The Royals placed Jacob Junis on the ten day IL yesterday. Any speculation on who will be the fifth started now. I vote Daniel Lynch. When was the last time a team had three rookies in their starting rotation? [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Don’t forget Danny Jackson was the best pitcher in the National League that year, too.
The shitty returns for trading Cone and Jackson and later Saberhagen single-handedly torpedoed that late 80s/early 90s squad, along with Bo’s injury.
I mean, Kurt fucking Stilwell and Ed Hearn? McReynolds?
What fueled those deals?
I mean the late 80's Royals weren't worried about money, so they weren't money trades. The 2nd Cone trade in '95 almost certainly was - things were different by then.
And the 1st Cone trade was probably just a bad baseball decision. He wasn't David Cone yet - though I still wonder why you trade the local kid with the solid pedigree and good minor league performance.
But Sabes and Jackson? WTF were those? Best I can figure is that the Royals thought Greg Jeffries would be better than he was. But if that's the case - why'd they unload him so soon? I was a big Jeffries fan in STL and he had a really nice career, but why do you trade arguably the best pitcher in the AL for a young hitter and then dump the hitter after a single season?
Just had to be some really weird stuff behind all that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
What fueled those deals?
I mean the late 80's Royals weren't worried about money, so they weren't money trades. The 2nd Cone trade in '95 almost certainly was - things were different by then.
And the 1st Cone trade was probably just a bad baseball decision. He wasn't David Cone yet - though I still wonder why you trade the local kid with the solid pedigree and good minor league performance.
But Sabes and Jackson? WTF were those? Best I can figure is that the Royals thought Greg Jeffries would be better than he was. But if that's the case - why'd they unload him so soon? I was a big Jeffries fan in STL and he had a really nice career, but why do you trade arguably the best pitcher in the AL for a young hitter and then dump the hitter after a single season?
Just had to be some really weird stuff behind all that.
Good questions. Is this why Schuerholz left?
I was too young to follow all the behind the scenes stuff back then. Plus, no internet, fans disnt have that much info. [Reply]
Probably shouldn't think terribly long about how the Reds SS situation looked when the Stillwell trade was made. It's just fair to point out that the Reds had this fella named Barry Larkin behind Stillwell at the time and Stillwell was the #2 overall pick so it stands to reason that the Reds liked him quite a bit.
Not sure how much arm twisting it might have required, but at that point in time and with the respective minor league careers to gauge them on, I have to believe that if the Reds were willing to give up Stillwell, they could've been convinced to give up Larkin instead. These were two similarly situated guys who were in an open competition at the time for the SS gig. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Did a little digging.
Probably shouldn't think terribly long about how the Reds SS situation looked when the Stillwell trade was made. It's just fair to point out that the Reds had this fella named Barry Larkin behind Stillwell at the time and Stillwell was the #2 overall pick so it stands to reason that the Reds liked him quite a bit.
Not sure how much arm twisting it might have required, but at that point in time and with the respective minor league careers to gauge them on, I have to believe that if the Reds were willing to give up Stillwell, they could've been convinced to give up Larkin instead. These were two similarly situated guys who were in an open competition at the time for the SS gig.
Larkin grew up in Cincy, the odds of getting them to trade the local kid was probably pretty low. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
May I point you in the direction of David Cone...
At that time the Reds generally made good decisions....
If you ever go back and look at some Royals trades or ones they declined it becomes apparent that for a long time they had some total clowns running that show. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
At that time the Reds generally made good decisions....
If you ever go back and look at some Royals trades or ones they declined it becomes apparent that for a long time they had some total clowns running that show.
I'm not saying it definitely would've happened - but it's kinda like when the Marlins shipped out Ozuna and Yelich, then Mozeliak tried to claim that Yelich wasn't available.
Horseshit - when a team's looking at two really evenly matched guys with premier pedigrees, at some point it becomes a question of the ask. Would it have required more risk? Very possibly.
But could it have happened? I don't think there's any question. I'm not saying Jackson for Larkin would've been as readily accepted. I'm saying that they had the two guys in an open competition that spring for the SS role and if Larkin were truly untouchable, that wouldn't have been the case.
Might it have costed Jackson and Aquino? Maybe. Even Jackson and Jeff Montgomery? Boy you'd think that would've gotten it done. Jackson and Tom Gordon? I think that's about 100% gonna happen if the Royals pursued it.
I'm just saying that a half-measure sure seems to have bitten the Royals in the ass a bit. Right team, right idea - wrong target. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'm not saying it definitely would've happened - but it's kinda like when the Marlins shipped out Ozuna and Yelich, then Mozeliak tried to claim that Yelich wasn't available.
Horseshit - when a team's looking at two really evenly matched guys with premier pedigrees, at some point it becomes a question of the ask. Would it have required more risk? Very possibly.
But could it have happened? I don't think there's any question. I'm not saying Jackson for Larkin would've been as readily accepted. I'm saying that they had the two guys in an open competition that spring for the SS role and if Larkin were truly untouchable, that wouldn't have been the case.
Might it have costed Jackson and Aquino? Maybe. Even Jackson and Jeff Montgomery? Boy you'd think that would've gotten it done. Jackson and Tom Gordon? I think that's about 100% gonna happen if the Royals pursued it.
I'm just saying that a half-measure sure seems to have bitten the Royals in the ass a bit. Right team, right idea - wrong target.
The Braves offered up David Justice for Montgomery and the Royals said no, what a joke huh? [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Did a little digging.
Probably shouldn't think terribly long about how the Reds SS situation looked when the Stillwell trade was made. It's just fair to point out that the Reds had this fella named Barry Larkin behind Stillwell at the time and Stillwell was the #2 overall pick so it stands to reason that the Reds liked him quite a bit.
Not sure how much arm twisting it might have required, but at that point in time and with the respective minor league careers to gauge them on, I have to believe that if the Reds were willing to give up Stillwell, they could've been convinced to give up Larkin instead. These were two similarly situated guys who were in an open competition at the time for the SS gig.
This is rebuttal #1: Stillwell was a GREAT prospect. And if you can trade a 27 yr old SP for a 23 yr old SS you do it. Jackson was 2 years from FA and there was a lot of concern all the sliders he threw would blow up his arm at any time. Stillwell was a surefire 6 year starter at a premium position (he made that 1988 ASG!)
Rebuttal #2: would you believe Ed Hearn was also a great prospect? Hearn was 6-3 220 and at age 24 in his rookie year, 135AB he hit .265. The Mets actually didn’t want to trade him (why would they?) and they held out unless they got a MLB-ready starter. Which they got.
Hearn blew out his shoulder 9 games in. What can you do? And Stillwell had 4 pretty good years here but lost interest in baseball. He became a fly-fishing guide after retiring [Reply]
After the Cone deal, the Royals has a very long trend of making bad deals. It gets worse when you realize they declined great deals and accepted awful ones.
Before the season they were offered Soriano for Dye, turned it down and ended up trading him for fucking Neifi Perez. [Reply]