Unintended Benefit of "The Trade"

[TheBigLebowski]

Note that this thread is not intended to open old wounds...perhaps it's inevitable not to when "The Trade" is referenced but, this post is designed to put a positive spin on things, months after the monumental deal went down.

Consider what our lineup would be right now had The Trade never happened.

C Ross
1B Sceff Coberg
2B Phillips
SS FeLo
3B EE (Will assume we'd still let Aurilia go via FA)
OF Kearns
OF Dunn
OF Jr
Freel still in a utility role.

Lopez is still an awful defensive SS. It does not appear to me that Kearns is ever going to be anything more than an average to above-average hitter and a decent defensive outfielder. Outfielders who are capable of hitting 24-30 HR's and batting in the .260's are not that tough to come by.

Now, compare the above to our current lineup. I'll only denote the changes that are directly attributable to The Trade.

OF: Jr/Hammy
OF: Dunn/Hammy
OF: Freel/Hammy
SS: Alex Gonzalez

The team as constructed pre-Trade was only slightly better offensively and quite a bit worse defensively. Alex Gonzalez has been a great addition to the team thus far and, I do not expect that to change.

However, the biggest benefit of The Trade, albeit an unforeseen benefit:

Josh Hamilton.

A Reds team with Kearns, Freel, Denorfia, JR, and Dunn simply does not have room for anyone else. Krivsky would not be out looking for a guy like Josh Hamilton if we still have Austin Kearns. I guess it is not out of the realm of possibilities that Krivs could have still taken a flier on him and stashed him away in Louisville for a while but, I just don't see it. With all the OF's we'd have had at the time, people would have accused him of acting like Jim Bowden.

I'm not trying to defend the deal, nor am I aiming to beat a dead horse. It just occurred to me yesterday, after Hammy hit his 4th HR, that he probably wouldn't be here if we never made that trade. Knowing that, I wouldn't take it back - not anymore.

[flyer85]

Or think of what the team could have been like if WK had waited until the offseason and traded for real players.

[TheBigLebowski]

Originally Posted by flyer85

Or think of what the team could have been like if WK had waited until the offseason and traded for real players.

Obviously it was not a good trade. Not trying to beat that dead horse, as I said. Just pointing out that Hamilton would not be here otherwise.

[BRM]

If Felipe was still here, he'd probably be at 2B with Phillips at SS. Also, I think Wayne gets Hamilton either way. In fact, he would have been easier to hide with the OF depth the Reds would have had with a healthy Deno and Kearns playing RF. The bench would have been much, much stronger with Freel and Hamilton both on the squad.

That said, I agree with flyer. I would have liked to have seen what type of return could have been had in the offseason. I had no issue with moving either player, for the record.

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by TheBigLebowski

Just pointing out that Hamilton would not be here otherwise.

why wouldn't he be here? Would Norris Hopper would have his spot?

[BRM]

Hamilton was going to be a Red with or without The Trade in my opinion.

[TheBigLebowski]

Originally Posted by flyer85

why wouldn't he be here? Would Norris Hopper would have his spot?

Do you really think Krivsky would have been looking for another OF? I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just don't think he would have been.

[BRM]

Originally Posted by TheBigLebowski

Do you really think Krivsky would have been looking for another OF? I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just don't think he would have been.

I think he would have taken Hamilton anyway. A roster glut at a given position has never stopped Wayne from acquiring a player he likes. I think he would have taken him in the Rule 5 draft and let spring training play out and see what happens.

[rdiersin]

Originally Posted by flyer85

why wouldn't he be here? Would Norris Hopper would have his spot?

Because Freel would be the backup outfielder? Just a thought. Even if Hamilton was here, he wouldn't have gotten much playing time with having Dunn, Freel, Jr., and Kearns in the outfield. So, yes, Hamilton getting playing time and showing what he can do is one benefit of trading Lopez and Kearns. That doesn't make it a good trade, but it certainly is a benefit.

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by TheBigLebowski

Do you really think Krivsky would have been looking for another OF?

with the complete lack of quality ones in the minors, the answer is very simply "yes".

The rule 5 draft is simply another means of acquiring talent. WK had no idea it would turn out as it has to this point. He was simply looking to upgrade the Reds talent at a position that is lacking in the minors.

[flyer85]

One thing you guys are all forgetting about Hamilton is he is one mistake away of being out of baseball for good(or an extended period of time) and it doesn't have to involve illegal drugs.

[Red Leader]

Originally Posted by BRM

Hamilton was going to be a Red with or without The Trade in my opinion.

Completely agree. If Hamilton was available in Rule V, even without The Trade, the Reds would have taken him. That's my opinion. You can't concretely say one way or another though because that's not how things happened in real life.

Originally Posted by rdiersin

Because Freel would be the backup outfielder? Just a thought. Even if Hamilton was here, he wouldn't have gotten much playing time with having Dunn, Freel, Jr., and Kearns in the outfield. So, yes, Hamilton getting playing time and showing what he can do is one benefit of trading Lopez and Kearns. That doesn't make it a good trade, but it certainly is a benefit.

Right. Hamilton's playing time and his ability to become a starter could be said to be a benefit of the trade, but not whether or not he's on the team. Tons of scenarios could have happened. You could say that without the trade the Reds had an OF depth chart of: Dunn, Griffey, Kearns, Freel, Denorfia (that's 5), why would they need Hamilton as a 6th, or would they have taken him as a 6th, but nobody will ever know for sure, the answer to that question.

[rdiersin]

Originally Posted by flyer85

One thing you guys are all forgetting about Hamilton is he is one mistake away of being out of baseball for good(or an extended period of time) and it doesn't have to involve illegal drugs.

Yea, everyone is forgetting that. Thanks for letting me know what I am forgetting.

I think most people are painfully aware of that. But that really isn't part of what the original poster said, is it? Is it a benefit to get a player with a ton of talent onto the field? Yes. It seems pretty simple to me. Are there possible problems? Certainly.

[TheBigLebowski]

Originally Posted by flyer85

One thing you guys are all forgetting about Hamilton is he is one mistake away of being out of baseball for good(or an extended period of time) and it doesn't have to involve illegal drugs.

We're all one big mistake away from some bad things. We all know that.

[luvdozer]

Im not going to take a position on the possible connection between "the trade" and Hamilton's signing.

I am going to ask that we put a quick stop to the use of "Hammy" as a moniker for Josh Hamilton. Its seems like tempting fate for a hamstring injury. Don't we have enough injury prone outfielders already?