the Hamilton trade

[icehole3]

Im more and more beginning to feel the Hamilton trade was a good one for Cincy. No way Hamilton and Johnny Narron could be apart from one another and with the Reds getting rid of Jerry Narron the clubhouse couldve been split or in ruins before the season even started in 2008. Here's a piece from an article from the Dallas Morning News.



http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...z.218a1b6.html

They were rarely apart. When Hamilton got antsy in the clubhouse, Johnny would play patsy on NCAA Football '07. When Hamilton went on the disabled list, Narron accompanied him on daily movie expeditions, even if meant sitting through "Transformers" for three consecutive days. They talked daily about baseball, life and faith.

"He is a unique talent who has some unique needs," Johnny says. "I'm there for him and all 25 players. Whatever I do for Josh, I'd do for anybody in the clubhouse."

[Jpup]

I still can't find anything good about the trade. Hopefully Volquez changes that. Josh Hamilton is an amazing baseball player that I am glad the Reds took a chance on. I just wish they would have stuck with him.

[dougdirt]

I still can't find anything good about the trade. Hopefully Volquez changes that. Josh Hamilton is an amazing baseball player that I am glad the Reds took a chance on. I just wish they would have stuck with him.

How about the fact that the player we traded literally needs more supervision than most 10 year olds on this planet to keep him out of his own way?

I like Hamilton as a player and all, but that is a huge flaw that it seems a lot of people want to overlook when it comes to Josh Hamilton.

[Unassisted]

How about the fact that the player we traded literally needs more supervision than most 10 year olds on this planet to keep him out of his own way?

We also heard rumblings that all of the extra attention and supervision Hamilton was receiving was causing discord in the clubhouse. That may have been more of a factor in his expendability than we will ever know.

[red-in-la]

There is an irony here that I find fascinating.

We basically fire (trade) a baseball player for what he did in his past, for what we are afraid of what he MIGHT do on his own time......but what our President does in his office (which we own by the way) is none of our business.

For the Hamilton trade to be anything less than a total disaster, Hamilton has to totally tank and/or Volquez has to win the Cy Young. There was no excuse for this trade.....not at the moment anyway.

[Caveat Emperor]

We basically fire (trade) a baseball player for what he did in his past, for what we are afraid of what he MIGHT do on his own time......but what our President does in his office (which we own by the way) is none of our business.

For the Hamilton trade to be anything less than a total disaster, Hamilton has to totally tank and/or Volquez has to win the Cy Young. There was no excuse for this trade.....not at the moment anyway.

I don't know how the President factors into any of this, but I do know that the Hamilton trade was a "surplus for need" more than anything else.

Did his personal situation factor into things? Most likely. However, the current surplus on the Reds is OF (argue amongst yourselves how much longer that is going to be true) and the current need on the Reds is pitching. Dunn & Griffey aren't moving, Freel & Hopper have no value, and it would be stupid to trade Jay Bruce right now. Hamilton was clearly the odd-man out.

Pretty elementary, if you ask me. I'll be happy if Volquez sticks in the bigs and throws sub-5.00 ERA ball. That alone will make this team wins better than last year.

[GAC]

What people state above may very well be a factor; but what about the fact that we took a Rule 5 draftee, with little or no investment, regardless of what he may/may not do in the future, and possibly got a positive return in Volquez (to be determined), in an area (pitching) that we direly need to improve and where the market is very tight?

For this team to show improvement it has to address their pitching. And this current market makes it tough to do so. We've already seen that when it came to guys like Haren and Bedard, teams were demanding our top prospects (plural), and we weren't going to take that approach.

So losing Hamilton, whom I don't consider a prospect, is not that big of a deal with me. Not when we held onto our "near ML ready" prospects, added to that, and we possibly end up getting as positive return from it.

And all it cost was a Josh Hamilton? Sure there was a risk/gamble involved. But not so much, IMHO, when it came to Josh.

Hamilton may go on to become that special type of player. That is yet to be determined. He certainly possesses the tools. At Redsfest, one fan asked Krivsky about Hamilton and stated the Reds had better never trade him. Krivsky gave all the complimentary praise of Josh; but then said something that really registered with me.... that this off-season will be very telling for Josh due to the type of conditioning program he puts himself through to avoid injury and increase his stamina/endurance for a 162 game schedule.

[sonny]

Krivsky gave all the complimentary praise of Josh; but then said something that really registered with me.... that this off-season will be very telling for Josh due to the type of conditioning program he puts himself through to avoid injury and increase his stamina/endurance for a 162 game schedule.

Interesting to say the least.

Was Josh looking out of shape?

[icehole3]

From the things I heard and read the rumblings were coming from veteran players, I think I heard Weathers name mentioned. I just cant see the trade not being a plus for the Reds. The clubhouse has enough problems with Jr and Dunn's shenanigans.

[Jpup]

How about the fact that the player we traded literally needs more supervision than most 10 year olds on this planet to keep him out of his own way?

I like Hamilton as a player and all, but that is a huge flaw that it seems a lot of people want to overlook when it comes to Josh Hamilton.

Big deal. He needed someone to watch over him. If I was investing that much money if someone I would want someone to watch him as well. Dice-K has his personal trainer and the Red Sox sure seemed to win anyway. I fail to see how this is any different.

It was a bad trade and I'm not sure that my opinion of that can ever be changed. Edison Volquez is not a return I am happy with. If the Reds had traded Hamilton for Bedard, then I wouldn't be griping. It was a bad baseball trade, a bad PR move, and a poor excuse as a social move.

Who is going to play right field next year for the Reds? An outfield of Dunn, Bruce, and Hamilton would have been very good. It's a huge loss for the Cincinnati Reds IMO. Why would the pitching inept Texas Rangers deal Volquez if he was the next coming of Pedro Martinez? Here are my thoughts:

1. Josh Hamilton is that good and they believe that having Johnny Narron around isn't something that is bad for their team.

2. Edinson Volquez is not that good.

Obviously the culture around the Reds needs to change. I think a trade like this sends it about 2 steps back.

[RedlegJake]

I look at it as an even trade for the moment. Hamilton has immense talent but a lot of baggage and concerns. Volquez is an electric arm that was ballyhooed as much as Cueto and then hit a snag - he was undoubtedly rushed and that put him back. Last year he showed signs that he was back on track. Plus talent for plus talent - both with question marks. The Reds land a young pitcher with huge upside. The Rangers get an outfielder with the same. I like the trade.

[klw]

From the things I heard and read the rumblings were coming from veteran players, I think I heard Weathers name mentioned. I just cant see the trade not being a plus for the Reds. The clubhouse has enough problems with Jr and Dunn's shenanigans.

Well there were also these comments from Phillips when Narron got fired.
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...milton+griffey

[princeton]

what about the fact that we took a Rule 5 draftee, with little or no investment, regardless of what he may/may not do in the future, and possibly got a positive return in Volquez (to be determined), in an area (pitching) that we direly need to improve and where the market is very tight.

maybe we bought a penny's worth of Microsoft stock, watched it shoot up to $100, then traded it for 10 cents of some other stock that we also like.

we made money

[pedro]

Personally I think it was good trade.

At this point I think it's really jumping the gun , even with the great year he had, to assume that he's going to be able to stay healthy for an entire season and hit left handed pitching. Coupled with the fact that his personal needs create a disruption in the workplace I think you are greatly overrating Hamilton's value in a trade. The idea that he could be the major piece in a trade for Erik Bedard is ludicrous IMO.

I think you're going to be surprised by Edinson Volquez. I really do.

Big deal. He needed someone to watch over him. If I was investing that much money if someone I would want someone to watch him as well. Dice-K has his personal trainer and the Red Sox sure seemed to win anyway. I fail to see how this is any different.

It was a bad trade and I'm not sure that my opinion of that can ever be changed. Edison Volquez is not a return I am happy with. If the Reds had traded Hamilton for Bedard, then I wouldn't be griping. It was a bad baseball trade, a bad PR move, and a poor excuse as a social move.

Who is going to play right field next year for the Reds? An outfield of Dunn, Bruce, and Hamilton would have been very good. It's a huge loss for the Cincinnati Reds IMO. Why would the pitching inept Texas Rangers deal Volquez if he was the next coming of Pedro Martinez? Here are my thoughts:

1. Josh Hamilton is that good and they believe that having Johnny Narron around isn't something that is bad for their team.

2. Edinson Volquez is not that good.

Obviously the culture around the Reds needs to change. I think a trade like this sends it about 2 steps back.

[westofyou]

Over 50 years of producing bats and over valuing bats, the Reds have finally decided to invest in some pitching, naturally they have only bats to trade for that at this point.

I'm personally tired of having great hitters pound the snot out of the ball only to lose because the other half of the game was devalued to the point of ridiculousness.

If the Reds have to trade Roy Hobbs and Josh Hamilton to get better on the mound then sign me up, 9-8 losses are a drag.