John Fay has a Q&A with Wayne Krivsky today. It’s a lot of nothing (Bailey will go at his own pace; He’s glad to have Dunn around; Narron will sort out the closer situation; Castellini is great to work with), but there’s one interesting comment on the Kearns/Majewski trade:

“It’s like any trade. You have to give it some time to see how it shakes out over time. Even the (Aaron) Harang-for-Jose Guillen trade – from what I understand – there were people saying, ‘What are you doing getting a guy like that for a proven guy like Guillen?’ It turns out it was a good move. When you’re dealing with young players, it takes years. I’m satisfied with what we got. I don’t like the circumstances of getting a player who was hurt at the time of the trade. We’ll deal with that.”

This is ludicrous. I don’t remember anyone complaining about the Guillen trade, at the time. Even the least-informed fans knew that Guillen had two months left on his contract, was due for a big payday, and had no long-term position (the Reds had Jr, Dunn, Kearns, and WMP). Everybody was in favor of trading Guillen – and comparing Guillen to Kearns and Lopez is insulting to any real fan. I don’t really expect Krivsky to admit a mistake (though I wish he would do it), but he’s hiding behind Aaron Harang’s success, basically.

About The Author

Related Posts

9 Responses

  1. Mark T

    It’s the problem with journalism everywhere, from Bob Woodward to John Fay – these guys trade on access. They are afraid if they put feet to the fire, they’ll not get another shot. Boring interview.

  2. preach

    Agreed, Chris. I was one who actually LIKED Guillen, but I understood and approved of the trade. With Willy Mo still not getting any playing time, I don’t know of anyone who didn’t. Maybe this trade will still shake out, but at least use fair comparables.

  3. Chris

    I didn’t even mention that Harang was only one of three guys acquired, and a few people even saw Joe Valentine as the key player. Here‘s a 2005 Post article that explains the entire trade environment, and debunk’s Krivsky’s version entirely.

    “The optimal thing in the stock market and in the baseball market is buy low, sell high,” Kullman said. “It’s the classic ‘guy we had to trade.'”

    The problem was finding the appropriate suitor. Because of Guillen’s clubhouse reputation, Kullman said, some teams didn’t think acquiring Guillen would be worth the risk.

    “We were getting three players back that weren’t big-time prospects but were well-regarded,” Kullman said.

  4. al

    i guess the criticism is fair, but it seems a little harsh. i don’t think kriv was trying to hide behind anyone’s success.

    it wasn’t a great comparison because guillen was obvious trade bait and kearns/lopez were not, but i think his point still stands, and what kullman said just supports it.

    They didn’t get any grade a guys for guillen but with young players it can take years for the dividends to pay off. If majic and bray become a nastyboy-esque combo for a few years, and lopez continues to be a mediocre ss, people will feel differently about the trade than they did last year.

    i know i feel differently about the guillen trade now than i did then. at the time i thought we got basically nothing in a salary dump – maybe a fifth starter and a relief prospect. turns out i was wrong, we got a solid #2, with ace upside. i think that’s all kriv was going for, that this might work out better than some people think.

  5. Chris

    Jose Guillen (in 2003): Age 27, pending free agent.
    Aaron Harang (in 2003): Age 25, controlled for 6 more seasons.
    Joe Valentine: Age 23, controlled for 7 seasons.

    Contrast with 2006:
    Austin Kearns: Age 26, controlled through 2008.
    Felipe Lopez: Age 26, controlled through controlled through at least 2008.

    Gary Majewski: Age 26, controlled through 2010.
    Bill Bray: Age 23, controlled through 2011.
    Royce Clayton, Age 438, pending free agent.

    Apples and oranges. And let’s say Majewski somehow turns into Rob Dibble at age 28 – again, we gave up a boatload more than 2 months of Jose Guillen (remember, that 2003 team was terrible, and lost nothing from that trade).

  6. Shawn

    There was some complaining about the Guillen trade…mostly from the Luddites. “How can you trade him, he’s the best player in the team, sign him to a big contract,” blah blah blah. Not a lot, but there was some.

  7. al

    apples and oranges to you i guess, but they were both baseball trades involving young unproven players, which is close enough for me not to slam the guy for making an off hand comment in an interview.

  8. Tom

    Jose Guillen was hitting the cover off the ball at the time of the trade. But he was the Reds 4th. outfielder and his rather explosive manner was upseting team chemistry. I don’t remember any controversy about the trade; only that Harang had potential and the Reds needed pitching.