Yeah that's brilliant.

REPORTER: "Brad Pitt, you just dumped Angelina Jolie so you could marry a toothless crack whore with AIDS. How come?"
BRAD PITT: "Well, you have to give up something to get something."

The real question is if these two could have been had for something similar to Kline, Wilson, and Viz II why weren't we in on that action?

<pre>
 Year Ag Tm  Lg  G   AB    R    H   2B 3B  HR  RBI  SB CS  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG   TB   SH  SF IBB HBP GDP
+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+---+---+--- +---+---+
 2002 22 CIN NL 107  372   66  117  24  3  13   56   6  3  54  81  .315  .407  .500  186   0   3   3   6  11
</pre>

NATS Get:
-(KEARNS) Currently serviceable MLB OF with a stellar minor league track record who is still young enough that it can fairly be said of him he just hasn't put it all together yet.
-(LOPEZ) Young MLB SS with an up and down minor league track record, but a breakout season in the bigs last year. Defense might be untenable at SS, but he's still young enough that it can fairly be said of him he still has time to improve that aspect of his game.
-(WAGNER) Former 1st round pitching prospect who put up filthy numbers in college. In the pros, he's walked too many guys, but the Ks are always there, and he's still young enough that it can fairly be said of him he still has time to figure out how to lower those walk totals. Until he does, he's a viable setup type guy, and if he does reduce the walks, he'll be a closing candidate.

REDS get:
-(MAJEWSKI) A middle reliever who hasn't shown that he can strike guys out consistently. In a good year, he's a setup guy, and in the long run all you can expect him to be is decent back of the bullpen filler.
-(BRAY) The left handed version of the first-round prospect above, only with a year less experience, and fewer walks. He looks to be a good relief prospect, especially if those Hits/9 would ever drop.
-(HARRIS) Infielder blocked on the big club. Was never a GREAT prospect anyway. The last time he put up even close to impressive numbers was 2004 in the PCL, an extreme hitter's league. Also blocked on his new team.
-(CLAYTON) Tony Womack, only with less speed and no positional flexibility.
-(THOMPSON) Very young, raw, undersized, right handed pitcher who hasn't shown a great K/BB ratio in 2 pro seasons. Too early to tell.

I thought the Reds were buyers. This makes no sense at all. None. Even the Yankees taking a flier on Ponson makes more sense.

http://www.redreporter.com/story/2006/7/13/15430/5675

You want to witness unbridled joy?

http://dcbb.blogspot.com/2006/07/trade-1-bye-clayton-tex-and-bray-hello.html

Anyone out there who would like to share the info?

Whatever happens, I fully expect Sabean to overpay to get a player the Giants don't really need. Just watch him trade for Mike Lieberthal.  This has been his M.O. of late, although last year's July trade was a good one.

One of the two players - Kearns or Lopez - for that package would have made more sense, particularly since they are throwing in their closer of the future, Wagner.  Because Majewski's only 26 and has had two great seasons as a reliever now.  And Bray is doing well this season, only 23 and has a plus slider (from my book, Minor League Baseball Analyst by Deric McKamey), good against lefties.  From same book, Daryl Thompson has a plus fastball, only 20, good command, maybe they want to convert him to relieving like we did with Sanchez (Don't know how's he's doing in minors this season).  

And Clayton's only going over to replace Lopez, I assume.  But to give up both players, there must be something unknown to us to explain that, perhaps Lopez' fielding is OK statistically because he doesn't try to make any hard plays?  (All assumptions, anyone has stats on his defense?)  

According to my BP 2006 book on Lopez, "Having an excellent arm and other plus defensive tools has not yet translated into being a good all-around defender in Lopez's case, as he has shown minus range; better positioning and experience should help in that regard."  Wow, the had him at a "-11" last season at SS, which means he cost his team 1.1 wins (@10 runs per win) with his defense last year, which is pretty bad...

Maybe they thought Clayton's defense would save more than Lopez's offense, but he was rated "-6" so he wasn't much better than Lopez and he certainly hit a lot worse.

One of them, maybe, but both?  Madness!!!  

Madness that we should have been party to, only the only trading chip we had that the Reds would want is Kline.  Had Accardo been doing better or Worrell was pitching like he was the past few years, we probably could have done the trade with, say, Sanchez and Vizquel, and that would have been about equal, because while the relievers are older, Vizquel is much better offensively and defensively over Clayton.  Then we could put Austin at 1B, Lopez at SS, bring up Munter and Taschner to replace the relievers, and the lineup would be that much more powerful.

But I think the lack of established relievers or relievers who were knocking the eyes off people, like Papebon, meant that we had no play in this jackpot, we would have had to trade with another team to get another good arm in order to work something out with