PDA

View Full Version : Merged: Really Disappointed / Krivsky, Ownership not as-advertised?



roby
12-19-2006, 12:17 AM
It is a major disappointment that the Reds are real close to being a contender and yet they are doing absolutely nothing but sitting on their hands. I know that some of you are thrilled about their inactivity...but I don't know how. I kind of liked the Gonzalez signing, and was pretty blah about the Stanton signing. But that was no time to quit! Several helpful players have slipped away without the reds seeming to have made much effort. I would still like to see them sign Craig Wilson and go after a decent #3 pitcher...like Jake Westbrook. (Even a Tony Armas would be better tan nothing. It would at least indicate some effort). I would also love to see the Reds at least explore the possibility of trading for Rios. (But not at the expense of Homer Bailey! Any other package of pitching prospects would be fine). What did Krivsky mean when he said, "Stay tuned?" was he just trying to torment us?

George Anderson
12-19-2006, 12:21 AM
It is a major disappointment that the Reds are real close to being a contender and yet they are doing absolutely nothing but sitting on their hands. I know that some of you are thrilled about their inactivity...but I don't know how. I kind of liked the Gonzalez signing, and was pretty blah about the Stanton signing. But that was no time to quit! Several helpful players have slipped away without the reds seeming to have made much effort. I would still like to see them sign Craig Wilson and go after a decent #3 pitcher...like Jake Westbrook. (Even a Tony Armas would be better tan nothing. It would at least indicate some effort). I would also love to see the Reds at least explore the possibility of trading for Rios. (But not at the expense of Homer Bailey! Any other package of pitching prospects would be fine). What did Krivsky mean when he said, "Stay tuned?" was he just trying to torment us?


Its only December. Judging on Krivskys past albeit a short one, I seriously doubt that this is the final product that we will see on opening day.

snowstorm
12-19-2006, 12:26 AM
Given what players are getting on the market, I think Wayne has shifted his attention to making a trade to help the team. Probably a pretty wise move if that is his thinking. We'll see where Zito ends up, but there just hasn't been anybody that I think is worth the money they've been given.

Hopefully, Wayne makes a trade that will help the team, instead of just making one for the sake of making one.

roby
12-19-2006, 12:32 AM
Given what players are getting on the market, I think Wayne has shifted his attention to making a trade to help the team. Probably a pretty wise move if that is his thinking. We'll see where Zito ends up, but there just hasn't been anybody that I think is worth the money they've been given.

Hopefully, Wayne makes a trade that will help the team, instead of just making one for the sake of making one.

Do you really have any hope that the Reds are players for Zito?

windycitybuck
12-19-2006, 01:02 AM
what is all this man love for tony armas, i just don't get it. he is not a good pitcher anymore so let's move on to someone else.

nmculbreth
12-19-2006, 01:15 AM
It is a major disappointment that the Reds are real close to being a contender and yet they are doing absolutely nothing but sitting on their hands. I know that some of you are thrilled about their inactivity...but I don't know how. I kind of liked the Gonzalez signing, and was pretty blah about the Stanton signing. But that was no time to quit! Several helpful players have slipped away without the reds seeming to have made much effort. I would still like to see them sign Craig Wilson and go after a decent #3 pitcher...like Jake Westbrook. (Even a Tony Armas would be better tan nothing. It would at least indicate some effort). I would also love to see the Reds at least explore the possibility of trading for Rios. (But not at the expense of Homer Bailey! Any other package of pitching prospects would be fine). What did Krivsky mean when he said, "Stay tuned?" was he just trying to torment us?

The Reds aren't close to contending and giving out bad contracts to mediocre players only harms the longterm future of the club.

macro
12-19-2006, 01:22 AM
It is a major disappointment that the Reds are real close to being a contender...

I've got to disagree that the Reds are close to being a contender. It has been pointed out here many times since the season ended, but they were very fortunate to have the record they did. They were much closer to a 74-88 team than they were to a 88-74 team. I think they'll put a worse team on the field for Opening Day 2007 than they did last year, so 70-72 wins is not out of the question. That will put them 20+ games out of first. I really don't think WK can make enough moves to make up that deficit.

Sorry to be such a Debbie Downer. Just callin' it like I see it.

MartyFan
12-19-2006, 01:31 AM
I'm glad Special K and Mr. C have "done nothing" this off season...have yo useen some of the stupid contracts going round? sure we have spent some money on older pitchers which I am not really against but some on the board are...all in all, I think Special K will wait till Spring or close to it to make any deals...he wants all the leverage of any deal to be in his.

Or at least I hope he does.

Caveat Emperor
12-19-2006, 01:39 AM
I'm glad Special K and Mr. C have "done nothing" this off season...have yo useen some of the stupid contracts going round? sure we have spent some money on older pitchers which I am not really against but some on the board are...all in all, I think Special K will wait till Spring or close to it to make any deals...he wants all the leverage of any deal to be in his.

Or at least I hope he does.

I'm as glad as anyone that Krivsky has laid off the players that have already signed overpriced deals, but the fact remains that the team is staring down the barrell of a bad negative run-differential this upcoming season.

Productivity has to come from somewhere -- a byproduct of losing so much offense in the Kearns/Lopez trade. Eventually, Krivsky is going to have to go make a move for another bat or two.

forfreelin04
12-19-2006, 02:24 AM
The needs on offense are well documented, but I'm curious as to what player from an opposing team would really make a big impact. He would have to be someone who could be added at a reasonable cost. So who do you think Redszoners?

I think will be fine as far as being competive. The 70 to 72 wins seems to be a very reasonable prediction if not in the 78 to 80 range depending on a monster Dunn year.

However, I shudder to think what happens if Harang or Arroyo go down with injuries. The horror! The horror!

forfreelin04
12-19-2006, 02:24 AM
double post sorry

snowstorm
12-19-2006, 02:30 AM
Do you really have any hope that the Reds are players for Zito?

Not really, but you never know. That would be a nice Christmas gift. :thumbup:

nmculbreth
12-19-2006, 02:31 AM
The needs on offense are well documented, but
However, I shudder to think what happens if Harang or Arroyo go down with injuries. The horror! The horror!

Or if Bronson turns back into a pumpkin at midnight...

The_jbh
12-19-2006, 02:58 AM
I'm glad Special K and Mr. C have "done nothing" this off season...have yo useen some of the stupid contracts going round? sure we have spent some money on older pitchers which I am not really against but some on the board are...all in all, I think Special K will wait till Spring or close to it to make any deals...he wants all the leverage of any deal to be in his.

Or at least I hope he does.

Some of the best deals are the ones that aren't made...



I'd much rather have money burning in the pocket than give out a rediculous contract to eric milton... oh wait... :evil:

Jim
12-19-2006, 10:38 AM
I'd much rather have money burning in the pocket than give out a rediculous contract to eric milton... oh wait... :evil:

The Reds would never be that stupid... :bang: :bang: :bang:

bucksfan2
12-19-2006, 11:05 AM
The reds are close to being a contender??? I agree with the poster above who says the reds were closer to 74-88 than the opposite. They have serious holes in their team, their offense is on the decline, and the person who contributes most to it, Dunn, many people want to trade. They have only 2 players in the minors who have the possibly to make an impact this year on the major league level. When Baily comes up he probably will struggle in his first dozen starts or so. As a fan I want a direction in which this team goes. If they are going to contend or if they are going to build for 2 years down the road. As crazy is it may seem I would see what I could get for Bronson. A legit #3 starter who has 2 cheap years left on his contract could demand quite a prospect. I dont care if they have a bad year but continue to get better and are legit in 08 but I dont want them to hang in the wasteland of a sightly below average team for the next decade to come.

Always Red
12-19-2006, 01:34 PM
^ good post, bucksfan2.

I agree with mch of what you have written. I've spent the offseason thus far frustrated by the inactivity, especially given the aggressive stance of Castellini towards improving and putting a championship team on the field.

If you look around, about 1/3 of the teams are really working hard to try to improve and compete; the others, much like our beloved Redlegs, are taking a more cautious approach. Most probably this lethargy is a response to the extreme sticker shock almost all of the teams have experienced thus far this offseason!

I also think the Reds are closer to 5th place than 1st place, with the team constituted as it is now. I've resigned myself to another year of not contending; meaning that I view last year as an abberation (the sun and moon and stars were all aligned perfectly for the Reds to come from nowhere and win the Central, until the hitting slump of all slumps struck at the end of August).

SO, this team needs to do something, though, not just stand still. Either add the pieces now (I know, very expensive), or like others have said, blow it up and start anew. Sign Harang to a deal, keep Dunn healthy and happy, keep on developing and improving EE and BP. I also would deal Arroyo, most probably right before the trading deadline, to maximize the return. He has clearly stated many times that he doesn't want to be here long term; I have no problem with that, and in fact, appreciate his candor and honesty. In '08, the big contracts of Junior and Milty will be off the book; those will both be different storys next year.

I don't expect for WK to tell me the plan; but I know there is one, and the plan is obviously not to win this year. I think that when we sit down and view the deals that have been done (and not done) this year, it all points to a short-term rebuilding process.

bucksfan
12-19-2006, 02:32 PM
The reds are close to being a contender??? I agree with the poster above who says the reds were closer to 74-88 than the opposite. They have serious holes in their team, their offense is on the decline, and the person who contributes most to it, Dunn, many people want to trade. They have only 2 players in the minors who have the possibly to make an impact this year on the major league level. When Baily comes up he probably will struggle in his first dozen starts or so. As a fan I want a direction in which this team goes. If they are going to contend or if they are going to build for 2 years down the road. As crazy is it may seem I would see what I could get for Bronson. A legit #3 starter who has 2 cheap years left on his contract could demand quite a prospect. I dont care if they have a bad year but continue to get better and are legit in 08 but I dont want them to hang in the wasteland of a sightly below average team for the next decade to come.


This is kinda like looking in the mirror but it isn't quite you in the reflection, but it's close. Welcome bucksfan2. If anyone gets you confused with me, only give me credit for the smart-sounding things, OK?

I also agree they were closer to having a worse recod than a better one. However I think the line is thin between the 2. I still think we are "in danger" of hovering in that dreaded wasteland right now, but I have more of a feeling that a move will be made one way or another to more firmly establish the direction (IMO pointing towards contending now, since I believe there is not that large of a gap between the Reds and contention).

roby
12-19-2006, 02:58 PM
I guess I have to disagree with a lot of what is posted here. I know that the free agent contracts given out, for the most part, have been ridiculously high. But that shouldn't be an excuse for NO ACTIVITY. Jose Guillen could have been had for a reasonable price. Rich Aurilia could have been retained for a reasonable price. reportedly, Jake Westbrook could have been had for Austin Kearns. Some advocate trading Bronson Arroyo because he doesn't want to be here. Maybe the Reds should build the kind of team that would make a decent pitcher want to stay here. I just think that the Reds are closer to contending than what many of you want to admit. While you say that you're happy that the Reds have sat on their hands and done nothing...and that you are perfectly content to wait around a few years until they build a contender (how many times are we gonna fall for that one??!!?), I don't think you are being completely honest about those feelings. The Reds are going to have to decide whether they are going to play Major League baseball or not. So far, they are satisfied to just exist and try to "break even" financially. If they are that small of a market that they are not planning on doing all that they can to win...they should have been more honest when they hoodwinked voters into building them a new ball park. The money is there..the will to win evidently is not.

Falls City Beer
12-19-2006, 03:14 PM
I guess I have to disagree with a lot of what is posted here. I know that the free agent contracts given out, for the most part, have been ridiculously high. But that shouldn't be an excuse for NO ACTIVITY. Jose Guillen could have been had for a reasonable price. Rich Aurilia could have been retained for a reasonable price. reportedly, Jake Westbrook could have been had for Austin Kearns. Some advocate trading Bronson Arroyo because he doesn't want to be here. Maybe the Reds should build the kind of team that would make a decent pitcher want to stay here. I just think that the Reds are closer to contending than what many of you want to admit. While you say that you're happy that the Reds have sat on their hands and done nothing...and that you are perfectly content to wait around a few years until they build a contender (how many times are we gonna fall for that one??!!?), I don't think you are being completely honest about those feelings. The Reds are going to have to decide whether they are going to play Major League baseball or not. So far, they are satisfied to just exist and try to "break even" financially. If they are that small of a market that they are not planning on doing all that they can to win...they should have been more honest when they hoodwinked voters into building them a new ball park. The money is there..the will to win evidently is not.


Very good post. If the Reds want to win, they'll win. It really is as simple as that.

George Anderson
12-19-2006, 03:21 PM
I guess I have to disagree with a lot of what is posted here. I know that the free agent contracts given out, for the most part, have been ridiculously high. But that shouldn't be an excuse for NO ACTIVITY. Jose Guillen could have been had for a reasonable price. Rich Aurilia could have been retained for a reasonable price. reportedly, Jake Westbrook could have been had for Austin Kearns.






Some advocate trading Bronson Arroyo because he doesn't want to be here. Maybe the Reds should build the kind of team that would make a decent pitcher want to stay here.


I just think that the Reds are closer to contending than what many of you want to admit. While you say that you're happy that the Reds have sat on their hands and done nothing...and that you are perfectly content to wait around a few years until they build a contender (how many times are we gonna fall for that one??!!?), I don't think you are being completely honest about those feelings. The Reds are going to have to decide whether they are going to play Major League baseball or not. So far, they are satisfied to just exist and try to "break even" financially. If they are that small of a market that they are not planning on doing all that they can to win...they should have been more honest when they hoodwinked voters into building them a new ball park. The money is there..the will to win evidently is not.


Austin Kearns is gone. How are you going to trade a player we dont have??

Even if the Reds were contenders I dont think Arroyo would wanna be here. He doesnt come across as a guy who particularly cares for the midwest.

GABP was built under the previous ownership and not the current ownership. So the current Reds ownership has "hood winked" no one into building them a new stadium.

jpurdy974
12-19-2006, 03:32 PM
Be careful what you wish for. The money being handed out to mediocre players is worse than the Milton contract and I think we all know the opinion of the majoruty of the RedsZoners on that subject.

redsmetz
12-19-2006, 03:33 PM
Folks are making some unbelievable stretches, I think, in this thread. The fact that no blockbuster trades or signings have occurred cannot be interpreted as a lack of activity by the FO. Absent someone being privy to the inside workings of the team, we can't say that they're completely rebuilding, that they're trying to "break even" or whatever. Lots of clubs have sat on the sidelines thus far, I think to see where the dust settles on a market which has exploded. The offseason is only a third over.

I did a little search on Bob Castellini and Krivsky and whether they've ever said they want to win immediately and what that means etc. I came across an interesting City Beat article by Bill Peterson shortly after WK was hired. I add it to the conversation on this thread.


Ignore this, if you'd like. Spring training begins this week, and you know it's hard to be crabby about the Reds at the beginning of spring training, even when one's best judgment is crabby about the Reds. So if the following is optimistic, a guilty plea for being ridiculous will be respectfully entered.
Pitchers and catchers report to Sarasota, Fla., Thursday as the Reds open still another rebuilding project, something like their fifth since the middle of 1997 and their second since the middle of 2003.

The new general manager, Wayne Krivsky, says he's a pitching and defense guy. Odd, then, that he should consider the Reds such an ideal situation. Unless he's ready, willing and able to do a complete teardown.

Sounds like he will. Quickly. If he can.

Krivsky already knows this ball club, considering that his 11 years as the Minnesota Twins assistant general manager included scouting the Reds about 35 times per season. Reds owner Bob Castellini told reporters that Krivsky's "game plan" for the Reds especially made an impression during the interview process.

No word yet about the plan's specific details, but we'll be able to read it in the walk. A broadcast interview with Krivsky on MLB.com last week turned up two fascinating remarks suggesting that he isn't going to sit around and make assessments. He's already made them.

First, an interviewer asked Krivsky how the Twins won without stars. He replied, "Offense is nice, but you need pitching and defense to be competitive. It's the easiest way to be competitive."

Later, the interviewer asked about the importance of keeping the Reds' core together, specifically naming Adam Dunn, Austin Kearns and Wily Mo Pena. Said Krivsky, "Certainly they all bring something to the party. As you go through the spring, various scenarios come up and I'm sure all the names you mentioned would fit on other clubs one way or another. They fit well here, too. It's just something that will play itself out in spring training. If they're all with the Reds on Opening Day, I'd be perfectly happy with that."

Yet it sounded equally like if one or all of them aren't with the Reds on Opening Day Krivsky would be perfectly happy with that, too.

The Reds aren't Wayne Krivsky's ball club. Not yet. If the Twins are his model -- and he's said so plenty of times -- the Reds aren't even a box of unassembled parts.

The Reds are the anti-Twins. The Reds are a big bunch of boppers in the batter's box, butchers on the base paths and dodos on defense. Generally speaking. About their pitiful pitching, nothing needs to be said.

Remember, the Twins won the AL Central three straight times, 2002-2004, with a combined total of five everyday .300 hitters and not one player who hit 30 homers in any of those years. In 2002 and 2003, the Twins hit doubles and triples. In 2004, they didn't do as much of that, so they stole bases.

In all three years, the Twins caught the ball and threw it to the right base. And their pitching staffs consistently avoided walks.

Those weren't great ball clubs, by the way. The Twins couldn't afford a hammer who would have made them a dominating presence. But they were good enough to win incredibly weak divisions, especially due to unbalanced schedules that pitted them one-third of the time against awful franchises in Kansas City and Detroit along with a Cleveland operation in reboot mode.

In those three seasons combined, only one other AL Central club won more than 83 games. Just one of those Twins clubs won a playoff series, that coming in 2002 against the low-revenue Oakland Athletics.

But in the first two of those years, the Reds spent more than the Twins and weren't nearly as good. A glance at the payrolls from those seasons suggests that the Twins got more bang for the buck because their bucks went to pitching.

According to USA Today's salary database, the Reds spent $45 million in 2002. Their top three salaries gobbled up $21.5 million, enriching position players Barry Larkin ($9 million), Junior Griffey ($8.557 million) and Sean Casey ($4 million). Their most expensive starting pitcher, Elmer Dessens, earned $1.825 million. The Reds won 78 games.

That same year, the Twins spent $40 million. Their top three salaries, totaling $19.75 million, went to pitchers Brad Radke ($8.75 million), Rick Reed ($7 million) and Eric Milton ($4 million). Their most expensive offensive player, Torii Hunter, made $2.4 million. The Twins won 94 games and advanced to the ALCS.

In 2003, the Reds spent $59.4 million. Their top three salaries -- again spent on Griffey ($12.5 million), Larkin ($9 million) and Casey ($5.6 million) -- gobbled up $27.1 million. Their most expensive starting pitcher, Ryan Dempster, earned $3.25 million. The Reds won 69 games in a dreadful campaign.

That same year, the Twins spent $55.5 million, $22.75 million on their top three salaries, again going to Radke ($8.75 million), Reed ($8 million) and Milton ($6 million). Their most expensive offensive player, Hunter, made $4.75 million. And the Twins won 90 games, again capturing the AL Central.

Noting the above, one finds not only that the Reds aren't the first club to pay Milton a big contract but that the Twins, with Krivsky in the middle of it, perhaps overpaid for pitching, just as the Reds spent inefficiently on hitting.

The Reds took their lumps for those contracts. Between them, over the two-year period, Casey, Griffey and Larkin added up to 50 homers, 236 RBI and a .267 average in 2,109 at-bats, all for the bargain total of $48.6 million.

But the Twins didn't clean up with their pitching expenditures either, and some of the wonks criticized them for signing players to expensive long-term deals off career years. (See the Twins entry in the 2004 Baseball Prospectus). Combining the 2002 and 2003 seasons, Radke finished 23-15 with a 4.57 ERA in 330 2/3 innings, while Reed totaled 21-19 with a 4.31 ERA in 323 innings. Ferguson Jenkins would have matched those wins, losses and innings in one year, without the high ERAs.

Milton is another matter, as we know too well. After finishing 13-9 with a 4.84 ERA in 171 innings for 2002, Milton missed nearly all of 2003 following spring training knee surgery. Before the 2004 season, the Twins traded him to Philadelphia, where he won 14 games in 201 innings.

So the Reds signed him last year for three seasons at $25.5 million, expecting him to match his track record. Instead, Milton gave up more hits and home runs than ever, and now the Reds despair of another bad contract on their hands.

The good news, and the bad news, is that Krivsky is likely to make the same kind of mistake for a pitcher. But for the Reds to err on the side of pitching is divine. Just as the Reds have made errors with contracts for hitters, they've also produced a lot of offense because they've committed themselves through the years to hitters.

The Reds' problem with pitchers isn't that they've made mistakes. Their problem is that they haven't addressed pitching seriously enough through the years to make mistakes. Last year, they finally made a couple. Maybe Krivsky will make enough of them to assemble a good pitching staff.

Generally, the Reds haven't valued pitching enough to over-value it, as many clubs do. About $8 million per year for a veteran pitcher who gobbles up 200 innings and wins 13 or 14 games is pretty close to the going rate. When the pitcher isn't even that good, it's a ripoff.

But the Reds, still with much of Jim Bowden's stamp on them, fall in love with hitters. Krivsky will take a different path, along the lines of departed GM Dan O'Brien trading Casey to Pittsburgh for lefthander David Williams. Expect more of the same in spring training.

Be ready for an exciting new kind of mistake. In time, perhaps, it could be just what the Reds need to change their fortunes.

redsmetz
12-19-2006, 03:36 PM
Austin Kearns is gone. How are you going to trade a player we dont have??

Even if the Reds were contenders I dont think Arroyo would wanna be here. He doesnt come across as a guy who particularly cares for the midwest.

GABP was built under the previous ownership and not the current ownership. So the current Reds ownership has "hood winked" no one into building them a new stadium.

Shortly after the trade, Arroyo commented on being disappointed about leaving Boston. He also, understandably, felt betrayed by signing a long term agreement and being traded immediately. But I've seen a player who is as engaged in the community as any Reds player around, even in the offseason. I don't think Bronson outside of his initial comments made right after the trade has said one way or the other whether he cares to be here or not. His actions shows he's a team player and good within the community.

George Anderson
12-19-2006, 03:41 PM
Shortly after the trade, Arroyo commented on being disappointed about leaving Boston. He also, understandably, felt betrayed by signing a long term agreement and being traded immediately. But I've seen a player who is as engaged in the community as any Reds player around, even in the offseason. I don't think Bronson outside of his initial comments made right after the trade has said one way or the other whether he cares to be here or not. His actions shows he's a team player and good within the community.

I just get the impression Arroyo prefers the east coast and its music scene and night life compared to here in the midwest. Just a hunch on my part.

dfs
12-19-2006, 03:46 PM
Jose Guillen could have been had for a reasonable price.
Where would you play him? You can't keep running Junior out to centerfield and pretend defense doesn't matter. If Junior is in right and Dunn is in left, there is no room at the inn for Jose Guillen. At six million per and the emotional baggage of being here before, I'm not sure I want him anyway.


Rich Aurilia could have been retained for a reasonable price.
Again, where would he play? The infield is pretty much covered. Rich wanted playing time more than he wanted the money or he would have taken the arbitration payday the reds offered.

As much as I may carp about the way Jerry Narron does things, he used Aurilia perfectly last season. More playing time against righthanded pitchers and his numbers will drop like a stone. FWIW there are several players out there that can fill Rich A's role. A right handed bat to spell Hatteberg, Junior or Dunn against lefties.

Craig Wilson is always mentioned here and I agree that he may be a great fit, but Shannon Stewart, Phil Nevin, Rondel White and Preston Wilson all look like much better hitters when you give them the platoon advantage 70% of the time. I doubt the reds would sign a type A free agent, but Cliff Floyd would be another great fit. That's six guys who are all probably sniffing around for a full time gig. I doubt any of them would be willing to sign a contract for any amount if all the playing time they were offered was in that limited role, but the closer we get to spring training, that role will start to look better and better as teams start allocating playing time.

Caveat Emperor
12-19-2006, 03:50 PM
Very good post. If the Reds want to win, they'll win. It really is as simple as that.

If they woke up tomorrow and wanted to win, I don't know that there is enough value left at all levels of the organization and enough quality players available via free agency to compete overnight.

bucksfan2
12-19-2006, 03:56 PM
Dont get me wrong I would love to see a starting rotation for the next 5+ years of Harang, Arroyo, and Baily. Yes Arroyo has talked about how much he missed Boston, but who wouldn't that championship team seemed like they had a blast playing baseball. Arroyo has acclimated himself to this city and has become a fan favorite. However, I see the market for an ok pitcher skyrocket this offseason. Arroyo is a quality pitcher who probably could command quite a bit in the open market. Top that off with the fact that he is signed for the next 2 years and you may have a very good trading chip. If the reds aren't going to contend this year, they have made no effort so far to do so, I would rather see them get something for Arroyo than let him walk after his third year as a red. The problem with the reds is that they are only a few pieces away from a contending team but those pieces are very expensive. They need a closer, another quality starter, and another run producer. The last thing I want the reds to do is go out and sign a mediocre pitcher to 8+ mil a year for 3 years and have this reds team continue to finish right around the .500 mark.

Kc61
12-19-2006, 04:01 PM
The Reds won 80 games last year and were in it most of the season. If they can add another 7 or 8 wins next year, they have a good chance for the playoffs. Not a guarantee, but a decent shot.

If they add a third starter and another bat, they have a chance at such a record. So, in that sense, they can be contenders. Not world champs, for sure, but reasonable contenders in their division, without wrecking the future.

There are plenty of available guys who can fill these couple of needs. No reason on earth, except for simple refusal to spend, that the Reds can't add those guys. Maybe they still will.

If the Reds are too cheap to acquire, say, Jeff Suppan and Craig Wilson, they should join the professional soccer leagues where players are a lot cheaper. Fans may think it is a lot of money to pay $8 million a year for a decent pitcher, but that is the market and ownership should have understood this when they got into the business.

This isn't complicated. Yes, I'd like to see them do more, but what I'm outlining is a minimum, and is eminently reasonable. It would at least give the team some chance to compete in 2007.

With that, they can continue to add to the farm system and hope young guys eventually do well, when ready.

If the Reds can't give its fan this kind of minimal improvement in the off-season, then they are hardly deserving of the support you see on Redszone. I don't care what there excuses are.

Always Red
12-19-2006, 04:32 PM
The Reds won 80 games last year and were in it most of the season. If they can add another 7 or 8 wins next year, they have a good chance for the playoffs. Not a guarantee, but a decent shot.



kc, I agree with most of your post, but the first sentence made me go and look up the Reds 2006 record, both before and after "the trade."

Not to rehash, but just to see what actually happened with the win total. The Reds were 46-44 prior to the trade, and only 34-38 after. Yes, the Reds needed relief pitching, big time. But the offense, for a variety of reasons, not just Lopez and Kearns obviously, was sorely lacking, especially in September.

I think this team was lucky to win 80 games, the Pythagorean show that. The fact that they were in contention is an abberation, based solely on the total suckitude of the NL Central last year, until the Cards put it all together in playoffs. This team as constituted right now is sorely lacking offense, a #3 SP, and a closer. There's a lot of work left to do. And the guy who was arguable the 2nd best hitter on the team signed with the Giants 2 weeks ago. This roster looks pretty weak right now, and Moeller, Bubba and Stanton are not improvements.



"I want to make a promise today to Reds fans wherever you are, a promise from one fan to another: We will bring championship baseball to Cincinnati"

Bob Castellini was wise to not put a timeline on this statement. Personally, I believe that Bob meant this with his whole heart, and I'm sure he's also frustrated with some of the same thigns we are- after all, he's a fan, too, that's why he bought the team.

I also agree with kc re: the cost of doing business. If the market is too high, you can't not play; you're still a part of the league. Get in there and compete, or find another way to do it. IF the price of poker is too high, then get what you can for the most valuable parts, and build up some prospects and give the folks back some some HOPE, for Pete's sake.

I'm not ready to give up on Kriv yet; as mentioned above, he may have something in the works. But he needs to spend or trade or get off the pot; in other words, he needs to build it up, or tear it down in order to build it up.

This team right now, as the roster is right at this minute, is weaker than the one that left Sarasota in April 2006, IMHO. A good fielding SS and some veteran middle relievers have not improved this club.

I'm not panicking, not at all. I sense some treading of water by this FO, rather than moving forward.

Falls City Beer
12-19-2006, 04:35 PM
If they woke up tomorrow and wanted to win, I don't know that there is enough value left at all levels of the organization and enough quality players available via free agency to compete overnight.

Time's not a concern. I know what it looks like for a team to build a winner. I have patience, but not for bumbling and incompetence. I know what it is to move towards a winner, and it absolutely doesn't involve guys like Cormier, Stanton, and Gonzalez--not in any universe is that movement towards something. I'd say it's retrograde.

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2006, 04:36 PM
Seems very quiet on all fronts for the Reds right now.

westofyou
12-19-2006, 04:40 PM
Time's not a concern. I know what it looks like for a team to build a winner. I have patience, but not for bumbling and incompetence. I know what it is to move towards a winner, and it absolutely doesn't involve guys like Cormier, Stanton, and Gonzalez--not in any universe is that movement towards something. I'd say it's retrograde.

Reminds me of that Bill James piece in the early 80's.


The pathetic thing about John Schuerholz is that he fancies himself a gambler, but a gambler is in fact, exactly what he’s not.

Bill James on the Royals 1983



It was, rather, this: the unavoidable acceptance that I am, as a fan, rooting for an organization whose philosophies are diametrically opposed to my own, not only the question of whether you succeed, but to the question of how you succeed.

Perhaps, in the eighties, the Royals’ organization will teach me differently. Will teach me that success comes from cashing in the raw material of potential for the hard wealth of established talent. I’m afraid I shall find this lesson hard to enjoy.

Bill James on the 1984 Royals.

Kc61
12-19-2006, 04:58 PM
Always Red, I agree that the Reds are not contenders in the sense of a powerhouse team. I know that in the AL East they would have no shot. But they happen to be in a division where, unless this year's Cubs moves change things, the Reds MIGHT have a chance to compete with some reasonable upgrades.

As for the "trade" that is ancient history to me. Looking at the team right now, it has some bullpen depth (although no ace relievers), it has a better defensive infield, it has left handed hitting, and it has two real good starters. A right handed bat and a starting pitcher are the obvious needs. A true closer would be nice, but I'm not pushing for that.

Granted, my suggestion may not work and the team may still fall short. Your reasoning on this is sound. But, at least to give fans some reason to watch in '07, the FO has an obligation -- that's the right word -- to make reasonable improvements to the team.

Always Red
12-19-2006, 05:08 PM
kc61, I hope you're right.

I think the Cubs have improved, but they better win with that team, or all heads involved will roll due to the cost. The Astros will hit a little better but their pitching has taken a big hit. The Cards are literally a "wild card" in my opinion, who knows if they have improved or not- they're just different. I think Dave Duncan is the MVP of that team, LaRussa and Pujols aside.

The NL Central may just give Kriv the breathing room he needs to both keep this team in contention and rebuld it at the same time, similar to what he did last year.

I really think Krivsky's plans for the team changed last year because they were competitive right out of the gate, and stayed in contention all year. If they would have flopped early, or if the Cards ran away and hid like they usually do, he might have dismantled it even further and deeper- who knows?

The_jbh
12-19-2006, 05:17 PM
I guess I have to disagree with a lot of what is posted here. I know that the free agent contracts given out, for the most part, have been ridiculously high. But that shouldn't be an excuse for NO ACTIVITY. Jose Guillen could have been had for a reasonable price. Rich Aurilia could have been retained for a reasonable price. reportedly, Jake Westbrook could have been had for Austin Kearns. Some advocate trading Bronson Arroyo because he doesn't want to be here. Maybe the Reds should build the kind of team that would make a decent pitcher want to stay here. I just think that the Reds are closer to contending than what many of you want to admit. While you say that you're happy that the Reds have sat on their hands and done nothing...and that you are perfectly content to wait around a few years until they build a contender (how many times are we gonna fall for that one??!!?), I don't think you are being completely honest about those feelings. The Reds are going to have to decide whether they are going to play Major League baseball or not. So far, they are satisfied to just exist and try to "break even" financially. If they are that small of a market that they are not planning on doing all that they can to win...they should have been more honest when they hoodwinked voters into building them a new ball park. The money is there..the will to win evidently is not.

Kearns is gone already so the Westbrook arguement is beating a dead horse... As for Aurilla, why resign him? He doesn't have the range for SS anymore, Phillips is clearly the future at 2B, and he would just take at bats away from encarnacion, possibly our brightest young player. I love how during the season every1 wanted him gone and now that he is people moan we didnt bring him back.

The reds have had Guillen before and it didn't work out. He was terrible in the club house. And remember to sign a FA, the player has to want to be here too and with his last experience in cincy, im not sure jose would want to return. That would have also ended all talk of griffey moving out of CF. I wouldnt have minded bringing guillen back but there was plenty of reason not to bring him back as well.

Honestly this market just hasnt dictated addressing our needs through free agency. The only deals that were even reasonable were the ones given to Lily and Marquis, and i dont think those pitchers match our park's needs. Schmidt's arm could fall off ne pitch, not a good investment of 15mil plus for 3 years, Zito won't want to come to cincinnati (hes just like arroyo)

So all you people pissed off about lack of moves? what do u propose be done? We can't just pull pitchers and bats out of a hat

Hoosier Red
12-19-2006, 05:23 PM
Where would you play him? You can't keep running Junior out to centerfield and pretend defense doesn't matter. If Junior is in right and Dunn is in left, there is no room at the inn for Jose Guillen. At six million per and the emotional baggage of being here before, I'm not sure I want him anyway.


Again, where would he play? The infield is pretty much covered. Rich wanted playing time more than he wanted the money or he would have taken the arbitration payday the reds offered.

As much as I may carp about the way Jerry Narron does things, he used Aurilia perfectly last season. More playing time against righthanded pitchers and his numbers will drop like a stone. FWIW there are several players out there that can fill Rich A's role. A right handed bat to spell Hatteberg, Junior or Dunn against lefties.

Craig Wilson is always mentioned here and I agree that he may be a great fit, but Shannon Stewart, Phil Nevin, Rondel White and Preston Wilson all look like much better hitters when you give them the platoon advantage 70% of the time. I doubt the reds would sign a type A free agent, but Cliff Floyd would be another great fit. That's six guys who are all probably sniffing around for a full time gig. I doubt any of them would be willing to sign a contract for any amount if all the playing time they were offered was in that limited role, but the closer we get to spring training, that role will start to look better and better as teams start allocating playing time.

That last point is a great one.
Anyone whom the Reds want to sign to be a platoon player is holding off right now anyway, waiting to see if a full time job opens up.
I'd love to get a third starter, and I'm on record with wanting to overpay for a Jeff Suppan type.
But most teams really haven't done anything and the ones who have, arguably haven't improved.

Handofdeath
12-19-2006, 05:28 PM
I'm as glad as anyone that Krivsky has laid off the players that have already signed overpriced deals, but the fact remains that the team is staring down the barrell of a bad negative run-differential this upcoming season.

Productivity has to come from somewhere -- a byproduct of losing so much offense in the Kearns/Lopez trade. Eventually, Krivsky is going to have to go make a move for another bat or two.

I totally agree with you on the first part. I think Krivsky is smart not to saddle the Reds with another overpriced contract or two. But I don't buy the argument that by trading Kearns and Lopez that the Reds lost that much offense. When the Reds made the trade on July 13 they were 46-44 and were -13 in run differential. On August 24 they were 66-60 and were -9 in run differential. They were also tied for 1st. This is a month and a half after the trade happened. Not only were the Reds not doing worse without Kearns and Lopez they were doing better. At least the numbers say so. What killed the Reds' season was what happened after August 24. They lost 9 out of the next 10 games. Team wide slump and the season's over. It happens.

Highlifeman21
12-19-2006, 05:35 PM
Since when are the Reds very close to contending?

Did I miss something?

redsmetz
12-19-2006, 05:41 PM
Since when are the Reds very close to contending?

Did I miss something?

I thought Handofdeath had a fairly good analysis of the post-trade Reds. The collapse late in the season overlooks that they had some life immediately post trade.

Handofdeath wrote


I totally agree with you on the first part. I think Krivsky is smart not to saddle the Reds with another overpriced contract or two. But I don't buy the argument that by trading Kearns and Lopez that the Reds lost that much offense. When the Reds made the trade on July 13 they were 46-44 and were -13 in run differential. On August 24 they were 66-60 and were -9 in run differential. They were also tied for 1st. This is a month and a half after the trade happened. Not only were the Reds not doing worse without Kearns and Lopez they were doing better. At least the numbers say so. What killed the Reds' season was what happened after August 24. They lost 9 out of the next 10 games. Team wide slump and the season's over. It happens.

Certainly we took a hit, and part of the good play towards the end was Aurilia, but I think we aren't far off from competing in the NL Central. I really don't want to sacrifice the future for one year.

And even Krivsky's propensity towards the Twins model of pitching and defense doesn't mean you can't have one stud in your line-up like Adam Dunn.
Let's see what this squad looks like on Opening Day.

Falls City Beer
12-19-2006, 05:56 PM
Reminds me of that Bill James piece in the early 80's.

I could be wrong--there were two other times when that happened.

But Schuerholz was really and genuinely a pup in 83.

Krivsky's far from a kid in this business; in baseball terms he's been around forever, and I doubt that if he's unable to see if his moves are totally ill-conceived and poorly executed that he's going to wake up at 60 years of age a changed man. Men harden their beliefs in their 50s, they typically don't undergo a sea change--unless it's from a Buick to a Corvette.

But Yeats had monkey gland treatment in his 50s, so anything's possible.

Handofdeath
12-19-2006, 05:59 PM
Since when are the Reds very close to contending?

Did I miss something?

On September 29 the Reds were 79-80. They had three games to play and yet were only 2 and 1/2 games behind the Cardinals for the division lead. Say what you want about about the NL Central being weak this year but the St. Louis Cardinals won the World Series and the Reds stayed with them until the very end. That is called being a contender.

roby
12-19-2006, 06:06 PM
Kearns is gone already so the Westbrook arguement is beating a dead horse... As for Aurilla, why resign him? He doesn't have the range for SS anymore, Phillips is clearly the future at 2B, and he would just take at bats away from encarnacion, possibly our brightest young player. I love how during the season every1 wanted him gone and now that he is people moan we didnt bring him back.

The reds have had Guillen before and it didn't work out. He was terrible in the club house. And remember to sign a FA, the player has to want to be here too and with his last experience in cincy, im not sure jose would want to return. That would have also ended all talk of griffey moving out of CF. I wouldnt have minded bringing guillen back but there was plenty of reason not to bring him back as well.

Honestly this market just hasnt dictated addressing our needs through free agency. The only deals that were even reasonable were the ones given to Lily and Marquis, and i dont think those pitchers match our park's needs. Schmidt's arm could fall off ne pitch, not a good investment of 15mil plus for 3 years, Zito won't want to come to cincinnati (hes just like arroyo)

So all you people pissed off about lack of moves? what do u propose be done? We can't just pull pitchers and bats out of a hat

I know that Kearns is gone. i was merely giving an example of where the reds could have improved in an area where they have a glaring need.

westofyou
12-19-2006, 06:36 PM
But Schuerholz was really and genuinely a pup in 83.

43 and in his 17th year in the game that season.

Falls City Beer
12-19-2006, 06:37 PM
43 and in his 17th year in the game that season.

43 is young. 51. Well, a lot less so, philosophically.

Spring~Fields
12-19-2006, 07:32 PM
On September 29 the Reds were 79-80. They had three games to play and yet were only 2 and 1/2 games behind the Cardinals for the division lead. Say what you want about about the NL Central being weak this year but the St. Louis Cardinals won the World Series and the Reds stayed with them until the very end. That is called being a contender.


April - 17-8 .680
May - 12-16 .428
June - 15-12 .555
July - 11-14 .444
August - 12-17 .413
September - 13-14 .481
October - 1-0
162 games 80 - 82 .493


I just don’t see one good month making a team a contender, a team that played every month with the lone exception of the first month at or below
.500 as being a contender.

May - October 137 games 63 - 74 .459

Now they are without Kearns, Lopez and Aurilia on offense and Guardado and Schoeneweis in the pitching dept.

westofyou
12-19-2006, 07:37 PM
43 is young. 51. Well, a lot less so, philosophically.
He's from the scouting side of the game, he already knows what cut of beef he likes.

Handofdeath
12-19-2006, 07:44 PM
April - 17-8 .680
May - 12-16 .428
June - 15-12 .555
July - 11-14 .444
August - 12-17 .413
September - 13-14 .481
October - 1-0
162 games 80 - 82 .493


I just don’t see one good month making a team a contender, a team that played every month with the lone exception of the first month at or below
.500 as being a contender.

May - October 137 games 63 - 74 .459

Now they are without Kearns, Lopez and Aurilia on offense and Guardado and Schoeneweis in the pitching dept.

But let's say that this happened...

April -17-8
May -13-15
June -15-12
July -12-13
August -13-16
September -13-14
October -1-0

Doesn't look that much better does it? Not counting October, 2 months over .500. The rest, not very good at all. Pretty bad actually. Guess what? If that happened your Cincinnati Reds are the 2006 N.L Central Champions.

Highlifeman21
12-19-2006, 07:49 PM
I thought Handofdeath had a fairly good analysis of the post-trade Reds. The collapse late in the season overlooks that they had some life immediately post trade.

Handofdeath wrote



Certainly we took a hit, and part of the good play towards the end was Aurilia, but I think we aren't far off from competing in the NL Central. I really don't want to sacrifice the future for one year.

And even Krivsky's propensity towards the Twins model of pitching and defense doesn't mean you can't have one stud in your line-up like Adam Dunn.
Let's see what this squad looks like on Opening Day.

Getting our butts handed to us out on the West Coast Swing told me we weren't contenders with Narron at the helm.

Let me rephrase what I said.

We still have Narron as manager and people think we are contenders?

A better manager would have done something to prevent the outcome of that West Coast Swing.

As long as Narron is our manager, we will never be contenders. Detroit would have missed the playoffs with Narron as their manager this year.

Highlifeman21
12-19-2006, 07:52 PM
On September 29 the Reds were 79-80. They had three games to play and yet were only 2 and 1/2 games behind the Cardinals for the division lead. Say what you want about about the NL Central being weak this year but the St. Louis Cardinals won the World Series and the Reds stayed with them until the very end. That is called being a contender.

Finishing the year under .500 and almost winning the division only tells me that we were in a weak division last year.

Say the Reds had won the division. They would have gotten stomped in the playoffs, IMO.

Any team around .500 is not a contender. Winning a division crown is not a contender to me. A contender to me is being favored to get to the World Series, or at least get to your respective League Championship Series.

The Reds under Narron will be lucky to win 80 games in 2007.

Caveat Emperor
12-19-2006, 07:53 PM
We still have Narron as manager and people think we are contenders?

A better manager would have done something to prevent the outcome of that West Coast Swing.

As long as Narron is our manager, we will never be contenders. Detroit would have missed the playoffs with Narron as their manager this year.

A better manager would've done what? Coaxed even higher numbers from the already career-years being posted by guys like Hatteberg and Aurillia? Fixed a slumping Adam Dunn? Taught the bullpen guys how to retire hitters?

Narron did a helluva job last year getting the team even close to respectability given the abysmal run differential and overall level of talent on the team.

Highlifeman21
12-19-2006, 07:55 PM
A better manager would've done what? Coaxed even higher numbers from the already career-years being posted by guys like Hatteberg and Aurillia? Fixed a slumping Adam Dunn? Taught the bullpen guys how to retire hitters?

Narron did a helluva job last year getting the team even close to respectability given the abysmal run differential and overall level of talent on the team.

I have to respectfully disagree.

This team won in spite of Jerry Narron.

His in game decisions are horrid, and whoever taught him how to fill out a lineup card needs a swift kick in the nuts.

Falling in love with KGJ in the 3 hole and RA in the 4 hole told me all I need to know about Narron.

redsmetz
12-19-2006, 07:57 PM
Getting our butts handed to us out on the West Coast Swing told me we weren't contenders with Narron at the helm.

Let me rephrase what I said.

We still have Narron as manager and people think we are contenders?

A better manager would have done something to prevent the outcome of that West Coast Swing.

As long as Narron is our manager, we will never be contenders. Detroit would have missed the playoffs with Narron as their manager this year.

Ah, yes. The "Jerry Narron is the face of evil" contingent rears its head.

redsfanmia
12-19-2006, 08:12 PM
I have to respectfully disagree.

This team won in spite of Jerry Narron.

His in game decisions are horrid, and whoever taught him how to fill out a lineup card needs a swift kick in the nuts.

Falling in love with KGJ in the 3 hole and RA in the 4 hole told me all I need to know about Narron.

I think you are completely off base. Narron may not be the greatest stategist but he has the respect of the players and they over acheived most of the season. I say a team playing over its head is not winning in spite of the manager.

Spring~Fields
12-19-2006, 08:23 PM
This team won in spite of Jerry Narron.

Your almost right, but I have to disagree with you. The Reds never won with Narron.


His in game decisions are horrid, and whoever taught him how to fill out a lineup card needs a swift kick in the nuts.
I agree with that, can't help but to.
Benched EE and played Clayton just a couple mistakes, over used his bullpen.


Falling in love with KGJ in the 3 hole and RA in the 4 hole told me all I need to know about Narron.
I think that Narron is or was afraid of Griffey and Aurilia

Has Narron ever managed a winning team?

Spring~Fields
12-19-2006, 08:27 PM
But let's say that this happened...

April -17-8
May -13-15
June -15-12
July -12-13
August -13-16
September -13-14
October -1-0

Doesn't look that much better does it? Not counting October, 2 months over .500. The rest, not very good at all. Pretty bad actually. Guess what? If that happened your Cincinnati Reds are the 2006 N.L Central Champions.

April was an outliar, you need to look from May forward for the truest version of the team and that was not a contender. Especially if you choose to ignore the loss of some key players.

May - October 137 games 63 - 74 .459 Traditionally not considered a contender in sports.

WVRedsFan
12-19-2006, 09:48 PM
April was an outliar, you need to look from May forward for the truest version of the team and that was not a contender. Especially if you choose to ignore the loss of some key players.

May - October 137 games 63 - 74 .459 Traditionally not considered a contender in sports.

Below his career record at that. His career winning percentage as a manager is .473, and you are correct. Never a winning season. Ever. Without that 17-8 April, his managerial skills equaled to a 63-74 record, eerily close to his first year with the Rangers at 62-72. That speaks for itself. 62, 72, 46, and 80 wins is not the stuff that you look for in a manager in his career. Except on RedsZone.


Year League Team Age G W L WP Finish
+----+-----------+--------+---+-----+----+----+------+------+
2001 AL West Texas 45 134 62 72 .463 4
2002 AL West Texas 46 162 72 90 .444 4

2005 NL Cent Cincnnti 49 93 46 46 .500 5
2006 NL Cent Cincnnti 50 162 80 82 .494 3
+----+-----------+--------+---+-----+----+----+------+------+
Cincnnti 255 126 128 .496
Texas 296 134 162 .453
+----+-----------+--------+---+-----+----+----+------+------+
TOTAL 551 260 290 .473

GAC
12-19-2006, 10:15 PM
From the article redsmetz posted....


The Reds are the anti-Twins. The Reds are a big bunch of boppers in the batter's box, butchers on the base paths and dodos on defense. Generally speaking. About their pitiful pitching, nothing needs to be said.

Boy that nailed it pretty good IMO. :lol:

They have a pretty good #1/#2 punch in the rotation with Arroyo and Harang. We may have another quality SP in the next year in Bailey.

Wouldn't that be like "acquiring" that other SP we know we all need? It's just waiting another year?

I'd rather see them do that then spend ridiculous money on a Lily, Marquis, and some of these others.

I bet Krivsky can't wait till the Milton contract is gone. So why would (or should) he go and sign another "Milton"?.... and for a far worse contract!

That would disappoint me. ;)

I think our offense will be "middle of the road" at the least. It could be better if Dunn rebounds, and if EE continues to show progress. He should get a full season in this year. ;)

We are going to miss Aurilla. How many on here would find themselves admitting that? :lol:

But there are some things we can do before ST that are not impossible.

To say that this FO is "inactive" because they haven't come home with that BIG acquistion, when what we need (pitching) is simply ridiculous in this current market, is inaccurate.

When I look at all the moves that Krivsky made last year... whether one agrees with them all or not.... I'm sure he and his staff are doing quite a bit "behind the scenes".

jmac
12-19-2006, 10:45 PM
Finishing the year under .500 and almost winning the division only tells me that we were in a weak division last year.

Say the Reds had won the division. They would have gotten stomped in the playoffs, IMO.

let me add that when many say " contenders" ...we are considering the division we are in.
Would the reds be contenders in the AL east....no
the AL central....no
the AL west...no

However we play in the National League and whether you call 81-81 contenders or not is up to the individual but the fact remains that a team that went 83-78 won the division and were not dominated but rather won the World Series.

I would like the reds chances against an NL team in a short series with Harang and BA as the top 2 starters.

As far as the upcoming season.....as of now ...the cards stros and yes, the cubs dont seem invincible.
Now can the reds "compete,contend,slip into" a playoff spot with current roster???
Well.....with a couple of moves ....it's at least possible !

Spring~Fields
12-19-2006, 10:57 PM
Well.....with a couple of moves ....it's at least possible !

It is possible, the starting pitching of Harang, Arroyo, Milton, Lohse and other could hold up in this division and make it through. Perhaps Milton comes back healthier, the new pitching coach helps Lohse, Milton and the bullpen just enough, they could be just good enough.

Especially with a couple of contributing pickup moves as you have said.

Now the guys that work hard and do good work on the RS vs RA stats etc are going to tell us otherwise, and probably will be right without some deviations or variables really swinging things more than they normally do.

But the Reds gm filling spots with what everyone says are of no consequence, with guys such as those last two or three causes some worry for those of us who had at least some hope that they might pick up some quality along the way to make the team better.

terminator
12-20-2006, 12:50 AM
Why the Narron bashing? He was given a team that based on its run differential was projected to go 76-86 and they went 80-82. Maybe the "overachieving" was totally unrelated to him, but they evidently did not get worse. After 2005, no one really thought we had a .500 team going into 2006, right? We all know managers don't make a huge difference in a team's final result and he surely didn't make the Reds' record worse than it would have been otherwise.

MartyFan
12-20-2006, 01:21 AM
Some of the best deals are the ones that aren't made...



I'd much rather have money burning in the pocket than give out a rediculous contract to eric milton... oh wait... :evil:

Agreed...remember that Special K was left with that one when he walked in the door.

WVRedsFan
12-20-2006, 01:37 AM
Why the Narron bashing? He was given a team that based on its run differential was projected to go 76-86 and they went 80-82. Maybe the "overachieving" was totally unrelated to him, but they evidently did not get worse. After 2005, no one really thought we had a .500 team going into 2006, right? We all know managers don't make a huge difference in a team's final result and he surely didn't make the Reds' record worse than it would have been otherwise.

Hmmm. Managers don't make a difference?

Let's see. Jim Leyland at Detroit (where were they before him?).

There are other examples, but I'm too tired and aggravated to remember them because it really doesn't make any differene anyway. It's the same old sing-song day after day in the Reds World. You point out how this man or this trade is just horrendous and someone--every daggone tim--comes up with this argument that he wasn't supposed to do as well as he did. Holy cow, that's rich. If you hire an intelligent baseball manager who makes good moves more than 60% of the time, this team last year wins 85 or more games and wins the division. He has never won anywhere as a manager and he won't win here.
And if the Reds weren't so dadgum cheap, they'd shell out the money for a first class manager. Cast had one early on, but he and Krivsky fell in love with Narron (must be that southern accent) and let Lou go to the Cubs. Matters not because, we couldn't have signed Lou for what he wanted.

Point of post. Winners are winners. Winners don't spend as much time in the majors as Narron has and still languish below .500. When the rest of you are calling for his head six months from now, I'll have been on board the non-bandwagon for nearly two years. Unless the fans, including us, demand competence and a winning ball club from the ownership and the GM, we won't get it. And settling for a little less than .500 won't do that!

BIG RANT OFF

Spring~Fields
12-20-2006, 08:19 AM
Point of post. Winners are winners. Winners don't spend as much time in the majors as Narron has and still languish below .500. When the rest of you are calling for his head six months from now, I'll have been on board the non-bandwagon for nearly two years. Unless the fans, including us, demand competence and a winning ball club from the ownership and the GM, we won't get it. And settling for a little less than .500 won't do that!


That's right, the fans need to push for better every step of the way and let the Reds know about it as much as they can.

Spring~Fields
12-20-2006, 08:28 AM
When I look at all the moves that Krivsky made last year... whether one agrees with them all or not.... I'm sure he and his staff are doing quite a bit "behind the scenes".

It was reported that he made 40 some moves last year, now if 4 of them were good to upgrade the team what were the other 36 moves? That would be quite a few moves, moves far out distancing his good moves. That was suppose to be because he did not have sufficent time, now this year he picks up where he left off with the 30+ bad moves. Dumpster diving and you don't think that Krivsky has a belief going here with retreads and discards?

So where and when do you see Krivsky improving the talent on this team to win more games than they lose?

redsmetz
12-20-2006, 09:51 AM
It was reported that he made 40 some moves last year, now if 4 of them were good to upgrade the team what were the other 36 moves? That would be quite a few moves, moves far out distancing his good moves. That was suppose to be because he did not have sufficent time, now this year he picks up where he left off with the 30+ bad moves. Dumpster diving and you don't think that Krivsky has a belief going here with retreads and discards?

So where and when do you see Krivsky improving the talent on this team to win more games than they lose?

While there are still some pressing needs for this club, I don't think three of the moves are as bad as some believe. I'll concur that Moeller and Crosby are curious moves (although as I recall, Crosby's is a split contract), I think this club is better having Gonzo's defense. And I'm fine with both signings of Weathers and Stanton (IMO, don't underestimate his significant post-season experience as a plus for this club).

Now, no question, we need the right handed bat added at first and another starter, preferably with #3 talent and we don't have too bad a ballclub. Now that said, I hope he and Jerry are able to move Jr. to right - that would help immensely. And we need some players to come back around or continue to develop. Hopefully, as many have said, EE continues to develop and I hope the same for Phillips (who really is too young to have a "career year" declared. A platoon at first with Hatteberg works for this year. Dunn, I think is the critical player. We need him to round out his game without losing OBP and power. If we can get about .250 out of him with the same power and walks numbers, I think that's a plus. Likewise, the two Rule V guys are a question mark, but not bad pick-ups.

Now I'm just going off the top of my head, but other than the two questionable offseason moves mentioned above, he hasn't had terrible signings thus far. Certainly work remains to be done.

RANDY IN INDY
12-20-2006, 10:13 AM
There is still work to be done and I'm a little bothered that there is absolutely no "buzz" around the Reds at this point of the offseason. There is basically no mention of the Reds with regard to any player movement or signings. Maybe that's a good thing. I just don't know what to think at this point.

westofyou
12-20-2006, 11:58 AM
Point of post. Winners are winners. Winners don't spend as much time in the majors as Narron has and still languish below .500.

Of course they don't that would make them losers, because that's what below .500 is.

Winners though usually have the horses, which from what I gather from this thread the Reds don't have, can't get, don't know how to get and will never get.

Now that's a loser attitude, definitely not a winning one.

redsmetz
12-20-2006, 12:21 PM
Point of post. Winners are winners. Winners don't spend as much time in the majors as Narron has and still languish below .500.

I've said this again and again. It's early in Narron's career, quite frankly. At this point, through about 3 1/2 complete seasons (551 games), Narron has a .473 record (260-290). I've noted several good managers who had worse records through their first seasons.

Joe Torre is one clear example and by mid-August of 1980 had a 234-322 record (.421) with the Mets.

We can certainly disagree about whether Narron's a good manager or not, but his record is too short to say whether the organization is sticking with a good one or not. It's too early.

terminator
12-20-2006, 01:27 PM
Hmmm. Managers don't make a difference?

Let's see. Jim Leyland at Detroit (where were they before him?).

There are other examples, but I'm too tired and aggravated to remember them because it really doesn't make any differene anyway.

The better question would be where was Jim Leyland before Detroit? An overall losing record in 11 seasons in Pittsburgh. (Okay, .496 ball) He was good through 1992 and then bad after 1993. What happened? Bonds left. After guiding his team of purchased 1997 All-Stars in Florida to 92 wins he went 54-108 in 1998. It's almost like the players were what mattered in his 38 game dropoff. Then in Colorado he had a bad losing season (90 losses). Now he inherited a nice team in Detroit and did a nice job with them in his 15th season managing. His career WP is .493.

It's 99.44% about the players. Earl Weaver with Connie Mack as his bench coach couldn't make a team with a -50 run differential a playoff team.

uks2h
12-20-2006, 01:50 PM
I have been one of the biggest "new regime" fans since the change. However, we just signed Weathers to a big contract, and have made no moves at all to really help our team's chances to do anything more than they did last year. This really pisses me off. I don't know how much longer Cincy will even go to games and support this pathetic franchise. Tradition may be the only thing that keeps this team in Cincy if Krivsky continues to do absolutely nothing.

Here's hoping he has some sort of plan....

:angry:

RichRed
12-20-2006, 01:56 PM
Finally, a fresh new topic.

dfs
12-20-2006, 01:57 PM
Consider where this team was after Miley and Boone and the bump it recieved when Narron took over. You have to give Narron some credit for that. The team has not underachieved with him around. That may not be much, but it is something.

I think the days of 8 regulars being penciled into the lineup on a consistant basis are pretty much over. That's not just Narron. That complaint has followed every manager this franchise has had since Tony Perez.

I'm not enamored with holding three catchers on the 25 man roster. I believe that's Narron's preference. He was a marginal catcher so I think he's identifiying with the himself here and I think it holds the team back. On the other hand, Ross and Valentine form a decent enough pinch hitting platoon and the third catcher allows him to use them that way.

Two Gm's in a row have gone out of their way to aquire "proven" older bullpen arms. I don't think that's an optimal way to build a bullpen, and given that two GM's in a row have done it, I have to think that's what Narron has asked them to do.

I was not thrilled by the release of Hancock and Hudson and (what looks to be) Claussen, but they're not exactly setting the world on fire elsewhere. I think his treatment of Elizardo was near-criminal, but then I don't think Elizardo is much of a pitcher anyway.

I was very critical of the way he rode Arroyo and Harang early in the season, but in retrospect he had the horses and rode them. They didn't get hurt despite how many innings the threw. Hopefully those huge IP's don't hurt the reds this year.

He spotted Rich Aurilia about as well as a player could be spotted. You have to give credit to Aurilia for what he did, but I think Narron deserves credit for putting Aurilia in a position where he could succeeed.

He played Brandon Phillips while Womack rotted on the bench. Tough not to like that isn't? For all the hand wringing about Tony Womack last off season, he only saw 18 at bats with the reds last year.

Likewise there were complaints about Aurilia stealing PT from Edwin, but Edwin still got his ab's.

Faced with a lack of a real shortstop he tried to get creative and cycle several guys through the position. It didn't work, but he tried. That's a plus.

I think Narron's usage patterns were at least partially responsible for the bullpen implosion last year. Chris Hammond got rocked on opening day, then he actually pitched pretty well, till he got overused and then imploded. The same pattern happened to several guys as Narron continually played the hot hand till pitchers gave out on him. I'm hoping that either he's learned from that or that the bullpen coach will help run the bullpen this year. I think that's the big place where Narron can improve.

I don't enjoy listening to the man. He's got that Andy Taylor twang that just irritates the heck out of me, but I can't look at what he's done and then at the roster and say "he's a loser." I think his teams have pretty consistantly overachieved and he deserves some credit for that.

redsmetz
12-20-2006, 02:42 PM
I have been one of the biggest "new regime" fans since the change. However, we just signed Weathers to a big contract, and have made no moves at all to really help our team's chances to do anything more than they did last year. This really pisses me off. I don't know how much longer Cincy will even go to games and support this pathetic franchise. Tradition may be the only thing that keeps this team in Cincy if Krivsky continues to do absolutely nothing.

Here's hoping he has some sort of plan....

:angry:

Is there something in the water??? Are we being "bah humbuggy" before Christmas? Good Lord! Now the team's moving because the off-season is only one third over and we've done little? Is all the angsts and drama to try to grab a late year Oscar?

Peace out, dude. It will work out soon enough. Go spread some holiday cheer or something.

bucksfan2
12-20-2006, 03:01 PM
In my mind Narron was responsible for 5-10 games this year. There were times in games where it just seemed Narron didn't have a feel for his ballclub. Many of his bullpen moves backfired immediatly. These are things that I consider intangables that you cant measure. However his playing of Aurilla over EE at 3b was in my mind wrong. He stessed that it was defensive but Aurilla had the range of a stone figure down at the hot corner. I dont know if he didnt have the guts or clout but batting Jr. in the 3rd spot was not where he belonged. The catcher situation was bad and having LaRue on this team ended up hurting it. One final thought is Narron is known as a players manager. Well Jerry your team quit on you last season. The collape and poor play was almost embarassing to watch at the end of last season.

fewfirstchoice
12-20-2006, 03:21 PM
If something doesnt happen before the start of the season you can then say they are not as advertised.But yes it is starting to look that way.

Falls City Beer
12-20-2006, 03:25 PM
Is there something in the water??? Are we being "bah humbuggy" before Christmas? Good Lord! Now the team's moving because the off-season is only one third over and we've done little? Is all the angsts and drama to try to grab a late year Oscar?

Peace out, dude. It will work out soon enough. Go spread some holiday cheer or something.

The offseason is half over. Actually more than that when you consider nothing ever occurs between Dec. 20th or so and January 20th. A ton of talent has already been shuffled to new destinations.

dunner13
12-20-2006, 03:27 PM
Yeh when they got here they promised to waste tons of money on overpaid free agents, so that in two years everyone on this board can complain about how we should have never signed them. Its better to spend no money then waste money on guys that arent going to help us and will just hurt our ability to bring in people later who actually can help us at a reasonable price.
Krivskys doing fine, the best arm available may be sitting in our minor league system and can be brought up in june to help push us into the playoffs.

Johnny Footstool
12-20-2006, 03:37 PM
Yeh when they got here they promised to waste tons of money on overpaid free agents, so that in two years everyone on this board can complain about how we should have never signed them. Its better to spend no money then waste money on guys that arent going to help us and will just hurt our ability to bring in people later who actually can help us at a reasonable price.
Krivskys doing fine, the best arm available may be sitting in our minor league system and can be brought up in june to help push us into the playoffs.

...assuming the Reds are in any position to contend in June. I really doubt they will be with Milton/Loshe/Nobody filling out the rotation and Weathers "closing" games.

The team has some major holes that Krivsky has not yet addressed, and he missed the boat on some good chances to address them (Dotel, Lilly, Padilla). If he's really interested in fielding a winning team, he'll find some answers within the next month or so.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 03:38 PM
I find it funny how in their first season in control the team had it's best season in 5 years and people are questioning them to this degree.

Progress takes time, more than a year. Outside of the top 3, the farm system is pretty dry. You don't become a destination on the free agent market in a year.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 03:44 PM
The team has some major holes that Krivsky has not yet addressed, and he missed the boat on some good chances to address them (Dotel, Lilly, Padilla). If he's really interested in fielding a winning team, he'll find some answers within the next month or so.


Those three guys, and much of the free agents, are complimentary players you bring in to help you win a title. The Reds are not in a position to win a title right now, so is it really necessary to commit that amount money to win 84 instead of 75 games?

The Reds would be worse off long term with those guys in the fold for multiple years. Lohse, Milton, and others are going to be off the books in short time. It's better to wait and use their money to acquire talent similar to them when contention is near.

M2
12-20-2006, 03:54 PM
I find it funny how in their first season in control the team had it's best season in 5 years and people are questioning them to this degree.

Progress takes time, more than a year. Outside of the top 3, the farm system is pretty dry. You don't become a destination on the free agent market in a year.

Krivsky and Castellini have acknowledged that the team has immediate needs and they've promised to address those needs. Based on what they've said, Krivsky and Castellini should be the first two to recognize that what the team has done to date this offseason isn't nearly good enough. It's really just a matter of holding them to their own standards.

Johnny Footstool
12-20-2006, 03:57 PM
Those three guys, and much of the free agents, are complimentary players you bring in to help you win a title. The Reds are not in a position to win a title right now, so is it really necessary to commit that amount money to win 84 instead of 75 games?

The Reds would be worse off long term with those guys in the fold for multiple years. Lohse, Milton, and others are going to be off the books in short time. It's better to wait and use their money to acquire talent similar to them when contention is near.

That would be nice if the team actually did that -- used their money to acquire talent when contention is near.

I'd rather have them spend some money to get themselves near contention first instead of waiting for a division title to fall into their laps. Or pinning their hopes on the empty promise of "next year."

The idea is to keep improving. Players like Lilly, Padilla, and Dotel make your team better.

You mention it yould only improve the Reds a little bit, from 75 wins to 84 wins. Well, those are 9 wins you probably won't find otherwise. Those 9 wins would sell a ton of season tickets.

And they would have been enough to win the NL Central this season.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 04:02 PM
That would be nice if the team actually did that -- used their money to acquire talent when contention is near.

I'd rather have them spend some money to get themselves near contention first instead of waiting for a division title to fall into their laps. Or pinning their hopes on the empty promise of "next year."

The idea is to keep improving. Players like Lilly, Padilla, and Dotel make your team better.

You mention it yould only improve the Reds a little bit, from 75 wins to 84 wins. Well, those are 9 wins you probably won't find otherwise. Those 9 wins would sell a ton of season tickets.

And they would have been enough to win the NL Central this season.

Would giving Ted Lilly $40 million for 4 years be a good idea? That's roughly 1/7 or 1/8 of your payroll.

Padilla is a guy I like, and would like to have him, but not at the price he got when the team is not going to contend for the World Series on paper.

The Reds do have multiple holes to be filled, no one's denying that. But is it really smart to fill them with guys like Lilly at that price on a medium sized budget just to show fans you're willing to spend?

When you do that, you end up with Eric Milton.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 04:05 PM
Krivsky and Castellini have acknowledged that the team has immediate needs and they've promised to address those needs. Based on what they've said, Krivsky and Castellini should be the first two to recognize that what the team has done to date this offseason isn't nearly good enough. It's really just a matter of holding them to their own standards.


That's rhetoric. Would you rather them say "We're going to really suck a big one during the rebuilding period."

There's holding someone to their word, and then there's realizing what's best for the team tomorrow, not just today. On a limited budget such as the Reds', that's every bit as important.

NJReds
12-20-2006, 04:08 PM
Would giving Ted Lilly $40 million for 4 years be a good idea? That's roughly 1/7 or 1/8 of your payroll.

Padilla is a guy I like, and would like to have him, but not at the price he got when the team is not going to contend for the World Series on paper.

The Reds do have multiple holes to be filled, no one's denying that, but is it really smart to fill them with guys like Lilly at that price on a medium sized budget just to show fans you're willing to spend?

When you do that, you end up with Eric Milton.

It's not all about spending. The Braves traded for Rafael Soriano for a relatively low cost. Meanwhile, the Reds gave a 2-year deal to Mike Stanton (when nobody else was offering 2 years). The Red Sox got Brendan Donnelly for a song. The Reds overpaid Mike Stanton.

There are players available on the trade market that could help the team, but I haven't heard/read that the Reds have been at all active on the trade front.

Team Clark
12-20-2006, 04:17 PM
The money is there..the will to win evidently is not.

Or the KNOW HOW......

Great post. A shame that I am out of rep points. :thumbup:

edabbs44
12-20-2006, 04:18 PM
Would giving Ted Lilly $40 million for 4 years be a good idea? That's roughly 1/7 or 1/8 of your payroll.

Padilla is a guy I like, and would like to have him, but not at the price he got when the team is not going to contend for the World Series on paper.

The Reds do have multiple holes to be filled, no one's denying that. But is it really smart to fill them with guys like Lilly at that price on a medium sized budget just to show fans you're willing to spend?

When you do that, you end up with Eric Milton.

Well, the market says that Lilly is worth that much.

Translation: Lilly is worth that much.

The financial landscape has changed today and if Cincy cannot afford a middle of the road guy like Lilly, then Bob has two choices:

1) Sell the team.
2) Rebuild from the ground up by stock-piling pitching.

Those choices are only if he wants to try and win. If he is content with fielding a team that is basically out of the race in March of each year, then he can continue to sign off on players like Stanton, Weathers and Gonzalez.

For all the mocking of teams like KC and Chicago signing pitchers like Meche and Lilly, at least they have recognized the fact that the market is where it is. If WK is waiting for the prices to come down, then we could be in for a rough couple of years.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 04:24 PM
It's not all about spending. The Braves traded for Rafael Soriano for a relatively low cost. Meanwhile, the Reds gave a 2-year deal to Mike Stanton (when nobody else was offering 2 years). The Red Sox got Brendan Donnelly for a song. The Reds overpaid Mike Stanton.

There are players available on the trade market that could help the team, but I haven't heard/read that the Reds have been at all active on the trade front.

You can't just say someone was available for low cost and take it as a knock on Krivsky. Did the Reds have anyone available that the Mariners would have taken for him? The Reds have very few mid-level prospects and even fewer cheap mid-level (and young) major league talent.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 04:29 PM
Well, the market says that Lilly is worth that much.

Translation: Lilly is worth that much.

The financial landscape has changed today and if Cincy cannot afford a middle of the road guy like Lilly, then Bob has two choices:

1) Sell the team.
2) Rebuild from the ground up by stock-piling pitching.

Those choices are only if he wants to try and win. If he is content with fielding a team that is basically out of the race in March of each year, then he can continue to sign off on players like Stanton, Weathers and Gonzalez.

For all the mocking of teams like KC and Chicago signing pitchers like Meche and Lilly, at least they have recognized the fact that the market is where it is. If WK is waiting for the prices to come down, then we could be in for a rough couple of years.


Well, the market says a PS3 is worth $600 bucks. Would it be smart to buy one if it clamps your budget?

I suppose that's in the eye of the beholder.

The Reds budget is on the lower end. That will likely never change. I don't think it's very wise to spend 1/8 of it on a mediocre starting pitcher.

edabbs44
12-20-2006, 04:37 PM
Well, the market says a PS3 is worth $600 bucks. Would it be smart to buy one if it clamps your budget?

I suppose that's in the eye of the beholder.

The Reds budget is on the lower end. That will likely never change. I don't think it's very wise to spend 1/8 of it on a mediocre starting pitcher.

A PS3 is a luxury. Pitching is a necessity.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 04:39 PM
A PS3 is a luxury. Pitching is a necessity.

Good pitching is a necessity. Mediocre pitching is not. They can find a 13 wins somewhere else.

NJReds
12-20-2006, 04:42 PM
You can't just say someone was available for low cost and take it as a knock on Krivsky. Did the Reds have anyone available that the Mariners would have taken for him? The Reds have very few mid-level prospects and even fewer cheap mid-level (and young) major league talent.

I'm not knocking him. I'm just saying that there are other ways of improving the team then offering $11M/yr to Meche-like pitchers.

Fact is, the Reds have not even been rumored in any deals, while most other teams have been quite active.

While I'm reserving judgement on WK's offseason until Opening Day, I can understand the frustration of some Reds fans. And part of that frustration comes from the FO's bravado that the days of losing would be over, and that money wouldn't be an issue.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 04:49 PM
I'm not knocking him. I'm just saying that there are other ways of improving the team then offering $11M/yr to Meche-like pitchers.

Fact is, the Reds have not even been rumored in any deals, while most other teams have been quite active.

While I'm reserving judgement on WK's offseason until Opening Day, I can understand the frustration of some Reds fans. And part of that frustration comes from the FO's bravado that the days of losing would be over, and that money wouldn't be an issue.

Ok, I apoligize for reading that wrong.

I understand the feeling, I'm just not sure now is the time to be questioning that. It would be different if they had a farm system full of trade bait and one or two open spots to fill. Right now they have pretty much zero trade bait in the minors and many more holes to fill. I don't think it makes sense to be spending that kind of money for marginal gain this year. Next year and 2009 will be a different story.

Team Clark
12-20-2006, 04:55 PM
A PS3 is a luxury. Pitching is a necessity.

Not in my house. :laugh:

How do you think I come up with trade ideas? All you do is override the CPU GM and waaahlaa... You have an all star team, no payroll worries and most important, ZERO team chemistry problems. :D I thought this is how everyone else does it. Was I wrong?:confused:

Johnny Footstool
12-20-2006, 04:57 PM
Well, the market says a PS3 is worth $600 bucks. Would it be smart to buy one if it clamps your budget?

I suppose that's in the eye of the beholder.

The Reds budget is on the lower end. That will likely never change. I don't think it's very wise to spend 1/8 of it on a mediocre starting pitcher.

If the Reds aren't willing to spend, then they need to go into full rebuilding mode and trade Arroyo, Harang, Dunn, Griffey, and Freel for prospects and low-cost major leaguers. Use the money saved to invest in scouting and the minors. Endure 6 years of last-place finishes until the draft pays off and the minor league system starts producing quality players.

Using the budget as an excuse is a great way to putter around the .500 mark for a few years.

edabbs44
12-20-2006, 04:57 PM
Good pitching is a necessity. Mediocre pitching is not. They can find a 13 wins somewhere else.

Good pitching is a necessity to compete. Medicore and below pitching is necessary to field a team.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 05:03 PM
If the Reds aren't willing to spend, then they need to go into full rebuilding mode and trade Arroyo, Harang, Dunn, Griffey, and Freel for prospects and low-cost major leaguers. Use the money saved to invest in scouting and the minors. Endure 6 years of last-place finishes until the draft pays off and the minor league system starts producing quality players.

Using the budget as an excuse is a great way to putter around the .500 mark for a few years.

How does this show they aren't willing to spend? To me, it says they aren't willing to overpay for mediocrity at this point.

edabbs44
12-20-2006, 05:11 PM
The funny thing is Florida had a fire sale after the '05 season and they did just fine in '06. IF WK has the capacity, he could turn this around sooner than expected.

Note the big "if".

M2
12-20-2006, 05:12 PM
That's rhetoric. Would you rather them say "We're going to really suck a big one during the rebuilding period."

There's holding someone to their word, and then there's realizing what's best for the team tomorrow, not just today. On a limited budget such as the Reds', that's every bit as important.

If what's happened with the team so far this offseason is all that's coming then Krivsky/Castellini have failed to do what's best for the team both today and tomorrow.

I'd rather the Reds do something decisive than try to ferry the same middle passage that's consistently failed the organization this decade.

I agree with you that Lilly and Padilla were bad targets. I wouldn't have wanted the Reds to drop big coin on either of those guys. Yet I'm thinking along the same lines as NJReds. Don't tell me (the Reds, not you) player acquisition is limited to the FA market and don't cry poor mouth at me. I'm sick of excuses and these guys promised a no excuses regime. They'd better come up with an interesting starting pitcher this winter and probably another bat or two to boot. That way, if it doesn't work you can't fault them for trying.

As for trade bait, I'm not the least bit sympathetic on that front. Krivsky burned a good chunk of his trade stash this summer for a neglible return. It was my chief complaint against the big deal with the Nats. Now he's got some tough choices to make. You can't have everything. If they want to make an earnest run at 2007 and 2008 then get cracking. If they want to rebuild around Homer Bailey and Jay Bruce then start figuring out what Harang and Arroyo can fetch.

What I can't get behind is this nowhereland approach.

Johnny Footstool
12-20-2006, 05:18 PM
How does this show they aren't willing to spend? To me, it says they aren't willing to overpay for mediocrity at this point.

Overpaying for mediocrity shouldn't worry you if it represents an upgrade over sub-mediocrity.

redsmetz
12-20-2006, 05:19 PM
If the Reds aren't willing to spend, then they need to go into full rebuilding mode and trade Arroyo, Harang, Dunn, Griffey, and Freel for prospects and low-cost major leaguers. Use the money saved to invest in scouting and the minors. Endure 6 years of last-place finishes until the draft pays off and the minor league system starts producing quality players.

Using the budget as an excuse is a great way to putter around the .500 mark for a few years.

I haven't really heard this new FO poor-mouth things. They've refused to state what the budget is and they've said that if they need to, they'll increase payroll. Fairly nebulous statements, frankly.

I think WK is seeing the market talent is weak overall and he's not going to overpay for mediocrity. That's merely my opinion, but I still say it's early and we'll see how the team looks come Opening Day.

guttle11
12-20-2006, 05:20 PM
As for trade bait, I'm not the least bit sympathetic on that front. Krivsky burned a good chunk of his trade stash this summer for a neglible return. It was my chief complaint against the big deal with the Nats. Now he's got some tough choices to make. You can't have everything. If they want to make an earnest run at 2007 and 2008 then get cracking. If they want to rebuild around Homer Bailey and Jay Bruce then start figuring out what Harang and Arroyo can fetch.

What I can't get behind is this nowhereland approach.

"The trade" was bad, there's no logical counterpoint. (However, I do question what exactly could have been had for those guys...although it's likely more than they got.)

What I do give them a pass for now is the minor league system. Good prospects will bring you the best ML talent in return 99% of the time. In order for the Reds to be able to really be players in the trade market, it'll take another two years at least. Whether or not they get to that point is squarely on Wayne's shoulders.

And I don't think it's a nowwhereland deal. They're still on the hook for a few bad contracts from the previous regime. That's why I'm trying not to be to hard on them now. When the entire team is their's, that will make it a lot easier to judge.

M2
12-20-2006, 05:31 PM
Overpaying for mediocrity shouldn't worry you if it represents an upgrade over sub-mediocrity.

The Reds are already looking for mediocrity from Lohse. They've got their costs-too-much mediocre starter slot flilled. What they need is someone who might be good. Cory Lidle, Ramon Ortiz, Eric Milton and the second contracts of Paul Wilson and Jimmy Haynes were all based on the notion that maybe they can be mediocre enough to win.

Johnny Footstool
12-20-2006, 05:51 PM
The Reds are already looking for mediocrity from Lohse. They've got their costs-too-much mediocre starter slot flilled. What they need is someone who might be good. Cory Lidle, Ramon Ortiz, Eric Milton and the second contracts of Paul Wilson and Jimmy Haynes were all based on the notion that maybe they can be mediocre enough to win.

Lohse and Milton are both below mediocre. Lohse appears to have some upside, but hasn't been able to harness it.

I guess it comes down to differing opinions of Ted Lilly. I happen to think he'll be well above mediocre in the NL. He's got upside and has shown the ability to harness it more frequently than either Lohse or Milton.

M2
12-20-2006, 06:04 PM
Lohse and Milton are both below mediocre. Lohse appears to have some upside, but hasn't been able to harness it.

I guess it comes down to differing opinions of Ted Lilly. I happen to think he'll be well above mediocre in the NL. He's got upside and has shown the ability to harness it more frequently than either Lohse or Milton.

I figure Lohse, Lilly and Padilla are all cut from the same quality of cloth. Padilla might be good, but now that he's got a contract and he's set for life, you can probably assume that he's stopped caring.

Spring~Fields
12-20-2006, 06:56 PM
While there are still some pressing needs for this club, I don't think three of the moves are as bad as some believe. I'll concur that Moeller and Crosby are curious moves (although as I recall, Crosby's is a split contract), I think this club is better having Gonzo's defense. And I'm fine with both signings of Weathers and Stanton (IMO, don't underestimate his significant post-season experience as a plus for this club).

Now, no question, we need the right handed bat added at first and another starter, preferably with #3 talent and we don't have too bad a ballclub. Now that said, I hope he and Jerry are able to move Jr. to right - that would help immensely. And we need some players to come back around or continue to develop. Hopefully, as many have said, EE continues to develop and I hope the same for Phillips (who really is too young to have a "career year" declared. A platoon at first with Hatteberg works for this year. Dunn, I think is the critical player. We need him to round out his game without losing OBP and power. If we can get about .250 out of him with the same power and walks numbers, I think that's a plus. Likewise, the two Rule V guys are a question mark, but not bad pick-ups.

Now I'm just going off the top of my head, but other than the two questionable offseason moves mentioned above, he hasn't had terrible signings thus far. Certainly work remains to be done.

I guess I stumble over how we can say that certain moves are not really bad moves even though they do not address real needs, while we agree that “there are pressing needs for this club” when “there is certainly work that needs to be done. “

We agree that Moeller and Crosby are “curious moves“, and that Livingston and Hamilton are “question marks” also.

These moves do not address the talent level of the 2007 season as best as I can discern, and I just can’t see why the moves were made to begin with and why they look so much like the rest of Mr. K’s 30-40 moves prior to these. I guess we could call them cheap at best. We could call them an expense and a problem that will have to be dealt with in the future too, the Reds already had that.

The rest of your thoughts on defense and relief pitching I don’t have any problem with, except I prefer that K. always be looking to upgrade them because they are temporary fixes that he had last year and so far this year. Mr. K would retort that he is, I would respond, Ok, K, I am just looking to see and I haven’t seen that yet.

The GABP should be a problem for most pitchers with any given pitch/strike possibly on its way to the river.

So I assume that they have to have a defense that they can trust and rely on at ss, 2b and 3b a great deal for them to be able to be comfortable to pitch well. I can see how it would be very important for Gonzo, Phillips and EE to be the answers to field and make that play at 1b so that the pitchers can get out of any inning fast at the GABP.

Caveat Emperor
12-20-2006, 07:39 PM
As for trade bait, I'm not the least bit sympathetic on that front. Krivsky burned a good chunk of his trade stash this summer for a neglible return. It was my chief complaint against the big deal with the Nats. Now he's got some tough choices to make. You can't have everything. If they want to make an earnest run at 2007 and 2008 then get cracking. If they want to rebuild around Homer Bailey and Jay Bruce then start figuring out what Harang and Arroyo can fetch.

What I can't get behind is this nowhereland approach.

Krivsky got burned on a deal. The component parts are gone and never coming back. How is it not a pass to say "we blew it, and now we've got nothing left to trade?" What does everyone expect Krivsky to do? Conjure up some players with actual value to trade? It sucks, and its a hard reality to stomach, but dealing Kearns and Lopez left the offense vulnerable. There are no runs left to give.

I'm for rebuilding, but that's a tough sell to the fans -- which means it probably won't happen.

I'll ask again: why is everyone scared and running around like loons over the inaction? Last year at this time we were stuck with both Tony Womack and Dave Williams. It wasn't until the spring that the three best acquisitions, Arroyo, Hatteberg and Phillips, entered the fold.

Has anyone changed hands, thus far, that you really are looking at and saying "Shoot, I wish he was wearing a Reds uni?" when you factor in cost to acquire?

Pateince. If they break spring training with this team, then the complaining can begin.

M2
12-20-2006, 07:55 PM
Krivsky got burned on a deal. The component parts are gone and never coming back. How is it not a pass to say "we blew it, and now we've got nothing left to trade?" What does everyone expect Krivsky to do? Conjure up some players with actual value to trade? It sucks, and its a hard reality to stomach, but dealing Kearns and Lopez left the offense vulnerable. There are no runs left to give.

You're right to a degree, but if you dig yourself into a hole then you've got to climb out, preferably before the hole collapses on you.

GAC
12-20-2006, 10:02 PM
While there are still some pressing needs for this club, I don't think three of the moves are as bad as some believe. I'll concur that Moeller and Crosby are curious moves (although as I recall, Crosby's is a split contract), I think this club is better having Gonzo's defense. And I'm fine with both signings of Weathers and Stanton (IMO, don't underestimate his significant post-season experience as a plus for this club).

Now, no question, we need the right handed bat added at first and another starter, preferably with #3 talent and we don't have too bad a ballclub. Now that said, I hope he and Jerry are able to move Jr. to right - that would help immensely. And we need some players to come back around or continue to develop. Hopefully, as many have said, EE continues to develop and I hope the same for Phillips (who really is too young to have a "career year" declared. A platoon at first with Hatteberg works for this year. Dunn, I think is the critical player. We need him to round out his game without losing OBP and power. If we can get about .250 out of him with the same power and walks numbers, I think that's a plus. Likewise, the two Rule V guys are a question mark, but not bad pick-ups.

Now I'm just going off the top of my head, but other than the two questionable offseason moves mentioned above, he hasn't had terrible signings thus far. Certainly work remains to be done.

Good post, and I couldn't agree more.

There is still plenty of time to acquire that RH'd bat they need to platoon with Hatteberg. Some seem to think that if it's not done at those winter meetings then it's not going to get done.

The acquisition of Gonzo and IF we can get Jr to move, would vastly improve an area that hurt this team last year - defense.

And as you mentioned - the further development of Encarnacion, who gets to play a full season, plus a "rebound" year by Dunn, would help this offense.

I just have a very "sneaky" feeling that even though they have money to spend, I look at their needs... starting pitching, solid RH'd batter, whether an OFer and/or 1Bman.... it's not just the ridiculous contracts/money being handed out in this market, but the very erratic performance record of alot of those players.

I personally think it's very risky.

Do I go after a Lily or Marquis type and lock myself into a bad contract? Or wait for Bailey? Do I give Votto a shot (low risk) before I overpay someone in this market?

Do some believe that the market ain't gonna get any better, so the Reds need to jump in it?

The market may not get any better as far as money/contracts, but the talent has to, at some point, get better.

And in that sense I think (or hope) that is Castellini/Krivsky's approach.

I am not going to fault them (yet) for not acting like the some of these other teams have over this winter. Your "regulars" (big market clubs) are always going to spend, and sometimes foolishly.

Until some sort of fiscal sanity is brought to MLB, it's not going to get any better. Not just for clubs like the Reds, Twins, Pirates, and K.C., but for a many organizations. That list keeps growing.

That's just simple reality.

Who will Zito end up signing with? We all know it's down to a very small handful of teams. And they will pay big time for his services thanks to agents like Boras.

For a team like the Reds to take on a contract like that... which is not impossible, but leaves no room for error.... it also leaves them very little to spread around and retain quality players.

So they are left to seek other alternatives..... farm system development or market "crumbs", or looking for that player that is "under the radar".

That's not making excuses for Castellini and/or Krivsky any more then it would be for probably 2/3 of the GMs in the same position around MLB.

Until some sort of fiscal sanity is brought to MLB it ain't going to get any better.

edabbs44
12-20-2006, 10:07 PM
The GABP should be a problem for most pitchers with any given pitch/strike possibly on its way to the river.

So I assume that they have to have a defense that they can trust and rely on at ss, 2b and 3b a great deal for them to be able to be comfortable to pitch well. I can see how it would be very important for Gonzo, Phillips and EE to be the answers to field and make that play at 1b so that the pitchers can get out of any inning fast at the GABP.

This is the fallacy that many of us do not realize...with this park and this staff, what difference does it make who's in the field? $14 million on Gonzalez is wasted unless WK gives him a raft and changes his position to Shortriver.

Always Red
12-20-2006, 10:17 PM
IF we can get Jr to move, would vastly improve an area that hurt this team last year - defense.





I think this will be a defining moment for this FO.

There should be no IF

It can be done gently and with tact, but Junior should be asked to move, and if he refuses, then told.

If Junior is playing CF this year, this team is going nowhere fast.

Spring~Fields
12-20-2006, 10:48 PM
So they are left to seek other alternatives..... farm system development or market "crumbs", or looking for that player that is "under the radar".

That's not making excuses for Castellini and/or Krivsky any more then it would be for probably 2/3 of the GMs in the same position around MLB.

Until some sort of fiscal sanity is brought to MLB it ain't going to get any better.

Pretty much says it all, the Reds have been doing just that and will not be winning anytime soon.

Spring~Fields
12-20-2006, 11:01 PM
This is the fallacy that many of us do not realize...with this park and this staff, what difference does it make who's in the field? $14 million on Gonzalez is wasted unless WK gives him a raft and changes his position to Shortriver.

You have a point. I was hoping that the new guy could at least get the ball over to first base compared to some of the fielding we witnessed last year.
Of course we know that Narron will be making many changes throughout, maybe he will have them at shortriver.

roby
12-21-2006, 01:27 AM
[QUOTE=George Anderson;1214636]Austin Kearns is gone. How are you going to trade a player we dont have??


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Jose Guillen could have been had for a reasonable price.

Where would you play him? You can't keep running Junior out to centerfield and pretend defense doesn't matter. If Junior is in right and Dunn is in left, there is no room at the inn for Jose Guillen. At six million per and the emotional baggage of being here before, I'm not sure I want him anyway.


Quote:
Rich Aurilia could have been retained for a reasonable price.

Again, where would he play? The infield is pretty much covered. Rich wanted playing time more than he wanted the money or he would have taken the arbitration payday the reds offered.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sometimes i think you guys pretend to misunderstand somebody's point so that you can try to make them look stupid. Anyone wo casually follows the Reds knows that Kearns has been traded. My point was that it may have been a lot smarter to send Kearns to the Indians for Westbrook. You could have still sent Lopez to the Nats for Bray. Someone will call that hindsight...but i think it is just sight, period. Obviously, if the Reds could have gotten westbrook instead of Majewski, they would have been WAY better off.

Yes, I know that Rich Aurilia is gone, too. But just maybe it would have been smarter to keep him and start him at 2nd base...moving Philips to shortstop. Somebody complained about people who initially didn't like the Aurilia signing and then changed their minds. I was one of those people. I didn't change my mind nearly as much as Aurilia changed my mind. He hit FAR BETTER than any of could have suspected. (Except for you few!). I personally think Aurilia would have been fine at 2nd base and that Brandon P would have been an exceptionally good shortstop.

As for Jose Guillen, My first choice would be to trade Griffey. He is not the reds future. Besides, Guillen said that he loved playing in Cincy more than anywhere else in his career. All he wanted to do was to play regularly. he deserved it. he played well when he was here, and the Reds kept messing him over.

It's sad when the KC Royals are busier than your team. It's even sadder when some fans defend the Reds sitting still when they need to be making some effort to improve. I've been following the Reds since 1961, and this is as disgusted as i have ever been with this franchise. Sadly, according to some of the posters on RZ..the fans are getting just what they want.

roby
12-21-2006, 01:37 AM
Or the KNOW HOW......

Great post. A shame that I am out of rep points. :thumbup:

Thanks Team Clark. I appreciate the compliment from you as much as I would rep points. :thumbup:

dsmith421
12-21-2006, 01:39 AM
Has anyone changed hands, thus far, that you really are looking at and saying "Shoot, I wish he was wearing a Reds uni?" when you factor in cost to acquire?

Off the top of my head:

Randy Wolf
Jose Guillen
Rafael Soriano
Andy Sisco
David Dellucci
Octavio Dotel

I might even have taken Jaret Wright if the Yanks ate his salary.

roby
12-21-2006, 01:49 AM
Yeh when they got here they promised to waste tons of money on overpaid free agents, so that in two years everyone on this board can complain about how we should have never signed them. Its better to spend no money then waste money on guys that arent going to help us and will just hurt our ability to bring in people later who actually can help us at a reasonable price.
Krivskys doing fine, the best arm available may be sitting in our minor league system and can be brought up in june to help push us into the playoffs.

No one is wanting the Reds to waste money or spend it by overpaying free agents. What we saying is that we're sick and tired of the LATER rhetoric. the reds need to improve..and do it while getting much younger. Signing Stanton, Weathers, the washed-up catcher, Hatteberg, Buuba Crosby, etc, is not the way to go. Add those contracts up...and you've got a pretty decent chunk of change to IMPROVE with instead of just regurgitating the same old stuff over and over. I'd far rather see Votto, Denorfia, Homer, Belisle, and maybe a good #3 pitcher. At some point the reds are going to have to figure out what they have with some of the young players...abd you don't do that by clogging up the way with senior citizens.

jbran1114
12-21-2006, 02:22 AM
That's rhetoric. Would you rather them say "We're going to really suck a big one during the rebuilding period."

There's holding someone to their word, and then there's realizing what's best for the team tomorrow, not just today. On a limited budget such as the Reds', that's every bit as important.

I would rather have them say that and save their money for a season when the Reds can actually contend. Castellini says they budget to break even, so whats wrong with making money for a few seasons ,while the team retools cheaply with young talent, and then blow what you've made on a season or two of real contention?

Blitz Dorsey
12-21-2006, 02:36 AM
I have no problem with Krivsky being patient on the free agent market. He wasn't even hired until just before spring training last year and made several solid moves. I have faith that he will find a gem or two before the team hits Sarasota. Castallini is willing to spend the money. He isn't going to be crazy about it, but I think he's willing to open his wallet enough. The only problem now is that the Griffey and Milton contracts are still crippling. One year and counting on Milty and two for Griffey (with a $4 million team buyout for '09 of course).

Caveat Emperor
12-21-2006, 03:20 AM
This is the fallacy that many of us do not realize...with this park and this staff, what difference does it make who's in the field? $14 million on Gonzalez is wasted unless WK gives him a raft and changes his position to Shortriver.

So you just write off the other 81 games per year that you DON'T play at GABP?

Patrick Bateman
12-21-2006, 03:32 AM
This is the fallacy that many of us do not realize...with this park and this staff, what difference does it make who's in the field? $14 million on Gonzalez is wasted unless WK gives him a raft and changes his position to Shortriver.

This is the fallacy right here.

You can limit the damage of the homerun by keeping men off base and ending the innings sooner. Defense still plays a large role.

geniusMoment
12-21-2006, 06:24 AM
I honestly believe Krivsky has been sniffing glue in the parking lot for the past 6 months. His trade for Magic and Bray was horrible, the signing of A-Gon was sickening, and then when I heard he signed Stanton for that money I threw up a little in my mouth. I don't think this team has any plan, I believe fruity bob is just like uncle carl, and I believe this organization will continue being the joke it's been for the past 6 years for the next few decades. This is as bad of a reds team as I have seen at this point in the offseason.

Look at the scorecard:

Their Hitting: Looks very bad right now
Defense: Average at best, except the outfield where Griffey and Dunn combine to cover 10 square feet
Starting pitching: We have a good two man rotation, the rest, well lets just say I'd rather walk in on my parents having sex than see the rest on the hill
Relief: Looks just as bad as last year, and it was horrible

There you have it. We have crappy hitting, crappy relief pitching, average to bad defense and two good starters.

edabbs44
12-21-2006, 07:33 AM
So you just write off the other 81 games per year that you DON'T play at GABP?

Not sure if the park will make that much of a difference. Milton/Lohse/Mr. X pitching anywhere will hurt.

edabbs44
12-21-2006, 07:34 AM
This is the fallacy right here.

You can limit the damage of the homerun by keeping men off base and ending the innings sooner. Defense still plays a large role.

Very true...but I would have still rather had that money spent on building the youth of the team than wasted on Gonzalez.

LoganBuck
12-21-2006, 08:46 AM
Would some of you be happy if they signed Jeff Suppan? He supposedly has a mystery team negotiating with him.

Hoosier Red
12-21-2006, 09:16 AM
i would be happy with Suppan.

redsmetz
12-21-2006, 09:24 AM
I honestly believe Krivsky has been sniffing glue in the parking lot for the past 6 months. His trade for Magic and Bray was horrible, the signing of A-Gon was sickening, and then when I heard he signed Stanton for that money I threw up a little in my mouth. I don't think this team has any plan, I believe fruity bob is just like uncle carl, and I believe this organization will continue being the joke it's been for the past 6 years for the next few decades. This is as bad of a reds team as I have seen at this point in the offseason.

Look at the scorecard:

Their Hitting: Looks very bad right now
Defense: Average at best, except the outfield where Griffey and Dunn combine to cover 10 square feet
Starting pitching: We have a good two man rotation, the rest, well lets just say I'd rather walk in on my parents having sex than see the rest on the hill
Relief: Looks just as bad as last year, and it was horrible

There you have it. We have crappy hitting, crappy relief pitching, average to bad defense and two good starters.

You must be vying for the "most negative" recognition. :) This team has weaknesses, but it's nowhere near as horrible as you paint it. We've got our work cut out for us, but some of the signings you mentioned are not as basd as you believe them to be.

I think I'd go for a long walk on a beautiful sunshiny day and look for spring to arrive early next year. And remember, it's just a game.

edabbs44
12-21-2006, 09:34 AM
Would some of you be happy if they signed Jeff Suppan? He supposedly has a mystery team negotiating with him.

If Suppan was where it ended, I would be more disappointed than I am now.

If there were more moves on the way, then I would be happy.

It's gonna take more than Suppan to right the ship.

Ltlabner
12-21-2006, 09:50 AM
If Suppan was where it ended, I would be more disappointed than I am now.

If there were more moves on the way, then I would be happy.

It's gonna take more than Suppan to right the ship.

I'm on vacation and I've been in and out on this thread so I perhaps I missed something.

But it seems you are saying you are mad that they aren't spending money. And that if they went out and spent money on Suppan you'd be even more disappointed. But isn't spending more money (improving the team) exactly what you want them to do?

Seems to me you are saying (and maybe I have this all wrong) that unless they go out and spend $50million extra dollars between now and April 1 (comming close to doubling the payroll) you are going to be mad at BCast and Krivsky no matter what they do.

Thats not a bad thing, neccessarly, but just trying to clarify.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 10:52 AM
I honestly believe Krivsky has been sniffing glue in the parking lot for the past 6 months. RZ the place for intelligent Reds talk.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 10:54 AM
But it seems you are saying you are mad that they aren't spending money. And that if they went out and spent money on Suppan you'd be even more disappointed. But isn't spending more money (improving the team) exactly what you want them to do?

Meanwhile more then 1/2 of the teams in baseball aren't listed as being alive if we use Ballbug as the barometer for action in baseball.

http://www.ballbug.com/

NJReds
12-21-2006, 11:05 AM
Meanwhile more then 1/2 of the teams in baseball aren't listed as being alive if we use Ballbug as the barometer for action in baseball.

http://www.ballbug.com/


But I think the difference is that Castellini came in here guns-a-blazin' saying that the era of losing would be over, that it would be win at all costs, a championship will return to Cincinnati...etc., etc.

Now it's seems like the FO has been possessed by the ghost of Reds' past in the image of Dan O'Brien.

The frustration of some fans is justified based on the actions of the FO not equalling their words. Instead we get "Power of Tradition" a flashy "RedsFest" and the return of Pete Rose.

There is plenty of offseason left and the Reds may well make the necessary moves to be competitive, but you can't just dismiss those who are frustrated, because the big boss said times were going to change, and thus far it's same-old, same-old.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 11:10 AM
But I think the difference is that Castellini came in here guns-a-blazin' saying that the era of losing would be over, that it would be win at all costs, a championship will return to Cincinnati...etc., etc.

11 months ago, one whole season under their belts and sitting on a Frig full of hamburger.

Yet everyone wants steak, yesterday, today and tomorrow.

I wish the game, off season and trade market was as fast as my mind too, but it's not and never has been.

"Eras" refer to a span of time, 11 months is a span of months that comprise one season, hardly an era and hardly anything more then a starting point to end the era.

RANDY IN INDY
12-21-2006, 11:18 AM
I think Krivsky will make one more fairly significant move before the season begins and try to find some lighning in a bottle somewhere else, although I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he pulls the trigger on a blockbuster type trade that really changes some things.

edabbs44
12-21-2006, 11:21 AM
I'm on vacation and I've been in and out on this thread so I perhaps I missed something.

But it seems you are saying you are mad that they aren't spending money. And that if they went out and spent money on Suppan you'd be even more disappointed. But isn't spending more money (improving the team) exactly what you want them to do?

Seems to me you are saying (and maybe I have this all wrong) that unless they go out and spend $50million extra dollars between now and April 1 (comming close to doubling the payroll) you are going to be mad at BCast and Krivsky no matter what they do.

Thats not a bad thing, neccessarly, but just trying to clarify.

I think the FO has one of 2 choices to make if they are seriously trying to win at some point:

1) Start building to win now, by signing top notch FAs and making trades (short-term).

2) Start to burn it down and build for the future (long-term).

I don't think Suppan is enough to go for #1. If Suppan was a small step in the direction of view #1, then I would be happy. But if Suppan was the biggest part of #1, then to me, #1 isn't going to work. I would rather see Cincy go 70-92 w/o Suppan than 76-86 with him. This team isn't a Suppan away from contention.

guttle11
12-21-2006, 12:13 PM
I think the FO has one of 2 choices to make if they are seriously trying to win at some point:

1) Start building to win now, by signing top notch FAs and making trades (short-term).

Do you really think that it's just that easy to sign free agents? I'm honestly shocked at how easy some people seem to think it is.

To make trades for the short term, you have to have either very good players with soon to expire contracts (they don't), or an embarassment of riches in the minors. (they don't.) Neither one of those is Wayne's or Castellini's fault. They didn't choose the contracts or farm system they inherited.

dfs
12-21-2006, 12:20 PM
Sometimes i think you guys pretend to misunderstand somebody's point so that you can try to make them look stupid.


FWIW I'm honestly sorry that you feel I misquoted you in order to make you look foolish or stupid. That was not my intent.



Yes, I know that Rich Aurilia is gone, too. But just maybe it would have been smarter to keep him and start him at 2nd base...moving Philips to shortstop. Somebody complained about people who initially didn't like the Aurilia signing and then changed their minds. I was one of those people. I didn't change my mind nearly as much as Aurilia changed my mind. He hit FAR BETTER than any of could have suspected. (Except for you few!). I personally think Aurilia would have been fine at 2nd base and that Brandon P would have been an exceptionally good shortstop.

We very much disagree about Aurilia's prowess in the middle infield. After watching him hobble around at shortstop during games in August, I don't think "he would have been fine." I believe the reds management set out to improve the defense of the team. Given Rich's defensive shortcomings, he had to play third or first or accept a platoon role. They already had players on the corners and Rich was pretty clear that he wouldn't accept a part time role. Frankly I was shocked that Aurilia didn't accept the reds offer for arbitration. Given the year he had and the comparable free agent signings, Auilia would have made a mint. He wanted PT instead of the money.

Why haven't the reds replaced that right handed platoon hitter already? Because nobody is willing to sign a contract in december to be a part time player when somebody else might come along and offer them a real starting job.



As for Jose Guillen, My first choice would be to trade Griffey. He is not the reds future. Besides, Guillen said that he loved playing in Cincy more than anywhere else in his career. All he wanted to do was to play regularly. he deserved it. he played well when he was here, and the Reds kept messing him over.

In order to trade Junior, they have to get two things. They need offers and Junior has to agree to the trade. Assume they can get somebody to take Junior off their hands if they pay...6 million of the salary and that junior agrees to it. (I don't think that's realistic, but it's possible) Then lets further assume that Guillen agrees to come here for the same 6 million dollar contract that he signed with Seattle.(Again, I don't think that's realistic, but you never know.) What have you done? You've saved salary in the future and replaced Junior's production with Guillen....Junior has out hit Guillen three of the last three years. That's not really progress for the team on the field.



It's sad when the KC Royals are busier than your team. It's even sadder when some fans defend the Reds sitting still when they need to be making some effort to improve. I've been following the Reds since 1961, and this is as disgusted as i have ever been with this franchise. Sadly, according to some of the posters on RZ..the fans are getting just what they want.

I don't know that a buisier off season is always a successful one.
KC has paid 5 million for a 33 year old hurt closer that has thrown 25 innings in the last two years.
KC has agreed to pay 55 million to a starting pitcher with a horrible injury history who has not put up a league average ERA in six years.
I don't want my team making those kind of moves.

I've detailed in other posts what Wayne has already done. I don't share his priorities, but he's shored up shorstop, taken care of his catching, filled his bullpen, brought in three players from the free talent pool and provided a third low cost/low risk centerfielder. That's not exactly sitting on his hands. He's got four starters that he's comfortable with and an Ubberprospect that may be ready in June.

Assuming he's found a way to get Junior out of center field, (a big assumption) He has three more tasks for the offseason.
#1 He needs to take care of his arbitration hearings such that they don't damage the club. He can't pay Lohse too much money and he can't piss off Aaron Harang.
#2 He needs that right handed platoon bat.
#3 He needs to work the margins and find a starting pitcher better than Lohse and Milton.

If he does 2 of those things in addition to what he's already done, it will have been a good offseason. If he does those three things and more, it may have been the best offseason since Jim Bowden was a young guy.

Johnny Footstool
12-21-2006, 12:23 PM
11 months ago, one whole season under their belts and sitting on a Frig full of hamburger.

Yet everyone wants steak, yesterday, today and tomorrow.

I wish the game, off season and trade market was as fast as my mind too, but it's not and never has been.

"Eras" refer to a span of time, 11 months is a span of months that comprise one season, hardly an era and hardly anything more then a starting point to end the era.

If all you have is hamburger, don't put steak on the menu.

The thing is, the current Reds "era" is set to last two seasons. Then the core of the team (Arroyo, Harang, Dunn) will most likely leave. Then they're back to a rebuilding "era."

If the plan is to win, action needs to take place sooner rather than later.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 12:32 PM
If the plan is to win, action needs to take place sooner rather than later. Sooner?

As in the past 2 weeks or the next 2 weeks?

Or prior to the start of spring training? It seems that much of the hand wringing comes because the wire has been quiet since the Reds signed Weathers. That's what? two weeks ago?

The season is still far away, if nothing happens prior to that then I'll believe they are stripping down to either go to the mattresses or con the fan base. But I can't see that the Reds are any worst now then they were two weeks ago or will be in a week, they haven't played a game yet.

Late December signings have gotten the Reds nothing but Lidle's and Milton's lately, that's Gil Mench country.

edabbs44
12-21-2006, 12:51 PM
Do you really think that it's just that easy to sign free agents? I'm honestly shocked at how easy some people seem to think it is.

To make trades for the short term, you have to have either very good players with soon to expire contracts (they don't), or an embarassment of riches in the minors. (they don't.) Neither one of those is Wayne's or Castellini's fault. They didn't choose the contracts or farm system they inherited.

No I don't.

And I completely agree with you saying that it isn't WK's and Bob's fault for the mess they inherited.

But, I do think it is time for them to take a step back and figure out what their gameplan is.

Is it to be middle of the pack? If so, they can try and go after their usual targets like AGon and Moeller and Stanton.

Is it to be a contender? If so, then they have to figure out a way to get there. And if they believe that they cannot compete through the FA process (which I agree they probably can't) then it's time to start from scratch.

It is very difficult to build a championship team w/o at least one or two big name FA or trade acquisitions. And if it is through trades, sometimes those being traded have no-trade clauses. I would assume many top players don't have Cincy as their first choice where to play. That is fine. But it is the FO's job to change those views by making the Reds into a team where people want to go. The #1 way to do that is to WIN.

I have been advocating a rebuild for a while now. The FO has to face reality...they will not compete if they continue in the direction they are headed. They have to make major noise in two aspects of the game:

1) The draft - Every year, there are numerous players who slip in the draft because of contract demands. Target these guys. Think Bard, Weaver, Hochevar from 2 years ago, etc. Take the best player available in each round with a HUGE emphasis on pitching. Drop millions into the draft. True that they sometimes don't work out, but I'd rather go 2-5 than 0-2.

2) International scouting - Make a splash here. Sign some young bonus babies. Worst case, we can trade these guys to Bowden if they don't pan out (think Melian, Aramboles, WMP, etc).

At this point, I have zero expectations for 2007. The 2006 FA signings are wasted money to me. Gonzalez's $14 million could have funded two years worth of huge draft budgets. I really don't expect my view to have any potential for change until the draft. If June is a bust, then something drastic must be done.

Johnny Footstool
12-21-2006, 01:00 PM
Sooner?

As in the past 2 weeks or the next 2 weeks?

Or prior to the start of spring training? It seems that much of the hand wringing comes because the wire has been quiet since the Reds signed Weathers. That's what? two weeks ago?

The season is still far away, if nothing happens prior to that then I'll believe they are stripping down to either go to the mattresses or con the fan base. But I can't see that the Reds are any worst now then they were two weeks ago or will be in a week, they haven't played a game yet.

Late December signings have gotten the Reds nothing but Lidle's and Milton's lately, that's Gil Mench country.

You were speaking about eras. I was pointing out that the Reds need to do something on a less Paleozoic scale.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 01:29 PM
You were speaking about eras. I was pointing out that the Reds need to do something on a less Paleozoic scale.

No kidding, but given the talent and the funds that the Reds have compared to the rest of the league it's a lot easier to to say "do it now and do it right" then it is to actually do it.

But I'm just noting how loud the screams get as the winter settles into the Christmas portion of the off season, a season that is a traditionally weak movement time in the game and one that is often fraught with desperation moves fueled by gambles, the need to spend left over revenue and the inevitable, unrealistic expectations.

You'd think that the reality of the last 10 years of Reds baseball, fluctuating attendance, weak player development, front office shenanigans, drafting gaffes, 6 manager since 1995 etc, etc, etc would let folks see how hard it is to fix something that's broken, it takes longer to build something then to say you're going to build it.

I too am tired of waiting for something to rise from the ashes.

The problem is the guys who have owned the team for 11 months are getting crap for saying something that Lindner never uttered. (and thus he was given crap for not uttering it)

And that's a simple statement, they are going to try and field a winning team, and sure they said NOW, I heard it, I read it, I rolled my eyes too.

But did you really believe that it could happen as fast as they wanted it to?

LoganBuck
12-21-2006, 02:12 PM
Despite the Cubs spending spree, I have yet to see where the Reds are dramatically worse off now, than they were at the end of the season compared to the division. The Cards got lucky at the end of the season, and the Astros pitching staff is markedly worse, and they overpaid for it. I don't think the Cubs have actually improved that much, the most important thing for them is that Derrick Lee comes back, and that they get something out of Wood and Prior. Otherwise they spent a ton of money, for a season of misplaced dreams.

Granted the trade hurt the offense, and the loss of Rich Aurillia hurts some more, but maneuvers can be made to bring in offense. Quite frankly I can deal with the current pitching staff, I don't have to like it, but I can accept it. Lohse and Milton are both in contract years. Ther Reds should have plenty of room to be players in FA in 2007, lets hold off the critism. Lets see what they can do, before we ask the Reds to blow their cash on the Jeff Suppans of the world. That would be the equivilant of going out and buying another millstone, fueling up the boat, and heading out onto the river.

M2
12-21-2006, 02:13 PM
You'd think that the reality of the last 10 years of Reds baseball, fluctuating attendance, weak player development, front office shenanigans, drafting gaffes, 6 manager since 1995 etc, etc, etc would let folks see how hard it is to fix something that's broken, it takes longer to build something then to say you're going to build it.

I too am tired of waiting for something to rise from the ashes.

The problem is the guys who have owned the team for 11 months are getting crap for saying something that Lindner never uttered. (and thus he was given crap for not uttering it)

And that's a simple statement, they are going to try and field a winning team, and sure they said NOW, I heard it, I read it, I rolled my eyes too.

But did you really believe that it could happen as fast as they wanted it to?

I actually believe it can happen. For me, the Arroyo trade and Phillips signing re-calibrated the combinations for the franchise. Those moves, particularly landing Arroyo, opened a window for 2007-8.

I don't think it was reasonable to expect the Reds to break through in 2006. They still had some major flaws to address. It's why I found the summer moves the team made so unfortunate. Had they wanted to gamble one of Lopez or Kearns for Bray that would have been all right, but they needed to get a return similar to what they got for Wily Mo with the other guy.

Yet, hard as it may be to make the kind of substative moves to hit that window, it's what the Reds must do. This isn't a matter of choice. It's a matter of necessity. The last six years did happen and, best as I can tell, the very belief in the fanbase that the Reds can field a truly good team is at stake. I'd submit that this is the most dire moment for the franchise in my lifetime, not as dire as what happened in the Depression, but I think the Reds are on the verge of convincing many Reds fans that the local baseball team is a perpetually lost cause.

That's not the fault of the new regime, but it's the crisis at hand. Sure, they still have time to make serious additions, but I think people are 100% right to underscore how imperative it is that serious additions get made. It's also just as possible the team will stand pat and the ugly ramifications of that potentiality deserve every bit as much discussion as those centered around potential additions.

Falls City Beer
12-21-2006, 02:20 PM
With enough intelligence, cunning, and money, this team could win the World Series this season.

It's all up to them.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 02:23 PM
I actually believe it can happen. For me, the Arroyo trade and Phillips signing re-calibrated the combinations for the franchise. Those moves, particularly landing Arroyo, opened a window for 2007-8.

Sure it can happen, the model that I see being used in the 1988 Orioles that turned into the 1989 Orioles. Team defense, a couple of good bats, a workable BP and a weak field of competition.

The problem is that sort of approach is not too sexy, but it plays right into the quote Pete Rose said the other day, get pitching, get more.

redsmetz
12-21-2006, 02:26 PM
That's not the fault of the new regime, but it's the crisis at hand. Sure, they still have time to make serious additions, but I think people are 100% right to underscore how imperative it is that serious additions get made. It's also just as possible the team will stand pat and the ugly ramifications of that potentiality deserve every bit as much discussion as those centered around potential additions.


I think it's a larger picture issue. Frankly part of what they're dealing with locally is a general malaise in the region particularly as it relates to the city and especially downtown. I think they've got some potential fans who are skittish about coming downtown and the Reds aren't alone in that. It's important to have a decent team on the field to counteract that impression. I think that's partly the reason Bob C. moved into the Banks project group. GABP is part of an island down there without that.

Now, that's not the only thing going on, but it's also an issue. We've been coming out from under two horrid ownership groups who have placed this franchise behind the 8-ball. Scouting, developing, marketing all need major repairs.

Caveat Emperor
12-21-2006, 02:36 PM
With enough intelligence, cunning, and money, this team could win the World Series this season.

It's all up to them.

Maybe if they had the Jedi Mind Trick too, they could just wave a finger and make the Willis for BJ Szymanski + Cash Considerations deal a reality.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 02:44 PM
I think it's a larger picture issue. Frankly part of what they're dealing with locally is a general malaise in the region particularly as it relates to the city and especially downtown.

Fine points, it's also part of the reason the Reds painted Redland after Crosley took over and again when Howsam took over (DeWitt too?) and then didn't the Lindner refurbish the park with grass and so forth? Often the city turns its back on the franchise and the franchise in turn does likewise to the city, then someone new has to come in and do the dirty work.

The arc of the Reds has never been constant, it's one that bottoms out then rebounds. The city has been trying to get people to come downtown since they pushed through the original Riverfront deal in the 60's. It's a cultural battle that transcends the Reds themselves and is a two pronged sword. Some will say they don't ever go downtown, others will say the Reds/Bengals/Facilities of downtown aren't a drawing card.

redsmetz
12-21-2006, 02:47 PM
Maybe if they had the Jedi Mind Trick too, they could just wave a finger and make the Willis for BJ Szymanski + Cash Considerations deal a reality.

:clap: :starwars: :laugh:

Very good!

NJReds
12-21-2006, 02:53 PM
The arc of the Reds has never been constant, it's one that bottoms out then rebounds. The city has been trying to get people to come downtown since they pushed through the original Riverfront deal in the 60's. It's a cultural battle that transcends the Reds themselves and is a two pronged sword. Some will say they don't ever go downtown, others will say the Reds/Bengals/Facilities of downtown aren't a drawing card.

I not completely familiar with the issues in Cincinnati, however, in the late 80s, people stopped going to Yankee Stadium, which is located in the South Bronx. Steinbrenner threatened to move the team to Northern New Jersey at one point.

Then the team started winning, and the team started drawing 3-4 million people per year. At the same time Guiliani became Mayor and really cleaned up the area -- but I think the winning had a lot to do with the attendance.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 02:55 PM
I not completely familiar with the issues in Cincinnati, however, in the late 80s, people stopped going to Yankee Stadium, which is located in the South Bronx. Steinbrenner threatened to move the team to Northern New Jersey at one point.

Then the team started winning, and the team started drawing 3-4 million people per year. At the same time Guiliani became Mayor and really cleaned up the area -- but I think the winning had a lot to do with the attendance.

Yep, the Bronx used to be a major war zone in the 80's. Going to Candlestick was never a joy, night games in the Spring in Oakland suck, the area is a mess too. That stuff isn't the only reason teams generate revenue, but it sure helps.

Falls City Beer
12-21-2006, 03:19 PM
Maybe if they had the Jedi Mind Trick too, they could just wave a finger and make the Willis for BJ Szymanski + Cash Considerations deal a reality.

It's fair to say it's going to be difficult, but to make silly hyberbolic remarks like the above is to buy into the self-defeating mindset of this franchise and fanbase.

It's couched as "realistic" in its "tut-tutting" moderateness, but really it's just excuse-making and incuriosity.

Contending for the NL Central crown, at the very least, is completely realistic and achingly attainable.

Falls City Beer
12-21-2006, 03:27 PM
I think it's a larger picture issue. Frankly part of what they're dealing with locally is a general malaise in the region particularly as it relates to the city and especially downtown. I think they've got some potential fans who are skittish about coming downtown and the Reds aren't alone in that. It's important to have a decent team on the field to counteract that impression. I think that's partly the reason Bob C. moved into the Banks project group. GABP is part of an island down there without that.

Now, that's not the only thing going on, but it's also an issue. We've been coming out from under two horrid ownership groups who have placed this franchise behind the 8-ball. Scouting, developing, marketing all need major repairs.

This is all great, well, and good, but frankly, it's akin to saying: "well, the team needs to consider that they have to have three bags, a homeplate, and green grass to play baseball in Cincinnati."

No kidding. Really? The team needs to improve the off-field infrastructure?

Pshaw. There's a revelation.

Look. I get it. But what exactly does the farm, scouting, marketing have to do with the price of tea in China? The lion's share of all Reds' fans don't want to hear about the stuff that is a given for a successful franchise (scouting, marketing, et al), they want their MLB not to play like dogcrap. If they want the reciprocity of the ticket dollar feeding the farm system, they can't let the MLB product rot for 5 years while they fix the other stuff. It just doesn't work that way. It never has.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 03:31 PM
The lion's share of all Reds' fans don't want to hear about the stuff that is a given for a successful franchise (scouting, marketing, et al), they want their MLB not to play like dogcrap.

Pshaw. There's a revelation. :p:

Falls City Beer
12-21-2006, 03:42 PM
Pshaw. There's a revelation. :p:

One thing I can applaud ownership for is that they haven't trotted out the "we gotta fix the other stuff first" argument; lucky for them, they've already got lieutenants on the ground to take care of that for them.

On April 1st, when the team isn't substantively better, I'm sure many of you will be dragging this argument out of the mothballs again.

Ron Madden
12-21-2006, 03:45 PM
Very interesting discussion within this thread. :thumbup:

M2
12-21-2006, 04:12 PM
Sure it can happen, the model that I see being used in the 1988 Orioles that turned into the 1989 Orioles. Team defense, a couple of good bats, a workable BP and a weak field of competition.

Bad example. The Orioles made some real nice under-the-radar moves that winter. They got Phil Bradley for Ken Howell, Mike Devereaux for Mike Morgan and Randy Milligan for nothing. Bradley was one of the more underrated players in the game, steady bat with a good glove and some speed.

Brady Anderson had been acquired the previous summer and Fruit Loops Tettleton was poised to get more ABs. Prospects like Steve Finley and Craig Worthington were coming up too. Worthington didn't pan out (though he had a solid rookie season), but Finley was the real deal. The Orioles went from an OF of Joe Orsulak, Fred Lynn and Ken Gerhart in '88 to Orsulak being part of a solid five-man crew in '89.

On the pitching side, Pete Harnisch and Bob Milacki were coming up for their first serious work, joining Jeff Ballard to form a young rotation. Gregg Olson turned out to be one of the quickest draft payoffs in history and Brian Holton was a fairly well-regarded arm pickup, coming off what turned out to be a career season with the Dodgers (and he came with Juan Bell, who was one of those famously overrated Dodgers middle IF prospects).

Anyway, the thing the Orioles had in spades heading in '89 was change. They didn't throw a fresh coat of paint on their ever-collapsing house, they blew it up and built a new one.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 04:18 PM
Bad example. The Orioles made some real nice under-the-radar moves that winter. I'm speaking more in theory of their team direction, higher premium on defense after a couple miserable years of really bad defense. However Finley and Anderson both OPS's in the low 600's (that would be a slam fest here) but they could catch the ball, and Deveraux was a late off season pick up, so maybe aside from Jeff Conine the Reds can find something like that later in the off season.

M2
12-21-2006, 04:25 PM
Look. I get it. But what exactly does the farm, scouting, marketing have to do with the price of tea in China? The lion's share of all Reds' fans don't want to hear about the stuff that is a given for a successful franchise (scouting, marketing, et al), they want their MLB not to play like dogcrap. If they want the reciprocity of the ticket dollar feeding the farm system, they can't let the MLB product rot for 5 years while they fix the other stuff. It just doesn't work that way. It never has.

Exactly.

Time is exactly what this franchise doesn't have. It could probably sell the fanbase on a major rebuild once, as that card hasn't been played in previous years. Yet, barring that, the pressure is on, rightly so, to deliver a winner.

M2
12-21-2006, 04:37 PM
I'm speaking more in theory of their team direction, higher premium on defense after a couple miserable years of really bad defense. However Finley and Anderson both OPS's in the low 600's (that would be a slam fest here) but they could catch the ball, and Deveraux was a late off season pick up, so maybe aside from Jeff Conine the Reds can find something like that later in the off season.

Well, as we approach 2007, it's going to have to be later in the offseason for big changes to take place.

As I recall, the Orioles made a decision to get younger more than anything else. They'd suffered through a pile of disappointing seasons with plodding veteran teams and things like defense and speed were a natural outcropping of the youth movement. Though, more importantly, what the Orioles realized was that change requires actually bringing in new faces.

They could aspire to being different than the previous few seasons because they were a completely different team. The Reds haven't nearly made the kind of changes to warrant that kind of outlook.

westofyou
12-21-2006, 04:42 PM
They could aspire to being different than the previous few seasons because they were a completely different team. The Reds haven't nearly made the kind of changes to warrant that kind of outlook.

In many ways that's very true, but the IF defense this season will prove to be much better then the last five is my guess. Can they shave off more then 1/3rd of a run? Probably not with all the FB starters, but it should help the relief since so many of them rely on GB.

Spring~Fields
12-21-2006, 05:17 PM
When I look at all the moves that Krivsky made last year... whether one agrees with them all or not.... I'm sure he and his staff are doing quite a bit "behind the scenes".

I kind of wish that he would do less after seeing all his moves.

Moeller, Hamilton, Livingston, Crosby, Conine

These the kind of moves that you are referring to?

guttle11
12-21-2006, 05:21 PM
I kind of wish that he would do less after seeing all his moves.

Moeller, Hamilton, Livingston, Crosby, Conine

These the kind of moves that you are referring to?

And Arroyo, Phillps, and Ross.

And all the players you mentioned have yet to play one game for the Reds. Calling them good, bad, or anything else is premature.

The true tale of the Reds offseason will not be told until well after the season begins.

Spring~Fields
12-21-2006, 05:28 PM
And Arroyo, Phillps, and Ross.

And all the players you mentioned have yet to play one game for the Reds. Calling them good, bad, or anything else is premature.

The true tale of the Reds offseason will not be told until well after the season begins.

Your welcome to your views. I seem to think that those players have a history and it is not much of one though, well some could claim ancient history.

guttle11
12-21-2006, 05:31 PM
Your welcome to your views. I seem to think that those players have a history and it is not much of one though, well some could claim ancient history.

They said teh same thing about Phillips and Ross. A change of scenary and a change of coaching style can do wonders.

Will any of these guys make the Reds WS contenders? No. Can they contribute and add to the success of the team? Absolutely.

Spring~Fields
12-21-2006, 05:39 PM
They said teh same thing about Phillips and Ross. A change of scenary and a change of coaching style can do wonders.

Will any of these guys make the Reds WS contenders? No. Can they contribute and add to the success of the team? Absolutely.

Will the Reds win more games than they lose in 2007 ?

guttle11
12-21-2006, 05:41 PM
Will the Reds win more games than they lose in 2007 ?

No one on planet Earth can definitely answer that right now.

Spring~Fields
12-21-2006, 05:43 PM
No one on planet Earth can definitely answer that right now.

I can, I can ;) These stats guys on Redszone do great work and I read them religously.


"Smile"

Smile though your heart is aching
Smile even though it's breaking
When there are clouds in the sky, you'll get by
If you smile through your fear and sorrow
Smile and maybe tomorrow
You'll see the sun come shining through for you

Light up your face with gladness
Hide every trace of sadness
Although a tear may be ever so near
That's the time you must keep on trying
Smile, what's the use of crying?
You'll find that life is still worthwhile
If you just smile

That's the time you must keep on trying
Smile, what's the use of crying?
You'll find that life is still worthwhile
If you just smile

Bigredfan#1
12-23-2006, 10:45 AM
I still think the Kearns/Lopez trade was utterly ridiculous!! I think Kearns alone or Lopez alone for the group they got would have been over paying. I could have swallowed one but both!! I thought K was going to be OK but now I am really beginning to question whether he has the baseball sense to run the REDS. Had hopes with the new owner but now.... not so sure!!