Catfish Hunter & Nolan Ryan: Almost Sens?

[Steve Jeltz]

I just read that at the December, 1969 winter meetings, the Mets offered either Tug McGraw or Nolan Ryan for 3B Ken McMullen and Short rejected the deal. At the same meetings, A's owner Charlie Finley offered Catfish Hunter to Washington for Mike Epstein. Bob Short said no to this trade as well. Short commented on why he turned the Hunter proposal down.

"We'd have to get more... Maybe if Finley started with John "Blue Moon" Odom, we could do some business. The way I see it, Epstein is a top-flight player, and if we trade him, we should get an outstanding player, such as a pitcher for him, and I would prefer a pitcher who can win 20 games."

With all due respect to McMullen and Epstein, Short was a fool to turn down those deals, if they were offered in the first place. It's more foolish when you consider that Short traded practically his entire infield the next year for the suspended Denny McClain. Epstein's and McMullen's trade values were at their highest at this time. I know that nobody could have foresaw the careers that Ryan, McGraw and Hunter would compile, but, in 1969, I believe any team with a competent baseball person would have taken a chance on any one of them.

[Aa3rt]

With all due respect to McMullen and Epstein, Short was a fool to turn down those deals, if they were offered in the first place. It's more foolish when you consider that Short traded practically his entire infield the next year for the suspended Denny McClain. Epstein's and McMullen's trade values were at their highest at this time. I know that nobody could have foresaw the careers that Ryan, McGraw and Hunter would compile, but, in 1969, I believe any team with a competent baseball person would have taken a chance on any one of them.

The key phrases in this post: "Short was a fool" and "any team with a competent baseball person". Bob Short refused to hire a general manager for the Senators-I don't know if this is because he thought he knew more about baseball than he really did or if it was part of his perurous makeup.

Regardless, he dismantled the heart of a promising team with the disastrous Denny McLain trade. After a successful 1969 (at least by Washington standards) season, things rapidly came apart at the seams. In 1971, the Senators finished with a 63-96 record.

I've yet to meet a Senators fan with anything good to say about the "esteemed" Mr. Short.

[Steve Jeltz]

The key words in this post: "Short was a fool" and "any team with a competent baseball person". Bob Short refused to hire a general manager for the Senators-I don't know if this is because he thought he knew more about baseball than he really did or if it was part of his perurous makeup.

Regardless, he dismantled the heart of a promising team with the disastrous Denny McLain trade. After a successful 1969 (at least by Washington standards) season, things rapidly came apart at the seams. In 1971, the Senators finished with a 63-96 record.

I've yet to meet a Senators fan with anything good to say about the "esteemed" Mr. Short.

After Short took control of the team in early 1969, he canned the GM George Selkirk. When Short was asked who he had in mind to replace Selkirk, Short said that he never had a general manager in any of his other businesses and wasn't about to start now. I would say that it was part of Short's disposition and that he genuinely believed he knew baseball talent.

Art, I agree that the McClain trade was a debacle and that the heart of the team was ripped out by that deal as well. Maybe the single worst deal in the history of both versions of the Senators. The more I learn about Short, I have yet to find any redeemable quality about the man.

Now, without having the benefit of a crystal ball, do you, if you were the Sens GM (heck, make yourself the owner) in 1969, make those deals? That may seem like a silly question in 2008, but in 1969, Ryan was considered a power pitcher unable to harness his stuff, Hunter was coming off a few inconsistent years and McGraw had yet to find his niche as a bullpen ace. Also, keep in mind that McMullen and Epstein were two important cogs of that 1969 team. If I were the GM in 69, I would have said yes in a heartbeat. Young, talented arms like that rarely become available and pitching wins championships. A top 3 of Hunter, Ryan and Joe Coleman is an excellent start. Losing Epstein and McMullen's bats would have hurt in the short term, but acquiring hitters is a much more easier task than acquiring quality pitching.

[TallIndian]

A pitching rotation of Hunter, Bosman, Coleman and Ryan! That would have been something!

[riredsox]

Where did you read this? If it's on Wikipedia, there's a good chance it's fake. Anyone with a Wiki membership can edit info, weather it's true or not. You also have to consider that Short had a pot of gold waiting for him in Texas. The worse Washington was, the easier it would be to move. Looking at Hunter's BB/K ratio from 1969, it's easy to see he was on the way up, but unfortunatly, sabermetrics didn't exist then, and it's doubtful Bob Short would have known what they were.

[Steve Jeltz]

Where did you read this? If it's on Wikipedia, there's a good chance it's fake. Anyone with a Wiki membership can edit info, weather it's true or not. You also have to consider that Short had a pot of gold waiting for him in Texas. The worse Washington was, the easier it would be to move. Looking at Hunter's BB/K ratio from 1969, it's easy to see he was on the way up, but unfortunatly, sabermetrics didn't exist then, and it's doubtful Bob Short would have known what they were.

You can find it in the books, "Washington Senators, 1901-1971" and in "Washington's Expansion Senators, 1961-1971" by James Hartley.

[welch]

If Hartley wrote it, then you can take it to the bank!

Now, if I had been GM in '69, it would have been tough to make either trade. McMullen was a solid hitter, and a great fielder. We insisted, with only a little "home-team love" that McMullen could field as well as Brooks Robinson. Hnestly, to see McMullen charge a bunt, bare-hand the ball, and catch the runner...well, it's one of the subtle reasons that we love baseball.

Epstein has a 30-homer first-baseman.

On the other side, the Mets valued Garry Gentry far above Nolan Ryan, and they wanted a third-baseman to replace Ed Charles. Who did they get for Ryan? Was it Aspromonte?

More info...we thought (again, home-town favoritism) that Dick Bosman, Joe Coleman, and Jim Hannan were pretty good. So...

I hope I'd have made the Ryan trade and maybe the Catfish Hunter trade, but the Senators had very little in the minors. Toby Harrah and Len Randle became major-league infielders, but only after some bumpy seasons in the early '70s. Maybe one of them could have replaced McMullen, but not right away. They might have moved Howard to 1B.

By the way, I mentioned Bob Short on a Redskins fan-board, and was (jokingly) reminded that even Short's name is a form of profanity.

[Aa3rt]

If Hartley wrote it, then you can take it to the bank!
On the other side, the Mets valued Garry Gentry far above Nolan Ryan, and they wanted a third-baseman to replace Ed Charles. Who did they get for Ryan? Was it Aspromonte?

Actually it was Jim Fregosi. The Mets traded Frank Estrada (a "One Game Wonder" with the Mets in 1971), Don Rose and Leroy Stanton along with Ryan for Jim Fregosi. Fregosi appeared in 101 games with the Mets in 1972, hitting .232. After another 45 games in 1973, where he hit .234, he was purchased by the Texas Rangers.

You're correct, in those days, giving up Mc Mullen or Epstein wasn't really a palatable thought to Senators fans.

By the way, I mentioned Bob Short on a Redskins fan-board, and was (jokingly) reminded that even Short's name is a form of profanity.

You mean it's NOT?!? :noidea

[Steve Jeltz]

Of course it is easy, with the hindsight of nearly 40 years, to look back and say "Why didn't they make those deals?" Nobody knew in 1969 that Hunter and Ryan would become HOF's. I'll attempt to analyze this from a 1969 perspective. Please do not hesitate to correct my analysis, as I was not yet born and I am only going from statistics.

The 1969 Senators main offensive threats were Howard, Epstein, McMullen and Del Unser. While Ed Brinkman substantially improved at the plate, nobody knew if it was a one season fluke or a sign of things to come. So, had the Sens made those trades, it would have had a crippling short term effect on the offense, as only Howard would have been the only offensive threat in the lineup for 1970. While the Senators minor leagues had future big leaguers Toby Harrah, Jeff Burroughs, Tom Grieve, Lenny Randle and Bill Madlock, the closest of those minor leaguers that was major league ready was Harrah. And, as welch mentioned, Harrah had a couple of tough seasons.

Minus McMullen and Epstein, opposing teams would simply not pitch to Howard and dare the likes of Tim Cullen and Paul Casanova to beat them. While Ryan may have been a few seasons away from his breakthrough, the pitching staff would have been excellent, nonetheless, with Hunter, Ryan, Coleman and Bosman. But to ask them to throw shutouts every game is impossible, obviously.

While all that is speculation and "what ifs", there is one fact that cannot be disputed: Bob Short not having a qualfied baseball person in charge to make these types of decisions was, and still is, inexcusable. If not for Short's ego and cheapness, nobody knows what would have happened had a GM been in place.