Ah yes. If the guy who engineered the outstanding 'Curt Schilling and Steve Finley - for - Glenn Davis' deal should not be enshrined for all eternity in the Baseball Hall of Fame, who should?

...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: If I recall, that deal was widely hailed as a great trade on the day it was made. Through the miracle of twenty years of highsight, you brilliantly figured out that all the experts were wrong.

It's worse. You left out Pete Harnisch. I remember what car I was driving and where I was on the beltway when they announced that trade. You're right, Pete-- I was ecstatic. Ah, the innocence of youth.

Mr Hemond was also the architect of the "Why Not" season of '89. He will always get a pass from me on the Glenn Davis trade thanks to that wonderful Summer of outcasts that came so close!! Phil Bradley, Randy Miligan, Tim Hulett, Mickey Tettleton, etc.
I only wish ESPN did a 30 on 30 of that Summer.

You're right, Pete. I myself thought it was a great deal. The guy was a consistent 35-HR hitter (big numbers in those days), Schilling hadn't shown much to that point, and Finley was looked upon as a defensive guy and slap hitter, not the role clubs looke for in their centerfielders. Harnisch was thought to be mediocre at best.

However, I was and still am your basic fan with llittle of the resourxes at Hemond's disposal. Nobody takes that much of a tank for no reason. Heck, my dad swore to his dying day that the Astros pulled one over on us by hiding something medical.

That's where Hemond comes into play. Did he talk to other NL GMs? Managers? Basdeball guys in general? Houston's or other NL doctors? For that matter, did he even have Glenn take the physical exam that is so ubiquitous today.

Sorry, Pete, but I must respectfully disagree with you on this one. I didn't use hindsight to figure out that the "experts" were wrong. I figured out, instead, that the "fans" were wrong. It seems to me that the experts were never even asked.

However, I must also, to be fair, agree with Sturmy on the 'Why Not?' year of 1989. One year after starting 0-21 and 54 wins altogether the previous summer, we went to the last weekend and probably only lost the division to Toronto because one of our starters (Jeff Ballard, perhaps?) was walking around with bare feet and stepped on something nasty. Dave Johnson pitched in his place and lost by something like 2-1. All time great clutch pitching, but the offense couldn't keep their end of the bargain.

What you saw that year was something you may never see again - every single person on that tream had a career year. They had never been that good before and were never to be that good again.

One other quaint item re: that season. I think that was the year (or was it the year before? The year after?) that Scott Boras sat Ben MacDonald out all summer becuase the O's wouid not come up with a bonus of $100,000 for - all told - three seasons! As in $100K altigether, not each year.

LOL! Now they argue over a five million buck bonus. Back then it was a $33,000 bonus per year for three years.. I'm thinnking maybe that times have changed!

Still, considering the previous year - and indeed, even standing upon its own - '89 was one of the truly great and exciting seasons in Oriole history. It's seldom you can say that about a season in which we ultimately lose, but this was one of those times.

And if the Orioles make the wild card this season, it will be another one of those times. Not likely, but consider - second place is wide open in the AL East, and our starting pitching may be right up there with the best of them. It's a start, is it not?

Roland Hemond might be a great guy but he engineered two of the worst trades in history: Eddie Murray for Juan Bell, et. al. and the three-fer to Houston for Davis. Who would trade the best clutch hitting switch hitter in the game for the centerpiece of a trade who was a shortstop? The O's already had a shortstop that played every INNING, Cal Ripken. Hemond has also been qouted as sayinng Murray wanted out, well so shat? Make the guy happy or actually get something of value in return. Roland Hemond began the downfall of the Orioles that we live in today. 89 was a wondrous year but a fluke, as 90 and 91 would prove.

As to the Davis trade, there were some publications that doubted it. Three future All-Stars for a 30 year old? I knew Harnisch would be good, and it wasn't 20 year hindsight Pete, he was an All-Star the NEXT season, led the league in shutouts once and won over 100 games. Schilling is a border line HOFer and Finley hit over 300 homers.

@Fang,

Finley wasn't just viewed as a good fielder, he was superlative and his defense was critical in that '89 season.

Davis would have been okay here if he did not get injured, people forget that he was hit in the neck during spring training by Chris Bosio (who was notorious for hitting guys) He ended up with a nerve injury that caused muscle wasting and he was never the same, his trapezius was mush.. He had more bad luck while in the minors on a rehab assignment a bouncer (who was later a heavyweight boxing contender) broke his jaw when he was trying to intervene on the part of some young teammates. His season was lost. But even if he'd gone 30 and 100 over the life of his contract, it was still gong to be a horrible trade. went on to be an ALl Star

I believe old Rollie also was the origin of the Orioles Confederate Money!

Under the control of more alcohol required to float a frigate, I suppose if one were to look at his entire body of work you could stretch it and include him, but that a lot of alcohol and for an Oriole fan, there is just no way.

Longevity and being a really nice guy doesn't translate to being in the HOF, if that were the case Sam Perlozzo and Dave Trembly should be in line!

Hail Mary and pass the wine!

First things first ... There seemed to be a majority of those who I spoke with that wanted the Glenn Davis trade. I was not one of them. Not because I knew Davis would be a bust, but because there were numerous answers to Why Not?

(1) The Orioles were wildly thin in depth. They could not afford a one-for-three trade even if Davis had hit 35 HR's in all three years.

(2) The Orioles faded at the end. The AL was running a balanced schedule at the time and they were actually the fifth best team in the league that year.

(3) While everyone focused on how close Baltimore was to Toronto -- two games -- most didn't realize the Blue Jays actually started a Trembley-like 12-24 before Cito Gaston took the helm. Whatever you think about Cito in the All-Star game debacle (and I can't print my thoughts publicly), you can't deny what 89 wins mean when you're handed a 12-24 team.

(4) The trade I would have wanted was Ballard for somebody or a bunch of somebodies. Yes, he won 18 games in '89. Yes, his ERA was sub 3.5. Yes, he was our only LH starter. But my eyes told me he was on lucky son of a gun. His H's to IP's ratio was lousy and he struck no one out. Well, he struck out Mattingly of all people three times in one game once. But that was 1989 for you. He also gave up three rocket shots -- two singles and a triple play.

Anyway, no one listens to me.

Getting to Roland Hemond, it is not important whether the Glenn Davis trade was lauded by every human being except me. It stunk. That was the results.

But that, too, isn't what is important.

Hemond is being honored with an award. Like the broadcasting counterpart, it is not an actual induction into the HOF. It is a recognition by the HOF.

And as Peter wrote, it "is presented to an individual for 'extraordinary efforts to enhance baseball's positive impact on society.' " From all I have heard about Hemond from all sorts of sources and from Hemond himself, I have difficulty having difficulty with him getting this award.

Umm, I mean, I think he deserves it 100%, too.

Obviously, I meant three-for-one (not one-for-three) when talking about the Davis trade.

Roland may be a fine person, a credit to his family and Schmuck's drinking buddy but those trades ruined the Orioles for years. Basically they gave three worthwhile players for the useless Glenn Davis ( a trade I remember hating at the time) and traded away Eddie Murray for nothing . The team only needed a power hitting 1st baseman like Davis because Murray was gone. Horrible trades by a horrible general manager.

One of the nicest and best men in baseball that I have ever met. I have worked in baseball in Arizona for 30 years and I have talked to the "great one in baseball" several times.

One of the nicest and best men in baseball that I have ever met. I have worked in baseball in Arizona for 30 years and I have talked to the "great one in baseball" several times.