Old Socks

IF Rowand had been in center for the Phils, he would have caught Patterson's double routinely.

Less than a week to go and we still have Anderson, Sweeney, and BMac.

Milton had a no hitter in the ninth and the first guy up hits a flare to center, and Glanville goes back on the ball. Two outs later Patterson hit a deep fly to left center that Rowand would have grabbed easily -- two runs, tie game. And Chip Carey proved again how stupid he is. I don't even want to repeat his dialogue.

So who are guys ready to say Bye-Bye to? Anderson, Sweeney, or BMac? 7 more days.

Big win.

I just thought of another can't miss prospect for a veteran. In the early 60's we traded Johnny Callison, who was our Primo prospect, for a band aid third baseman, Gene Freese. Callison went on to a tremendous career and the band aid was gone in a year. We don't get too many Johnny Callisons here. I think we had another in Reed. In fact, that is a better comparison than Kotsay.

If Boras goes away, it might work.

OK. But I like the second Everett trade.

In my original post, the rambling one, I mentioned a few significant prospect for veteran trades. One big one that I forgot is when Seattle traded Johnson to Houston for Freddy Garcia, Guillen (the shortstop now with Detroit), and Halama. Now, I know Randy helped get Houston to the playoffs where they were quickly dispatched by the Braves, but my goodness they gave up a lot. Those guys would have made Houston a much better team for the next five years. Regarding comments about Reed not having superstar material, he had those skills a year ago. I don't think they went away, even though he was hitting in the .270's at Charlotte. And why do you guys always compare him to Kotsay? His name is Jeremy Reed. I wouldn't trade Reed for ten Kotsays. I bet Seattle lwouldn't either. My problem is the negotiating position. Seattle wanted to trade Garcia, and they have every right to get the most out for as they can. I just don't like it when it is at our expense. All we have to do is start off by saying "Reed, Anderson, Sweeney, (and possibly McCarthy) are off the table." End of story. The trade still could have been made. Who was going to make a better offer? And if Kenny offered Texas the choice of six players, then shame on him. I repeat, that deal was done because he was free, in terms of 2003 salary. Just like Robbie. Carl performed very well offensively, and we still came in second to Minny. I am not second guessing Kenny when I say that was a bad trade, because I vented immediately after the trade was made, ad nauseum.

I am not intrigued by Ring. The Mets were ready to waive Robbie, so why give up a guy who had some potential to make it, even if it is as a set up reliever. The majors are full of lefties who throw in the mid to high 80's and who, according to my pal Rex, "know how to pitch." Saying he knows how to pitch is not much of an indictment.

Rex, Robbie might have made some of the Sox better at first, but Jose? I don't think so. He probably helped Harris as much as anyone. But the guy did not hustle. He hit a lot of weak grounders and jogged to first, and he just could not hit any more. The reason we made the trade was not because Ring threw only 86 mph, it's because he was free. It was a bad trade from the beginning. Harris was a better player than Robbie in July, 2003. So he sits, Robbie jogs, and Ring goes away. It's a hat trick. But he was free. And pullease don't lay that brother stuff on me. If that is our criteria for trading, ............

As July 23 comes to a close, Anderson, Sweeney , and McCarthy are still with us. 8 days to go.

I think we should leave Timo in right. He is not an automatic out like JB. The bottom of a batting order of Borchard, Crede, and Davis et al will kill us

Rex: If you don't mind, I'll probably answer in 2-3 posts, because your question(s) deserve a spontaneous response, and then tomarrow I'll reply with some thought behind it. I have gone on record to opposing three of Kenny's trades. 1)Ring/Alomar; 2) Rupe, Webster, Francisco/Everett; and 3) Olivo, Reed/Garcia. No need to discuss the Kip Wells fiasco. If we are going to trade a previous year's first rounder, (Ring), either give him a chance to fail, and he didn't, or you better be damn sure you are going to get somebody who can help you win a bunch of games that you otherwise would have lost. Robbie was washed up, pure and simple; I said so then, and I say so now. It was sooooo obvious. So I guess my first rule of thumb is not to trade last years first rounder for a washed up veteran, even if his salary is picked up. I know that there were a couple of dozen pitching prospects throughout the minors better than Ring, but he still had potential to reach the bigs in 1-2 yrs. Harris at the the time was playing better than Alomar. The trade was stupid. It would not have been made if not for the fact the Mets picked up his salary for 2003. Re: the first Everett trade, I objected to the poor negotiating skills of KW as much as anything. Texas just kept asking for more and got it. Now, Carl hit well for us in 73 games in 2003. I had no idea how bad he was defensively, but KW should have. Carl hit as well as anyone could reasonably expect, and it still didn't do anything for us. One of my answers is NOT to give someone a choice of six of our top prospects. Make a decision, and we either say yea or nay. So much of that trading decision was caused by the fact that we did not have to pay Carl's salary for 2003. I say, don't be swayed by that type of financial consideration. Just because he was free doesn't make it a good trade. They told us who to put in the pot, and KW bent over and complied. All three of those prospects had a great chance to make it to the bigs, barring serious injury. Too much. I think Texas would have done the deal for one of those guys. If not, then walk away. I hated the Garcia trade when it came down. Obviously, my criticism has softened after we signed him for three yrs, but there was no reason to believe that would happen when the trade came down. Reed was untouchable in late 2003, and he didn't do anything to change that in 2004. Don't trade a potential superstar who is less that a year away from the bigs for a pitcher who barely had a .500 record. Blue chips don't come along very often, so keep them. I would not have given Reed for anyone on the Seattle 25 man roster. Hands off Reed, Anderson, Sweeeney, and maybe McCarthy. Summary: Don't give up too much talent just because someone picks up a salary for three months. Don't give up your best prospect when EVERYONE raves about him. You yourself raved about Reed when he was in B'ham. "He knows how to play the game." You said it. The kid just hits, and fields, and runs, and seemed to have a great attitude, and I can't believe we could not have made the trade without him. If not, okay, we keep Reed. If he is untouchable he is untouchable. When Kenny traded Webster, he said we had Reed in the wings. When he traded Reed, he said we have Anderson in the wings. You know he has considered trading Anderson and probably Sweeney, too. Why do I feel lthis way? Go back in history and see who wins these battles. Usually the team getting the top propect prevails. The Braves ripped off the Tigers for a one yr pitcher when they got Smoltz. Houston ripped off Boston for Bagwell for Anderson. The Sox ripped off Texas when we got Sosa and Alvarez for Baines. We ripped off the Cubs when we got Garland for Karchner. I'll think of a few others by tomarrow. I don't believe in giving up your very top prospects for a band aid. When do I like a trade like that. I would say when you give up players who have been given 2-3 opportunities and just haven't knocked the door down. Like Rauch and Majewski. If they make it, then so what? There will be some trades in the next 8 days, and in every case some team will give up way too much for a veteran who has as much uncertainty as the top prospect. More to follow, and thanks for asking, Rex. Jim

Ten days remain for Kenny to trade Anderson/Sweeney.

We haven't hit at all for the first six games of this trip. I don't think one game qualifies.

He is the best we have for now. No more than one year deal, however. No one will give him a long term contract.

Vinny came over to the AL a few yrs ago and could not hit. He had a great start this year, but has tailed off. Still great in the field, but he will decline before too long. The Rockies have three third basemen in the minors that I would love to have, any of them.

When we traded for Garcia. was Olivo the throw-in or was it Reed.

He went ohforfour last night, average down to .230. Do they boo players in Houston? I wonder if agent Boros is getting nervous.

One of the reasons why pro athletes whine is because they always have someone to listen to them -- the media. This doesn't happen much in real life.

Plus a lot of first to third action, since his arm is below average.

Our bottom third must be the worst in the bigs.

I'll never understand how any General Manager could have given a contract like that to Everett for 2004-5. And now we have it for 2005.

Rex, please don't give Kenny any ideas.