PDA

View Full Version : Is the old man getting impatient?



Chip R
11-24-2006, 11:49 PM
It's been an interesting couple of weeks in the free agent market. Cubs re-sign Ramirez and Wood and give Soriano 9 years and a ton of money. HOU signs Lee and Woody Williams. L.A. signs Juan Pierre to a very silly deal and ANA signs the Private up for a 5 year hitch at $10M per. Meanwhile the Reds shore up their defense by signing Gonzo to a modest 3 year deal at under $5M per and keep Mike Stanton off the Social Security rolls by inking him to a multi year deal. Now you may think these deals are awful - and most of them are. But, still, Bob is known to be an impatient man. And you have to think that when two teams in the same division spend a ton of money to make themselves better in the near future, you have to believe that the Reds' signings pale in comparison to the others and perhaps Bob feels the same way. I think Bob wants to spend money but he knows how limited our revenues are. Building through the farm system is nice but it's not very sexy and it does nothing in the short term to sell tickets short of giving Homer Bailey a spot in the rotation.

It does nothing to win games next year either and I think that is what Bob wants above all else. I think he would blow the budget to smithereens to get a division championship. I do think he trusts in Wayne and has been patient with him and his rebuilding through the minors but there comes a point where Bob might just throw up his hands and give Wayne a blank check to sign someone - preferably a pitcher - but someone to get the fans' attention and sell tickets but most importantly to win. And if it means overpaying someone, then that is what it takes.

This may not be a wise course of action but Bob may feel that he has to keep up with the Joneses and let Wayne overpay for someone that could make the team better even if it blows the budget and even if the contract is a future liability.

paulrichjr
11-25-2006, 12:12 AM
I don't disagree but who is he going to sign? There isn't very many "fan draw" names left.

flyer85
11-25-2006, 12:21 AM
I hope not. Sometimes the only move is not to play.

pedro
11-25-2006, 12:24 AM
I hope not. Sometimes the only move is not to play.

thanks joshua. :)

flyer85
11-25-2006, 12:28 AM
thanks joshua. :)
well, I'd wizz on a spark plug if I thought that would help.

RFS62
11-25-2006, 12:32 AM
I do think he trusts in Wayne and has been patient with him and his rebuilding through the minors but there comes a point where Bob might just throw up his hands and give Wayne a blank check to sign someone - preferably a pitcher - but someone to get the fans' attention and sell tickets but most importantly to win. And if it means overpaying someone, then that is what it takes.



That's exactly the mindset that landed Milton, IMO.

Aronchis
11-25-2006, 12:45 AM
Spending for the sake of spending doesn't cut it. Yet, to appease the lay fan base in the offseason, that is what the Reds should be doing. Ah, some things never change.

Chip R
11-25-2006, 01:05 AM
Spending for the sake of spending doesn't cut it. Yet, to appease the lay fan base in the offseason, that is what the Reds should be doing. Ah, some things never change.


I didn't say he should do it. I asked if he will do it. Much like how the media speculates on the future of Joe Torre every year when the Yankees are eliminated. Most people think he should be retained but they wonder if he will.

It's a question as to how he thinks which is relevant to how the team will be ran. Will he stay the course or will he try to make a splash? When ticket sales were slow for that big 4 game series against the Cards, he cut ticket and hot dog prices to get people to come. He didn't just sit back and hope people would come out. He made the effort to get people there. It may not have had the desired result and it may have cost them money long term, but at least he did something. And, yes, that is how we got Milton. I'm hoping if the same scenario presents itself, the result will be different.

I'm not saying you have to spend money on dumb contracts just cause everyone else is. What I'm asking is is the temptation too great for Bob to stay the course?

WVRedsFan
11-25-2006, 01:53 AM
I agree with everything that's been siad (for the most part), but I have to wonder. Bob C came in like a hurricane bringing back tradition and swearing the Reds would compete for a title soon. He hires Wayne Krivsky, boy wonder GM, and the team improves, but it not quite there. Move after move is made to try to improve the club nearly all season and we come to this--kind of a disappointment. Is Wayne listening to Jerry Narron too much? Is Narron assuring him that our offense is fine and our pitching is adequate with the acquisition of Stanton? Wayne has such faith in him...sorry, but I don't understand.

Jr's Boy
11-25-2006, 02:59 AM
That's exactly the mindset that landed Milton, IMO.

But the Reds had a moron's mindset at the time,i.e.Dano.

Caveat Emperor
11-25-2006, 04:53 AM
I agree with everything that's been siad (for the most part), but I have to wonder. Bob C came in like a hurricane bringing back tradition and swearing the Reds would compete for a title soon. He hires Wayne Krivsky, boy wonder GM, and the team improves, but it not quite there. Move after move is made to try to improve the club nearly all season and we come to this--kind of a disappointment. Is Wayne listening to Jerry Narron too much? Is Narron assuring him that our offense is fine and our pitching is adequate with the acquisition of Stanton? Wayne has such faith in him...sorry, but I don't understand.

The market is out of control right now -- given the market size they play in and the horrid state of their rotation, the Reds simply don't have the financial resources to throw out huge-dollar deals to players who don't pitch.

What you're seeing right now from Casty and Krivsky is straight of the Twins playbook and the Cardinals playbook: you don't necessarily make the flashy deal, you make the right deal for your ballclub.

GAC
11-25-2006, 08:01 AM
It's been an interesting couple of weeks in the free agent market. Cubs re-sign Ramirez and Wood and give Soriano 9 years and a ton of money. HOU signs Lee and Woody Williams. L.A. signs Juan Pierre to a very silly deal and ANA signs the Private up for a 5 year hitch at $10M per. Meanwhile the Reds shore up their defense by signing Gonzo to a modest 3 year deal at under $5M per and keep Mike Stanton off the Social Security rolls by inking him to a multi year deal. Now you may think these deals are awful - and most of them are. But, still, Bob is known to be an impatient man. And you have to think that when two teams in the same division spend a ton of money to make themselves better in the near future, you have to believe that the Reds' signings pale in comparison to the others and perhaps Bob feels the same way. I think Bob wants to spend money but he knows how limited our revenues are.

Or Bob sees the idiocy that is going on in this current market and realizes it wouldn't be a smart move to jump into this pool. ;)



but there comes a point where Bob might just throw up his hands and give Wayne a blank check to sign someone - preferably a pitcher - but someone to get the fans' attention and sell tickets but most importantly to win. And if it means overpaying someone, then that is what it takes.

I'm blowing this pic up and sending it to Bob to put on his wall to help temper any emotion he might have.....

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/images/2006/02/21/ptSTbYZC.jpg



Does anyone have a pilot license? We could buzz his office with it. :lol:

GAC
11-25-2006, 08:10 AM
What you're seeing right now from Casty and Krivsky is straight of the Twins playbook and the Cardinals playbook: you don't necessarily make the flashy deal, you make the right deal for your ballclub.

That is exactly what they have to do. Pinpoint your needs, see what is out there and who is available, what possible deal(s) can be worked.....

But don't go nutso and end up overpaying for a Suppan-type just because you think he might help.

RedsBaron
11-25-2006, 08:38 AM
Good post Chip. I've had similar thoughts. I suspect that Bob has an itchy trigger finger and wants t opull the trigger on one or more major moves. I too hope another Milton signing is not the result.

redsmetz
11-25-2006, 10:14 AM
This is really all just conjecture. Castellini has said he wants to win and to win sooner, rather than later. That said, I don't think you make the money he's made by jumping the gun. I don't expect either him or WK to go crazy throwing dollars out there simply for the sake of "doing something". Even the Nats trade last season was done to fix something that was horribly in need of fixing. But that trade aside, we gave nothing significant away while throwing some pitchers against the wall. And I'm one of the handful who still say the jury's still out on the Nats trade. Patience, folks.

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 10:35 AM
Does everyone really believe that all of these big contracts will backfire? I'm fine for staying on the sidelines if they don't like the talent, but to avoid signing real talent just for the sake of money sounds like the same old same old.

RANDY IN INDY
11-25-2006, 10:37 AM
I'm not so much against the money as I am the length of the money.

vaticanplum
11-25-2006, 10:43 AM
Does everyone really believe that all of these big contracts will backfire? I'm fine for staying on the sidelines if they don't like the talent, but to avoid signing real talent just for the sake of money sounds like the same old same old.

I agree. I'd be more than happy to overpay Zito, for instance. The rest of the club is in a state such that a deal like that wouldn't cripple the team unless he had a season-ending injury...and that's a risk you take no matter what. Sometimes you get what you pay for. That's why love is free.

Some of the big-money deals currently being signed out there are ludicrous. and some of the big-money deals being signed will be worth the money. When free-agent shopping, you just need to recognize the difference. But ALL expensive deals aren't bad.

Jpup
11-25-2006, 10:49 AM
I wonder if they could trade for Austin Kearns?

Chip R
11-25-2006, 10:57 AM
I'm not so much against the money as I am the length of the money.


And that's a really good point. It's curious that these players are getting such long term deals. Especially with the money being thrown around. Do these agents feel that 3-4 years from now they are going to stop spending crazy money? Take Soriano, for instance. Guy is in the prime of his career and he takes a 9 year deal. Granted he's making crazy money and will be when he doesn't have the skills he has now. But 3-4 years from now he might be able to get even more money than he's making now.

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 11:02 AM
And that's a really good point. It's curious that these players are getting such long term deals. Especially with the money being thrown around. Do these agents feel that 3-4 years from now they are going to stop spending crazy money? Take Soriano, for instance. Guy is in the prime of his career and he takes a 9 year deal. Granted he's making crazy money and will be when he doesn't have the skills he has now. But 3-4 years from now he might be able to get even more money than he's making now.

I think teams are banking on the fact that salaries will continue to escalate--that, for instance, 16 million for Lee will look like a relative bargain three years from now.

Whether or not that's true, I don't know....

RANDY IN INDY
11-25-2006, 11:09 AM
I don't know how they are ever going to go back from these kinds of dollar amounts. The union will never let it happen, and the charges of collusion would rear their ugly heads. The owners are setting themselves up for some real problems down the road. I don't see where it can stop and it really continues to hamstring the small markets.

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 11:11 AM
I don't see where it can stop and it really continues to hamstring the small markets.

Except for St. Louis, for instance.

RFS62
11-25-2006, 11:15 AM
The way I look at it, I'd rather see the money go to the players than the owners. Revenues are up dramatically from several sources.

The business of baseball has never been better.

RANDY IN INDY
11-25-2006, 11:18 AM
I would too, RFS62, and I'm all for the free market but some of these amounts are getting bizarre, plus it is causing a lot of the fans in smaller markets to consistently have to watch some pretty bad baseball teams.

RFS62
11-25-2006, 11:26 AM
I would too, RFS62, and I'm all for the free market but some of these amounts are getting bizarre, plus it is causing a lot of the fans in smaller markets to consistently have to watch some pretty bad baseball teams.


Yeah, I agree. But that can only be fixed by a more aggressive form of revenue sharing than is now in place.

But the union will probably never agree to it.

RANDY IN INDY
11-25-2006, 11:29 AM
I agree with that, although I was surprised at the supposedly good negotiations with the union and the owners with the new contract.

Jpup
11-25-2006, 11:37 AM
Except for St. Louis, for instance.

St. Louis DMA #21
Cincinnati DMA #33

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 11:47 AM
St. Louis DMA #21
Cincinnati DMA #33

I realize that St. Louis is bigger, but they're comparable cities when you factor in the great many satellite cities that Cincy can draw upon for a fanbase that St. Louis doesn't have (Louisville, Lexington, Dayton, Columbus). We've had this discussion before: there's no reason Cincinnati can't go toe to toe with St. Louis in terms of market size.

westofyou
11-25-2006, 11:59 AM
I realize that St. Louis is bigger, but they're comparable cities when you factor in the great many satellite cities that Cincy can draw upon for a fanbase that St. Louis doesn't have (Louisville, Lexington, Dayton, Columbus). We've had this discussion before: there's no reason Cincinnati can't go toe to toe with St. Louis in terms of market size.

I've said this before and I'll say it again.

Get in your car in St Louis and drive any direction, see how many pro sports franchises you hit on your journey, then do the same for Cincinnati.

To state that Cincinnati has all these big towns to draw off of misses the fact that all those big towns that are within 4 hours of Cincinnati also have teams in the NHL, NBA, NFL, Major College Sports, and several other MLB and ML teams. What's to stop the Columbus folks from going to OSU games, BJ's games, Pacer games, Cavs games, Browns, Bengals, Steelers, Pirates, or Penguins games? They are all pretty damn close to Columbus

Get in your car in St. Louis and drive any direction and it's a different story.

RANDY IN INDY
11-25-2006, 12:09 PM
Exactly.

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 12:10 PM
I've said this before and I'll say it again.

Get in your car in St Louis and drive any direction, see how many pro sports franchises you hit on your journey, then do the same for Cincinnati.

To state that Cincinnati has all these big towns to draw off of misses the fact that all those big towns that are within 4 hours of Cincinnati also have teams in the NHL, NBA, NFL, Major College Sports, and several other MLB and ML teams. What's to stop the Columbus folks from going to OSU games, BJ's games, Pacer games, Cavs games, Browns, Bengals, Steelers, Pirates, or Penguins games? They are all pretty damn close to Columbus

Get in your car in St. Louis and drive any direction and it's a different story.

Dayton, Lexington and Louisville (a growing city) are great natural satellite cities with no pro sports franchises. St. Louis has no comparable cities surrounding it.

St. Louis has one of the tiniest populations surrounding it among all of the major U.S. cities. It might as well be on an island. I lived there. I know this.

No reason at all that Cincinnati can't compete with St. Louis's market. None.

To say it's impossible is merely making excuses.

westofyou
11-25-2006, 12:15 PM
Dayton, Lexington and Louisville (a growing city) are great natural satellite cities with no pro sports franchises. St. Louis has no comparable cities surrounding it.

St. Louis has one of the tiniest populations surrounding it among all of the major U.S. cities. It might as well be on an island. I lived there. I know this.

No reason at all that Cincinnati can't compete with St. Louis's market. None.

To say it's impossible is merely making excuses.

And all the aforementioned cities have major college programs and ML teams.

No one said it was impossible, I just said that the competition for the sports dollar is different in SW Ohio vs Mo.

That's a fact, not an excuse.

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 12:19 PM
And all the aforementioned cities have major college programs and ML teams.

No one said it was impossible, I just said that the competition for the sports dollar is different in SW Ohio vs Mo.

That's a fact, not an excuse.

St. Louis metro continues to hemorrhage population, as well. At a higher rate than even Cincy metro, IIRC.

gonelong
11-25-2006, 12:37 PM
Dayton, Lexington and Louisville (a growing city) are great natural satellite cities with no pro sports franchises. St. Louis has no comparable cities surrounding it.


Dayton has 2 D1 basketball teams, minor league hockey, minor league baseball, and some sort of arena league football team. Plenty to spend your sports bucks on in Dayton.

I know because I used to go to a healthy number of Reds games and have spent the last 3-4 years going to Flyers, Raiders, Bombers and Dragons games INSTEAD of going to Reds games.

GL

Ltlabner
11-25-2006, 01:44 PM
Dayton has 2 D1 basketball teams, minor league hockey, minor league baseball, and some sort of arena league football team. Plenty to spend your sports bucks on in Dayton.

I know because I used to go to a healthy number of Reds games and have spent the last 3-4 years going to Flyers, Raiders, Bombers and Dragons games INSTEAD of going to Reds games.

GL

And this is the key, and WOY also touched on it. There are so many options on where to spend your money. And the Reds have been a poor option for so many years that they are just another choice on a long list, instead of being THE choice at the top of the list. It will take more than one year (or one partial year really) of good baseball to change that.

Frankly, even if the Reds were to majically go all the way next year, my guess is you wouldn't see a real swell in attendence until the end of the year. Even then, you wouldn't see significant and real results until they had been competitive for a number of years. This doesn't meant they shouldn't pursue this goal, they should and obviously are. But it is different than being the only real game in town.

I think BCast is an impatitient, hard driving sorta boss, but having been in the baseball world I think he has the experience to know not to push "too hard" or make a dumb deal just to make it.

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 02:19 PM
Well, St. Louis has college competition: SLU, Mizzou, Illinois, SIU in both basketball and football. They have pro hockey and football in St. Louis. They have the Cubs to the north, which cuts the state of Illinois in half. The other "nearby" cities, Louisville, Memphis and Nashville all have their own niches.

Me, I'd rather have Cincy's population density & competition than St. Louis's cornering of a shrinking market.

Caveat Emperor
11-25-2006, 02:36 PM
Does everyone really believe that all of these big contracts will backfire? I'm fine for staying on the sidelines if they don't like the talent, but to avoid signing real talent just for the sake of money sounds like the same old same old.

There's a differnece between signing real talent and talent that makes a real difference to the ballclub.

Having Alfonso Soriano around or Carlos Lee around would be great, but every team has a budget (even the ones throwing these big deals around), and the key to winning baseball is getting the right players on the roster before you hit the budget ceiling. It would be foolhardy to throw huge dollars at one of those two, and then count on the current crop of jokers on the pitching staff to get the job done because the money is all gone.

I'm not against spending money, I'm against spending money stupidly. Spending money stupidly includes commmitting almost 20% of a team's payroll to a guy that doesn't pitch. Spending money stupidly means tying your hands financially for almost a decade to come and banking that the reward will continue to outweigh the cost for that many years to come.

Its time for this club to finally be smart for a change.

pahster
11-25-2006, 02:41 PM
Well, St. Louis has college competition: SLU, Mizzou, Illinois, SIU in both basketball and football. They have pro hockey and football in St. Louis. They have the Cubs to the north, which cuts the state of Illinois in half. The other "nearby" cities, Louisville, Memphis and Nashville all have their own niches.

Me, I'd rather have Cincy's population density & competition than St. Louis's cornering of a shrinking market.

I can't speak for the other schools, but not too many people in St. Louis give a crap about MIZZOU, especially not for basketball. The Cardinals have done a great job at marketing themselves throughout the state. I grew up in southwestern Missouri, and almost everyone I knew were huge Cards fans. Most of them were more than willing to drive the 3+ hours one way to see several games a year. I knew exactly one Royals fan. I haven't lived in Ohio since 1990, but when I go to visit my dad (who lives in Centerville) I get the impression that no one really cares about the Reds.

Kc61
11-25-2006, 02:49 PM
There's a differnece between signing real talent and talent that makes a real difference to the ballclub.

Having Alfonso Soriano around or Carlos Lee around would be great, but every team has a budget (even the ones throwing these big deals around), and the key to winning baseball is getting the right players on the roster before you hit the budget ceiling. It would be foolhardy to throw huge dollars at one of those two, and then count on the current crop of jokers on the pitching staff to get the job done because the money is all gone.

I'm not against spending money, I'm against spending money stupidly. Spending money stupidly includes commmitting almost 20% of a team's payroll to a guy that doesn't pitch. Spending money stupidly means tying your hands financially for almost a decade to come and banking that the reward will continue to outweigh the cost for that many years to come.

Its time for this club to finally be smart for a change.

I agree. But I want them to be willing to spend money for a guy that does pitch. Not another Milton deal, which didn't work out. But I want the Reds to be willing to pay market price for a bona fide, solid starting pitcher.

Frankly, if the Reds went for a Zito or a Schmidt -- and it doesn't work out --I can live with it. At least it shows that the team is trying to be in the top echelon.

Castellini has promised to try to become a first tier team. Krivsky supposedly is a keen talent appraiser. Between the two, they should be able to find a starting pitcher, and possibly a reliever, that will finally help this team pitch well enough to contend.

The market is what it is. Good players are expensive. I don't expect the Reds to sign a dozen of them. But one smart, big move for the pitching staff is necessary.

redsfanmia
11-25-2006, 04:06 PM
But the Reds had a moron's mindset at the time,i.e.Dano.

That "moron" drafted our top prospects, the guy was not a great gm but not a moron. He is gone stop killing the poor man. In a few years we will begin to see Obie in a new light IMO.

reds44
11-26-2006, 01:53 AM
If Wayne goes out and trades Dunn, it will blow up this theory, but here are my thoughts on the situation.

If you look at what Wayne is doing to this team, you can see he has a plan.

Part A:
He is building his offense around 2 young power hitters.
1. Adam Dunn
2. Edwin Encarnacion

The 2 no doubt have questionable D, but they have the potential to combine for well over 200 RBIs for years to come. 1 is a lefty, the other the righty. 1 hits 40 homers, the other has the chance to break the Reds doubles record. Krivsky got rid of 3 strike our prone guys in Kearns, Lopez, and LaRue, Therfore you can afford Dunn and EE's strike outs every year.

Part B:
Fill out the rest of the lineup.
1. Scott Hatteberg
2. Brandon Phillips
3. David Ross

Scott Hatteberg is slow. Scott Hatteberg plays average (at best) D. Scott Hatteberg does not hit for power. Scott Hatteberg is a fill in until Votto is ready next year. However, Hatte does bring good things to the table. He is a guy who is going to walk alot, and hit for a decent average. I don't think he belongs EVER batting 3rd, 4th, or 5th, but rather 2nd. He'll work the count for your leadoff man, and he will get on base for your big boppers.

Brandon Phillips is decent at alot of things, is a very good defender, and has a bad batting eye. IMO, he belongs batting 6th getting the "table scraps" from the middle of the order. He can hit it deep and drive people in, yet he can also swipe a base to get in scoring position for your 7-8 hitters to drive in before the pitcher. You know he is going to play solid D.

Then, you have David Ross. A virtual unknown, he burst onto the scene showing massive power. If you can get decent production from your catcher, it's a plus. He's not good defensivley, but he is a pretty good game manager. He could move up in the lineup, but IMO he belongs batting 7th to start the season.

Part C:
Your role players.
1. Alex Gonzalez
2. Chris Denorfia
3. Ryan Freel

Alex Gonzalez was the 2nd best SS on the market. Considering the market, I don't find 3-14 a bad deal. He should obviously be the 8 hitter, but he can bring you awesome defense and help out your pitchers. Considering the left side of your defense (Dunn, EE) Gonzo, Phillips, and Deno make up the best middle D in all of baseball.

It appeard Chris Denorfia would get a chance when Austin Kearns was traded, however Ryan Freel started in RF most of the time. When Denorfia actually had a chance to play everyday in late September he flourished. His defense is never a question, but he really hit late in the year. He has above average speed and a pretty good eye, IMO he deserves a chance to leadoff at the start of the year.

Ryan Freel, when used correctly, is one of the best assests in all of baseball. He can play 2B, 3B, LF, CF, RF, and play all of them well. When his body is given time to rest, he is one of the best leadoff men in baseball. If you only making him play 3-4 times a week, he will hit above .300 and steal alot of bases. We need to not fall into the trap of making him play everyday.

Offensive conclusion:
Starting 8.
1. Chris Denorfia CF
2. Scott Hatteberg 1B
3. Adam Dunn LF
4. Edwin Encarnacion 3B
5. Ken Griffey Junior RF
6. Brandon Phillips 2B
7. David Ross C
8. Alex Gonzalez SS

Part D:
The starting staff.
1. Aaron Harang
2. Bronson Arroyo
3. Homer Bailey

What? only 3 guys in the starting staff, including one that has never pitched an inning above AA? The starting 5 is a work in progress. He has 2 studs at the top, and Homer will be up by June at the latest, and I wouldn't be surprised if he is in it out of camp. We all know what Harang and Arroyo bring to the table. Then there is Milton (who I will talk about later) and he need a free agent to fill out the back end. Elizardo Ramirez is still an option for next year.

Part E:
The bullpen.

I think Krivsky's plan is pretty clear here. Get as many arms as you can. The bullpen is a crapshoot, and good pen pitchers are hard to find and expensive. Wayne will hope to see imrpovement from Bray, and hopefully Majewski will return to form with an offseason of rest on his arm. The Stanton move is giving an older player years rather then money. A realitvely cheap contract, but a 2 year contract allows insurance for Stanton, but still an out option for the Reds. Coffey is solid. Krivsky will look to build his pen through the draft (see Sean Watson), and try to piece a pen together until then.

Part F:
Holding Krivsky back.
1. Eric Milton
2. Ken Griffey Junior

When you are a small market team, when you give out big contracts you better be getting really good production in return. In Milton, you get a bad pitcher making 9 million dollars. Not good. In Griffey you get an injury prone, bad defender, who forgot how to walk. Now it is Krivsky's job to TELL, not ask Griffey to move to RF, but the lack of production and games played is not his fault. We get out from Milton's contract after next year, but we will have to deal with Griffey's for a few more years. I think if you gave Krivsky the money that we are paying Milton and Griffey to spend on free agents/trades, you would see his plan come together.

In conclusion, Wayne is trying to bring balance to the Reds. A balance of offense and defense, power and contact, and 2 great pitchers to go along with some decent pitchers. He has a plan, and he is trying to execute it. It will be interesting to see what he will do with Uncle Milty's 9 million next year.

There's my opinon on what Wayne is trying to do. Thanks for reading.

mth123
11-26-2006, 02:02 AM
Good Post Reds44. I basically agree but I think its about a couple years from now more than 2007. I would add Votto and Bruce to the offensive core and by then Milton and Griffey will be out of the picture. For it to work Harang, Arroyo and Dunn need to be locked-up a little longer. Another starter would help a lot, but this day and age having 3 good ones gives you an edge over most teams. A lot rides on Bailey, Bruce and Votto IMO.

reds44
11-26-2006, 02:05 AM
Good Post Reds44. I basically agree but I think its about a couple years from now more than 2007. I would add Votto and Bruce to the offensive core and by then Milton and Griffey will be out of the picture. For it to work Harang, Arroyo and Dunn need to be locked-up a little longer. Another starter would help a lot, but this day and age having 3 good ones gives you an edge over most teams. A lot rides on Bailey, Bruce and Votto IMO.
Yep, alot of the future does depend on Bailey, Bruce and Votto. If you look past next year, then it looks even brighter. Don't forget about Cueto and Wood also.

WVRedsFan
11-26-2006, 03:02 AM
The only problem I have with all of this is the dissing of Griffey based on defense and money.

1. Griffey costs the club a lot in money, but $9 million is peanuts today.

2. If you somehow trade Griffey or make him go away via the injury or whatever, you lose 27 HR (I know, that's not important except to the fannies in the seats) and 72 RBI's.

Let's replace Griffey in the outfield with Freel or Super Chris Denorfia. You immediatly lose run production. Freel played 23 games more than Griffey last year (yes, many forget that he is nearly as fragile as Griffey) and scored only 5 more runs from the leadoff position (for the most part)! He only had 27 RBI's which is 45 less, so that's unscientifically 42 more runs with Griffey in the lineup. Unless Krivsky is a miracle worker, that means that our pitching staff must limit the opposition to more runs and that seems a little laughable at this point. And don't tell me about defense. Freel sure at the devil won't save 42 runs in center.

As pitching improved last season, the one problem was run production and to call Griffey the problem with his defense drives me nuts. Yes, he's getting older and his wheels are bad, but a full -time (if you can call him that) Freel in center is fool's gold.

GAC
11-26-2006, 07:50 AM
The only problem I have with all of this is the dissing of Griffey based on defense and money.

Those are two very important factors though. ;)


1. Griffey costs the club a lot in money, but $9 million is peanuts today.

He makes 10.2 Mil in '07. And that is not peanuts to alot of teams. I'd love to have that money freed up for other vital areas.

Contracts like the Jr and Milton ones hurt teams like the Reds far more then a Yanks, Sox, LA, or Chicago.

Wouldn't you like to be able to take that Jr money, plus obviously add some more to it, and at least be able to make a top dollar bid for a Barry Zito for example?

I'm not saying that Zito would come here; but at least you could be a participant in the bidding war and make it interesting. ;)

I'd love to be able to take that combined Jr/Milton money (19 Mil/yr) and offer an enticing multi-year contract to a Zito of 15-16 Mil/yr. You're getting a quality longterm player, and also saving around 3 Mil/year.

Make your best offer possible, so that if another teams wants him, then they are really going to have to commit/pay.

But at least you made a serious effort.

But right now, we have almost 1/3 of our yearly payroll tied up in two guys whose contributions, for whatever reasons, is marginal. And we can't trade them away because of that; but have to wait till their contracts are up over the next year or two.

Nor can anyone ignore the fact that those contracts are, to an extent, hindering us from spending.

RedsBaron
11-26-2006, 08:31 AM
In Griffey you get an injury prone, bad defender, who forgot how to walk. Now it is Krivsky's job to TELL, not ask Griffey to move to RF,

I liked the entire post, but I particularly agreed with the above portion. I am a Griffey fan, but it drives me nuts when I read that there is nothing the Reds can do about Junior's supposed reluctance to play anywhere other than centerfield or bat anywhere other than third in the order. Maybe that was the case when Junior was in his twenties and playing Gold Glove defense while hitting 50 HRs a season, but he is no longer the gorilla that nobody can do anything with. Ask him to play where he most helps the team; if he refuses, TELL him.

mth123
11-26-2006, 08:48 AM
The only problem I have with all of this is the dissing of Griffey based on defense and money.

1. Griffey costs the club a lot in money, but $9 million is peanuts today.

2. If you somehow trade Griffey or make him go away via the injury or whatever, you lose 27 HR (I know, that's not important except to the fannies in the seats) and 72 RBI's.

Let's replace Griffey in the outfield with Freel or Super Chris Denorfia. You immediatly lose run production. Freel played 23 games more than Griffey last year (yes, many forget that he is nearly as fragile as Griffey) and scored only 5 more runs from the leadoff position (for the most part)! He only had 27 RBI's which is 45 less, so that's unscientifically 42 more runs with Griffey in the lineup. Unless Krivsky is a miracle worker, that means that our pitching staff must limit the opposition to more runs and that seems a little laughable at this point. And don't tell me about defense. Freel sure at the devil won't save 42 runs in center.

As pitching improved last season, the one problem was run production and to call Griffey the problem with his defense drives me nuts. Yes, he's getting older and his wheels are bad, but a full -time (if you can call him that) Freel in center is fool's gold.


I think the current version of the Reds needs Griffey's bat and power very much. I wouldn't propose replacing him in the line-up with Deno or Freel. But when this team is ready to win, Bruce will be in his spot (or another power guy if Bruce is a bust) and the money can be put to use on the on-going nucleus. Griffey isn't part of the Reds future beyond 2008 unless he takes a Larkin like low dollar deal and hangs around to play a role.

For this year the Reds need him to accept RF and be happy if he bats in the 5 hole. I, for one, believe he could still be an asset there protecting Dunn and EE for a couple years. I firmly believe that this team can not win with him in CF. I prefer Deno over Freel in CF.

buckeyenut
11-26-2006, 10:22 AM
I think the current version of the Reds needs Griffey's bat and power very much. I wouldn't propose replacing him in the line-up with Deno or Freel. But when this team is ready to win, Bruce will be in his spot (or another power guy if Bruce is a bust) and the money can be put to use on the on-going nucleus. Griffey isn't part of the Reds future beyond 2008 unless he takes a Larkin like low dollar deal and hangs around to play a role.

For this year the Reds need him to accept RF and be happy if he bats in the 5 hole. I, for one, believe he could still be an asset there protecting Dunn and EE for a couple years. I firmly believe that this team can not win with him in CF. I prefer Deno over Freel in CF.

I would personally go to Jr and tell him he is moving out of CF and can either move to RF or 1B this offseason. Personally, I like Hatteberg as a backup and bat off the bench so I would rather Jr at 1B, giving us Deno in CF and Freel in RF unless we pick up another bopper for RF (which would be ideal, sliding Freel to back up 5 positions). I like a lineup of Freel, Deno, Dunn, EE, Jr, Ross, Phillips, Gonzo and if I got a big bat for RF, I'd probably slide Dunn into the two hole. If Bruce and Votto were ready right now, this would be a good offensive team, but we need to hold down the fort for a year or two till they are ready.

I don't think Jr is hurting the team $$ wise, but he is defensively. Milton is obviously hurting the team both production wise and $$ wise. He is at best a #5 starter, getting #2 money. But, I believe that if we can pick up a guy like Jason Schmidt this offseason, this team is good enough to compete.

mth123
11-26-2006, 10:40 AM
I would personally go to Jr and tell him he is moving out of CF and can either move to RF or 1B this offseason. Personally, I like Hatteberg as a backup and bat off the bench so I would rather Jr at 1B, giving us Deno in CF and Freel in RF unless we pick up another bopper for RF (which would be ideal, sliding Freel to back up 5 positions). I like a lineup of Freel, Deno, Dunn, EE, Jr, Ross, Phillips, Gonzo and if I got a big bat for RF, I'd probably slide Dunn into the two hole. If Bruce and Votto were ready right now, this would be a good offensive team, but we need to hold down the fort for a year or two till they are ready.

I don't think Jr is hurting the team $$ wise, but he is defensively. Milton is obviously hurting the team both production wise and $$ wise. He is at best a #5 starter, getting #2 money. But, I believe that if we can pick up a guy like Jason Schmidt this offseason, this team is good enough to compete.

Mostly agree but redeploying Griffey $ could help the team.

I like the idea of Griffey at 1B and think he would be good there (as opposed to Dunn who I think would be a disaster). He has stated that his legs may not hold up under all the stretching so I haven't really considered it an option. If he could do this and a power bat was added to RF, the team would look a lot better. Hat would really help the bench.

As far as this year otherwise, the team still has two pretty solid starters and if they could add a 3rd, they could probably compete without another power bat because 3 good starters is more than just about anyone has. But they would really struggle to score runs without another bopper unless Hat, Phillips and Ross all repeat their 1st half of 2006.

RedsManRick
11-26-2006, 11:33 AM
Given the market and the available FA, Griffey in RF and Deno in CF seems like the best option to maximize offense and defense. Now, if you can trade Junior for some pitching help (without paying too much salary), and then go out and replace his production with a Wilson/Nixon platoon, fine. But I don't think that's realistic given Junior's trade veto rights.

reds44
11-26-2006, 03:09 PM
For this year the Reds need him to accept RF and be happy if he bats in the 5 hole. I, for one, believe he could still be an asset there protecting Dunn and EE for a couple years. I firmly believe that this team can not win with him in CF. I prefer Deno over Freel in CF.
Agreed.

If he bats 5th and plays in RF he is an asset to the Reds. However the days of him batting 3rd and playing CF are in the review mirror. When he is doing that, he is not an asset.

wally post
11-26-2006, 03:18 PM
I liked the entire post, but I particularly agreed with the above portion. I am a Griffey fan, but it drives me nuts when I read that there is nothing the Reds can do about Junior's supposed reluctance to play anywhere other than centerfield or bat anywhere other than third in the order. Maybe that was the case when Junior was in his twenties and playing Gold Glove defense while hitting 50 HRs a season, but he is no longer the gorilla that nobody can do anything with. Ask him to play where he most helps the team; if he refuses, TELL him.

RB - Great post IMO. I agree with you completely - BUT... do we know that the reds actually asked Griffey to move? I wonder. It seems to me that Narron isn't much of a "creative thinker". If the latter is the case, then why should we place blame on Griff? Can somebody confirm whether Griffey was ever asked to move?

WVRedsFan
11-26-2006, 03:23 PM
OK. Trade him. Give him away. Do whatever. I don't care anymore, but one question.

Who is going to replace 72 runs driven in that is presently on this club and I mean 72 more since Griff will be gone? Can we count on Dunn and Encarnacion to take it on themselves? I don't think so. Can we hope that Freel and Denorfia can do it? Looking at past performance, I don't think so even if they save 72 runs in CF (which is nearly impossible).

But, OK. dump him for an infield vet and a turkey and spend that money on more defense and more relief pitching, just like last year.

Yeah, that worked out well, didn't it.

RFS62
11-26-2006, 03:27 PM
RB - Great post IMO. I agree with you completely - BUT... do we know that the reds actually asked Griffey to move? I wonder. It seems to me that Narron isn't much of a "creative thinker". If the latter is the case, then why should we place blame on Griff? Can somebody confirm whether Griffey was ever asked to move?


Yeah, I agree, RB. Great post.

And I can't remember ever hearing anyone broach the subject with Junior either.

It's all on management until then.

I don't blame any player for believing in himself. But it's not his call.

He reminds me of the old Satchel Paige line.... "I'm running as hard as I ever did. I'm just not getting there as fast"

Junior used to be the most electric outfielder in baseball. His first step and anticipation.... his speed closing on fly balls.... he was up there in the rarified air with Willie Mays on every single aspect of his defense.

To imagine that he could still play stellar defense at his age with four screws holding his hamstring on the bone is beyond unrealistic. If he didn't have such a great baseball IQ, he'd be even worse. He compensates as much as anyone could with positioning and reading the ball off the bat. But it's just not enough any more.

"A good man knows his limitations." - Dirty Harry Callahan.

GAC
11-26-2006, 06:16 PM
I liked the entire post, but I particularly agreed with the above portion. I am a Griffey fan, but it drives me nuts when I read that there is nothing the Reds can do about Junior's supposed reluctance to play anywhere other than centerfield or bat anywhere other than third in the order. Maybe that was the case when Junior was in his twenties and playing Gold Glove defense while hitting 50 HRs a season, but he is no longer the gorilla that nobody can do anything with. Ask him to play where he most helps the team; if he refuses, TELL him.

I agree.

I proposed a solution that this FO could use a few weeks ago on here.

They need to sit down with Jr and use diplomacy. They first need to address Jr from an issue of respect for what he has done for the game and accomplished. That cannot be denied.

But his age and declining skills cannot also be denied. He needs to made to see that.

If I may "borrow" the term for the sake of this discussion....

You don't want to go into that meeting with a George Bush attitude (my way or the highway) ;)

You have to approach Jr with the above diplomatic attitude BUT - backed by the position going into that meeting that he is going to move for the good of the team one way or another.

The FO needs to tell Jr that they will do whatever he wants them to say/do, as far as public PR, to make him look good... save face, protect his pride, make it look like it was all his decision for the good of the team....

but he has got to move.

You have to show Jr that the move is not only for the good of the team, but to also prolong his career and keep him in the lineup.

It's not like they're benching the guy. They want him in the lineup, and know he can still contribute.

The move would help to assure that. They have to reassure him and convince him of these facts.

But put the ball in Jr's court, and take it off the FO.

And if he resists, after the efforts you made, then you just tell him you're going to do it.

What is Jr going to do when a majority think he should move positionally?

Is he going to run to the media? That same media that thinks he should move?

And what will the media (and fans) think when it is discovered that the FO tried to sit down with Jr in a respectful diplomatic approach to resolve this, only to be rebuffed by Jr?

It will look far better on this FO then Jr.

Then what is he going to do? Demand a trade? :lol:

vaticanplum
11-26-2006, 08:00 PM
I honestly don't see what the problem is with right field. Center field may be the marquee position, but that marquee shifts over for any individual player if he plays it better than center.

mth123
11-26-2006, 08:49 PM
I honestly don't see what the problem is with right field. Center field may be the marquee position, but that marquee shifts over for any individual player if he plays it better than center.

I don't really know, but I would guess that its a man known as "the kid" all of his life not wanting to admit that he is nearing (or in) middle age. It happens. The particular person its happening to is usually the last to know or admit it.

It could be something else completely though.

Chip R
11-26-2006, 08:57 PM
I honestly don't see what the problem is with right field. Center field may be the marquee position, but that marquee shifts over for any individual player if he plays it better than center.


I can't remember when he said it but he was talking about the sequence of a CF switching positions when you get older. He said something about CF-RF-LF-1B-DH. Perhaps he feels that when you go to RF, it's the beginning of the end. Then again, perhaps he's all ready to switch positions if someone just asks.

GAC
11-26-2006, 09:30 PM
Then again, perhaps he's all ready to switch positions if someone just asks.

Would this work?

RedsManRick
11-26-2006, 10:22 PM
I think it's human nature. Moving to a different position not only signals that you aren't as good as you used to be, but it opens you up for embarrassment if you don't perform as well. It's easier to think to yourself that you're doing fine or maybe just a little worse, but can compensate, than to openly admit you simply aren't what you used to be and make a move that puts the team ahead of your own ego.

The line I remember Junior saying was something like "If I thought that moving out of CF or hitting somewhere else was best for the team, I'd be happy to do it" He then went on to say he was still a good fielder and a good hitter. Rather than go the "I'm the boss route" route and pull rank, I'd go the numbers route and show him 50 different ways that he's the 3rd best CF on the team right now.

gm
11-27-2006, 08:44 PM
perhaps he's all ready to switch positions if someone just asks.

Sounds like a good subject for a Redsfest banner?

"HEY JUNIOR, WOULD YOU PLEASE MOVE 50 YARDS TO YOUR LEFT? THANKS."