Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27

Thread: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

  1. #1
    Member Jpup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Southern KY
    Posts
    6,967

    ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...ge=keri/060714


    By Jonah Keri
    Special to Page 2

    The e-mail came in from my buddy Rich about 4 p.m. Thursday.

    "As a Reds fan, I have to ask: What the hell was that trade about? It has to be a joke, doesn't it? Krivsky fleeced by Jim Bowden? Say it ain't so."

    Scenarios quickly flashed through my mind. All but out of the race, the Nats were known to be shopping Alfonso Soriano, their most expensive and most marketable player. What could GM Wayne Krivsky and the Reds possibly have given up for him? Austin Kearns and some B-level prospects? Or would they do an all-prospects deal for Soriano, something that would help them now but come back to haunt them later?

    Then again, by his normally calm standards, Rich was practically frothing at the mouth over this deal. I mean, how bad could it be?

    I plunged into the AP story:

    "Worried their rickety bullpen was dragging them out of playoff contention, the Cincinnati Reds swung an eight-player trade ... "

    Wow, eight-player trade!

    " ... with the Washington Nationals on Thursday, getting relievers Gary Majewski and Bill Bray ... "

    OK, Bray's a good, young lefty reliever, first-round draft pick. Majewski's a useful bullpen guy. Not great, but no biggie if they didn't give up much of value.

    " ... but giving up two everyday players."

    Wait, what? Which two players?

    "The Reds parted with right fielder Austin Kearns and shortstop Felipe Lopez, hoping to shore up one of the majors' worst bullpens."

    WHAAAAT???

    Uh, who else did the Reds get? Turns out they picked up Daryl Thompson, a 20-year-old minor league pitcher with shoulder problems, and Brendan Harris, an uninspiring utility infielder -- for a team that has 32 guys just like him. The Nats also picked up Ryan Wagner, another first-round pick but one who has failed to live up to potential.

    OK, that's seven players. The other guy the Reds got must have been Soriano, right?

    "Besides the right-handed Majewski and lefty Bray, the Reds acquired shortstop Royce Clayton ... The 36-year-old Clayton will take over at shortstop for Lopez, who made his first All-Star team last year."

    I think Rich needs a reply.

    From: Jonah
    To: Rich
    Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 4:10 PM

    This may be the worst trade I've ever seen.

    If you want a detailed analysis of this train wreck of a trade, Keith Law does a great job breaking it down. Set aside scouting reports, prospect hounding and in-depth statistical analysis for a second, though.

    On a broader scale, how can someone call a trade the worst ever, the best ever or anything else? A lot of trades end up looking terrible after the fact. The Tigers wanted to make a run at the title in 1987 and were prepared to give up a good, young talent to get a veteran starter who could make the difference for them. The trade they made, viewed from that angle, met that goal. Even in the post-analysis, they did well for themselves. Doyle Alexander went 9-0 with a 1.53 ERA in 11 starts for Detroit, and the Tigers went on to win the AL East. The player Detroit gave up was then prospect, now future Hall of Famer John Smoltz. But if a team in the race is willing to trade a top prospect for a win-now player, mazel tov. After all, flags fly forever.

    The fairest way to evaluate a trade isn't years later -- it's right here, right now. What do we know about the players being traded? What's their real value? What's their perceived value? Using the information we have now, what are they likely to do in the future?

    A couple of years ago, Page 2 ran through the worst trade deadline deals in MLB history. Page 2 also ran readers' responses on the worst deals. The deadline deal gained popularity as teams grappled with the new free-agent and arbitration structures, starting in the 1970s and accelerating from there. Page 2 rated Lou Brock for Ernie Broglio as the worst deadline deal ever, but it happened before the free-agent era -- and before my time.

    Other, more recent trades that stood out on those lists:

    July 31, 1997: The Mariners trade Derek Lowe and Jason Varitek to the Red Sox for Heathcliff Slocumb

    And ...

    July 31, 1997: The A's trade Mark McGwire to the Cardinals for T.J. Mathews, Eric Ludwick and Blake Stein

    Ugly day in history for two AL West rivals. The M's chase the always dangerous, always overpriced Proven Closer, giving up two future All-Stars in the process. The A's trade a first-ballot Hall of Famer for three people who have never been in my kitchen.

    Jan. 10, 1991: The Baltimore Orioles trade Curt Schilling, Pete Harnisch and Steve Finley for Glenn Davis

    Somehow, the Orioles missed the oh-so-subtle warning signs, like Davis missing 69 games the year before he was traded. He spent the next three seasons mostly on the DL, and never came close to the power he showed in his 20s. Harnisch and Finley made three All-Star games between them, enjoying long, successful careers. That Schilling fella's pretty good too.

    Aug. 31, 1990: The Red Sox trade Jeff Bagwell to the Astros for Larry Andersen

    Andersen was terrific for Boston down the stretch that season, posting a 1.23 ERA in 22 innings. Of course, those might have been the most expensive 22 innings in Red Sox history.

    All horrendous deals. But maybe if you squint really hard, you can see teams either going for it all now at the expense of a great prospect ... or three (Slocumb, Davis, Andersen deals) or hoping to strike gold with some prospects, only to whiff badly (McGwire).

    The two trades not mentioned in the Page 2 surveys (one was too recent, one wasn't a deadline trade) that stood out most for me:

    November 14, 2003: The Giants trade A.J. Pierzynski to the Twins for Joe Nathan, Francisco Liriano and Boof Bonser

    Nathan had a great arm, but he was also a failed starting pitcher with command issues. Liriano was a great prospect, but injuries were holding him back at the time. Some prospect mavens saw Bonser as the plum of the deal at the time. The trade looks like grand theft larceny now, with Nathan one of the top closers in baseball, Bonser a decent prospect on the cusp and Liriano only the best young pitcher in the game, with a shot at both the Rookie of the Year and Cy Young awards. But it wasn't quite as bad at the time.

    July 30, 2004: The Mets trade Scott Kazmir and Jose Diaz to the Devil Rays for Victor Zambrano and Bartolome Fortunato

    Brutal. Zambrano had decent stuff but terrible control problems. Fresh off pitching coach Rick Peterson's molding Mark Mulder, Tim Hudson and Barry Zito into aces in Oakland, the Mets might have thought he could cure all Zambrano's ills and make him a star. That was a stretch. Meanwhile, Kazmir had some command issues of his own. But he also was widely regarded as one of the best young pitchers in the game. He made his major league debut less than a month later and is now on the verge of stardom. Injuries and ineffectiveness have washed out Zambrano's career. This trade looks brutal now. But it looked really bad then, too.

    So was Thursday's Reds-Nats deal really the worst trade ever? Probably not. The Reds said they needed bullpen help. Bray and Majewski should contribute, even if neither one is Joe Nathan. The Reds said they needed defensive help. Lopez might have been the worst defensive shortstop in baseball, so anyone's an upgrade with the glove. The team also made room for top outfield prospect Chris Denorfia by dealing Kearns, and it shed some salary in the process. Kearns is injury-prone. Young pitching is hard to find.

    Of course, that ignores how the Reds gave up the two best players in the trade; they didn't acquire any premium prospects to help them down the road; they're still in contention in the NL Central and not far off the wild-card lead, but they didn't pick up any difference makers to help them now; they gave up two of their best trading chits; and they might give serious playing time to Clayton. That's the same Royce Clayton whose reputation outstrips his actual ability -- he's well below average going by advanced defensive metrics. He also rarely gets on base, but he makes up for it with zero homers in 87 games played.

    On the scale of worst trades I've ever seen, I rate The Royce Clayton Fiasco about fourth on my list -- not as bad as the Kazmir Krisis, but worse than Smoltz Under Siege.

    "We paid a steep price," Reds general manager Krivsky said after the deal was announced. "I'm sure this will be a controversial trade. I know a lot of people will be leaving nasty messages on my voice mail, and I'll have some who think it's great."

    Really? Who thinks this trade is great? Krivsky's cousin Ed? The local barbershop community, after seeing Majewski's head shot? The St. Louis Cardinals?

    I couldn't find anyone who liked this trade for Cincinnati -- outside the Reds' organization. These were some of the other comments I read from friends in and around the game yesterday:

    "I keep thinking I'm missing something. Is there a player to be named later, like perhaps the U.S. Treasury going to Cincy as part of the deal? Seriously, it doesn't seem possible."

    "That's an awful deal ... unless Kearns is hurt or a [really nasty, baseless accusation deleted]."

    "I swear to God I've read the deal four times now trying to get it."

    "Man ... "

    Sorry, Rich. Bengals' season starts Sept. 10.
    "My mission is to be the ray of hope, the guy who stands out there on that beautiful field and owns up to his mistakes and lets people know it's never completely hopeless, no matter how bad it seems at the time. I have a platform and a message, and now I go to bed at night, sober and happy, praying I can be a good messenger." -Josh Hamilton

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member redsrule2500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    3,215

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    lame
    redsrule2500
    Go Reds!
    Baseball Bliss
    Im a normal guy blessed with the ability to hit a baseball. - Sean Casey

  4. #3
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Only Reds fans drinking the Wayne's World Kool-Aid can see it differently than that. However, ultimate success or failure is defined on the field by the W-L column.
    Last edited by flyer85; 07-14-2006 at 01:50 PM.
    What are you, people? On dope? - Mr Hand

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,347

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    That article is pretty much spot on, and echoes the thoughts of more or less everyone from Cincinnati I've talked to recently.

    Turns out Krivsky is just as incompetent as O'Brien. Who knew?

  6. #5
    Member writerdan33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Clemson, SC
    Posts
    479

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Quote Originally Posted by dsmith421
    That article is pretty much spot on, and echoes the thoughts of more or less everyone from Cincinnati I've talked to recently.

    Turns out Krivsky is just as incompetent as O'Brien. Who knew?
    Rare post by me, but I had to respond after seeing this comment.

    In truth, only time will tell if this trade is good or bad, but I for one think it makes the Reds a better team today and, likely, for the future. Whether that corresponds into a postseason berth this year, who knows? But ultimately I believe the organization is headed in the right direction.

    Consider:

    - Kearns has been a non-factor on this team for, what, three years? His first half of this season was productive, yes, but with Kearns you always felt like there's more he should be giving. His work ethic has been openly questioned by people much closer to the organization than I, which is cause enough to look to jettison a player after the five-year stretch this team has been through. If Castelinni and Krivsky have shown us anything, it's that malingering will not be welcome in the new Reds regime (see Hancock, Josh).

    - Lopez, for all his physical gifts, has had one - count 'em - one good season. Last year. His erratic defense and poor right-handed hitting are reasons enough to question his long-term wealth to this team. For all the good he's done, it's clear he's taken a step backwards this season.

    In return for these two you get two young, strong arms who, if you could somehow project their current performances into the Reds season, surely would have cut down on the 13 blown saves this bullpen has accumulated by half, maybe more. At their current level of performance, both outclass most of the Reds bullpen as it stands now, and the ceiling on both appears to be high.

    The name of the game, folks, is pitching. This team will score runs without Kearns and Lopez, in my opinion. But how many runs can we keep the other team from scoring with a better bullpen and, in Clayton, a short-term shortstop who at the very least isn't going to kick the routine play?

    It's a gamble, I believe, worth taking.

    And then there's this. Both are making less than $2 million this year. Both likely stand to get healthy raises if they go to arbitration this offseason (despite Lopez's falloff). It's not out of the realm of possibility that both could go to $3.5 million or so.

    Seems to me, some of that money could go toward more pitching in the offseason.

    Which, again, makes this a better team.

    Here's to a strong final 2 1/2 months...
    Dan Scott, Program Director
    Host of Cruise Control
    The Drive, 104.9 FM
    Clemson, SC
    www.danscottshow.com
    ------------------------------------------------
    I'm always serious. And stop calling me Shirley...

  7. #6
    Harry Chiti Fan registerthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    5,872

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Quote Originally Posted by writerdan33
    The name of the game, folks, is pitching. This team will score runs without Kearns and Lopez, in my opinion. But how many runs can we keep the other team from scoring with a better bullpen and, in Clayton, a short-term shortstop who at the very least isn't going to kick the routine play?

    It's a gamble, I believe, worth taking.
    Clayton may not boot the routine play, but Lopez's offensive talents outstripped his defensive liabilities--and its likely that he was destined for a position other than shortstop in 2007 anyway. Clayton is a slight defensive upgrade, and a tremendous offensive downgrade. On no planet that I've inhabited could that be considered a good deal.

    As far as the pitching is concerned--again, no one's arguing that the reds didn't need to upgrade their pitching staff. And no one's arguing that this trade didn't acocmplish that. But, good grief, the price to do so was astronomical.

    You say that the team will score runs without Lopez and Kearns, but where are those runs going to be coming from? Both players were solid run producers. Even if Denorfia steps in seamlessly to the void kearns left behind--a big if--you still have a blackhole at shortstop that's going to give you nothing in the way of offensive production.

    Slice it, dice it, flip it--view it however you wish. This trade is a 1976 Gremlin of a deal that looks bad now, and has a very high likelihood of looking even worse later.
    We'll burn that bridge when we get to it.

  8. #7
    Member writerdan33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Clemson, SC
    Posts
    479

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    You may be correct. Time will tell. In the meantime, I'll stand by my opinion.

    I believe that Kearns and Lopez, age aside, are as good as they're ever going to get. History, I suppose, will be the final judge.

    Let's make it two straight tonight.
    Dan Scott, Program Director
    Host of Cruise Control
    The Drive, 104.9 FM
    Clemson, SC
    www.danscottshow.com
    ------------------------------------------------
    I'm always serious. And stop calling me Shirley...

  9. #8
    RZ Chamber of Commerce Unassisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    13,450

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Quote Originally Posted by flyer85
    Only Reds fans drinking the Wayne's World Kool-Aid can see it differently than that. However, ultimate success or failure is defined on the field by the W-L column.
    Whose Kool-Aid are you drinking? And will you still be drinking it in late September if the Reds are in the playoff race?
    /r/reds

  10. #9
    The Lineups stink. KronoRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West N. Carolina
    Posts
    55,672

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Funny stuff

    Never take ESPN serious
    Go Gators!

  11. #10
    Member CrackerJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    5,007

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    yeah regardless of how you feel about the trade, that ESPN "article" read more like something you'd see on a bulletin board...

    "my buddy e-mailed me and said this was the worst trade ever dude! Clayton sucks! I didn't really go into any detail about the pros and cons for each team, but, since the Reds didn't trade for anyone I immediately recognized, and included Clayton, it must suck!"

    End of article...

  12. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,347

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Quote Originally Posted by CrackerJack
    yeah regardless of how you feel about the trade, that ESPN "article" read more like something you'd see on a bulletin board...
    It's on Page2, which is dedicated to humor articles and the kind of things you would read on a blog like Deadspin. Bill Simmons writes there, the Uni Watch guy writes there. It's not supposed to be serious journalism.

  13. #12
    Member redsrule2500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    3,215

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Because ESPN is actually against the trade probably makes even more reason to like it.
    redsrule2500
    Go Reds!
    Baseball Bliss
    Im a normal guy blessed with the ability to hit a baseball. - Sean Casey

  14. #13
    Plays The Right Way Hap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    796.357
    Posts
    1,719

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Quote Originally Posted by registerthis
    Clayton may not boot the routine play.....
    friday's game.....two outs in the eighth.......
    .

  15. #14
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    Because ESPN is actually against the trade probably makes even more reason to like it.
    It is amusing that some here who normally refer to ESPN (and baseball media as a whole) as a bunch of know nothing dolts are using the "baseball media" bashing the trade to support their argument that it was a horrible trade.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  16. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    7,639

    Re: ESPN Page 2: Defining A Horrific Trade

    In fairness to Wayne Krivsky, many people were making these exact same comments about him after the Wily Mo/Arroyo deal.

    That's worked out pretty well.....
    "Strickland Propane... Taste the meat, not the heat." - Hank Hill


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25