PDA

View Full Version : Reds should trade in sluggers for small ball



BoydsOfSummer
09-24-2007, 01:13 AM
http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/content/oh/story/sports/pro/reds/2007/09/23/ddn092407audible.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=35



Reds should trade in sluggers for small ball


http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/cnishared/newsworthy/images/click-to-listen.gifClick-2-Listen (http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/content/oh/story/sports/pro/reds/2007/09/23/ddn092407audible.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=35#)
By John Erickson (jerickson@DaytonDailyNews.com)
Staff Writer

Monday, September 24, 2007
The Reds hot stove league will be buzzing over the next couple of months about trading either Ken Griffey Jr. or Adam Dunn. Here's my solution: trade both.
It's not that these guys aren't prolific. This year alone, they've combined for more than 70 home runs and 195 RBIs. But in the seven years they've been playing together, they've not produced a single winning season. In fact, during those seven years, the team lost 100 games more than it won.


So what are the Reds preserving? Trade these guys while they still have value. You might get a hot pitching prospect or two, as well as a speedy outfielder. Trading Griffey and Dunn would create a huge hole in the lineup, but it would also usher in a style of small ball that might lead to more wins. Want proof? In 2001, the Oakland As won 102 games with MVP Jason Giambi at first base. The next year, after the Yankees bought him, they won 103.
The best organizations are the ones that adapt and change. Look at the Atlanta Braves. They won the first of 14 consecutive division titles in 1991. When the streak ended in 2006, just one player remained from the beginning of the streak: John Smoltz. They turned over their entire roster and kept winning.
Trade Griffey and Dunn. You never know, you might just find the next John Smoltz.
Contact this reporter at (937) 225-2266 or jerickson@DaytonDailyNews.com.

Patrick Bateman
09-24-2007, 01:32 AM
Trading Griffey and Dunn would create a huge hole in the lineup, but it would also usher in a style of small ball that might lead to more wins. Want proof? In 2001, the Oakland As won 102 games with MVP Jason Giambi at first base. The next year, after the Yankees bought him, they won 103.

This may be the least convincing argument I have ever seen.

WVRedsFan
09-24-2007, 01:38 AM
This may be the least convincing argument I have ever seen.


Yep. Take a team with poor ptiching that isn't likely to get better for 2 or 3 years and take out 70 HR's and 200 RBI's. Yep, that's the ticket. We'll win for sure.

Look at today's ineup in SFran. See how much a Griffey or a Dunn was needed, if not to drive in runs and hit homeruns, but to offer better pitches for those who do not.

For the first time in my life, i'm glad Wayne Krivsky is in charge and not some of the fans. Small ball indeed.

Caveat Emperor
09-24-2007, 01:42 AM
This may be the least convincing argument I have ever seen.

Bill Simmons, father of the so-called "Ewing Theory", is probably smiling somewhere.

Patrick Bateman
09-24-2007, 01:44 AM
In regards to that Giambi quote, I really love how the writer puts zero effort in actually suggesting the 'small ball' players that replaced Giambi. Or mention that Oakland is the worst example for 'small ball' in the world. Or that Oakland wasn't actually better by getting rid of Giambi. They instead basically remained at staus quo (which was a great team anyways). It's not like Oakland wen't from bad to good by getting rid of Giambi.

I better stop. My head hurts.

mth123
09-24-2007, 02:37 AM
Possibly the worst baseball article I've ever read.

KronoRed
09-24-2007, 03:09 AM
Hysterical article

camisadelgolf
09-24-2007, 03:13 AM
It's a horribly-written article, but I agree with it. Griffey's age prevents him from being a big piece of the future, so if you can trade him for something of good value (and you probably can't for a variety of reasons), go for it. As for Dunn, he has improved, and that would be a lot of production missing, but he belongs in the American League, and the Reds have the outfield depth to trade him (Josh Hamilton and Jay Bruce, for example). Also, if you trade both of them, that frees up a lot of money, which could be very useful when it comes to keeping around the players who are the future of the franchise.

Oh, yeah, and who knows . . . Maybe you could find the next John Smoltz in a trade.

M2
09-24-2007, 03:20 AM
This may be the least convincing argument I have ever seen.

You know, I want to say there was a book or something written about the A's during the 2001-2 offseason, but it's name escapes me. I wonder if it could shed any light on Erickson's contention?

RedsBaron
09-24-2007, 06:44 AM
You know, I want to say there was a book or something written about the A's during the 2001-2 offseason, but it's name escapes me. I wonder if it could shed any light on Erickson's contention?

I'm pretty sure Joe Morgan gave it a negative book review, and Joe didn't even have to read it or even know who wrote it. ;)

RedsBaron
09-24-2007, 06:45 AM
Possibly the worst baseball article I've ever read.

Agreed. Does somebody actually pay Erickson to write such stuff?

Raisor
09-24-2007, 07:39 AM
This is from The Onion, right?

redsmetz
09-24-2007, 07:49 AM
In regards to that Giambi quote, I really love how the writer puts zero effort in actually suggesting the 'small ball' players that replaced Giambi. Or mention that Oakland is the worst example for 'small ball' in the world. Or that Oakland wasn't actually better by getting rid of Giambi. They instead basically remained at staus quo (which was a great team anyways). It's not like Oakland wen't from bad to good by getting rid of Giambi.

I better stop. My head hurts.

I'm surprised no one noted the irony that the Reds currently have Jason Giambi's replacement on our roster - Scott Hatteberg.

What a dreadful piece. He makes the old warrier Hal McCoy look like a Pullitzer Prize winning writer.

GAC
09-24-2007, 07:58 AM
It's not that these guys aren't prolific. This year alone, they've combined for more than 70 home runs and 195 RBIs. But in the seven years they've been playing together, they've not produced a single winning season. In fact, during those seven years, the team lost 100 games more than it won.

But this writer misses the most important part as to why the Reds, in that timespan, haven't produced a winning season. And it has nothing to do with Jr and/or Dunn, and has everything to do with PITCHING.

So hey! Lets dismantle the good we have (offense)?

He makes it sound like it's their fault, or a burden that must rest solely on the shoulders of Dunn and Jr, as the reason why we haven't produced a winning season.

Simply ridiculous notion.

Raisor
09-24-2007, 08:00 AM
He makes it sound like it's their fault, or a burden that must rest solely on the shoulders of Dunn and Jr, as the reason why we haven't produced a winning season.

Simply ridiculous notion.



It's the Reds.com message board come alive!

RFS62
09-24-2007, 08:05 AM
Oy vey.

That article was Krispy.

So, as least we know BadFundamentals real name now

RedsManRick
09-24-2007, 08:58 AM
Smart, by Shel Silverstein

My dad gave me one dollar bill
'Cause I'm his smartest son,
And I swapped it for two shiny quarters
'Cause two is more than one!

And then I took the quarters
And traded them to Lou
For three dimes -- I guess he don't know
That three is more than two!

Just then, along came old blind Bates
And just 'cause he can't see
He gave me four nickels for my three dimes,
And four is more than three!

And I took the nickels to Hiram Coombs
Down at the seed-feed store,
And the fool gave me five pennies for them,
And five is more than four!

And then I went and showed my dad,
And he got red in the cheeks
And closed his eyes and shook his head--
Too proud of me to speak!

Highlifeman21
09-24-2007, 09:33 AM
Awesome, trade Dunn AND Griffey and next year we'll have Freel and Hopper playing everyday.

I can't wait!

Johnny Footstool
09-24-2007, 09:45 AM
Reds should trade in sluggers for flying monkeys

By Johnny Footstool
Staff Writer

Monday, September 24, 2007
The Reds hot stove league will be buzzing over the next couple of months about trading either Ken Griffey Jr. or Adam Dunn. Here's my solution: trade both. In the seven years they've been playing together, they've not produced a single winning season. In fact, during those seven years, the team lost 100 games more than it won.

So what are the Reds preserving? Trade these guys and use the cash savings to genetically engineer a trio of flying monkeys to patrol the outfield. Those flying monkeys are ball-hawks in the field, and they're hard as hell to catch in a run-down.

Don't ask me where the science will come from; that's for the stat-geeks to ponder. I just know that flying monkeys work cheap, can forage for their own food, and won't complain about laying down a sac bunt. Trading Griffey and Dunn would create a huge hole in the lineup, but it would also usher in a style of small ball that might lead to more wins. Want proof? Prior to the 2005 season, the Pittsburgh Pirates refused to add any flying monkeys to their roster. The team put up back-to-back 95-loss seasons.

The best organizations are the ones that adapt and change. Look at the Atlanta Braves. They won the first of 14 consecutive division titles in 1991. But when the streak ended in 2006, they had no flying monkeys on their roster. Would an investment in flying monkeys have extended that streak? Absolutely. But the Braves' stubborn refusal to play God left them in the lurch.

Trade Griffey and Dunn. You never know, you might just find the next Chim-Chim.

RedsManRick
09-24-2007, 10:14 AM
Where are rep points when you need them....?

westofyou
09-24-2007, 10:17 AM
The Dayton paper should trade in their columnist who uses audio links and sign one with a pen and a clue.

RFS62
09-24-2007, 10:20 AM
We have got to close the flying monkey gap!!!!


http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/9/90/Dr-strangelove-06.jpg

M2
09-24-2007, 10:33 AM
Does the Aero Primate 3000 also come with a built-in laser cannon?

Chip R
09-24-2007, 10:36 AM
Flying monkeys would be a great idea. Imagine how distracted the defense would be when the monkeys started flinging their poo at them.

Johnny Footstool
09-24-2007, 10:36 AM
Does the Aero Primate 3000 also come with a built-in laser cannon?

No, that would be cheating.

However, it can fling its poo fairly accurately.

EDIT: Chip and I made simultaneous posts about poo flinging. How awesome is that?

BCubb2003
09-24-2007, 11:03 AM
Are flying monkeys part of the amateur draft or are they like foreign ballplayers? Do they have agents?

M2
09-24-2007, 11:04 AM
No, that would be cheating.

However, it can fling its poo fairly accurately.

Laser-guided poo perhaps? First the red dot appears on your forehead and then SPLAT!

Johnny Footstool
09-24-2007, 11:09 AM
Laser-guided poo perhaps? First the red dot appears on your forehead and then SPLAT!

That gives new meaning to the phrase "painting your target."

Ltlabner
09-24-2007, 11:11 AM
Without rules we'd all just be monkeys in the trees, flinging our crap at each other.

Red Foreman.

RedlegNation
09-24-2007, 11:34 AM
Reds should trade in sluggers for flying monkeys

By Johnny Footstool
Staff Writer

Absolutely brilliant.

harangatang
09-24-2007, 12:11 PM
It's the Reds.com message board come alive!Man, I feel really dirty for doing this but...

http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-reds&tid=40601

KronoRed
09-24-2007, 12:13 PM
I dunno...I've heard flying monkeys like to show off and throw stuff at fans, doesn't sound like they hustle that much.

BRM
09-24-2007, 12:18 PM
Man, I feel really dirty for doing this but...

http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-reds&tid=40601

They agree with the article wholeheartedly. Shocking.

Johnny Footstool
09-24-2007, 12:21 PM
They agree with the article wholeheartedly. Shocking.

Ideas without the burden of logic seem very popular there.

KronoRed
09-24-2007, 12:21 PM
They agree with the article wholeheartedly. Shocking.

You know the big red machine NEVER hit any homeruns ;)

RichRed
09-24-2007, 12:28 PM
EDIT: Chip and I made simultaneous posts about poo flinging. How awesome is that?

Answer: Pretty freaking awesome.

Great stuff, Johnny. :clap:

BRM
09-24-2007, 12:30 PM
You know the big red machine NEVER hit any homeruns ;)

They never struck out and hardly ever drew walks either.

Highlifeman21
09-24-2007, 12:32 PM
Man, I feel really dirty for doing this but...

http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-reds&tid=40601

I knew I shouldn't have clicked the link...

That was a monumental waste of time.


The even bigger monumental waste of time would be trading Griffey and Dunn during the same timespan. If either of them should go, it should be Griffey, but I just don't see it happening before we hopefully decline to pick up his option.

RedsBaron
09-24-2007, 12:54 PM
I believe the whole premise of "here's who the Reds should trade" is, well, ass backwards. The Reds should be considering "here's who we want to acquire"; once you know that, then you can consider who to trade to get the proposed acquisition.
I do not believe that Bob Howsam went into the offseason after 1971 thinking "I have to trade away Lee May." Instead, Howsam first decided who he wanted to attempt to acquire, and then, having decided upon Joe Morgan, he determined who he could afford to give up.
If you approach trades with the attitude of "here's a guy I want to get rid of," without first deciding upon whom you want to acquire, odds are you won't get much for the guy you discard.

RedsManRick
09-24-2007, 12:56 PM
Interesting point RB.

pedro
09-24-2007, 12:57 PM
I believe the whole premise of "here's who the Reds should trade" is, well, ass backwards. The Reds should be considering "here's who we want to acquire"; once you know that, then you can consider who to trade to get the proposed acquisition.
I do not believe that Bob Howsam went into the offseason after 1971 thinking "I have to trade away Lee May." Instead, Howsam first decided who he wanted to attempt to acquire, and then, having decided upon Joe Morgan, he determined who he could afford to give up.
If you approach trades with the attitude of "here's a guy I want to get rid of," without first deciding upon whom you want to acquire, odds are you won't get much for the guy you discard.


I think that's an excellent point RB.

M2
09-24-2007, 01:08 PM
I believe the whole premise of "here's who the Reds should trade" is, well, ass backwards. The Reds should be considering "here's who we want to acquire"; once you know that, then you can consider who to trade to get the proposed acquisition.
I do not believe that Bob Howsam went into the offseason after 1971 thinking "I have to trade away Lee May." Instead, Howsam first decided who he wanted to attempt to acquire, and then, having decided upon Joe Morgan, he determined who he could afford to give up.
If you approach trades with the attitude of "here's a guy I want to get rid of," without first deciding upon whom you want to acquire, odds are you won't get much for the guy you discard.

It really can't be said better than that.

Big Klu
09-24-2007, 01:28 PM
Are flying monkeys part of the amateur draft or are they like foreign ballplayers? Do they have agents?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e0/MargaretHamiltoninTheWizardOfOz.jpg/300px-MargaretHamiltoninTheWizardOfOz.jpg

WVRedsFan
09-24-2007, 02:19 PM
Man, I feel really dirty for doing this but...

http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-reds&tid=40601

You could have gone all year without giving us that link. You just can't resist clicking it and then you read that junk.

BCubb2003
09-24-2007, 02:50 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e0/MargaretHamiltoninTheWizardOfOz.jpg/300px-MargaretHamiltoninTheWizardOfOz.jpg

They're Boras clients?

redsmetz
09-24-2007, 02:59 PM
Man, I feel really dirty for doing this but...

http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-reds&tid=40601

I suddenly feel like Albert Einstein. I'm ready to take on some physics!

KronoRed
09-24-2007, 04:12 PM
Like I said the other day, RedsBaron for GM :D

camisadelgolf
09-24-2007, 04:14 PM
Personally, I would be willing to trade Adam Dunn and Ken Griffey for John Smoltz in his prime. Maybe I over-value pitching. :dunno:

Gainesville Red
09-24-2007, 04:45 PM
I like reading articles like that.

If publications are paying staff writers to articulate the finer points of garbage it shouldn't be to much of a problem for me to get a job after college.

By all means Mr. Erickson, keep it up. I'm going to steal your job.

flyer85
09-24-2007, 04:48 PM
Personally, I would be willing to trade Adam Dunn and Ken Griffey for John Smoltz in his prime. Maybe I over-value pitching. :dunno:is that trade available?

Johnny Footstool
09-24-2007, 05:45 PM
is that trade available?

After we finish the Flying Monkey Generator, we can work on a John Smoltz Anti-Aging Chamber.

Big Klu
09-24-2007, 05:51 PM
They're Boras clients?

I was hoping somebody would tomahawk home my alley-oop lob! :D

Yachtzee
09-24-2007, 06:04 PM
After we finish the Flying Monkey Generator, we can work on a John Smoltz Anti-Aging Chamber.

A Juvenation Machine would work.

TeamBoone
09-25-2007, 12:01 AM
It's not that these guys aren't prolific. This year alone, they've combined for more than 70 home runs and 195 RBIs. But in the seven years they've been playing together, they've not produced a single winning season. In fact, during those seven years, the team lost 100 games more than it won.


Makes it sound like these two guys should be able to produce a winning season single handedly.

In addition, AD has not played for 7 seasons... he came up in late August of 2001. For that matter, neither has KGJr... I doubt he factored in how much time he's missed.

This article is severely flawed in oh so many ways.

RB, your post was right on the money.

TeamBoone
09-25-2007, 12:03 AM
I like reading articles like that.

If publications are paying staff writers to articulate the finer points of garbage it shouldn't be to much of a problem for me to get a job after college.

By all means Mr. Erickson, keep it up. I'm going to steal your job.

I hope you do that, but keep in mind that most publications have no idea wheather their staffers are reporting bunk or truth.

Razor Shines
09-25-2007, 04:10 AM
Reds should trade in sluggers for flying monkeys

By Johnny Footstool
Staff Writer

Monday, September 24, 2007

Don't ask me where the science will come from; that's for the stat-geeks to ponder. I just know that flying monkeys work cheap, can forage for their own food, and won't complain about laying down a sac bunt. Trading Griffey and Dunn would create a huge hole in the lineup, but it would also usher in a style of small ball that might lead to more wins. Want proof? Prior to the 2005 season, the Pittsburgh Pirates refused to add any flying monkeys to their roster. The team put up back-to-back 95-loss seasons.


Trade Griffey and Dunn. You never know, you might just find the next Chim-Chim.
I can't really put my finger on it but for some reason that part makes me laugh and laugh. I don't know if there is something to the idea of saving meal money for pitching, but it's worth looking into.

camisadelgolf
09-25-2007, 04:48 AM
is that trade available?

Heck no. Whoever received Dunn and Griffey would be getting a huge ripoff.

RedEye
09-25-2007, 09:35 AM
Reds should trade in sluggers for flying monkeys

By Johnny Footstool
Staff Writer

Monday, September 24, 2007
The Reds hot stove league will be buzzing over the next couple of months about trading either Ken Griffey Jr. or Adam Dunn. Here's my solution: trade both. In the seven years they've been playing together, they've not produced a single winning season. In fact, during those seven years, the team lost 100 games more than it won.

So what are the Reds preserving? Trade these guys and use the cash savings to genetically engineer a trio of flying monkeys to patrol the outfield. Those flying monkeys are ball-hawks in the field, and they're hard as hell to catch in a run-down.

Don't ask me where the science will come from; that's for the stat-geeks to ponder. I just know that flying monkeys work cheap, can forage for their own food, and won't complain about laying down a sac bunt. Trading Griffey and Dunn would create a huge hole in the lineup, but it would also usher in a style of small ball that might lead to more wins. Want proof? Prior to the 2005 season, the Pittsburgh Pirates refused to add any flying monkeys to their roster. The team put up back-to-back 95-loss seasons.

The best organizations are the ones that adapt and change. Look at the Atlanta Braves. They won the first of 14 consecutive division titles in 1991. But when the streak ended in 2006, they had no flying monkeys on their roster. Would an investment in flying monkeys have extended that streak? Absolutely. But the Braves' stubborn refusal to play God left them in the lurch.

Trade Griffey and Dunn. You never know, you might just find the next Chim-Chim.

Some of the best satire I've read in awhile. :beerme:

Far East
09-25-2007, 10:11 AM
"But in the seven years they've been playing together, they've not produced a single winning season."

Those of old enough to remember heard the same rationalization by management when they traded away Frank Robinson.

"We didn't win with him, so we traded him."

The Orioles couldn't have won without him!!

RedsManRick
09-25-2007, 10:15 AM
This whole concept of blaming your best players for your failures as a team has always been around, but it seems to be picking up even more steam with the Bonds and ARod situations.

redsmetz
09-25-2007, 10:25 AM
This whole concept of blaming your best players for your failures as a team has always been around, but it seems to be picking up even more steam with the Bonds and ARod situations.

You know Ernie Banks, Billy Williams and Ron Santo where such total losers.... :rolleyes:

BCubb2003
09-25-2007, 11:29 AM
It amazes me how fans and reporters use to give Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio a hard time.

RedsBaron
09-25-2007, 01:23 PM
John Erickson's article is so stupid, on so many levels, but I just thought of yet another reason why his arguments are ill-founded. He argues for trading Dunn and Griffey in the hopes that the Reds would get a John Smoltz in return.
Fine. Let's look as his suggestion. The Braves acquired Smoltz late in the 1987 season, while Smoltz was still a minor leaguer with no major league appearances. Did they trade a Dunn or Griffey to get him?
Probably the closest comparable player to 2007's Adam Dunn on the 1987 Braves would be Dale Murphy. This isn't a perfect match. Murphy was the better player, with much better baserunning skills and a Gold Glove outfielder. Murphy, at age 31, was also four years older in 1987 than Dunn is now. Still, compare some of their numbers. Murphy scored 115 runs in 1987; Dunn has 101 runs thus far this season. Murphy hit 44 HRs, while Dunn thus far has 40. Murphy had 105 RBI while Dunn has 106 RBI so far. Murphy hit .295 with a .417 OBP and .580 SLG; Dunn's numbers are .264 .386 .554. Not a perfect match, but comparable. If Erickson was consistent in his arguments, then we should find that the Braves traded Murphy for Smoltz.
Nope. The Braves traded 36 year old Doyle Alexander to the Tigers. At the time of the trade Alexander was 5-10 with a 4.13 ERA. Would Erickson advocate that the Reds trade away 30 year old Bronson Arroyo, 9-14 with a 4.22 ERA, for a minor league pitcher?

Chip R
09-25-2007, 01:28 PM
His editor should have fired him on the spot when he turned in that dreck.

Ltlabner
09-25-2007, 01:30 PM
If flying monkeys are not available, are robotic squirls an option?

vaticanplum
09-25-2007, 06:37 PM
Reds should trade in sluggers for flying monkeys

By Johnny Footstool
Staff Writer

Monday, September 24, 2007
The Reds hot stove league will be buzzing over the next couple of months about trading either Ken Griffey Jr. or Adam Dunn. Here's my solution: trade both. In the seven years they've been playing together, they've not produced a single winning season. In fact, during those seven years, the team lost 100 games more than it won.

So what are the Reds preserving? Trade these guys and use the cash savings to genetically engineer a trio of flying monkeys to patrol the outfield. Those flying monkeys are ball-hawks in the field, and they're hard as hell to catch in a run-down.

Don't ask me where the science will come from; that's for the stat-geeks to ponder. I just know that flying monkeys work cheap, can forage for their own food, and won't complain about laying down a sac bunt. Trading Griffey and Dunn would create a huge hole in the lineup, but it would also usher in a style of small ball that might lead to more wins. Want proof? Prior to the 2005 season, the Pittsburgh Pirates refused to add any flying monkeys to their roster. The team put up back-to-back 95-loss seasons.

The best organizations are the ones that adapt and change. Look at the Atlanta Braves. They won the first of 14 consecutive division titles in 1991. But when the streak ended in 2006, they had no flying monkeys on their roster. Would an investment in flying monkeys have extended that streak? Absolutely. But the Braves' stubborn refusal to play God left them in the lurch.

Trade Griffey and Dunn. You never know, you might just find the next Chim-Chim.

That was brilliant. Oh man.

Some genuinely good points on this thread, but regarding the initial article, you have got to be kidding me. Sometimes I honestly wonder if I became a serious baseball fan so that exposure to all the great morons of the world would make me feel smarter.

pedro
09-25-2007, 06:48 PM
Reds should trade in sluggers for flying monkeys

By Johnny Footstool
Staff Writer

Monday, September 24, 2007
The Reds hot stove league will be buzzing over the next couple of months about trading either Ken Griffey Jr. or Adam Dunn. Here's my solution: trade both. In the seven years they've been playing together, they've not produced a single winning season. In fact, during those seven years, the team lost 100 games more than it won.

So what are the Reds preserving? Trade these guys and use the cash savings to genetically engineer a trio of flying monkeys to patrol the outfield. Those flying monkeys are ball-hawks in the field, and they're hard as hell to catch in a run-down.

Don't ask me where the science will come from; that's for the stat-geeks to ponder. I just know that flying monkeys work cheap, can forage for their own food, and won't complain about laying down a sac bunt. Trading Griffey and Dunn would create a huge hole in the lineup, but it would also usher in a style of small ball that might lead to more wins. Want proof? Prior to the 2005 season, the Pittsburgh Pirates refused to add any flying monkeys to their roster. The team put up back-to-back 95-loss seasons.

The best organizations are the ones that adapt and change. Look at the Atlanta Braves. They won the first of 14 consecutive division titles in 1991. But when the streak ended in 2006, they had no flying monkeys on their roster. Would an investment in flying monkeys have extended that streak? Absolutely. But the Braves' stubborn refusal to play God left them in the lurch.

Trade Griffey and Dunn. You never know, you might just find the next Chim-Chim.

Brilliant.

I'd also like to add that flying monkeys do not require pants and that the net savings can be used to secure better players through the draft.

http://www.bartcop.com/burns-flying-monkeys.JPG

Yachtzee
09-25-2007, 09:55 PM
Johnny's post has to be the favorite for post of the year.

RedsBaron
09-26-2007, 02:12 AM
Johnny's post has to be the favorite for post of the year.

Agreed. Johnny's post should be sent to the Dayton Daily News.

RFS62
09-26-2007, 07:16 AM
Johnny's post has to be the favorite for post of the year.



It's actually so good someone should send it in to The Spitter.

Boy, I miss that awesome site. I wonder what Oscar Gamble would have to say about all this.

Johnny Footstool
09-26-2007, 09:27 AM
It's actually so good someone should send it in to The Spitter.

Boy, I miss that awesome site. I wonder what Oscar Gamble would have to say about all this.

I'm currently in litigation with Oscar. He wants 20% of The Spitter's profits. I tried to explain that 20% of zero is zero, but his lawyers won't listen.