If you're ok with the Reds just tossing aside resources with no gain, then I don't really know what to say.

And utility infielders might not make $15m a year, but they're really not a dime a dozen. The Reds are a team that started Royce Clayton at the end of last season, and one of their utility infielders is named Juan Castro at the moment.

Surely you're not satisfied with that?

1.  Good utility infielders are not "a dime a dozen".  Rich Aurillia, at this point in his career, is a good utility infielder.  The Giants are paying him $8M over the next 2 years.
2.  Juan Castro is not a good utility infielder.  He catches everything that's hit to him, but that's it.  He has not become a better hitter as he's aged; last year, his OPS+ was 61.  He may be paid below the league average (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt - no one makes below the minimum), but he'll make 3 times what Harris will next year.  In no way is he worth it.
3.  "(W)ho would be better and cheaper that's available"?  Brenden Harris, for one.
4.  If Harris is "not a resource" and only "roster space", why was he considered such a big part of The Trade at the time?  As for what he brought, this is looking more and more like a trade for Hamilton (the Reds probably didn't entertain any offers for Harris), which I said elsewhere would be idiocy.
5.  Clayton was not brought in to "occupy the spot" or a "stop-gap".  He was brought in to help the team make the playoffs, which a blind monkey could have told you was stupid.

I actually told a buddy of mine at the time that the trade was horrible, but it would have been less horrible if we didn't have to take Clayton in the deal. I would've told Bowden, "Naw, Jim...keep Clayton, we're good."

Lopez was a middle infielder with a sign around his neck that read: Hit it here, win first base.  Kearns will never develop into an All Star or even remotely close.  IF the thinking was, we'll get immediate bullpen help to shore up our biggest weakness now (granted, that part didn't work out so well) with the added bonus of a young guy who has the potential to develop into a solid closer, then I still think the trade makes sense.  But you are right... it is too early to make a final verdict.  

Put it another way.... can anyone here really make a convincing argument that if the Reds hadn't made that trade, they would have made the playoffs last year?  I can't.  So... the bottom line is who would you rather have for the next few years, Kearns or Bray?  I don't know the answer yet.  

Everyone needs pitching. No one everhas enough. Some worse than others. The Reds are not worse than most in that regard.

Yes, but why keep good pitchers just to win 75 games when you can trade them for multiple young talented players and win 90 games in two seasons?  When you don't have many trading pieces, you have to look at everyone as tradeable for the right deal.

And no matter how cheap he is, if Arroyo isn't likely to stay past his contract then you have to at least look at what you can get for him on the trade market.  Let's see, a reasonably young, cheap pitcher who just greatly over-performed anything he has done in the past.  Yeah, I think I'd be shopping him around a bit just to see who salivates the most.  I probably wouldn't trade him, but I wouldn't turn away from any conversations that's for sure.

Then why did Krivsky acquire Harris in the first place?  That's what I don't get.  If he has no value and no future in the organization, then he's worthless to the Reds, yet Krivsky asked for (or simply accepted) him as part of a deal.  Can you explain why that makes sense?  Because, you know, I'm an idiot.

Do you even know how the Rule 5 draft works?  It's for guys who've been in your system for 6 years, but aren't on your 40 man roster.  That's right - after 6 years, Toronto doesn't think enough of Hamilton to even think he's one of the 40 best players they own the right to.

Like I said, Harris is no Larkin, but he's had more success at higher levels; he hasn't played AA ball since '03, and A ball since '02.  And that .807 OPS of Hamilton's?  Harris' was better, at a younger age in A and AA.

If, like you said, this isn't part of a Hamilton move, it looks even dumber.  Harris would be more valuable and cheaper to the Reds this year than Castro or Conine, and much more valuable (but the same price) than Hamilton.

Finally, you're damning him with being in 5 organizations, but (1) Toronto is only his 4th organization (Montreal and Washington are the same organization), and the first two of his three moves he was used to get Nomar Garciaparra, Matt Murton, Austin Kearns, and Filipe Lopez.  It's not like he's just bouncing around, looking for work!

Plus, SeanJP has not yet used any of the following words or phrases:

1.  Rob Deer
   
2.  Savvy
   
3.  Run out to his position
   
4.  Strikeouts
   
5.  Homeruns (as a single word, rather than "home runs")

If Bray becomes this team's closer for the next few years - and doesn't totally suck - you don't think this would have been a good trade in the long run?  I know that's a big if.. but that's still what it comes down to.  Kearns didn't help the Nationals much this year.  Will he help them win ball games in the future more than Bray will help the Reds?  I don't care about stats because they don't always translate to wins and losses.  

Also, answer my question... do you think the Reds would have made the playoffs if they hadn't made the trade?  That deals with the short term part of the equation.

And I was really tempted to not use "Reply to this" but rather create a brand new diary entirely titled "Rereading this thread will make my headache even worse."  

The Reds sent 2 starting position players and a Triple-A reliever.

This is what they got in return:
Bray - young, good potential, not a bad pitcher to acquire
Majewski - injured at the time of the trade, but still acquired to help get the team to the playoffs in 2006.  Could be good in future, but not likely to be great.
Clayton - sucked his whole career, sucked in Cincinnati
Harris - a "toss in", Triple-A fodder
Thompson - a single-A pitcher coming off of surgery

I think I've been critical, but I also think that it's a fair assessment of the deal.  If Harris is just a throw in, this deal goes from bad to incompetent because the Reds traded 2 starters who were above average hitters, with Kearns having a plus glove and Lopez terrible on defense, and all they got in return of value were two relievers, one of whom was injured at the time of the trade.  How does this make sense?

Kearns and Lopez were due for huge arbitration raises and combined would have cost $11 million to S15 million in 2007.

I don't know where you are getting those numbers for salary, but I would be surprised if Lopez and Kearns combined for more than $10 million next year.  Last year they made a combined $4.5 million, that would be quite a hefty raise to get through arbitration for them to make a combined $11+ million.

Majewski had been a very good, durable middle reliver who throws groundballs

I think you downplay the fact that Majewski was injured too much.  The guy got a cortisone shot before coming to the Reds, and whether the Reds knew about it or not, they should have at least given the guy a physical (something they admitted to not doing).  Yes, Bowden is a tool for not disclosing it, but Krivsky got taken by the tool.

But in "theory," they needed Clayton as some insurance. He sucked. So what?

So what?  So they took on a player that hurt the team when they were oh so close to going to the playoffs.  I'm not going to blame Clayton on missing the playoffs, but how long did he get to start before the Reds finally wised up and put both Aurilia and Encarnacion in there?

If Harris was padding, that means he was non-essential to the trade.  That means that you can take him out and the trade is still balanced the same, right?  And as boobs said above, I think you could take Clayton out of the deal and the Reds would look better.  So that means the deal comes down to Kearns, Lopez, and Wagner for Bray, an injured Majewski, and Thompson.  Even if the Reds are saving money, they used that money on Cormier, Gonzalez, and Stanton.  Do you think this team is better than the team assembled last year?

That is my frustration with this.