PDA

View Full Version : What do you people want??



redsfan30
12-22-2004, 04:18 PM
For as long as I can remember, posters here have complained that we have done nothing to even remotely make the club better. I think we can all agree that the bullpen, thirdbase and the rotation were our problems in order. You cursed the team for not doing anything.

So what does the team do? They go out and get David Weathers, Ben Weber and Kent Mercker for the bullpen. Sorry to sound so nasty, but anyone who thinks that that is not an improvement over what we had in the pen last year doesn't know what they're talking about.

You all complained about Austin Kearns moving to third. You said it wouldn't work out. The team realized that, so what did they do? They went out and signed a *PROVEN MAJOR LEAGUE* thirdbaseman. Sorry to sound so nasty, but anyone who thinks that Randa is not an improvement over what we had at third last year doesn't know what they're talking about.

Ramon Ortiz has been added to the top of the rotation. He is a veteran who had a streak of some mighty fine numbers over a three or four year period and also has World Series experience. He allows us to put Josh Hancock in Louisville, where at this stage of his career, I think he belongs. More importantly, Dan O'Brien has said he's not done yet. We know for a fact that we are intested in Wade Miller.

This team is improved over last year. Everyone is entitled to thier own opinion, but it is my opinion that anyone who has any knowledge whatsoever about baseball should be able to see that this is a better team than what we had last year. People are actually complaing that O'Brien had a better off season last year when he did nothing???? What gives? Do you want the Reds to go out and sign Beltran and trade for Johnson....and while we're at it, why don't we go get Schilling and Gagne and Smoltz? Heck, why stop there?

So...my question presented to the posters here at Redszone is....What in the world makes you people happy?

PS. I'm sorry to sound so negative towards the vibe here, but it is just so frustrating to hear people say how we have to do this this and this to the team...and when we finally do it, you complain about it.

MWM
12-22-2004, 04:20 PM
http://www.yankeetradition.com/trophy.jpg

Mitri
12-22-2004, 04:21 PM
-A true, lights-out, #1 starter.
-health
-luck

redsfan30
12-22-2004, 04:22 PM
http://www.yankeetradition.com/trophy.jpg
That's what we all want. We weren't going to get it running the likes of Castro, Hancock, Padilla, Norton, Sanchez and others out there. We have made improvements over them. That's my point.

bomarl1969
12-22-2004, 04:23 PM
http://www.yankeetradition.com/trophy.jpg

I agree, that is what would make me happy...the Reds 6th World Series C-Ship! :gac:

Tony Cloninger
12-22-2004, 04:24 PM
You and every other team want that. So do i, of course.

However if you expect that every year and do not get it then what?
First i would like this team to contend at least.

MWM
12-22-2004, 04:25 PM
I don't always agree with some of princeton's ideas, but I'm totally in his camp on this one. The only reason you play baseball is to win World Championships. Now I'm going to enjoy following the Reds even if they never win again, but that should ALWAYS be the goal. So if you have no chance this year, be working towards a time when you DO have a chance. I'd rather they crash and burn trying like hell to get one, then to have them flaggling around .500 for a decade.

OldXOhio
12-22-2004, 04:27 PM
Should they completely forego the 2005 & 2006 seasons in doing so?

Rojo
12-22-2004, 04:31 PM
I think we can all agree that the bullpen, thirdbase and the rotation were our problems in order. You cursed the team for not doing anything.

No. We don't. My priorities were rotation, rotation and rotation and then maybe shortstop.

traderumor
12-22-2004, 04:34 PM
I don't always agree with some of princeton's ideas, but I'm totally in his camp on this one. The only reason you play baseball is to win World Championships. Now I'm going to enjoy following the Reds even if they never win again, but that should ALWAYS be the goal. So if you have no chance this year, be working towards a time when you DO have a chance. I'd rather they crash and burn trying like hell to get one, then to have them flaggling around .500 for a decade.I think that is what the Cubs, White Sox, Astros, Phillies, Mariners, Indians, Rangers, Brewers, Padres, Expos have been doing all these years. They're just working towards that year when they have a chance.

Now, the Red Sox have given all of the MLB futile franchises hope that one day, all that looking to next year will eventually arrive.

Tony Cloninger
12-22-2004, 04:36 PM
They could forget about 2005/2006 and 2007 also and people would be even less happy.

You cannot gaurantee that if you blow up for 2-3 years like in 82-83-84....you will get the same results of 1985-1990.

Who is willing to go through those 2-3 bad years?

I know some people would not mind this...but at the same time they do not believe DO and the rest of the FO is capable of rebuilding like MINN did.

And at the same time they say it can be done faster if you just do what i say.
Like it's just that easy to move contracts like DG or KG and get full value for WMp or AK when they have never put 1 full good season together.

Ga_Red
12-22-2004, 04:42 PM
2/09/07

MWM
12-22-2004, 04:44 PM
You cannot gaurantee that if you blow up for 2-3 years like in 82-83-84....you will get the same results of 1985-1990.

That's no reason not to try. There are no guarantees in life, period.


Who is willing to go through those 2-3 bad years?

Me


And at the same time they say it can be done faster if you just do what i say.
Like it's just that easy to move contracts like DG or KG and get full value for WMp or AK when they have never put 1 full good season together.

Other teams seem to do it.

Tony Cloninger
12-22-2004, 04:53 PM
How may other teams do this? It seems that maybe some teams here and there can do it.....and i mean moving bad contracts.
If you trade AK now or WMP now....i feel this org. and us will rue the day beacuse more could have been obtained for them in another year..then now.

I know people are dreading being the Bengals.....but i can also live with 82-83-84 all over again to get 10 years of contending.

Rojo
12-22-2004, 04:54 PM
Like it's just that easy to move contracts like DG or KG and get full value for WMp or AK when they have never put 1 full good season together.

Nobody said it was an easy job.

Cedric
12-22-2004, 04:55 PM
You haven't been here for long if you don't think people here assume they can do it quite well and easily.

cReds1
12-22-2004, 04:59 PM
To call that an improvement of players is a slap in the face. If you call those improvements then I don't know what to say. Yea, those are improvements to make every Red fan rush to the ticket office and, buy, buy, buy tickets. That is what the old man wants you think. OK, we will improve by 3 games from last season. Big Deal!

wheels
12-22-2004, 05:04 PM
Good RF30. I'm glad you're happy with things, and I'll look forward to reading about how positive you are in, say, late July.

Keep the faith.

M2
12-22-2004, 05:14 PM
No. We don't. My priorities were rotation, rotation and rotation and then maybe shortstop.

What he said.



Who is willing to go through those 2-3 bad years?

Where you been the past four years? I went through those. FWIW, looks to me like we've got 2-3 bad years coming up following DanO's current gameplan. Nothing gets better until this team figures out how to bring in some quality starting pitching. Ramon Ortiz doesn't even come close.

Which gets me back to what Rojo said.

Matt700wlw
12-22-2004, 05:15 PM
I want several million bucks, but that's not going to happen

Redsland
12-22-2004, 05:19 PM
Last year this team broke the record for worst ERA in its 130 year history.

This year, they broke it again.

Improvement? That's what some people are happy with? The notion that next year's Reds team might not be the worst one ever for the third straight year?

Forgive me if I expect this team to aim a little higher than "improvement."

RosieRed
12-22-2004, 05:21 PM
For as long as I can remember, posters here have complained that we have done nothing to even remotely make the club better. I think we can all agree that the bullpen, thirdbase and the rotation were our problems in order. You cursed the team for not doing anything.

So what does the team do? They go out and get David Weathers, Ben Weber and Kent Mercker for the bullpen. Sorry to sound so nasty, but anyone who thinks that that is not an improvement over what we had in the pen last year doesn't know what they're talking about.

I'll agree the bullpen was a problem last year, and needed to be addressed. I'm not sure, however, that we needed to spend the money we spent on these guys. I don't mind the Mercker signing so much, because we definitely need a LH in the pen. But Weathers and Weber, in my mind, are question marks right now. Especially Weber and his health. There's no real way of knowing how these two will perform next year, and one might argue we could get similar performances from guys within our system, for a lot less money.

But if they're even average relief pitchers in 2005, you're right. It's an improvement.


You all complained about Austin Kearns moving to third. You said it wouldn't work out. The team realized that, so what did they do? They went out and signed a *PROVEN MAJOR LEAGUE* thirdbaseman. Sorry to sound so nasty, but anyone who thinks that Randa is not an improvement over what we had at third last year doesn't know what they're talking about.

I think this comes down to Randa vs. Freel. There are sound arguments for why Freel should be the third baseman, including batting him leadoff every day. In my opinion, it comes down to two things: Freel's bat/OBP/speed vs. Randa's glove, and the money. At a price of $2.15M, is it worth having Randa at 3B over a $400K Freel? (Or whatever Freel stands to make.)


Ramon Ortiz has been added to the top of the rotation. He is a veteran who had a streak of some mighty fine numbers over a three or four year period and also has World Series experience. He allows us to put Josh Hancock in Louisville, where at this stage of his career, I think he belongs. More importantly, Dan O'Brien has said he's not done yet. We know for a fact that we are intested in Wade Miller.

Ortiz's stats have been laid out numerous times here. Even when he was posting his "mighty fine" numbers, he still had some problems (giving up home runs, for one). But more importantly, he has not posted mighty fine numbers in the past two seasons. Essentially we're gambling $4M~ on him being average, if you ask me. As has been said a number of times, why not take that money and go get someone who hasn't been on a big decline for two seasons?


This team is improved over last year. Everyone is entitled to thier own opinion, but it is my opinion that anyone who has any knowledge whatsoever about baseball should be able to see that this is a better team than what we had last year. People are actually complaing that O'Brien had a better off season last year when he did nothing???? What gives? Do you want the Reds to go out and sign Beltran and trade for Johnson....and while we're at it, why don't we go get Schilling and Gagne and Smoltz? Heck, why stop there?

I too think the team has improved. However, incremental improvements in the pitchng staff aren't going to get us very far. What you have to realize is that we're coming off a season where this team had the second-worst ERA in the majors, and the worst in Reds history. (IIRC.) So improving upon that not only should not be hard, but there also needs to be a *serious* improvement. And while I do think Weathers, Weber and Mercker will help the pen somewhat, if they're all healthy, Ortiz alone seemingly doesn't improve the rotation. Of course he could have a great year, but evidence indicates that is a long shot. Much in the same way that Hancock could have a good year, but it's unlikely.

Improving something that was awful to start with does not automatically make it good. This team could probably get by with an average pitching staff, but we have quite a few guys who either are below average, or for whom an average year could be considered a career year.


So...my question presented to the posters here at Redszone is....What in the world makes you people happy?

PS. I'm sorry to sound so negative towards the vibe here, but it is just so frustrating to hear people say how we have to do this this and this to the team...and when we finally do it, you complain about it.

The problem with that statement is, what exactly have we "finally done" that we're all complaining about? It's not like we signed an ace pitcher and we're all sitting around moaning and groaning about it. We signed Ortiz, who is a huge question mark and had awful numbers last year; Weathers and Weber, question marks. Mercker will be okay, IMO, but I could still argue the money needed to go elsewhere. Randa ... well, what can you say? He's good with the glove?

Obviously everyone has a different idea of what the team could do to make them happy. I'd venture a guess and say that signing some starting pitchers who are healthy and have put up decent numbers in the immediate past would be a good place to start. Lock up Dunn to a LTC, or a three-year deal, whatever. Let us know he's going to be around. For me, at least, those are the two things I wanted this offseason, and neither have happened.

To sum up: Maybe the team is improved. But year after year, this team's success is contingent on "ifs". If these pitchers have career years, and if everyone stays relatively healthy, and if the young pitchers perform well, we are improved. I would like some of those ifs removed.

MWM
12-22-2004, 05:22 PM
Last year this team broke the record for worst ERA in its 130 year history.

This year, they broke it again.

Improvement? That's what some people are happy with? The notion that next year's Reds team might not be the worst one ever for the third straight year?

Forgive me if I expect this team to aim a little higher than "improvement."

OK. Where's the punchline? Don't you know you're not supposed to post here without saying something clever? :RedinDC:

Kiddig. Nice post. I couldn't agree more.

Boss-Hog
12-22-2004, 05:26 PM
RedsFan30, I think your confusion can be summed up as follows: you think the signings/trades the Reds have made are enough to make them a contending team. There are plenty of us here, including me, who wanted the team to do something gives us a legitimate hope to reach the postseason, not just a marginal upgrade of the team we had, which in my opinion, is exactly what they did. Last year's team trotted out the worst rotation in team history. Their solution was to trade for a starter who compiled an ERA in the 5's as a starter in 2004. That's great if the moves they've made excite you; they don't do it for me unless the goal is to finish ahead of the Brewers and Pirates, which is what it appears.

pedro
12-22-2004, 05:26 PM
What do you want from life
To kidnap an heiress
or threaten her with a knife
What do you want from life
To get cable TV
and watch it every night

There you sit
a lump in your chair
Where do you sleep
and what do you wear
when you're sleeping

What do you want from life
An Indian guru
to show you the inner light
What do you want from life
a meaningless love affair
with a girl that you met tonight

How can you tell when you're doin' alright
Does your bank account swell
While you're dreaming at night
How do know when you're really in love
Do violins play when you're touching the one
That you're loving

What do you want from life
Someone to love
and somebody that you can trust
What do you want from life
To try and be happy
while you do the nasty things you must

Well, you can't have that, but if you're an American citizen you are entitled to:
a heated kidney shaped pool,
a microwave oven--don't watch the food cook,
a Dyna-Gym--I'll personally demonstrate it in the privacy of your own home,
a king-size Titanic unsinkable Molly Brown waterbed with polybendum,
a foolproof plan and an airtight alibi,
real simulated Indian jewelry,
a Gucci shoetree,
a year's supply of antibiotics,
a personally autographed picture of Randy Mantooth
and Bob Dylan's new unlisted phone number,
a beautifully restored 3rd Reich swizzle stick,
Rosemary's baby,
a dream date in kneepads with Paul Williams,
a new Matador, a new mastodon,
a Maverick, a Mustang, a Montego,
a Merc Montclair, a Mark IV, a meteor,
a Mercedes, an MG, or a Malibu,
a Mort Moriarty, a Maserati, a Mac truck,
a Mazda, a new Monza, or a moped,
a Winnebago--Hell, a herd of Winnebago's we're giving 'em away,
or how about a McCulloch chainsaw,
a Las Vegas wedding,
a Mexican divorce,
a solid gold Kama Sutra coffee pot,
or a baby's arm holding an apple?

M2
12-22-2004, 05:27 PM
What Do You Want?
It's too complicated
What do you mean?
It's too hard to state it
What do you do?
It's not what but whether
Who do you love?
I'm in love with leather

What do you want?
I don't know what is it
What do you need?
I just need a minute
What will it take?
It will take forever
Who do you love?
I'm in love with lethargy

Matt700wlw
12-22-2004, 05:27 PM
- I'll take Ramon Ortiz over Corey Lidle

- I'll take Weber, Weathers, and Mercker over Rielding, Norton, and Padilla (or Matthews)

- I'll take Joe Randa over Brandon Larson

Championship caliber? I doubt it....but improvement, and steps in the right direction, and hell...perhaps they're not finished making moves -- and NO long term contracts with these vets that would gaurantee their tenure if they have injury problems

I'm seeing more THIS offseason than LAST offseason - I'm willing to give this "plan" time as long as they're showing that there actually is one

Boss-Hog
12-22-2004, 05:30 PM
Very well said Rosie.

RosieRed
12-22-2004, 05:46 PM
- I'll take Ramon Ortiz over Corey Lidle

- I'll take Weber, Weathers, and Mercker over Rielding, Norton, and Padilla (or Matthews)

- I'll take Joe Randa over Brandon Larson

Championship caliber? I doubt it....but improvement, and steps in the right direction, and hell...perhaps they're not finished making moves -- and NO long term contracts with these vets that would gaurantee their tenure if they have injury problems

I'm seeing more THIS offseason than LAST offseason - I'm willing to give this "plan" time as long as they're showing that there actually is one

-Ortiz vs. Lidle is like organic eggs vs. regular eggs. One may or may not be better for you, and at the end of the day eggs are still high in cholesterol.

-Agreed on the bullpen.

-I'd probably take Randa over Larson too, unless Randa's money could go to a starting pitcher. In which case I'd take Freel over Randa, and be happy about it.

Maybe these are steps in the right direction. But if they are, they are the tiniest of baby steps. I hear you re. no long-term contracts for veterans, but come next off-season we could be right back where we were this offseason: Few, if any, good starting pitchers, and a bullpen that will have been bruised by the massive amount of innings it will have pitched.

Tony Cloninger
12-22-2004, 05:46 PM
I have been right here......look when i first started posting. :D

I was not saying in any way that i am satisfied with the off-season.

It would make me happy if they would sign Mohr and either Perez or Millwood.
Yet i know that would not be enough.

I am just responding to those who say only a championship would make them happy. It would make me happy also but i am also a bit more realistic...right now....that this is not going to happen...and that contending for a divsion title or WC this year......would make me happy. And by contending...i mean like they were contending in 1999.

CougarQuest
12-22-2004, 05:47 PM
I love it when people complain before they see the whole picture. :thumbup:

Redsfaithful
12-22-2004, 06:00 PM
As has been said a number of times, why not take that money and go get someone who hasn't been on a big decline for two seasons?

Who would you have gotten instead for $4 million?

It was Ortiz for $4 million, or Hancock for the league minimum in the rotation. I'd rather have Ortiz at $4 million.

I'm completely not one of those people who says over and over that you can't criticize the front office because you don't know that better deals were out there ... but this time I am.

I haven't seen any better deals that O'Brien has turned down. Clement wasn't an option. Hudson wasn't an option. Mulder wasn't an option. Not if you really want the Reds to be thinking long term.

Tell me, anyone, what you'd prefer the Reds have done. Who should they have signed, that's already signed somewhere else? Out of the people who've been traded in the past few weeks, who should the Reds have nabbed?

These moves make 2005 a little more interesting.

I haven't seen anyone show how they hurt 2006 or 2007.

Rojo
12-22-2004, 06:12 PM
It was Ortiz for $4 million, or Hancock for the league minimum in the rotation. I'd rather have Ortiz at $4 million.

Not me.

wheels
12-22-2004, 06:13 PM
You know what RF....I completely understand where you're coming from, I really do. I can't argue with your logic.

Thing is, don't expect me to be all warm and funzzy inside, either. The Ramon Ortiz signing and the Joe Randa signing aren't gonna make me warm up my credit card for a future playoff ticket purchase.

We come here to discuss baseball, and analyze it. If someone tells me that Ramon Ortiz has electric stuff, and he automatically makes the Reds a playoff contender because they have a real thirdbaseman now, and the bullpen's better so that means they aren't going to blow leads anymore yeeehhhaawww...

Welp, I'm gonna have to disagree. (I'm not saying you've been one of those people, but you get my point)

If folks wanna call me a grumpdy dumps, that's cool, but I know how I feel about the Reds as an entity, and I'm always having lots of fun, win or lose, so I don't care.

M2
12-22-2004, 06:19 PM
Who would you have gotten instead for $4 million?

It was Ortiz for $4 million, or Hancock for the league minimum in the rotation. I'd rather have Ortiz at $4 million.

I'm completely not one of those people who says over and over that you can't criticize the front office because you don't know that better deals were out there ... but this time I am.

I haven't seen any better deals that O'Brien has turned down. Clement wasn't an option. Hudson wasn't an option. Mulder wasn't an option. Not if you really want the Reds to be thinking long term.

Tell me, anyone, what you'd prefer the Reds have done. Who should they have signed, that's already signed somewhere else? Out of the people who've been traded in the past few weeks, who should the Reds have nabbed?

These moves make 2005 a little more interesting.

I haven't seen anyone show how they hurt 2006 or 2007.

Targets shift. Goals shouldn't.

It wasn't just Ortiz's money. At a minimum it was Ortiz plus Wilson (which will cost roughly $7.5M in 2005). I figure the Reds probably could have lumped another $1M on top of that without feeling a pinch.

You take that money and you start going after the kinds of pitchers who can make a difference. What you don't do is stop that hunt and settle for rotation filler like Wilson and Ortiz. The key is having the money on hand when the opportunity presents itself. The Reds no longer have the money, making the opportunity a moot point.

I want no part of paying crummy pitchers because it's hard work to get good ones. If you have to play longshots have the good sense not to lavish millions upon them. The option that right now looks to be off the table is making a serious addition to the front of the rotation.

RosieRed
12-22-2004, 06:23 PM
Who would you have gotten instead for $4 million?

It was Ortiz for $4 million, or Hancock for the league minimum in the rotation. I'd rather have Ortiz at $4 million.

I'm completely not one of those people who says over and over that you can't criticize the front office because you don't know that better deals were out there ... but this time I am.

I haven't seen any better deals that O'Brien has turned down. Clement wasn't an option. Hudson wasn't an option. Mulder wasn't an option. Not if you really want the Reds to be thinking long term.

Tell me, anyone, what you'd prefer the Reds have done. Who should they have signed, that's already signed somewhere else? Out of the people who've been traded in the past few weeks, who should the Reds have nabbed?

These moves make 2005 a little more interesting.

I haven't seen anyone show how they hurt 2006 or 2007.

I don't know Redsfaithful. Clearly I'm not a GM, and even if I pretend to be one in this minute, I don't have many (any?) answers to your questions off the top of my head. Nor do I know all the trades and signings that have been made off the top of my head.

But I would start with: Could Millwood be had for $4M? Or $5M even? What if, instead of signing Weathers and Weber, we combined their money and signed Steve Kline? What if we hadn't signed Randa, and used his money plus the $4M for Ortiz toward a better staring pitcher? Odalis Perez, maybe? In other words, what if our acquisitions were Perez, Kline and Mercker, instead of Ortiz, Weathers, Weber, Mercker and Randa?

It's not that the moves O'Brien made are inherently bad in and of themselves. Even the Randa signing, when taken alone, has its positives. It's the sum of the moves, and the sum doesn't amount to a whole lot. To me, it equals (the possibility of?) a marginally better team, especially concerning the pitching.

Overall, I would agree the team is improved this year over last year, on paper. I just don't know that it's improved enough to matter.

As for the future: Maybe none of these moves will hurt 2006 or 2007. But do any of them really help 2006 or 2007? At best, we seem to be heading for status quo in those years.

Trace's Daddy
12-22-2004, 06:27 PM
I'd like for them to sign a healthy Wade Miller and to trade Griffey for M. Hampton.
A 2005 Yankees meltdown would be nice as well :mhcky21:

redsfan30
12-22-2004, 06:28 PM
Never, in any of my posts did I say that these moves made the Reds a World Series contender. But I just don't get how you could say that Joe Randa is not an improvement over Brandon Larson....Kent Mercker is not an improvement over Phil Norton...David Weathers is not an improvement over Todd Van Popple....Ben Weber (assuming he's healthy) is not an improvement over Juan Padilla.

I never said this is a championship club. I said that this team is improved over last season and I will fight that point for as long as it takes.

traderumor
12-22-2004, 06:29 PM
I love it when people complain before they see the whole picture. :thumbup:

For example, I would love to see the Reds get more aggressive with some early season moves, or get more involved at the trade deadline. For example, Weathers was the principle in the Hidalgo deal (I know that was a salary dump more than anything, but...).

I am right with those who wanted to deal some folks to take advantage of hot starts/first halfs by Casey, Griffey, Wilson. Not necessarily trades to get rid of guys, although a dump of Graves in that vein would be welcome anytime, but good baseball trades for both sides, or someone who might like fool's gold.

For example, take trading Kearns as has been suggested. Don't deal him now unless a deal knocks your socks off. If he comes out of the gate healthy and on fire, then go after your target and dangle him out there, then maybe you are more likely to get a quality pitcher as opposed to the hot stove league. That is an area where you can pull off a deal in the heat of the battle that you might not be able to pull off when the fire is blazing in the furnace and you still figure everyone you need to have a career year will. Not to mention injuries that create holes on clubs.

redsfan30
12-22-2004, 06:33 PM
RedsFan30, I think your confusion can be summed up as follows: you think the signings/trades the Reds have made are enough to make them a contending team.
I never said that the moves made them a contender, I said that it makes us a better team over what we ran out there last year.

And I'm confused because I think that????

TeamBoone
12-22-2004, 06:38 PM
http://www.yankeetradition.com/trophy.jpg

Baby steps, MWM. Baby steps.

RosieRed
12-22-2004, 06:44 PM
Never, in any of my posts did I say that these moves made the Reds a World Series contender. But I just don't get how you could say that Joe Randa is not an improvement over Brandon Larson....Kent Mercker is not an improvement over Phil Norton...David Weathers is not an improvement over Todd Van Popple....Ben Weber (assuming he's healthy) is not an improvement over Juan Padilla.

I never said this is a championship club. I said that this team is improved over last season and I will fight that point for as long as it takes.

I don't think most people are arguing that point. Most people here, IMO, would agree that those individual players are better than the players they replaced. Of course Mercker is better than Norton, etc.

The so-called complaing stems from a larger picture than those individual players, which is this: The overall pitching on this team last year was BAD. It was the worst the team has EVER had. Now, with the new players, it is not as bad as it was last year. But it is still not GOOD. One could argue it is still not even close to good.

RedsFanBrooklyn
12-22-2004, 06:44 PM
Hey, Redsfan, count me as being in agreement.

Posters here seem to think that the team is capable of doing more than it can. Who's to say Kline, Miller, etc etc ad nauseum would even WANT to sign, even if you offered them MORE money?

After years of complaining fans (for good reason), the front office is finally upping the payroll a bit and trying to do it with an idea of trying to improve incrementally, rather than throw money at Hampton (who, btw would be THE WORST signing in Reds history for the $$ he is owed) or his ilk.

So I hear ya. Seems the Reds are damned if they don't and damned, now, if they do.

M2
12-22-2004, 07:02 PM
Lots of false choices being offered here.

For instance, is Joe Randa a better 3B option than Ryan Freel? Are the extra outs Randa gets with the glove worth the extra outs he makes at the plate? No reason to compare him to Brandon Larson.

Why compare Weathers to Van Poppel? He's replacing Todd Jones. Will he do better than Jones did last year? I wouldn't bet on that.

Weber may or may not be healthy. He'd be replacing Riedling if he is, but until we know he's ready to pitch and capable of pitching well again, it's empty speculation as to whether this helps the team.

Why would anyone be compared to Juan Padilla? The Reds will call up some journeyman next September to pitch a dozen innings, probably not well, and that's who's replacing Padilla.

Ortiz replaces Lidle, who was a bust, and doesn't profile as being any better.

Mercker does replace Norton, so the Reds have identifiably improved their primary LH reliever (assuming Mercker doesn't go all gopherball like he did a few years ago). So the Reds have improved roughly 55 IP worth of a 1,450 IP season.

Seems to me that for the Reds to do better in 2005, players already with the team will have to step up. The new acquisitions don't strike me as having a lot of impact.

MWM
12-22-2004, 07:08 PM
:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

That's why M2 is M2. Beautifully articulated.

Puffy
12-22-2004, 07:18 PM
What do you people want??

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-9/825505/nicole4.jpg

Oh, and world peace.

Redsfaithful
12-22-2004, 07:27 PM
For instance, is Joe Randa a better 3B option than Ryan Freel?

I still don't think these are all the right questions.

Is Ryan Freel a better bench option than whoever would have taken the last spot previously?

Is Ortiz better than Josh Hancock, who would have been our fifth starter with no signings?

I think the answer to both of those questions is yes. Therefore, I think the team is better than it was a week ago.


Seems to me that for the Reds to do better in 2005, players already with the team will have to step up. The new acquisitions don't strike me as having a lot of impact.

I agree. But I think the impact they do have will be positive.

Boss-Hog
12-22-2004, 07:38 PM
Yes, the team is "improved", I suppose - as I said, marginally. However, most of us are not happy with improvement that will, at best, lead to a few extra games gained in the standings - not when there was (and still is) a need for major improvements.

M2
12-22-2004, 07:40 PM
I still don't think these are all the right questions.

Is Ryan Freel a better bench option than whoever would have taken the last spot previously?

Is Ortiz better than Josh Hancock, who would have been our fifth starter with no signings?

I think the answer to both of those questions is yes. Therefore, I think the team is better than it was a week ago.

Name for me a team that's been reliant on the last guy on the bench. Doesn't work that way. Last guy on the bench is a fungible item. What wins you games is the quality you get from the guys who play the bulk of the time.

And the contention of the rf30's post was that the Reds had improved the team over last season. Lidle was the guy in the shoes Ortiz has filled. As for upgrading Hancock, IMO the Reds could go scrapheaping in a few weeks and get a pitcher every bit as good as Ortiz (in whom I have no faith) for cents on the dollar.

Using your definition, every team improves in the offseason because every move is an addition to the current mix.

redsfanmia
12-22-2004, 07:47 PM
The signings/trades have made this team much better than last year. Randa is a quality major league third baseman unlike Freel who cant field the position. Freel is a bench player and a pretty good bench player but thats his best role.
The bullpen atleast has major league pitchers now unlike Padilla and Norton, i think the bullpen is much improved. Plus Acevado was lights out in the bullpen last year so i think he could be a very good set up man.
Ortiz is an upgrade over Lidle and having Hudson for the entire year is going to be a plus, he looked pretty good last year. Claussen had a few good starts and he could be a good solid 3 starter.
People want to trade Kearns or Pena, I think we should maybe deal Casey, his value is high and lets face it last year is probably as good as he gets so lets deal him and put either Griffey or Dunn at first!

RosieRed
12-22-2004, 08:05 PM
Why compare Weathers to Van Poppel? He's replacing Todd Jones. Will he do better than Jones did last year? I wouldn't bet on that.

Weber may or may not be healthy. He'd be replacing Riedling if he is, but until we know he's ready to pitch and capable of pitching well again, it's empty speculation as to whether this helps the team.

Why would anyone be compared to Juan Padilla? The Reds will call up some journeyman next September to pitch a dozen innings, probably not well, and that's who's replacing Padilla.

Ortiz replaces Lidle, who was a bust, and doesn't profile as being any better.

Mercker does replace Norton, so the Reds have identifiably improved their primary LH reliever (assuming Mercker doesn't go all gopherball like he did a few years ago). So the Reds have improved roughly 55 IP worth of a 1,450 IP season.

I don't disagree with you M2, but I think it's worthy of looking at the bullpen as a whole at this point. Obviously, signing Weathers, Weber and Mercker means Van Poppel and Norton won't be in the bullpen, regardless of which pitcher they specifically replaced.

The bullpen around the start of the season last year was who?
Danny Graves
Todd Jones
Phil Norton
Brian Reith
John Reidling
Todd Van Poppel
Ryan Wagner

And now we have:
Danny Graves
Ryan Wagner
Kent Mercker
David Weathers
Ben Weber
TBA
TBA

Which sounds better than what we started with last year. Though I'm not going to argue it's a great staff.

redsfan30
12-22-2004, 08:39 PM
Lots of false choices being offered here.

For instance, is Joe Randa a better 3B option than Ryan Freel? Are the extra outs Randa gets with the glove worth the extra outs he makes at the plate? No reason to compare him to Brandon Larson.

Why compare Weathers to Van Poppel? He's replacing Todd Jones. Will he do better than Jones did last year? I wouldn't bet on that.

Weber may or may not be healthy. He'd be replacing Riedling if he is, but until we know he's ready to pitch and capable of pitching well again, it's empty speculation as to whether this helps the team.

Why would anyone be compared to Juan Padilla? The Reds will call up some journeyman next September to pitch a dozen innings, probably not well, and that's who's replacing Padilla.


Ortiz replaces Lidle, who was a bust, and doesn't profile as being any better.

Mercker does replace Norton, so the Reds have identifiably improved their primary LH reliever (assuming Mercker doesn't go all gopherball like he did a few years ago). So the Reds have improved roughly 55 IP worth of a 1,450 IP season.

Seems to me that for the Reds to do better in 2005, players already with the team will have to step up. The new acquisitions don't strike me as having a lot of impact.
There will be injuries in the outfield. Ryan Freel can play five different positions servicably. Are you going to tie him down to one position all year? No. Randa had better BA/HR/RBI totals last year in an injury plagued year. I know his other numbers are alittle lower...but let's let Ryan Freel play an entire Major League career before making these judgements. I don't think 1 1/2 years is a good sample size compared to 10 years.

I would argue that if healthy, Weber will replace Jones. Mercker will be replacing Norton. The one out of all those guys that can go four or five innings if need be out of the pen is Weathers. Not saying that he will only be used in that role. But he is the most equipped for it. And yes, I think Weathers will be good in that role.

If healthy, Weber will be the best pitcher in the bullpen. Mark it down. If he's not totally healthy, that's another story. But if he's not, surely the Reds would not have given him a deal basically promising him a spot on the 25 man roster.

Padilla personifies some of the crap they ran out there last year. It seems at some point all year, they had some journeyman in the bullpen who did nothing but smell. That's why I compare to Juan Padilla.

Are these moves going to put the Reds at the top of the division, no. But it is a step in the right direction.

M2
12-22-2004, 08:39 PM
Rosie, iirc, folks were pretty high on the Reds bullpen heading into last season. There was a widespread love affair with Wagner (me included). Lots of folks believed Riedling was closer material. Reitsma was in the mix until the very end of ST and then Jones stepped in. You also didn't have to search too hard for folks who'd toss a bouquet at Van Poppel or Norton. And Danny Graves was a "proven closer."

I remember folks catching flak for suggesting the Reds bullpen was headed for a sharp downward turn. IMO, this group still doesn't have the makings of a good pen. Maybe it will be better than last year's group (that's a real low bar to clear), but it's not anything near the terminator units that were common in the JimBo regime.

wheels
12-22-2004, 08:52 PM
I just hope that these signings won't cause a guy with real stuff and potential like Todd Coffey to have to hang around in the minors.

Let's shake these boys down and see what they've got.

That's what's really exciting to me.

I wanna hear that mitt pop and soon after batters walking away shaking their collective heads.

I miss that.

I think Wagner turned a bit of corner near the end of last season, and I hope he's not an afterthought.

I just don't agree with backloading a staff with vets if you've got young turks with something to prove.

RosieRed
12-22-2004, 08:54 PM
Rosie, iirc, folks were pretty high on the Reds bullpen heading into last season. There was a widespread love affair with Wagner (me included). Lots of folks believed Riedling was closer material. Reitsma was in the mix until the very end of ST and then Jones stepped in. You also didn't have to search too hard for folks who'd toss a bouquet at Van Poppel or Norton. And Danny Graves was a "proven closer."

I remember folks catching flak for suggesting the Reds bullpen was headed for a sharp downward turn. IMO, this group still doesn't have the makings of a good pen. Maybe it will be better than last year's group (that's a real low bar to clear), but it's not anything near the terminator units that were common in the JimBo regime.

I agree, with all that. Especially the low bar to clear part, and bullpens of the past being much better than what we have today.

But come Opening Day this year, I'll probably even be saying that this current bupllen will be a good one, everyone will have a great year, etc. Because when it comes time to play ball, I want to believe the Reds can win, so I just choose to think it's possible. :)

I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I think it's fine for a fan to think, at the beginning of the year, that Riedling is closer material, Wagner will be great, etc. Then you go through the year, and realize "hmm, not so great as I thought." So in the offseason, when the FO gets some new players who (on paper at least) look better than some of the players we had, the whole process starts all over again. I'm at least going to allow for the possibility that the bullpen could be markedly improved by the new additions.

(Yes, okay, I realize I'm trying to convince myself now. :) )

redsfan30
12-22-2004, 08:56 PM
I wanna hear that mitt pop and soon after batters walking away shaking their collective heads.

I miss that.
Amen, brother. There's alot of disagreement in this thread, but I think that is something we could all agree on.

pedro
12-22-2004, 09:01 PM
what about a Monkey Butler? would that be too much to ask?

http://monkbiz.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/media/MonkeyButler%20Reg.jpg

tom browning
12-22-2004, 09:03 PM
I want a starting pitcher with an ERA below 4.00.


If Ortiz wins 15 and has an ERA below 4.00 , THEN I'll call him a good pitcher. Pardon me if I dont pass out the punch and cookies in the mean time.

Redsfaithful
12-22-2004, 09:04 PM
Name for me a team that's been reliant on the last guy on the bench.

The Reds, both of the past two seasons, due to injury.

Caveman Techie
12-22-2004, 09:19 PM
If Ortiz wins 15 and has an ERA below 4.00 , THEN I'll call him a good pitcher. Pardon me if I dont pass out the punch and cookies in the mean time.


2002 Ortiz had 15 wins 9 loses with an ERA of 3.71. So we'll be waiting for your punch and cookies ;) or does it only count now that he's in a Reds uniform? :)

M2
12-22-2004, 09:20 PM
Pedro,

A simian trained in service and discretion could improve the lot of us all.

pedro
12-22-2004, 09:39 PM
Pedro,

A simian trained in service and discretion could improve the lot of us all.


and talk about "magic" in the clubhouse!

GAC
12-22-2004, 10:22 PM
I want a solid #1 starter also. But why can't teams like the Reds, and so many others, afford them? That is the question that MLB should be addressing.

Where did all the available #1 starters end up this winter? Did the Reds, or any of the other teams even have a chance of obtaining them?

The improvements to this BP will go a long way to helping this team.

PinchRunner
12-22-2004, 10:52 PM
It's one thing to add some players to key need positions. It's another to actually add high-caliber talent.
Now I do think some of these moves are improvements over last season. But, it'd be nice to get a few marquee players instead of always going the low-budget and/or over-the-hill route.

Falls City Beer
12-22-2004, 11:04 PM
what about a Monkey Butler? would that be too much to ask?

http://monkbiz.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/media/MonkeyButler%20Reg.jpg


Have I mentioned today how much I love dressed-up monkeys?

Krusty
12-22-2004, 11:06 PM
What do I want?..................

Just Win Baby!

REDREAD
12-23-2004, 12:01 AM
Not me.

Seriously? I can respect your opinion, but do you think Ortiz isn't going to outperform one of Clausen, Hancock, Hudson, or Harang?

That's where his value lies. I can say with 100% confidence that at least one of those youngsters is going to be a complete disaster. I'm glad we're not commited to putting all 4 in the rotation. I hope DanO can bring in another vet starting pitcher.. because if we only have to use two of those youngster candidates, that would be good. We'd have a chance for 2 of them to be passable next year.

Red Heeler
12-23-2004, 10:38 AM
I want a solid #1 starter also. But why can't teams like the Reds, and so many others, afford them? That is the question that MLB should be addressing.

Where did all the available #1 starters end up this winter? Did the Reds, or any of the other teams even have a chance of obtaining them?

The improvements to this BP will go a long way to helping this team.

I won't argue the point that MLB needs to address the revenue disparity among teams. You are completely right in that respect.

On the other hand, I think that the reason that the #1 starters ended up with larger market teams is that the small market teams think with small minds. The Reds could have afforded Clement. They chose to take the small market route and sign several lesser players instead of one really good one. Would it have made a difference for 2005? Probably not, but Graves comes off the books after next year. Larue and Jimenez will not be around for 2006, either. There is the money for another top flight starter. Now you have two. Hopefully, a Claussen, Gardner or Paully would be ready to do some good things by then, too.

Rojo
12-23-2004, 04:23 PM
Seriously? I can respect your opinion, but do you think Ortiz isn't going to outperform one of Clausen, Hancock, Hudson, or Harang?

I think he will outperform them but he doesn't get us into the post-season, now or in the future. Pass.

gm
12-23-2004, 04:38 PM
What do they want? Cue the "Cheer's" theme music

"You want a place where people know, so much about the game
...you want to go where everybody can complain"

RFS62
12-23-2004, 04:42 PM
What do they want? Cue the "Cheer's" theme music

"You want a place where people know, so much about the game
...you want to go where everybody can complain"



:MandJ: :MandJ: :MandJ:

pedro
12-23-2004, 04:51 PM
a three handled family credenza?

maybe a yellow bellied sneech?

http://flash.uchicago.edu/~siegela/RH/sneech_sign.jpg

cReds1
12-23-2004, 05:11 PM
I love it when people complain before they see the whole picture. :thumbup:

and the whole picture is ???

Losing??? oh, i get the point.

pedro
12-23-2004, 06:15 PM
and the whole picture is ???

Losing??? oh, i get the point.


no. the "whole picture" is the team that is on the field when the season starts. there is still a lot of time for DanO to makes moves. whether he will, or if so, if those moves are any good is another story......