often than those of us who disagreed with the deal.

It's over and done with now. Let's move on.

mth123
04-04-2007, 07:37 AM
Just my humble opinion, Like many others here I believe it was a bad trade. A trade made in desperation.

Nobody is saying that Kearns or Lopez should not have been traded. The problem is what we recieved in return. Two Middle Relievers and a washed up SS. Some other teams later aquired better middle relievers at a much lower price than Wayne paid.

I believe Kearns and Lopez could've been valuable trading chips during the off season but now we will never know.

The defenders of "The Trade" bring the subject up more often than those of us who disagreed with the deal.

It's over and done with now. Let's move on.

It was a bad trade, but I really think that Krivsky was trying to solve all his problems with 1 deal. Open up RF for Griffey and a spot for Deno, improve defense up the middle, add young pitching to the organization, etc.

As much as I hate the trade, the Reds really had little else to deal besides Kearns and Lopez. I think WK knew that if he was going to trade these guys he needed to get youth for the pitching staff. While lots of pitchers were moved, Bray was the main guy with a lot of future value. Imagine the uproar if Kearns had been traded for a journeyman who offered no value beyond 2006. I think he settled for a lesser pitcher for 2006 in order to get a return for future seasons as well. In the process he undermined his attempts to improve the 06 team. I really believe that this trade was so ambitious that talent was sacrificed to acheive these other goals. I hope a lesson was learned.

Ron Madden
04-04-2007, 07:46 AM
It was a bad trade, but I really think that Krivsky was trying to solve all his problems with 1 deal. Open up RF for Griffey and a spot for Deno, improve defense up the middle, add young pitching to the organization, etc.

As much as I hate the trade, the Reds really had little else to deal besides Kearns and Lopez. I think WK knew that if he was going to trade these guys he needed to get youth for the pitching staff. While lots of pitchers were moved, Bray was the main guy with a lot of future value. Imagine the uproar if Kearns had been traded for a journeyman who offered no value beyond 2006. I think he settled for a lesser pitcher for 2006 in order to get a return for future seasons as well. In the process he undermined his attempts to improve the 06 team. I really believe that this trade was so ambitious that talent was sacrificed to acheive these other goals. I hope a lesson was learned.

You could very well be right.

MaineRed
04-04-2007, 08:52 AM
I'm not arguing it was a good trade but I don't believe it is nearly as bad as people make it out to be. Most of the folks who disagreed with the trade say they aren't upset that Austin and Felo were traded but the return is the problem. Well who should we have gotten instead? Who did WK miss out on and who are these "better" relievers who were acquired for less? I'm not arguing that they aren't out there, just asking who they are. We ended up with two pitchers. How much better should the two guys we got be? What should their resume and scouting report say that it doesn't?


I miss Kearns because I liked him and because I think this team could use him.

You mentioned Kearns in an outfield rotation with 3 other guys who expect to play and you also mentioned Kearns as the teams first basemen. Which is it? You don't start at 1B and then also fill the role of the 4th OF. It doesn't work that way. You want to make Austin the first basemen then you can't use the OF depth argument and Griffey and Freel's arguements. This isn't MVP baseball on the playstation where you install Austin as your first baseman and then just move him back to the OF when Griffey goes down. If the Reds were going to move Austin to first they would have to commit to it.

I think first base is just fine. We have a solid guy there now as a stopgap and one of the best prospects in the organization at the position and he'll hopefully be ready next year. Austin at first makes no sense. Sorry.

When it comes to platooning in the outfield we all know Kearns had a chip on his shoulder. He wasn't going to sit around and wait for an injury before being a full time starter. Austin in an OF platoon wouldn't work.

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 09:20 AM
We've been without kearns for quite awhile now. The talk of missing him has subsided, and for good reason. Does anybody still miss him? I really don't. Hamilton has come and captured our hearts. Let's look at the outfield a season after the dreaded trade.

1. Griffey moving to right- Impossible without Kearns being dealt .

Sure, it's possible. Move Dunn to 1b. In any event, it's crazy to deal a player for below value to simply open a slot up. That's like saying it would be a good idea to give Freel away for nothing to open up a slot for Hamilton




2. Adam Dunn's new offensive and defensive approach - It was well documented that some people felt that Kearns and Dunn were lazy together, if it was true, then maybe this is a benefit of the seperation.
.

If this is true.. And I doubt it.. It seems like a character flaw in Dunn.
Dunn is good friends with Jr too.. Is Jr making him lazy? If EdE or Harang becomes friends with Dunn, will we have to dump them too to prevent Dunn from getting lazy?






3. Josh Hamilton - Quite simply, do we make the deal for Josh with Kearns still around? If we do, then could we have offered him enough playing time to make it worth while?.

Sure, we could still make that deal. Why not? Hamilton plays all the OF positions. We need depth. He's not going to get that much playing time this year, unless the Reds are forced to do so by injuries.




Let me say, this isn't a thread to discuss "the deal", rather the absence of Kearns and what it means to the Reds.

I think we will be disappointed in the offense this year. Kearns and Lopez's bats will definitely be missed. Wayne never attempted to replace their offense. It's a big stretch to think Freel/Deno/Hamilton will replace Kearn's bat. Freel maybe, but after watching him vanish last September, I have my doubts.

Shaggy Sanchez
04-04-2007, 09:21 AM
I guess I didn't make myself clear, I think that he would be best served on this team as an OFer. I said that he could have been moved to 1st as a response to people that have justified him not being here by saying there was no room for him here. I never mentioned moving him back and forth whenever Narron wanted to. Austin would make sense at 1st however in the fact that he would give us better offense than Hatte until Votto does come up and at that point Griffey will be just about done and Kearns could go back to RF. I'm not trying to act like this is a video game but players do move around and it can be done.

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 09:24 AM
Kearns at 1B would've been good. Hadn't that been discussed before, too?
.

I guess, but it seems silly to have Kearns at 1b and Dunn in LF.

Jr caught all kinds of grief because people suspected he was resisting a move to RF, yet Dunn gets a free pass when there's pretty strong proof that he resisted a move to 1b? And BTW, despite having a "bad attitude", Kearns apparently did his best to attempt to learn 3b over a winter. He couldn't do it, but he tried to do what the team asked him to. Kearns also played CF for the good of the team when asked.

But yes, I'd prefer to have Kearns at 1b over no Kearns at all.

remdog
04-04-2007, 09:27 AM
Jr caught all kinds of grief because people suspected he was resisting a move to RF, yet Dunn gets a free pass when there's pretty strong proof that he resisted a move to 1b? And BTW, despite having a "bad attitude", Kearns apparently did his best to attempt to learn 3b over a winter. He couldn't do it, but he tried to do what the team asked him to. Kearns also played CF for the good of the team when asked.

Some very good points there, RR.

Rem

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 09:36 AM
Who did WK miss out on and who are these "better" relievers who were acquired for less?

Wickman
Stanton (23.1 IP, 23 hit, 3.09 ERA after picked up by Giants)
Many others too, but Wickman and Stanton were basically acquired for nothing (low level prospects).

Heck, basically every reliever acquired in the the 2006 season pitched better than Maj. The inital trade was Kearns for Maj.

Maj gave up 30 hits in 15 innings, with an 8.40 ERA. I really doubt any other pitching acquision did much worse.

Bray was overall mediocre, and finished poorly after a decent start.

MaineRed
04-04-2007, 10:50 AM
You weren't going to get Bray and Majewski for low level prospects and the fact that they didn't pitch well after getting here doesn't change that. Bray and Majewski was a move for the future as much as it was a move for last year. Is Stanton still with the Giants? Bray and Maj are still here and that counts for something.

I understand you answered the question I asked but you aren't taking circumstances into account. You are saying Stanton was better than Bray and Maj which is true but you out of all people would be even MORE upset if we had traded Kearns for Stanton.

And for all the talk about how Bray and Maj did upon arrival I haven't exactly been hearing rousing cheers out of DC over Kearns and Felipe. This trade involved four young players in their 20s who all have some decent potential but none of them have really put it all together. We ended up with two who were pitchers. I'll take my chances with them.

redsfanmia
04-04-2007, 11:01 AM
The move also allowed the Reds to say some payroll, what do Kearns and Lopez make now? What do Maj and Bray make? I think if we had not traded Lopez he would have been dealt or non-tendered in the offseason.

harangatang
04-04-2007, 11:29 AM
The best thing might just be Dunn. PERHAPS he saw his buddy get traded, had time to reflect and it woke him up.Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Dunn have a horrible second half last year? He did tear it up in Spring Traning and turned on a couple Carlos Zambrano fastballs on Opening Day, but that's a pretty small sample size. I'll reserve my judgment until after this season to make any sort of conclusion such as that.

acredsfan
04-04-2007, 11:41 AM
Sure, it's possible. Move Dunn to 1b. In any event, it's crazy to deal a player for below value to simply open a slot up. That's like saying it would be a good idea to give Freel away for nothing to open up a slot for HamiltonSure we could move Dunn to first, but when we did that before, he didn't play that well. I guess maybe Kearns could have played first, but we also tried him at 3rd. If we tried him at first, what will happen when Votto comes up?


If this is true.. And I doubt it.. It seems like a character flaw in Dunn.
Dunn is good friends with Jr too.. Is Jr making him lazy? If EdE or Harang becomes friends with Dunn, will we have to dump them too to prevent Dunn from getting lazy?It may or may not be true, but ask Hamilton how much "friends" can influence your life. Would he have made his recovery if he hadn't gotten rid of his friends from his past life?


Sure, we could still make that deal. Why not? Hamilton plays all the OF positions. We need depth. He's not going to get that much playing time this year, unless the Reds are forced to do so by injuries. Then we would be fighting to get playing time for Freel and Hamilton. The way it stands now, Hamilton is first in line if an injury occurs or one of the three OFs need a day off.


I think we will be disappointed in the offense this year. Kearns and Lopez's bats will definitely be missed. Wayne never attempted to replace their offense. It's a big stretch to think Freel/Deno/Hamilton will replace Kearn's bat. Freel maybe, but after watching him vanish last September, I have my doubts.Like what has been said a million times, you can't win 9-7 every night. Yes, we gave up offense, but we also have a much more solid defense. Not as a result of "the trade", but give me Gonzo and Phillips up the middle any day. Both are better defensive players than Lopez. Moving Griffey to right also improves the defense by putting a guy with good range in center whether it be Freel or Hamilton. In the long run we have plenty of power developing that I would much rather take a chance on in Votto and Bruce. You have to include Hamilton in that too, if he can continue to develop and learn, he will be good too.

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 11:48 AM
You weren't going to get Bray and Majewski for low level prospects and the fact that they didn't pitch well after getting here doesn't change that.

Ok.. if Bowden is asking for the moon for Bray and Maj, then you don't pull the trigger. You walk away. Bray and Maj weren't the only relievers available.
The proof is that Wayne himself got other relievers for less which were more effective. Other teams did too. The Reds didn't HAVE to get Bray and Maj.
There were other options.




Bray and Majewski was a move for the future as much as it was a move for last year. Is Stanton still with the Giants? Bray and Maj are still here and that counts for something.

No, it doesn't count for anything. Bray and Maj are still here, but if we traded a low level prospect for Stanton instead of Maj, then Kearns and Lopez would've been available to use or trade for something better.





I understand you answered the question I asked but you aren't taking circumstances into account. You are saying Stanton was better than Bray and Maj which is true but you out of all people would be even MORE upset if we had traded Kearns for Stanton.

I have a big problem with the contract Wayne gave Stanton last winter.
I'd have less of a problem renting Stanton for the second half of last year.
You can go back and look at my reaction to the Cormier trade. I said I probably wouldn't have made it, but the cost was low, so I didn't have a huge problem with it, even though I thought Cormier was going to provide negligible help. I would've probably had a similiar reaction to Stanton.

I wanted to trade for Wickman, but not resign him for a multiyear deal. Trading for Wickman and then extending him for 1 year ( or maybe even 2 years ) might be ok since we are so thin in relief pitching.





And for all the talk about how Bray and Maj did upon arrival I haven't exactly been hearing rousing cheers out of DC over Kearns and Felipe. This trade involved four young players in their 20s who all have some decent potential but none of them have really put it all together. We ended up with two who were pitchers. I'll take my chances with them.

That's true that Kearns and Felipe didn't exactly set the world on fire. Time will tell, but I think it's pretty safe to assume Wash will get the better result of this trade over the longterm.

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 11:52 AM
The move also allowed the Reds to say some payroll, what do Kearns and Lopez make now? What do Maj and Bray make? I think if we had not traded Lopez he would have been dealt or non-tendered in the offseason.


Payroll was not a problem this winter. The Reds likely blew the "Savings" on extending Cormier and getting Conine. That's about 4 million. Not to mention, they had to spend a lot on Gonzo to fill a hole.

Even if you like Gonzo better, there's no financial argument. The trade cost us money because of the replacement cost. Also, Wayne had plenty of money to make moves so giving up Kearns and Lopez for below value to save cash made no sense.

BTW, salary dumps for less than market talent seldom work out for the salary dumper, especially in this era.

klw
04-04-2007, 11:52 AM
Now that we have a game thread forum, a minor league forum, etc can we set up a "The Trade" forum?

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 11:57 AM
Sure we could move Dunn to first, but when we did that before, he didn't play that well. I guess maybe Kearns could have played first, but we also tried him at 3rd. If we tried him at first, what will happen when Votto comes up?

I love Dunn, but it's not as if he plays LF well either. Why move your best OF arm (Kearns) to 1b just to make Dunn "happy". That's worse than keeping Jr in CF to make him happy.






It may or may not be true, but ask Hamilton how much "friends" can influence your life. Would he have made his recovery if he hadn't gotten rid of his friends from his past life?

Dunn isn't a drug addict. He is who he is. Every spring there's a story about Dunn's new attitude, how the new batting coach and get along great, etc.
My guess is that Dunn hasn't changed much at all. He probably understands that the Kearns trade was a business decision. I doubt it's changed him positively in terms of attitude, performance on the field, defense, etc.

Just like removing the chairs by Miley didn't change Dunn either, when it was supposed to.





Then we would be fighting to get playing time for Freel and Hamilton. The way it stands now, Hamilton is first in line if an injury occurs or one of the three OFs need a day off.

I don't think the Reds want Hamilton to get a lot of playing time this year.
They are going to be working with him off the field a lot, much like they did with Wily Mo's first year in the majors. They know he's going to be overmatched by ML pitching.

MaineRed
04-04-2007, 12:57 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Dunn have a horrible second half last year? He did tear it up in Spring Traning and turned on a couple Carlos Zambrano fastballs on Opening Day, but that's a pretty small sample size. I'll reserve my judgment until after this season to make any sort of conclusion such as that.

The theory I brought up in the very post you quoted was that PERHAPS Dunn's slide was a result of Austin being traded last year but was also the very thing that awoke Adam this winter. Here is what I said:


maybe it was losing AK that killed him last year but yet will be the very thing that awakens him for the long term.

I simply believe the possibility is there that Dunn fell apart partly due to seeing AK shipped out last season but then after having time to get over it he decided to use it as motivation for his own career. As far as the small sample size, I agree, but nobody is asking anyone to come to any sort of conclusion about it.

I'm not coming to any conclusions myself. The two giant PERHAPS I posted in the thread you quoted were supposed to make that obvious.

MaineRed
04-04-2007, 01:27 PM
Ok.. if Bowden is asking for the moon for Bray and Maj, then you don't pull the trigger. You walk away.

The moon? Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez are the moon?

I live in Red Sox country. I'll be generous and guess that 5-10 % of hardcore Red Sox fans would know who the two of these guys are. These guys are average players that the casual fan doesn't even know.

Sorry, doesn't equate the moon. The moon is Adam Dunn and Homer Bailey. Or Aaron Harang. Not Austin Kearns. Not Felipe Lopez. Kearns and Lopez aren't going to fetch you a stud pitcher. Not going to happen. It is safe to assume that.

gonelong
04-04-2007, 01:48 PM
I guess, but it seems silly to have Kearns at 1b and Dunn in LF.

Agreed.


Jr caught all kinds of grief because people suspected he was resisting a move to RF, yet Dunn gets a free pass when there's pretty strong proof that he resisted a move to 1b?

Because the situations are completely different?

Dunn basically made that a bargaining chip in his negotiations from what I could tell. If you want me to be a 1B then I'll sign elsewhere. I can't really argue against a player using his leverage to make a few special requests as I have done it myself from time to time.

He let his preference be known to the team BEFORE he was signed and they had the option to pass if they didn't want to sign him under those conditions.

On top of all that, its not as if Dunn refused to play 1B, he logged a number of games there in years past.

Kudos to Griffey to moving to RF.

GL

kaldaniels
04-04-2007, 01:49 PM
Now that we have a game thread forum, a minor league forum, etc can we set up a "The Trade" forum?

:laugh:

Johnny Footstool
04-04-2007, 01:52 PM
The moon? Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez are the moon?

I live in Red Sox country. I'll be generous and guess that 5-10 % of hardcore Red Sox fans would know who the two of these guys are. These guys are average players that the casual fan doesn't even know.

Sorry, doesn't equate the moon. The moon is Adam Dunn and Homer Bailey. Or Aaron Harang. Not Austin Kearns. Not Felipe Lopez. Kearns and Lopez aren't going to fetch you a stud pitcher. Not going to happen. It is safe to assume that.

When the main return is two middle relievers, yes, Kearns and Lopez are "the moon."

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 03:52 PM
The moon? Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez are the moon? .

That was in response to you saying this..



You weren't going to get Bray and Majewski for low level prospects and the fact that they didn't pitch well after getting here doesn't change that.

I was under the impression you were saying, "It was impossible to get Bray and Maj without paying a high price", thus justifying what we traded. My counterpoint was that if the price was that high, the Reds should've just hung up the phone and called elsewhere. If that was not your point, I apologize for misreading. "the Moon" meant a high price..



I live in Red Sox country. I'll be generous and guess that 5-10 % of hardcore Red Sox fans would know who the two of these guys are. These guys are average players that the casual fan doesn't even know..

I don't see how that is relevant. How many people on this board knew who Bray and Maj were before the trade? Not many, I imagine. How many Red Sox fans know who Bray and Maj are now? Probably fewer than Kearns and Lopez. Remember, Lopez made the all star team 2 years ago, so he probably has better name recognition than the Washington guys.. Although I really don't care how many people know a player's name. I just care about how they perform; Bray has been mediocre and Maj has been dismal.

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 04:07 PM
Agreed.



Because the situations are completely different?

Dunn basically made that a bargaining chip in his negotiations from what I could tell. If you want me to be a 1B then I'll sign elsewhere. I can't really argue against a player using his leverage to make a few special requests as I have done it myself from time to time.

He let his preference be known to the team BEFORE he was signed and they had the option to pass if they didn't want to sign him under those conditions.

On top of all that, its not as if Dunn refused to play 1B, he logged a number of games there in years past.

Kudos to Griffey to moving to RF.

GL

I'm not saying Dunn is a bad guy. I don't blame him for using whatever leverage he has to dictate his working conditions. Just like I don't blame Arod for insisting on all the perks he got in his deal.

I'm just saying that the mere suspicion of Jr resisting a move to RF for the good of the team had people pouncing on him. Just like people for years claimed that Lark resisted playing in the leadoff slot, despite actually appearing there.

I just think that certain players are criticized for every little thing here, while others commit the same "things" and get a free pass.

Another example was 2 years ago. A lot of people twisted every quote Aurillia made into him being a bad apple, just because they didn't want him to sign here due to Lopez.

I guess my point is there's a lot of double standards on here. The point isn't that Dunn is a troublemaker (and Jr wasn't either).

acredsfan
04-04-2007, 04:37 PM
I love Dunn, but it's not as if he plays LF well either. Why move your best OF arm (Kearns) to 1b just to make Dunn "happy". That's worse than keeping Jr in CF to make him happy.I have to start out by saying, man, you are busy keeping up by replying to everybody. I'm impressed. Anyway, what is your answer then, give up some defense and move Dunn to 1st? Seems pointless to me when we have Votto poised to make it up here shortly.


Dunn isn't a drug addict. He is who he is. Every spring there's a story about Dunn's new attitude, how the new batting coach and get along great, etc.
My guess is that Dunn hasn't changed much at all. He probably understands that the Kearns trade was a business decision. I doubt it's changed him positively in terms of attitude, performance on the field, defense, etc.

Just like removing the chairs by Miley didn't change Dunn either, when it was supposed to.No, he's not a drug addict, but he may be a habit addict. You hang around anybody for very long and you are going to pick up some of their habits. Just ask anybody who is married.

Oh and about the chairs, if people stole my property and sold it I wouldn't want to change my attitude for the better, I would be angry with them and not do what they said.


I don't think the Reds want Hamilton to get a lot of playing time this year.
They are going to be working with him off the field a lot, much like they did with Wily Mo's first year in the majors. They know he's going to be overmatched by ML pitching.If that is the case then why did he start so much in the spring? I don't buy that, they want to get him out there as much as possible. Jerry said he is going to get him a start before the week is over.

MaineRed
04-04-2007, 05:47 PM
REDREAD, unlike you I don't have the every GMs phone bugged so I have no clue whether we could have gotten Maj and Bray for less. Do I THINK Bowden gives them to us for Denorfia and Gookie Dawkins? No, I don't. Do I believe WK should have walked away if Bowden was insisting AK and FL? I honestly don't know. That is up to Wayne and his staff and what they believed they were getting and giving up. They know a lot more about Kearns and Lopez than we do and they know a lot more about guys they are looking at. I don't know how WK viewed any of these guys, if he was targeting or got targeted. But I don't believe he got fleeced. I just don't buy it. Kearns and Lopez simply aren't good enough to be involved in the kind of heist you guys refer to this as. They just aren't. Not to mention there is plenty of time on the final determination on this trade if all you care about is how a guy performs.

But letting results determine the final say on this one would force you to give up the, it was a bad trade matra. And we know you won't be doing that, even if Bray wins the Cy Young.

Johnny Footstool
04-04-2007, 06:10 PM
REDREAD, unlike you I don't have the every GMs phone bugged so I have no clue whether we could have gotten Maj and Bray for less. Do I THINK Bowden gives them to us for Denorfia and Gookie Dawkins? No, I don't. Do I believe WK should have walked away if Bowden was insisting AK and FL? I honestly don't know. That is up to Wayne and his staff and what they believed they were getting and giving up. They know a lot more about Kearns and Lopez than we do and they know a lot more about guys they are looking at. I don't know how WK viewed any of these guys, if he was targeting or got targeted. But I don't believe he got fleeced. I just don't buy it. Kearns and Lopez simply aren't good enough to be involved in the kind of heist you guys refer to this as. They just aren't. Not to mention there is plenty of time on the final determination on this trade if all you care about is how a guy performs.

But letting results determine the final say on this one would force you to give up the, it was a bad trade matra. And we know you won't be doing that, even if Bray wins the Cy Young.

The timing of the trade was a huge factor. The trade was designed to *immediately* improve the Reds bullpen for a playoff run. It failed miserably in that respect.

Being that both pitchers the Reds acquired are young, the trade does have the potential to pay off in the future. However, any future success will not erase the failure of the trade in it's main intended purpose -- to push the Reds into the 2006 playoffs.

pedro
04-04-2007, 06:11 PM
The timing of the trade was a huge factor. The trade was designed to *immediately* improve the Reds bullpen for a playoff run. It failed miserably in that respect.

Being that both pitchers the Reds acquired are young, the trade does have the potential to pay off in the future. However, any future success will not erase the failure of the trade in it's main intended purpose -- to push the Reds into the 2006 playoffs.

That's a fair assessment IMO.

MaineRed
04-04-2007, 06:27 PM
The timing of the trade was a huge factor. The trade was designed to *immediately* improve the Reds bullpen for a playoff run. It failed miserably in that respect.

Being that both pitchers the Reds acquired are young, the trade does have the potential to pay off in the future. However, any future success will not erase the failure of the trade in it's main intended purpose -- to push the Reds into the 2006 playoffs.

Fair enough. But REDREAD said he only cares about the players performance and I don't believe that is true. Like you say, the timing of the trade isn't going to change no matter what Bray or Majewski do and neither is REDREAD's opinion on the matter.

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 07:50 PM
I have to start out by saying, man, you are busy keeping up by replying to everybody. I'm impressed. Anyway, what is your answer then, give up some defense and move Dunn to 1st? Seems pointless to me when we have Votto poised to make it up here shortly.

I wouldn't make decisions on the ML level based on some prospect that might be ready in a year or two. When Votto is ready, bring him up or trade him.
It's a good problem to have too many ML quality players.




No, he's not a drug addict, but he may be a habit addict. You hang around anybody for very long and you are going to pick up some of their habits. Just ask anybody who is married.


I guess that's my point. If we had to trade Kearns to keep Dunn on the straight and narrow, doesn't that imply that Dunn has a weak character?
Doesn't that imply that we might have to trade other people with "bad habits" down the road to keep Dunn motivated? My own thoughts are that Dunn initially was mad/disappointed with the Kearns trade. Then he got over it. I don't see any evidence that it changed him one iota. He's always been a hardworker. Look up the old articles about how hard he worked with Chambliss (when Kearns was around). They are almost a direct carbon copy of the articles this spring about him working with Jacoby. I don't think Dunn is lazy. I don't think he needed "a kick in the pants".




Oh and about the chairs, if people stole my property and sold it I wouldn't want to change my attitude for the better, I would be angry with them and not do what they said.


I agree, but perhaps Dunn forgived the organization after Miley was canned.




If that is the case then why did he start so much in the spring? I don't buy that, they want to get him out there as much as possible. Jerry said he is going to get him a start before the week is over.

Hamilton got a ton of PT in the spring, because it was spring training and the games didn't matter. The Reds had to make an important decision about Josh, so it was a good idea to get him as much playing time as possible in the spring. Sure, Josh might get a few spot starts, but when he struggles, I expect them to become less frequent. Let's not forget how difficult it is to jump from A ball to the majors, especially when you've been out of the game. Even the best athletes are going to struggle, especially once a scouting report is out on Josh.

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 07:59 PM
REDREAD, unlike you I don't have the every GMs phone bugged so I have no clue whether we could have gotten Maj and Bray for less.


The Reds should've offered much less. If Bowden refused (and he probably would have, you are right), then you simply walk away from the deal and call someone else. It's bad for a GM to become so obsessed with a player that he buys them at any cost. For some reason, Wayne got really enamored with Maj. I have no clue why, but he believed Maj was a premier setup guy, and overpaid.







Do I believe WK should have walked away if Bowden was insisting AK and FL? I honestly don't know. .

So, if you could go back in time and be in control of things, you might tell Wayne to still make the deal? Is that what you're saying? That's amazing if true. Like I said last year, there's a decent chance that Wagner ends up having a better year than Maj this year, not because Wagner is great, but because Maj is so bad. That's appalling.






That is up to Wayne and his staff and what they believed they were getting and giving up. They know a lot more about Kearns and Lopez than we do and they know a lot more about guys they are looking at..

Ok, if you are going to use the appeal that they are smarter than us because they "know more", why even have this message board? Just because Wayne has the title of GM doesn't mean he's perfect. Actually, he has the disadvantage of being under tremendous pressure to make a move. We don't, so we can look at things objectively.






But letting results determine the final say on this one would force you to give up the, it was a bad trade matra. And we know you won't be doing that, even if Bray wins the Cy Young.

I'm always willing to admit that I am wrong. Yes, there is a chance that the Reds might end up with the better end of this trade. Is it probable? No. It's not very likely at all. If Kearns and Lopez fall off the face of the earth and Bray becomes a solid closer (I'm not even asking for a Cy), then the Reds do win the trade. I'll agree with that.

REDREAD
04-04-2007, 08:03 PM
Fair enough. But REDREAD said he only cares about the players performance and I don't believe that is true. Like you say, the timing of the trade isn't going to change no matter what Bray or Majewski do and neither is REDREAD's opinion on the matter.

Actually, at the time of the trade I said that if Bray and Maj help the Reds get into the playoffs (in 2006), it would be a good trade. I would gladly sacrifice Kearns and Lopez for a playoff appearance.

The first 3 weeks (approximately) that Bray was here, he contributed. Then he started stinking up the place. Maybe it was because Narron overused him. I don't know. There's still hope for Bray.

Maj is a lost cause. I'll still root for him, but I doubt he's ever effective again.
Wayne had extremely poor judgement on that one.

vaticanplum
04-04-2007, 09:24 PM
My favorite thing about Kearns as a Red was always his potential trade value.

Thus, he failed to live up to the expectations I had for him as a Red :)

TeamBoone
04-05-2007, 12:56 AM
Oh and about the chairs, if people stole my property and sold it I wouldn't want to change my attitude for the better, I would be angry with them and not do what they said.

Miley also stole his signed Graves jersey (yes, I know, nobody likes Graves, but Adam Dunn did and the jersey was a goodbye gift from his friend), and his wife sold it on ebay.

I don't condone stealing by anybody, I don't care who it is... if my boss stole from me, I'd raise a holy stink. Stealing and then selling the loot is even worse. Not only that, but it's also a felony.

The audacity of that whole fiasco still makes me absolutely livid every time it's brought up or that I think about it.

BTW, Kearns has gotten off to a decent start so far. I follow him because I like/liked him that much.

remdog
04-05-2007, 02:05 AM
Miley also stole his signed Graves jersey (yes, I know, nobody likes Graves, but Adam Dunn did and the jersey was a goodbye gift from his friend), and his wife sold it on ebay.

I don't condone stealing by anybody, I don't care who it is... if my boss stole from me, I'd raise a holy stink. Stealing and then selling the loot is even worse. Not only that, but it's also a felony.

That audacity of that whole fiasco still makes me absolutely livid every time it's brought up or that I think about it.

BTW, Kearns has gotten off to a decent start so far. I follow him because I like/liked him that much.

I never heard anything about this. I'd like to know what went down. Please.

Rem

acredsfan
04-05-2007, 12:51 PM
Miley also stole his signed Graves jersey (yes, I know, nobody likes Graves, but Adam Dunn did and the jersey was a goodbye gift from his friend), and his wife sold it on ebay.

I don't condone stealing by anybody, I don't care who it is... if my boss stole from me, I'd raise a holy stink. Stealing and then selling the loot is even worse. Not only that, but it's also a felony.

The audacity of that whole fiasco still makes me absolutely livid every time it's brought up or that I think about it.

BTW, Kearns has gotten off to a decent start so far. I follow him because I like/liked him that much.Yeah, I forgot about that. I can understand a manager taking away privelidges and things of that nature, but posessions? That is just wrong. If there is one good thing about Narron, he respects his players and their opinions, sometimes to a fault. I like Kearns too, but he just didn't live up to what he could have been. Injuries and possibly pressure got to him. I hope he succeeds, but the Reds just weren't a good fit.

RedEye
04-05-2007, 09:36 PM
This team would be better even if we gave back everyone we got in the trade, took back Kearns and let the Nationals keep Lopez. We could really use Kearns. Outside of Hamilton, who should be in AAA, this team has no offensive depth. We are an injury or two away (and, I might add, a pretty likely injury or two) from being pretty terrible. Kearns would be a huge help right now.

Completely agreed. Plus, Kearns's RH bat would look much better in the 3 hole than Phillips. We REALLY miss him.

To the poster of this thread: you can't really bring up Kearns without bringing up The Trade. It just can't work that way. We're all too bitter and shellshocked from it.

We also miss Lopez's offense. I still think Phillips at SS and Lopez at 2B would balance with what we currently have. The Phillips/Lopez combo is slightly better on offense, the Gonzalez/Phillips combo slightly better on defense. Either way, my guess is we probably break even in win shares.

Finally, I think we make the move for Hamilton whether or not we have Kearns in the fold - it's the kind of low risk/high reward move that Wayne seems to love. I love them too, and it's the type of move that is starting to make me forgive Wayne for The Trade, slowly but surely.

pedro
04-05-2007, 09:45 PM
While Phillips at SS and Lopez at 2b may have worked. It also could have been a disaster. I think it is a big assumption that it be even close to what the Reds have now. Offensively, it certainly would be better though.

RedEye
04-05-2007, 09:49 PM
While Phillips at SS and Lopez at 2b may have worked. It also could have been a disaster. I think it is a big assumption that it be even close to what the Reds have now. Offensively, it certainly would be better though.

That's all I was saying in my last post. To summarize:

Phillips SS + Lopez 2B = solid offense, questionable defense
Seabass SS + Phillips 2B = questionable offense, solid defense

I do like D in general, but I guess my thinking now has changed because I wonder whether or not this team needs that as badly as it needs more O. Over the first three games, they've looked very similar to the post-July team of last year - not much firepower. Somehow, I think Phillips scoops up most of the balls Seabass does, tho perhaps doesn't make all the throws. Still, we'd have Castro and Janish (?) for late-inning replacements at a lot cheaper price. I'm starting to think we should have kept FeLo and put him at 2B and then used the Seabass money to sign Tomo Ohka.

GoReds
04-05-2007, 11:17 PM
I agree the Reds miss having a solid RH bat in the lineup, but I don't think Kearns was or ever would have been that with the Reds.

pahster
04-05-2007, 11:36 PM
I agree the Reds miss having a solid RH bat in the lineup, but I don't think Kearns was or ever would have been that with the Reds.

I'd argue that a career OPS of .824 says otherwise. He certainly wasn't godlike, but he was productive.

jojo
04-06-2007, 07:21 AM
That's all I was saying in my last post. To summarize:

Phillips SS + Lopez 2B = solid offense, questionable defense
Seabass SS + Phillips 2B = questionable offense, solid defense

I do like D in general, but I guess my thinking now has changed because I wonder whether or not this team needs that as badly as it needs more O. Over the first three games, they've looked very similar to the post-July team of last year - not much firepower. Somehow, I think Phillips scoops up most of the balls Seabass does, tho perhaps doesn't make all the throws. Still, we'd have Castro and Janish (?) for late-inning replacements at a lot cheaper price. I'm starting to think we should have kept FeLo and put him at 2B and then used the Seabass money to sign Tomo Ohka.

A while back, this issue was addressed by comparing the impact of each pair here (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1235537&postcount=74) and here (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1228810&postcount=16). It's basically a wash. Given Lopez's final two arb years are going to cost the Nats about $10M total (Lopez got $4M this year and its reasonable to assume a raise next season), keeping Lopez probably wouldn't have saved that much money...

GoReds
04-06-2007, 08:27 AM
I'd argue that a career OPS of .824 says otherwise. He certainly wasn't godlike, but he was productive.

His career OPS may have been 824, but other than his first year with the Reds, he didn't post a full-season OPS over 800.

The Kearns-love is understandable, considering he was homegrown, but he was certainly over-valued in Cincy. I don't think he stood a chance to reach his potential with the Reds. Maybe not the Nats, either, but I'd say the odds are better.

pahster
04-06-2007, 09:51 AM
His career OPS may have been 824, but other than his first year with the Reds, he didn't post a full-season OPS over 800.

The Kearns-love is understandable, considering he was homegrown, but he was certainly over-valued in Cincy. I don't think he stood a chance to reach his potential with the Reds. Maybe not the Nats, either, but I'd say the odds are better.

He did last year. In 2005 he was pretty close at .785. Thats not great for a COF,but its not terrible either. 2004 was bad. His OPS that year was .740 (was that the year he had the hole in his hand all year?). 2003 wasn't a full season, but he OPS'd .819.His rookie year was .907.

Like I said, he's not godlike. But he certainly has value.

REDREAD
04-06-2007, 10:32 AM
I never heard anything about this. I'd like to know what went down. Please.

Rem

I don't remember all the details, but after Graves was let go, he gave a Jersey to Dunn. I believe Dunn had it hanging in the locker room. Miley decided it was a distraction (or whatever) and stole it. Mrs Miley sold it on ebay for her charity without Dunn's permission.