As for the Soriano trade, I liked it at the time and I still do.  There was no reason whatsoever to see Soriano's 2006 season happening.  And if Wilkerson comes back healthy and plays to his normal ability then the Rangers will have a very solid outfield in 2007.

You do go on to say that it was a very bad trade, but that looks like talking out of both sides of your mouth.

The REASON we keep harping on the Young trade is that you have people still saying, "Hey, we should wait before we really judge a trade." even though all the scenarios that we (the detractors of the trade) laid out as the most likely came to pass.

Eaton was injured and fairly ineffective.

Young did well in his new haunt.

A Gonzalez produced like most expected him to do.

Otsuka was a great reliever.

I still don't even see why you're trying to say we should give it another year to judge. San Diego has likely already won the trade just ON THE FIRST YEAR. We have only what Otsuka will do in the following 3 years to make up for the huge difference in value that Young and Gonzalez provided over Eaton and Otsuka.

Basically, the likely scenario we laid out for why this trade was horrible came to pass, and now you're saying that 1) it's hindsight, and 2) we should give it another year?

I don't get it. Is it because you don't want to admit that maybe we got royally screwed on the deal?

It WOULD be hindsight and worthless to espouse if we hadn't outlined the problems of the deal when it first occurred (e.g., if any of us starting taking JD to task over Soriano, then, you could probably accuse us of using hindsight and trying to stir up stuff), but we actually laid down the groundwork and arguments for WHY this deal was so horrible right when the deal was announced.

And it came down almost exactly as some of us predicted. Does this mean that JD was incorrect to try to trade Chris Young? No, not at all. It's just that the return we got for him and our best position prospect was so low, that it was nigh impossible to see a "best-reward" scenario which would make the deal in our favor.

At least with the McCarthy deal, I can see a solid potential for the Rangers making out well (which is why I don't think it's a bad deal).

Most of us are not bitching for the sake of bitching. Most of us, though, also, don't trust JD implicitly, either, just because he's not Hart.

Req

Just because for the most part, Hart did nothing (and when he DID do something it was bad) and was a bad GM, doesn't mean that because JD did something different implies he is a good GM.

In the right context, doing nothing is good (e.g., if you can't get good enough value for your parts, you DON'T make the trade, a la Otsuka or Chris Young). In the right context, doing something is good (a la Padilla, Dominguez, Diaz/Young).

But there's usually no universals here, where we can say "4-feet good, 2-feet bad."

Req