Q & A: Krivsky Unfiltered

[Jpup]

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070211/SPT04/702110451/1071


BY JOHN FAY | JFAY@ENQUIRER.COM

We got general manager Wayne Krivsky's thoughts on some subjects near and dear to Reds fans. We started with the one that will be debated as long as he's GM - the trade that sent Austin Kearns, Felipe Lopez and Ryan Wagner to Washington for Bill Bray, Gary Majewski (far left) and Royce Clayton:

The Washington trade

"It's like any trade. You have to give it some time to see how it shakes out over time. Even the (Aaron) Harang-for-Jose Guillen trade - from what I understand - there were people saying, 'What are you doing getting a guy like that for a proven guy like Guillen?' It turns out it was a good move. When you're dealing with young players, it takes years. I'm satisfied with what we got. I don't like the circumstances of getting a player who was hurt at the time of the trade. We'll deal with that."

Homer Bailey

"We're glad we have him. I spent some time with him on the Winter Caravan. I thought he handled himself very well. He's mature, level-headed. He understands where he's at. He understands we're all in this together, that we want to do what's best for him long term and short term. I don't think he's getting too far ahead of himself. It's a mature attitude he has for a 20-year-old."
ADVERTISEMENT

ADAM DUNN

"Glad to have him, too. I know Adam put a lot of pressure on himself in September after (Ken) Griffey went out. I think from talking to him he feels embarrassed - I don't know if that's the right word - but I know he's disappointed. I like to think he's worked hard and he'll be much better for the experience of last year."

The closer situation

"That will evolve in spring training. I think we've got some capable guys. It will probably be a committee. It's up to Jerry (Narron) and our staff. They might experiment with some guys in spring training. It's up to them. Maybe we don't have one guy every night. Maybe we do. I'm not smart enough to figure that out. We've got a nice mix of veterans and young guys with good stuff. Any manager would like to have a regular closer." Eddie Guardado (above) signed a minor-league deal recently but won't be ready for the start of the season.

CEO Bob Castellini

"I can't say enough. He gave me my big opportunity that I've been waiting for for a long time. I'm very comfortable with our relationship. It's very open, very honest. He's very supportive. I feel very fortunate to have him as the owner. As long as I wanted an opportunity like this, to get it with an owner like him, it makes it twice as good."

[Johnny Footstool]

The Washington trade

"It's like any trade. You have to give it some time to see how it shakes out over time. Even the (Aaron) Harang-for-Jose Guillen trade - from what I understand - there were people saying, 'What are you doing getting a guy like that for a proven guy like Guillen?' It turns out it was a good move. When you're dealing with young players, it takes years. I'm satisfied with what we got. I don't like the circumstances of getting a player who was hurt at the time of the trade. We'll deal with that."

I don't think I've heard that from Krivsky's mouth before.

The Jose Guillen trade was a deadline deal that brought talent to a going-nowhere team in exchange for a pending free agent. The Kearns/Lopez deal involved jettisoning two everyday players from a contending team in exchange for two bullpen arms (one unproven, one with a mediocre ceiling), an ancient shortstop, and minor league throw-ins. It occurred well before the deadline, and Krivsky stated at the time that the bullpen needed *immediate* help.

Apples and oranges.

Just admit it was a bad deal, Wayne. They happen sometimes. Admit it and move on.

[dougdirt]

Just admit it was a bad deal, Wayne. They happen sometimes. Admit it and move on.

This isn't directed at you, so don't take it this way, its just a generalization. But even if he comes out and says it was a bad move and moves on (which it seems he has moved on) I don't think anyone else is going to move on who doesn't like the trade, becuase it is brought up on this board alone 20 times a day.

[Jaycint]

The closer situation

"That will evolve in spring training. I think we've got some capable guys. It will probably be a committee. It's up to Jerry (Narron) and our staff. They might experiment with some guys in spring training. It's up to them. Maybe we don't have one guy every night. Maybe we do. I'm not smart enough to figure that out. We've got a nice mix of veterans and young guys with good stuff. Any manager would like to have a regular closer." Eddie Guardado (above) signed a minor-league deal recently but won't be ready for the start of the season.

That's reassuring...

[Red Leader]

I think it was a bad trade. I think Krivsky made the deal with the hope of immediate help for the bullpen and winning the division in '06. That didn't happen. Both players underperformed badly.

Having said all of that, I'd be pretty upset if Krivsky came out and said "my mistake, that was a bad trade that I made." He's got 2 players that he traded FOR that are on this team. They are a part of the Cincinnati Reds this year and will be for the next couple years at least. What would that say to them if Krivsky came out and said "I made an awful trade."

You can't do that if you are Wayne Krivsky, even if you know it's true.

[Johnny Footstool]

Maybe it's just me, but I like a leader who can recognize his own screwups, admit to them, and learn from them. I can't stand guys who rationalize like a 5 year-old telling his parents why it's not his fault that he broke the cookie jar.

[Ltlabner]

Maybe it's just me, but I like a leader who can recognize his own screwups, admit to them, and learn from them. I can't stand guys who rationalize like a 5 year-old telling his parents why it's not his fault that he broke the cookie jar.

I do too Johnny, but can't he do that without running to the press to issue a mea culpa? There are other considerations, as Red Leader pointed out, that make it less appropriate for a leader to basically say, "the guys I got sucked" in the press. Behind closed doors is probably the better way to handle it.

And the cynic in me thinks that even if he were to publicially admit he was wrong people would continue to complain because either he didn't admit he was wrong the way they wanted him to, or because a leader should lead, or whatever reason they can manufacture. There are some folks who just aren't going to let the trade go and no matter what the guy does they are going to dog him for it, IMO.

BTW - that doesn't mean people shouldn't say they don't like the trade if they don't like it, but some people just can't let something go and are going to think Wayne sucks no matter what he does because of the trade. It's a very small segment, but it does exist.

[Johnny Footstool]

I do too Johnny, but can't he do that without running to the press to issue a mea culpa? There are other considerations, as Red Leader pointed out, that make it less appropriate for a leader to basically say, "the guys I got sucked" in the press. Behind closed doors is probably the better way to handle it.

And the cynic in me thinks that even if he were to publicially admit he was wrong people would continue to complain because either he didn't admit he was wrong the way they wanted him to, or because a leader should lead, or whatever reason they can manufacture. There are some folks who just aren't going to let the trade go and no matter what the guy does they are going to dog him for it, IMO.

BTW - that doesn't mean people shouldn't say they don't like the trade if they don't like it, but some people just can't let something go and are going to think Wayne sucks no matter what he does because of the trade. It's a very small segment, but it does exist.

I don't think he needs to run to the press with it, but when asked (as he so often is), it would be nice if he would cop to it. I think rationalizing it will haunt him more (especially in the eyes of the fans) than saying "Hey, it was a bad deal. I thought it would work but it didn't. I won't let that kind of thing happen again."

[Ltlabner]

I don't think he needs to run to the press with it, but when asked (as he so often is), it would be nice if he would cop to it. I think rationalizing it will haunt him more (especially in the eyes of the fans) than saying "Hey, it was a bad deal. I thought it would work but it didn't. I won't let that kind of thing happen again."

I guess it all depends on how he handles it/says it.

The rationalizing seems to hurt him in the eyes of the serrious fans. They are the ones still discussing it, talking about it's ramifications, etc. Casual fans probably have already forgotten the trade and moved on from it. That's why I question whether "applogizing" for it would do any good. It might placate 15% of the fans, while 85% of the fans could care less.

At the end of the day, if Wayne thinks it was a good move, he's likely not going to cop to it.

[Johnny Footstool]

At the end of the day, if Wayne thinks it was a good move, he's likely not going to cop to it.

What really bothers me is the idea that he might still think it was a good move.

:shudder:

[M2]

I don't think he needs to run to the press with it, but when asked (as he so often is), it would be nice if he would cop to it. I think rationalizing it will haunt him more (especially in the eyes of the fans) than saying "Hey, it was a bad deal. I thought it would work but it didn't. I won't let that kind of thing happen again."

He has to walk a tight line on that, though. Bray and Majewski are still in town and he surely doesn't want to throw them under a bus.

So, he could probably say the deal didn't work out last year the way he had hoped and that Bray and Majewski will need to step up in order to justify the deal.

[westofyou]

Maybe it's just me, but I like a leader who can recognize his own screwups, admit to them, and learn from them. I can't stand guys who rationalize like a 5 year-old telling his parents why it's not his fault that he broke the cookie jar.

You also said last week that you didn't like to look at trades from the standpoint of what falls after them due to the trade. That's a major difference in philosophy from scout based analysis, you call it rationalization and he'd probably call it reality I guess. Plus you have already termed it (and many others) as a "screwup" whilst he follows the aforementioned "work in progress" ideal.

However many minds around here are already made up, as is his. I don't see the difference.

[DoogMinAmo]

I think it was a bad trade. I think Krivsky made the deal with the hope of immediate help for the bullpen and winning the division in '06. That didn't happen. Both players underperformed badly.

Having said all of that, I'd be pretty upset if Krivsky came out and said "my mistake, that was a bad trade that I made." He's got 2 players that he traded FOR that are on this team. They are a part of the Cincinnati Reds this year and will be for the next couple years at least. What would that say to them if Krivsky came out and said "I made an awful trade."

You can't do that if you are Wayne Krivsky, even if you know it's true.


My thoughts exactly. What he says and what he knows and feels may be two entirely different things, politicking is important, no matter how much many of us may despise it.

[DoogMinAmo]

He has to walk a tight line on that, though. Bray and Majewski are still in town and he surely doesn't want to throw them under a bus.

So, he could probably say the deal didn't work out last year the way he had hoped and that Bray and Majewski will need to step up in order to justify the deal.

That is almost word for word a quote from him I had seen on this board not too long ago. The question is, if he had said exactly what M2 has written above, is that enough to quell those who feel he could make the same mistake again?

[Roy Tucker]

Yeah, with Bray and Majewski still on the team, WK can't really say what he thinks of the trade.

What's done is done and Krivsky/Narron have to make the best of what the realities are today. Undermining players still on the team doesn't accomplish that no matter how much we want to know what he *really* thinks.

Maybe after Krivsky moves on after some number of years, we'll see an interview with him in 2017 saying "yeah, I really bollixed up that trade, it didn't turn out at all like I wanted, I wish I never made it".

[pedro]

What bothers me is that no matter what Krivsky says someone always brings it back to the trade and how he was a moron for making it and then goes on to parse his every word and cry like their wife was cheating on them because they don't feel he's being honest with them.

Can we just start a sub forum called "the trade" and then everyone can go cry in their beer there?

[dunner13]

What if darryl thompson puts it together this year and dominates the way bailey did last year? I doubt he will have the strikeouts that Bailey does but he could put up a great ERA and move up through the system pretty fast. If he establishes himself as our best pitching prospect after Bailey, how much better does that make the trade?

Not saying it will happen, just saying What If?

[Johnny Footstool]

What bothers me is that no matter what Krivsky says someone always brings it back to the trade and how he was a moron for making it and then goes on to parse his every word and cry like their wife was cheating on them because they don't feel he's being honest with them.

Can we just start a sub forum called "the trade" and then everyone can go cry in their beer there?

When he's asked a direct question about the trade, then yeah, I'm interested in his response.

When his response doesn't seem to indicate that he realizes how bad the deal was, then yeah, I'm going to call him out on it.

If you'd rather not listen to me "cry in my beer" about it, you certainly don't have to read the Krivsky/Trade threads.

Or maybe you can just pull an Armin Tanzarian, pretend the trade never happened, and never speak of it again under penalty of torture.

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally posted by Johnny Footstool
When he's asked a direct question about the trade, then yeah, I'm interested in his response.

When his response doesn't seem to indicate that he realizes how bad the deal was, then yeah, I'm going to call him out on it.

If you'd rather not listen to me "cry in my beer" about it, you certainly don't have to read the Krivsky/Trade threads.

Or maybe you can just pull an Armin Tanzarian, pretend the trade never happened, and never speak of it again under penalty of torture.


The fact is although most believe that deal was made for the present when it was made, I don't believe WK did or does. Sure he wanted too stay competitive at the time but he also wanted to find a way to get better for the future at the same time. And I never felt it was a deal strictly for the present either because of two reasons.

1. He has said from the beginning that if he sees an opportunity to better the team he would do it. He never said it was necc. going to make us better for the present and anyone who thought that when he said it needs to back-up and go over that idea again.

And 2. He comes from a philosophy that says acquire players who are ripe for the picking (a possible impact arm whom is being overlooked) and groom them in the right way to become that player.

If you add those 2 things to the fact that he received these arms from a guy who knows absolutely nothing about harvesting pitching in any way (except has beens who are on the downside). I'd say let's take the wait and see approach, as I have been saying for awhile already.

Bottom line take on this deal and any other for me is very simple. What you want to acquire is people who not only have talent but also the makeup to take advantage of that talent. They have to be both willing and able to do this.

I'm not sure Kearns was willing too at that point and perhaps he never will be (I'm not saying he won't get there, I'm saying he wasn't progressing like any of us believed he should and still hasn't). Lopez on the other hand showed tons of willingness IMHO to improve but perhaps wasn't able to (at times he seemed like an airhead to some extent), he may still pan out but we needed to give up something of value to get these guys.

A set-up man with a very good track record (a better track record than anyone else in the trade at the time) a very young lefty with a live arm and a bulldogs makeup (just watch his game face when he is on the mound, he's got some fire in his belly).

And a very good minor league arm (Darryl Thompson for those who don't seem to remember he was a part of that trade) who's ascent closely resembles the trek that Francisco Liriano took to the majors. I'm of course not comparing their talents but their journey.

So IMO it very much is and always has been a wait-and-see deal and not necc. a win now (then) deal. But most would rather crucify Krivsky (mainly because he's not out dealing for marquee guys than he cannot yet afford) than to see it for what it may actually be and very likely is and always was.....PART OF A PLAN.

I'm not calling you out necc. and saying that you are one who is purposely being adamant just so you can hate on him. Perhaps you just overlooked something, or maybe I have.

But I have suffered long enough as a fan of this organization and my patience is wearing thin but I have to be realistic about how to improve an organization that was so devoid of talent from top to bottom. It didn't get this bad in one season and it's not going to get fixed in one either.

It took years for Marge, Bowden, Allen & Lindner and an endless supply of boneheads in scouting, development and coaching to crumble Rome and it will take more than one Day for it to be built again. That day looks to be approaching if our luck holds out this time (Bailey, Votto, Cueto, Bruce, Wood and the like) so I am willing to sit patient for a while longer before I declare war on the guys trying to re-build it. Hopefully more of you whom haven't taken this approach will join those of us who have.

[Scrap Irony]

He'd be nuts to cop to any negative viewpoint of the deal, no matter how "stand up" he might be.

Disagree?

Name any other GM in the history of the game that would.

None. Zip. Nada.

Maybe-- maybe-- he might say something ten years or so after the deal, but the year after? With those players still on the team? Even Bill DeWitt didn't say anything one year after the Robbie for Pappas deal.

[westofyou]

Even Bill DeWitt didn't say anything one year after the Robbie for Pappas deal. He just sold his team and shed a tear.

[MartyFan]

I don't think the deal is as bad as everyone else and I STILL think there is a way the Reds WIN in THE TRADE...I don't think Lopez is anything special...Kearns was never going to do anything in a Reds uniform and honestly, too many people said the same thing about him and Dunn both...so one of them had to go. Wagner...mishandled as a kid by his current GM so he could save his job...maybe he will be another one of Dr K's specials before long?

[vaticanplum]

Krivsky likes Dunn, or at least he believes in him. I am sure of it. Almost.

[Newman4]

I agree the deal stunk then, stinks now and probably will in the future. I'm past that. What I like is Wayne's "Spin of the Month". We've heard "payroll flexibility", "trading the disgruntles", "Hey, he cheated b/c Maj was hurt", "avoid arbitration" and the ever popular "veteran presence at SS". It's like the crap in the tabloids: same old stories, same people involved, same results....but you still read about it, take sides and talk about it with your friends.

[Caveat Emperor]

It's like the crap in the tabloids: same old stories, same people involved, same results....but you still read about it, take sides and talk about it with your friends.

As long as 85 years from now my grandkids aren't talking about the Curse of the Ears or some similar nonsense, I suppose it is all fun and games.

But, seriously, it was just a bad trade -- not everything that comes after it is in some way related to it.

[remdog]

I don't think I've heard that from Krivsky's mouth before.

The Jose Guillen trade was a deadline deal that brought talent to a going-nowhere team in exchange for a pending free agent. The Kearns/Lopez deal involved jettisoning two everyday players from a contending team in exchange for two bullpen arms (one unproven, one with a mediocre ceiling), an ancient shortstop, and minor league throw-ins. It occurred well before the deadline, and Krivsky stated at the time that the bullpen needed *immediate* help.

Apples and oranges.

Just admit it was a bad deal, Wayne. They happen sometimes. Admit it and move on.

I'll take Johnny's viewpoint on this one. Krivsky could say, when asked, that he's happy with the guys he got and he thinks that they have a great future. But, unfortunately, last year it wasn't enough to put the Reds over the top and he continues to work to accumulate the pieces needed to do that.

(He doesn't even need to mention that he gutted a big part of the offense, got taken to the woodshed by Bowden and schooled on checking medicals when making a trade, acquired a SS that was even worse defensively than the one he traded and is reduced to hoping a sore-armed former top prospect will make a comeback to balance the deal. We're all willing to forgive and forget. :) )

Rem

[membengal]

Mario-Rijo wrote:

"And a very good minor league arm (Darryl Thompson for those who don't seem to remember he was a part of that trade) who's ascent closely resembles the trek that Francisco Liriano took to the majors. I'm of course not comparing their talents but their journey."

M-R:

That may be the only time we ever read Liriano and Thompson in the same sentence again (unless Thompson blows out his elbow too). Nowhere have I heard Thompson breathed about in the same class as Liriano was. Am I missing something that you have read somewhere? If so, I would like to read it. Otherwise, that's a rationalization for the trade that I cannot come close to buying...

[tbball10]

if bray and magic pitch like they are capable this year everyone will shut up. i am also in the minority that believes we can end up winners of this deal.

although i thought kearns and felo were decent players, i do not think i value them as high as most people on this board. i loved them both when they were coming up, but lopez is a sub-par defensive ss, and i dont think kearns will ever be the same after that hit he took from ray king. he seems to struggle greatly with pulling the ball with power.

[registerthis]

I don't think the deal is as bad as everyone else and I STILL think there is a way the Reds WIN in THE TRADE

I don't think you can look at this trade with a "won" or "lost" mindset. The more I look at it, the more I think, simply, "meh." At first, i was ardently opposed to it, and as a trade designed to improve the club's immediate chances of obtaining a postseason berth, it failed miserably. There's really no debating that point. But I also think the deal could have some as-yet-unseen benefits for the club that, perhaps, were not immediately recognized at the time of the deal.

To begin, it's going to be nearly impossible for Bray and Majewski, alone, to equal the production that was lost when Kearns and Lopez departed. Unless one of them somehow develops into the stud closer that this team needs, it's highly unlikely that two middle relievers are ever going to offer the Reds similar production as two established, productive offensive players. So you can't look at the trade from that perspective alone.

However, moving Kearns out of right field presents the Reds with an option that could help address perhaps the team's most visible flaw: it is an opportunity to get Junior's shoddy defense out of centerfield whilst keeping his bat in the lineup, while also presenting an opportunity for a superior defensive player (Denorfria) with an opportunity to play every day.

Additionally, there is no question that Gonzalez is inferior to Lopez from an offensive standpoint, but his defense is unquestionably better. So the trade, indirectly, presents the Reds with the opportunity to have one of the better up-the-middle defenses in the NL, a glaring weakness on last year's team--and of particular importance for a team who's pitching staff is mediocre, at best.

Finally, pitching to their capabilities, there's no doubt that Bray and majewski offer two quality bullpen arms, a valuable commodity that can't be overlooked. No, I don't think either one of them is going to set the world on fire, but concerning the dearth of talent in the Reds bullpen, it's something that can't be overlooked.

Thus, in a nutshell, the trade has worked out like this: potential for worse right field defense but better centerfield defense (a plus), worse offensive production but markedly improved defense at shortstop (a wash), improved relief pitching (a plus) but likely overall lower offensive production (a negative.) Someone else might disagree, but that's how I'm viewing things.

So, no, the trade likely hasn't worked out as Krivsky intended, and there are certainly some aspects of it that leave much to be desired. But it also presents the Reds with some bona fide opportunities to make improvements to the club, so "the trade" certainly has some positive aspects to it as well.

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally posted by membengal
M-R:

That may be the only time we ever read Liriano and Thompson in the same sentence again (unless Thompson blows out his elbow too). Nowhere have I heard Thompson breathed about in the same class as Liriano was. Am I missing something that you have read somewhere? If so, I would like to read it. Otherwise, that's a rationalization for the trade that I cannot come close to buying...


Memphis, read the last sentence of that paragraph.
I'm of course not comparing their talents but their journey."


However I did read somewhere after the deal about his talents and he did not sound too be that far off from being a legit prospect. I will look to see if I can find the information I am referring too. Of course like I said before I am not comparing him talent wise to Liriano but WK got him under similiar circumstances as he did Liriano at a very close stage in his career.

[Razor Shines]

I'll take Johnny's viewpoint on this one. Krivsky could say, when asked, that he's happy with the guys he got and he thinks that they have a great future. But, unfortunately, last year it wasn't enough to put the Reds over the top and he continues to work to accumulate the pieces needed to do that.
(He doesn't even need to mention that he gutted a big part of the offense, got taken to the woodshed by Bowden and schooled on checking medicals when making a trade, acquired a SS that was even worse defensively than the one he traded and is reduced to hoping a sore-armed former top prospect will make a comeback to balance the deal. We're all willing to forgive and forget. :) )

Rem
Because some of us don't know it wasn't enough to get the Reds over the top last year? Why would he need to say that? As far as the rest of your statement goes I think he's said things very similar to it.

I think he answers the questions about the trade the only way he can. Most of the guys he got are still on the Reds, he can't say that he wishes he could trade them back.