Here's what I don't understand. For all of you Denorfiates (nice word!) who claim that he wasn't given enough of a chance to play, who did you want to see him play over? If he wasn't out for the year, would you play him over Hamilton? Griffey? Dunn? I just don't get it! Best case scenario, he never had a shot, nor should he have had the chance to be anything more than the 4th outfielder, and that job is/was already taken by Ryan Freel. I was fine with trading Freel before the season began and giving the #4 job to Denorfia, but once Freel resigned for cheap, Denorfia was a goner. And I can't envision any other way that it should have went down.
As for your comments Cyclone, if and when the Reds started to struggle in May because of their bullpen woes, you would honestly be against acquiring bullpen help because a guy might be imporant to hang onto for 2009 (when he'll be starting his first season as a regular at age 30) when and if the Reds trade two or more of their current outfielders, I think you would have met some opposition.
Any guy at any position can be considered valuable because they provide depth in case your star players at that position get injured or traded. But especially when they aren't (by anyone's calculations) considered future stars, those are the exact same guys you have to be willing to trade to improve your weaknesses. And that is exactly what happened with Denorfia.