PDA

View Full Version : If Krivsky REALLY has some cojones....



Edskin
06-14-2006, 08:36 AM
The eight game win streak got me pumped up too. At that point, I would not have been in favor of "seller" mode because I think it's important to take advantage of a season that has potential to be "magic." I think you owe it to the your players and fans to "go for it" if the team is showing definite signs of competing deep into the season.

However, this 5 game skid has hammered home that we are NOWHERE NEAR serious contenders. The good news is that I do believe we've gotten better and I do believe we could wind up around .500, which would be an improvement from the last few years. But the line-up is inconsistent, the bullpen is atrocious, and the starting pitching may be performing on borrowed time.

Look around at the standings-- almost EVERY team is still "alive"-- it is a seller's market to be sure. There just aren't a lot of teams out there with spare parts to trade away to contending teams.

I think we have some VERY enticing pieces that Krivsky can dangle. He has already proven to be a better evaluater of talent than his predeccesors, so I' more willing to hand him the keys to bigger deals.

Of course, he's going to have to have some cojones-- it won't be an easy sell to the fans to trade away key components to a team that currently sits atop the wild card standings.

But when you seriously look at this franchise, the talent isn't really spread throughout the system at all. The minors are pitching poor, and we have very few young guys "on their way up."

I would identify a few "untouchables......"

Arroyo: He's what we're looking for: Quality starting pitching at a reasonable cost. I see NO logic in trading Bronson.

Harang: See above.

Edwin: Not in love with the guy, but at his current price tag and considering we've searched for a third basemen for so long, I see no point in dealing him either.

Coffey: He's young and he's our only quality bullpen arm at this point.

Honestly, that's about it. I think everyone else is pretty much fair game.

Obviously, most of us are in favor of dealing Larue, Hatteberg, Ross, or Aurilia, etc... those guys really don't play a role in our future, but at the same time, I don't see us getting much in return for them.

But if Krivsky REALLY wants to rapidly improve the future of this franchise, I think he'd be on the phone right now offering up these names:

Lopez
Dunn
Kearns
Freel
Milton
Griffey

I'm not saying we should trade ALL of them, but those are the players I identify as potentially helping change the overall outlook of the franchise in the long-run. Trading Milton or Griffey could allow Castellini to spend more of that money he talks about spending and trading the others on that list could very well bring in a nice haul.

Starting pitching is STILL "the thing." Now that we have Arroyo and Harang, I can finally see light at the end of the tunnel. Get two more younger starters and possibly add a veteran in the off-season with the money you've saved, and all of a sudden you've got a top notch rotation. I'll worry about the rest later.

My main point is a simple one: The time is now. This team has proven they simply don't have enough talent to bottle it up and make a magical run this year. Take advantage of the current market and further the rebuilding process while no one else is looking.

Jpup
06-14-2006, 08:43 AM
...and there only 3 games out. Go get some pitching. The offense is not the problem. It's not time to burn it down yet. If the Reds are 8 or 10 back in the next few weeks, then let the fire sale begin, but I still don't see how you can trade your best defensive outfielder, and maybe the best defensive player on your team or your best hitter. I just can't see the Reds getting a fair deal for either one.

REDREAD
06-14-2006, 09:16 AM
Problem is that if you trade 5-6 veterans, you won't get enough talent to reload the farm anyhow. Look at the Indians. They made some excellent moves during their last rebuild (got Sizemore, Hafner, Lee and others), but they had the awesome farm system to help rebuild with it. Even still, they've been struggling this year as well.

I think the Reds have a window of maybe 2-3 years (without a big free agent spending spree) to keep this great offense intact and try to patch together a pitching staff. Then we're going to see a dry spell, thanks to the lack of talent on the farm assembled by previous regimes. I see no reason to accelerate that dry spell.

Krusty
06-14-2006, 10:46 AM
If the Reds are within five games at the trading deadline, you have to make a move or two to make the playoffs. The bullpen needs help with possibly two or three arms but at the same time you can't deviate from the longterm plan of rebuilding the farm system.

registerthis
06-14-2006, 10:52 AM
If the Reds are within five games at the trading deadline, you have to make a move or two to make the playoffs. The bullpen needs help with possibly two or three arms but at the same time you can't deviate from the longterm plan of rebuilding the farm system.

Ahhh, call it the 1999 quandry. In spite of how much fun that season was, 1999 team set the Reds long term plans back for years, as it gave management the misplaced belief that the team was built to contend long term.

Everyone, I'm certain, would love to see the Reds contend this year. That's a no-brainer, really. But we all have to ask ourselves, how much "contention" is worth to this team, both this year and in subsequent years. They don't, as you mentioned, want to set the Reds long-term plans back, but they also want to show a committment to winning NOW. It's not an easy thing to do, I don't envy Krivsky's position one iota.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-14-2006, 10:57 AM
I posted this yesterday in the "Krivsky needs to make a move now" thread, but the thread was eventually locked after it typically got hijacked by the Dunn-haters. Anyway, I agree Krivsky need to realize that this is not the team and look to the future. I just disagree with Ed as far as who he should be looking to trade away. I don't think we need a clean overhaul. We agree on some of the key names, just not Lopez, Dunn, and Freel. See below.


I say WK needs to break this thing down and start selling off anything not named Lopez, Phillips, Dunn, EE, Coffey, Arroyo, or Harang.

Face it, this is nothing more than a Jekyl and Hyde .500 team. There is no point in holding back the future just because of the mirage of possible postseason. It's simply not there. This is the same problem that has set this organization back in the past - over and over and over again. PLEASE recognize AGAIN this is not the year - AGAIN. Stick to the plan and shoot for 2008 and beyond and don't let the "freakshow" cloud your judgment and take away from the long-term vision.

I say break it down and make it yours, WayneK. Don't buy into the hype. This is not the team.



-Trade Milton at the deadline if you can find a sucker. If you can get the sucker to take on his entire salary (or at least 12M) ask for a fringe prospect in return.

-Trade Griffey to anyone that will take the remaining 37M. If not, let him ride out his career as a Red in LF. Hurt feelings? Too bad.

-Trade Kearns for pitching prospects. I say you have to decide between keeping Kearns or Dunn for the long-haul and I'll take Dunn. For all the talk of Kearns having this super-duper year, he's still not performing (offensively) at the same level as the SLUMPING Dunn. I think you can find a GM that overvalues him. Add to the fact that Dunn may be easy to negotiate with due to the traditional (low BA, "he strikes out too much") barometer of supposedly what a good hitter is. WE know what we have with him and I say lock him up and use that subjective old-school BS to negotiate his contract to a manageable number.

-Trade Aurilia to a contender at the deadline for prospects. Tissues for Marty.

-Deal LaRue. Face it. Big paydays backfire with this club. We can't quit doing it (see Dunn) but we can face the facts that 2 years of LaRue at 9 Mil sounded cool last year, but it's not what this team needs now. Ross and Valentin have proven that they can get the job done at a fraction of the cost.

-Hats can hang around and bridge the gap of Dunn from LF to 1B. He's not costing much anyway. If he wants to hang around in 2007, as a back-up, for peanuts - fine.

-DFA QM yesterday and bring up Denorfia so he can get some meaningful AB's that will help him for 2007 and beyond. If not, deal Denorfia while he still has value and all his hair.

-Keep Freel around as the super utility guy. He enables you to carry an extra pitcher or keep three catchers (of course one those not being LaRue) if that's where you get your jollies. Regardless, Cincy loves scrappy players and he is one scrappy dude that has value. Keep him. We'll also need an extra OF'er after we trade Kearns.

-Flippity-flop Lopez and Phillips (SS and 2B) by 2007.

-Don't mess with EE. Keep him at 3B and let him stay a Red for the next 10 years. He'll win a few gold gloves and hit like a mad man every year. Just watch.

-I don't care what you do with Rick White, Chris Hammond, Mike Burns, Esteban Yan, or Joe Mays as long as you don't pay them anymore money to wear a Reds uniform. DFA them or ride their sorry arms out to get through the season. Whatever. Just keep in mind that there are a few arms down in Chattanooga that need some seasoning and like FCB says, "if you got 'em, smoke 'em." Eventually, we are going to need to bring up Shafer, Guevara, - hell, even Medlock and see what they can do. Who knows, hopefully at least one of them will take their lumps, stick around and be useful to us by 2008. Maybe even a future set-up man or closer.

-Keep Mercker around as the LH specialist. He can still break 90 and he his a good dude. Plus we both played at the same HS and I sometimes get tickets.

-Collect insurance for Paul Wilson's arm or pay him his 850k buyout for 2007. Yuck. I will try to remove his name from my memory forever.

-Ride out Arroyo through 2008 and see what he gets you before locking him up any longer. Why spoil a great thing by getting stuck in another un-tradable contract? Enjoy what we have with 3 years for 9 Mil and see what it gets us. If we are still poopy in 2008 and the two-year plan becomes three or four, he can be dealt at the deadline - at that time.

-Lock Harang up for 4 years. He's young and will be a FA by 2009. Pay him through 2009 or 2010 and take advantage of the fact that the guy is a big time under-appreciated and underrated by today's standards. In my opinion, he is a #1. Maybe not a bona fide Cy Young caliber #1, but a #1 nonetheless. Use the fact that he's not viewed as the typical #1 and his lack of the traditional bean-counter stats (see: Wins) to get him signed under market value. How about 4 years/16-20M or 3 years/12-15M? Same with Lopez. Lock him down for 4 years. Say 16-20M as well. We can ride Phillips and EE around cheap until we need to start worrying about arbitration. For that reason alone, these two should be untouchable. So, lock down Dunn, Harang, Lopez, dump the retreads and aging veterans, bring up some young arms that are ready to be tested at the ML level and start the whole process as soon as possible.


Again, I say break it down and make it yours, WayneK. Don't buy into the hype. That's a sucker bet.

Topcat
06-14-2006, 11:05 AM
IF we win lets say 3 of the next 6 ? Would that not make us 11-5 over past 16 games? It is a season not a sprint. That being said the bullpen is god awful and the over all defense is double aa quality and a poor dbl aa quality.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-14-2006, 11:12 AM
It is a marathon.

And we are the young dude running his first ever marathon that starts sprinting right out of the gate and he thinks he's pretty cool as he gets to the 10 mile mark ahead of all the Kenyans.

Little does the young dude know that he will soon run out of gas and his running shoes were not laced up as well, so if he doesn't slow down and tie them up, get a drink and get back to the original plan of just finishing, he's going to fall down and maybe even turn an ankle or rupture an achilles as the Kenyans pass him at mile 13 and he never runs a marathon again.

princeton
06-14-2006, 11:15 AM
Tissues for Marty.

would make a pretty good user name

M2
06-14-2006, 11:50 AM
It is a marathon.

And we are the young dude running his first ever marathon that starts sprinting right out of the gate and he thinks he's pretty cool as he gets to the 10 mile mark ahead of all the Kenyans.

Little does the young dude know that he will soon run out of gas and his running shoes were not laced up as well, so if he doesn't slow down and tie them up, get a drink and get back to the original plan of just finishing, he's going to fall down and maybe even turn an ankle or rupture an achilles as the Kenyans pass him at mile 13 and he never runs a marathon again.

Great analogy. Heartbreak hill looms ahead.

reds44
06-14-2006, 01:10 PM
IF we win lets say 3 of the next 6 ? Would that not make us 11-5 over past 16 games? It is a season not a sprint. That being said the bullpen is god awful and the over all defense is double aa quality and a poor dbl aa quality.
Exactly. This team isn't as good as the 8 game streak and not as bad as the 5game skid. We need to start putting some wins together or it will become a porblem.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-14-2006, 01:35 PM
Exactly. This team isn't as good as the 8 game streak and not as bad as the 5game skid. We need to start putting some wins together or it will become a porblem.

Exactly, this is a .500 ball club and they need to realize that and start worrying about 2007, 2008, and beyond.

Sacrificing the future because of today would be a big mistake and possibly set us back on the 2000-2005 path.

Falls City Beer
06-14-2006, 01:46 PM
Sacrificing the future because of today would be a big mistake and possibly set us back on the 2000-2005 path.

But what "future" would we risk giving away? I'd give away anything and everything in this organization's minor leagues to contend the rest of this season.

flyer85
06-14-2006, 01:48 PM
co-jones - would that be putting Tracy and Motorboat in charge?:)

BuckeyeRedleg
06-14-2006, 01:52 PM
But what "future" would we risk giving away? I'd give away anything and everything in this organization's minor leagues to contend the rest of this season.


To simply contend, you'd give away what little we have (Bailey, Bruce, Wood, Cueto, etc)?

Falls City Beer
06-14-2006, 01:55 PM
To simply contend, you'd give away what little we have (Bailey, Bruce, Wood, Cueto, etc)?

Yeah. This window of struggling Cards and Astros comes around once in a decade (so far).

My money's on only one of those guys ever impacting a MLB roster, probably Bruce--in 5 years. I'll roll those dice.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-14-2006, 02:02 PM
Yeah. This window of struggling Cards and Astros comes around once in a decade (so far).

My money's on only one of those guys ever impacting a MLB roster, probably Bruce--in 5 years. I'll roll those dice.

Yes, but what if dealing those other prospects (Wood, Bailey, Cueto, etc.) insures you get an arm to help you in 2007 or beyond, and not this year?

I think the Astros will be toast soon enough. I'd worry more about the Brewers long term. Regardless, I still think worrying about a window may be be a little short-sighted for this franchise. It's bit us in the butt before. Anyway, I think if DanO were still in charge, he might make a run, but WK is in this for the long haul, so I don't think we'll be buyers at the deadline and I hope I'm right.

This team is "fools gold".

M2
06-14-2006, 02:17 PM
Yeah. This window of struggling Cards and Astros comes around once in a decade (so far).

Actually that was 2003. The Birds are wounded, but they're winning just fine.

I don't mind dealing the kids for present talent, but, like BuckeyeRedleg, I'd want to deal for players who could help with the 2007-8 window. That's where I thought the organization needed to focus prior to the season and I wouldn't derail it now. Hoping to land a haymaker doesn't interest me.

IslandRed
06-14-2006, 02:19 PM
Krivsky may run the team, but he doesn't own it. The guy who does wants to win and he wants to convince the fan base of that. My opinion is that the fans will be OK with an honest effort that falls short, but waving the white flag before the season has demanded a surrender will convince many prospective ticket-buyers that Castellini's going to be another Lindner.

Now, it's probably going to come to pass that the air goes out of the season... but they're not going to let the air out while the balloon still looks full.

The trading deadline's still six weeks away. That's plenty of time for the situation to clarify itself one way or the other. Plenty of dealin' gets done in the offseason, too. If faux contention makes deadline deals a hard sell, they can be done over the winter. I'm pretty sure the team will get a makeover by next spring, it's just a matter of when.

danforsman
06-14-2006, 02:20 PM
With regard to one's hope of competing for a pennant, winning eight out of 13 intradivision is good. With a young, competitive team like the Reds, it's not surprising that their wins and losses both come in bunches. It's mid-June, and the Reds are three games back of the Cardinals, their starting pitching has been good and their young players have been inconsistent. Nothing too far out of the ordinary has occurred, in my opinion...no reason to blow anything up. The Reds need better bullpen arms in order to compete this season. Don't trade the long-term away in order to make a push this season, but if you can move Aurilia or LaRue for a solid bullpen arm, you do it.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-14-2006, 02:29 PM
With regard to one's hope of competing for a pennant, winning eight out of 13 intradivision is good. With a young, competitive team like the Reds, it's not surprising that their wins and losses both come in bunches. It's mid-June, and the Reds are three games back of the Cardinals, their starting pitching has been good and their young players have been inconsistent. Nothing too far out of the ordinary has occurred, in my opinion...no reason to blow anything up. The Reds need better bullpen arms in order to compete this season. Don't trade the long-term away in order to make a push this season, but if you can move Aurilia or LaRue for a solid bullpen arm, you do it.


I don't want them to blow it up either. I just would like to see them stick to the plan and not get to googly over a couple of hot streaks (April 23-May 2, May 31st to June 8th).

This team has shown that it giveth hope and then immediately taketh that same hope away. I just don't want to see the plan compromised for a quick fix.

Falls City Beer
06-14-2006, 02:30 PM
Actually that was 2003. The Birds are wounded, but they're winning just fine.

I don't mind dealing the kids for present talent, but, like BuckeyeRedleg, I'd want to deal for players who could help with the 2007-8 window. That's where I thought the organization needed to focus prior to the season and I wouldn't derail it now. Hoping to land a haymaker doesn't interest me.

Sure. My mission is to get the MLB product better. Preferably "long-term," but I tend to think of "short term" and "long term" both as fool's lights. If you're smart, like the Braves and Cardinals, all you worry about is making the MLB product better--preferably with players you can keep around for a while, though, I'm not exactly sure why the Reds couldn't pick someone up in a trade and keep him around--not every acquisition has to be Randy Johnson in a walk year. At any rate, I make trades as often as possible to improve the MLB roster and worry about the minors and contracts and "the future" another day.

Falls City Beer
06-14-2006, 02:37 PM
It's bit us in the butt before.
.

The only reason it's bit us in the butt is because the people trying to create a winner couldn't recognize talent. Presumably, Krivsky doesn't have that problem (though that's still very much debatable at this point). If one's able to keep the mill churning, there's no reason the Reds of 99 couldn't or the Reds of 2006 can't be parlayed into long-term success. Bowden failed because he was an idiot.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-14-2006, 02:38 PM
Sure. My mission is to get the MLB product better. Preferably "long-term," but I tend to think of "short term" and "long term" both as fool's lights. If you're smart, like the Braves and Cardinals, all you worry about is making the MLB product better--preferably with players you can keep around for a while, though, I'm not exactly sure why the Reds couldn't pick someone up in a trade and keep him around--not every acquisition has to be Randy Johnson in a walk year. At any rate, I make trades as often as possible to improve the MLB roster and worry about the minors and contracts and "the future" another day.

But you could also help yourself for next year by dealing an Eric Milton. It would free up money maybe for a free agent that would be better than Milton in 2007. Maybe even someone that could be part of the future.

So, in some cases you may have to take one step back in 2006 to move those two steps forward in 2007 and beyond.

Unfortunately with some of the contracts we are stuck with, we may not be finished taking those steps back.

Falls City Beer
06-14-2006, 02:41 PM
But you could also help yourself for next year by dealing an Eric Milton. It would free up money maybe for a free agent that would be better than Milton in 2007. Maybe even someone that could be part of the future.

So, in some cases you may have to take one step back in 2006 to move those two steps forward in 2007 and beyond.

Unfortunately with some of the contracts we are stuck with, we may not be finished taking those steps back.

Moving Milton this July is always and forever a step forward if you know what you're doing in finding his replacement. Again, supposedly Krivsky can identify talent. Getting bad players out is good, no matter what their current avatar.

KronoRed
06-14-2006, 04:11 PM
If the Reds are within five games at the trading deadline, you have to make a move or two to make the playoffs.
And get swept out? to me the plan should be to win the world series, right now this team is not close to that goal.

Topcat
06-14-2006, 07:05 PM
And get swept out? to me the plan should be to win the world series, right now this team is not close to that goal.

Well said. Enjoy atleast in year ! under Krivsky a progress forward. Give the guy some time. The window of oppurtunity that is being spoken about in this thread is most defintly an illusion. Give it some time! In this year 1 under Krivsky we have netted Ross, Phillips, Arroyo and have seen positives from our starters. Deal for the long term and this is not going to be a world Series contender. To gut what little talent that is in the minors would be insane.

Mario-Rijo
06-14-2006, 08:41 PM
Not to be rude guys but you are really being a bit pessimistic, and I think I am being nice in that assessment. Just a note as I don't agree with too much being discussed/proposed here, but if I argued every point here I would not get any sleep for a few days. Let me 1st say I am not looking at the glass half empty because I don't buy it, and I am choosing not to look at the glass half full either. Instead I am looking at simple facts based on how I see the game of baseball.

#1.) The bottom line for now & the future is 2 things, finances & winning. Unfortunately we as baseball fans have become all too OK with dealing away the present for the future. And most don't feel one has anything to do with the other, I don't agree. If you win consistently you put money in your pocket, regardless of what the owners say no smart business man is breaking even or even losing money and is ok with it. And you don't become succesful enough to afford a ML baseball team w/o being smart. And this money can go as much to the future as it can with the present as we all know. Who wouldn't want to have the best scouts & coaches to make sure that they have a bright future? Not to mention what having a winning organization means to breeding future success, look at the breaks teams like the NYY and Braves get with their high levels of success.

2.) Baseball is (like someone already stated) a marathon not a sprint. You are going to have some bumps in the road, losing streaks, injuries, slumps etc. And giving up on a team that is right there within a handful of games of the BEST RECORD in their respective league is not an option for many, myself included. And once the fans go away so goes the money as does the players and the success.

3.) The most succesful teams are ones where the players throughout the organization know they have a chance year in and year out. W/O that trust between the players and management you find a lot of negative things going on and not much positive including consistent winning. If you say you are committed to winning now & always and show something the opposite it will completely undermine your current and near future success, and if you are willing to give in you likely never will fully commit to winning. SO w/o a huge philosophy change or someone else getting to call some shots (see Mike Brown & Troy & Katie Blackburn) you are doomed to fail forever.

Greatness is rarely thrusted on those who are not worthy, but instead grasped by those who are. Mario-Rijo cir. 2006

Tommyjohn25
06-14-2006, 11:17 PM
Not to be rude guys but you are really being a bit pessimistic, and I think I am being nice in that assessment. Just a note as I don't agree with too much being discussed/proposed here, but if I argued every point here I would not get any sleep for a few days. Let me 1st say I am not looking at the glass half empty because I don't buy it, and I am choosing not to look at the glass half full either. Instead I am looking at simple facts based on how I see the game of baseball.

#1.) The bottom line for now & the future is 2 things, finances & winning. Unfortunately we as baseball fans have become all too OK with dealing away the present for the future. And most don't feel one has anything to do with the other, I don't agree. If you win consistently you put money in your pocket, regardless of what the owners say no smart business man is breaking even or even losing money and is ok with it. And you don't become succesful enough to afford a ML baseball team w/o being smart. And this money can go as much to the future as it can with the present as we all know. Who wouldn't want to have the best scouts & coaches to make sure that they have a bright future? Not to mention what having a winning organization means to breeding future success, look at the breaks teams like the NYY and Braves get with their high levels of success.

2.) Baseball is (like someone already stated) a marathon not a sprint. You are going to have some bumps in the road, losing streaks, injuries, slumps etc. And giving up on a team that is right there within a handful of games of the BEST RECORD in their respective league is not an option for many, myself included. And once the fans go away so goes the money as does the players and the success.

3.) The most succesful teams are ones where the players throughout the organization know they have a chance year in and year out. W/O that trust between the players and management you find a lot of negative things going on and not much positive including consistent winning. If you say you are committed to winning now & always and show something the opposite it will completely undermine your current and near future success, and if you are willing to give in you likely never will fully commit to winning. SO w/o a huge philosophy change or someone else getting to call some shots (see Mike Brown & Troy & Katie Blackburn) you are doomed to fail forever.

Greatness is rarely thrusted on those who are not worthy, but instead grasped by those who are. Mario-Rijo cir. 2006

Absolutely fantastic post. I just looked through this thread for the first time and was going to post something similar. Well done.

CougarQuest
06-15-2006, 12:01 AM
I don't see Krivsky as a guy who makes serious trades for short term answers, regardless where the Reds are at the July trading deadlines. I think he makes serious trades that will help short and long term.

Mario-Rijo
06-15-2006, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by Tommyjohn25 Absolutely fantastic post. I just looked through this thread for the first time and was going to post something similar. Well done.


Thanks TJ. I have my moments once in a while. I know we haven't been the bulldozer many would like this season but we have been better than any of us really expected deep down. And for that I am appreciative. I know we need to fix some things (defense) and add some parts (BP), but for having these issues we still find ourselves in the thick of it. It's easy to be pessimistic (we all do, myself included) but I for one think that at the very least we have a legit shot to make the playoffs and that is a victory all to itself. And with some luck we might just surprise, we have the capability of beating any team in the NL in my mind at any time and the AL matters not until a short 7 game series in November when anything can happen. If not we have made a statement that the Redlegs are back for real and we will command respect.

I think we can do all this w/o forfeiting our future. We can make some marginal deals to improve the problem area's in late July, but don't need to deal any major future assets. So just trying to spread the optimism. And just so everyone gets me I will say I have not felt optimistic in the past years when we seemingly have something going. It just is different! ;)

Krusty
06-15-2006, 12:57 AM
I don't see Krivsky as a guy who makes serious trades for short term answers, regardless where the Reds are at the July trading deadlines. I think he makes serious trades that will help short and long term.

Agree. With the exception of Hatteberg, Krivsky's acquistions will be here at least for a couple of more years. What he acquires at the July trading deadline could have an impact come the 2007 season.

I do think Krivsky will not deviate from the main goal of the organization which is to build through the farm system.

If anyone read the past week's issue of Sports Weekly, Krivsky pretty much has the longterm focus of developing the farm system....just like Dan O'Brien. Only difference is Krivsky is trying to win at the same time.

schroomytunes
06-15-2006, 04:37 AM
I think Krivsky has done a hell of a job so far with this team. Since he took over we have 1) got an Ace in Arroyo for basically nothing in WMP. 2) We got a good young 2B in Phillips for absolutley zero. 3) We have one of the best slugging catcher's in Ross for nothing. 4)Hatteberg gives us more options and his OBP is great.
The long -term plan of this guy is to acquire as much young talent as he can and I think he is doing that. Granted we would all like to see the bullpen upgraded, but at the cost of losing what prospects we have? I think we are 1-2 good arms away in the pen right now to make a run at this. I feel we can make some moves regarding our 25 man roster to fix it. Some guys that I feel we can shop are Aurilia, Larue, Valentin, Hatteberg, Weathers,Mercker, Olmedo,and Claussen. Granted some of these guys wont get you much, but if you can get someone to overpay for these guys then its a win. I think Aurilia,Weathers,and Claussen would be high priorities for a contender.

schroomytunes
06-15-2006, 05:03 AM
At this point I would be on the phone with Kansas City, they need loads of young talent and are going nowhere fast. I would want to get some veterens who could come in and help us now, but w/o jepardizing our future. So if I'm Krivsky then I propose this deal:

Reds trade: William Bergolla(2b) Ryan Wagner(RP) and BJ Symanski(OF)

Royals trade:Elmer Dessens(RP) and low A prospect

The Royals get some much needed talent in their minors at positions of need, while the Reds deal from areas of strength. The Royals lose Dessens salary while the Reds get a guy who can go 1-2 innings in the pen and allows us to shore up our glaring bullpen weakness, while also acquiring a young arm in the low minors. Our pen would now be: Coffey,Belisle,Hammond,Weathers,Mercker,Yan/Mays,Dessens
its still an improvement, although a small one, but we haven't hurt our long term goals either.

GAC
06-15-2006, 07:10 AM
...and there only 3 games out. Go get some pitching. The offense is not the problem.

While I obviously agree on the pitching - I'm not sure that this offense isn't the problem.

I was talking with another fellow RZer about this the other day, and it was like we really couldn't put our finger on it, and when one looks at various stats the body looks "well"; but IMO there is something wrong.

I know, I know - someone is now gonna come on here and refute me by posting various stats to show I am full of it! :lol:

And believe me, I've already been pouring over a multitude of those in the last week or so (comparing them with the last year or two also).

But I still say something is just not right with this offense.

Before Dunn's final at-bat yesterday, the Reds were 4-for-40 (.100) with runners in scoring position over their five-game losing streak, including 0-for-the-last-24.

The Reds lead the National League with 99 homers as a club. A sign of how much they've lived and died by the long ball lately -- 14 of their last 15 runs scored have come via a homer. It was mentioned tin the broadcast the other day that our offense is dependent (48%) on the HR.

We are 8th in the ML in OB% (.347), and 1st in BB's (279). That's good.

But we are 17th in hits (587), and 19th in B/A (.260). And we always hear that batting average doesn't matter. And while I agreee that it is not as critical a stat as the others, I have never agreed that it doesn't matter.

And again, while I can't really put my finger on it, I think the about two stats somehow ties in with this team's offensive erraticness.

I'm gonna throw something out here, and again, I may be completely wrong - but I'm simply scratching my head over this team offensively.

Should there be more "balance to the force" (i.e OB %) between hit and BB's? Is there an imbalance?

I'm not knocking BB's, or saving we need to be up there hacking away more trying to produce hits. I'm simply making an observatory "guess" as if that may be a problem?

And if it is? Then is it something that the players CAN correct or improve on?

remdog
06-15-2006, 07:32 AM
I think Krivsky has done a hell of a job so far with this team. Since he took over we have 1) got an Ace in Arroyo for basically nothing in WMP. 2) We got a good young 2B in Phillips for absolutley zero. 3) We have one of the best slugging catcher's in Ross for nothing. 4)Hatteberg gives us more options and his OBP is great.

The first three mentioned are all playing substantially over their career averages. Of those three I have hopes for Phillips to be the best long-term due to his potential and his young age. Arroyo will be OK long-term but hardly an 'Ace'. Ross has been basically filler who has never been highly rated and he's already been dumped by three other teams in his MLB career. To say that any of these three is currently having a 'career year' would be a gigantic understatement. I'm glad that they are having it with the Reds but I don't look for all of them to continue performing at this level for the next several years.

As for Hatteberg, he's 'Casey Light' and, at his price I can live with that but he should be strictly a bench jocky.

Rem

MattyHo4Life
06-15-2006, 08:35 AM
My money's on only one of those guys ever impacting a MLB roster, probably Bruce--in 5 years. I'll roll those dice.

The Cardinals only seem to struggle when they play the Reds now that Danny Graves isn't around. The Cards have been playing fine otherwise. Hopefully Walt will be able to pull off a deal and send Starting Pitcher packing for a hitter so we can see Anthony Reyes in the rotation for good.

Krusty
06-16-2006, 11:03 AM
At this point I would be on the phone with Kansas City, they need loads of young talent and are going nowhere fast. I would want to get some veterens who could come in and help us now, but w/o jepardizing our future. So if I'm Krivsky then I propose this deal:

Reds trade: William Bergolla(2b) Ryan Wagner(RP) and BJ Symanski(OF)


Royals trade:Elmer Dessens(RP) and low A prospect

The Royals get some much needed talent in their minors at positions of need, while the Reds deal from areas of strength. The Royals lose Dessens salary while the Reds get a guy who can go 1-2 innings in the pen and allows us to shore up our glaring bullpen weakness, while also acquiring a young arm in the low minors. Our pen would now be: Coffey,Belisle,Hammond,Weathers,Mercker,Yan/Mays,Dessens
its still an improvement, although a small one, but we haven't hurt our long term goals either.

I was thinking about Dessens too. Also, Mike McDougal will be ready for a rehab assignment. If he is healthy and throwing effectively come the trade deadline, there is someone else for Krivsky to pursue.

NJReds
06-16-2006, 11:09 AM
Brandon Donelley (LA Angels) demanded a trade due to his lack of use, but he said that his request was denied and that he was told that he won't be dealt.