***From The Orlando Sentinel Tribune, Feb. 29, 1992*** ---The Kansas City Royals didn't just trade away one of the best pitchers in baseball last December. The people of Kansas City considered Bret Saberhagen a native son, despite his Chicago roots.
Read Related
Comments
nice quote from Joe Po on the Damon trade:
And I’m here to tell you it was a great trade for Kansas City.Not a good trade. A great one.
by royalsreview on May 17, 2008 4:10 AM EDT 0 recs
JoPo is a great writer
But his baseball analysis isn’t much better than the average knowledgeable fan. He also hated the Tucker-for-Dye trade.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on
May 17, 2008 11:52 AM EDT
up
0 recs
That's true
I also think he’s such a positive guy that he goes above-and-beyond in trying to see the good in any current management’s moves (or lack thereof). And he knows enough to give anything the veneer of credibility. Not that he’s insincere, but that he can convince himself of anything.
Unlike the good people at this blog… right?
Hope is not a strategy. And neither is playing Tony Pena every day. (Rany Jazayerli)
by devil_fingers on
May 17, 2008 12:40 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I don't think he's reliably positive about moves the Royals make
He hated the Tucker-Dye trade. He very much didn’t like the Guillen signing. I don’t think he’s always positive or always trying to put a positive spin on things. I just think he’s an average, knowledgeable fan who is a very good writer. That gives rise to excellent columns and mediocre analysis.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on
May 17, 2008 12:53 PM EDT
up
0 recs
not to nitpick...
but i would guess that JoePo has seen and analyzed more baseball than virtually anyone on this message board which is composed of like the cream of the Royals’ fandom crop. Not sure how that makes him in any way average.
he takes a positive spin relative to other media folks who are often harshly critical of local club officials and players regularly. his temperament is positive even if his opinion isn’t. as he said this week on his blog, guys with positive spins are often wrong, especially when that positivity is aimed towards organizations as mediocre as the Royals and Chiefs.
by billexgordler on
Jun 7, 2008 10:59 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Who hasn't been wrong about trades though?
I didn’t care for the Dye-Tucker deal either. Tucker had a sweet swing, good minor league power, good plate discipline, good speed. Had the Royals left him at 2B, he probably would have been pretty valuable. Dye seemed like a free swinging hack-machine who had a few good months with a contender. It seemed like a really stupid deal at the time. The critics, yours truly included, were wrong.
I don’t know how you defend the Neifi Perez deal. No one liked that. The Damon deal was pretty roundly criticized at the time too, although its a bit more defensible.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on
May 17, 2008 4:01 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Getting something for nothing...
If they had just let Damon walk, imagine we’d never have a Rookie of the Year on our team and we’d be stuck with Mark Ellis.
by mazoboom on May 17, 2008 7:57 AM EDT 0 recs
Sounds like
We really dodged a bullet.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on
May 17, 2008 4:02 PM EDT
up
0 recs
The 1995 Cone trade was worse than the 1987 Cone trade
by jbrocato on May 17, 2008 10:29 AM EDT 0 recs
I'd rather have Chris Stynes than Ed Hearn
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on
May 17, 2008 11:53 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Agreed
Cone was not some hot prospect in 1987, he was a wild starter, converted to a reliever, who had not done well at the MLB level. The Royals were loaded with pitching, and Cone was not even among the top pitching prospects in the organization (I think Scott Bankhead and Melido Perez might have been considered better). The Royals needed catching, and although I think trading for catchers is a dumb idea, and Ed Hearn wasn’t exactly a known quantity, it at least made some sense.
In 1995, you knew what you had in Cone. He was the reigning Cy Young winner. He was still in the prime of his career. The Royals needed to shed about $12 million from the payroll, but they had a number of ways to do this – dealing Jeff Montgomery, Kevin Appier, Brian McRae, Greg Gagne, or Tom Gordon. Cone was in the last year of his deal, so maybe his value was diminished somewhat, but they had no shortage of suitors for him, and the fact they only got a mediocre AAA second baseman, a minor league reliever with one good year under his belt, and a no-hit shortstop in low A ball is a testament to incompetence. They rushed that trade, presumably because David Glass, then CEO, required payroll be slashed immediately, rather than give Herk Robinson time to search for the best deal. They could have cut payroll, but still set up the organization for success the next few years. Instead that deal would be emblematic of the organization’s inability to flip valuable commodities for good young prospects as successful small market organizations have done.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on
May 17, 2008 3:59 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Hmmmm...
I had never thought about it that way. It’s a portion of the ‘business’ side to baseball and negotiations that I had really been shielded from until a few years ago.
Oh, to be a fly on the wall in the front office.
I really don't know what to say... Did the post above this signature make sense? Probably not.
by RoyalsFanInMarinerTown on
May 17, 2008 6:10 PM EDT
up
0 recs









