Can't win with 'em
Can't win without 'em
I'd simply say EE kinda fell back into the Jays lap. Hard to argue against that.
Having said that I think at the time most would have acknowledged that he was a serviceable player who should have found a job somewhere, at the right price. It's correct to say many of his transactions in 2009-10 were due to cost.
I actually suspect he has turned the Bautista-like corner, and will have another good/great season. Why (rhetorically speaking) do we spend so much time arguing about Stewart when the real piece we "should" be upset (not that it bothers me) about is EE? That's just comedy to me.
Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong
I'm witchcrafting everybody.
I can't believe people are seriously arguing that the Reds didn't dominate this trade -- they could have claimed both Encarnacion and Stewart off waivers at various points after the trade was made.
If they were that enamored with either guy, they could have had both of them AND Rolen in the organization right now.
23 Years and Counting...
Caveman Techie (01-31-2013)
But, really, what difference does it make? It's pretty much like the other trades that Jocketty has done. He's gotten what the Reds needed, damned the cost, and, well, most of them have worked out. This one was one of his better ones, regardless of what Encarnacion or Stewart have done.
"It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."
I'm not a man of many words. Read my posts, and you'll see what I mean.
Some people are Optimists (They see the glass 1/2 full).
Others are Pessimists (They see the glass 1/2 empty).
Me, I'm a Realist. 1/2 empty IS 1/2 full.
Did the Reds make a mistake in not claiming Encarnacion, Roenicke, or Stewart on waivers? Maybe--especially in the case of Encarnacion. But did the Reds make a mistake in pulling the trigger on the trade? Heck no.