PDA

View Full Version : Why not much talk about the awfulness of Konerko-Cameron trade?



Blitz Dorsey
06-24-2012, 11:08 AM
For all the hand-wringing we do about trades gone wrong (myself included) I don't hear much griping about what has to be one of the worst trades in franchise history: The horrible decision to trade Paul Konerko for Mike Cameron. Konerko is a borderline HOFer, while Cameron was an above-average MLB OF. That was a steal of a trade for the Pale Hose.

jojo
06-24-2012, 11:15 AM
I think Cameron is closer to a borderline HOFer than Konerko. In hindsight I'd do that trade every time. Cameron is one of the most underrated players of his generation IMHO.

wolfboy
06-24-2012, 11:16 AM
For all the hand-wringing we do about trades gone wrong (myself included) I don't hear much griping about what has to be one of the worst trades in franchise history: The horrible decision to trade Paul Konerko for Mike Cameron. Konerko is a borderline HOFer, while Cameron was an above-average MLB OF. That was a steal of a trade for the Pale Hose.

There's a pretty strong argument that Cameron had a more productive career than Konerko.

oneupper
06-24-2012, 11:19 AM
Without Cameron, 1999 doesn't happen.
With Konerko on the team, Votto is probably traded for some sore-arm or head-case pitcher.
I'm not losing sleep over that one.

traderumor
06-24-2012, 11:28 AM
Prob because it was 13 years ago and was essentially a good trade for both squads that benefitted both. Konerko was still in the very early stages of his career and Cameron provided a great season in '99, which turned into Griffey. Would Konerko have brought in Griffey? Of course, one can further use hindsight and say, "no, and that would have been a good thing" but I think that would be disingenuous.

dfs
06-24-2012, 11:29 AM
The reds had 15 bazillion firstbasmen and Jon Nunnelly in centerfield.

Cameron had a great year here and then was a major block in the trade for Junior. Tough to complain about that.

The choice of which of young, casey, petaguine, perez or konerko to let go and which to keep was a long time ago. It's easy in retrospect to say they should have kept konerko and young, and traded Casey, but that's 20/20 hindsight. At the time Casey was a AAA batting champ and looked like a stud while Konerko had been moved from catcher to third to first and had trouble staying healthy.

Oh. Yeah. Without adding war up, I suspect that the notion that Konerko is incredibly of more value than Cameron has to do with over valuing tangible counting stats and undervaluing defense and speed. And I'm NOT a big believer in speed and defense.

jojo
06-24-2012, 11:41 AM
There's a pretty strong argument that Cameron had a more productive career than Konerko.

There's also a pretty strong argument that the Reds would've been better off with Cameron than Jr.

Johnny Footstool
06-24-2012, 11:47 AM
Cameron was a juicer, though.

westofyou
06-24-2012, 11:52 AM
Tommy Harper
Alex Johnson
Joe Adcock
Hank Sauer
Ken Williams

All were quality players who were moved by the Reds, let's not forget to try and nail somebody for losing them.

1999 happened in many ways because of the Konerko deal, seeing how until 2010 that was the only decent Reds memory since the 1995 playoff win over the Dodgers I can't bellyache about it myself.

Plus RH 1st baseman are usually lower on the runs created scale than LF ones, look at the RH 1b with 4000 PA's since 1990


CAREER
1980-2011
1B
RIGHT HANDED HITTERS
AT BATS displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RUNS CREATED/GAME DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE AB
1 Frank Thomas 5.58 10.57 4.98 3262
2 Albert Pujols 4.40 9.45 5.06 4541
3 Mark McGwire 3.62 8.52 4.90 6134
4 Jeff Bagwell 3.04 8.11 5.07 7797
5 Andres Galarraga 1.30 6.15 4.85 7843
6 Derrek Lee 1.23 6.36 5.13 6962
7 Paul Konerko 1.18 6.21 5.03 7112
8 Cecil Fielder 0.95 5.77 4.82 4129
9 Richie Sexson 0.80 5.95 5.15 4604
10 Kevin Millar 0.31 5.44 5.13 3799


Now the LH


CAREER
1980-2011
1B
LEFT HANDED HITTERS
AT BATS displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RUNS CREATED/GAME DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE AB
1 Todd Helton 3.79 8.97 5.18 7232
2 Jim Thome 3.69 8.88 5.19 4272
3 Jason Giambi 3.16 8.29 5.13 5537
4 Carlos Delgado 2.76 7.94 5.18 6573
5 Prince Fielder 2.60 7.62 5.02 3527
6 Will Clark 2.35 7.18 4.84 7173
7 Ryan Howard 2.34 7.37 5.03 3794
8 Mo Vaughn 2.12 7.27 5.15 5532
9 Fred McGriff 2.03 6.91 4.88 8385
10 Rafael Palmeiro 1.97 6.90 4.94 8472


Finally, since 1998 this has been the Reds 1b in RC/27 vs the league




RUNS CREATED/GAME DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE AB
1 Reds 1.47 6.64 5.16 7983


And this has been Konerko



RUNS CREATED/GAME DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE AB
1 Paul Konerko 1.28 6.30 5.03 6961

Blitz Dorsey
06-24-2012, 11:56 AM
I remember the time well. I remember Casey getting hit in the face during batting practice by a thrown ball from Damian Jackson (there's a blast from the past). I remember the glut of first basemen and lack of CFers. It's just funny you still hear people complain about Frank Robinson, but Konerko is still playing (at a high level) and I don't hear many Reds fans gripe about that one. It's probably because Konerko barely played for the Reds. Heck, Cameron's one-year stint seems long by comparison.

I agree though ... if the Reds had kept Konerko, we likely never would have been treated to Joey Votto as the Reds' starting first baseman. I'll take it the way things worked out.

Blitz Dorsey
06-24-2012, 12:01 PM
1999 happened in many ways because of the Konerko deal, seeing how until 2010 that was the only decent Reds memory since the 1995 playoff win over the Dodgers I can't bellyache about it myself.

Well, as great as '99 was (what a fun year), the Reds could have been good during the entire decade of the 2000's with Konerko. He was the key player in the White Sox's World Series title in 2005. So, I wouldn't agree that having one good year and then a decade of futility makes the trade decent by any means.

westofyou
06-24-2012, 12:02 PM
Well, as great as '99 was (what a fun year), the Reds could have been good during the entire decade of the 2000's with Konerko. He was the key player in the White Sox's World Series title in 2005. So, I wouldn't agree that having one good year and then a decade of futility makes the trade decent by any means.

I did not know that Konerko pitched.

If anything was missing from the 2000's it was pitching, not offense from the Reds 1st basemen

Blitz Dorsey
06-24-2012, 12:39 PM
I did not know that Konerko pitched.

If anything was missing from the 2000's it was pitching, not offense from the Reds 1st basemen

The point is that saying "Well, '99 was good, so the Konerko trade was good" is shortsighted IMO. I would trade a decade-plus of Konerko's production for one good year.

Also, Konerko wouldn't have cost nearly as much as Griffey, so there would have been more $$ for pitching. Either way, the Reds likely wouldn't have been good during the "otts." But the point is that trading Konerko was a horrible move in retrospect.

Revering4Blue
06-24-2012, 12:42 PM
I did not know that Konerko pitched.

If anything was missing from the 2000's it was pitching, not offense from the Reds 1st basemen

This.

I've already stated my case in the previous Sean Casey thread, so further expounding here seems pointless.

Even though I've disagreed with certain deals over the years, even deals that eventually worked out well in favor of the Reds, I at least can see the logic behind the decision making process.

Any hand-wringing from me results from deals in selling mode in which defined assets--sometimes, as a result of holding on to them too long--were literally given away for pennies on the dollar, when they certainly were worth more than the Reds received.

Read: Adam Dunn, Aaron Boone and just about every Red dealt in the 2003 firesale not named Jose Guillen.

Patrick Bateman
06-24-2012, 12:48 PM
Career WAR:

Cameron 52
Konerko 30

Obviously, Konerko has been a good player, but at times he wasn't that impressive of a masher considering the era of the game, and his lack of overall ability otherwise held him back from being a high end player. He's aged surprisingly extremely well, but Cameron's overall game was more valuable for a long time.

The reason there is no hand wringing over the trade is because the Reds won it.

Blitz Dorsey
06-24-2012, 01:09 PM
Cameron was a juicer, though.

This can't be ignored. And he wasn't just a suspected user (like Sammy Sosa and many others) ... Cameron was actually caught cheating.

Crumbley
06-24-2012, 02:08 PM
I can't get too mad about it. Casey ended being a good player and the fact that those 2000's teams would have been just as dreadful. Do they draft and keep Votto around for as long as they did if they've got Konerko?

George Anderson
06-24-2012, 02:21 PM
Do they draft and keep Votto around for as long as they did if they've got Konerko?

Hard telling, maybe if the Reds knew talent at the time they would have hung on to Konerko and traded Casey instead. Then again assuming they knew talent, they still would have drafted Votto realizing the star potential he had and unloaded Konerko for something better.

I don't like to look back on the past and play the "what if" game but it is hard not to look back and realize we traded away an awfully good player and is still playing awfully well in Konerko and kept Casey who was maybe an above average player for a few short years.

jojo
06-24-2012, 03:15 PM
This can't be ignored. And he wasn't just a suspected user (like Sammy Sosa and many others) ... Cameron was actually caught cheating.

How is it even relevant? Cameron spent nearly his entire career in pitchers parks and posted 20 WAR than Konerko. As far a trades go, trading Cammy for Paulie would be like trading a $10 bill for a $5 bill.

Blitz Dorsey
06-24-2012, 03:19 PM
How is it even relevant? Cameron spent nearly his entire career in pitchers parks and posted 20 WAR than Konerko. As far a trades go, trading Cammy for Paulie would be like trading a $10 bill for a $5 bill.

How is it relevant that Cameron was a proven cheater? Really? Remember how you (and by "you" I mean "everyone") couldn't believe some of the numbers he was putting up soon after leaving the Reds? Well, now you know.

jojo
06-24-2012, 03:43 PM
How is it relevant that Cameron was a proven cheater? Really? Remember how you (and by "you" I mean "everyone") couldn't believe some of the numbers he was putting up soon after leaving the Reds? Well, now you know.

He tested positive for the use of stimulants related to treatment for head trama related to his collision in 2005. Also statistically, his best season was 1999.

I dont think you can really make the argument that you're making about PEDs and his production.

Vottomatic
06-24-2012, 03:45 PM
All I can say is.......if we have Konerko in today's game, we win. ;) :laugh: :eek:

MWM
06-24-2012, 03:46 PM
Why don't we revisit Roninson/Pappas while we're at it.

Vottomatic
06-24-2012, 03:49 PM
Why don't we revisit Roninson/Pappas while we're at it.

I'm still upset about the John Wetteland/Bill Risley trade to the Expos for Willie Greene, Dave Martinez, and Scott Ruskin.

Big Klu
06-24-2012, 04:01 PM
Not a fan of the Bill Gullickson trade to the Yankees for Dennis Rasmussen.

Ray Knight to the Astros for Cesar Cedeño was also questionable.

Vottomatic
06-24-2012, 04:02 PM
And giving up Trevor Hoffman in the '92 expansion draft was a questionable move.

Vottomatic
06-24-2012, 04:07 PM
Trading Norris Hopper to get Corky Miller back still haunts me.

Big Klu
06-24-2012, 04:14 PM
Trading Norris Hopper to get Corky Miller back still haunts me.

Nah, I liked that one.

Reggie Jefferson to the Tribe for Tim Costo was a blunder, though.

Vottomatic
06-24-2012, 04:16 PM
But the Reds really raked the Braves trading Ted Davidson, Bob Johnson (how did the Bengals let that happen?), and Milt Pappas to the Braves for Woody Woodward, Clay Carroll and Tony Cloninger. That was a good one.

Big Klu
06-24-2012, 04:44 PM
Also, trading Kal Daniels and Lenny Harris to the Dodgers for Mariano Duncan and Tim Leary seemed dubious at first, but then turning around and trading Leary and Van Snider to the Yankees for Hal Morris was a masterstroke.

Blitz Dorsey
06-24-2012, 05:29 PM
Also, trading Kal Daniels and Lenny Harris to the Dodgers for Mariano Duncan and Tim Leary seemed dubious at first, but then turning around and trading Leary and Van Snider to the Yankees for Hal Morris was a masterstroke.

Duncan was a key cog for the '90 World Champs. (And yes, I know you were being sarcastic. Ha.)

MikeS21
06-24-2012, 05:36 PM
I'm still a little ticked off over the Paul O'Neill for Roberto Kelly trade ...

traderumor
06-24-2012, 05:47 PM
I remember the time well. I remember Casey getting hit in the face during batting practice by a thrown ball from Damian Jackson (there's a blast from the past). I remember the glut of first basemen and lack of CFers. It's just funny you still hear people complain about Frank Robinson, but Konerko is still playing (at a high level) and I don't hear many Reds fans gripe about that one. It's probably because Konerko barely played for the Reds. Heck, Cameron's one-year stint seems long by comparison.

I agree though ... if the Reds had kept Konerko, we likely never would have been treated to Joey Votto as the Reds' starting first baseman. I'll take it the way things worked out.Because many people probably do not recall even seeing Konerko play for the Reds (raises hand). Robinson was a star, Konerko was a prospect, Robinson came back into town for a WS, Pappas was long gone. Robinson is a HOFer, Konerko is a barely above average player in his time.

George Anderson
06-24-2012, 06:18 PM
sKonerko is a barely above average player in his time.
409 HR's 1300 Rbi and a .284 career BA is barely above average?
Konerko doesnt get my Cooperstown vote but to call him barely above average I dont think is fair.

Big Klu
06-24-2012, 06:32 PM
Duncan was a key cog for the '90 World Champs. (And yes, I know you were being sarcastic. Ha.)

Only half-sarcastic. The 1989 Reds fell apart, both on and off the field. Lots of injuries (In my memory only 1993 was as injury-plagued), but the key losses were losing Barry Larkin to a season-ending injury at the All-Star Game skills competition, and of course Pete Rose's permanent suspension.

With Larkin gone for the second half of the season, SS became a big hole. Luis Quiñones was not a true SS, and Lenny Harris was even worse defensively at SS than Louie Q. Jeff Richardson was a good gloveman at SS, but couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat. So the Reds needed somebody who could man the position and perform at a major-league level.

Mariano Duncan was a former starting SS in LA, but had fallen out of favor. So the Reds pulled the trigger, giving up Kal Daniels (who was a big bat, but injury-plagued and had a bad attitude) and Harris (who was still an unproven utilityman, but I liked him) for Duncan and Tim Leary. I don't know if Leary had been in the doghouse in Los Angeles, but you could tell by his body language he certainly didn't want to be in Cincinnati. (And by the way he pitched, we fans didn't want him there, either.)

Duncan finished the 1989 season as the Reds regular SS, but at the time there was no guarantee that he was going to be a key cog in the 1990 club's success. Larkin obviously returned at SS, and Duncan had to win a starting job at 2B in Spring Training with competition from Ron Oester, with Quiñones also in the mix. Duncan won the 2B job, and had one of his best seasons in the big leagues, helping the Reds to the 1990 World Championship.

So by the amount of talent given up by each club, I think it would be fair to say that it appeared at the time that the Reds may have given up more, though in hindsight the Reds did all right. Of course, it didn't hurt when new GM Bob Quinn packaged the malcontent Leary and OF Van Snider to the Bronx for minor-league OF/1B Hal Morris. I was in college at the time, and the guy in the dorm room next to me was a big fan of minor-league baseball--he knew all about prospects for different clubs, and which players were going to be future stars. When the Leary/Morris trade happened, he told me, "You're really gonna like Hal Morris!"

Big Klu
06-24-2012, 06:57 PM
I'm still a little ticked off over the Paul O'Neill for Roberto Kelly trade ...

In retrospect, so am I. But though I wasn't crazy about the deal when it happened, I understood it. Paul O'Neill had appeared to plateau in Cincinnati--he was a good RF with above-average power, but he had big problems vs. LHP. The Reds had been patient with him in this regard, but he had not shown any improvement. Additionally, he was going to be 30 in 1993, so there wasn't any real reason to expect him to change. The Reds figured that "he is what he is" at that point.

Furthermore, the Reds had decided that second-year OF Reggie Sanders could not handle CF on anything more than an emergency/fill-in basis. (I strongly disagreed with this assessment.) So the Reds believed that they needed an everyday CF. In that respect, Roberto Kelly was a good target. He had been a highly-regarded prospect in the Yankees organization, and I had seen him play on several occasions for the Columbus Clippers a few years earlier. He was definitely a major-league CF. So though I wasn't crazy about the deal, I accepted it. (And Kelly was an All-Star in his first year with the Reds.)

In hindsight, we had no way of knowing that Kelly was going to be injury-prone and gone by mid-1994, or that O'Neill was going to be the monster that he became in New York. My main reasons for not liking the trade was that I thought Sanders could handle CF capably, and trading O'Neill for Kelly would make the club very righty-heavy. After the trade, the only left-handed bats in the starting lineup were Hal Morris and Bip Roberts (a switch-hitter). And Morris suffered an injury in Spring Training that caused him to miss around two months to start the season. The only lefty bats on the bench were utility INF Jeff Branson, OF Gary Varsho, and switch-hitting OF Cecil Espy. Espy was released around the same time that Tony Perez was fired, and the Reds eventually acquired switch-hitting OF Thomas Howard for 1B Randy Milligan (who had filled in for Morris during his injury).

So I would have preferred to have kept O'Neill, primarily for his left-handed bat. But I understood why the Reds went in the direction they did. (Even though it turned out to be wrong.)

Revering4Blue
06-24-2012, 07:27 PM
Believe it or not, most National Sports Talk Radio hosts/reporters at the time, granted, National Sports Talk Radio wasn't nearly as prevalent as it is now, were panning the Yankees for trading away Kelly.

Sure, O'Neill for Kelly was bad, but not Liebrandt for Tufts bad. Plus, that same off-season, Bowden robbed the Mariners of Kevin Mitchell for Norm Charlton.

Vottomatic
06-24-2012, 07:36 PM
409 HR's 1300 Rbi and a .284 career BA is barely above average?
Konerko doesnt get my Cooperstown vote but to call him barely above average I dont think is fair.

My thoughts exactly. :thumbup:

Vottomatic
06-24-2012, 07:39 PM
Believe it or not, most National Sports Talk Radio hosts/reporters at the time, granted, National Sports Talk Radio wasn't nearly as prevalent as it is now, were panning the Yankees for trading away Kelly.

Sure, O'Neill for Kelly was bad, but not Liebrandt for Tufts bad. Plus, that same off-season, Bowden robbed the Mariners of Kevin Mitchell for Norm Charlton.

Ha! Kevin Mitchell and his barehanded grab in left field. I'll never forget that. Dude was not known for his fielding, but that was a unique play, if not impressive.

And here it is......found it on Youtube for all you young'uns.

Kevin Mitchell Catch - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7b_NY5iA3hw)

Johnny Footstool
06-24-2012, 07:45 PM
In retrospect, so am I. But though I wasn't crazy about the deal when it happened, I understood it. Paul O'Neill had appeared to plateau in Cincinnati--he was a good RF with above-average power, but he had big problems vs. LHP. The Reds had been patient with him in this regard, but he had not shown any improvement. Additionally, he was going to be 30 in 1993, so there wasn't any real reason to expect him to change. The Reds figured that "he is what he is" at that point.
...
So I would have preferred to have kept O'Neill, primarily for his left-handed bat. But I understood why the Reds went in the direction they did. (Even though it turned out to be wrong.)

O'Neill was at a dead-end in Cincinnati. Lou Pinella absolutely hated Paul O'Neill, for whatever reason. Also, the Reds were fixated on making O'Neill a dead-pull cleanup hitter. When the Yankees got him, they told him to stop trying to pull everything and just do what was comfortable. He did.

Blitz Dorsey
06-24-2012, 09:14 PM
Plus, Paul O'Neill hit two home runs when Kramer promised that boy in the hospital he would.

(OK, a HR ... and a triple scoring with an error.)

Benihana
06-24-2012, 09:30 PM
David Wells for Curtis Goodwin hurt.

So did John Wetteland for Dave Martinez, Scott Ruskin and Willie Greene (rumors were we took that package instead of a young Larry Walker straight-up. Ouch!)

Josh Hamilton for Edinson Volquez probably makes the top 5 stinkers of my lifetime despite Edinson's one very good season.

Konerko for Cameron is debatable, but it's not one of the 5 worst of the last 30 years.

Roy Tucker
06-24-2012, 09:30 PM
Actually, the bad trade was the Dodgers giving Konerko and the Big Sweat for Jeff Shaw.

With 20-20 hindsight, I'd take Konerko over Casey, but the decision was 15 years ago and I've moved on.

MWM
06-24-2012, 10:00 PM
I'm glad he didn't stay with the Reds. I hate the way his last name is pronounced and I'm glad I didn't have to listen to it for 13 years. Can you imagine Brantley trying to say his name over and over again?

Big Klu
06-24-2012, 11:33 PM
O'Neill was at a dead-end in Cincinnati. Lou Pinella absolutely hated Paul O'Neill, for whatever reason. Also, the Reds were fixated on making O'Neill a dead-pull cleanup hitter. When the Yankees got him, they told him to stop trying to pull everything and just do what was comfortable. He did.

I agree with your post 100%.

The funny thing is, Paul O'Neill and Lou Piniella are two of the most popular Yankees of the last 40 years. Both were incredibly intense competitors.

dfs
06-25-2012, 09:28 AM
David Wells for Curtis Goodwin hurt.


That wasn't really an exchange of talent, but more a salary dump. The reds would have taken a bucket of balls to shed Wells salary that year.

I'm glad this team doesn't work that way anymore.

mth123
06-25-2012, 08:23 PM
That wasn't really an exchange of talent, but more a salary dump. The reds would have taken a bucket of balls to shed Wells salary that year.

I'm glad this team doesn't work that way anymore.

Well, if they could've got a bucket of balls instead, then they made a bad deal.;)

Hollcat
06-26-2012, 12:02 AM
If konerko had put up the same numbers with the reds as he has with the Sox I dont think the Reds could have kept him salary wise especially after the Griffey deal which would have still happened somehow even without Cameron to send to Seattle

RedlegJake
06-26-2012, 12:48 AM
The Reds wanted Casey flat out. The trade wasn't a bad one that's why no one calls it awful. The Casey call was off kilter but that doesn't matter in the trade - it still wasn't a bad deal. Cameron was a darn good centerfielder and it wasn't like Casey was terrible. As others have alluded to, the Griffey trade would still have gone down most likely meaning the Reds would not have kept Konerko when he went Free Agent. Remember those were the salary dumping years.

REDREAD
06-26-2012, 10:22 AM
The Reds were trying to contend in 1999. It made a lot of sense to keep Casey (who at the time was better than Konerko) than to keep the prospect Konerko.

Plus, there's no guarantee the Sox woudl've accepted Casey instead. They were rebuilding, they probably prefered Konerko by a landslide, for the same reason Redszoners did (higher upside, younger).

Honestly, I think the Konerko-Cameron trade was one of the best trades the REds made in my lifetime.. Cameron was EXACTLY what the team needed.
It's very difficult to trade for a young CF with that much talent.

Johnny Footstool
06-26-2012, 03:30 PM
The Reds were trying to contend in 1999. It made a lot of sense to keep Casey (who at the time was better than Konerko) than to keep the prospect Konerko.

Plus, there's no guarantee the Sox woudl've accepted Casey instead. They were rebuilding, they probably prefered Konerko by a landslide, for the same reason Redszoners did (higher upside, younger).

Honestly, I think the Konerko-Cameron trade was one of the best trades the REds made in my lifetime.. Cameron was EXACTLY what the team needed.
It's very difficult to trade for a young CF with that much talent.

Agreed. In 1999, the Reds looked like they were acquiring a long-term answer in CF - a great fielder who had some power, great speed, and the ability to draw some walks, and who was cheap.

Then Junior made it clear that he wanted to come to Cincinnati, and everything changed.

Reds1
06-26-2012, 05:28 PM
I couldn't imagine a world that had no Sean Casey "The major" as the Reds 1st basemen which if we kept may not have happened. I don't think fans want to bash a trade that would have made a world that didn't include SC as a Red.

Revering4Blue
08-03-2012, 05:28 PM
David Wells for Curtis Goodwin hurt.

So did John Wetteland for Dave Martinez, Scott Ruskin and Willie Greene (rumors were we took that package instead of a young Larry Walker straight-up. Ouch!)

Josh Hamilton for Edinson Volquez probably makes the top 5 stinkers of my lifetime despite Edinson's one very good season.

Konerko for Cameron is debatable, but it's not one of the 5 worst of the last 30 years.

Check out this nugget from the December 27, 1995 New York Times.


Jim Bowden, the Reds' general manager, declined to discuss the Yankees' involvement, but an official familiar with the Wells talks said Steinbrenner called Bowden Saturday night and offered pitcher Mariano Rivera and catcher Jorge Posada.

Bowden, looking to cut his payroll, obviously decided he preferred Goodwin, a 23-year-old left-handed hitter, who in 87 games with the Orioles last season batted .263 and had 22 stolen bases in 26 attempts.

The Chicago Cubs, San Diego Padres and Texas Rangers had also been interested in Wells.

Sure, it makes for interesting reading. Do you believe that this actually occurred, or was this just a ridiculous rumor along the lines of Pokey Reese for Soriano circa 2000?

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/27/sports/pro-baseball-the-rich-get-richer-as-orioles-get-wells.html?pagewanted=2&src=pm