PDA

View Full Version : Dayn Perry's GM Rankings......Krivsky 28th



Redhook
01-22-2007, 08:18 AM
This winter's round of signings and trades are, for the most part, over and done with. So the time for assessment has arrived.

It's not hard to find opinions on how each team's general manager has fared throughout the most recent Hot Stove season, but we're going to widen the scope a bit. What follows are the "GM Rankings" for MLB's current crop of top executives. The rankings are, of course, highly subjective, and they're based mostly on each GM's tenure with his current team (although, for those GMs who have toiled elsewhere we'll give minor consideration to their entire bodies of work).
So let's light this candle …

1. John Schuerholz, Braves
On the job since … October 1990
Playoff appearances: 14

The peerless GM running the peerless organization, so there's really no argument here. Schuerholz has, of course, won consistently and convincingly, and he's also managed to maintain a generally strong farm system over the years.

2. Walt Jocketty, Cardinals
On the job since … October 1994
Playoff appearances: 7

No GM is better at pulling off the big trade. Since coming to St. Louis, Jocketty has executed one-sided deals for players like Mark McGwire, Jim Edmonds, Scott Rolen, Edgar Renteria, Woody Williams, Mike Timlin, Darryl Kile, Larry Walker, Dennis Eckersley, Fernandos Vina and Tatis and Chuck Finley, among others.

3. Terry Ryan, Twins
On the job since … September 1994
Playoff appearances: 4

Billy Beane gets most of the ink when it comes to small-market success stories, but Ryan's work has been even more impressive. Under Ryan, the Twins have cultivated a tremendous eye for amateur talent and knack for identifying (and nabbing) projectable prospects in other organizations.

4. Billy Beane, A's
On the job since …October 1997
Playoff appearances: 5

Tight budget, much success. Now he's done it without two-thirds of the "Big Three" in the rotation, and the A's have finally won a playoff series.

5. Theo Epstein, Red Sox
On the job since … November 2002
Playoff appearances: 3

Epstein works with tremendous payroll flexibility, but he also does a fine job of vetting the "freely available talent" markets (see: Papi, Big). Under Epstein, the Sox have the occasional weakness for conspicuous consumption, but on the whole they've been quite successful since he took over.

6. Dave Dombrowski, Tigers
On the job since … October 2002
Playoff appearances: 1

Under Dombrowski, the Tigers have become one of most daring teams in baseball when the amateur draft comes around. They won the pennant last season, and with all those power arms in the system they're not going anywhere.

7. Kevin Towers, Padres
On the job since … November 1995
Playoff appearances: 4

He's in a class with Beane and Ryan in terms of succeeding without loosened purse strings. The difference is that Towers has been doing it for years. For the first time in franchise history, the Pads have reeled off three straight winning seasons.

8. Kenny Williams, White Sox
On the job since … October 2000
Playoff appearances: 1

Five years ago, Williams would've been near the bottom of this list. No exec in recent memory has evolved to such a degree. He identifies weaknesses and addresses them efficiently, and he often deals from a position of strength on the trade market.


The Mets' Omar Minaya and the Braves' John Schuerholz are trying to one-up each other in the NL East. (Rich Pilling/MLB / Getty Images)

9. Omar Minaya, Mets
On the job since …September 2004
Playoff appearances: 1

Minaya trusts his youngsters and does well in terms of identifying premium talent and filling holes on the roster. He's also made the Mets the destination for Latin talent. Let's also not forget the solid work he did under impossible circumstances with Montreal.

10. Larry Beinfest, Marlins
On the job since … February 2002
Playoff appearances: 1

Perhaps the most underrated operator in the game today. Beinfest has a World Series ring, and he did a tremendous job of trading off vets for young talent at the behest of Jeffrey Loria.

11. Brian Cashman, Yankees
On the job since … February 1998
Playoff appearances: 9

It's difficult to know which decisions Cashman is making and which are dictated to him from on high. The Yankees have won and won often on his watch, but those limitless coffers have more than a little to do with that.

12. Bill Stoneman, Angels
On the job since … November 1999
Playoff appearances: 3

Stoneman makes seriously questionable contract decisions from time to time (e.g., Darin Erstad, Gary Matthews Jr.), but there's no questioning the overall success he's had.

13. Mark Shapiro, Indians
On the job since … November 2001
Playoff appearances: 0

Outstanding job assembling the young talent that's now in place. Occasionally gets desperate in the search for relievers and is overly loyal to Eric Wedge. Still, the Tribe's poised for a nice run in the brutal AL Central.

14. Doug Melvin, Brewers
On the job since …September 2002
Playoff appearances: 0

Never deserved to be fired at Texas. Brewers farm system improved under Melvin, and they're now darkhorse contenders in the NL Central.

15. Pat Gillick, Phillies
On the job since … November 2005
Playoff appearances: 0

Since leaving Toronto, Gillick's success has mostly been a matter of good timing. Poor track record of building farm systems, but a capable "win now" exec.

16. Josh Byrnes, Diamondbacks
On the job since … November 2005
Playoff appearances: 0

Too early to make any lasting judgments about Byrnes, but he's one of the brightest young GMs in the game today. Nice work seamlessly integrating the wealth of young talent. Javier Vazquez trade was a masterstoke.

17. Brian Sabean, Giants
On the job since … September 1996
Playoff appearances: 4

The Giants have won a pennant and three division titles under Sabean, but his neglect of the farm system and his willingness to part with the few prospects the Giants have developed are not to his credit. Neither is his undying fondness for decline-phase veterans.

18. Tim Purpura, Astros
On the job since …November 2004
Playoff appearances: 1

The ‘Stros have won a pennant under Purpura, but Gerry Hunsicker's fingerprints were all over that team. He's done little to distinguish himself, but he's kept Houston in the competitive fray. Purpura, like Towers, Epstein and Cashman, is skilled at blending statistical and traditional methods of evaluating talent. Long-term, he should become one of the game's best.

19. Dayton Moore, Royals
On the job since … June 2006
Playoff appearances: 0

Moore has made some nifty additions during his brief tenure, but the trade of Andy Sisco for yet another DH/corner defender type was highly dubious. Lots of work ahead in a ruthlessly tough division, but elite talents like Alex Gordon and Billy Butler are on the way.

20. J.P. Ricciardi, Blue Jays
On the job since … November 2001
Playoff appearances: 0

Last season, the Jays finished higher than third place for the first time 1993. He's made the organization more efficient, but the farm system has foundered badly under him, mostly because of his college-heavy drafts. Ricciardi's social skills and media savvy also leave much to be desired.

21. Ned Colletti, Dodgers
On the job since … November 2005
Playoff appearances: 1

The Dodgers netted a playoff appearance in Colletti's first season, but in the process he traded away a number of high-ceiling prospects. He learned his craft under Sabean, so the "prospects are bargaining chits" mentality was heavily inculcated.

22. Andrew Friedman, Devil Rays
On the job since … November 2005
Playoff appearances: 0

Very little track record to go on, but so far Friedman has failed where Chuck LaMar failed — in finding pitching. That's the challenge going forward.

23. Jon Daniels, Rangers
On the job since … October 2005
Playoff appearances:

Daniels has done some good things, but he's betrayed a questionable eye for pitching. The Rangers' front office needs to understand that groundball pitchers are a necessity, and chasing the likes of Barry Zito (thankfully for Texas he signed elsewhere) is not defensible. He also took the short end of the Alfonso Soriano trade with D.C.

24. Jim Bowden, Nationals
On the job since … October 2004
Playoff appearances: 0

Bowden is the depth and breadth of inconsistency. He's occasionally brilliant on the trade market (see immediately above and below), but he's a poor evaluator when it comes to signing upper-tier free agents.

25. Jim Hendry, Cubs
On the job since … July 2002
Playoff appearances: 1

Hendry was brilliant as a scouting director, but he's woefully overmatched as a GM. He's failed to identify pitchers well suited to work in Wrigley, and that trend continued this winter. Hendry's now operating with a high payroll, but it's not likely to make much of a difference.

26. Mike Flanagan, Orioles
On the job since …December 2002
Playoff appearances: 0

The O's these days aren't as miserable as they're often made out to be, and the farm system is improving. However, the pointless — and expensive — patch job remains the hallmark of this once-proud organization. Flanagan has the smarts, but he lacks the autonomy to run the organization his way.

27. Dave Littlefield, Pirates
On the job since … July 2001
Playoff appearances: 0

If you haven't had a winning season in almost 15 years, then you'd at least hope the farm system is brimming. That's not the case with Littlefield and the Pirates. In particular, he's done a poor job managing his 40-man roster in advance of the Rule 5 Draft. There's no discernible plan in Pittsburgh.

28. Wayne Krivsky, Reds
On the job since … February 2006
Playoff appearances: 0

Krivsky hasn't been in Cincy for very long, but he's already done damage. In particular, the 2006 trade that sent Austin Kearns, Felipe Lopez and Ryan Wagner to the Nationals in exchange for Bill Bray, Gary Majewski, Royce Clayton, Brandan Harris and Daryl Thompson was, from Cincy's perspective, one of the worst trades of the decade. Like a lot of GMs whose teams toil in hitter-friendly parks, Krivsky acts out of desperation when trying to find pitching.
29. Dan O'Dowd, Rockies
On the job since … September 1999
Playoff appearances: 0

One of the modern world's great mysteries is how O'Dowd is still employed as a Major League GM. He discards prevailing strategies like used tissue, and the farm system has churned out precious little on his watch. He's the guy who gave Mike Hampton the 15th-largest contract in sports history and signed Todd Helton through 2011. ‘Nuff said.

30. Bill Bavasi, Mariners
On the job since … November 2003
Playoff appearances: 0

No GM is worse when it comes to identifying free-agent targets, and on the trade market he's also played a little fast and loose with the organizational depth. He'll leave the M's as an organization that's in demonstrably worse shape than when he arrived.

Personally, I don't care much for Dayn Perry, but it's hard to argue his point in this General Manager ranking. Obviously, the trade hasn't been too successful to date, but would the Reds be that much better right now if we had one of the top GM's?

Krivsky is in a difficult situation in Cincinnati. The roster and minor leagues are thin. The budget still limits major signings. I guess my major complaint would be there is no direction with this team. I thought Krivsky had a plan when he took over, and after the trade when he freed up some extra money, but at this point, "his plan" has yet to surface.....or, was there ever a plan? It appears to me, that he had an idea of what he wanted to do, but things haven't transpired (lack of patience?) like he thought and now he's stuck in transition.

HumnHilghtFreel
01-22-2007, 08:41 AM
Krivsky is in a difficult situation in Cincinnati. The roster and minor leagues are thin. The budget still limits major signings. I guess my major complaint would be there is no direction with this team. I thought Krivsky had a plan when he took over, and after the trade when he freed up some extra money, but at this point, "his plan" has yet to surface.....or, was there ever a plan? It appears to me, that he had an idea of what he wanted to do, but things haven't transpired (lack of patience?) like he thought and now he's stuck in transition.

They way I look at it, the "plan" isn't for 07, but for 08 and beyond. Use the money freed up to lock down Harang. Tread water with some of the older guys signed until the likes of Bailey, Votto, Bruce, etc. are up and then try to make significant signings in the FA market.

Maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part though.

Unassisted
01-22-2007, 08:48 AM
The major reason for the low ranking appears to be a trade which looked awful in '06, but could look better this year or next. The reviewer also conveniently overlooks the positive moves, like the trade for Phillips.

MrCinatit
01-22-2007, 08:52 AM
Being ranked below guys who have been doing their jobs longer - yet helm teams which have yet to see a ray of playoff hope - pretty much negates any bit of realism in this ranking.

Crosley68
01-22-2007, 09:16 AM
I agree MrCinatit, especially behind Littlefield. I think the LaRoche deal is going to turn out well, but there has been some real bonehead moves in the past 6 years there. Compairing one lousy trade to 6 years of mistakes is poor execution at best and biased at worst.

DaReds22
01-22-2007, 09:25 AM
I agree with this post krivisky is a horible Gm he has done nothing but hurt the Reds. The only person he has brought in that helped the reds was Guardado and he got hurt at the end when we needed him.

HumnHilghtFreel
01-22-2007, 09:29 AM
I agree with this post krivisky is a horible Gm he has done nothing but hurt the Reds. The only person he has brought in that helped the reds was Guardado and he got hurt at the end when we needed him.

Arroyo, Phillips, Ross... those guys had little impact, I know, but give the man a chance... he might just get one right one of these times:)

redsfan30
01-22-2007, 09:31 AM
I agree with this post krivisky is a horible Gm he has done nothing but hurt the Reds. The only person he has brought in that helped the reds was Guardado and he got hurt at the end when we needed him.

Yeah....David Ross, Bronson Arroyo, Brandon Phillips and Scott Hatteberg did nothing to help the team last year.

:rolleyes:

westofyou
01-22-2007, 09:34 AM
Bob Howsam tried to make bad trades for the Cardinals, it was the main reason they let him walk, I guess Dayne didn't have any basketball to write about.

Lesson to me, no one is perfect and not one traded defines your regime (however short it may be)

http://www.deadballart.com/redszone/how1.gif

Danny Serafini
01-22-2007, 09:37 AM
Putting the Royals at 19 and D-Rays at 22 removed all legitimacy from this list.

Falls City Beer
01-22-2007, 09:44 AM
Bob Howsam tried to make bad trades for the Cardinals, it was the main reason they let him walk, I guess Dayne didn't have any basketball to write about.

Lesson to me, no one is perfect and not one traded defines your regime (however short it may be)

http://www.deadballart.com/redszone/how1.gif

No, but the Milton acquisition defined the DanO era, fair or not. One deal can kill a gm, but we'll never know if it was deserved or not in the majority of the cases because it wasn't long after that said GM got canned.

westofyou
01-22-2007, 09:48 AM
No, but the Milton acquisition defined the DanO era, fair or not. One deal can kill a gm, but we'll never know if it was deserved or not in the majority of the cases because it wasn't long after that said GM got canned.

If you sit on your hands for years and only go out and buy a package of ham and no bread, cheese or mustard then yes it can.

But Dan O'Brien had 28 months, Krivsky is closing in on 12... so I suggest we sit back and watch.

paulrichjr
01-22-2007, 09:53 AM
Putting the Royals at 19 and D-Rays at 22 removed all legitimacy from this list.

This is GM rankings and the Royals GM is new on the job so I understand him being ranked close to where he was. (Except maybe that free agent signing (Meche) he made this winter..what was it...20 years and $300 million or something like that. JK)

Danny Serafini
01-22-2007, 10:08 AM
That's the thing, your one big deal is a horrible, horrible contract and you get ranked ahead of 11 other GMs? That's nonsense.

Ltlabner
01-22-2007, 10:43 AM
No, but the Milton acquisition defined the DanO era, fair or not. One deal can kill a gm, but we'll never know if it was deserved or not in the majority of the cases because it wasn't long after that said GM got canned.

The Milton deal was a major part of DanO's reputation FCB, but I think his overall inactivity (execept for largley bad moves when he finally did something), combined with LaRue and Wilsons contracts + Sean Casey's trade also played a major role in the overall view of his ragime.

I don't think it's accurate to say DanO is soley defined by one trade.

bucksfan2
01-22-2007, 10:47 AM
Look what Krivsky had to work with. 3 of the biggest contracts the reds had were and aging superstar, a pitcher who couldn't keep the ball in the park, and a catcher who couldn't hit the ball to save his life. He took over a poorley constructed team to say the least. While I didn't like the trade last season I will give him the benefit of the doubt until he builds his own club. The one thing I do not like about him is why he is bring back Narron for another season.

This is a big year for Krivsky. If the reds go though the entire year with a losing record and still have the likes of Dunn, Jr., Freel, Hatte, Conine, and Arroyo on the team I will begin to lose faith. Sooner or later this team needs to be blown up and started over again.

redsmetz
01-22-2007, 10:53 AM
I'm not familiar with this pundit, but he strikes me as a lightweight (being from Fox isn't a ringing endorsement in my book) - in a list of MLB's top 100 prospects, he only ranked Homer Bailey and then only at 91st - I know our system isn't the best, but I'd think Bailey would rank higher than that and we might have some other prospect or another who could be ranked in the top 100 of 2006.

Redsland
01-22-2007, 10:53 AM
While I didn't like the trade last season I will give him the benefit of the doubt until he builds his own club.
He's made 40 transactions. This team is his.

Ltlabner
01-22-2007, 10:55 AM
He's made 40 transactions. This team is his.

While I agree he's made a ton of transactions, he's still saddled with the Jr and Milton contracts. Neither of which were his doing.

I don't know how much leeway that grants him, but in my book it gives him some.

Redsland
01-22-2007, 11:01 AM
Correction: He's acquired 48 players, not 40.

Milton is movable. Griffey is productive and affordable, particularly in light of the deferred money.

forfreelin04
01-22-2007, 11:21 AM
Correction: He's acquired 48 players, not 40.

Milton is movable. Griffey is productive and affordable, particularly in light of the deferred money.


I've heard this Milton is movable for sometime now. Who exactly wants him? Unless they reconstruct the Polo Grounds in some major league city, I sincerely doubt there is much interest.

I think Milton's problems are well documented. But I think it will be telling in the Dick Pole era of pitching whether or not he can make Milton into just an average major league pitcher. I for one, think he needs to disguise his pitches more often and start to throw inside. Perhaps, a a simple altercation in his windup and throwing his fastball in on the hands will be the ticket. If you notice and this is just one example of the many, but the Batters that typically feast on Milty are the big boppers. Derek Lee for instance, actually scoots up to the plate to hit Milton. He's practically ON the plate. This way his entire bat covers well more than just the outside corner. This positioning allows Lee to see the outside corner so much better. Then he can see exactly when the ball is outside of the zone and when the ball is coming back towards the plate. By doing this, Lee and others can really unload on Milton like batting practice. It would be kinda like seeing the ball coming with a magnifying glass. You just see it so much clearer. Thus, Multon's intimidation factor is nothing! Perhaps, he needs a change of mentality. Start throwing at some heads and get the batter thinking he's in charge. I mean it couldnt hurt!

westofyou
01-22-2007, 11:31 AM
I'm not familiar with this pundit, but he strikes me as a lightweight (being from Fox isn't a ringing endorsement in my book) - in a list of MLB's top 100 prospects, he only ranked Homer Bailey and then only at 91st - I know our system isn't the best, but I'd think Bailey would rank higher than that and we might have some other prospect or another who could be ranked in the top 100 of 2006.

Perry is not a lightweight, by any means. A former BP writer who is pretty good with statistical analysis and the like. This piece seems tossed off IMO.

TRF
01-22-2007, 11:45 AM
If you sit on your hands for years and only go out and buy a package of ham and no bread, cheese or mustard then yes it can.

But Dan O'Brien had 28 months, Krivsky is closing in on 12... so I suggest we sit back and watch.

I'd argue Krivsky did more damage in 12 months than DanO did in 28. But Krivsky seems to get a bye because he is "active".

His FA signings are curious to say the least. He favors vets over the age of 37. How many FA's did he sign that were under 37?

His trades are perplexing. And no, I won't mention The Trade. He trades for guys with injury clouds over their heads. He shuffles his roster to acquire players at the same talent level that he DFA's to get said player. His first draft choice was almost universally panned. He's seems obsessed with loading the bullpen with guys that never had a peak, ranging from just bad to awful. But at least he buys in bulk.

He has yet to address the biggest need this club has: a SP to go along with Harang and Arroyo.

And if it weren't for the 2 bozos at 29 and 30, I could see him as coming in dead last.

Arroyo, Ross and Phillips were excellent acquisitions. But in retrospect...

Ross was dumb luck. No way he was projected to be anything more than insurance for LaRue. He overachieved. I hope he does it again.

Phillips was a no brainer for a club with no real option at 2B. And Cleveland is all the dumber for having let him go.

Arroyo, well I thought the Reds sold WMP low, and I still think that. But I could have lived with it had Krivsky not decided to dismantle half the offense. WMP is poised for a breakout year. All he needs are AB's. No one really knows the health status of Drew. If Pena can get 400 AB's, he'll be a starter in 2008. And he'll post monster numbers. But for the Reds, Arroyo was definitely what the doctor ordered AT THE TIME. The Reds needed a second starter to complement Harang. And now the Reds have one of the best 1-2 starters in the league if not all MLB. So Krivsky gets a gold star for this one.

westofyou
01-22-2007, 11:48 AM
I'd argue Krivsky did more damage in 12 months than DanO did in 28. That would quite the argument. I'd say one season under his belt hardly is a fair comparison.

And that's a no-brainer IMO.

Falls City Beer
01-22-2007, 11:48 AM
I'd argue Krivsky did more damage in 12 months than DanO did in 28. But Krivsky seems to get a bye because he is "active".

.

Krivsky gets a bye because he came in on the heels of the palace coup (Cast replacing Lindner), and both Cast and Krivsky talk a good game.

That's pretty much it. Merit is only a minor consideration.

Heath
01-22-2007, 11:50 AM
I've heard this Milton is movable for sometime now. Who exactly wants him? Unless they reconstruct the Polo Grounds in some major league city, I sincerely doubt there is much interest.

He would have sucked worse in Polo Grounds where it was 248 in left and 257 in Right.

Now, Hilltop Park in Manhattan (where the Highlanders played) had dimensions of 365 in left, 542 in Center and 400 in Right. I think Eric Milton could have been an AL-All Star in 1904 with Jack Chesbro.

:p:

westofyou
01-22-2007, 11:51 AM
WMP is poised for a breakout year.

And Arroyo just led the team in Win Shares and just had the 5th best Reds season vs the league in ERA since World War 2


CINCINNATI REDS
SEASON
1945-2006

ERA YEAR DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE
1 Ewell Blackwell 1947 1.60 2.47 4.07
2 Tom Seaver 1977 1.57 2.34 3.91
3 Jose Rijo 1993 1.56 2.48 4.05
4 Gary Nolan 1972 1.46 1.99 3.46
5 Bronson Arroyo 2006 1.20 3.29 4.49
6 Jose Rijo 1991 1.18 2.51 3.69
7 Ewell Blackwell 1950 1.18 2.97 4.14
8 Jose Rijo 1994 1.14 3.08 4.22
9 Bob Purkey 1962 1.13 2.81 3.94
10 Bucky Walters 1945 1.12 2.68 3.80

Ltlabner
01-22-2007, 12:00 PM
I'd argue Krivsky did more damage in 12 months than DanO did in 28. But Krivsky seems to get a bye because he is "active".

Krivsky gets a "bye" because some people started carping on him 4 months into the job. Oh yea, and he took over an orginization that has been in various degrees of neglect since the 80's. And oh yea, he's been on the job for 1 whole year. And most people have pointed out his flaws as well as his pros.

I'd argue that we are running in place over the past 12 months (or slightly improved). Some really good moves, some bad moves and some moves that are just plain head scratchers.

He's leaned on older, less expensive players to try to reduce the risk of another burdensome contract or blocking some of the up and comming prospects. Also, having fairly expendable guys means if a great deal pops up he doesn't have to pass because player X is penciled in the line up for the next 7 years.

That said, he's gone overboard on snaching up older, experienced players IMO. But the same time we are protecting the youth movement. Dunn signed to LTC. EE is the 3B for 2007. Phillips at 2B. Prospects in the minors not rushed for short term gain. So again, a wash.

But I don't see how building the best 1-2 rotation in most of MLB, setting up solid up the middle IF defense, establishing EE/BP as everyday players and building a mediocre to servicable bullpen can be qualified as "damaging" the team.

westofyou
01-22-2007, 12:02 PM
He would have sucked worse in Polo Grounds where it was 248 in left and 257 in Right.

Now, Hilltop Park in Manhattan (where the Highlanders played) had dimensions of 365 in left, 542 in Center and 400 in Right. I think Eric Milton could have been an AL-All Star in 1904 with Jack Chesbro.

:p:
Milton would have learned the spitter then, it would have worked well with his love of the high fastball, as it is now nothing works very well.

edabbs44
01-22-2007, 12:22 PM
But I don't see how building the best 1-2 rotation in most of MLB, setting up solid up the middle IF defense, establishing EE/BP as everyday players and building a mediocre to servicable bullpen can be qualified as "damaging" the team.

If they players 2 games per week, then he has done a fine job. But you need more than 2 pitchers to compete. The drop from #2 to #3 could be one of the most drastic in the league.

Ltlabner
01-22-2007, 12:25 PM
If they players 2 games per week, then he has done a fine job. But you need more than 2 pitchers to compete. The drop from #2 to #3 could be one of the most drastic in the league.

I agree edabbs, and it's another example of a "wash" situation. Builds the best 1-2 punch but then it's katie-bar-the door after that. I'd of liked to have seen that mythical decent #3 pitcher brought to town also. Hopefully Wayne will find a way to get it done. If not, it's definaty a mark against him.

Heath
01-22-2007, 12:32 PM
WMP is poised for a breakout year,unless he gets hurt as much as Drew does.

TRF, I fixed one of your whoopses.

Jpup
01-22-2007, 01:20 PM
Any list that has Kenny Williams as anything above #20 is a joke IMO. Brain Sabean and Tim Purpura would also be way down the list and below Wayne Krivsky. Dayton Moore hasn't done anything in Kansas City worth mentioning in a positive way, I think that will change though. Ned Colletti is horrible in LA. Jim Bowden is the worst GM in baseball with maybe the exception of Bavasi. There is 6 guys that I would put Krivsky ahead of. Jim Hendry has proved that he knows how to spend money, but it doesn't look to me that he has done it the best way possible. We all know about Dave Littlefied in Pittsburgh, but he has done a nice job with developing the farm system up there.

It's way too early to be beating up Krivsky. If this list was made on opening day, I would be as upset with it. The winter isn't over.

C'mon Ken Williams? Ned Colleti?

fearofpopvol1
01-22-2007, 01:27 PM
There is no way that 12 months is enough time to farily judge. He made some good trades and he made a trade that seemingly wasn't favorable. At least he is active. DanO was scared to pull the trigger on anything. Kriv has a lot of money tied up in players that he had nothing to do with. I think he would gladly move Milton if the trade were right, but the Reds are thin on SP as it is and there aren't exactly a ton of options waiting in the wings.

Everyone can complain about Wayne all they want. However, he's between a rock and a hard place. The big issue Wayne faces is to gut out the team or not. The fans are restless and after a season that almost garnered a winning record last year, the bar is set even higher. However, the Reds cannot compete at this time with their farm system and the salary restrictions that are in place. So gutting out the team would likely not bring about a favorable response. It's such a tough predicament to be in, really. I do have faith that he does have a plan, but that it will take time for him to implement it. I could be wrong, but there is just something that makes me feel optimisitc.

Tom Servo
01-22-2007, 01:28 PM
Wow. Littlefield, Flanagan, AND JimBo all ahead of the Kriv? And the TB and KC GM's too? Sure the The Trade is looking like a pretty big flop but still this was a bad team going into last season and Wayne managed to get us 80 wins and a good playoff chance before the big collapse. I'm not one to defend Wayne on all fronts (seriously, Chad Moller) but he's better than this list gives him credit for.

TRF
01-22-2007, 01:56 PM
And Arroyo just led the team in Win Shares and just had the 5th best Reds season vs the league in ERA since World War 2


CINCINNATI REDS
SEASON
1945-2006

ERA YEAR DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE
1 Ewell Blackwell 1947 1.60 2.47 4.07
2 Tom Seaver 1977 1.57 2.34 3.91
3 Jose Rijo 1993 1.56 2.48 4.05
4 Gary Nolan 1972 1.46 1.99 3.46
5 Bronson Arroyo 2006 1.20 3.29 4.49
6 Jose Rijo 1991 1.18 2.51 3.69
7 Ewell Blackwell 1950 1.18 2.97 4.14
8 Jose Rijo 1994 1.14 3.08 4.22
9 Bob Purkey 1962 1.13 2.81 3.94
10 Bucky Walters 1945 1.12 2.68 3.80

Yup. Youve used this stat before i think when you ignore the part where I stated:


Arroyo was definitely what the doctor ordered AT THE TIME. The Reds needed a second starter to complement Harang. And now the Reds have one of the best 1-2 starters in the league if not all MLB. So Krivsky gets a gold star for this one.

However, he dismantled the offense, added dreck pitcher after dreck pitcher, made moves for the sake of making moves. I hated the move to get Guardado, and Mays and Franklin and Yan and Lohse.

His draft was certainly not inspiring. He has no eye for pitching. He seems to be a good negotiator. He's been lucky more than good, and IMO that assessment is a no-brainer.

redsmetz
01-22-2007, 02:04 PM
Perry is not a lightweight, by any means. A former BP writer who is pretty good with statistical analysis and the like. This piece seems tossed off IMO.

I'll defer to your familiarity with him. I was impressed with this piece and I only scanned the 100 top prospects articles from early last season. I'm still trying to pronounce his name Dan or Dane. :)

AdamDunn
01-22-2007, 05:58 PM
Krivisky's on my blacklist because he signed Alex Gonzalez for a lot of money even though his bad is a liability, the players we drafted haven't looked so great, he keeps adding old guys to the bullpen, and Johnny Almaraz left the system because of him... at least DanO could do the draft right.

But then, yet again, Arroyo, Phillips, and Hatte all turned out alright.

I think he can redeem himself with this years draft, or he can plung himself into an abyss. So I'll just wait and see.

vaticanplum
01-22-2007, 08:14 PM
I see almost zero possibility of moving Milton with his current contract. He could possibly add something to some poor team's back of the rotation or bullpen, but no poor team will take on that money. And the teams that can afford him won't want him.

Will M
01-22-2007, 09:21 PM
April 2009 is the time to be judging Krisky. By then he will have been on the job 3 years, been through 3 drafts & had time to get out of Milton's and Griffey's contracts.

He inherited a team with minimal defense and pitching, 2 BAD contracts and a weak AA/AAA. One year on the job is too soon to be judging him.

Falls City Beer
01-22-2007, 09:27 PM
April 2009 is the time to be judging Krisky. By then he will have been on the job 3 years, been through 3 drafts & had time to get out of Milton's and Griffey's contracts.

He inherited a team with minimal defense and pitching, 2 BAD contracts and a weak AA/AAA. One year on the job is too soon to be judging him.

Were you in favor of giving DanO another year?

TRF
01-22-2007, 09:45 PM
Were you in favor of giving DanO another year?


I wouldn't have, but then I'd have never hired him in the first place. not for the GM position. I'd have thrown a truckload of money at Depodesta.

M2
01-22-2007, 09:59 PM
Even if Krivsky were the 28th-best GM in baseball that would still put him two slots ahead of where DanO was.

Also, Jim Hendry's an awful GM. Jon Daniels made two, count 'em two, horrible trades in his first year and punting Chris Young and Adrian Gonzalez ranks equal with the Kearns/Lopez punt.

Jpup
01-23-2007, 01:35 AM
Even if Krivsky were the 28th-best GM in baseball that would still put him two slots ahead of where DanO was.

Also, Jim Hendry's an awful GM. Jon Daniels made two, count 'em two, horrible trades in his first year and punting Chris Young and Adrian Gonzalez ranks equal with the Kearns/Lopez punt.

equal? I think that would be worse. far worse.

jmcclain19
01-23-2007, 02:13 AM
Bill Bavasi is by far the worst GM in baseball, and it's not even close, at least Perry got that right.

Ron Madden
01-23-2007, 02:53 AM
Dan O' had to work for Carl Lindner & John Allen. (that's not a good thing)
O'Brien made his share of mistakes but he also drafted some young talent.

Wayne works for Bob. (big difference) Wayne came in with both guns ablaze.
His first few moves worked out very well.

IMHO Wayne hasn't made a move to improve our chances of winning since the spring or early summer of 2006. I hope the Gonzales deal works out, I really do.

I'm not an O'Brien Fan at all. I Just fail to see the reasoning behind all the love and excuses for Wayne and all of the blame and hatred towards Dan'O.

Jpup
01-23-2007, 04:12 AM
Dan O' had to work for Carl Lindner & John Allen. (that's not a good thing)
O'Brien made his share of mistakes but he also drafted some young talent.

Wayne works for Bob. (big difference) Wayne came in with both guns ablaze.
His first few moves worked out very well.

IMHO Wayne hasn't made a move to improve our chances of winning since the spring or early summer of 2006. I hope the Gonzales deal works out, I really do.

I'm not an O'Brien Fan at all. I Just fail to see the reasoning behind all the love and excuses for Wayne and all of the blame and hatred towards Dan'O.

DanO didn't run the draft. I think he had little to do with any success the Reds had in the draft. DanO makes Krivsky look like a genius. Anybody would be better than O'brien.

Ltlabner
01-23-2007, 06:19 AM
Dan O' had to work for Carl Lindner & John Allen. (that's not a good thing)
O'Brien made his share of mistakes but he also drafted some young talent.

I'm not an O'Brien Fan at all. I Just fail to see the reasoning behind all the love and excuses for Wayne and all of the blame and hatred towards Dan'O.

So DanO's only problem was the interfearence from Linder and Allen? And I don't know how much credit for the draft I'd give him. Remember Johnny Almaraz was on the sceen then. Since some on RZ blew a gasket when he left I figure that he's soooo good that he had something to do with those drafts. So I don't think DanO gets sole credit for his drafts (some, certinally, but not all).

I think people give Wayne some leeway because (1) they are realistic and understand 15+ years of orginizational rot can't be undone in one whole year (2) because he has made some good moves, something DanO didn't do much of (3) There is some "tail coat" effect from BCasts taking the helm, we're going to win now, etc etc. (which is evaportating as reality sets in). (4) People can understand why you wouldn't want to invest a huge chunck of the teams payrol in a Gill Meche, Gary Mathews Jr, Juan Piere type contract in the current FA market.

I guess when you add that all together it means people aren't willing to freakout over every move, or run the man out of town because they don't agree with Wayne's each and every breath.

M2
01-23-2007, 08:09 AM
I'm not an O'Brien Fan at all. I Just fail to see the reasoning behind all the love and excuses for Wayne and all of the blame and hatred towards Dan'O.

Dan O'Brien was his own special bolgia of hell. Just one year after he left his legacy has boiled down to three draft picks. Krivsky has done better than DanO did. That's an objective statement. Though Krivsky's 2006-7 offseason has been DanOesque.

Puffy
01-23-2007, 10:07 AM
I think people give Wayne some leeway because (1) they are realistic and understand 15+ years of orginizational rot can't be undone in one whole year (2) because he has made some good moves, something DanO didn't do much of (3) There is some "tail coat" effect from BCasts taking the helm, we're going to win now, etc etc. (which is evaportating as reality sets in). (4) People can understand why you wouldn't want to invest a huge chunck of the teams payrol in a Gill Meche, Gary Mathews Jr, Juan Piere type contract in the current FA market.

I guess when you add that all together it means people aren't willing to freakout over every move, or run the man out of town because they don't agree with Wayne's each and every breath.

So I guess people like me who didn't want Wayne hired in the first place are stupid and unrealistic? Gee, thanks for telling me.

Once again, Reds fans settle for the old "Well, at least he's better than what we had"

Krusty
01-23-2007, 10:19 AM
Here's the thing....if Majewski and Bray rebound and put up solid seasons in 2007 how does the trade look then?

You see what Kearns and Lopez are asking for in arbitration and ask would they handcuff the Reds financially if the trade didn't happen? Lopez is shifting to second base in 2007. If he stayed in Cincy, would you have been comfortable with Lopez at second and Phillips at shortstop? Or are you more comfortable with Gonzalez at short and Phillips at second?

I'm waiting till after this season to judge the merits of the trade with Washington. I think Majewski and Bray will put up better numbers. At the same time, I think that Death Valley at RFK will hamper Kearns offensively and Lopez doesn't evolve into an allstar second baseman.

membengal
01-23-2007, 10:30 AM
I dream of days when the rankings of the Reds front office, on-field talent, and minor league talent don't always seem so correct when placed in the bottom fifth of the league.

Nothing WK has done to this point makes that kind of ranking incorrect. The trade was a huge gamble and failed. It was supposed to help them contend last year, by shoring up the pen, and instead made them worse offensively while the pen was still awful. If Maj wakes up from his coma and Bray develops, it will help, but still won't save that trade from being a full blown disaster. Plus, I, along with countless others, still think WK vastly undersold Kearns and Lopez. 28th sounds about right. It could arguably have been 30th.

redsmetz
01-23-2007, 10:42 AM
Here's the thing....if Majewski and Bray rebound and put up solid seasons in 2007 how does the trade look then?

You see what Kearns and Lopez are asking for in arbitration and ask would they handcuff the Reds financially if the trade didn't happen? Lopez is shifting to second base in 2007. If he stayed in Cincy, would you have been comfortable with Lopez at second and Phillips at shortstop? Or are you more comfortable with Gonzalez at short and Phillips at second?

I'm waiting till after this season to judge the merits of the trade with Washington. I think Majewski and Bray will put up better numbers. At the same time, I think that Death Valley at RFK will hamper Kearns offensively and Lopez doesn't evolve into an allstar second baseman.

I think your assessment is right. You really have to look at this trade with the players involved moving along a parallel. Only time will tell if the trade was an absolute disaster or whether it proves to be astute. It could well end up in the middle.

I understand the belief that it is a disaster, but only time will tell if that is true.

membengal
01-23-2007, 10:45 AM
Frankly, the trade is already a disaster because it hurt the team in the short term, instead of helping them, which it was supposed to do. That deal was about last year, in addition to the future. To pretend that last August and September didn't happen when evaluating that deal is disingenuous at best.

westofyou
01-23-2007, 11:00 AM
To pretend that last August and September didn't happen when evaluating that deal is disingenuous at best.

And to pretend that the Reds BP wasn't the reason the Reds tanked in June and had to be addressed somehow is what?

Denial?

membengal
01-23-2007, 11:04 AM
And to pretend that the Reds BP wasn't the reason the Reds tanked in June and had to be addressed somehow is what?

Denial?

Nope, but WOY, it is certainly at the agree to disagree point that the "cure" was necessary. And it is beyond dispute that the "cure" in fact made the patient sicker. I am positive that no amount of talk on this will change my mind that the value for Kearns and Lopez was dreckful or yours that it was worth a throw and may ultimately be the correct move.

But in the meantime, we are left with what we actually saw the Reds get and how those players performed. And they failed, in their first attempt to help the club. Pretty miserably.

Caveman Techie
01-23-2007, 12:35 PM
Do we have to go through this again? Wayne Krivsky is the devil...He's going to run this orginization into the ground...Felipe Lopez is the next A-Rod...Austin Kearns is going to be better than <insert HOF'er name here>...This trade was the worst thing since Boston traded the Babe.

Other side:

Give Wayne time...Bray is young and will be better...Majewski was hurt and Bowden lied...Bray and Maj are still under the Reds control for a long time...Felipe and Austin were going to make too much...Boras is the Devil.

Does that cover it all? Can we move on now?

TRF
01-23-2007, 01:17 PM
Nope, but WOY, it is certainly at the agree to disagree point that the "cure" was necessary. And it is beyond dispute that the "cure" in fact made the patient sicker. I am positive that no amount of talk on this will change my mind that the value for Kearns and Lopez was dreckful or yours that it was worth a throw and may ultimately be the correct move.

But in the meantime, we are left with what we actually saw the Reds get and how those players performed. And they failed, in their first attempt to help the club. Pretty miserably.

It hurt in both the short term and the long term. When guys like Alex Gonzales are getting 3 year 15 mil contracts on the FA market, how much could Kearns or even Lopez have been worth.

But to me the real questions have always been why trade both and what was the going rate for middle relievers? Was it Travis Chick or most of your offense. Was it Ward? Germano?

Krivsky panicked when the pen soured, but why did the pen sour? Looking at all the relief pitchers splits it was clear that Shackelford was a LH specialist. He was dominant against LH hitters. that was and probably always will be his role. Standridge was the same but against RH hitters... a ROOGY if you will. Narron misused his pen. badly. Shackelford struggled a bit in May, righted himself in June at Louisville. RH hitters killed him in 27 AB's, but LH hitters didn't do squat against him in 40 AB's.

And why exactly did Brad Salmon never get a single inning pitched in a Reds uniform? 11.24 K/9 and a WHIP of 1.09? Are you kidding me?

But I guess the only option when the pen goes sour is to gut the offense, then replace it with...

damn this still kills me.

redsmetz
01-23-2007, 01:20 PM
Do we have to go through this again? Wayne Krivsky is the devil...He's going to run this orginization into the ground...Felipe Lopez is the next A-Rod...Austin Kearns is going to be better than <insert HOF'er name here>...This trade was the worst thing since Boston traded the Babe.

Other side:

Give Wayne time...Bray is young and will be better...Majewski was hurt and Bowden lied...Bray and Maj are still under the Reds control for a long time...Felipe and Austin were going to make too much...Boras is the Devil.

Does that cover it all? Can we move on now?

Um, it's cold and dreary outside. It's about a month until Pitchers & Catchers report. No signings or trades today. Did I mention it's cold and dreary outside?

No, this is certainly more interesting than commenting on the cold and dreary weather outside. Yikes! I can't believe I just said that.

westofyou
01-23-2007, 01:29 PM
Bob Howsam came to the Reds with some baggage, some of it is strangely similar to complaints that follow Krivsky around.


http://www.deadballart.com/redszone/howt.gif

And it came on the heels of a hurtful trade that was still being paraded around in the press, causing more salt in the wounds of Reds fans.

MVP awards dinner January 1967


http://www.deadballart.com/redszone/robby1.gif

Ltlabner
01-23-2007, 01:33 PM
So I guess people like me who didn't want Wayne hired in the first place are stupid and unrealistic? Gee, thanks for telling me.

Once again, Reds fans settle for the old "Well, at least he's better than what we had"

No, as the sentence read, you are unrealistic if you think 15 years of orginziational rot can be undone in 12 months.

Had nothing to do with being stupid (which was your word, not in my original post) or whether or not he should have been hired (which wasn't even a subject of my post).

bottom_feeder
01-23-2007, 01:38 PM
. Though Krivsky's 2006-7 offseason has been DanOesque.

You mean you're not impressed with the Reds spending big bucks on Lohse, Gonzales, Stanton, Weathers, Hat, Castro, and Conine (and extending Cormier)?

Krivsky has had a horrible offseason. What a tremendous waste of money.
He had enough money to bring in one or two difference makers. Instead, he brought in a crowd of mediocrity that isn't going to make any difference at all, and won't even be very attractive to contending clubs at the trade deadline.

redsmetz
01-23-2007, 02:01 PM
You mean you're not impressed with the Reds spending big bucks on Lohse, Gonzales, Stanton, Weathers, Hat, Castro, and Conine (and extending Cormier)?

Krivsky has had a horrible offseason. What a tremendous waste of money.
He had enough money to bring in one or two difference makers. Instead, he brought in a crowd of mediocrity that isn't going to make any difference at all, and won't even be very attractive to contending clubs at the trade deadline.

I just now noted your ID and it's just a little ironic with the name Bottom Feeder that you fail to recognize a fellow traveler in WK. :)

Seriously, you're looking at seven players and we're paying them an average of $2.37 Million each and that's "big bucks" - that's chump change in today's market! That money might have gotten us 1 1/2 pitchers this offseason (and half pitchers don't do us too much good - although it might be argued we've run a few of them out there in past years!).

While time is running out on this offseason, there still is time for making some move or another; either by trade or signing some remaining free agent. I really don't expect us to be much better than last year's team, but we still haven't been forced to trade one of our gem prospects and we haven't jumped into any Milton-like contracts, as others have regularly noted.

Redsland
01-23-2007, 02:02 PM
No, as the sentence read, you are unrealistic if you think 15 years of orginziational rot can be undone in 12 months.
Why can't it?

He has a new ownership group behind him that isn't aftraid to spend money and has an impatient countenance. He's replaced most of DanO's front office people with his own. Presumably he's happy with the job that's being done by everyone else. He's brought in 48 players via trade or free agency. He's held an amatuer draft and a Rule V draft. He's allocated the budget as he has seen fit. He's severed ties with one baseball academy and established another one. He's made a long-term committment to the spring training locale of his choice. And on and on and on.

He has literally overhauled this organization from top to bottom. There's no reason why he couldn't have also acquired the two or three players he needed to make this team into a contender. Instead he got Chad Moeller and Jeff Conine.

Puffy
01-23-2007, 02:38 PM
No, as the sentence read, you are unrealistic if you think 15 years of orginziational rot can be undone in 12 months.

Had nothing to do with being stupid (which was your word, not in my original post) or whether or not he should have been hired (which wasn't even a subject of my post).

Right - so anyone who disagrees with you about 15+ years of organizational rot is unrealistic. Again, thanks for informing us what is so crystal clear to you.

Puffy
01-23-2007, 02:39 PM
Why can't it?

He has a new ownership group behind him that isn't aftraid to spend money and has an impatient countenance. He's replaced most of DanO's front office people with his own. Presumably he's happy with the job that's being done by everyone else. He's brought in 48 players via trade or free agency. He's held an amatuer draft and a Rule V draft. He's allocated the budget as he has seen fit. He's severed ties with one baseball academy and established another one. He's made a long-term committment to the spring training locale of his choice. And on and on and on.

He has literally overhauled this organization from top to bottom. There's no reason why he couldn't have also acquired the two or three players he needed to make this team into a contender. Instead he got Chad Moeller and Jeff Conine.

Quit being so unrealistic, Redsland.

That must be why you and me use so much humor - we are dreamers who aren't ground in the realist realm of things.;)

remdog
01-23-2007, 02:45 PM
So just how long are we supposed to wait to judge 'the trade'? Since the reason for the trade was to win the division in '06, the end of the season would seem to be reasonable. The Krivsky apologists would like to wait till the end of the '07 season now. What happens if it's still a bust? Wait till '08, '09, give it 15 years?

At some point you make your call. For folks that understand the reason for the trade, they've made their call and, in reality, are correct in their assessment. For everyone that wants to wait, have at it. It's a different set of criterion.

Rem

redsmetz
01-23-2007, 02:47 PM
So just how long are we supposed to wait to judge 'the trade'? Since the reason for the trade was to win the division in '06, the end of the season would seem to be reasonable. The Krivsky apologists would like to wait till the end of the '07 season now. What happens if it's still a bust? Wait till '08, '09, give it 15 years?

At some point you make your call. For folks that understand the reason for the trade, they've made their call and, in reality, are correct in their assessment. For everyone that wants to wait, have at it. It's a different set of criterion.

Rem

But trades aren't made in a vacuum. Yes, of course, it didn't work for last year, but you can't dismiss what may or may not happen this year, either with the players we received or with the players we gave up. The instant society we live in desperately wants everything now - unfortunately, things don't always work that way.

remdog
01-23-2007, 02:52 PM
But trades aren't made in a vacuum. Yes, of course, it didn't work for last year, but you can't dismiss what may or may not happen this year, either with the players we received or with the players we gave up. The instant society we live in desperately wants everything now - unfortunately, things don't always work that way.

That's called changeing the criterion---better known as making excuses.

Rem

Redsland
01-23-2007, 02:57 PM
The instant society we live in desperately wants everything now - unfortunately, things don't always work that way.
In the case of The Trade, for instance.

Tom Servo
01-23-2007, 03:04 PM
That's called changeing the criterion---better known as making excuses.

Rem
Only it's obvious the trade wasn't made just to try to boost the Reds into the playoffs this last year. Krivsky could have gone out and traded for Roberto Hernandez or Arthur Rhodes or any other one-year rental, but they wouldn't be any sort of long term solution to prevent the same thing happening again next year. It made sense to trade a guy like Felipe who was a bad fielder and struggled against LHP for bullpen help, but I think Wayne let JimBo talk him into giving up Kearns as well which was the mistake.

I'm not a supporter of the Trade, but hypothetically if Bray and Majewski are good this season and Wayne somehow manages to find a guy/guys to provide what Kearns could, the Trade becomes a non-factor. The season hasn't started yet, my proposed scenario could happen, so I do believe it's simply too early to call the Trade a total bust.

Cyclone792
01-23-2007, 03:20 PM
I'm waiting till after this season to judge the merits of the trade with Washington. I think Majewski and Bray will put up better numbers.

I didn't know people suddenly had oodles of faith in a lifetime 5.33 K/9, 3.60 BB/9, 1.48 K/BB, and 1.45 WHIP. Unless Gary Majewski receives a significant amount of good fortune, he just flat out doesn't miss enough bats and walks far too many batters to be much more than a back of the bullpen guy.

Sure, the guy had very nice HR rates while in Washington, but that comes with the caveat that 1) his home park suppressed homers, and 2) three outta four road NL East parks he played in also suppressed homers. Now he's moved into a home stadium that gives up homers by buckets while also playing more road games in NL Central stadiums, and his NL Central road games will be in stadiums that are less forgiving with the long ball than he was used to in Washington.

If people are hoping for that 2.93 ERA or anything close again, then you better put your hopes on a low BABIP or high LOB%, both of which are very difficult for a pitcher to control himself.

M2
01-23-2007, 03:24 PM
Nope, but WOY, it is certainly at the agree to disagree point that the "cure" was necessary. And it is beyond dispute that the "cure" in fact made the patient sicker. I am positive that no amount of talk on this will change my mind that the value for Kearns and Lopez was dreckful or yours that it was worth a throw and may ultimately be the correct move.

But in the meantime, we are left with what we actually saw the Reds get and how those players performed. And they failed, in their first attempt to help the club. Pretty miserably.

Excellent post. Krivsky made an insane trade in reaction the team's June bullpen implosion. He misdiagnosed his team (it wasn't all set outside of the bullpen) and the move quite possibly cost the Reds a division title.

It shouldn't be lost on folks that the trade is probably the chief reason the Reds have had such a forgettable offseason. It left the franchise with precious little wiggle room to make a creative deal. I imagine that Krivsky's also a bit reluctant to stick his hands back in the fire now that he's suffered some third-degree burns.

Ltlabner
01-23-2007, 03:26 PM
Right - so anyone who disagrees with you about 15+ years of organizational rot is unrealistic. Again, thanks for informing us what is so crystal clear to you.

Yes, I'd say it's unrealistic to expect:
* The entire farm system staff to be evaluated, reorginizanized and re-staffed where appropriate
* The entire farm system to be restocked with tallent from top to bottom
* The prospects in the entire farm system to be evaluated, plans for their devlopement reviewed and determinations on whether they are going to be part of the future or not made
* The entire player development and scounting staff to be evaluated, reoganized if needed and re-staffed where appropriate. Tallent searches and hiring processes completed.
* The orginization of the entire front office staff evalutated, personell evaluated and changes, where neccessary, made. Where people are let go, the tallent search and hiring process completed
* Revenue projections, cost analysis and future pricing structures determined and implemented.

Oh yea, and have all of those things done in under 1 year. That's my opinion of what would be needed just to start to unravel some of the originizational rot. Let alone show significant progress.

Those are just some "to-do" items I came up with on my own that are apparent needs. I'm sure there a bunch more. Some of those processes have been started, some have not. Some we know nothing about. I also understand that Wayne doesn't personally perform all of these functions, but as anyone with any life experience knows, change doesn't always happen over night in the business world.

I think it's completely unrealistic to think that bad business practices that have haunted the orginization for years and years (from top to bottom) are going to be rooted out and reversed in under 12 months. Significant headway, maybe. Complety undone? Unrealistic.

westofyou
01-23-2007, 03:32 PM
Sure, the guy had very nice HR rates while in Washington, but that comes with the caveat that 1) his home park suppressed homers, and 2) three outta four road NL East parks he played in also suppressed homers. Now he's moved into a home stadium that gives up homers by buckets while also playing more road games in NL Central stadiums, and his NL Central road games will be in stadiums that are less forgiving with the long ball than he was used to in Washington.

Since he was made a reliever he only gave up 10 HR's in 220 ML IP before he hit Montreal, 1 HR every 22 IP . In the majors his rate is even lower 9 in 177 IP for 1 every 19.6 IP

That's his main skill set from what I can tell.

Ltlabner
01-23-2007, 03:42 PM
Why can't it?

He has a new ownership group behind him that isn't aftraid to spend money and has an impatient countenance. He's replaced most of DanO's front office people with his own. Presumably he's happy with the job that's being done by everyone else. He's brought in 48 players via trade or free agency. He's held an amatuer draft and a Rule V draft. He's allocated the budget as he has seen fit. He's severed ties with one baseball academy and established another one. He's made a long-term committment to the spring training locale of his choice. And on and on and on.

He has literally overhauled this organization from top to bottom. There's no reason why he couldn't have also acquired the two or three players he needed to make this team into a contender. Instead he got Chad Moeller and Jeff Conine.

You act as if he did all these things on day 1 and then has been twiddling his thumbs since.

Yes, he's acomplished a lot, or at least, had a lot of activity. But to think the effects of a lengthy period of abuse are going to dissapear overnight just doesn't make sense to me. Does that give him the sarcastic 15 years people suggest, obviously not. Does it give him some leeway to not expect a top to bottom overhaul in a short period of time. Yep.

Yep he had a draft. One draft. Even if everybody loved the draft picks, is it realistic to then say "well, the farm system is restocked with tallent" ? I'd say no.

Same with the baseball academy. Is it realistic to think it's cranked out a bunch of tallent up and down the orginization in less than 1 year. I'd say no.

Same with hiring people. Is it realistic to think he made all of the personell changes needed in the entire orginization and rehired the needed tallent in week 1? I'd say no. As the season progressed should he have more and more of the people he wanted in place, obviously yes.

Wayne was burdened with problems he had no contoll over. He was also burdened with problems of his own making. I give him leeway for the issues outside of his control and dock him points for the problems of his own making. I guess I'm just an excuse maker because I don't lay every problem at Waynes feet, only the ones I felt he had a hand in making/not preventing?

None of what I just typed exuses the fact that this offseason has been a bust thus far. None of this validates wasting time with Moller or wasting in money on Conine when better options may have been available. Not having much farm tallent does eliminate the tightspot Wayne put himself in with the trade.

What he did/should have done this offseason is a subset of the overall process of rebuilding the entire organization.

Cyclone792
01-23-2007, 03:43 PM
Since he was made a reliever he only gave up 10 HR's in 220 ML IP before he hit Montreal, 1 HR every 22 IP . In the majors his rate is even lower 9 in 177 IP for 1 every 19.6 IP

That's his main skill set from what I can tell.

The problem is that's his only skill set, and what compounds the problem is he's moving away from anti-homer parks and into homer friendly parks.

NL East HR Index 2004-06
Atlanta - 0.97
Florida - 0.91
New York - 0.85
Philadelphia - 1.22
Washington - 0.84

NL Central HR Index 2004-06
Chicago - 1.18
Cincinnati - 1.19
Houston - 1.15
Milwaukee - 1.04
Pittsburgh - 0.83
St. Louis - 0.88

M2
01-23-2007, 03:54 PM
Yes, I'd say it's unrealistic to expect:
* The entire farm system staff to be evaluated, reorginizanized and re-staffed where appropriate

I absolutely, positively, no question about it expect Krivsky and his chosen lieutenants to have completed that task by now. In fact, I assume they have and that anything that happens from here on out is being done by what can be called the Krivsky regime. I wouldn't give the time of day to a GM candidate who claimed he couldn't do that within a year's time.


* The entire farm system to be restocked with tallent from top to bottom

No one expected that, but some upper end restocking would have been nice.


* The prospects in the entire farm system to be evaluated, plans for their devlopement reviewed and determinations on whether they are going to be part of the future or not made

I'd demand walking papers from Krivsky if he hadn't completed those evaluations, set those plans and separated the probable keepers from the trade bait. I assume he's done the first two, but I get the sense he's being wishy-washy on the third part, which is a common ailment among GMs.


* The entire player development and scounting staff to be evaluated, reoganized if needed and re-staffed where appropriate. Tallent searches and hiring processes completed.

Again, that had better be done as of this moment. My guess is Krivsky would tell you that work is done (as much as a never-ending process can be done that is).


* The orginization of the entire front office staff evalutated, personell evaluated and changes, where neccessary, made. Where people are let go, the tallent search and hiring process completed

There's no excuse for why this wouldn't be done.


* Revenue projections, cost analysis and future pricing structures determined and implemented.

Like most everything above, that's what he's been hired to do. He'd be professionally incompetent if those things weren't done. Staffing and finances are the basics of the job. Frankly, I can't think of anything more damning to say about Krivsky than to insist he's only made minimal progress on those fronts. It's certainly the most bizarre thing I've ever seen offered in support of a GM.

Yes, people expect Krivsky to perform the basic functions of his job. That stuff shouldn't even be in question (and as far as I'm aware it isn't). What's up for debate should be what kind of vision and ability he brings to the job.

Ltlabner
01-23-2007, 04:08 PM
Like most everything above, that's what he's been hired to do. He'd be professionally incompetent if those things weren't done. Staffing and finances are the basics of the job. Frankly, I can't think of anything more damning to say about Krivsky than to insist he's only made minimal progress on those fronts. It's certainly the most bizarre thing I've ever seen offered in support of a GM.

Yes, people expect Krivsky to perform the basic functions of his job. That stuff shouldn't even be in question (and as far as I'm aware it isn't). What's up for debate should be what kind of vision and ability he brings to the job.

Where in the world did I say he's made minimal progress on these fronts?

My point is that getting all of those items completed is a process. Some will/should have been completed rather quickly. Others will take a longer period of time, especially considering he came on board right before the season started. More importantly, the effects of those moves will take time to show themselves. An employee (say a scout, for example) isn't hired day 1 and 100&#37; effective on day 4.

The effect of implementing these changes, coupled with the lag-time until employees reach 100% effeciency, will most definatley effect the how he goes about installing his vision of what the orginization should be and how quickly we see results from those changes.

His raw ability is a fixed quantity. He either has what it takes or he doesn't. But how he goes about installing his vision will also be impacted by variables outside of his control.

redsmetz
01-23-2007, 04:16 PM
That's called changeing the criterion---better known as making excuses.

Rem

I didn't change any criterion. I said all along that this trade had to be judged over time. Reality is these players are the Reds property for several years and we'll see how effective they are. You can call it making excuses all you want, but that's not the case from my perspective.

remdog
01-23-2007, 04:27 PM
I didn't change any criterion.

Sure you did. He's being judged as to whether or not the trade accomplished what it was intended to. Plain fact is, it didn't. Change it to a longer time-frame and that's changing the criterion. It's also making excuses.

Rem

redsmetz
01-23-2007, 04:36 PM
Sure you did. He's being judged as to whether or not the trade accomplished what it was intended to. Plain fact is, it didn't. Change it to a longer time-frame and that's changing the criterion. It's also making excuses.

Rem

Whatever.

M2
01-23-2007, 04:37 PM
Where in the world did I say he's made minimal progress on these fronts?

My point is that getting all of those items completed is a process. Some will/should have been completed rather quickly. Others will take a longer period of time, especially considering he came on board right before the season started. More importantly, the effects of those moves will take time to show themselves. An employee (say a scout, for example) isn't hired day 1 and 100% effective on day 4.

The effect of implementing these changes, coupled with the lag-time until employees reach 100% effeciency, will most definatley effect the how he goes about installing his vision of what the orginization should be and how quickly we see results from those changes.

His raw ability is a fixed quantity. He either has what it takes or he doesn't. But how he goes about installing his vision will also be impacted by variables outside of his control.

Everything's a process, but as far as having his own regime in place, getting a handle on the financial picture and having a gameplan for how to handle the players in the organization, that had better be under control as of today. No group of humans is ever 100% effective, but every Reds employee in scouting, development and the front office should be there with the expectation that they can effectively perform their jobs. A GM does not get to claim a year into his tenure that he doesn't have the personnel in place to carry out his vision. That's beyond a cop out. It's a complete abdication of sensibility.

It is in fact such an abdication of sensibility that I'm reasonably sure you will never hear a GM make such a claim in public as it would be the rough equivalent of dropping his pants and sticking his bum underneath an automatic spanking machine. I'll guarantee you that Wayne Krivsky would tell you that the Reds organization as constituted today is a beast that meets with his approval and is ready to act upon the goals he's set for the franchise without excuses or caveats attached.

As for Wayne's raw ability, it may be fixed, but it is not known (quite possibly even by him). If the organization is unable to support whatever vision he lays out, then that goes to him lacking the raw ability to build the proper organization.

remdog
01-23-2007, 04:42 PM
Only it's obvious the trade wasn't made just to try to boost the Reds into the playoffs this last year.

Sure it was. If this was for the long-term then you wait till the off season when you have more players available and combine trading chips/money/upcoming prospects to advance your teams' future.


I'm not a supporter of the Trade, but hypothetically if Bray and Majewski are good this season and Wayne somehow manages to find a guy/guys to provide what Kearns could, the Trade becomes a non-factor. The season hasn't started yet, my proposed scenario could happen, so I do believe it's simply too early to call the Trade a total bust.

And I might grow to 6'8" next year but at my age it's not likely. How far down the road do you go with this stuff? Maybe over various transactions with the players involved the Reds pick up an obscure minor leager that becomes the second Sandy Kofax in 2012. Should we wait that long to evaluate a trade? I, and many others here, are evaluating this trade based on the fact that it didn't accomplish what it was designed to do.

Rem

remdog
01-23-2007, 04:45 PM
Whatever.

You're a very good whatever poster. :)

Rem

redsmetz
01-23-2007, 04:48 PM
You're a very good whatever poster. :)

Rem

:laugh: Okay, you've got me on that one. Prost! :beerme:

Ltlabner
01-23-2007, 04:56 PM
I'll guarantee you that Wayne Krivsky would tell you that the Reds organization as constituted today is a beast that meets with his approval and is ready to act upon the goals he's set for the franchise without excuses or caveats attached.

As for Wayne's raw ability, it may be fixed, but it is not known (quite possibly even by him). If the organization is unable to support whatever vision he lays out, then that goes to him lacking the raw ability to build the proper organization.

But isn't saying that it's a "beast that meets his approval" the same is "I'm happy with where we are"? Frankly, I'd be horrified if an executive ever was satisfied with the status quo and was happy with where they were at that moment in time. There is always room for improvement. There are always key pieces of the execs vision that can't be implemented at this moment in time (or until another key peice falls into place).

An exectutive who tells you that their orginization is prefectly constructed to his or her likeing and is perfectly created to handle any issue that's thrown it's way is 100% full of it, or an idiot.

I agree that Wayne's ablities are not established, although a picture is becomming clearer over time.

Redsland
01-23-2007, 05:16 PM
Only it's obvious the trade wasn't made just to try to boost the Reds into the playoffs this last year.
Really?

Here's (http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060713&content_id=1555255&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin)what Wayne said at the time:

"I think anyone who's seen us play in the first half realizes that the bullpen has been a little bit of a soft spot on our team and I think for us to compete and get in the playoffs in the second half, we had to upgrade the bullpen," Krivsky said.

And:

"We did what we needed to do."

And:

"We've got 16 games to play before the trading deadline," Krivsky said. "I didn't want to wait around until the trade deadline. I wanted to do something now. [I knew] if we did and we addressed the bullpen, then we've got it [for] 16 games extra."

That's a guy who's talking about the here and now.

redsmetz
01-23-2007, 05:21 PM
Really?

Here's (http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060713&content_id=1555255&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin)what Wayne said at the time:

"I think anyone who's seen us play in the first half realizes that the bullpen has been a little bit of a soft spot on our team and I think for us to compete and get in the playoffs in the second half, we had to upgrade the bullpen," Krivsky said.

And:

"We did what we needed to do."

And:

"We've got 16 games to play before the trading deadline," Krivsky said. "I didn't want to wait around until the trade deadline. I wanted to do something now. [I knew] if we did and we addressed the bullpen, then we've got it [for] 16 games extra."

That's a guy who's talking about the here and now.

Well there you go. The "here and now" is long past, so all we have is the future. I don't think anyone questions that for the "here and now" of last year, this trade (and the incidental ones that followed) didn't do the trick.

Okay, over and done with. How will this trade look in the future. That is something we will have to face and we'll see how it pans out. Act One ended on a downer. Let's hope it picks up in the succeeding Acts.

Tom Servo
01-23-2007, 05:23 PM
Really?

Here's (http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060713&content_id=1555255&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin)what Wayne said at the time:

"I think anyone who's seen us play in the first half realizes that the bullpen has been a little bit of a soft spot on our team and I think for us to compete and get in the playoffs in the second half, we had to upgrade the bullpen," Krivsky said.

And:

"We did what we needed to do."

And:

"We've got 16 games to play before the trading deadline," Krivsky said. "I didn't want to wait around until the trade deadline. I wanted to do something now. [I knew] if we did and we addressed the bullpen, then we've got it [for] 16 games extra."

That's a guy who's talking about the here and now.
Well, notice I said "just". Yes it was meant to help last year, but my point is that these guys were acquired because they will be under our control for years to come. He overpaid now for the future and admitted it. It wouldn't have taken FeLo or Ears to get Roberto Hernandez or Arthur Rhodes.

Redsland
01-23-2007, 05:30 PM
You act as if he did all these things on day 1 and then has been twiddling his thumbs since.
I do? How on earth do you get that out of what I posted?

You said he'd only had a year. I provided a long list of accomplishments during that time which demonstrate that this organization has been remade into Wayne's own creation. There's no more need for wait-and-see. We're at what-you-see-is-what-you-get.

rdiersin
01-23-2007, 05:57 PM
We're at what-you-see-is-what-you-get.


Really? Was Billy Beane at what you see is what you get after his first year?

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/TM_OAK1998.htm

All I see is good drafting, which of course doesn't help immediately. What about his next couple of years? For the most part, more of the same. Not too many blockbuster signings or trades.

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/TM_OAK1999.htm

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/TM_OAK2000.htm

Terry Ryan?

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/TM_MIN1995.htm

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/TM_MIN1996.htm

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/TM_MIN1997.htm

Fact is Wayne did some good things, and some bad, but I wouldn't put it past him to grow as a GM as these two did. Sure, he could get worse too, but how can you say he is at a what you see is what you get stage? After one year? Sounds like a small sample size. I don't see enough data to completely characterize the guy at this point.
http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/TM_CIN2006.htm

gm
01-23-2007, 06:14 PM
Safe to say that the only Red's GM who got favorable ratings after his first 12 months on the job was Bob Quinn. (Long term "love" was another story)

westofyou
01-23-2007, 06:24 PM
Safe to say that the only Red's GM who got favorable ratings after his first 12 months on the job was Bob Quinn. (Long term "love" was another story)

Bill Bergesch - Hired October 1984
Former Title - Director of Baseball Operations - New York Yankees.

First Move - Keefe Cato to San Diego for Darren Burroghs. Bergesch made only 2 trades in his first 8 months on the job.

Most Famous Player Traded First - Cesar Cedeno was traded to the Cardinals in August for Mark Jackson. Cesar was out of the game the next year but strung together 76 magical at bats for the NL pennant winners.

Most Famous Trade Pickup - Buddy Bell, 10 months in to the job Bergesch made his first significant trade, trading Duane Walker and Jeff Russell in mid July of 1985.

Best Young Player Pickup - Slow on the draw was Bergesch’s main problem it took him 15 months to pick up a future impact Red, once again though it was steal, with the Reds relinquishing Wayne Krenchicki and ending up with Norm Charlton.

See Ya - Who’d he cut? - Every GM usually comes aboard with a plan and often that doesn’t include the former regimes players. So the axe often swings freely, in Bergesch’s tenure the axe took down longtime Reds Frank Pastore.

Biggest Mistake - Being slow with the trade trigger was Bill’s biggest headache and it would eventually cost him his job as he held on to both the Reds shortstop prospects and the quickly multiplying outfield prospects.

First Draft - Bergesch endeared himself to Reds fans forever by being the GM who chose Barry Larkin with the 4th pick in the 1985 draft.

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

Murray Cook - Hired October 1987
Former Title: Montreal GM and Yankee Employee.

First Move - - Unlike his predecessor Cook started off with a bang, trading Kurt Stillwell for left hander Danny Jackson, who would be a major player for the Reds for the next few years.

Most Famous Player Traded First - Targeting pitching was Cooks first order of business, so he moved Dave Parker for Jose Rijo and Tim Birtsas.

Most Famous Trade Pickup - Danny Jackson was an established starter who immediately strengthened the Reds weak staff.

Best Young Player Pickup - Jose Rijo would go on to be one of the best pitchers in team history.

See Ya - Who’d he cut? - Cook was the man who sent Tom Hume into the coaching profession in the autumn of 1987.

Biggest Mistake - Saddled without a first round choice in the 1988 draft Cook took Jeff Branson with the first pick, in a draft that was largely disappointing from top to bottom for the Reds.

First Draft - See above.

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

Bob Quinn - Hired October 1989
Former Title: Yankee Employee

First Move - - It almost seems common with Reds general managers, the first deal is usually a deal for arms, and in Cook’s case it was no different, in December he sent John Franco to the Mets for Randy Meyers and Kip Gross.

Most Famous Player Traded First - John Franco was the Reds closer and a fan favorite, evidently he was easy to replace.

Most Famous Trade Pickup - Billy Hatcher/Bill Doran. Not looking for big name players Quinn’s biggest names acquired would both play roles in the 1990 teams run for the title, and neither would cost more then a middling prospect.

Best Young Player Pickup - Quinn’s 2nd trade was a steal for the Reds as Quinn picked the pocket of his former employers the Yankees and traded Tim Leary and Van Snider for Hal Morris.

See Ya - Who’d he cut? - Quinn was the man responsible finally getting Dave Collins off the field of play.

Biggest Mistake - The man drove the bus to the World Series in his first season, we’ll give this one a pass.

First Draft - In Quinn’s first draft he created what some consider a cardinal sin, he drafted a catcher with his first pick. Holy Steve Swisher, it didn’t fail… nor impress many either.

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

Jim Bowden - Hired October 1993
Former Title: Reds Front Office (Via Yankees and Pirates)

First Move - Jim Bowden tried to reverse the jinx of the first round catcher pick by jettisoning Dan Wilson to the Mariners for Eric Hanson and Bret Boone.

Most Famous Player Traded First - Bowden’s most famous player move was a telltale sign of an obsession that still follows him to this day, the swift centerfielder type is Jim Bowden’s dream player, the man obviously has a weakness for centerfielders and his career is littered with examples, it starts with his first trade as a Reds GM when he traded Roberto Kelly for Deion Sanders, thus beginning the long back and forth between Deion and the city.

Most Famous Trade Pickup - Deion Sanders was celebrity, and a so-so baseball player, he made a splash in Cincinnati time and time again, but no more then when he first showed up.

Best Young Player Pickup - Bret Boone anchored the Reds middle infield until 1998 and helped the Reds get Denny Neagle for the 1999 team.

See Ya - Who’d he cut? - Bowden didn’t see a future in Chris Sabo and at over 3 million bucks a year he was willing to let him walk.

Biggest Mistake - Beginning the infatuation dance with Deion Sanders, a man who would visit the Reds roster 3 separate times and only give back a .665 OPS in over 900 trips to the plate.

First Draft - Bowden’s first pick was C. J. Nitkowski, a player later traded for David Wells in the midst of the 1995 pennant race.

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

Dan O’Brien - Hired October 2003
Former Title: Assistant GM Texas Rangers

First Move - - In the first 3 months of O’Brien’s tenure he signed 21 free agents before he focused on the Reds current roster. His first trade was Chris Reitsma for Jung Bong and Bubba Nelson.

Most Famous Player Traded First - Possessing the same paralysis that Bergesch had O’Brien can only claim to have moved pitchers in his first year and they were Reitsma, Jones and Lidle. By Default Reitsma is the most famous.

Most Famous Trade Pickup - Since he was so fun in the trade market to find his most famous pickup you’d have to point to the free agent signing of Cory Lidle, a Christmas present most Reds fans would rather forget.

Best Young Player Pickup - Elizardo Ramirez?

See Ya - Who’d he cut? - O’Brien shed the team of two Bowden’s last buys, Russ Branyan and Ryan Dempster.

Biggest Mistake - Fear, inertia, not realizing that the hub of the wheel was the major league club, not the minor leagues.

First Draft - Homer Bailey, RHP, Texas HS, Currently making his way up the ladder, cross your fingers.

fearofpopvol1
01-23-2007, 07:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltlabner
* The entire farm system to be restocked with tallent from top to bottom

<<No one expected that, but some upper end restocking would have been nice.>>

Yeah, but you're also forgetting that this is probably the most important aspect out of the whole list. Certainly the one that will impact the team the most.

M2
01-24-2007, 01:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltlabner
* The entire farm system to be restocked with tallent from top to bottom

<<No one expected that, but some upper end restocking would have been nice.>>

Yeah, but you're also forgetting that this is probably the most important aspect out of the whole list. Certainly the one that will impact the team the most.

It's the most important thing yet all he's gone an entire offseason and not acquired any young talent. I'd think that anyone who thinks the former would be a bit distressed by the latter. Drafting alone isn't going to do the trick.

BTW, I think assessing Krivsky on how well he rebuilds the Reds for the long haul is a good standard, but if that's going to be your outlook, if you think that's what he's actually trying to accomplish, then hold him to that standard instead of using it as a get-out-of-jail free card. What key pieces for the long haul has Wayne Krivsky added this winter? The answer doesn't work in his favor. I'd hoped heading into this offseason that Krivsky would define the direction in which he wants to take this franchise. Unfortunately it's been another holding pattern offseason. I'm far more disappointed by that than by the Kearns/Lopez trade.

Aronchis
01-24-2007, 03:05 AM
The Reds have been in a holding pattern for the last 10 years.

Ron Madden
01-24-2007, 03:37 AM
DanO didn't run the draft. I think he had little to do with any success the Reds had in the draft. DanO makes Krivsky look like a genius. Anybody would be better than O'brien.

The Crown Jewels of our farm system were drafted under O'Briens watch.

In no stretch of the imagination am I giving O'Brien 100% credit for that.

I do however give DanO credit for being part of team of evaluators who drafted that young talent. Young talent is the lifeblood of any organization especially Small Market Baseball Clubs.

O'Brien is gone now and so too are the scouts instrumental in signing those Crown Jewles.

Ron Madden
01-24-2007, 04:44 AM
So DanO's only problem was the interfearence from Linder and Allen? And I don't know how much credit for the draft I'd give him. Remember Johnny Almaraz was on the sceen then. Since some on RZ blew a gasket when he left I figure that he's soooo good that he had something to do with those drafts. So I don't think DanO gets sole credit for his drafts (some, certinally, but not all).

I think people give Wayne some leeway because (1) they are realistic and understand 15+ years of orginizational rot can't be undone in one whole year (2) because he has made some good moves, something DanO didn't do much of (3) There is some "tail coat" effect from BCasts taking the helm, we're going to win now, etc etc. (which is evaportating as reality sets in). (4) People can understand why you wouldn't want to invest a huge chunck of the teams payrol in a Gill Meche, Gary Mathews Jr, Juan Piere type contract in the current FA market.

I guess when you add that all together it means people aren't willing to freakout over every move, or run the man out of town because they don't agree with Wayne's each and every breath.

Please read my post again.

Nobody here wanted Gil Mech, Mathews Jr, or Juan Piere that's a very weak and very tired argument.

All I'm sayin' is O'Brien held the GM position for just about 29 months. 24 months were under Lindner and Allen. The focus of Lindner and Allen was always on the bottom line. Profits ahead of Winning.

It may be true that O'Brien never had a clue, it could also be true that working under
Lindner and Allen he never had a prayer.

We must be fair here and give O'Brien some credit for the best prospects in our farm system.

Ltlabner
01-24-2007, 06:08 AM
Please read my post again.

Nobody here wanted Gil Mech, Mathews Jr, or Juan Piere that's a very weak and very tired argument.

All I'm sayin' is O'Brien held the GM position for just about 29 months. 24 months were under Lindner and Allen. The focus of Lindner and Allen was always on the bottom line. Profits ahead of Winning.

It may be true that O'Brien never had a clue, it could also be true that working under Lindner and Allen he never had a prayer.

So you're willing to give O'Brien some leeway because there might have been factors beyond his controll that made his job more difficult. You seem to be considering the mittigating issues when evalutating him.

Yet with Wayne, it's "off with his head" and there are no excuses, it's his team, etc etc. Wayne is far from perfect, and this offseason has been dissapointing, but while you cut Dan'O some slack you seem to give Wayne none.

Ron Madden
01-24-2007, 06:20 AM
So you're willing to give O'Brien some leeway because there might have been factors beyond his controll that made his job more difficult. You seem to be considering the mittigating issues when evalutating him.

Yet with Wayne, it's "off with his head" and there are no excuses, it's his team, etc etc.

You love to put your words into other peoples mouths don't you?

I have NEVER called for Waynes head on a platter.

I have said that Wayne worries me.

I want Wayne to succede, I really do.

Continue your witch hunt with someone else.

M2
01-24-2007, 08:07 AM
The Crown Jewels of our farm system were drafted under O'Briens watch.

The crown jewels of everyone's farm system were drafted in the last two to three years. High first round draft picks are supposed to be well-regarded prospects. Those same talent evaluators did precious little with later picks though and the Reds are currently thin on lifeblood. In fact, the system's as thin as it's been since before the 1998 draft.

TRF
01-24-2007, 09:30 AM
So you're willing to give O'Brien some leeway because there might have been factors beyond his controll that made his job more difficult. You seem to be considering the mittigating issues when evalutating him.

Yet with Wayne, it's "off with his head" and there are no excuses, it's his team, etc etc. Wayne is far from perfect, and this offseason has been dissapointing, but while you cut Dan'O some slack you seem to give Wayne none. Krivsky comes in with a new owner in place. Sweeping changes were promised by said owner. John Allen was reassigned. Yeah, Krivsky gets less slack than DanO.


The crown jewels of everyone's farm system were drafted in the last two to three years. High first round draft picks are supposed to be well-regarded prospects. Those same talent evaluators did precious little with later picks though and the Reds are currently thin on lifeblood. In fact, the system's as thin as it's been since before the 1998 draft.

It's thin in position prospects, but better in pitching prospects. And this looks to be the best year for pitching prospects the Reds have had in a very long time.

Also I would like to point out that DanO did bring in some international talent as well. When the Reds severed ties with Rijo's academy and got their own team in the VSL and expanded operations in the D.R. they picked up some talent. Cueto is the biggest name so far. Obispo might start at AA this year. I'd love to see some position players developed in Latin America, a SS would be nice.

Krivsky is quicker at pulling the trigger than DanO was. That works both for and against him IMO.

bottom_feeder
01-24-2007, 09:41 AM
Seriously, you're looking at seven players and we're paying them an average of $2.37 Million each and that's "big bucks" - that's chump change in today's market! .

Look at it this way:

Lohse 4.2 million
Gonzales about 5 million
Stanton about 2.5 million
Weathers, about 3 million
Hat about 2 million
Castro 1 million
Conine 2 million
Cormier 2 million

That's about 22 million flushed down the toilet. Weathers is the only defendable signing in the bunch. The rest are replacement level players at best. WayneK is putting his mark on this team.. a mark of mediocrity, and striving to make .500 each year instead of wisely using resources to try to actually improve the team.

Also, WayneK failed to move Milton in the early part of the offseason when there was an insane market for any starting pitcher with a pulse. WayneK still has a chance to move Milton to a pitching starved contender like the Mets. Will he do it? Probably not.

I do like his Sarloos trade though, because at least that's a young player with a chance to provide above replacement level pitching.

redsmetz
01-24-2007, 10:31 AM
Also I would like to point out that DanO did bring in some international talent as well. When the Reds severed ties with Rijo's academy and got their own team in the VSL and expanded operations in the D.R. they picked up some talent. Cueto is the biggest name so far. Obispo might start at AA this year. I'd love to see some position players developed in Latin America, a SS would be nice.

Krivsky is quicker at pulling the trigger than DanO was. That works both for and against him IMO.

I really am itching to learn more about our Latin America operations. That would be a perfect offseason story. I wrote one columnist and he thought it was a good idea, but I don't know if he'll do anything with it. I'd love for the Reds to have better reporting on their Latin teams during their seasons.

redsmetz
01-24-2007, 10:41 AM
Look at it this way:

Lohse 4.2 million
Gonzales about 5 million
Stanton about 2.5 million
Weathers, about 3 million
Hat about 2 million
Castro 1 million
Conine 2 million
Cormier 2 million

That's about 22 million flushed down the toilet. Weathers is the only defendable signing in the bunch. The rest are replacement level players at best. WayneK is putting his mark on this team.. a mark of mediocrity, and striving to make .500 each year instead of wisely using resources to try to actually improve the team.

Also, WayneK failed to move Milton in the early part of the offseason when there was an insane market for any starting pitcher with a pulse. WayneK still has a chance to move Milton to a pitching starved contender like the Mets. Will he do it? Probably not.

I do like his Sarloos trade though, because at least that's a young player with a chance to provide above replacement level pitching.

I think you're going to be in for a frustrating season taking such a dismal view of the team. I think we'll see some changes before season's start (my usual, I think Cormier will be gone). With regards to the group you show (our own Yankees since you're talking "Flushing"), I think you need to look at them individually.


Hatteberg has been a valuable player since he's been here. Most of us believe he's holding down first until Votto comes up - probably next year.

Gonzalez is a significant defensive improvement, his weak bat notwithstanding, and that should help our pitchers immensely.

Stanton and Weathers will do an adequate job in the pen and give some of the younger pitchers a veteran presence. Some scoff at that notion, but I think there's value there. Both are on two year deals and either could be flipped this year or next for prospects (caliber underdetermined, of course).

Conine will platoon in various spots and in my mind, it's an open question as to whether he's done or will perform capably for our team.

Cormier, as I said, will I think be sent somewhere else, perhaps to one of your aforementioned "pitching starved" teams.


There are certainly other players on our 40-man roster who could be moved yet and there have been some signings which will prove to be nothing at all (and possibly a waste of the 40-man roster). I'm not saying this is a perfect team, but I think it is one that can nominally compete in our division while we develop our younger players. I can understand how some believe that is "more of the same" and part of the long, hard wait which never produces anything. I'll lean towards a bit more optimism myself.

Wheelhouse
01-24-2007, 10:56 AM
Dayn Perry loses credibility in my book when he describes Billy Beane as having "much success." I would use the phrase "many wins." It seems the A's have superior teams over a spectrum of 162 games. Over 5 or 7 game series, against good teams, they fail. That's a huge problem with Beane's teams. Bottom line--Krivsky made three of the best acquisitions of the season in Arroyo, Phillips and Ross, and that has to count for something. Maybe Perry will see the light when Kearns shows up to Nats spring camp this year weighing 400 lbs. and Lopez starts bringing up the insurance premiums for seats behind first base at RFK.

redsmetz
01-24-2007, 10:58 AM
Dayn Perry loses credibility in my book when he describes Billy Beane as having "much success." I would use the phrase "many wins." It seems the A's have superior teams over a spectrum of 162 games. Over 5 or 7 game series, against good teams, they fail. That's a huge problem with Beane's teams. Bottom line--Krivsky made three of the best acquisitions of the season in Arroyo, Phillips and Ross, and that has to count for something. Maybe Perry will see the light when Kearns shows up to Nats spring camp this year weighing 400 lbs. and Lopez starts bringing up the insurance premiums for seats behind first base at RFK.

Well that's one way of putting! :D

Ltlabner
01-24-2007, 04:18 PM
Look at it this way:

Lohse 4.2 million
Gonzales about 5 million
Stanton about 2.5 million
Weathers, about 3 million
Hat about 2 million
Castro 1 million
Conine 2 million
Cormier 2 million

That's about 22 million flushed down the toilet. Weathers is the only defendable signing in the bunch. The rest are replacement level players at best. WayneK is putting his mark on this team.. a mark of mediocrity, and striving to make .500 each year instead of wisely using resources to try to actually improve the team.



Comparison of Alex Gonzalez and Jeff Conines stats to league average & replacement level


YEAR LG AVG OBP SLG
2006 NL .265 .334 .427 - League average batting stats 2006 per BP
.272 .331 .406 - League average for SS 2006 per BP
.237 .296 .371 - Replacment level batting stats
.246 .292 .392 - A Gon's carear stats
.286 .348 .445 - Conine's carear stats

I'm not a fan of Conine at all, but he's hardly "replacement level". Can he put up these sorts of numbers at his age? That's a totally different question. But thus far, he's not replacement level. Gonzo, who I do like, is also barely above replacement level with his bat. Mix in his highly regarded glove and he's most definatley above replacement level.

BTW - Since I am no numbers guru I used the defination of replacement players from this site (http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/woolner/vorpdesc.htm). "Replacement level is set to 35 points below the positional average in each of AVG, OBP, and SLG." I kept just the three basic offensive stats just to keep things simple. Not making any agrument that they are the only way to measure a players performance.

With regards to Loshe...

Kyle Lohse Stats


ERA WHIP
4.49 1.40 - League average 2006 per BP
4.86 1.44 - Kyle Lohse carear pitching

NOTE: Comparing to replacement level reflects the fact that a league average performer is actually rare enough to be valuable. - from referenced website

Again, with information from the above referenced site, I would say Loshe is close enough to league average with these two admiditly basic metrics that he does have some value over your basic replacement level pitcher.

Weathers and Stanton don't light my fire at all. Cromier shouldn't be back IMO.

Again, I'm not saying there weren't better options or Wayne did everything perfectly, but Gonzo, Conine and Lohse are hardly "replacement level" players IMO.

M2
01-24-2007, 06:22 PM
Dayn Perry loses credibility in my book when he describes Billy Beane as having "much success." I would use the phrase "many wins." It seems the A's have superior teams over a spectrum of 162 games. Over 5 or 7 game series, against good teams, they fail.

Yes, it's much better to fail over the course of 5 or 7 seasons.

westofyou
01-24-2007, 06:33 PM
Yes, it's much better to fail over the course of 5 or 7 seasons.

Yep, he's done nothing but win.

Just in this decade, anyone who cares to do the dollar spent per win comparison between the top 5 teams let me know what you get, I already have an opinion on who's the winner in that race.



2000-2006

WINS W L PCT
1 Yankees 679 451 .601
2 A's 664 469 .586
3 Cardinals 658 475 .581
4 Braves 650 482 .574
5 Red Sox 634 499 .560
6 Giants 624 507 .552
7 White Sox 617 517 .544
T8 Angels 609 525 .537
T8 Twins 609 524 .538
10 Mariners 603 531 .532
11 Dodgers 601 533 .530
12 Astros 599 535 .528
13 Phillies 576 557 .508
14 Indians 574 560 .506
15 Marlins 569 564 .502
16 Mets 568 564 .502
17 Diamondbacks 563 571 .496
18 Blue Jays 561 572 .495
T19 Cubs 542 592 .478
T19 Padres 542 592 .478
21 Rangers 535 599 .472
22 Reds 527 607 .465
23 Nationals 520 614 .459
24 Rockies 513 621 .452
25 Orioles 497 636 .439
26 Brewers 488 645 .431
27 Pirates 484 648 .428
28 Tigers 481 652 .425
29 Royals 463 671 .408
30 Devil Rays 447 684 .395

Cincy75
01-24-2007, 07:05 PM
I don't get the tremendous grief that Krivsky gets for that deal nor that ridiculous ranking. First of all, while it's very true that the much-talked about trade with Washington didn't work out well at all in terms of bolstering the bullpen. Take a look at what left town and the potential of a 24-year-old lefty who might close.

Austin Kearns has a terrific arm but he's by no means a sure-fire perennial all-star.. His bat is just okay and gives you some pop but with the two outfield prospects waiting in the minors and the ability to fill outfield holes, that doesn't worry me at all. If I have to give up OFs for the potential of a good bullpen, you do it every time. Unfortunately, he was dealing with the snake in Washington. No excuse but just an explanation.

Secondly, Felipe Lopez is a good hitter for a shortstop but waaaay too inconsistent defensively and you've replaced him arguably with the best defensive SS in the game and with the Reds pitching staff, having a strong DP combo in Gonzo and Philips is HUGE.

Talk about someone who is limited by a budget and is trying makeover the roster, that is EXACTLY what he has done in acquiring Arroyo, Philips and Ross and Hatteberg.

My bigger concern is that they didn't do much to shore up the rotation this offseason with someone like Tomo Ohka, who was available. But this is pretty much an indication they expect Homer to finally debut. And PLEASE, no babying of Bailey. He's a big boy. He can handle the big leagues. There are so many examples of young pitchers, who with proper handling, can contribute right away. Smart move not to rush him into the pennant race last year but his time has come.

remdog
01-24-2007, 07:51 PM
Unfortunately, he was dealing with the snake in Washington. No excuse but just an explanation.

You may call JimBo a snake but the explanation is that Krivsky got 'schooled'. Due diligence is a given and Wayne didn't do it. I doubt that will happen again but it's a tough way to learn the lesson.

And, despite all of their blathering, the Reds (as far as I know) still haven't filed anything formally. Anyone hear anything different?

Rem

Cyclone792
01-24-2007, 07:56 PM
Yep, he's done nothing but win.

Just in this decade, anyone who cares to do the dollar spent per win comparison between the top 5 teams let me know what you get, I already have an opinion on who's the winner in that race.

I've always found it curious when people attempt to rip Beane for the job he's done in Oakland. It's almost as if people are indirectly claiming that they'd rather not average 95 wins per season over seven seasons while making the playoffs five times during that stretch.

All Beane does is put together a team year in and year out that wins a ton of games despite being handicapped by a low payroll relative to some of his biggest competitors. The Reds need a guy like him who is able to duplicate that kind of success. Why people wouldn't want that baffles me.

M2
01-24-2007, 11:30 PM
I've always found it curious when people attempt to rip Beane for the job he's done in Oakland. It's almost as if people are indirectly claiming that they'd rather not average 95 wins per season over seven seasons while making the playoffs five times during that stretch.

All Beane does is put together a team year in and year out that wins a ton of games despite being handicapped by a low payroll relative to some of his biggest competitors. The Reds need a guy like him who is able to duplicate that kind of success. Why people wouldn't want that baffles me.

Me too. What I really get a kick about is many of those same people then sing the praises of Terry Ryan. I happen to think both guys have done a stellar job. They both have built strong farm systems. They've both put small market franchises into consisent contention during the 21st century. Both of their franchises have failed to do much in the playoffs too. No franchise is perfect, but I can't imagine there's a Reds fan alive who wouldn't want to see the team in the hunt every season.

bottom_feeder
01-25-2007, 09:25 AM
Comparison of Alex Gonzalez and Jeff Conines stats to league average & replacement level


YEAR LG AVG OBP SLG
2006 NL .265 .334 .427 - League average batting stats 2006 per BP
.272 .331 .406 - League average for SS 2006 per BP
.237 .296 .371 - Replacment level batting stats
.246 .292 .392 - A Gon's carear stats
.286 .348 .445 - Conine's carear stats



Considering that Conine is 40 years old, don't you think it's more fair to use
his last year's stats: OBP 325/ SLG 399.. That's ok for a bench player, I guess.. but is it worth paying 2 million for when you have a limited budget, and plenty of gapping holes, PLUS Conine is a defensive liablity?

Gonzales' career stats are a fairer number as to what to expect from him this year. I agree with that. Did you notice how close he is to the replacement level stats you posted? You just proved my point. In theory, a replacement level player is someone you can grab off waivers for nothing.. like Olmedo.
I don't think Olmedo is the answer, but WayneK should've done was use his rule V pick to grab the best SS that was exposed. Then he should've scoured everyone's minor leauge system to find the two best SS that he could find and could trade for without giving up Homer. At bare minimum, he should be able to find a guy like the 2000 version of Juan Castro. In 2000, LA was in a roster crunch, so they gave Castro away for nothing..
Then you bring in Olemedo, Machado, and the 3 other guys and let them fight it out for the SS job in spring training. Maybe that would motivate Olmedo (maybe not). You hope to get a replacement level player (which is close to Alex Gonzales) out of that casting call. Then you've got a cheap SS that as just as good as Gonzales without the 3 year commitment, and you have 5 million to buy pitching or a legitimate OF bat (Both of which would help us out a whole lot more than Gonzales).

Another route that could've been explored would've been to move Phillips to SS and pick up a 2b..

The Reds had much better options than signing Gonzales. We have to make every cent work for us. Throwing away 14 million over 3 years for Gonzales is almost as bad as the Milton contract. He's going to be another immovable albotross.

bottom_feeder
01-25-2007, 09:40 AM
I'd like to add that I can understand why we resigned Lohse. It's the same reason why I like the Sarloos trade. We have no pitching depth, and it's imperative to have some bodies to man the team. Sadly, Lohse is better than our other inhouse options, and thanks to The Trade, we have very little left to trade to upgrade our pitching.

Another reason I like the Sarloos trade is that it does potentially give us the option to move Milton or Lohse without having to put someone like Belisle in the rotation, who is horrible.

So WayneK isn't all bad as a GM, but he's below average, for sure.

RichRed
01-25-2007, 01:05 PM
Me too. What I really get a kick about is many of those same people then sing the praises of Terry Ryan.

Maybe because Terry Ryan had the good taste to not "write" Moneyball like Billy Beane did (hi, Joe Morgan)? :dunno:

I don't get it either. I'd take Billy Beane in a minute: 90+ wins a year sounds like heaven compared to well, let's just say, NOT winning 90+ a year.

M2
01-25-2007, 01:12 PM
Maybe because Terry Ryan had the good taste to not "write" Moneyball like Billy Beane did (hi, Joe Morgan)? :dunno:

I don't get it either. I'd take Billy Beane in a minute: 90+ wins a year sounds like heaven compared to well, let's just say, NOT winning 90+ a year.

It's a religious thing. I was skeptical of Beane's approach when he put together that beer league team in the late 90s, but if anyone's paid attention since then, the A's scout and instruct as well as any team in baseball. That Beane blends it with soild numerical analysis should be viewed as a plus, not a negative. It does cause him to tip a few sacred cows, though, and that gets the orthodoxy all a-twitter.

Jpup
01-25-2007, 01:32 PM
Yep, he's done nothing but win.

Just in this decade, anyone who cares to do the dollar spent per win comparison between the top 5 teams let me know what you get, I already have an opinion on who's the winner in that race.



2000-2006

WINS W L PCT
1 Yankees 679 451 .601
2 A's 664 469 .586
3 Cardinals 658 475 .581
4 Braves 650 482 .574
5 Red Sox 634 499 .560
6 Giants 624 507 .552
7 White Sox 617 517 .544
T8 Angels 609 525 .537
T8 Twins 609 524 .538
10 Mariners 603 531 .532
11 Dodgers 601 533 .530
12 Astros 599 535 .528
13 Phillies 576 557 .508
14 Indians 574 560 .506
15 Marlins 569 564 .502
16 Mets 568 564 .502
17 Diamondbacks 563 571 .496
18 Blue Jays 561 572 .495
T19 Cubs 542 592 .478
T19 Padres 542 592 .478
21 Rangers 535 599 .472
22 Reds 527 607 .465
23 Nationals 520 614 .459
24 Rockies 513 621 .452
25 Orioles 497 636 .439
26 Brewers 488 645 .431
27 Pirates 484 648 .428
28 Tigers 481 652 .425
29 Royals 463 671 .408
30 Devil Rays 447 684 .395

That is depressing. :(

gonelong
01-25-2007, 01:53 PM
The Reds from 1970-1976 won 683 regular season games.

The A's from 2000-2006 have won 664 regular season games.

The A's fans are watching Teams that have won nearly as many games as the BRM did during the season. The A's certainly have had NONE of the playoff success that the BRM had, but I would surely call that "much success" and I'd bet its damn fun to go the ballpark to watch their teams.

Conversley todays Reds have won 442 games over the 2000-2006 span.

GL

Ltlabner
01-25-2007, 03:14 PM
Considering that Conine is 40 years old, don't you think it's more fair to use his last year's stats: OBP 325/ SLG 399..

Gonzales' career stats are a fairer number as to what to expect from him this year. I agree with that. Did you notice how close he is to the replacement level stats you posted? You just proved my point. In theory, a replacement level player is someone you can grab off waivers for nothing..

I made a mistake with Conine's numbers. I used the SS postion replacement player stats for the A Gon comparison but I forgot to use the corresponding position replacement stats for Conine. Just noticed that.

I think only looking at last years stats is the definition of small sample size. I'd rather look at the entirty of the players stats, which will include all of the ups and down and give us a better picture. Then you factor in age, any decline over the past few years, etc. If you only look at last year you run the risk of panning/praising a player for one year that may or may not be repeated.

As far as A Gon goes, I guess I proved your point if the sole value of a player is defined by what he does at the plate. I guess I never got the memo that said, "defensive skills don't matter".

Eric_Davis
01-25-2007, 03:42 PM
Thanks for the article on Dayn Perry. He proves in this article what an idiot he is. I can ignore anything else he ever writes.

Who is Dayn Perry?

bottom_feeder
01-25-2007, 04:10 PM
I made a mistake with Conine's numbers. I used the SS postion replacement player stats for the A Gon comparison but I forgot to use the corresponding position replacement stats for Conine. Just noticed that.

I think only looking at last years stats is the definition of small sample size. I'd rather look at the entirty of the players stats, which will include all of the ups and down and give us a better picture. Then you factor in age, any decline over the past few years, etc. If you only look at last year you run the risk of panning/praising a player for one year that may or may not be repeated.

As far as A Gon goes, I guess I proved your point if the sole value of a player is defined by what he does at the plate. I guess I never got the memo that said, "defensive skills don't matter".

No. Defense does matter. I never said it didn't. But you don't pay 5 million/year for it when there's players that can give you Alex Gonzales' glove for much less. Offense is important too though, especially when you are a small market team shelling out 15 million for a SS. Don't you think my approach of just having a cattle call for SS makes more sense, particularly if the Reds are only looking for a glove at SS. A motivated Olmedo might've given us that. There's probably a rule V pick that could've fielded just as well as Gonzales. As I said, if you are going to punt offense at SS, just try to find a 2000 version of Castro.. Grab 3 young guys that have the potential to do that, and don't sign Castro or Gonzales.. Don't trade for Conine. Now you've got about 8 million to get a real bat for the OF and/or real bullpen help. 8 million is enough to get a player that will make a difference. Chaff like Gonzales, Conine, and Castro aren't going to make a difference.

Considering that Conine is 40 years old, and is likely to be a part time player, I think using his previous years stats is very fair. I agree that it's possible he might have a better year, but usually once players hit 40, they start to decline, not improve. Conine was a good player when he was younger. Using his career stats to project what he'll do this year is like using Larkin's career stats to predict what he'd do if he played one more year.

Ltlabner
01-25-2007, 04:28 PM
But you don't pay 5 million/year for it when there's players that can give you Alex Gonzales' glove for much less.

And who are the players who would comprise the cattle call list to provide Gonzo level defense?


Don't you think my approach of just having a cattle call for SS makes more sense.

No. I'd rather have an established player at such a critical position. Refer to some of WOY's posts on how many outs are created at SS. I don't want just some guy there.


Chaff like Gonzales, Conine, and Castro aren't going to make a difference.

I'm not a fan of Conine so I can't argue much with you there. Castro is a roll player. Ed Armbruster and Dan Dreissen contributed in ways as role players in the 1975 world serries. Yet, those are the kinds of guys who would be crucified here on RZ as "wastes of a roster spot". I'd say a highly regarded glove man at one of the most crucial defensive positions is a smart money move, not chaff.


Considering that Conine is 40 years old.....I agree that it's possible he might have a better year, but usually once players hit 40, they start to decline, not improve.

Which is exactly why I said that after looking at the carear stats you factor in age and any decline over the previous years. But judging a player soley on the previous years stats is missleading IMO.

bottom_feeder
01-25-2007, 04:51 PM
And who are the players who would comprise the cattle call list to provide Gonzo level defense?
.

That's WayneK's job. I'm not going to spend hours looking through every team's minor league system to give you a list of names of AAA or AA SS that could give you close to replacement level performance. It wouldn't convince you anyway. The point is that Gonzo hits at replacement level, and there's plenty of SS in the minors that can field ok, but not hit.
The cattle call could easily get you a player that is 80-90% as good as Gonzo for the minimum salary. Heck, Olmedo could do it if he got a little more focused on the field.

You want an established player at SS. Since Gonzo's only skill set is fielding, that isn't hard to replace.

The reason I said that I wouldn't resign Castro is because I'd rule V one SS, and trade for 2 other young ones. So, I'd get my backup SS from that cattle call as well. Since I have a rule V guy and possibly a young SS out of options, I'm not going to waste a roster spot on Castro.

You know the best part of going young at SS now? Well, when the rebuilding is over (if it's ever over), we might have a decent SS come out of giving a young guy a chance. Or we might have a decent young SS to trade for other needs. Gonzo serves no purpose other than being a temporary stop gap. He'll never be a desirable asset that other teams want to trade for.

I'm not saying a SS isn't important, but spending 8 million an OF bat and pitching is wiser than spending it on Gonzo/Castro/Conine. Also, realistically we aren't going to contend this year anyway, so why the urgency to get a veteran SS with no upside? More running in place by the Cincinnati Reds.

Ltlabner
01-25-2007, 05:10 PM
The cattle call could easily get you a player that is 80-90% as good as Gonzo for the minimum salary. Heck, Olmedo could do it if he got a little more focused on the field..

Looks like Olmedo would have to do more than get "a little" more focused to provide the cheap solution you speek of. Especially considering he's even worse at the plate than Gonzo, whom you find unacceptable.


FPCT RF ZR
Gonzo as SS .970 4.51 .843
Olmedo as SS .933 4.35 .855



Carear AVG OBP SLG OPS
Gonzo .246 .292 .392 .684
Olmedo .230 .280 .293 .573

gonelong
01-25-2007, 05:11 PM
I'm not a fan of Conine so I can't argue much with you there. Castro is a roll player. Ed Armbruster and Dan Dreissen contributed in ways as role players in the 1975 world serries. Yet, those are the kinds of guys who would be crucified here on RZ as "wastes of a roster spot".

Those kind of guys are useful to a championship caliber team. They aren't near as useful to a team that has more holes than a slice of swiss cheese.

If the Reds can take care of their gaping chest wound I'll worry a bit more about the small cuts on their arms and legs. As it is, they are putting gauze on the cuts on their arms and legs while they bleed out.

GL

Ltlabner
01-25-2007, 05:37 PM
Those kind of guys are useful to a championship caliber team. They aren't near as useful to a team that has more holes than a slice of swiss cheese.

If the Reds can take care of their gaping chest wound I'll worry a bit more about the small cuts on their arms and legs. As it is, they are putting gauze on the cuts on their arms and legs while they bleed out.

GL

You raise a good point that I can't refute much. However, if Wayne pulls off the move for a power bat, and one of these pitchers steps up (I know it's a strech) to help AH and BA we could very much be in contention, especially in this division.

TRF
01-25-2007, 05:41 PM
Thanks for the article on Dayn Perry. He proves in this article what an idiot he is. I can ignore anything else he ever writes.

Who is Dayn Perry?

Oh come on now. And where would you have Krivsky ranked? Really, it's ok to be objective and be a fan.

Ltlabner
01-25-2007, 07:22 PM
The cattle call could easily get you a player that is 80-90% as good as Gonzo for the minimum salary. Heck, Olmedo could do it if he got a little more focused on the field..

Apparently the Blue Jays didn't think much of Ray Ray's focus either.


To make room on the 40-man roster for Ohka, Toronto outrighted infielder Ray Olmedo to Triple-A Syracuse. The Jays claimed Olmedo off waivers from the Reds on Friday.

Source (http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070125&content_id=1786536&vkey=news_tor&fext=.jsp&c_id=tor)

bottom_feeder
01-26-2007, 01:06 PM
Looks like Olmedo would have to do more than get "a little" more focused to provide the cheap solution you speek of. Especially considering he's even worse at the plate than Gonzo, whom you find unacceptable.


That's why I said Olmedo was one of the candidates in the cattle call. I never said he was the answer, Mr Genius.

Olemedo might've ended up winning the backup job from Castro. Or if he had a legitimate chance of winning the starting job, he might step it up like Lopez finally did.

Olmedo is probably doomed to be a backup SS at best, but I would've rather kept him for the cattle call than to sign Juan Castro. As I said, I would've brought in 3 young SS from outside the organization, in addition to Olmedo.
Yes, there's a risk that they all end up stinking, but with the money I save I get improved pitching or a bat in the OF which is going to more than make up for a bad bat at SS. As it is, we're spending 6 million on Castro and Gonzo, and are guaranteed a offensive black hole. Let me add, we're stuck with Gonzo for 3 years. Therefore, even if we acquire a nice young SS, we'll probably have to pay someone to take Gonzo off our hands, just like we did with Larue.

bottom_feeder
01-26-2007, 01:09 PM
You raise a good point that I can't refute much. However, if Wayne pulls off the move for a power bat, and one of these pitchers steps up (I know it's a strech) to help AH and BA we could very much be in contention, especially in this division.

And if we weren't stuck with Gonzo, Conine, and Castro, we'd have 8 million dollars to get that power bat or get a pitcher, instead of just crossing our fingers now. That's the point I am trying to make. WayneK had 22 million in payroll flexibility (perhaps more) and he spent it very questionably.

Ltlabner
01-26-2007, 02:12 PM
That's why I said Olmedo was one of the candidates in the cattle call. I never said he was the answer, Mr Genius.

Olemedo might've ended up winning the backup job from Castro. Or if he had a legitimate chance of winning the starting job, he might step it up like Lopez finally did.

If Olmedo had a chance of winning anything he would have taken it by now. Especially considering that the Reds were looking for options last year.

And that no other team in all of MLB wants him doesn't say much for his skills cattle call or not.

But your main premise of just having a cattle call and see what shakes out makes zero sense, IMO. If you are going to do it at SS, why not do it at every position? Why, we could field an entire team for league minimum and save lots of money.

I'm not aruging that Wayne made some poor choices with his payroll allocations this offseason. I've said that over and over. I don't like Conine, Moeller, not thilled about Castro (he's an ok roll player but I would have rather focused on a prime need), Weathers and Stanton don't light my fire. I guess it's good he nailed down some periferal guys in the midst of the FA frenzy but none of those players fix the big problems of the team. Some of them worsen the problems.

But I don't agree with lumping Loshe and Gonzo into the "they aren't HOF calliber so they suck eggs" argument either. They both have flaws, without a doubt, but they do address some of the weakness of the team without having hideous contracts that anchor the team.

Ltlabner
01-26-2007, 02:14 PM
Let me add, we're stuck with Gonzo for 3 years.

Royce Clayton

If there is a market for his skills, I don't think we'd have a problem moving Gonzo if we suddenly had a chance to bring Jetter or Tejada to town.

bottom_feeder
01-26-2007, 03:58 PM
And that no other team in all of MLB wants him doesn't say much for his skills cattle call or not.

But your main premise of just having a cattle call and see what shakes out makes zero sense, IMO. If you are going to do it at SS, why not do it at every position? Why, we could field an entire team for league minimum and save lots of money.

The Reds are already doing it in one OF slot, 1b, a few bullpen slots, and slots #3-#5 in the rotation. All those slots are basically crapshots. I'd even say that catcher is a crap shoot next year as well. That's why the team doesn't look like a contender.

I'm not a big fan of Olemdo either.. If you think he sucks, cut him, and trade for another young SS.. I don't care.

It makes sense to take a risk with a guy like Sarloos who is relatively inexpensive and might improve. I'd even go so far as to say that Lohse isn't a horrible signing, given the inhouse alternatives. I expect him to disappoint though. We only need one of Weathers/Stanton/Cormier.. Wasting about 8-9 million on 3 veteran relievers who are almost ready for social security makes no sense to a rebuilding team, as they will have little value at the trade deadline.

My main point of this thread is that we could've gotten a player at least as good as 80-90% of Gonzo for the mimimum salary. With good scouting, we could get a player better than Gonzo.

WayneK spent his entire payroll flexibility (23 + million including Sarloos) on marginal players. Not all those moves sucked, but none of those players are going to be impact players in the near term or the long term. They are all moves that simply tread water.

WayneK has totally ignored the offense this offseason, and that's going to come back to bite him in the arse. The offense is going to have to be carried by Dunn, EE, and Jr. That's a recipe for disaster.






I'm not aruging that Wayne made some poor choices with his payroll allocations this offseason. I've said that over and over. I don't like Conine, Moeller, not thilled about Castro (he's an ok roll player but I would have rather focused on a prime need), Weathers and Stanton don't light my fire. I guess it's good he nailed down some periferal guys in the midst of the FA frenzy but none of those players fix the big problems of the team. Some of them worsen the problems.


That's what I'm saying. I'd rather Wayne went out and spent 15 million/year on a player that would make a difference, than the bucket of unmarketable spare parts he's accumulated. 2 years for Stanton is crazy.


But I don't agree with lumping Loshe and Gonzo into the "they aren't HOF calliber so they suck eggs" argument either. They both have flaws, without a doubt, but they do address some of the weakness of the team without having hideous contracts that anchor the team.

If we're lucky, Lohse will have a good start and be tradable at the deadline.
I think we control his rights for 2008, but he's likely to be pretty expensive, even if he's mediocre in 2007.

I think Gonzo did get a hideous contract. It will prevent us from upgrading SS for the next 3 years.

Lohse is a better pickup, because we can nontender him next year if he really stinks up the joint.

bottom_feeder
01-26-2007, 04:00 PM
Royce Clayton

If there is a market for his skills, I don't think we'd have a problem moving Gonzo if we suddenly had a chance to bring Jetter or Tejada to town.


The difference is that Clayton is signed to a one year, 1.5 million dollar contract.. Basically, a Castro contract.

Gonzo is a 14 million dollar, 3 year commitment.

Redsland
01-26-2007, 04:53 PM
If we're lucky, Lohse will have a good start and be tradable at the deadline.
I think we control his rights for 2008, but he's likely to be pretty expensive, even

Lohse is a better pickup, because we can nontender him next year if he really stinks up the joint.
He just had his third year of arb eligibiliy, so he should be a free agent after this season.

bottom_feeder
01-29-2007, 08:29 AM
He just had his third year of arb eligibiliy, so he should be a free agent after this season.


Thanks for the information.

So, it looks like Lohse will be gone after this year. Either he'll have a good year and price himself out of town or he'll stink so bad that we don't want him back.

I wonder if he'll be worth more than Zach Ward at the deadline?