What would you choose?

[runfreelrun]

If the Reds could go back and redo the Kearns/Lopez trade, which of the two players would you prefer to keep. I feel that for all his shortcomings we somehow miss Lopez. Without him we are a slower team (22 steals at the trade), Clayton has no range up the middle giving teams hits that Lopez would get to, sometimes throwing the ball into the stands, but at least he gave the team a chance defensively. I can't believe I am saying this but I miss him out there, and I wish that Narron would open his eyes and realize that our best chance to win is with Phillips at SS and by bringing up Ray Olmedo or Will Bergolia to play second with Freel playing everyday in right. Just my opinion.

[dman]

I think I'd be more inclined to keep FeLo. I'd had enough of Kearns. I was supporting him at the start of the year, when it looked like he was finally going to blossom into the prodigy that he was always touted to be. So, in short, keep Lopez and take our chances with him but hold onto Kearns until the deadline and looking for a better trading partner with a better deal. I'm no GM, but looking at some of the deals that went down at the deadline, there had to have been better takers on Kearns than the Nats.

[reds44]

I'd rather keep Lopez. Freel, as much as I hate on him, is a much better player then Royce Clayton is.

I wish the deal would have been Kearns for Bill Bray.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by reds44

I'd rather keep Lopez. Freel, as much as I hate on him, is a much better player then Royce Clayton is.

I wish the deal would have been Kearns for Bill Bray.

The deal should have been, at minimum, Kearns for Majewski, Bray, and a high-level prospect on offense.

But it wasn't. The Reds spent all their MLB trading chips to provide better relief pitching in order to protect leads they wouldn't have as often.

Great plan.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Originally Posted by SteelSD

The deal should have been, at minimum, Kearns for Majewski, Bray, and a high-level prospect on offense.

But it wasn't. The Reds spent all their MLB trading chips to provide better relief pitching in order to protect leads they wouldn't have as often.

Great plan.

Exactly.

We gave Lopez away and are paying the price for it. Awful trade then, now, and 20 years from now.

I'm afraid Krivsky is just like Bowden. Big ego, loves the attention at the deadline, but instead of toolsy outfielders and former #1 draft picks, Wayne is infatuated with experience, scrappiness, middling relief pitching, and overrated defense.

I would be interested in seeing what current Twins Kriv is responsible for. I wonder if he had anything to do with David Ortiz being let go. I guess we'll never know for sure. Anyway, whoever was responsible for that decision must not feel pretty good about themselves right now.

Of course, someone signed off on snagging Liriano and Santana. Hopefully, for our sake, I got this guy pegged wrong and he was more of the Liriano/Santana dealmaker and less of the Ortiz screw up.

[fearofpopvol1]

There's no way Kearns would've landed Bray, Magic man and a high level offensive prospect. Absolutely no way any GM would've done that. I'm not saying they didn't overpay or that they couldn't land more players, but to think Kearns would land 2 (at least at the time) very good relievers and a high level offensive prospect is just not even feasible.

[Redhook]

I haven't missed Kearns at all.

I miss Lopez every single time the Reds play.

[oregonred]

Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1

There's no way Kearns would've landed Bray, Magic man and a high level offensive prospect. Absolutely no way any GM would've done that. I'm not saying they didn't overpay or that they couldn't land more players, but to think Kearns would land 2 (at least at the time) very good relievers and a high level offensive prospect is just not even feasible.

Absolutely agree. Maybe the Kearns of 2002/2003 as a 22-year old with unlimited potential in front of him. The other 29 GM's had a 4.6-year track record in front of them (a nice player, getting expensive, injury prone, quetionable work ethic). If Soriano or Carlos Lee couldn't land anything close to that then certainly the Kearns of July 2006 wasn't either.

My take was I wanted to see Kearns/Wagner for Maj/Bray and see if Jimbo would bite out of manlove for two of his former toys. I'd still make that deal today and twice on Sunday. Who knows what happened, but that didn't end up flying. BTW, I Just love having Bray under control until 2012 and he was the best young arm moved in the month of July. I really liked him at the time of the trade and now like him even more. (I also still think Maj will be fine as a cheap and effective innings eater for many years).

FeLo clearly had value for the rest of '06 and then I would have liked to see him moved in the offseason due to position uncertainty/salary escalation/regressing to career .740 OPS norms. I viewed Clayton as pure fill-in fodder for 2006, misjudging that he would be the everyday SS -- clearly that's a disaster.

My current Reds issues in order

1) KGJ. Offensive black hole since early June. Major defensive liability with this staff

2) Rotation -- Claussen needed to be serviceable in 2006. Very discouraging after showing good signs in 2005. Too expensive to get any kind of #3/#4 rotation pitching at the deadline -- let alone anything that might help past 2006.

3) Bad Luck. The last six games have been frustrating and all felt winnable with one or two bad breaks (defensive lapses, 2-out/none on opponent rallies, offensive funk, etc.). Could it be the franchise's 5-year culture of losing rearing its head and needing to be expunged once and for all??

4) Agree on the Clayton/EE situation. Need to get as many AB's as possible for EE/Freel with third option as Aurillia (He's had a great year for the $$). Limit Clayton to spot starts or 50% or less PT as much as possible.

On my list of issues, the bullpen would be about #23 right now. Heck even the 2H Milton is easily in the double digit priority list of current issues.

[KalDanielsfan]

krivsky was thrown in last second before the season started...there is a reason he wasnt a GM before a month before the season. Fire him. NOW. Hire Barry Larkin as his replacement.

[redsmetz]

Originally Posted by KalDanielsfan

krivsky was thrown in last second before the season started...there is a reason he wasnt a GM before a month before the season. Fire him. NOW. Hire Barry Larkin as his replacement.

The reason he wasn't a GM before then was MLB dragged their feet approving the ownership change. And before that it was because Carl Lindner overruled his management team who made Krivsky their first choice. Good heavens, the guy's been behind the eight ball all season playing catch up from not having an off-season to work with. It's very possible that he erred in the particulars of the trade with Washington, but to suggest he should be fired is absurd, to say the least.

[Ltlabner]

Originally Posted by KalDanielsfan

krivsky was thrown in last second before the season started...there is a reason he wasnt a GM before a month before the season. Fire him. NOW. Hire Barry Larkin as his replacement.

Sarcasim I hope?

If not...wow. Yea, there was a reason he wasn't a GM until the last minute. The deal to sell the team was delayed until the last minute, which meant the hiring of a GM was delayed to the last minute. Nice try though.

[Sea Ray]

I agree he did not get value in his trade with the Nats but Kearns was not worth what Steel said either. But you have to admit this: This team was horrible before the Nats trade and w/o it the Reds would not be talking playoffs right now. They were scuffling along at 1-8 with no end in sight. That trade at the very least extended the pennant race another month.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

I agree he did not get value in his trade with the Nats but Kearns was not worth what Steel said either. But you have to admit this: This team was horrible before the Nats trade and w/o it the Reds would not be talking playoffs right now. They were scuffling along at 1-8 with no end in sight. That trade at the very least extended the pennant race another month.

Did it?

Pre-All Star Break:

Runs Scored/Game: 5.03
Runs Allowed/Game: 5.20
Differential/Game: -0.17

Post-All Star Break:

Runs Scored/Game: 4.21
Runs Allowed/Game: 4.68
Differential/Game: -0.47

You produce like that and you're extending nothing. Today will be the 20th game since the trade. In the 19 games post-trade, the Reds have produced a worse per-game Run Diff than their pre-ASB numbers. You can't have an offense that produces 4.21 Runs per Game unless you've got a pitching staff that's giving up significantly fewer per Game. The margains are too tight at that point.

And the worst part is that the bulk of the remaining lineup was playing (and some still are) well over their heads going into the ASB. Brandon Phillips has regressed to a reasonable level. Hatteberg isn't a .900+ OPS hitter. Ditto for Dave Ross' 1.052. Freel's a useful guy, but .847 OPS? Not long term. Aurilia might be able to sustain the .800 OPS level, but not if he's going to be grabbing a higher % of PA versus right-handed pitching going forward. You shove overproducers into a lineup long enough hoping that they'll continue to outproduce their reasonable projections and you're likely to eventually stare into the abyss of regression to the mean.

And we can argue 'till the cows come home about whether or not Austin Kearns was worth a mediocre middle man, a young LHP with 23 MLB Innings on his resume, and an offensive prospect. Sure doesn't seem like a lot to ask for in exchange for a young above-average MLB Right Fielder. At minimum, it's what should have been required to make the deal viable. Instead, Krivsky saw a "now" need area without understanding the situational dynamics involved with dramatically overpaying and shot the moon without addressing the Run Differential in any way, shape, or form.

And yes, part of the situational dynamic is that Kearns was truly one of the final chips they had. When that's the case, you must win the trade from a Run Diff perspective in order to positively impact the "now". The Reds didn't. The result is that what actually needed fixing (Run Diff) didn't get fixed so the Reds must then respond by sending out real prospects like Zach Ward for the Kyle Lohse's of the world and end up using the Payflex created by trading good players for an ill-tempered bust (Lohse) whom the Twins couldn't use during a pennant race and a LOOGY (Cormier) who seems to have suddenly lost the ability to get LH hitters out.

Barring a real Run Diff value haul on the table, what Krivsky should have done was focus on other short-term targets to take care of the "now". They were out there and they were available and we know this because a number of them changed hands for fractions of what the Reds paid for "now" help. And if Kearns and Lopez were worth only what the Reds got, I can't possibly believe that the same middling return wouldn't have been available in the offseason.

[RedsManRick]

We have in house replacements for Kearns. We didn't for Lopez. If they would've simply flipped Lopez and Philliips, that would've improved the defense. You then trade Kearns alone for Bray and the A baller and it's a bit more reasonable.

[Heath]

Well, hindsights always 20/20.

I was ok with the trade, and I am ok with it now - Kearns is hitting .260 since being traded and Lopez's defense isn't improving. Plus, they'll get lost in Washington.

I wouldn't be shocked if Majewski gets DL'd and rests for a while.

Royce Clayton's just a big ew. I'd rather have Phillips at SS.