Loading ...As you probably know by now, Austin Kearns returned to Cincinnati with a Krivsky-cringe-inducing homer last night. In the Post, Josh Katzowitz says it’s almost like old times for Kearnsie:
For Kearns, this four-day stint probably will feel like the old days. He’ll be an hour away from his hometown of Lexington, Ky., and he’ll see some of his best buddies in the opposite dugout.
After all, he doesn’t get to see them -or his family – much anymore.
“I was spoiled playing here,” Kearns said. “I was an hour from home, I could go home for an off-day, I could go home after a day game. Even coming up in the minor leagues, I was playing in Dayton and Chattanooga and Louisville, and I could do that there. It was fun while it lasted. I’m glad I got to do it. But you have to move on sometime.” …
Still, Kearns is enjoying his new surroundings. Even with a team that’s one of the worst in the National League – just like his old team, when you think about it – he has reason to hope.
“I enjoyed my time here,” Kearns said. “But I’m happy where I’m at, and I’m happy with what’s taking place. It was time to move on. I’ve done that. I’m not lying to you guys when I say I’m happy. We have a bunch of good guys, and we’re definitely going to win.”
The Enquirer had their requisite Kearns story this morning, as well. Here is Kevin Kelly’s article
I gotta tell you, I miss the big guy. I enjoyed having Kearns in a Reds uniform. I wish it had worked out here.
But hey, we have The Majewk Man!
While I am not a fan of “The Trade” I am perplexed by the almost unilateral opinion that Austin Kearns is a future star. While I think that he is a good player, I would not trade him for any of the starting three outfielders the Reds have now (Hamilton Dunn Griffey). That being said, he seems like a nice guy and is a nice player, but I am perplexed by this opinion that he is a great slugging prospect.
At this point, I agree, I think calling him a future star is overstating it. Saying that we didn’t get true value for him and Lopez is not…
… but we had to trade for Majewski, with Paul Wilson gone he fills our quota for having at least one sex offender-era Pee Wee Herman look-a-like on the roster
http://z.about.com/d/crime/1/0/v/7/reubenspaul.jpg
A player doesn’t have to be a star to be a valuable player. If he’s just “good,” as you stated, heck, I’d take a player like that.
Again, though, the problem with the trade wasn’t who got traded, it was who we got in return. I didn’t want to see Kearns traded, but I wouldn’t have called him untouchable. We basically gave him away for free, though.
Agreed, I don’t think he’s a great player but he’s a heck of a lot better than what we got for him
“You don’t have to be a star, baby; to be in the show.”