PDA

View Full Version : RON OESTER fired



RFS62
09-22-2004, 07:14 AM
Oester fired from job in minors

Naehring says 'fit' was wrong

By John Fay
Enquirer staff writer

ATLANTA - It seemed like a perfect fit when Ron Oester, a tough player bred in the old-school Reds tradition, was hired to lead the on-field minor-league operation. It didn't work out that way.

Oester was relieved of his duties last week, just as he was about to depart for the Instructional League.

"I guess I wasn't enough of a yes man," Oester said.

Oester said he was shocked by the move and wasn't sure who was behind it.

Reds director of player development Tim Naehring said it simply wasn't working out.

"Hindsight is 20-20," Naehring said. "Obviously, Ronnie Oester is a good person and a good baseball man. But the demands of the on-field coordinator are time-consuming. With organizing the schedule and everything else, it's a difficult job. It wasn't a good fit."

The Reds hired Oester Dec. 31. The move was big news because Oester had left the Reds in 2001 after 27 years in the organization, a year after the manager's job was taken out from under him in a misunderstanding with then-general manager Jim Bowden.

Oester was working in the Philadelphia Phillies' player development department when the Reds wooed him to a position created under new GM Dan O'Brien.

"I wanted to help the club get back to the way it used to be," Oester said. "I thought I was doing that. I guess I didn't kiss enough (butt).

"The puzzling thing to me is the same guys survive year after year and the organization doesn't get any better."

Naehring said the job will be filled.

"We don't have anyone in mind," Naehring said. "I'm going to sit down with Dan and talk about it. I want to make sure whoever it is is 100 percent comfortable with the way we do things."

Oester has no immediate plans. He said he'll consider his options for a few weeks.


http://reds.enquirer.com/2004/09/22/red1nte.html

RedsBaron
09-22-2004, 07:19 AM
I can't say I'm a big fan of Oester, but I'm not all that thrilled by the management that fired him either. Of the management charged with building the Reds into a winner, about the only guy I'd give a passing grade to right now would be Chris Chambliss.

Hoosier Red
09-22-2004, 07:24 AM
I'd take anything Ronnie O says with a grain of salt right now. He is clearly very bitter.
That said, I wish there was more damning evidence to fire a guy than "he wasn't a good fit."

RFS62
09-22-2004, 07:29 AM
Well, there had to be a lot more to it than the "good fit" line, but not for public consumption.

letsgojunior
09-22-2004, 08:02 AM
I guess we can't blame this one on Jim Bowden.

SandyD
09-22-2004, 08:08 AM
"We don't have anyone in mind," Naehring said. "I'm going to sit down with Dan and talk about it. I want to make sure whoever it is is 100 percent comfortable with the way we do things."

Must have been some kind of conflict.

Krusty
09-22-2004, 08:12 AM
Oester needs to quit being a cowboy and doing things his way. You work for a company and you do it the company's way or you're out the door. It's that plain and simple.

But to come out and say that the Reds want nothing but "yes men", well.......what's that say about Ron Oester? Oester should be thankful he was able to come back to the Reds. New GM and new direction the organization was taking after canning Jim Bowden. Instead, maybe the problem was all Jim Bowden but alittle of Ronnie Oester too.

Ravenlord
09-22-2004, 08:12 AM
man, i'd love to be anywhere in the FO right now...

smith288
09-22-2004, 08:30 AM
"I wanted to help the club get back to the way it used to be," Oester said. "I thought I was doing that. I guess I didn't kiss enough (butt).
No offense, Ron, but what did you do to add to the team to make it "what it used to be"?

I respect him as a baseball man but as a team player, he appears to lack the skill. You get paid, you follow direction. Thats how working works.

zombie-a-go-go
09-22-2004, 08:32 AM
"The puzzling thing to me is the same guys survive year after year and the organization doesn't get any better."

Ditto.

traderumor
09-22-2004, 08:40 AM
Ditto.Ronnie has had two stints himself during this period of losing.

RANDY IN INDY
09-22-2004, 08:49 AM
When things go bad, you have to fire someone, right? It's called deflection.

Chip R
09-22-2004, 09:00 AM
Oester needs to quit being a cowboy and doing things his way. You work for a company and you do it the company's way or you're out the door. It's that plain and simple.

But to come out and say that the Reds want nothing but "yes men", well.......what's that say about Ron Oester? Oester should be thankful he was able to come back to the Reds. New GM and new direction the organization was taking after canning Jim Bowden. Instead, maybe the problem was all Jim Bowden but alittle of Ronnie Oester too.
Agreed. When :lol: Oester gets to run his own organization he can do things however he wants. But when you are working for someone else, you need to do things their way or else suffer the consequences.

REDJAKE
09-22-2004, 09:00 AM
I get the impression that he is not a yes man and that a man whos ideas don't match what the Reds do than theres the door. Ron is a idea man and thats tough to be around these yes men running the show.Do you think Miley would have been rehired if he weren't a good yes man? I like both men but this organization doesn't want anyone on board who thinks a little different than the FO. SO FAR D.O. HAS SHOWN NOTHING IN THE SHORT TIME HE'S BEEN HERE. GO CINCY!!!!!

BigRed75
09-22-2004, 09:24 AM
Ditto.

Ditto for what? What Oester said was 100% not true. Let's see what occurred last year...Bowden, Boone and most of his coaches were fired, McKeon was let go. Seems to me the same guys don't survive year after year. Oh and you're gone now too Ronnie...good riddance to you!

Hubba
09-22-2004, 09:30 AM
Do you think this is a clue? When you work for someone you do it their way. Sounds like Oster didn't do that.

"
"We don't have anyone in mind," Naehring said. "I'm going to sit down with Dan and talk about it. I want to make sure whoever it is is 100 percent comfortable with the way we do things."

traderumor
09-22-2004, 09:41 AM
I deplore "yes" men. However, one has to be within an organization to identify if that is the culture. Jim Bowden survived several years with dubious credentials in the latter years, and I have not seen too many charactrizations of him being a "yes" man. Some also think that Miley has went toe to toe with DO on occasion regarding personnel decisions. His contract was picked up for the second year. Is he simply toeing the company line in every instance? What is the evidence that he does so? Perhaps there is confusion about expressing an opinion to superiors but then doing what the superiors ask if they do not agree with the employee's dissenting opinion. That person is not a "yes" man--he is employed. Ronnie is not.

REDREAD
09-22-2004, 09:41 AM
I'm not going to cry over OESTER getting canned, but this is so funny.
DanO rehiring OESTER was hailed as him correcting one of Bowden's 'big injustices'
I find it hillarious and ironic that Oester didn't even last a year (compared to the
many years that he lasted under Bowden... In fact, Bowden never fired him, Oester quit).

However, I bet Bowden had a much better ability to work with independent and/or dissenting
opinions that DanO does. I do believe Oester that DanO wants to surround himself with "yes men".
That's very distressing, as it means the Reds will probably never do anything innovative under DanO's
watch

MWM
09-22-2004, 09:47 AM
Deflection? Or maybe it just might be possible that it's Ronnie's fault. I think some people think Oester represents the old way of baseball, so they can't come to grips with the idea that he might be wrong. He's always struck me as a malcontent who isn't willing to take direction. He wants Naehring's job.

I'm sorry, but I don't care what organization you work for, if you aren't in line with the way they do things you're going to be asked to leave. You can't run an organization if you've got key people wanting to do their own thing and consistently causing a conflict every time you disagree. If you have big disagreements with the way the organization does things, you absolutely can't approach it the way Ronnie does. It's counterproductive. If he had such a problem with the organizational direction, then he should have decided to leave on his own rather than cry like a big baby.

Don't make Ronnie out to be some kind of martyr here. He probably deserved what he got.

traderumor
09-22-2004, 09:53 AM
I'm not going to cry over OESTER getting canned, but this is so funny.
DanO rehiring OESTER was hailed as him correcting one of Bowden's 'big injustices'
I find it hillarious and ironic that Oester didn't even last a year (compared to the
many years that he lasted under Bowden... In fact, Bowden never fired him, Oester quit).

However, I bet Bowden had a much better ability to work with independent and/or dissenting
opinions that DanO does. I do believe Oester that DanO wants to surround himself with "yes men".
That's very distressing, as it means the Reds will probably never do anything innovative under DanO's
watchWhat makes you think it was between DO and not Naehring? Naehring is Oester's supervisor and seems to be the person deeming his dismissal necessary.

As for surrounding one's self with "yes" men, it is a false assumption that following the direction of one's superiors starves innovation. The wise subordinate innovator provides ideas within the company's political structure. He might even humble himself and let the superior think that the innovation was his idea if it will make the organization succeed. The foolish subordinate innovator throws out his chest and pridefully refuses to kiss anyone's butt. The organization that he purports to care about and wants to help doesn't ge t the benefit of his innovation.

Chip R
09-22-2004, 10:01 AM
I'm sorry, but I don't care what organization you work for, if you aren't in line with the way they do things you're going to be asked to leave. You can't run an organization if you've got key people wanting to do their own thing and consistently causing a conflict every time you disagree.

Don't make Ronnie out to be some kind of martyr here. He probably deserved what he got.True. There's a difference between a Yes-man or a butt kisser and someone who wants to do things their own way. And another thing, he couldn't get along with JimBo and Co. and now he can't get along with DanO and Co. Say what you want about each GM but you have to admit that their styles and personalities are polar opposites. Oester couldn't get along with either regime so he's gone. What does that tell you about him? I don't think Oester will be happy unless he's GM. Then he won't have to worry about conflicts with his superiors.

Ga_Red
09-22-2004, 10:49 AM
2/09/07

Red Leader
09-22-2004, 10:49 AM
I don't dislike the firing as it seems to me to be what others have said, he didn't follow orders and instead wanted to do things his way, and since that is a huge part of his job, he wasn't being viewed as being "a good fit". That's acceptable.

lollipopcurve
09-22-2004, 10:50 AM
Totally agree with MWM, Chip and others who speculate that Ronnie O probably deserved to go. He's always struck me as a guy who thinks he deserves to have a place in the Reds organization just because he was born in Cincy and played for the Reds. In my mind, he has been given carte blanche by lotsa fans and the local media, and it has gone to his head. My guess is they'll try to make him out to be a martyr again -- talk about lack of a fresh perspective.

Good move by the FO -- shows me they're not afraid to take a PR hit, and to admit a mistake.

dougflynn23
09-22-2004, 12:32 PM
:D RonnieO was my manager at Reds Baseball Heaven and I respect him as a stand-up guy, but even in Sarasota he was complaining about the Spring Training set-up and minor league pitch counts. I wondered how long it would take before he and management's relationship imploded. In any industry, you have to kiss butt; it's the way of the world, and RonnieO isn't very good at it. There has to be some bitterness remaining in that the manager job he feels he was cheated out of was likely his one shot at managing in the big leagues...the name Ron Oester doesn't mean anything outside of Cincy. I hate when people blow up the bridge on their way out of town.

Chip R
09-22-2004, 01:41 PM
:D RonnieO was my manager at Reds Baseball Heaven and I respect him as a stand-up guy, but even in Sarasota he was complaining about the Spring Training set-up and minor league pitch counts. I wondered how long it would take before he and management's relationship imploded. In any industry, you have to kiss butt; it's the way of the world, and RonnieO isn't very good at it. There's nothing wrong with having a difference of opinions and not wanting to kiss butt. I'm sure most of us have a difference of opinions with the people who run the places where we work. And some of us may kiss butt and some of us may just choose to keep silent and do our jobs like the companies want us to even if we disagree. Oester was a member of an organization - or we could say he was a member of a team. Since Oester was a former player he knows what it is like to be part of a team. As a team player you may disagree with how the manager runs things but you don't make a stink about it. I wonder if Oester ever disagreed with any of his managers' strategies? Did he think Rose should have pinch hit Player A instead of Player B during a game? If he did, did he start carping about it? No manager worth his salt would put up with that on a regular basis. But it seems here like Oester isn't a team player. He may not have thought what DanO is doing is the right way to go about things but he needed to suck it up and do what he was hired to do the way they wanted him to or else he should have quit. Oester now can take his act elsewhere. I just hope for his sake that they run things exactly the way he wants it to be ran.

princeton
09-22-2004, 02:02 PM
It was just last month that they were talking about RonO's importance to the organization-- they gave him a lot of input into the Philadelphia deals, it seemed.

I also thought that some of our MIers, FeLo in particular but maybe Olmedo too, got themselves together once Oester showed up. Machado tanked in Philly once Oester left. Who knows if any of it was his influence, but something happened

As an employer, I've discovered that I'd rather have a great person on a flexible schedule than a bad one who fits my schedule. Hopefully this move won't prove to be as bad as a similar one in which Leland Maddux (he of the fine 2003 draft) was cashed out for Terry Reynolds (owner of the shoddiest draft record in history). There was a rumor that Maddux didn't fit DanO's schedule because he wanted to base his operations outside of Cincinnati.

Don't silence your critics: employ 'em and challenge 'em to do better.

Chip R
09-22-2004, 02:11 PM
As an employer, I've discovered that I'd rather have a great person on a flexible schedule than a bad one who fits my schedule. I'm not really sure how that applies in this situation. First, there's scant evidence that Oester is a great talent in what he does - which is what I assume you meant because I don't pretend to judge Oester as a person. Secondly, the schedule doesn't seem to be the problem but rather the differences in philosophy. It's one thing if you are really good in what you do and want to work out of your home. It's quite another when your boss says do it like this and you don't. If Oester thought the philosophy stunk clear back before ST, why did he even A. Take the job and B. keep working for the Reds?

princeton
09-22-2004, 02:37 PM
the schedule doesn't seem to be the problem but rather the differences in philosophy

"the demands of the on-field coordinator are time-consuming" cited Tim Naehring


personally, I've no idea how RonO is at the on-field job, but I suspect that he'd be ideal.

Last year the Reds needed to hire a completely new team of developers with a history of success, and all they really did was bring in RonO. Pfft. But immediately RonO goes so the turnover slows even more. It's an inauspicious start to the offseason, IMO

princeton
09-22-2004, 02:53 PM
personally, rather than giving us a lot of "time," or buying our "philosophy," I'd be more interested in results from my team of developers, the only prominent new member of which is RonO. Are players more ready this year than in previous years?

Certain players were. Dunn and Pena are the big accomplishments this year, and I doubt that Ron had squat to do with that. But beyond that there's Lopez, EdE, Gardner and Pauly. I doubt that Oester had much to do with the pitchers, but M2 and I were speculating at the beginning of the year that Oester would either ruin FeLo for good or else be the best thing that ever happened to him. Maybe it's neither, but FeLo looks so much better and who's new?Maybe Chambliss, maybe Whisler, maybe Oester. Keep 'em all and see if EdE can be next.

I'd have Oester in FL right now, and Maddux would have run that '04 draft. Don't fire anyone after a success unless you're sure that they had nothing to do with it.

traderumor
09-22-2004, 03:09 PM
Oester's track record seems to be that he was being an uncooperative twit. Not sure those are welcome in any organization.

Matt700wlw
09-22-2004, 03:09 PM
He'll be on after the game with Furball....should be interesting to hear what he says

kxblue
09-22-2004, 03:20 PM
Oester needs to quit being a cowboy and doing things his way. You work for a company and you do it the company's way or you're out the door. It's that plain and simple.

Many people have brought this point up, but if Oester was working to change some things maybe thats not such a bad thing. Companies need to be successful and clearly the Reds aren't. Personally, I think the Reds need to change their ways, as what they're doing isn't working right now.

Matt700wlw
09-22-2004, 03:27 PM
I wouldn't doubt if Oester's way was better than the way that isn't working currently, but unfortunately, the Reds aren't going to change their ways...they'll just bring in a "yes sir" person in to do the job, because they supposedly have a plan in place, and a way of going about doing that plan.

Will it work? From what I've seen so far, I doubt it, hell, the players don't even want to be part of it, but we'll see

It's business....like it or not

traderumor
09-22-2004, 03:42 PM
He'll be on after the game with Furball....should be interesting to hear what he saysJust a word of warning from the book of Proverbs:
18:17The first to state his case seems right
until another comes and cross-examines him.

lollipopcurve
09-22-2004, 04:11 PM
Lopez has credited Whisler and Larkin with helping him. No mention of Oester.

Hey, some guys have an axe to grind, as is their right, whether it's Ronnie O or some posters on this board. Familiar bedfellows, I say.

LINEDRIVER
09-22-2004, 04:16 PM
"The puzzling thing to me is the same guys survive year after year and the organization doesn't get any better." Ronnie Oester

Could that be Ronnie firing a shot at Don Gullett??? If so, I totally agree with him on that one.

princeton
09-22-2004, 04:25 PM
Lopez has credited Whisler and Larkin with helping him. No mention of Oester.

Whisler and Larkin helped him play a lot better in Louisville?

CougarQuest
09-22-2004, 05:24 PM
The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Sounds to me the Reds have set a course for eveyone to be in one direction instead of everyone going off on their own tangent and Ron went off on his own direction. Ronnie sounds like a team player, but not a team supervisor/manager. Ron's statement is a classic comment from someone that doesn't understand the mission. "I didn't kiss eveyone's butt, so they fired me". No, you didn't truly understand the mission and wanted to go off differently than eveyone else and you're not meeting the teams goals and objectives. You're ideas may be worthwhile, in fact they may even be better than what we are doing now, but you have to sell those above you on the ideas, so the organization as a whole works towards the same thing, not just go off and do them by yourself, because perhaps what you think will work towards the mission may in fact work against it because you don't truly understand the mission. If you can't sell those above you on your ideas, those below you will never buy into them either. Especially when the upper management tells the employees we are going to do it this way, and your boss comes in from another avenue. Creates a whole bunch of confussion throughout the organization. When you have the supervisor/manager taking personnel in different directions throughout the organization, that's when your organization is in trouble.

I believe someone had asked mid-way through the year, what has Ron done/doing, when DanO was going throughout the organization for weeks at a time. Sounds like DanO was wondering the same thing.

ODERED
09-22-2004, 05:58 PM
I'd take anything Ronnie O says with a grain of salt right now. He is clearly very bitter.
That said, I wish there was more damning evidence to fire a guy than "he wasn't a good fit."

Well, Chambliss has only been with the organization for one year, so he deserves more time. Gullett does need to go, with all the pitchers he's had come through, very few of them really improved under him.

It's not always what you do with talent, it's also how much you improve those that supposedly don't have much talent. I'd also send the third base coach on his way.

Not that he's cost them a lot of wins, but some of his decisions have been downright stupidfying. Some of them were, IIRC, at a moment when the Reds were hanging on for dear life.

ODERED
09-22-2004, 06:00 PM
Where will Ronnie end up next?

ODERED
09-22-2004, 06:15 PM
True. There's a difference between a Yes-man or a butt kisser and someone who wants to do things their own way. And another thing, he couldn't get along with JimBo and Co. and now he can't get along with DanO and Co. Say what you want about each GM but you have to admit that their styles and personalities are polar opposites. Oester couldn't get along with either regime so he's gone. What does that tell you about him? I don't think Oester will be happy unless he's GM. Then he won't have to worry about conflicts with his superiors.

You could look at it this way. Bowden did diddly-squat for the organization over his tenure with the Reds. DanO had the opportunity to improve the club enough to make a "tiny run" at it late in the season, but he didn't. He sat around in his hotel room last off-season, when he COULD have been out and about talking to other GM's, letting them know that he was interested in not only building a competitive organization, but also in being a good representative for baseball.

So, maybe both GM's do have their own styles. The one constant I see, however, is that neither seems to "get it", in terms of what it takes to build a club in a positive direction. Perhaps Oester knows this as fact? I'm just stating what I feel.

When Ronnie talks about people "surving year after year", I have no doubt he's talking about people like Don Gullett, who basically is nothing more than a "poor man's pitching coach who has a really nice smile".

Yes, he should adhere to company rules and policies. But, you can't take the "sense of direction" out of an employee.

Chip R
09-22-2004, 07:07 PM
You could look at it this way. Bowden did diddly-squat for the organization over his tenure with the Reds. DanO had the opportunity to improve the club enough to make a "tiny run" at it late in the season, but he didn't. He sat around in his hotel room last off-season, when he COULD have been out and about talking to other GM's, letting them know that he was interested in not only building a competitive organization, but also in being a good representative for baseball.

So, maybe both GM's do have their own styles. The one constant I see, however, is that neither seems to "get it", in terms of what it takes to build a club in a positive direction. Perhaps Oester knows this as fact? I'm just stating what I feel.

When Ronnie talks about people "surving year after year", I have no doubt he's talking about people like Don Gullett, who basically is nothing more than a "poor man's pitching coach who has a really nice smile".

Yes, he should adhere to company rules and policies. But, you can't take the "sense of direction" out of an employee.
First of all, DanO was hired in mid-November last year. Then he had to do a managerial search. As for making trades at the winter meetings, how many players were traded then? Not very many. Also, without the benefit of hindsight, what did we have to give up to get something?

You don't give DanO much time, do you? With the budget he was given and the players he had and the time available, what did you expect, a division title?

Actually, I disagree with you about Oester meant Gullett in his remarks. I think he is talking about people in the front office. Naehring perhaps. Maybe gtuys like Al Goldis or Gene Bennett. I doubt seriously that Oester would think Gullett is one of those guys. He's a Big Red Machine guy so to guys like Oester he is a sacred cow.

No you can't take "sense of direction" out of an employee. But, as Coug said, if you think that is the way it should be you need to sell it to your superiors instead of grumbling and making a fuss about it. If he can't sell it to DanO and Naehring, how is he going to get his charges to believe in it? It's always someone else's fault when things happen to Oester. He never takes responsibility for his actions.

ODERED
09-22-2004, 09:10 PM
Did anyone here say that the Reds should have won the division title? What I did say is that the Reds could have made a "mini-run" late in the season, if DanO had it in him to pull some strings. Paul Wilson might have been "robbed" of some decisions, but he's been terrible as of late. If they'd traded him when they had the chance, the bullpen might not have been as bad as it has been lately. DanO balked on that one. Now Paul's back to being the type of pitcher he's been his entire career. About 7-9 wins and a 4.75 ERA or so.

Chip R
09-22-2004, 09:28 PM
Did anyone here say that the Reds should have won the division title? What I did say is that the Reds could have made a "mini-run" late in the season, if DanO had it in him to pull some strings. Paul Wilson might have been "robbed" of some decisions, but he's been terrible as of late. If they'd traded him when they had the chance, the bullpen might not have been as bad as it has been lately. DanO balked on that one. Now Paul's back to being the type of pitcher he's been his entire career. About 7-9 wins and a 4.75 ERA or so.
Really? How were they going to make a "mini run" with Jr. out, the starting pitching turning to crap and the bullpen in a shambles? If they were going to get anyone for Wilson it would have been kids. I think trading Wilson would have been a good move but it sure wasn't going to be enough to keep them in the race. You can't have it both ways. You trade Wilson and you lose a decent starting pitcher. Your bullpen may get somewhat better but certainly not to the point where it can be trusted with a lead. You insinuate that if DanO did anything during the off season we'd be talking about magic numbers by now.

MWM
09-22-2004, 09:33 PM
What's a "mini" run?

Chip R
09-22-2004, 09:39 PM
What's a "mini" run?
I don't know but it didn't happen because DanO was sitting in his hotel room all off season. :confused:

SteelSD
09-22-2004, 09:56 PM
What's a "mini" run?

Sounds like a short burst of respectable baseball followed by long-term regression to the mean.

Hmn. Never seen that before.

CrackerJack
09-22-2004, 10:47 PM
Sounds like a short burst of respectable baseball followed by long-term regression to the mean.

Hmn. Never seen that before.


Ah, you mean the Reds in April and May every year?

SteelSD
09-22-2004, 11:06 PM
Ah, you mean the Reds in April and May every year?

Yep. That would be it. Easy to identify...

If the Reds are over-under on their Run Differential, yet have a winning record while a number of guys are playing well above expectations, that's the mirage.

If the Reds are right-side-up on their Run Differential and posting a winning record while players are performing to their potential, that's the real deal.

Bill
09-23-2004, 12:22 AM
If Oester wanted to change how some things are being run in the organization, don't fire him, make him GM.

Ok assistant GM.

Krusty
09-23-2004, 12:43 AM
And what makes Ron Oester an expert on how an organization should be run?

RANDY IN INDY
09-23-2004, 08:06 AM
I've been wondering the same thing about the Reds front office for quite some time now. ;)

ODERED
09-23-2004, 02:03 PM
Sounds like a short burst of respectable baseball followed by long-term regression to the mean.

Hmn. Never seen that before.

Can't suit you, can I? Knowing that no one here would agree that the Reds could have hung in this thing ALL season long, I chose a word that I thought would "soften" the impact of what I was suggesting: that the Reds could have made some moves to at least give them a chance.

ODERED
09-23-2004, 02:08 PM
Really? How were they going to make a "mini run" with Jr. out, the starting pitching turning to crap and the bullpen in a shambles? If they were going to get anyone for Wilson it would have been kids. I think trading Wilson would have been a good move but it sure wasn't going to be enough to keep them in the race. You can't have it both ways. You trade Wilson and you lose a decent starting pitcher. Your bullpen may get somewhat better but certainly not to the point where it can be trusted with a lead. You insinuate that if DanO did anything during the off season we'd be talking about magic numbers by now.

But, whether they were going to make the wildcard or not, they would not have been 25-30 games out of their division and 15-20 games out of the wildcard race. You see, the Reds are "the best of the worst" in the wildcard race. That wouldn't have been the case had DanO pulled the strings when he could have. They could have just brought up the minor league pitchers we're seeing now, and let them see if they can keep the Reds in it. Which would make sense, since you're saying the Reds starting pitching was going to crap. If it was going to crap, then there was no point in keeping Wilson (who was having a career year to that point, and is now a lesser version of a Jimmy Haynes) anyway.

SteelSD
09-23-2004, 02:50 PM
Can't suit you, can I? Knowing that no one here would agree that the Reds could have hung in this thing ALL season long, I chose a word that I thought would "soften" the impact of what I was suggesting: that the Reds could have made some moves to at least give them a chance.

A chance? I'm not sure Cinci had the goods to deal for Randy Johnson, Brad Penny, Ben Sheets and half a bullpen at any point in 2004.

Team Clark
09-23-2004, 02:58 PM
Did anyone hear "O" last night on Fuhrman? I was not able to tune in. Anyhting good, bad, indifferent?

lollipopcurve
09-23-2004, 03:14 PM
I'm not interested in what Oester says to Andy Furman. Bitterness stirred into media schlock... such a tired recipe.

Team Clark
09-23-2004, 03:54 PM
Lollipop...True, just interested in what he had to say if anyhting. Having known O for some time I was curious as to what he may have said. I have not had the opportunity to speak to him so I was a little more than curious on his take. Ron does hold grudges so I am sure he is bitter to some degree.

princeton
09-23-2004, 04:39 PM
What's your take, TC? Oester seemed ideal for that particular job, and ostensibly was one of DanO's few offseason hires.

Doc. Scott
09-23-2004, 04:44 PM
All I caught was a clip this morning about how Oester said he wasn't "politically correct" enough. Furman said (rightfully), "What's that mean?", but O replied, "I don't know," then went on about how he spoke his mind.

It left me wondering if O is sort of "old-fashioned" in his attitudes, or if it just meant that he was a little too critical of top management to the wrong people. But I don't have the rest of the context.

CougarQuest
09-23-2004, 06:00 PM
Hmm, "not politically correct". Using his reasons, one could jump to the conclusion that he used an inappropriate word towards someone.

Team Clark
09-23-2004, 06:23 PM
Seeing how stiff Dan O and his staff are they may have perceived Ron O as a "renegade". I can tell you this...there is not a lot of confidence in Dan O within the organization. I supported his hiring but I can say that my support has dwindled. Dan is a "Yes" man and so is Dean Taylor. The impression that I get along with many others within the organization is that Dan is "feeling" his way through this job. Which IMO is somewhat to be expected but not to the large degree that is evident. I'm not talking about Big League payroll and trades I am talking about the ability to effectively oversee what 99% of the fans do not get to hear or see. Player Development, Scouting at both the ML and amateur levels, Minor League coach development, Instruction, and League wide relationship building.

I really though that Dan O could be a Bob Quinn but I was wrong. Dan is proficient as an INDIVIDUAL in the scouting arena. No question. He's adeqaute at best in the Player Development arena. He seriously lacks the abilities to coordinate putting the right people in place to help him effectively manage a Major League organization. Quite honeslty he has very little support from the people I talk with on a regular basis. That includes Players, Player Development staff, Scouts and Coaches. Real shame.

Team Clark
09-23-2004, 06:26 PM
Do not take my statement as defending Ron Oester. I have yet to speak to Ron about his dismissal. Knowing Ron it will probably be one sided but with a large degree of merit.

Krusty
09-24-2004, 08:27 AM
Reds' minor leagues a mess


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oester firing, fallout reveal disturbing truth



It's a classic case of He Said-He Said. Unless you're one of the two men directly involved, it's not important whom you believe. Ron Oester said the Reds treated him shabbily, again. Tim Naehring said it was a difference in philosophies that led the club to fire Oester.

"It's sad to see this organization in the state it's in," said Oester, the Reds' former minor-league field coordinator.

"I feel very confident we've tried to re-establish what the Cincinnati Reds are all about," said Naehring, the Reds' director of player development and Oester's immediate supervisor.

Oester said Naehring was rarely available. "As the year went on, he wouldn't answer his cell phone," Oester said. Naehring said he returns calls promptly, an assertion defended by at least one club official and John Fay, the Enquirer's beat reporter. Maybe Naehring has Caller ID.

Oester said Naehring "is in over his head." Naehring said he wouldn't comment on that.

And so on. What matters is not that two Cincinnati kids - Oester went to Withrow, Naehring to La Salle - had a rude parting of the ways. What matters is what it suggests about the Reds' farm system. With tightwad ownership, if you don't hit home runs in the minors, you will strike out in the majors. Every time.

Cincinnati's only chance to be anything greater than a footwipe rests in its ability to scout, draft, sign and develop players. The people they have running the operation better be smart and innovative, not divided and squabbling.

You could say Ron Oester is a hothead.

You could say he's willful, stubborn and confident in his beliefs. Oester knows what he knows. But you could see where he wouldn't always be the easiest guy to get along with.

Here's something else about Oester: He's old-school tough. He expects things to be done a certain way. He remembers when doing things the Reds Way was a given. And he knows the game.

"He's a good baseball person," Naehring said.

Here's what the good baseball person had to say about the Reds' organizational philosophy, when it comes to developing players: "I didn't see anything like that."

Here's what he said when asked if he thought loyalty counted for more than competence among non-playing members of the organization: "No doubt. I think the guy that's more qualified is going to have his own opinions on how to change things (for) the better. I don't know that they want to hear that."

Naehring said only that the Reds are committed to being the kind of organization that will make the fans and city proud. "(Oester's) job description was laid out (to Oester) and not fulfilled," Naehring said. "We needed to move on."

Oester said he was stunned to arrive at spring training to see minor-leaguers walking on and off the field. "This is the Cincinnati Reds," Oester said Thursday, more amazed than angered, "and we have players walking on and off the field."

Oester said he saw a minor-league hitting instructor sleeping in the dugout during a game in Sarasota. He said he saw a kid hit a home run, trot to first base "then peel off and head back to the dugout."

Oester said the organization mandated that minor-league hitters not swing at a pitch until they were thrown a strike. When he questioned that wisdom, he said Reds general manager Dan O'Brien told him to allow two players per team to swing away, and if that experiment worked, he could add two more. Say what?

Oester said he was rarely consulted on player moves. "I was never invited to any meetings with Dan and Tim. I'm supposed to be running the minor leagues on the field. I didn't hear anything except on voice mail."

Oester said he was involved in deciding September call-ups. He advocated recalling catcher Corky Miller. "I like his makeup," Oester explained. Oester recalled O'Brien said Miller "is always dirty. It seems to me Corky Miller should be playing on a Sunday beer league team."

"No disrespect, Dan," Oester came back. "But I'd rather have somebody play good than look good."

O'Brien didn't return a phone message Thursday.

The Reds said Oester returned from a seven-day trip to the Dominican Republic in August, after just one day. Oester said that was true. He left after a night because he was unable to get clean towels in his hotel room. The Reds also said on several occasions in March, Oester skipped afternoon workouts in Sarasota.

The team claimed Oester

missed at least nine of the 91 days he was expected to be on the road. Oester said he explained his absences. Naehring said only this: "Ron made the decision for the organization" to fire him.

On it goes. He Said-He Said leaves one lasting impression: The Reds don't have their act together in the minor leagues. And that's death to a small-payroll team.

Krusty
09-24-2004, 08:28 AM
So, who do you believe more....Oester or the Reds?

zombie-a-go-go
09-24-2004, 08:55 AM
Ditto for what?

Gullett.

Gary Redus
09-24-2004, 08:56 AM
You have to wonder how with Oester it is always someone else's fault and this is with two different administrations. There is also a huge difference in the freedom to talk and debate inside the organizational hierarchy versus venting outside. I don't know what the deal is but something about Oester's attitude makes me leery. I lead about 40 people and have to build a leadership team (sometimes from contentious folks) but I wouldn't touch Oester.

knuckler
09-24-2004, 08:56 AM
The headline of Daugherty's article has no relation to the content. Nowhere in there is even the hint of analysis about if the minor league situation is good, bad, improving, declining, etc. Just another stir-the-pot column from Daugherty, his specialty.

Redny
09-24-2004, 09:26 AM
The Reds said Oester returned from a seven-day trip to the Dominican Republic in August, after just one day. Oester said that was true. He left after a night because he was unable to get clean towels in his hotel room.


Ron needs to grow up, and learn to deal with some of the bumps in the road on the way. What a baby.

Chip R
09-24-2004, 09:51 AM
Ron needs to grow up, and learn to deal with some of the bumps in the road on the way. What a baby.
I used to use a towel for a week or more without washing it. He's in the Dominican Republic. What does he expect, mints on his pillow?

RFS62
09-24-2004, 09:55 AM
If that towel story is true, he should have been fired on the spot.

I liked Ron Oester as a player. I tolerated Windmill Oester as a third base coach. I've had about enough of RON OESTER in any form of management.

He seems to be determined to burn every bridge in town on his way to career suicide.

Doc. Scott
09-24-2004, 10:00 AM
The headline of Daugherty's article has no relation to the content. Nowhere in there is even the hint of analysis about if the minor league situation is good, bad, improving, declining, etc. Just another stir-the-pot column from Daugherty, his specialty.


That's exactly what I was thinking, too. Just because the lower-level employees don't get along with management doesn't necessarily mean the company's product sucks (even if it does). Whether Oester was or is or can be a competent employee is still up for debate, but if everyone's at loggerheads, letting him get on with it is absolutely the best decision. Meanwhile, the Enquirer's headline writer seems not to have read the column at all.

Johnny Footstool
09-24-2004, 10:01 AM
Oester said he was involved in deciding September call-ups. He advocated recalling catcher Corky Miller. "I like his makeup," Oester explained. Oester recalled O'Brien said Miller "is always dirty. It seems to me Corky Miller should be playing on a Sunday beer league team."

I sincerely hope this isn't true.

Chip R
09-24-2004, 10:03 AM
He must be a joy to live with. Could you imagine some of the conversations around the house if things aren't done exactly the way he wants them when he wants them done? And I thought my dad was a control freak. :eek:

lollipopcurve
09-24-2004, 10:10 AM
daugherty's piece = dirty laundry posing as analysis of Reds' system

couldn't agree more with knuckler

the column makes it clear that Oester didn't do his job, but the writer doesn't have the guts to come out and say it

instead, he offers a blanket rip job on the whole minor league system (b/c of 1 disgruntled ex-employee????)

it's just more pathetic mainstream media

traderumor
09-24-2004, 10:25 AM
Ok, Ron Oester's job, as far as we have been told, was to set up a gameplan for each and every minor leaguer. So, the guy that didn't run out his home run, it would seem that might be something Oester would address with the young man. The sleeping hitting instructor, did he let anyone know about it, and what was the resolution if he did? Or did he just wag his head and put it in his mental file for later use? I'm sure there are all kind of doozy stories that could be told in each organization. Heck, last year Naehring caught a lot of flack because some minor leaguers were demoted for complaining about conditions in extended spring training. Now Oester says things are too loosey goosey for his tastes?

As for Daugherty's conclusion, he sure didn't make the case.

As the Corky Miller comment, he was called up, so what's the beef? Sounds like an off the cuff remark made hundreds of times here on Redszone. From what information the article provides, sour grapes as far as Oester is concerned. It sounds like he just wasn't meeting the basic job requirements and then wants to blame it on politics and loyalty being more important than performance. Yet from the information regarding his performance, he was not performing satisfactorily.

REDREAD
09-24-2004, 11:35 AM
Well, I think the article does show that the guys "running" the Reds minor league system, which are supposed to be leading us into some kind of renaissance, may not know what they are doing.

This (in addition to the Corky quote), is particularly disturbing:


Oester said the organization mandated that minor-league hitters not swing at a pitch until they were thrown a strike. When he questioned that wisdom, he said Reds general manager Dan O'Brien told him to allow two players per team to swing away, and if that experiment worked, he could add two more. Say what?

This seems to underscore that DanO appears to be a micromanager who wants to make blanket rules from the top, and not let the guys in the trenches have any kind of say. How stupid is that suggestion quoted above? Maybe if a particular kid needs help with the strikezone, the coaches could force him to always take a strike, but why announce to the world that everyone in the minors must take a first strike? (Or everyone but two players :MandJ: )
If we know about it, surely all the oppositon teams know about it.

IMO, DanO has completely squandered his first year here. His only accomplishment was getting 5 borderline Philly prospects. (which cost the team roughly 1.5 million.. half of Lidle's salary to "rent" him until he was traded).
DanO had about 4 million to spend last winter, and the best he could do was Lidle and VanderWall. Pathetic. The team is certainly not better since he arrived.

westofyou
09-24-2004, 11:41 AM
How stupid is that suggestion quoted above?

Zero Percent, zero.

The organization is trying to get guys to learn the strike zone, tactics such as this are used regularly in Oakland and most likely Boston, even going as far as giving a kid 100 bucks for getting the most walks in a month and not giving player of the month awards to guys with poor on base percentages.

It goes with 6 man rotations and pitch counts and all the other ilk everyone laughs at throughout the year, it's an attempt to develop a player at his most moldable state.

But keep laughing at an attempt to maximize ability, that's just as funny to me.

westofyou
09-24-2004, 11:46 AM
The team is certainly not better since he arrived.

Straighter ship in the clubhouse, younger pitchers on the mound, Dunn, Freel and Pena all having good years, more wins, Lopez..... yeah I long for last year too.

traderumor
09-24-2004, 11:49 AM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27819&highlight=taking+strike

This isn't something we just found out about. There was a pretty good discussion on it. So much for Oester falling victim to the system not wanting to listen to his innovative ideas. Sounds more like he's the one not open to innovation. I also didn't say this earlier, but it is rather ironic for Daugherty to claim the Reds' farm system is in a shambles, yet sides with one whose job it was to get things more organized and he failed to do so, according to his employers.

deltachi8
09-24-2004, 11:52 AM
The team is certainly not better since he arrived.

...maybee, maybee not, but the ORGANIZATION, or for those in Canada OrganEYEzation (yes, i will miss hockey this year), is better. There is now, IMHO, a plan that will be kept to - to develop talent form within, not rush players, etc. I like what i see thus far.

What amazes me is how the guy gets ripped and he has yet to complete one yearon the job.

westofyou
09-24-2004, 11:54 AM
yes, i will miss hockey this year

I miss it already.

princeton
09-24-2004, 11:55 AM
He seriously lacks that abilities to coordinate putting the right people in place to help him effectively manage a Major League organization. Quite honeslty he has very little support from the people I talk with on a regular basis. That includes Players, Player Development staff, Scouts and Coaches. Real shame.

right. Here we have Oester, who was one of the few DanO hires in development, saying that he never agreed with developmental philosophy. It's like there never was a developmental philosophy, which fits with quite a few things that we saw implemented this year (strange callups, position switches, 8 man rotations altered to five man rotations in midstream, etc). One would have assumed that such philosophies were discussed prior to the hire. Not only is there no consistent philosophy, but there's some kind of outrageous communication problem. No real change from the past but, again, there's no real change from the past.

he'll have more opportunities, and I don't see Oester as irreplaceable. However, what are the chances that he gets it right this time? DanO seems to swing and miss as often behind the scenes as he does with the big club, and that's a scary thought for a person brought in exclusively to shore up the foundation.

SteelSD
09-24-2004, 12:12 PM
Anyone wonder if Oester felt that his job was "beneath" him?

Personally, I think this is a classic case of a guy (Oester) on the wrong side of the career curve- especially after having a MLB Manager position offered to him.

Didn't like to travel. Grumpy about not being invited to meetings that his superiors didn't feel he needed to be invited to. Thinks Naehring is "over his head". Consistently appears to want more control that his position allows. No clean towels (god forbid he find someone who knows where to buy some in the DR).

O'Brien may have actually hurt himself by not being consistent with implementing his philosophies (ie. not sticking with his "first pitch strike" mandate and backing off the 8-man rotation). IMO, I think that's more of a sign that he doesn't buy into those philosophies because they were developed by others. But still it seems that consistency is what Oester respects. And I think that inconsistency, even though Oester got his way a couple times, led to a further breakdown of respect from Oester. O'Brien would have been better off saying "No, Ron. This is the organizational philosophy I'm expecting you to implement.".

I've seen this kind of thing before. Regardless of what O'Brien and Naehring did or said, this relationship was doomed from the start. Oester obviously wanted more than the position offered. I hate laying blame for stuff like that, because it's paramount that both parties clearly define and identify that during the interview process.

RedsBaron
09-24-2004, 12:21 PM
I used to use a towel for a week or more without washing it. He's in the Dominican Republic. What does he expect, mints on his pillow?
I understand that his pillow wasn't properly fluffed either-how much can one man take? :mhcky21:

traderumor
09-24-2004, 12:25 PM
Great points, Steel. Perhaps rather than it being unclearly communicated job expectations, they were communicated at a reasonable level of clarity, but Oester nodded approval despite clear objections figuring that getting his foot back in the door in the Reds org. was more important than philosophical differences. That happens all the time also, esp. with folks that are taking a step backwards (real or perceived) in an organization with the goal of working their way up. But doing so can be a very humbling experience and some just can't take the lack of involvement with higher ups in the organization.

LoganBuck
09-24-2004, 12:59 PM
Does anyone else get the feeling that Hal McCoy has been getting his info from Oester? The two strikes thing, and I will bet the "Austin Kearns cant play" flap also came from him.

Tony Cloninger
09-24-2004, 01:00 PM
I would love to know who these DEVELOPMENT people that Team Clark talks about are.......................are they the same development people who have not and cannot develop any starting pitchers for this team in the last 10 years?
The same people who seem to only be here collecting paychecks?

Aronchis
09-24-2004, 01:05 PM
The Reds Farm System is in shambles? Sorry, no. Shambles is what it was in 1997. Now it is just on the par, with some interesting prospects, which is typically the case, but not elite.

princeton
09-24-2004, 01:06 PM
I would love to know who these DEVELOPMENT people that Team Clark talks about are.......................are they the same development people who have not and cannot develop any starting pitchers for this team in the last 10 years?
The same people who seem to only be here collecting paychecks?

so why are they still here, Tony?

I'm not sweating the idea that people are complaining about a new regime; I've been through that, and that's what often happens. It doesn't have to happen, though

however, when the new employees hired by the new regime are also questioning the new regime's sanity, then you appear to have 10 times the mess.

I guess the real question is whether DanO hired Oester directly, or if he was a Lindner add in the way that Miley seemed to be. Maybe DanO had no say over Oester's hiring last year. Certainly that'd better explain philosophical differences and lack of communication

lollipopcurve
09-24-2004, 01:08 PM
I think it's unfair to say O'B displayed inconsistency by going from 8-man rotations in A ball to 5-man rotations "in midstream." If you'll recall, this change was made late in the year, and the explanation was that some pitchers were getting worn down from going every 4th day.

The idea here, apparently, was to help pitchers avoid injury. Which was also a significant objective of the 75-pitch limit/8-man rotations instituted for most of the season. To my way of thinking, that's consistency, combined with the ability to be flexible. I have absolutely no problem with that.

And, it worked -- very few arm injuries in the minors this year.

Of course, if Ronnie O didn't like it -- even without knowing why he didn't like it -- there must be something wrong with it. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Team Clark
09-24-2004, 01:39 PM
Tony I'd love to tell you. I'll make it all encomapssing.... I have spoken with no one in Player Development who DOES agree with Dan O's flimsy philosophy or wavering firection. And when I say no one that only leaves out six people in the Player Development department who I have not spoke with in the last year a few old and the rest all new hires. Read into it what you will.

princeton
09-24-2004, 01:54 PM
I think it's unfair to say O'B displayed inconsistency by going from 8-man rotations in A ball to 5-man rotations "in midstream." If you'll recall, this change was made late in the year

inconsistency in late-stream, then

I think that he saw Grady abandon it in midyear, and decided that it was OK. Not exactly the "Scientific Method."

if it's a good thing and helped with injuries, then stick with it. Shut down anyone that's tired.

Heck, be really innovative and bring it to AA and AAA and then to the majors in the form of bona fide four man rotations. That's a change that I'd like to see, because it directly addresses the small market team's problem with payrolling a pitching rotation. But until Grady Fuson does it, I think that DanO's going to stay away from it.

Phhhl
09-24-2004, 02:11 PM
Seeing how stiff Dan O and his staff are they may have perceived Ron O as a "renegade". I can tell you this...there is not a lot of confidence in Dan O within the organization. I supported his hiring but I can say that my support has dwindled. Dan is a "Yes" man and so is Dean Taylor. The impression that I get along with many others within the organization is that Dan is "feeling" his way through this job. Which IMO is somewhat to be expected but not to the large degree that is evident. I'm not talking about Big League payroll and trades I am talking about the ability to effectively oversee what 99% of the fans do not get to hear or see. Player Development, Scouting at both the ML and amateur levels, Minor League coach development, Instruction, and League wide relationship building.

I really though that Dan O could be a Bob Quinn but I was wrong. Dan is proficient as an INDIVIDUAL in the scouting arena. No question. He's adeqaute at best in the Player Development arena. He seriously lacks that abilities to coordinate putting the right people in place to help him effectively manage a Major League organization. Quite honeslty he has very little support from the people I talk with on a regular basis. That includes Players, Player Development staff, Scouts and Coaches. Real shame.

This is exactly what I saw the day he took the podium and accepted the job as GM. If you tossed Carl Lindner, John Allen and Dick Wagner into a blender and poured it, it could come out heaping tall glass of Dan O'Brien. The guy has just enough baseball knowledge to be dangerous, and he would be more than happy spending the next twenty years tinkering with unoriginal development mandates, second tier prospects, high school draftees and fringe major leaguers while running this franchise into the ground. I know Oester can be a hothead, but I tend to believe what he says... and for that matter, what TeamClark says. DanO is a loser, and I'm afraid he is going to be here for a miserably long time.

crector
09-24-2004, 02:16 PM
Reds' minor leagues a mess


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oester firing, fallout reveal disturbing truth



It's a classic case of He Said-He Said. Unless you're one of the two men directly involved, it's not important whom you believe. Ron Oester said the Reds treated him shabbily, again. Tim Naehring said it was a difference in philosophies that led the club to fire Oester.

"It's sad to see this organization in the state it's in," said Oester, the Reds' former minor-league field coordinator.

"I feel very confident we've tried to re-establish what the Cincinnati Reds are all about," said Naehring, the Reds' director of player development and Oester's immediate supervisor.

Oester said Naehring was rarely available. "As the year went on, he wouldn't answer his cell phone," Oester said. Naehring said he returns calls promptly, an assertion defended by at least one club official and John Fay, the Enquirer's beat reporter. Maybe Naehring has Caller ID.

Oester said Naehring "is in over his head." Naehring said he wouldn't comment on that.

And so on. What matters is not that two Cincinnati kids - Oester went to Withrow, Naehring to La Salle - had a rude parting of the ways. What matters is what it suggests about the Reds' farm system. With tightwad ownership, if you don't hit home runs in the minors, you will strike out in the majors. Every time.

Cincinnati's only chance to be anything greater than a footwipe rests in its ability to scout, draft, sign and develop players. The people they have running the operation better be smart and innovative, not divided and squabbling.

You could say Ron Oester is a hothead.

You could say he's willful, stubborn and confident in his beliefs. Oester knows what he knows. But you could see where he wouldn't always be the easiest guy to get along with.

Here's something else about Oester: He's old-school tough. He expects things to be done a certain way. He remembers when doing things the Reds Way was a given. And he knows the game.

"He's a good baseball person," Naehring said.

Here's what the good baseball person had to say about the Reds' organizational philosophy, when it comes to developing players: "I didn't see anything like that."

Here's what he said when asked if he thought loyalty counted for more than competence among non-playing members of the organization: "No doubt. I think the guy that's more qualified is going to have his own opinions on how to change things (for) the better. I don't know that they want to hear that."

Naehring said only that the Reds are committed to being the kind of organization that will make the fans and city proud. "(Oester's) job description was laid out (to Oester) and not fulfilled," Naehring said. "We needed to move on."

Oester said he was stunned to arrive at spring training to see minor-leaguers walking on and off the field. "This is the Cincinnati Reds," Oester said Thursday, more amazed than angered, "and we have players walking on and off the field."

Oester said he saw a minor-league hitting instructor sleeping in the dugout during a game in Sarasota. He said he saw a kid hit a home run, trot to first base "then peel off and head back to the dugout."

Oester said the organization mandated that minor-league hitters not swing at a pitch until they were thrown a strike. When he questioned that wisdom, he said Reds general manager Dan O'Brien told him to allow two players per team to swing away, and if that experiment worked, he could add two more. Say what?

Oester said he was rarely consulted on player moves. "I was never invited to any meetings with Dan and Tim. I'm supposed to be running the minor leagues on the field. I didn't hear anything except on voice mail."

Oester said he was involved in deciding September call-ups. He advocated recalling catcher Corky Miller. "I like his makeup," Oester explained. Oester recalled O'Brien said Miller "is always dirty. It seems to me Corky Miller should be playing on a Sunday beer league team."

"No disrespect, Dan," Oester came back. "But I'd rather have somebody play good than look good."

O'Brien didn't return a phone message Thursday.

The Reds said Oester returned from a seven-day trip to the Dominican Republic in August, after just one day. Oester said that was true. He left after a night because he was unable to get clean towels in his hotel room. The Reds also said on several occasions in March, Oester skipped afternoon workouts in Sarasota.

The team claimed Oester

missed at least nine of the 91 days he was expected to be on the road. Oester said he explained his absences. Naehring said only this: "Ron made the decision for the organization" to fire him.

On it goes. He Said-He Said leaves one lasting impression: The Reds don't have their act together in the minor leagues. And that's death to a small-payroll team.


Just some more of Paul Daugherty's negativity. Even if the Reds won the World Series, he'd find something to trash the team about.

traderumor
09-24-2004, 02:24 PM
The guy has just enough baseball knowledge to be dangerous, and he would be more than happy spending the next twenty years tinkering with unoriginal development mandates, second tier prospects, high school draftees and fringe major leaguers while running this franchise into the ground.Sounds more like our previous GMs MO than the current one, and he came just a bit shy of 20 years.

lollipopcurve
09-24-2004, 02:27 PM
Princeton -- the point is that, late in the season, they didn't feel they had enough resilient arms to stay with the 8-man rotations -- if they had "shut down everyone who's tired," that is, everyone who was unable to continue in an 8-man rotation on a 75-pitch limit -- then they wouldn't have had enough pitchers to form complete staffs

the solution was to pull some guys from "starting" duty (i.e., 75-pitch duty) and put them in the bullpen

the more resilient arms stayed on the 75-pitch limit

then there a case like Pauly's, who was shut down for a couple starts after complaining about his elbow and then brought back onto the 75-pitch regimen

you seem to be arguing in black-and-white terms -- either do it or don't -- but reality is that different pitchers react differently and the system showed it had enough flexibility to accommodate giving different #s of pitchers -- from 8 to 5 -- "starting" duty on 75-pitch limits for the whole year

in effect, the system did not change, it shrank

your theory that O'B is simply mimicking Grady Fuson may or may not be true -- but it has no basis in fact at this point, so far as I can tell

Aronchis
09-24-2004, 02:37 PM
This is exactly what I saw the day he took the podium and accepted the job as GM. If you tossed Carl Lindner, John Allen and Dick Wagner into a blender and poured it, it could come out heaping tall glass of Dan O'Brien. The guy has just enough baseball knowledge to be dangerous, and he would be more than happy spending the next twenty years tinkering with unoriginal development mandates, second tier prospects, high school draftees and fringe major leaguers while running this franchise into the ground. I know Oester can be a hothead, but I tend to believe what he says... and for that matter, what TeamClark says. DanO is a loser, and I'm afraid he is going to be here for a miserably long time.

DanO's a loser? You make that claim after a year on the job with a downtrodden club? Good for you have foresight. Maybe a little more non-inflammatory analysis would be due than self-rightous bantering which ruins any points your trying to make.

princeton
09-24-2004, 02:48 PM
you seem to be arguing in black-and-white terms -- either do it or don't

exactly. If you believe in a system, then apply it. When not applied systematically, there's not a system

Tony Cloninger
09-24-2004, 03:06 PM
I do not know why they are stll here Princeton.

If Team Clark, and he has most inside info, is correct, then these people either need to get more positive with DO approach or leave.

I would like to give DO at least another year though before i annoint him a "loser".

I am not a patient person either but rebuilding this FA takes more than 1 year to do. No one seems to want to do this....or beacuse DO does not do what they would do then he must not know anything.

I am all for the 4 man rotation though. With 2 long swingman in the bullpen i blv it can work.

Phhhl
09-24-2004, 03:10 PM
DanO's a loser? You make that claim after a year on the job with a downtrodden club? Good for you have foresight. Maybe a little more non-inflammatory analysis would be due than self-rightous bantering which ruins any points your trying to make.

I don't need to support it. Ron Oester, Sean Casey and Team Clark have provided enough support already. DanO is impompetent if the long term plan is to win a championship. If you're happy with the Hall of Fame and the pretty new ballpark, I guess he's your man.

Aronchis
09-24-2004, 03:34 PM
I don't need to support it. Ron Oester, Sean Casey and Team Clark have provided enough support already. DanO is impompetent if the long term plan is to win a championship. If you're happy with the Hall of Fame and the pretty new ballpark, I guess he's your man.

They do? Oester is his own man, which gets himself into trouble, always will move him aside.

Sean Casey? Doesn't want to rebuild anymore since he has only a little more time in Cincy. Though he may be surprised how things turn around, I get Sean's point, I get O'briens(build from the Farm System).

Team Clark: Hearsay, maybe overstated, maybe just how DanO works. It is how it churns out on the field what counts, we don't know how DanO will end up yet though you try to be nihilistic about it.

Santo, your making a flat statement, without good evidence. If DanO takes the Reds to the playoffs in 2006, you will be looking awfully poor. It is your opinion, but I think he deserves his time to turn things around. Whether we like it or not, the Reds are pretty much right on track where I expected things to be at this time. We weren't screwed up over night, it won't turn around overnight, but it may come damn close.

REDREAD
09-24-2004, 03:35 PM
But keep laughing at an attempt to maximize ability, that's just as funny to me.


Yes, it makes a whole lot of sense to have someone like DanO (who has probably never even seen or heard of some of these guys) come in and immediately order them not to swing until they get a strike. Kind of contradicts the idea that Oester was supposed to develop an individual plan for each farm hand.

When Dunn was in the minors, should he have been forced to take strike 1?
He already had plate discipline.

I'm sorry, but blanket rules that apply to everyone with no exceptions are almost always a bad idea, especially when they come from the top and handcuff the managers in the trenches trying to get work done.

REDREAD
09-24-2004, 03:40 PM
Straighter ship in the clubhouse, younger pitchers on the mound, Dunn, Freel and Pena all having good years, more wins, Lopez..... yeah I long for last year too.

:MandJ: Really reaching there.

I see just as much unhappiness in the clubhouse as last year. Everyone was down. Casey wants to leave. Everyone still sees the Reds as a temporary pitstop until they go to a team that is willing to pay them.

Dunn had a good year last year, as a stat guy, I think you'll agree :)

Pena.. you mean the guy DanO was going to cut and was behind Romano, Clark, and other scrubs, who gave credit to Chambliss and Lark?

I will give him credit for Chambliss and Freel.

But he spent just about all his payflex on Cory Liddle. That was dumb.

He did nothing special with Lopez. Any GM would've started him at AAA (since he had an option) and brought him up when Lark was hurt.

Younger pitchers on the mound.. How is that good? Other than Claussen and Wagner, there's probably not a keeper in the bunch.

REDREAD
09-24-2004, 03:44 PM
This is exactly what I saw the day he took the podium and accepted the job as GM. If you tossed Carl Lindner, John Allen and Dick Wagner into a blender and poured it, it could come out heaping tall glass of Dan O'Brien. .

Man, that's the most toxic drink ever. :MandJ:

traderumor
09-24-2004, 03:58 PM
Yes, it makes a whole lot of sense to have someone like DanO (who has probably never even seen or heard of some of these guys) come in and immediately order them not to swing until they get a strike. Kind of contradicts the idea that Oester was supposed to develop an individual plan for each farm hand.

When Dunn was in the minors, should he have been forced to take strike 1?
He already had plate discipline.

I'm sorry, but blanket rules that apply to everyone with no exceptions are almost always a bad idea, especially when they come from the top and handcuff the managers in the trenches trying to get work done.I'm not sure what GM knows the intricacies of every player in their farm system. Furthermore, if you read through the discussion on the topic, there is not a whole lot of details given about the system, so much is open to conjecture. Also, giving a command from the top about one aspect of a player's development plan isn't exactly handcuffing someone from doing their job, whether it be Oester's positon or a manager of a club. In fact, you want to "handcuff" them in some areas, like pitch counts, as has already been pointed out.

Hopefully, Oester's replacement will be more concerned about their own job instead of evaluating their superiors. This is a common problem the wannabes have--get envious of the people ahead of them and can't perform their own job because they are worrying about the job someone else is doing.

lollipopcurve
09-24-2004, 04:02 PM
Santo -- may I suggest you choose happiness over unhappiness?

The road is simple. It is pin-striped.

Princeton -- You ignore my argument, which is that the system was first and foremost a 75-pitch limit system -- which tried to a) keep starting pitchers healthy and b) expand the pool of pitchers who could become SPs. All that varied (and this only late in the season) was the number of pitchers anointed starters under that system. The variations were based on health concerns. The 75-pitch system was implemented consistently all season long, at the A ball level.

Your claims of inconsistency are based on the assumption that it was first and foremost an 8-man system, not a 75-pitch system. Certainly there were reasons they chose to start it out as an 8-man system (probably logistical reasons given the size of minor league pitching staffs), but the health of certain pitchers dictated that it could not continue late in the year. No biggie! For most of the season they got to see more young pitchers in a starting role (good evaluation) and they kept pitchers pretty healthy (good development). I'm sorry, but your complaining about this just seems a little superficial and hardheaded. :)

IslandRed
09-24-2004, 04:26 PM
Heck, be really innovative and bring it to AA and AAA and then to the majors in the form of bona fide four man rotations. That's a change that I'd like to see, because it directly addresses the small market team's problem with payrolling a pitching rotation. But until Grady Fuson does it, I think that DanO's going to stay away from it.

Which will be a problem, given that Grady's about to be out of a job.

I agree with you on this -- the one thing I best liked about 4/8/75 was the implication that pitching every fourth day is something this organization would like to see happen up the ladder. Given that, if I were in the situation, instead of eliminating 4/8/75 I might have lightened up the pitch count or the in-between throwing for the guys whose arms were getting tired, rather than move everyone off the four-day schedule. I say that with the usual caveat that I don't know what the minor-league pitching coaches were saying. It'll be instructive to see if they start on the four-day schedule again next spring.

SteelSD
09-24-2004, 04:31 PM
Great points, Steel. Perhaps rather than it being unclearly communicated job expectations, they were communicated at a reasonable level of clarity, but Oester nodded approval despite clear objections figuring that getting his foot back in the door in the Reds org. was more important than philosophical differences. That happens all the time also, esp. with folks that are taking a step backwards (real or perceived) in an organization with the goal of working their way up. But doing so can be a very humbling experience and some just can't take the lack of involvement with higher ups in the organization.

That's very well said, tr.


Yes, it makes a whole lot of sense to have someone like DanO (who has probably never even seen or heard of some of these guys) come in and immediately order them not to swing until they get a strike. Kind of contradicts the idea that Oester was supposed to develop an individual plan for each farm hand.

Ron Oester was supposed to develop a plan for each farm hand...one that meshed with organizational philosophy and established system. It's obvious that Oester felt he was supposed to drive that when, in fact, that's the GM's perogative.

Oester didn't want to do it that way even though O'Brien provided him some flexibility within the system. There's no possible way to blame Dan O'Brien for that even though it's very possible that by being flexible with Oester's wishes, O'Brien may have actually shot himself in the foot by being flexible with an inflexible guy.

princeton
09-24-2004, 04:48 PM
your complaining about this just seems a little superficial and hardheaded. :)

those words are mere synonyms for scientific and innovative. And I not only agree, but I also thank you ;)

westofyou
09-24-2004, 04:59 PM
Really reaching there.

Yep, I'm the one reaching.

Thanks for pointing out I was wasting my time.

Chip R
09-24-2004, 11:24 PM
Oester's a pretty high strung guy. Since he also has a great love of clean towels, he should hang around this guy for a while. ;)

http://29ways.homestead.com/files/towelie-sm2.gif