Also...

The Angels are apparently going to be major players for Zack Greinke and will need to shed some salary afterwards (Dan Haren or Ervin Santana or both). Both are intriguing buy-low candidates at the moment, especially Haren.

Considering that both have expensive options that are unlikely to be picked up and are basically rentals for the rest of the season, I can't imagine the price will be high at all.

I'd be interested to see what the Angels would want for them, especially Haren (who has bad numbers because of a small injury and a back problem).

If his stuff is truly back and he still continued to do poorly...they probably figured he might need some confidence building. I have no problem with the demotion.

Was Sanchez's velocity down considerably last year? If so, it becomes a bit harder to justify trading for this particular player.

As I've said all along, though, I thought it was a good move at the time, so I'm not going to go crazy Monday morning QBing this thing. However, as eazy notes, someone is paid a lot of money to know a lot more than me about these things...

I wanted to trade Francoeur as opposed to Cabrera. I felt like Cabrera's improvement was more sustainable then Frenchy's but I understand why they went the route they did. Melky had a "ready-now" prospect behind him while Frenchy didn't.

The trade is what it was, a good gamble. Gambles don't usually work out, it wasn't a good trade for a good player. Our other option was most likely trading Melky for a low A guy with some upside. In that case no one would be upset because we got something out of a guy who was leaving anyways. DM took a high risk/high reward chance on Sanchez. People forget that the market for Cabrera wasn't very large, we couldn't move him at the deadline.

Basically it was ML guy who most likely is done, but has shown flashes and there is a small chance he will get it back. Or, somebody who we might see in 4-5 years but most likely will never get to the bigs.

Yes, but so are a lot of people. No baseball exec comes close to hitting on 100 percent of their moves.

Moore was ridiculed for signing Melky Cabrera on the cheap in the first place (by other executives, scouts, fans, writers, everyone). It worked out, obviously, last year. But I don't remember ANYBODY thinking Cabrera would even repeat what he'd done. His BABIP was seemingly unsustainable, and most scouts thought he would regress (possibly significantly) due to his career high K rate, low walk rate, and good luck in 2011. Folks I talked to all thought it was a great trade for KC.

So instead of sitting on the seemingly small gold claim he'd hit, Moore tried to flip an excess commodity (offense-based outfielder) for a significant need (starting pitching). The trade partner was a team that had tons of starting pitching but needed more offense. It was a good and logical match for both sides. Many Giants fans were pissed, even, in giving up Sanchez and getting only Cabrera back. There was risk involved with Sanchez, but he came back with a clean bill of health.

I'm not saying it wasn't a bad move, in hindsight. Just that it was a logical and understandable move when made. It just happened to work out that there was a talent in Cabrera that pretty much no one saw coming, and Jon Sanchez is in Oliver Perez/Steve Glass-land.

If the Royals had more control over Cabrera (he turned down an extension like the one Francouer was offered, and if he'd been signed to an Alex Gordon-like extension instead of the trade, people would have been outraged), I'd be much more upset.

As it is, it freaking sucks. But giving up one year of Cabrera is not something I'm going to say is fireable. Moore's time is running out. I can't see him surviving past next season unless the Royals are a winning club. But this is a back-breaking straw, IMO.

You can't "win" every trade, especially when you have zero leverage. I hope we make moves for high risk/reward guys all that time and eventually we will hit on one.

The real flaw in this whole thing is that Sanchez continues to pitch for this team. I have no defense for that.

Wow, im a prophet! Posted on July 2nd.

You're ignoring many other options, including:

1) keeping Melky this year;

2) increasing our multi-year contract offer to him;

3) trading him for someone who didn't end up being the worst pitcher in the league.

I sure would have liked Cabrera's 3.3 WAR this year over Frenchy's -0.9. No one held a gun to Moore's head and told him to trade Cabrera instead of Frenchy.

At what point does the fanbase stop making excuses for why Dayton Moore fucked up?

Oh, they could have easily slid Cabrera over to RF had they traded Francouer. Only problems with that:

1) Cabrera turned down a two-year deal, and they wanted insurance for Myers (who has jumped his progression schedule considerably. After his struggles last year, a mid-season 2013 ETA seemed more likely)
2) Cabrera had more trade value (but not a ton). No one was really interested in Frenchy.

Yeah right. Greinke was 16-6 with them last year and helped get Milwaukee to the postseason. I understand he's a FA after this season but getting to the playoffs is the goal.

If anything the Brewers have already won that trade.

I understand that Escobar is a good player but I don't see him in any All Star Games yet...Cain is completely unproven who can't stay healthy....Odorizzi from all accounts is NOT an ace, more like a 3rd starter...and Jeffress or whoever sucks.

1) This would have been fine, though trading from a (seeming) surplus is good baseball roster management, most of the time.
2) Could have done that, but would have been roundly mocked if Cabrera was offered a Gordon-like contract.
3) Teams were not beating down the door for Melky. He was available at the deadline last year and no one really wanted him.

I won't make excuses for Moore on a lot of the things he's done, but when he's being criticized for something that 99 percent of baseball thought was a good move at the time, something that almost every exec in his situation would have done, I'll defend that.

No one saw this coming for Cabrera. No one. Heck, no one even really saw Cabrera duplicating his efforts from last year.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing that the move was logical and understandable. But it was WRONG, period. Baseball trades aren't a success if Keith Law and the guys at Baseball Prospectus give their approval, they are a success if they are backed up by results.

Moore's original signing of Melky was great, but it appears it was more of a blind luck scrapheap signing than any magical evaluation by Moore, as he traded him after one year.

And I agree that giving up one year of Cabrera is not something that is fireable. What is fireable is an inability to build anything approaching a winning baseball team despite seven years on the job.

The only ability he's shown is that he can convince Glass to throw millions of dollars at elite draft prospects in the 1st round.

All star game selections is what you're using? Come on, man. It's a popularity contest. Dan Uggla, Mike Napoli and Derek Jeter were all starters last night.

Escobar has a strong case for best SS in the American League this year. If he plays at this level for the rest of his time in KC, the Royals win the trade based on that alone, regardless of what is received from Jake Odorizzi and Lorenzo Cain.

You keep saying this but you really have no clue if it's true. Did you conduct a survey of everyone in baseball?

"Everyone" also roundly mocked Moore for signing Frenchy. Can we blame him yet for that brilliant acquisition or is too early? What about Yuni Betancourt, who might literally be the worst position player in the game? We acquired him not once, but twice.

Clearly Brian Sabean thought Cabrera was capable of a repeat performance. But he has a WS ring so I guess he is content to not just go with what "everyone" else thinks about player evaluation.