PDA

View Full Version : 2007 Reds = YAAAAWWWN........



Edskin
04-23-2007, 08:08 AM
First of all, let me confess that I am pretty wrapped up in the NBA Playoffs right now-- being a Cavs fan and all, so it may help to explain this post.

Having said that, I have watched the majority of the Reds' games so far this year, and the few I've missed, I've followed as closely as possible.

My assessment?

Yawn.

I mean that in two ways.

1. The team is not very fun to watch. Both the offensive production and the offensive approach (including line-up construction) are tough to watch. I am a fence-rider when it comes to Dunn, I don't love the guy, but I also acknowledge his strengths, but it has become fairly clear to me that the guy is simply never going to be a big run-producer in terms of RBI's. Contrary to popular opinion, I DO believe that hurts the team to a certain extent. And Narron makes it all the worse by keeping him out of the 2 hole, where I believe Dunn truly belongs.

I am fairly pleased with the starting pitching, but the bullpen is laughable, which makes Krivsky look really, really, really bad.

2. I see virtually no upside. It's as if the goal in building this team was to field a squad that could win no less than 77 games, or win no more than 81 games. It's one thing if we were a .500 team w/ a bunch of young guys everywhere, but we are LITTERED with veterans. And some of those veterans carry hefty contracts.

It's as if the Reds have gotten themselves caught in between no longer wanting to be a laughingstock (which they aren't) and not really wanting to make the tough decisions to truly turn the organization around (which they aren't doing).

The relative malaise of the Central division should keep me "interested" throughout most of the summer. While I can't see the Reds getting "hot," I also can't really see us tanking either. I think we'll basically stay the current course-- and that course will probably at least keep us in the fringes of contention. And yeah, that's more fun than being 15 games out on August 1st.

This is a boring team, both on the field and in the "hope" department.

I think 9-10 says it all. Might as well be 80-82.

camisadelgolf
04-23-2007, 09:39 AM
. . . and how does this differ from the past few years? I believe there is more hope for this team than there has been for a while.

Krivsky came into a near-hopeless situation, and I'm very happy with what he's done. It took Bowden/O'Brien a good deal of time to make this mess, and in theory, it should take at least as long to fix it.

Gripe all you want. I'm enjoying the team for what it is--a small-to-medium market team hamstrung by Griffey's and Milton's contracts. They probably won't win the division this year, but I believe that, with the new GM and ownership, they have more reason for optimism than the following organizations in the years to come:

For obvioius reasons: Tampa Bay, Florida, Pittsburgh, Washington, Kansas City

For being in the same division as the Red Sox and Yankees: Baltimore and Toronto

Because history repeats itself: Texas, Chicago Cubs, San Diego, Colorado

Because they have no future: Detroit, San Francisco, Seattle

Puffy
04-23-2007, 09:52 AM
Are people surprised at this? I mean this was the Twins before Johan arrived. They were Miectwourhkjfnz at first, Rivas at second, Guzman at short, Koskie at third and an outfield of Jones, Hunter and whoever they could find. They were boring, oh so boring to watch. And if they didn't play in a putrid division they wouldn't have won anything.

But you play where they put you - however, one thing people seem to forget is how pedestrian those teams were. They see division winner and think those teams were actually good. They weren't.

REDREAD
04-23-2007, 10:01 AM
Another year of running in place (at best).

People are saying that Wayne needs time to fix this club. IMO, he's taken a couple steps forward, but he's taken a lot of small steps backwards.. Examples: Cormier and Stanton won't necessarily kill the club, but they don't really help the club either, and they waste money. Obviously, Wayne has also had a major blunder which I won't bring up now.

In summary, I'm not sure the club is that much better off than it was when DanO left. I'm not sure the club will improve upon it's W-L record from the previous year. Sure, the pen won't give up 5 runs every night, but it's STILL a liablity. Edwin vanishing has almost negated the offense Josh has added..

I just don't see any significant progress this year.

KronoRed
04-23-2007, 12:26 PM
But you play where they put you - however, one thing people seem to forget is how pedestrian those teams were. They see division winner and think those teams were actually good. They weren't.

Well said.

None of those teams got to the World Series, only one even got out of the 1st round, that's not what I want, I want banners and stuff :D

BRM
04-23-2007, 12:29 PM
Well said.

None of those teams got to the World Series, only one even got out of the 1st round, that's not what I want, I want banners and stuff :D

You're such a materialistic person. ;)

Reds1
04-23-2007, 01:41 PM
It's awfully early to really know what this team is going to be. The 1st couple weeks we had the best pen and the last couple we had the worst. My guess is we are somewhere in the middle. We've had a bunch of injuries as I feel Bray was a top pen guy. The fact is we need a closer and all the other places fit into place. We have a much better defensive SS and the middle is much better than last year. We have an exciting new player in Hamilton that leads all rookies in every offensive cateragory. The pitching is much improved - including Milton. AAA starters also excite me! The team is right in the thick of it despite a rough offensive start. We haven't had Griffey this past series. This line up really needs him. We also just happen to catch the wrong pitchers for Philly and Houston is playing out there butt. It's all good! Just early. I for one am still very excited about this year and the moves we made. I still could have my early season blinders on, but so be it! :)

Falls City Beer
04-23-2007, 04:36 PM
You think this is bad; wait till the injuries start to mount up.

This team is Pirates-bad. If Harang or Arroyo miss a month or so, this team will lose 100 games.

And there are no Santanas on the horizon. Or Joe Nathans for that matter.

Puffy
04-23-2007, 04:39 PM
Well, we are hoping that Homer is our Santana.

Then again - Harang and Arroyo are greater than Radke and Milton circa 2001.

Still, I am not looking forward to the slightly above average starting pitching, average bullpen, very good defense and poor offense era that we seem headed for. Its a recipe for 83 wins teams.

boognish
04-23-2007, 04:48 PM
You think this is bad; wait till the injuries start to mount up.

This team is Pirates-bad. If Harang or Arroyo miss a month or so, this team will lose 100 games.

And there are no Santanas on the horizon. Or Joe Nathans for that matter.

Maybe Wayne can orchestrate a deal for two like them out of a league average catcher...well, I guess we can wait for the PTBNL for which we traded LaRue and 3MM.

Ltlabner
04-23-2007, 04:50 PM
Edwin vanishing has almost negated the offense Josh has added..

How is Edwin getting off to a slow start Waynes fault? This almost implies that Wayne has somehow made a mistake by going with Edwin. Maybe I am missing something?

REDREAD
04-23-2007, 04:54 PM
How is Edwin getting off to a slow start Waynes fault? This almost implies that Wayne has somehow made a mistake by going with Edwin. Maybe I am missing something?

It's not Wayne's fault that EdE is struggling.. I almost put "Not Wayne's fault" after that statement :) However, it is Wayne's fault that the only offense he added this offseason was Conine.

Yeah, he added Hamilton, but obviously no one was counting on him to be the cleanup hitter..That was just a pleasant surprise.

My point is that while we've gotten a bonus in Hamilton, that has been offset by EdE vanishing.. thus, the offense continues to sputter, particularly against LH pitchers, just like last year.

Falls City Beer
04-23-2007, 05:00 PM
Well, we are hoping that Homer is our Santana.

Then again - Harang and Arroyo are greater than Radke and Milton circa 2001.

Still, I am not looking forward to the slightly above average starting pitching, average bullpen, very good defense and poor offense era that we seem headed for. Its a recipe for 83 wins teams.

Homer is not Santana. He's not even in the same universe with Santana. Santana is a Pedro/R. Johnson once-in-a-generation talent.

And if this team, as currently constituted, wins 83 games I'll buy every person on this board the alcoholic beverage of his or her choice.

Ltlabner
04-23-2007, 05:04 PM
And if this team, as currently constituted, wins 83 games I'll buy every person on this board the alcoholic beverage of his or her choice.

Why don't you be a real dare devil and make the same bet with the "as currently constituted" caveat removed?

I mean, we all know Wayne is no Jocketty or Schuerholz (as you occasionally remind us) so you shouldn't have to worry that he might make a move to improve the team.

Live on the edge :p:

Puffy
04-23-2007, 05:05 PM
Homer is not Santana. He's not even in the same universe with Santana. Santana is a Pedro/R. Johnson once-in-a-generation talent.

And if this team, as currently constituted, wins 83 games I'll buy every person on this board the alcoholic beverage of his or her choice.

You misunderstand me - I'm not saying this team will win 83 games. I'm saying that Wayne's model, i.e., what he seems to me and me alone to be building, is an 83 win year in year out team.

Falls City Beer
04-23-2007, 05:11 PM
Why don't you be a real dare devil and make the same bet with the "as currently constituted" caveat removed?

I mean, we all know Wayne is no Jocketty or Schuerholz (as you occasionally remind us) so you shouldn't have to worry that he might make a move to improve the team.

Live on the edge :p:

You're on. I think Wayne's current bout of trading constipation should last at least till the trading deadline, at which point it'll be too late to dredge up this Titanic.

Falls City Beer
04-23-2007, 05:11 PM
You misunderstand me - I'm not saying this team will win 83 games. I'm saying that Wayne's model, i.e., what he seems to me and me alone to be building, is an 83 win year in year out team.

I see. I agree with that.

Ltlabner
04-23-2007, 05:18 PM
You're on. I think Wayne's current bout of trading constipation should last at least till the trading deadline, at which point it'll be too late to dredge up this Titanic.

Well, I was just joshing with you really, but sounds like you are in a betting mood so I'll have to take you up on it.

remdog
04-23-2007, 05:33 PM
Well, I was just joshing with you really, but sounds like you are in a betting mood so I'll have to talk you up on it.

Ask FCB where his kid is.....

Rem

Ltlabner
04-23-2007, 05:39 PM
Ask FCB where his kid is.....

Rem

Huh?

I don't get it (shrug) :)

remdog
04-23-2007, 05:55 PM
Huh?

I don't get it (shrug) :)

First of all, that is now known as the (famous shrug). Secondly, FCB has always lived on the edge on this board, i.e. when he put up his kid as the prize that Jimmy Hyanes wouldn't win 15 games.

Now, I think you may get the idea....:laugh:

Rem

Redsland
04-23-2007, 07:07 PM
Secondly, FCB has always lived on the edge on this board, i.e. when he put up his kid as the prize that Jimmy Hyanes wouldn't win 15 games.
15? You're being too kind. FCB wagered his firstborn child that Jimmy Haynes wouldn't win 14 (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2162) games. Then Jimmy went and overachieved.

:beerme:

remdog
04-23-2007, 07:17 PM
Geez, you stats guys.....LMAO.

Rem

WVRedsFan
04-23-2007, 09:35 PM
If you want to get really depressed, look at our lineup:

1B - Scott Hattebert and Jeff Conine. One 38 and theother 40. Neither speedy or power-laden and costing us a couple of million total, but old guys injure easily and the gamble is Votto is the future. If so, why not have him playing today and save a million? It couldn't be any worse.

2B - Brandon Phillips. The kid had a career year last year and this year has Pokey Reese disease--swing for the fences. He's never had a decent OBP and yet the manager bats him mostly in the 2-3 hole. He's speedy and has range, but most of the pitchers are fly ball pitchers and his spped is not utilized.

3B - Edwin Encarnacion - Most feel he will be a star, but he can't throw for beans. He's also been picked on by the manager for loafing and making errors and has been taken out of games. He's missed at-bats for the likes of Rich Aurilia and Juan Castro, and Ryan Freel. What a way to develop what they think is a super star in the making...

SS - Alex Gonzalez - What did Krivsky pay for him? $4 million per year? And yet he is on his way to having a career error high. And he was taken for his defense. He's not a consistent hitter nor is he a high OBP man.

LF - Adam Dunn - Most say he strikes out too much, so you alter the hitting style that got him that +/- .900 OPS and 40 HR's the last two years. In the meantime, you give him a 2 year deal that you know he'll walk away from at the end. He struggle as he is put in the 2 hole then the 3 hole then the 4 hole and even the 5th hole and you wonder why he's having trouble adjusting. Oh yeah, he can't field.

CF - Ryan Freel - The fan favorite. Don't get a jump on the ball? D-I-V-E! The fans love it. Marty goes on and on about how much effort he gives. George Grande calls him "exciting". He's too impatient to be a great leadoff guy and is too streaky to have a high OPB. He never drives in any runs even when given the opportunity and gets hurt often. Wow.

RF - Ken Griffey, Jr. - My favorite Red, but he gets injured often which causes the fans to go into full cardiac arrest when they look at his contract. When he plays, he is the most offensively productive Red, even though some thing his bat speed is slowing down and he's fat.

ALT OF - Josh Hamilton - A kid who has it all, but his long-term worth still needs to be proven. Trouble is, even when he's playing and hitting in the power positions, the 1-3 hitters aren't getting on for him to drive in. Not only that, but he's got a history of substance abuse problems that might flare up at any moment. Iffy is the word.

C - David Ross and Javy Valentin - Worst catching corps I can ever remember in a Reds uniform. Ross was a big tease last year. Most realized this, but Krivsky did not. Now he and we pay.

SP - Harang, Arroyo, Belisle, and Lohse seem solid even if Milton is a time bomb. No complaints.

RP - Ugh! As much as Krivsky has given away to build a bullpen, you'd think these guys would be better, but they're not. Stanton and Cormier are old has-beens and yet we spend millions to get them--even gave Cormier an extention! Coffey is still not mature enough to pitch in tough situations. He's also off and on at times. Saarloos and Cont are adequate but not spectacular. Santos is young. What a mess. We have no closer unless ED Eddie comes back and if he does can he pitch? Weathers is not depdable. To think we gave up two starters for two pitchers still in AAA who have not shown most folks (who know pitching) anything. And a bigger question is...who goes down when they come up? Once again, what a mess.

There you have it. Krivsky has built an unexciting team, much like the Minnesota Twins he came from, based on pitching and fielding. Only trouble is that this team is rarely pitching and never hitting. Krivsky gets good marks for some of his moves (including revitalizing the farm system and some of the individual deals that paid off last year), but overall this team is worse than the team that started out the 2006 season. Why? Very simply, they can't score enough runs to win complicated by personnel who are hackers and poor lineup construction.

Not much fun at all.

Patrick Bateman
04-23-2007, 09:56 PM
1B - Scott Hattebert and Jeff Conine. One 38 and theother 40. Neither speedy or power-laden and costing us a couple of million total, but old guys injure easily and the gamble is Votto is the future. If so, why not have him playing today and save a million? It couldn't be any worse.


These guys have actually been some of the more dependable guys in the line-up so far. They are very far off from being great, and play at a below average rate for 1st basemen, but they could not be replaced by a guy who is struggling to hit the ball in AAA. Votto needs more time, otherwise, he's just going to contribute to the problem.

WVRedsFan
04-24-2007, 12:08 AM
These guys have actually been some of the more dependable guys in the line-up so far. They are very far off from being great, and play at a below average rate for 1st basemen, but they could not be replaced by a guy who is struggling to hit the ball in AAA. Votto needs more time, otherwise, he's just going to contribute to the problem.

I totally agree about Votto. Hatteberg was OK last year, but he's looking more and more like the Hatteberg that Oakland gave up on these days. And Conine came in and gave the team some spark, but old guys get injured easier and there he was unavailable for days.

If Votto wasn't the answer, Krivsky should have gone shopping and looked around. Trouble was, and is, he gave away all his trading chips (most all of them) in a trade for relief pitching that's still in AAA and a shortstop who was washed up. That's why I do not admire him. Yes, the pitching is better, but the defense is similar to last year while the offense is horrible. Not an improvement in my book.

Ltlabner
04-24-2007, 08:08 AM
If you want to get really depressed, look at our lineup:

There you have it. Krivsky has built an unexciting team, much like the Minnesota Twins he came from, based on pitching and fielding.

Or one could read any number of posts and threads on RZ, especially a game thread after a loss.

What does "unexciting" team mean? People keep tossing that out there and in many cases it's folks who say things like, "all I care about it winning". But there seems to be this new cavat latley that those wins better be exciting too. It's almost as if some folks would actually be dissapointed if we won but it was a "boring game" (and I'm asuming boring = lack of huge run scoring potental. That or any game won by a means other than that with which they approve).

Who gives a rip how "exciting" things are? Wins by their very nature are exciting. Are you saying that if we have a bunch of borning 2-1 wins that it woln't get "exciting" in September as we get closer to clenching the division? Or that it wouldn't get exciting being in the playoffs? Or the World Series?

Currently the Reds have a lot of work to do just to put together the winning part of equation. I'm just confused about the new requirement that those wins also be exciting.

(world famous shrug, as made famous by Remdog. All rights reserved.)

Edskin
04-24-2007, 08:45 AM
The "yawn" doesn't necessarily come from the actual play on the field. It comes from knowing that this team is stuck in the muck and headed nowhere.

REDREAD
04-24-2007, 10:43 AM
Why don't you be a real dare devil and make the same bet with the "as currently constituted" caveat removed?

I mean, we all know Wayne is no Jocketty or Schuerholz (as you occasionally remind us) so you shouldn't have to worry that he might make a move to improve the team.

Live on the edge :p:

I'll make that bet with you.. I'll even give Wayne leeway to make any kind of trades he wants.. This team doesn't win 83 games this year. But how about you living on the edge and taking a risk as well? It's easy to take Fall City's children, house, and money when you aren't putting up anything yourself. :)

REDREAD
04-24-2007, 10:50 AM
What does "unexciting" team mean? People keep tossing that out there

The last game of the Philly series was a classic example of the unexciting look of the new Reds.

As soon as Belisile gave up the runs that made it 4-0 or 4-1, there just wasn't much hope to win the game. The offense is bad, and you just knew the bullpen would give up another run or two (it actually ended up giving up more).

In contrast, the old Reds teams that had plenty of power and a solid bullpen were at least exciting, because that was a team that could generate some come from behind, walk off homer wins.

This team needs a solid start from its starting pitcher, AND usually needs to score about 4 runs to give the bullpen a cushion in order to preserve the win.
If they don't get that by inning 6, they generally don't win the game.

MaineRed
04-25-2007, 01:42 AM
I'll make that bet with you.. I'll even give Wayne leeway to make any kind of trades he wants.. This team doesn't win 83 games this year. But how about you living on the edge and taking a risk as well? It's easy to take Fall City's children, house, and money when you aren't putting up anything yourself. :)

Most people wouldn't say something like that because the last thing they want to do is spend $10,000 on drinks so they can continue to post here with some dignity.

You want to be edgy and make such statements, go for it. There aren't any rules that say people have to say something equally as ignorant to take you up on your wager.

Ltlabner
04-25-2007, 08:07 AM
In contrast, the old Reds teams that had plenty of power and a solid bullpen were at least exciting, because that was a team that could generate some come from behind, walk off homer wins.

This team needs a solid start from its starting pitcher, AND usually needs to score about 4 runs to give the bullpen a cushion in order to preserve the win.
If they don't get that by inning 6, they generally don't win the game.


In contrast, the old Reds teams were never above .500 at the end of the season. How exciting is that? Maybe this year's team will do about the same, but in general, I think wins at the end of the year are exciting, no matter how you get there.

They generally don't win the game....yes, after the first 4 weeks of the season, that has been the case. Will that continue? Will changes be made that stir things up? Beats me. But it's been a few weeks and several players are in major slumps. So let's not act as if it's a guarented certinaty that this is how the team will perform until the end of recorded history.

Ltlabner
04-25-2007, 08:09 AM
I'll make that bet with you.. I'll even give Wayne leeway to make any kind of trades he wants.. This team doesn't win 83 games this year. But how about you living on the edge and taking a risk as well? It's easy to take Fall City's children, house, and money when you aren't putting up anything yourself. :)

I take a risk every day when I come to RZ. Will the board be happy or depressed? Will we be going to the world series or never win a game ever again?

It's like Wheel of Fortune for mood swings.

REDREAD
04-25-2007, 09:57 AM
Most people wouldn't say something like that because the last thing they want to do is spend $10,000 on drinks so they can continue to post here with some dignity.

You want to be edgy and make such statements, go for it. There aren't any rules that say people have to say something equally as ignorant to take you up on your wager.


No, I'm not making a blanket statement that I will give unlimited beers to everyone here without them taking a risk as well. If someone wants to bet me, I'll do it, and I'll hope I lose, because I'd like to see the Reds finish over 500 this year. I just don't see it happening, even if we give Wayne the season to "fix" things.

REDREAD
04-25-2007, 10:03 AM
In contrast, the old Reds teams were never above .500 at the end of the season. How exciting is that? .
Maybe this year's team will do about the same, but in general, I think wins at the end of the year are exciting, no matter how you get there.

The "new" Reds aren't over .500 either. If they were, you'd have a point.
Also, last season's team completely vanished at the end of the year. Bad pitching and horrible hitting. They had a nice April last year.. That was fun. The rest of the season wasn't that exciting.

So far, this season has been kind of frustrating. Good to see them beat the Cards last night though.









They generally don't win the game....yes, after the first 4 weeks of the season, that has been the case. Will that continue? Will changes be made that stir things up? Beats me. But it's been a few weeks and several players are in major slumps. So let's not act as if it's a guarented certinaty that this is how the team will perform until the end of recorded history.

Sure, I concede that there's a chance Wayne might eventually fix this team. Do I think it's likely? Nope. The guy thinks Gonzo and Ross are building blocks to build a contender around, while EdE is a problem child. He thinks Narron is a good manager. As hard as he tries, he still can't build a bullpen (which is a big part of winning with pitching).. Wayne has a lot of work to do.

Edskin
05-08-2007, 09:03 AM
Rather than start another donwtrodden thread, I figured I'd just bump this one. Our recent play has only cemented my belief that this is a 100% dead season. It might as well be September IMO, because this season is officially lost.

It's not so much the standings as it is our leadership and our roster. I defended Krivsky last year, but now I look about as stupid as he does. When you expend so much energy on one area (the pen) and that area is still a MAJOR weakness, then you have failed.

Beyond that, I see our line-up as extremely limited from an upside standpoint, and I imagine eventually our starting pitching will dip.

Just imagine, we're 14-18 w/ good to very good starts thus far. Imagine where we'll be if a few of those guys come back down to earth.

Honestly, this season sucks. Just my honest opinion..........

creek14
05-08-2007, 09:11 AM
I'm just happy we have tickets to about 15 Dragon's games this season.

Edskin
05-08-2007, 09:26 AM
Creek-

Yep, avert your eyes whenever you can.

I am just so frustrated with the Reds at this point. I fear we've officially become a "loser" franchise. To me, that tag is defined when things keep changing (owners, GM's, managers, players, etc...) yet the results stay virtually the same.

We went 80-82, which was OK based on expectation and a new regime. But it is NOT unreasonable for a fan to want to build off of that season. Instead, we seem to AT BEST be recreating it, and at worst we're significantly worse than we were last year.

It's as if 80 wins is our "everything goes perfectly" upside-- and I'm sorry, but that's frustrating as heck.

Redsland
05-08-2007, 09:55 AM
17,000 fans on a beautiful night against Roy Oswalt and the Astros.

This team stumbled early and has been sputtering full-bore since then. When it comes to generating fan interest and excitement, this season is already on the brink.

Yachtzee
05-08-2007, 10:05 AM
As much as I love the Reds, they are what they are. But I do still love them, and I hope they can surprise us all and put together a pennant run this season.

That being said, as much as folks complain about the big league club, I'd much rather seem them proactive in stocking the farm system with talent. They also need to improve their development system to ensure more of that talent makes the major leagues. It's the only way they can compete long term and I feel like they still haven't righted the wrongs of Marge Schott.

The hard part is living near Cleveland and watching a team do it like the Reds should be doing it. The Indians ALWAYS seem to be stocked with young talent at every level. Go to an Aeros game, AA level, and expect to see at least two or three guys who will be playing at Buffalo halfway through the summer and one or two may be with the big club by the end of summer, and doing well. They have so much talent in their system they aren't afraid to trade some of that young talent to get players they need to fill holes. Sizemore, Peralta, Martinez, and Garko all came up through Akron, as well as 3/5 of their starting rotation. That's just who they have on the team now. There are plenty of other major league starting players who made their way through Akron in the past decade and I expect to go to the park this summer and see at least 2 or 3 guys who will be in the majors next season, either with the Indians or with some other team. Can you say that with the Chattanooga Lookouts?

The Reds problem is that they constantly try to win at things like taking fliers on veteran talent, getting talent through trades, and winning at things like the Rule V draft. Those are great ways to fill a hole in an already well-constructed team. But it's no way to build a team from an also-ran to a contender. Krivsky has done a good job of building 4/5 of a starting rotation, but as it stands, they don't have enough talent on the big club for trading to shore up the bullpen. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they have a lot of surplus talent at Louisville, either. So unless they've got some relievers in the minors or are willing to part with some of the young studs at the AA and A levels, they aren't going to be able to do much about it.

I'd like to hear from TCII or Dougdirt or anyone else who follows the Reds minor league system to see if there is any hope on the horizon that shows the Reds philosophy on this has changed since Castellini took over.

Edskin
05-08-2007, 10:12 AM
The Reds problem is that they constantly try to win at things like taking fliers on veteran talent, getting talent through trades, and winning at things like the Rule V draft. Those are great ways to fill a hole in an already well-constructed team. But it's no way to build a team from an also-ran to a contender. Krivsky has done a good job of building 4/5 of a starting rotation, but as it stands, they don't have enough talent on the big club for trading to shore up the bullpen. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they have a lot of surplus talent at Louisville, either. So unless they've got some relievers in the minors or are willing to part with some of the young studs at the AA and A levels, they aren't going to be able to do much about it.

Excellent paragraph.

And that is why I am ALL for a total and complete firesale during this season. Right now, we should restock the farm by trading our valued vets-- including Adam Dunn.

shredda2000
05-08-2007, 12:15 PM
Homer is not Santana. He's not even in the same universe with Santana. Santana is a Pedro/R. Johnson once-in-a-generation talent.

And if this team, as currently constituted, wins 83 games I'll buy every person on this board the alcoholic beverage of his or her choice.

I will take a ROOT BEER thank you!!! :beerme:

Yachtzee
05-08-2007, 12:21 PM
Excellent paragraph.

And that is why I am ALL for a total and complete firesale during this season. Right now, we should restock the farm by trading our valued vets-- including Adam Dunn.

Actually though, from a business perspective, and possibly a baseball perspective, standing pat is possibly better than a fire sale at this point. At least with standing pat, fans have some hope that the team could turn it around, so they won't get completely discouraged.

I would work on improving scouting and development first and getting some in-house developed talent first before starting the "fire sale." Why? Well, how much talent are you really going to get by trading Adam Dunn, or anyone else for that matter? If done properly you'll get maybe one major league ready talent and some AA or A level talent thrown in. Those AA or A level talents may be the key to the trade. Unfortunately, if the Reds development system isn't going to help these kids move up the ladder, it's like throwing good money after bad. How many times have the Reds traded their high-priced talent for prospects, only to have those prospects turn into fool's gold before they even reach the majors? With a good system, a fire sale may set you back 1 or 2 years before you can expect to start improving again. A fire sale with the Reds' history of developing players, particularly pitchers, may set the team back five or six years. So I say fix the farm system first and get your own talent in the pipeline first, then worry about restocking it through trades.