PDA

View Full Version : Grade Wayne Krivsky: Pre 2007 Trade Deadline Poll



Cyclone792
06-21-2007, 10:43 AM
Please read the post, then vote in the poll. ;)

On an organizational wide scale - major league roster, farm system, prospect development, organizational philosophy, coaching staff currently in place, team transactions, etc. - what's your overall grade of Wayne Krivsky and his regime since his hire prior to the 2006 season?

Try to base your vote on the full job you believe Krivsky has done and the overall direction you believe the organization has gone since his hiring. With the 2007 trade deadline looming - and with that deadline possibly being particularly crucial to the future success of this franchise - I wanted to open this poll/thread before any trading deadline moves are made. Then after the dust settles in early August after the 2007 trading deadline and it becomes apparent which direction Krivsky goes in that regard, we can fire up a new poll/thread and compare that poll's results to this poll's results.

To summarize the timeline, the Krivsky regime has overseen the following ...

2006 spring training
2006 amateur draft
2006 trade deadline
2006 full regular season (majors and minors)
2006-07 offseason
2007 spring training
Two plus months of the 2007 regular season (majors and minors)
And just recently, the 2007 amateur draft

If you had to give Wayne Krivsky and his regime a grade so far, what would it be?

flyer85
06-21-2007, 11:01 AM
Krivsky may have shown himself to be a good scout, farm director, etc. however, he has shown zero ability to build a team or assess major league personnel properly. Allowing him to make major decisions about the long term future at this point would be a roll of the dice. You make get a good result simply due to random chance.

krivsky hasn't destroyed this organization but with the decisions he makes in the next few months he well could.

Puffy
06-21-2007, 11:01 AM
I gave him a D - then again, I'm biased because I was one of the very, very few who hated this hiring from the beginning, so maybe he deserves a better grade, I don't know.

What I do know is that I am not nor never will be a fan of the Twins major league model from 2002-2006, and that is what I see Krivsky aiming for. And that is - slightly above average fielders who don't know how to take a walk, hit .260 and have moderate power; vets over young guys; an endless parade of ex-Twins; pitchers who, on the whole, don't miss bats but rely on the defense.

Yeah, I'm not a fan - but like I said, I never was a Krivsky fan so I may be harder on him than others, and maybe harder on him than is realistic.

edabbs44
06-21-2007, 11:04 AM
I'm going to give him a D, though I believe, with more information, I could give him an "F".

The only thing saving him from an "F" is that he didn't blow off the '07 draft by overdrafting a bunch of guys. I don't think he hit a HR, but I think it could have been worse.

But the main Issue I have had with this guy is that he hasn't shown a direction. He increased the payroll by 16% or so this season and is currently battling for the WORST RECORD IN BASEBALL. The Royals and Tampa are laughing at Cincinnati.

It is a dark time for Reds fans and, while we are all happy that contracts like Milton's are coming off the books, Wayne has already pissed away those savings on potentially a new Milton, Mr. Bronson Arroyo.

Wayne has done some good things since he's been here, but he has made so many transactions it's hard to say whether he got lucky or if he knew what he was doing. My personal belief is that those acquisitions of Hamilton and Phillips were luck. Remember when Ross and Arroyo were the big items on his resume?

The reason why I need more info is that I am not sure whether this guy knows where he is going. Does he actually think he can win now (Gonzalez, Stanton, Conine, etc) or is he building for the future (?)? I think he has been given enough time as this team has gotten much worse very fast w/o a great influx of talent in the minors. But if he flubs this deadline, he should be gone Aug 1.

Redsland
06-21-2007, 11:15 AM
Wayne's job is to evaluate players, make trades, and ultimately construct a major league roster.

He hasn't given me a lot of confidence in his ability to do those things.

flyer85
06-21-2007, 11:16 AM
for the Reds to be successful in the long run I am pretty certain they need a GM that would get an "A".

NJReds
06-21-2007, 11:30 AM
for the Reds to be successful in the long run I am pretty certain they need a GM that would get an "A".

I agree. And IMO, Krvisky gets a C. He's had some very good moves to go along with some very questionable moves. I don't have confidence in him turning this franchise around.

TOBTTReds
06-21-2007, 11:42 AM
I gave WK a B. The organization as a whole is in a very good position right now compared to the last 10 years. Our last two GM's had good drafts, but mishandled the ML side. Although, I give a lot of credit to WK for these things:

Phillips - got him for nothing
Ross - got him for nothing
Hatte - got him for nothing
Arroyo - got him for WMP, won the deal big time
Re-signing Arroyo and Harang - I know Arroyo aint too hot right now, but I think he will be fine in the long run.
Josh Hamilton - got him for, what, 150k?
Good depth in his drafts.
Taking it slowly with his MiL'ers

Those above signings are absolute STEALS. It is incredible.

BUT, I dislike:

AGonz for 3 years
Cormier for two
Stanton for two
STUBBS!
Chad Moeller


But overall, our Minor League system went from being ranked around dead last, to 11th prior to this season. We actually have some depth, and I think this years draft was a good one again (and I actually like our first pick).

Kc61
06-21-2007, 11:56 AM
The Reds have the most losses in the major leagues and the second worst record. It is hard to give Krivsky high marks for leading them there.

He has a number of good pick ups, but he constructed this bullpen for which he gets a poor grade.

Longer term, he has helped stock up the farm, but last year's first pick hasn't hit -- compare to DanO's top draft picks -- and it is just too soon to know how these guys will pan out.

The one point I will give him is that he is obviously committed to young players, has kept and nurtured the higher end prospects, and this game plan can be successful if executed properly.

So I gave Krivsky the middle (C) grade so far. Disappointed short term, hopeful long term.

PuffyPig
06-21-2007, 12:03 PM
BUT, I dislike:

AGonz for 3 years


I agree with most of what you posted, but this one I find curious.

We had no SS to speak of coming into 2007, and he signed one with a current OPS of about .800 who supplies good defense. If he was a FA today, he would command larger dollars. His contract could actually be moved for value if we wanted.

dfs
06-21-2007, 12:08 PM
This franchise was in terrible shape while they aren't winning today, there are places you can see improvement.

Junior is out of centerfield.

He's decided on a shortstop.

It looks like he's decided on a secondbaseman, catcher and thirdbaseman.

He's started assembling a real rotation, not a bunch of 34 year olds who had double digit wins in the last 5 years.

He's worked the ruleV, ptbnl and waiver wire field about as well as it can be worked.

I'm not thrilled with many of Wayne's decisions, but he's a step up from the man he replaced and DanO was a step up from what Jim Bowden had turned into be the end of his time here.

traderumor
06-21-2007, 12:13 PM
Drafts-B Already some players producing and being promoted from his drafts. Sean Watson comes first to mind.

Minors-B The farm teams are winning, promotions are generally timely and appropriate, arm injuries (whether luck or purpose, I don't know which) have been few and far between, and we have some guys either busting through the ceiling and contributing (Bailey, Encarnacion) or ready to (Votto, Bruce, Watson) in the next year or two.

Majors-C- IMO, this disaster falls primarily on the shoulders on the two headed monster known as BowBrien. The bullpen is an area that Krivsky has been the most exposed, but then I read yesterday where the Detroit Tigers are looking for bullpen help, when last year they were looking like the second coming of the Nasty Boys. In other words, bullpens are hard to build AND maintain, with the volatility of relievers being harder to manage than a tech stock mutual fund. Does he get a pass for that? Nope, that is why he gets a C, because it is possible to build a bullpen that is consistently good from year to year with replaceable parts. The bullpen failure is mitigated by the dumpster diving of exciting position players like Brandon Phillips and Josh Hamilton and the Arroyo trade. But, the bullpen is getting poised for a turnaround with some exciting young arms. A power arm or two showing up for next season (if Coffey is not injured and refinds his command, we could already have two with Salmon coming along) and a junkballer, it could be evolving as we speak.

Now, get something meaningful for Griffey, Lohse, and Weathers and either take a dump or get off the pot with Dunn and it could be an overall B, but I went with C with weight added to the major league fiasco of late 2006 through current.

KronoRed
06-21-2007, 12:20 PM
D, I wouldn't mind the worst record in baseball so much if there was more hope on the horizon, there simply isn't anymore then when Wayne arrived, it's still the same MO as Bowden and Dan O, hope for career years from veterans.

Phillips has been a nice surprise, Hamilton..well lets wait and see, Ross and Arroyo looked nice before this season, more wait and see I suppose.

What he does this trading season will be key, if it's stand pat or trade for spare parts that might help this year then the D goes to F

smith288
06-21-2007, 12:34 PM
He SHOULD get an F just for his infatuation with older vets over young up and comers but I will give him a D.

Solid transactions like Phillips and Hamilton can only take you so far when you compare it to "the trade", the horrible bullpen and weak arse bench.

RedsManRick
06-21-2007, 12:51 PM
Definitely a mixed bag. I would rate him on three scales:

1.) Evaluating potential. I think Krivsky is good at evaluating potential in terms of skill development and "ceiling". At heart, he's a scout, and a good one. He's done well at acquiring cheap talent which has not fully developed. His drafts also look pretty good, but the development (or lack thereof) of Stubbs could change my opinion. B+

2.) Performance measurement. BIG weakness here. Krivsky has not shown very much acumen in properly valuing performance at the major league level. He consistently over-values the performance of guys like Castro, Cormier (pre-trade), and Majewski (pre-trade), prone to overreaction to low ERAs and strong batting averages in small samples and in the absence of supporting peripheral numbers. This suggests he relies heavily on his scouting instincts and does not have an understanding of what metrics truly reflect ability. He does not seem to understand the concept of "replacement level". D

3.) Management. Right or wrong, he has a process which he adheres to in terms of promoting minor leaguers, designing his major league roster, etc. While I question some of the choices he makes in executing said plan (Stubbs, signing Castro, Moeller, etc.), at least he's got one. He also is willing to admit mistakes, as seen in the cutting of Cormier. C

Overall, I've rated him a C, aka Meh. I would love to see him hire a right hand man who can bring him in to the 21st century in terms of quantitative analysis. Until he does that, I think he's going to fail in actually executing his vision for the team due to consistent mistakes based on out-dated scouting information.

Cyclone792
06-21-2007, 12:57 PM
I'm going to try to sort through this and be as objective as I can ... the key word here being "try" ...

The good ...

The overall across the board improvement with the minor league system and prospect development (honestly, this is the bulk of the good, IMO).
Arroyo/Pena trade
Phillips acquisition
Hatteberg acquisition and extension
Other notable extensions: Dunn (last season), Harang, and Arroyo
Hamilton acquisition
Lohse acquisition
Resigning Weathers
Letting Aurilia walk in 2006 and gaining a compensation draft pick
Acquiring Schoeneweis in 2006, then letting him walk and gaining a compensation draft pick
It's difficult to guage so soon, but my inital reactions with the 2007 draft is, while it wasn't outstanding, it was pretty good
Griffey moved to right field

Some of these moves have been good so far, but there's still an opportunity for Krivsky to blow them in the end. For example, the Kyle Lohse acquisition has so far turned out to be a pretty good one. However, if Lohse is extended for far more than he's worth, or if he's traded for garbage or is allowed to walk without a draft pick coming in return, then the entire Lohse situation won't be much of a step in a positive direction. The Weathers signing also falls into a similar category.

The indifferent and/or incomplete ...

Gonzalez signing: working now, but could be a disaster by the end
Denorfia/McBeth trade
Conine acquisition
Freel extension


The bad ...

Keeping Narron and allowing Narron to destroy the pitching staff
The simple fact that the 2007 Reds are 28-45 right now on June 21st
Kearns/Lopez trade to Washington for Bray, Harris, Thompson, a batting tee relief pitcher and a crap veteran infielder
Excluding Weathers, the current bullpen is a complete disaster
The current bench is a complete disaster
Juan Castro: the acquisition, the extension, the subsequent playing time
Drew Stubbs was a complete miss for a 2006 first round pick
Giving Brendan Harris away for nothing
Cormier acquisition and subsequent extension
Stanton acquisition
Saarloos acquisition
Moeller acquisition
Joe Mays acquisition and subsequent playing time in 2006
McCracken and Hollandsworth in 2006

It wouldn't surprise me if I've forgotten a few, whether they're positive moves or negative moves, but this is the general gist of what I could recollect. So far, after moving through all of this dreck, my initial grade for Krivsky is probably either a C or a D.

The farm system moving in a positive direction is a big mark in Krivsky's favor, and the Arroyo, Hamilton, and Phillips acquisitions are also marks in his favor. But other factors such as allowing Narron to blow up the pitching staff, the lousy 2007 season, the bullpen/bench being a complete disaster, Drew Stubbs being drafted with the team's first round pick in 2006, and the Kearns/Lopez trade last season are big marks against Krivsky.

So what ultimately was the final factor that determined whether or not I gave Krivsky a C or a D? A philosophy within the organization ...

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43324


walter_wiseman:
11:55 am - I am curious about the signing of so many over 35 veteran players. Is this part of your philosophy or just the best available players this year?

cinguest:
11:56 am - Krivsky: My philosophy is one where there is always room for quality veteran type leadership. I know Jerry shares the same idea, particularly as it pertains to his bench. Younger players have a difficult transition coming off the bench when they are used to playing everyday in the minors. In many cases, it is better for that younger player to play every day in AAA to get his necessary work and development time.

This answer from Wayne Krivsky pertaining to veterans was from a February, 2006 chat session with fans. Should a young player like Votto come off the bench? Not at all, and Krivsky is correct with that small caveat. But could a young player like Brendan Harris be a valuable bench player? Very much so.

As of then, we had no idea what Krivsky meant when he said he has a philosophy where there is always room for "quality veteran leadership," including, but not limited to, the bench. It's been almost a year and a half since then, and now we have a pretty good idea what Krivsky meant with that statement. And frankly, it's a philosophy that I absolutely loathe.

This is the type of organizational thinking that leads to acquiring a player such as Juan Castro, extending a player such as Juan Castro, and then giving playing time to a player such as Juan Castro. It's also the type of organizational thinking that lets Brendan Harris slip through one's fingers and into thin air. The 2007 bench is full of veterans with apparent quality veteran leadership, and the 2007 bench is horrible.

The bench is one aspect of the team, and it's been the highlight of this type of philosophical shortcoming thus far.

Final grade as of June 21st, 2007: D

An even bigger problem potentially in the future, however, is when the farm system starts producing some starting caliber talent and how this organization transitions into that young starting caliber talent. During Krivsky's tenure in Minnesota, the Twins maintained a history of blocking good young players with old, veteran garbage. Only when the Twins finally allowed their young talent to play with regularity last season did the Twins bust out and become a legitimate World Series contending team, and that didn't happen until early last season when Krivsky was no longer with that organization.

The next remaining hope for Wayne Krivsky to improve his grade in my eyes is the 2007 trading deadline, which will be an important point in the future of the franchise. If Krivsky puts together a solid string of deadline deals that look to improve the future fortunes of this franchise, then he could raise his grade and appear much more promising under his leadership.

But if Krivsky blows this trading deadline altogether by sitting on his hands and failing to cash certain players in (i.e. Lohse and Weathers, among others) and/or giving a franchise caliber talent such as Adam Dunn away for a marginal return, then my patience with him will be over and I will be calling for Wayne Krivsky's dismissal on August 1st.

flyer85
06-21-2007, 01:08 PM
During Krivsky's tenure in Minnesota, the Twins maintained a history of blocking good young players with old, veteran garbage. and they still do, see Ortiz and Ponson.

I hate the use of recycled waste and yet it seems to be an organizational philosophy, of the Reds and the Twins.


then my patience with him will be over and I will be calling for Wayne Krivsky's dismissal on August 1st.... and it will be too late at that point.

A decision needs to be made now, not after the fact.

Are you confident that Krivsky is the right man for the job between now and August 1st?

That is the only pertinent question.

RedsManRick
06-21-2007, 01:19 PM
Great point at the end there Cyclone. There's a big difference in turning a young future major league starter like Votto in to a major league bench player and turning a young future bench player like Harris in to a major league bench player.

Having a bench/platoon guy like Conine, who plays a specific necessary role and does it competently is just fine. But wasting spots on "veterans" who don't add any particular value above replacement beyond their expertise, and usually carry a price tag above the minimum (Castro, Moeller, etc.) is just ridiculous. He doesn't appear to understand, or at least appreciate, the difference.

Interestingly, the Twins consistently block their minor leaguers -- but they do adjust. They bring in the veterans, but they DO ship them out as soon as they fail or once the minor league talent forces the issue. They treat them as the stopgaps which they are. They trade Juan Castro (to us), they cut Ponson. Krivsky just hasn't yet learned the difference between bringing those types in to buy time and bringing those guys in as fixed parts of the team.

Narron simply exacerbates Krivksy's poor decision by giving those bit players an elevated role.

Caveat Emperor
06-21-2007, 01:22 PM
He SHOULD get an F just for his infatuation with older vets over young up and comers but I will give him a D.

Solid transactions like Phillips and Hamilton can only take you so far when you compare it to "the trade", the horrible bullpen and weak arse bench.

Everyone likes old vets in baseball. The only reason anyone ever plays a kid is because either A.) He is so undeniably talented that he forces his way onto the team or B.) The owner won't spend for an old vet to play.

Old vets are security for managers and GMs -- they're known commodities with histories that back up the decision to play them.

traderumor
06-21-2007, 01:37 PM
During Krivsky's tenure in Minnesota, the Twins maintained a history of blocking good young players with old, veteran garbage.

Torri Hunter, Doug Mienckewicz, AJ Perzynski, Chrisitian Guzman all were phased in at basically the same time and helped start a new generation of winning baseball in Minny. Ryan is currently in his second generation of good young players carrying the torch. Ortiz was the big one that got away, something that happens to even good fisherman. I don't understand the basis for that statement at all. Of course, they were ready to fire Ryan because of the length of the development process before the vine finally ripened in about 2001, but I think Minny is quite glad they did not at this point.

redsmetz
06-21-2007, 01:46 PM
Torri Hunter, Doug Mienckewicz, AJ Perzynski, Chrisitian Guzman all were phased in at basically the same time and helped start a new generation of winning baseball in Minny. Ryan is currently in his second generation of good young players carrying the torch. Ortiz was the big one that got away, something that happens to even good fisherman. I don't understand the basis for that statement at all.

There's little basis for it with the Reds either. Of our starters, all are 30 or younger except for the 1st Base platoon and Griffey. Most people understand that Hatterberg and Conine are caretakers waiting for a younger player to arrive and Griffey is Griffey. Aside from these two slots, the vets are Ross & Gonzalez, both at 30. The average age of our starters (going with Hatteberg @ 1st) is just under 30.

There is no young player in the Reds system being blocked by an aging vet starter.

One can argue all they want to players like Castro and Valentin and Moeller are taking up space that could be filled by a younger, cheaper replacement player, but there's not a starter up whose blocking a minor league player who is ready today.

Cyclone792
06-21-2007, 01:52 PM
... and it will be too late at that point.

A decision needs to be made now, not after the fact.

Are you confident that Krivsky is the right man for the job between now and August 1st?

That is the only pertinent question.

Actually, that's not the pertinent question.

The pertinent question is would you rather have Bob Castellini and/or John Allen ordering Bob Miller and Scott Nethery to make payroll-based trades at the trading deadline this season?

Look, I'd love to see DePodesta, Forst, or some new forward-thinking guy from the Beane camp in here as much as anybody, but if Krivsky was canned right now, none of those guys could be brought in until the offseason. Whether or not Miller/Nethery could actually run better deadline deals than Krivsky would probably be a moot point too, because if Krivsky gets canned prior to the deadline, then I imagine Miller/Nethery would be under close and direct orders from Castellini and Allen on what they would be allowed or not allowed to do. There's no way in the world Castellini would hand over the reigns to Miller/Nethery without either getting involved himself in a much bigger role on the baseball operations side or temporarily shifting John Allen over to get involved in a much bigger role on the baseball operations side.

I may not have too much confidence in Krivsky to direct this team through the trading deadline, but I have more confidence in him than I do in Castellini and Allen ordering the team's two current Assistant GMs around. Neither scenario is win-win for me, but keeping Krivsky right now is the lesser of the two evils.

flyer85
06-21-2007, 02:06 PM
but if Krivsky was canned right now, none of those guys could be brought in until the offseason.I have a hard time believing their current organizations would stand in the way if they were being interviewed a GM job.

Cyclone792
06-21-2007, 02:21 PM
I have a hard time believing their current organizations would stand in the way if they were being interviewed a GM job.

If you're an organization that actually wants to make sure you hire the right guy, then going out and researching, interviewing, and then hiring a general manager in the middle of the season with less than six weeks until the trading deadline doesn't seem to be the best route of action. The problem with firing general managers (and managers) in the middle of the season is it leads to rash decisions about who to hire as a replacement. That's not to say they shouldn't be fired in the middle of the season, but if they are, then an interim replacement needs to take over while the team searches for the proper replacement. At least if Krivsky would be fired in August, it'd be easy to allow the team's assistant general managers to take over in the interim without having to deal with a major issue such as a trade deadline.

It's rare for teams to even hire a general manager at any point in the middle of the season. The Royals hired Allard Baird in June of 2000, and that was anything but a brilliant move. Then they fired Baird last season and hired Dayton Moore in late May. But Dayton Moore didn't even run the team's draft in June; interim GM Muzzy Jackson did.

If Krivsky would be fired now, it'd be Miller and Nethery running the show next month with Castellini and Allen looking right over their shoulders.

pedro
06-21-2007, 02:26 PM
If you're an organization that actually wants to make sure you hire the right guy, then going out and researching, interviewing, and then hiring a general manager in the middle of the season with less than six weeks until the trading deadline doesn't seem to be the best route of action. The problem with firing general managers (and managers) in the middle of the season is it leads to rash decisions about who to hire as a replacement. That's not to say they shouldn't be fired in the middle of the season, but if they are, then an interim replacement needs to take over while the team searches for the proper replacement. At least if Krivsky would be fired in August, it'd be easy to allow the team's assistant general managers to take over in the interim without having to deal with a major issue such as a trade deadline.

It's rare for teams to even hire a general manager at any point in the middle of the season. The Royals hired Allard Baird in June of 2000, and that was anything but a brilliant move. Then they fired Baird last season and hired Dayton Moore in late May. But Dayton Moore didn't even run the team's draft in June; interim GM Muzzy Jackson did.

If Krivsky would be fired now, it'd be Miller and Nethery running the show next month with Castellini and Allen looking right over their shoulders.

adding the new date (Aug 15th IIRC) that draft picks must be signed by and it makes it even more unwise to fire a GM in mid season.

bucksfan2
06-21-2007, 02:27 PM
The bad ...
Keeping Narron and allowing Narron to destroy the pitching staff
The simple fact that the 2007 Reds are 28-45 right now on June 21st
Kearns/Lopez trade to Washington for Bray, Harris, Thompson, a batting tee relief pitcher and a crap veteran infielder
Excluding Weathers, the current bullpen is a complete disaster
The current bench is a complete disaster
Juan Castro: the acquisition, the extension, the subsequent playing time
Drew Stubbs was a complete miss for a 2006 first round pick
Giving Brendan Harris away for nothing
Cormier acquisition and subsequent extension
Stanton acquisition
Saarloos acquisition
Moeller acquisition
Joe Mays acquisition and subsequent playing time in 2006
McCracken and Hollandsworth in 2006

Cyclone I am going to take you to task on some of these. While I think the first 2 are evident I feel that this team is talented enought to compete in the division.

The Kearns Lopez trade is a wash now if you ask me. They wern't going to be back and the only think you can argue is that they didn't get good value. But if Bray and Thompson pan out that would be very good value for the reds. Remember Bray was a top draft pick and highly thought of.

Bullpen is horiable but I would argue that is a half and half battle. They are lacking some pieces but Narron has mismanaged the heck out if it. A good manager would have the pen pitching better.

Castro at the time wasn't a bad acquisition. He helped a poor left side of the infield. The extention is unexplanable unless he is helping out EE on the defensive end. Note that EE has gotten much better on d since his demotoin.

Stubbs Just because you don't like the pick doesn't mean it would turn out to help the club. Many people also didn't like the watson pick but that looks pretty good right now. As bad as you think Stubbs is he did make the all star game.

No one know what Bendan Harris could do as a regular. He wasn't going to be a regular as a red. He was unproven so you couldn't measure his value. I do not mind seing him in tampa because he wans't going to help this club out. It takes a special kind of player to excel in a bench/platoon roll.

Cormier at the time was leading the NL in ERA. While misleading no one know he would bomb as a red. Yea his track record may not have been that good but a lot of relievers do get better with age and succeed into their 40's.

Stanton has been horiable this year but started to turn it on. The past few weeks he has been pitching like we thought he would all year.

Saarloos IMO is a product of misuse by Narron. I don't mind the acquisition because I think he could be a useful player with the reds. Narron just doesn't use him right.

Joe Mays made 4 starts as a red. He was picked up for nothing and then dumped. I have no problem with that because at the time the reds pitching was horaible and they needed a boost because the team was playing well.

Krivsky has made a lot of moves of the smaller variety. He hasn't given up much in terms of prospects and has kept the farm system nicely stocked. His one big move will forever be questioned because for many people Kearns or Lopez were their favorite players and they didn't think the reds recieved enough value in return. If you ask me the team today with the dismal record and all is in better shape than the team was last year. The team's good play last year may have set the organization back a year because moves were made for the present (which most fans wanted) instead of the future.

I will say that the Dunn and Jr. decisions are going to be very important. This trading deadline could vastly improve the reds club in the future as soon as 2008.

traderumor
06-21-2007, 02:31 PM
I see the Ryan model as being Krivsky's MO more and more, and I'd be ok with that. The losing years hurt, and there are probably some areas that could be improved on the statistical analysis side, but if we end up with what Minny has after 5 years of Krivsky with his first crop of homegrown talent hitting the fields in waves, then I think this talk of firing him (basically for a bad trade) will end.

Cyclone792
06-21-2007, 02:40 PM
Cyclone I am going to take you to task on some of these. While I think the first 2 are evident I feel that this team is talented enought to compete in the division.

The Kearns Lopez trade is a wash now if you ask me. They wern't going to be back and the only think you can argue is that they didn't get good value. But if Bray and Thompson pan out that would be very good value for the reds. Remember Bray was a top draft pick and highly thought of.

The Kearns/Lopez trade was a disaster. I'm not interested in rehashing it, but if you want, feel free to read everything I stated about it last season when it happened. The initial goal of the trade was to help the team reach the playoffs in 2006, but it cost the Reds 30-40 runs of run value in 2006 alone, and it failed in its attempt to land the team in the playoffs.

As for 2007, Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez, as much as they have struggled, have been worth more run value than Bill Bray (who hasn't thrown one pitch) and Gary Majewski (who has cost this team runs and wins).


Bullpen is horiable but I would argue that is a half and half battle. They are lacking some pieces but Narron has mismanaged the heck out if it. A good manager would have the pen pitching better.

And the fact that Jerry Narron is still allowed to mismanage the bullpen is also a fault of Krivsky's.


Castro at the time wasn't a bad acquisition. He helped a poor left side of the infield. The extention is unexplanable unless he is helping out EE on the defensive end. Note that EE has gotten much better on d since his demotoin.

Juan Castro is one of the 15 or 20 worst hitters in the last 100 years of big league baseball. I have not heard one shred of evidence from the front office claiming that Juan Castro was brought in to help or mentor anybody. Castro is not even replacement level; he's well below replacement level. Krivsky persuaded the Twins to acquire Castro because he liked Castro's game, and he acquired him last season for that very same reason.


Stubbs Just because you don't like the pick doesn't mean it would turn out to help the club. Many people also didn't like the watson pick but that looks pretty good right now. As bad as you think Stubbs is he did make the all star game.

Stubbs was a disaster in Billings last season, and he's been a disaster in Dayton this season. For a college player at his age, he's quickly running out of time. Sure, the guy could play great defense at the big league level, but right now the only thing Stubbs is projecting himself to be is a backup outfielder based on defense. Teams that blow first round picks on those types of players aren't typically teams who are successful.


No one know what Bendan Harris could do as a regular. He wasn't going to be a regular as a red. He was unproven so you couldn't measure his value. I do not mind seing him in tampa because he wans't going to help this club out. It takes a special kind of player to excel in a bench/platoon roll.

All Brendan Harris did down in Louisville last season was hit to the tune of a .900 plus OPS. Additionally, Brendan Harris has a career minor league OPS well over .800, which showed that he could potentially be a contributor at the major league level. Compare that to Norris Hopper, who several people love, and Hopper has a career minor league OPS well under .700. If Brendan Harris was on the Reds roster right now as a bench player, he would be their best hitter off the bench.


Cormier at the time was leading the NL in ERA. While misleading no one know he would bomb as a red. Yea his track record may not have been that good but a lot of relievers do get better with age and succeed into their 40's.

Cormier had a 4.41 DIPS ERA in Philadelphia last season, which was a far away from a highly lucky 1.59 actual ERA. His K/9 ratio with the Phillies was a lousy 3.44, and his K/BB ratio was a lousy 1.00. That's the type of pitcher who has disaster written all over him, and that's the type of pitcher Cormier was while with the Reds.


Saarloos IMO is a product of misuse by Narron. I don't mind the acquisition because I think he could be a useful player with the reds. Narron just doesn't use him right.

Saarloos, like Cormier, is another pitcher that strikes nobody out. Saarloos has a career K/9 of 4.37, and guys that strike out that few amount of batters never have any type of sustained success as a pitcher in the big leagues.


Joe Mays made 4 starts as a red. He was picked up for nothing and then dumped. I have no problem with that because at the time the reds pitching was horaible and they needed a boost because the team was playing well.

Like Juan Castro, Joe Mays should never have been on a big league roster. He's a below-replacement value pitcher.

Puffy
06-21-2007, 03:45 PM
I see the Ryan model as being Krivsky's MO more and more, and I'd be ok with that. The losing years hurt, and there are probably some areas that could be improved on the statistical analysis side, but if we end up with what Minny has after 5 years of Krivsky with his first crop of homegrown talent hitting the fields in waves, then I think this talk of firing him (basically for a bad trade) will end.

Before last year, the Twins of Terry Ryan were soley "good" because they played in a weak division. If they played in the AL East or West they would have never won over 85 games.

The first wave of talent produced was Miectwopyhpiuhz, Guzman, Rivas, Piersenski (sp?), Koskie, Jones and Torii Hunter. The pitching staff was Radke, Milton and also rans, with a young Santana in the bullpen and Everyday Eddie closing.

They are a very overrated group because they won divisions in a division that was weak.

Now, this second wave is different - Mauer, Morneau, Cuddyer, etc., but those guys are fruits of 5 years worth of top 10 draft picks.

RedsManRick
06-21-2007, 03:46 PM
There is no young player in the Reds system being blocked by an aging vet starter.

Joey Votto says hi. Harris would be here if Castro wasn't. Brad Salmon should've been on the roster from opening day but wasn't because Cormier was. It's not just a "blocking" issue, though that's always relevent. It's relying on retread veteran talent in lieu of developing better in house alternatives. Mildly productive veterans can fill the periphery of a roster in some circumstances. They should not be the core.

As much as the bullpen has been struggling, I'm thrilled that at least it's Coffey, Coutlangus, Salmon, etc. struggling. Either they'll pan out and we'll improve, or they won't and we can move on the the next higher ceiling opportunity with the knowledge that these guys aren't the answer. Guys like Stanton, Santos, Cormier, Saarloos, etc. do nothing to help us win now and nothing to help us win later, while eating up resources that could be diverted in a more focused manner to acquire actual performance from top talent.

traderumor
06-21-2007, 04:26 PM
Before last year, the Twins of Terry Ryan were soley "good" because they played in a weak division. If they played in the AL East or West they would have never won over 85 games.

The first wave of talent produced was Miectwopyhpiuhz, Guzman, Rivas, Piersenski (sp?), Koskie, Jones and Torii Hunter. The pitching staff was Radke, Milton and also rans, with a young Santana in the bullpen and Everyday Eddie closing.

They are a very overrated group because they won divisions in a division that was weak.

Now, this second wave is different - Mauer, Morneau, Cuddyer, etc., but those guys are fruits of 5 years worth of top 10 draft picks.

They have played winning baseball and won divisions for this decade, which is two-thirds gone. I recall a similar discussion on the Atlanta Braves, and through that I came to appreciate what the Braves had accomplished, even though some of their accomplishments were a result of strength of division, or lack thereof. Oh, that the Reds could be up for such consideration of "overrated" success.

redsmetz
06-21-2007, 04:39 PM
Joey Votto says hi. Harris would be here if Castro wasn't. Brad Salmon should've been on the roster from opening day but wasn't because Cormier was. It's not just a "blocking" issue, though that's always relevent. It's relying on retread veteran talent in lieu of developing better in house alternatives. Mildly productive veterans can fill the periphery of a roster in some circumstances. They should not be the core.

As much as the bullpen has been struggling, I'm thrilled that at least it's Coffey, Coutlangus, Salmon, etc. struggling. Either they'll pan out and we'll improve, or they won't and we can move on the the next higher ceiling opportunity with the knowledge that these guys aren't the answer. Guys like Stanton, Santos, Cormier, Saarloos, etc. do nothing to help us win now and nothing to help us win later, while eating up resources that could be diverted in a more focused manner to acquire actual performance from top talent.

Votto's not being blocked by anybody, so he needn't say "hi" - he's not quite ready yet. If he becomes ready, I expect one of the platoon pair will be traded. Harris/Castro isn't a starter question. Whether you or I agree or not, I think the Reds saw Castro as the better bench player than Harris. They took the cash and it is what it is - it's not a veteran vs. a rookie question.

I'm not sure how to look at the pen viz Vet Love and all that. I certainly would look at the '06 and '07 pens as different and unrelated (to some degree). Last year, they were looking at any arm they could find to right the ship. This year, that might not be a bad idea, but I don't think you can broad brush with this year's group. Yes, you had the vets like Cormier (I agree, he was a mistake). I think Weathers is exactly who the Reds want, even if he's not a protypical closer. I think the Stanton we're seeing of late, is the Stanton they expected when they signed him.

Santos is a filler and I'll allow his presence is debatable, but he's here, every club has someone like him. Saarloos isn't an aged guy - he's only 28, so I'm not sure how he falls into a discussion that's particularly about vets blocking rookies.

The main point, aside from the question of whether Votto is ready (and I don't think he's quite there), there is no veteran starter blocking a rookie from coming up.

dabvu2498
06-21-2007, 04:41 PM
Now, this second wave is different - Mauer, Morneau, Cuddyer, etc., but those guys are fruits of 5 years worth of top 10 draft picks.

Strange part about their success is that the Twins "missed" on three of their top 6 picks from that decade -- BJ Garbe, Ryan Mills, Adam Johnson. Their 02,03, and 04 1st round picks appear to be no great shakes at this point either.

Morneau was a 3rd round pick, BTW.

KronoRed
06-21-2007, 05:40 PM
Votto's not being blocked by anybody, so he needn't say "hi" - he's not quite ready yet.
I'm going to disagree with that, Bailey was up here after a hot few starts so why not Votto? if Bailey is "ready" then so is Votto.

BRM
06-21-2007, 05:43 PM
I'm going to disagree with that, Bailey was up here after a hot few starts so why not Votto? if Bailey is "ready" then so is Votto.

I agree. Votto isn't in Cincinnati right now because he has no place to play, not because he isn't ready.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-21-2007, 05:46 PM
I would like to see each and every member of the ORG vote in this poll.



I picked a grade of D. Why? See Cyclone's post which pretty much echoes my sentiments.

IslandRed
06-21-2007, 05:55 PM
I agree. Votto isn't in Cincinnati right now because he has no place to play, not because he isn't ready.

He wasn't ready at the start of the season. Somebody had to play first base in the meantime, and it's not a bad thing that the stopgaps are actually playing well enough to keep their jobs and conceivably be worth something in trade. If they're still here blocking Votto after the trade deadlines, then there's a beef to be had, but in the meantime, let's give them a chance to be traded for something.

pedro
06-21-2007, 07:16 PM
He wasn't ready at the start of the season. Somebody had to play first base in the meantime, and it's not a bad thing that the stopgaps are actually playing well enough to keep their jobs and conceivably be worth something in trade. If they're still here blocking Votto after the trade deadlines, then there's a beef to be had, but in the meantime, let's give them a chance to be traded for something.

Good points.

Mario-Rijo
06-21-2007, 08:00 PM
I'm going to try to sort through this and be as objective as I can ... the key word here being "try" ...

The good ...

The overall across the board improvement with the minor league system and prospect development (honestly, this is the bulk of the good, IMO).
Arroyo/Pena trade
Phillips acquisition
Hatteberg acquisition and extension
Other notable extensions: Dunn (last season), Harang, and Arroyo
Hamilton acquisition
Lohse acquisition
Resigning Weathers
Letting Aurilia walk in 2006 and gaining a compensation draft pick
Acquiring Schoeneweis in 2006, then letting him walk and gaining a compensation draft pick
It's difficult to guage so soon, but my inital reactions with the 2007 draft is, while it wasn't outstanding, it was pretty good
Griffey moved to right field

Some of these moves have been good so far, but there's still an opportunity for Krivsky to blow them in the end. For example, the Kyle Lohse acquisition has so far turned out to be a pretty good one. However, if Lohse is extended for far more than he's worth, or if he's traded for garbage or is allowed to walk without a draft pick coming in return, then the entire Lohse situation won't be much of a step in a positive direction. The Weathers signing also falls into a similar category.

The indifferent and/or incomplete ...

Gonzalez signing: working now, but could be a disaster by the end
Denorfia/McBeth trade
Conine acquisition
Freel extension


The bad ...

Keeping Narron and allowing Narron to destroy the pitching staff
The simple fact that the 2007 Reds are 28-45 right now on June 21st
Kearns/Lopez trade to Washington for Bray, Harris, Thompson, a batting tee relief pitcher and a crap veteran infielder
Excluding Weathers, the current bullpen is a complete disaster
The current bench is a complete disaster
Juan Castro: the acquisition, the extension, the subsequent playing time
Drew Stubbs was a complete miss for a 2006 first round pick
Giving Brendan Harris away for nothing
Cormier acquisition and subsequent extension
Stanton acquisition
Saarloos acquisition
Moeller acquisition
Joe Mays acquisition and subsequent playing time in 2006
McCracken and Hollandsworth in 2006

It wouldn't surprise me if I've forgotten a few, whether they're positive moves or negative moves, but this is the general gist of what I could recollect. So far, after moving through all of this dreck, my initial grade for Krivsky is probably either a C or a D.

The farm system moving in a positive direction is a big mark in Krivsky's favor, and the Arroyo, Hamilton, and Phillips acquisitions are also marks in his favor. But other factors such as allowing Narron to blow up the pitching staff, the lousy 2007 season, the bullpen/bench being a complete disaster, Drew Stubbs being drafted with the team's first round pick in 2006, and the Kearns/Lopez trade last season are big marks against Krivsky.

So what ultimately was the final factor that determined whether or not I gave Krivsky a C or a D? A philosophy within the organization ...

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43324



This answer from Wayne Krivsky pertaining to veterans was from a February, 2006 chat session with fans. Should a young player like Votto come off the bench? Not at all, and Krivsky is correct with that small caveat. But could a young player like Brendan Harris be a valuable bench player? Very much so.

As of then, we had no idea what Krivsky meant when he said he has a philosophy where there is always room for "quality veteran leadership," including, but not limited to, the bench. It's been almost a year and a half since then, and now we have a pretty good idea what Krivsky meant with that statement. And frankly, it's a philosophy that I absolutely loathe.

This is the type of organizational thinking that leads to acquiring a player such as Juan Castro, extending a player such as Juan Castro, and then giving playing time to a player such as Juan Castro. It's also the type of organizational thinking that lets Brendan Harris slip through one's fingers and into thin air. The 2007 bench is full of veterans with apparent quality veteran leadership, and the 2007 bench is horrible.

The bench is one aspect of the team, and it's been the highlight of this type of philosophical shortcoming thus far.

Final grade as of June 21st, 2007: D

An even bigger problem potentially in the future, however, is when the farm system starts producing some starting caliber talent and how this organization transitions into that young starting caliber talent. During Krivsky's tenure in Minnesota, the Twins maintained a history of blocking good young players with old, veteran garbage. Only when the Twins finally allowed their young talent to play with regularity last season did the Twins bust out and become a legitimate World Series contending team, and that didn't happen until early last season when Krivsky was no longer with that organization.

The next remaining hope for Wayne Krivsky to improve his grade in my eyes is the 2007 trading deadline, which will be an important point in the future of the franchise. If Krivsky puts together a solid string of deadline deals that look to improve the future fortunes of this franchise, then he could raise his grade and appear much more promising under his leadership.

But if Krivsky blows this trading deadline altogether by sitting on his hands and failing to cash certain players in (i.e. Lohse and Weathers, among others) and/or giving a franchise caliber talent such as Adam Dunn away for a marginal return, then my patience with him will be over and I will be calling for Wayne Krivsky's dismissal on August 1st.

I hate to quote the whole thing but it helps to be able to reference things being as it was on page 2.

1st things 1st I initially gave Wayne a "B" based on his acquisitions and the like. However as I voted I quickly remembered my biggest gripe with Wayne....Jerry Narron!! So before I get started I would like to retract that B if allowed and give Wayne a "C"., so please everyone remember that when looking at the poll take one away from "B" and add 1 vote to "C".

I wanna say that initially all GM's acquisitions have to be looked at through the eyes of the GM. And in order to do so you must attempt to understand what it is he is doing, I.E. what is his direction. IMO you have to read between the lines a little bit because actions speak louder than words and GM's aren't always gonna give you the complete plan. I think most can see rather easily that his approach is a simple one. Be competitive at every level within your financial capabilities now, while building for the future.

Now I know that BC and company agreed to spend many in order to remain competitive but they never promised to win it all right now. Just to get this franchise back to where we are competing for championships. So it should go without saying that they will spend some money to put them over the hump should they (past and present) find themselves in a position to win now. As long as it doesn't hurt the semi-near future or beyond. Krivsky made some deals that he felt would help them remain in it while not giving up the Bailey's and Bruce's of the organization. It didn't work out and had that offense played even remotely decent at the end of the year we likely would have been in the playoffs.

Now on to Cyclones post because I do agree for the most part with him. But I will never agree with most on "The trade" until something gives. It's most folks contention that (As Cyclone agrees with) the deal was mainly made to compete for last year. I don't agree with that sentiment and that's likely the reason we disagree on the trade. Sure the bullpen needed help last year and the offense seemed to be the place that we could deal from a place of perceived strength.

But I do not recall anyone in the organization stating that the deal was made strictly for the playoff push, and if they had what would you expect them to say? "We are simply building for the future", or "well we expect it to make us better this year but really we think it's a trade we made to help down the road" or perhaps even "it's simply a matter of getting better talent in the system and dealing guys who we don't believe have any further upside and we felt that we should sell high"?!

Here is where I read between the lines. They got 2 minor leaguers, a Rookie a has been shortstop and a solid (at the time and prior was solid) 8th inning guy, for 2 everyday players and a minor leaguer. So tell me why anyone would believe with certainty that a Bum, 1 Experienced 8th inning guy and a Rookie were going to help us get to the playoffs moreso than 2 everyday guys who were at the time playing fairly well. I say it's because Krivsky and company felt that we could get by on offense w/o aforementioned players add to the pen some guys with some stuff who would give us some youth and upside. (And BTW they were right about getting by because as bad as we were for 2 onths practically we only finished 3.5 games out) In other words for the future, and not so much the present.

So therefore until we cut the players we got or Kearns, Wagner and/or Lopez break out or one of the three players we still hold break out it's a wash at worst. Especially since we have replaced the 2 everday players with guys who have as good or better production and/or upside. Because I have always felt that "The Trade" was done more for the future and not necc. the present.

But I digress so let me make the rest of this short as possible.

Good - Everything Cyclone stated plus:
1.) The Gonzo signing- It may end up being bad but it had to be done, and he was the best and most reasonably priced option ava.
2.) The Conine signing-Why indifferent, we didn't give up anything of note for him and he does help provide leadership for the youth on the team, a good example and he gives us a guy who is dependable for what we need from him for the money.

Indifferent:
1.) Denorfia/McBeth trade (I'm leaning towards good, but too soon to know)
2.) Freel extension (He needed a little more cash but not that much or that long)
3.) "The Trade"
4.) The Current bench should be in the bad but they are one of the better hitting bench's around in the bigs this yr, this could however end up bad with Castro and Moeller continuing to be a part of it.
5.) Drew Stubbs - I like him to an extent, but like most was concerned about that lack of hitting for being such a high pick, and in light of a recent blurb about his lack of bat speed I am closing in quickly on this being a bad move. But I want to hear a bit more about his bat speed 1st before I completely give up on him.
6.) Saarloos - It takes all kinds of arms to make a pen, not just power arms. You need a guy who can give you some innings in long relief and someone with the versatility to start if necc. So the right thought was in mind but perhaps he isn't the guy for the job. And Sheafer hasn't acquitted himself well since being dealt so no harm no foul.
7.) Stanton - He could acquit himself with a solid season once he gets back, he was seemingly on track until the groin issue.

The Bad:
Keeping Narron and allowing Narron to destroy the pitching staff
The simple fact that the 2007 Reds are 28-45 right now on June 21st
Juan Castro: the acquisition, the extension, the subsequent playing time
Giving Brendan Harris, Brandon Watson & Cody Ross away for nothing
Cormier acquisition and subsequent extension
Moeller acquisition
Joe Mays & Esteban Yan acquisition and subsequent playing time in 2006
Letting go of Germano-He's a GB pitcher and could have possibly fetched more than Cormier
Letting go of Zach Ward (I know it brought Lohse, which I am ok with that if he HAD to get rid of Ward, I wonder if they would have taken Germano instead and we kept Ward and not gotten Cormier. Ward/Germano pretty similar pitchers Ward = Younger)

So again my final grade is a C for now and like Cyclone this deadline could be quite pivotal to what happens later. Also how long Narron is allowed to ruin this team is weighing on me heavily right now.

mth123
06-22-2007, 05:16 AM
Cyclone's post states pretty much how I feel as well. I also voted "D."

For me currently, the Jerry Narron issue is the top question.

He has continually mismanaged the pitching staff to the point that the bullpen problems have been magnified and multiplied exponentially. His misuse/overuse of his pitchers have jeopardized the few quality arms in his possession. Its clear that Arroyo is an example. IMO many of Coffey's problems can be traced to Narron's handling and I'm suspicious of the same concerning Coutlangus. Weathers has been ridden pretty hard with his multi-inning performances (many arising from situations brought on by prior in-game mishandling of the pitchers who preceded him) and I hope he is cashed in before his arm acts up. Harang has been worked hard and needs to be protected the rest of the season and the concern about Bailey is well founded (although Narron did the right thing in Bailey's last outing).

Add in other silliness like the lefty righty extremes in his line-up construction and pinch hitting Juan Castro for anyone and I can't find much reason to keep Narron around.

I feel so strongly that simply firing Narron by the end of the current road trip would move Krivsky up from a "D" to a "C", but allowing Narron to continue putting his pitchers in harm's way will probably drop him to an "F."

REDREAD
06-23-2007, 04:18 PM
I gave him a D..

Phillips and Hamilton are what saved him from getting an F.

He has made so many bad decisions that it's pathetic. The fact that he gave Juan Castro a 2 year extension and then let go Brandon Harris to make room for Castro speaks VOLUMES of his incompetence. Exhibit B is the entire bullpen, particularly Stanton, Cormier, Maj, etc. It's it unbelievable that with all the bullpen tinkering, he hasn't found a single reliable reliever.. I mean, Weathers was already here, and Guarado doesn't count because he only lasted a few weeks.

Wayne was smart enough to pick up Phillips based on the recommendation of a scout that saw him hit a HR vs Oswalt. He was smart enough to listen to Jerry on Hamilton. Arroyo trade is a win, but it's not looking like a big win now. Not much positive stuff on Wayne's resume. In fact, I really have no argument with people that say Wayne should get an F.

Falls City Beer
06-23-2007, 04:21 PM
What "direction?"

bucksfan2
06-23-2007, 06:18 PM
I gave him a D..

Phillips and Hamilton are what saved him from getting an F.

He has made so many bad decisions that it's pathetic. The fact that he gave Juan Castro a 2 year extension and then let go Brandon Harris to make room for Castro speaks VOLUMES of his incompetence. Exhibit B is the entire bullpen, particularly Stanton, Cormier, Maj, etc. It's it unbelievable that with all the bullpen tinkering, he hasn't found a single reliable reliever.. I mean, Weathers was already here, and Guarado doesn't count because he only lasted a few weeks.

Wayne was smart enough to pick up Phillips based on the recommendation of a scout that saw him hit a HR vs Oswalt. He was smart enough to listen to Jerry on Hamilton. Arroyo trade is a win, but it's not looking like a big win now. Not much positive stuff on Wayne's resume. In fact, I really have no argument with people that say Wayne should get an F.

Here's the thing Narron didn't really have a say until Krivsky drafted Hamilton. All the reports I read were that Krivsky told him he was going to draft Hamilton without any knowledge of his connection to Hamilton. Also Krivsky picked up two players who are young, supremely talented, for basically pennies on the dollar and you give him a D. He has failed to put together a quality pen, whether that is his or Narron's fault is debatable. But the thing I see is that he had not done anything to harm this club at all. The club is underperforming and if you ask me is as talented as any team in the NL central. My only problem that I have with Krivsky is that he has kept Narron for as long as he is.

Marc D
06-23-2007, 06:26 PM
He has failed to put together a quality pen, whether that is his or Narron's fault is debatable. But the thing I see is that he had not done anything to harm this club at all.

7/13/2006

CINCINNATI -- The Cincinnati Reds today acquired from the Washington Nationals RHP Gary Majewski, LHP Bill Bray, SS Royce Clayton, IF Brendan Harris and RHP Daryl Thompson in exchange for OF Austin Kearns, SS Felipe Lopez and RHP Ryan Wagner.

SteelSD
06-24-2007, 01:04 AM
I gave him an F. Krivsky took over a team with talent that had glaring needs and he hasn't been able to actually address those glaring needs. His efforts to fix the roatation and pen have thusfar almost completely backfired. His one attempt at a high-value trade was pitiful. The Manager he backs is inept on multiple levels. The bench is awful and his "pitching/defense" mentality has produced the fifth worst DER in MLB (.685) and the fourth worst team ERA in the NL.

We're not talking about a guy who hasn't had the opportunity to place his stamp on the Cincinnati Reds. We're talking about an active GM who hasn't done much of anything but make the Reds a worse ballclub.

You get an "F" for that every day of the week.

Aronchis
06-24-2007, 01:07 AM
I gave him an F. Krivsky took over a team with talent that had glaring needs and he hasn't been able to actually address those glaring needs. His efforts to fix the roatation and pen have thusfar almost completely backfired. His one attempt at a high-value trade was pitiful. The Manager he backs is inept on multiple levels. The bench is awful and his "pitching/defense" mentality has produced the fifth worst DER in MLB (.685) and the fourth worst team ERA in the NL.

We're not talking about a guy who hasn't had the opportunity to place his stamp on the Cincinnati Reds. We're talking about an active GM who hasn't done much of anything but make the Reds a worse ballclub.

You get an "F" for that every day of the week.

Or maybe he has inside the framework of the organization. Bad, good and everything in the middle.

Lets be clear, Wayne Krivsky deserves every bit of the doubt people gave Jim Bowden with the ownership at that time. Yet, nobody wants to give him any.

Bob Cast outright was turned down by 2 Assistant GM's before he was forced to settle for Krivsky who had been passed over several times before for a GM job. That is because Cast's "plan" for the Reds franchise was BS. Literally, they said they didn't like his plan and Cast wasn't going to bend so he went to plan B.

When Cast said he 'wasn't a patient man' I was not happy. I think that told us all we needed to know about the Reds organization and where it was going under Bob Cast: The new boss same as the old.

We spend enough on the major league team to keep people hopefull but are among the bottom of the pack for spending money on signing International and Domestic prospects. We spend just enough for the most part to sign our picks in the June draft, but that also forces us to pass on more talented players and foreign born players because we don't budget the money.

I mean, if Wayne Krivsky had told Cast he was going to trade Adam Dunn and A.Harang(probaby the Reds best return on a trade commodities), slash payroll down to 40 million and put 20 million into signing new talent, oh yeah, we are going to suck in 06-09 and have plenty of high draft choices who could help in 2010 and beyond, Cast would have punched him in the face and not hired him. It is that simple. Cast wants to win now and do it going through the backdoor. Last year, we got some luck, Wayne made a couple of nice deals early on, got some surprising production from players and they overachieved through the first 60 games of the season. Not this year, Arroyo has had a rough start, Coffey has been poor: 2 "hero's" of the 2006 team struggling. Krivsky made some errors(as all GM's do) while making some promising inroads and the team declines in 07. Who didn't see it coming?

Cast gave Krivsky a almost impossible task this year and Wayne simply didn't bat 1000. Probably not even .500, but unless he could almost batted a 1000, the Reds weren't going to be "competitive" anway. Krivsky tries to lower the risk by signing cheap Vets who can possibly fullfill Cast's vision and he could remove painlessly in the near future. Do the Reds really have anybody in the organization that could fill those roles? Maybe, but probably not. Maybe Krivsky could have filled those another ways? Maybe, but nobody, again, bats a 1000. Maybe we should be counting our lucky stars the Reds didn't plow 9 million into the next Eric Milton.

Fire Krivsky all you want, unless Cast changes his tune and plan, nobody with some good skills is even going to sniff this organization. We are a disgrace and Cast is forwarding on this tradition. Depodesta? You gotta be kidding me, he wouldn't even sniff at this franchise much less another quality Assistant GM.

It starts at top and it is time to wipe that denial about Bob Cast off your face Redzoners. Might as well bring back Lindner(or any of the other limiteds) as Chief Officer. He didn't give a crap and was just waiting to sell.

SteelSD
06-24-2007, 01:44 AM
Or maybe he has inside the framework of the organization. Bad, good and everything in the middle.

I'm not quite sure what that means, Aronchis.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 11:22 AM
I gave him an F. Krivsky took over a team with talent that had glaring needs and he hasn't been able to actually address those glaring needs. His efforts to fix the roatation and pen have thusfar almost completely backfired. His one attempt at a high-value trade was pitiful. The Manager he backs is inept on multiple levels. The bench is awful and his "pitching/defense" mentality has produced the fifth worst DER in MLB (.685) and the fourth worst team ERA in the NL.

We're not talking about a guy who hasn't had the opportunity to place his stamp on the Cincinnati Reds. We're talking about an active GM who hasn't done much of anything but make the Reds a worse ballclub.

You get an "F" for that every day of the week.

This is my take. There's been plenty of time. And if judgment is being deferred till after July 31st, then my feeling on that is that judgment could be deferred indefinitely. Sure, I do know people change and philosophies change and smart advisors are hired, but Wayne strikes me as a 52 year old man who is confident in his position. Every press clipping I've read from him makes him sound like a man committed to the very ideas that have brought him to this low point with this team. This isn't some young, curious pup with an active mind and a coterie of bright advisors and scouts feeling his way through the job.

The question one needs to ask oneself is: is this the man capable of making the sea change necessary (philosophically, intellectually, structurally) to get this team to a winning place? Because this team needs a sea change from its current direction, not just a tweaking or fan patience. The current philosophy stretched out till the crack of doom will produce losers after losers.

KronoRed
06-24-2007, 03:24 PM
What "direction?"

Is circling the drain a direction?

SteelSD
06-24-2007, 06:10 PM
Is circling the drain a direction?

Northern or Southern Hemisphere?

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 06:31 PM
As of now, 85 people have voted in this poll. Lots of D grades, a fair number of C grades, some B grades, and even a few F grades handed down.

The most telling aspect? Not a single A vote for Krivsky. Not even one.

Of course, now that I say that, someone will jokingly vote and give him an A, but even if that happens there still wouldn't be a serious A vote.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 06:40 PM
This team is on a collision course with 100 losses. To jokingly give Krivsky an A strikes me as sacrilege if you really value the Reds.

traderumor
06-24-2007, 07:00 PM
As of now, 85 people have voted in this poll. Lots of D grades, a fair number of C grades, some B grades, and even a few F grades handed down.

The most telling aspect? Not a single A vote for Krivsky. Not even one.

Of course, now that I say that, someone will jokingly vote and give him an A, but even if that happens there still wouldn't be a serious A vote.

Telling of what? Of course no one is going to vote for an "A" in a poll like this when the team is having yet another losing season, not to mention the grading scheme was not much of a continuum to choose from. The comments are much more productive than some arbitrary letter grade in a poll with not enough choices in the first place. Some folks out there have not joined the lynching mob and evaluate someone differently than the first 18 months of their term and one major trade and one offseason in a league-wide soft trade and free agent market. But then, the short term is how the TV and microwave (and message board GMs) generation evaluates everything.

I'm sick of losing too. I'm just not as ready as some to lay 10+ years of it at Krivsky's feet.

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 07:17 PM
Telling of what? Of course no one is going to vote for an "A" in a poll like this when the team is having yet another losing season, not to mention the grading scheme was not much of a continuum to choose from. The comments are much more productive than some arbitrary letter grade in a poll with not enough choices in the first place. Some folks out there have not joined the lynching mob and evaluate someone differently than the first 18 months of their term and one major trade and one offseason in a league-wide soft trade and free agent market. But then, the short term is how the TV and microwave (and message board GMs) generation evaluates everything.

I'm sick of losing too. I'm just not as ready as some to lay 10+ years of it at Krivsky's feet.

An organization such as the Reds needs a general manager and its entire front office to rise above the pack and clean a lot of people's clocks. In order to make the postseason, the Reds have to either outplay five specific other NL Central teams, or outplay 12 other specific NL teams themselves. If the Reds are going to be a perennial contender, then the Reds are going to accomplish the above repeatedly season after season. Most times it's going to require one of the best general managers in the game. At worst, it's going to require a B-level general manager who's still likely better than two-thirds of his competition.

Other organizations have figured it out without having to spend the money of the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Angels, or the Dodgers. How much faith do you have in Krivsky figuring out what organizations such as the A's, Tigers, and Padres have figured out?

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 07:21 PM
Telling of what? Of course no one is going to vote for an "A" in a poll like this when the team is having yet another losing season, not to mention the grading scheme was not much of a continuum to choose from. The comments are much more productive than some arbitrary letter grade in a poll with not enough choices in the first place. Some folks out there have not joined the lynching mob and evaluate someone differently than the first 18 months of their term and one major trade and one offseason in a league-wide soft trade and free agent market. But then, the short term is how the TV and microwave (and message board GMs) generation evaluates everything.

I'm sick of losing too. I'm just not as ready as some to lay 10+ years of it at Krivsky's feet.

Dave Littlefield. There's patience, and then there's futility.

traderumor
06-24-2007, 07:23 PM
An organization such as the Reds needs a general manager and its entire front office to rise above the pack and clean a lot of people's clocks. In order to make the postseason, the Reds have to either outplay five specific other NL Central teams, or outplay 12 other specific NL teams themselves. If the Reds are going to be a perennial contender, then the Reds are going to accomplish the above repeatedly season after season. Most times it's going to require one of the best general managers in the game. At worst, it's going to require a B-level general manager who's still likely better than two-thirds of his competition.

Other organizations have figured it out without having to spend the money of the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Angels, or the Dodgers. How much faith do you have in Krivsky figuring out what organizations such as the A's, Tigers, and Padres have figured out?and Twins? I don't think he has to "figure out" anything, I think he will put a contender on the field in a similar manner to his primary mentor.

Caveat Emperor
06-24-2007, 07:31 PM
How much faith do you have in Krivsky figuring out what organizations such as the A's, Tigers, and Padres have figured out?

Three pathways to success:

As: Strive to the point of obsession on keeping ahead of the curve in terms of market trends. Have and develop great pitching that you can sell at the highest price point while simultaneously reloading with equivalent talent.

Padres: Build a really big ballpark and spend everything you have on pitching.

Tigers: Suck it hard for the better part of 2 decades and accumulate enough high draft picks to eventually build a contending ballclub.

I personally don't like the direction the Reds are taking right now, but at the same time I recognize that this has been an awful team for a really long time. During that time period, they swung and missed on a LOT of draft picks that, theoretically, should be coming through the system right now. Without a constant stream of good talent to fill the roster and the occasional superstar to carry the ballclub, really what is the team supposed to do other than keep sucking?

As much as I want to blast Krivsky, I don't really see how most of this is his fault. He inherited a team with virtually no marketable major league talent (you can cry Kearns and Lopez all you want, but they've proven that both teams lost the deal last season) and a minor league system that was, by all accounts, just short of outright awful. Who was expecting a change overnight?

I guess you could fire him now to send a message that this franchise won't tolerate wheel-spinning -- but really, what is the next guy going to do expect spin his wheels?

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 07:37 PM
and Twins? I don't think he has to "figure out" anything, I think he will put a contender on the field in a similar manner to his primary mentor.

Minnesota's had some success, and kudos to them. But what's interesting is Minnesota's pythag wins since 2001 ...

81, 86, 85, 87, 84, 93, 86 (projection this season)

That's an average of 86 pythag wins.

Sure, that's much better than we've seen in Cincinnati in quite a long time (and I'd sure take it over what we've seen recently), but the Twins were in some weak divisions for quite awhile. Now with the Tigers and Indians being a much more dominant force, Minnesota is having problems. I suspect the Tigers may be a problem for Minnesota for quite a few seasons now too.

I'd like to see 90-95 pythag wins for the Reds in the future. Would I complain about 86 pythag wins? Nah, but that still opens the door for another organization to run up 90+ wins and leave the Reds out of the playoffs ... something you may see Detroit and/or Cleveland do to Minnesota now.

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 07:50 PM
I guess you could fire him now to send a message that this franchise won't tolerate wheel-spinning -- but really, what is the next guy going to do expect spin his wheels?

While I'm not one of the ones advocating to fire Krivsky now (though I certainly understand that stance), it is important for people to realize part of his stamp for the future of this organization will be made in the next five to six weeks.

At the beginning of the month, I stated that Krivsky's future with the Reds may be determined by how well this team drafts this year and deals with a potential full or partial firesale. The draft was fine, IMO, but the firesale part remains.

The team is out of contention, and it does have some moderate talent not named Adam Dunn that it could flip in a series of moves designed for helping this franchise win in 2008 and beyond. How well Krivsky orchestrates those potential moves could be crucial to determining how well this franchise is set to win in 2008 and beyond. If Krivsky turns in a series of nice moves before the deadline, the organization could be showing some signs of heading down that nice path they need to start heading down.

The key thing here is ... Krivsky can't blow it at the deadline ... especially if he trades Adam Dunn. But even if he holds on to Dunn, he still can't blow it at the deadline.

It looks like that joke A vote was finally cast. ;)

traderumor
06-24-2007, 08:01 PM
While I'm not one of the ones advocating to fire Krivsky now (though I certainly understand that stance), it is important for people to realize part of his stamp for the future of this organization will be made in the next five to six weeks.

At the beginning of the month, I stated that Krivsky's future with the Reds may be determined by how well this team drafts this year and deals with a potential full or partial firesale. The draft was fine, IMO, but the firesale part remains.

The team is out of contention, and it does have some moderate talent not named Adam Dunn that it could flip in a series of moves designed for helping this franchise win in 2008 and beyond. How well Krivsky orchestrates those potential moves could be crucial to determining how well this franchise is set to win in 2008 and beyond. If Krivsky turns in a series of nice moves before the deadline, the organization could be showing some signs of heading down that nice path they need to start heading down.

The key thing here is ... Krivsky can't blow it at the deadline ... especially if he trades Adam Dunn. But even if he holds on to Dunn, he still can't blow it at the deadline.

It looks like that joke A vote was finally cast. ;)

CE has made some very good points about the teams you are applauding, one of which is a flavor of the month. Now that we have a Minny guy, two different folks have told me "eh, they were the product of a weak division." By the same vein, Oakland and SD both have been playing in weak divisions during the same time frame, yet no mention of that. That's curious. Winning is winning. The Twins were playing similar schedules with a few more games against weak sisters even if you get the "weak division" argument. I see no need to discount what they have accomplished because we have Krivsky now.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 08:23 PM
Three pathways to success:

As: Strive to the point of obsession on keeping ahead of the curve in terms of market trends. Have and develop great pitching that you can sell at the highest price point while simultaneously reloading with equivalent talent.

Padres: Build a really big ballpark and spend everything you have on pitching.

Tigers: Suck it hard for the better part of 2 decades and accumulate enough high draft picks to eventually build a contending ballclub.

I personally don't like the direction the Reds are taking right now, but at the same time I recognize that this has been an awful team for a really long time. During that time period, they swung and missed on a LOT of draft picks that, theoretically, should be coming through the system right now. Without a constant stream of good talent to fill the roster and the occasional superstar to carry the ballclub, really what is the team supposed to do other than keep sucking?

As much as I want to blast Krivsky, I don't really see how most of this is his fault. He inherited a team with virtually no marketable major league talent (you can cry Kearns and Lopez all you want, but they've proven that both teams lost the deal last season) and a minor league system that was, by all accounts, just short of outright awful. Who was expecting a change overnight?

I guess you could fire him now to send a message that this franchise won't tolerate wheel-spinning -- but really, what is the next guy going to do expect spin his wheels?

That's some pretty revisionist history vis. the Tigers. What Dave Dombrowski inherited 4 years ago was every bit as bad as what Krivsky inherited; in 3 years time his team was in the World Series.

But what's more important than getting into the World Series in 3 years' time is the clear, easily-traceable plan that he began implementing almost immediately. He worked aggressively, drafted circles around any single thing that Krivsky's drafted, traded for just the right pieces (Bonderman), and didn't shy away from spending money to nail it down (Sheffield, Ordonez). What he did in Detroit is textbook, and they now have so much pitching they CAN be set for the next 3-5 seasons. What Dombrowski did is nothing short of amazing, and what makes it so frustrating to watch as a Reds' fan is that it's doable. And, unlike the Twins fits, starts, and stubbornnesses, it's a PLAN.

edabbs44
06-24-2007, 08:27 PM
Three pathways to success:

As: Strive to the point of obsession on keeping ahead of the curve in terms of market trends. Have and develop great pitching that you can sell at the highest price point while simultaneously reloading with equivalent talent.

Padres: Build a really big ballpark and spend everything you have on pitching.

Tigers: Suck it hard for the better part of 2 decades and accumulate enough high draft picks to eventually build a contending ballclub.

I personally don't like the direction the Reds are taking right now, but at the same time I recognize that this has been an awful team for a really long time. During that time period, they swung and missed on a LOT of draft picks that, theoretically, should be coming through the system right now. Without a constant stream of good talent to fill the roster and the occasional superstar to carry the ballclub, really what is the team supposed to do other than keep sucking?

As much as I want to blast Krivsky, I don't really see how most of this is his fault. He inherited a team with virtually no marketable major league talent (you can cry Kearns and Lopez all you want, but they've proven that both teams lost the deal last season) and a minor league system that was, by all accounts, just short of outright awful. Who was expecting a change overnight?
I guess you could fire him now to send a message that this franchise won't tolerate wheel-spinning -- but really, what is the next guy going to do expect spin his wheels?

Who was expecting a change in the direction of THE WORST RECORD IN THE MAJORS? That's what a lot of people are missing here. Payroll was increased 16% this season. He got to sign a bunch of players. He has put his stamp on this team. The team has THE WORST RECORD IN THE MAJORS. If he gutted this team and started from scratch, do you know what the only difference would be? That the team would have a better future, since they are already THE WORST IN BASEBALL. In 1.5 years, he took this team and made them the laughingstock of the league. Everyone was all giddy because of the acquisition (and subsequent extension) of Arroyo. How does that look now? Same with Ross...everyone was wetting themselves over those acquisitions. They don't look so hot now. Krivsky has two moves that keep his tenure from being a complete whiff. Phillips and Hamilton, and Hamilton is still a work in progress.

Krivsky has one more shot to win back the fans. July 31st. (And like an idiot, I'm flying home from Vegas that day). If he doesn't come up aces, he's a goner. I gave WK a D, since bringing a GM in one month before the deadline would be a more ridiculous move than even "The Trade." But on August 1st, it might be an F.

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 08:28 PM
CE has made some very good points about the teams you are applauding, one of which is a flavor of the month. Now that we have a Minny guy, two different folks have told me "eh, they were the product of a weak division." By the same vein, Oakland and SD both have been playing in weak divisions during the same time frame, yet no mention of that. That's curious. Winning is winning. The Twins were playing similar schedules with a few more games against weak sisters even if you get the "weak division" argument. I see no need to discount what they have accomplished because we have Krivsky now.

Oakland's been playing in a weak division? C'mon TR ...

1999 AL West Champ: Texas with 95 wins (Oakland second with 87 wins)
2000 AL West Champ: Oakland with 91 wins (Seattle was second with 91 wins)
2001 AL West Champ: Seattle with 116 wins (Oakland second with 102 wins)
2002 AL West Champ: Oakland with 103 wins (Anaheim was second with 99 wins and Seattle was third with 93 wins)
2003 AL West Champ: Oakland with 96 wins (Seattle second with 93 wins)
2004 AL West Champ: Anaheim with 92 wins (Oakland second with 91 wins and Texas third with 89 wins)
2005 AL West Champ: Los Angeles with 95 wins (Oakland second with 88 wins)
2006 AL West Champ: Oakland with 93 wins (Los Angeles second with 89 wins)

So let's see, from 1999-2006, the average AL West winner had 98 wins, and the average second place team had 92 wins. The lowest win total the AL West division crown has required was 91 wins in 2000. In five of the eight last seasons, the AL West winner won 95+ games.

If Minnesota was in the AL West during their run, how many times would they have made the playoffs? Once, and that would have been just last season. This is the problem with building a sub 90 win pythag team. The Twins outperformed their pythag during several seasons, and if they were in the AL West (or AL East), they wouldn't have that current playoff run they do have.

And the Tigers? They did stink in 2003 during Dombrowski's first season. And since then they have an AL pennant and are one of the best teams and organizations in all of baseball. The amount of talent that team has stocked throughout its organization is incredible, and they once again had what looks to be a very nice draft just a few weeks ago.

If by 2010 the Reds have a league pennant and one of the best overall organizations in baseball, then they'll match what the Tigers have done and I'll both be shocked and thrilled. But right now, I'm not counting on that happening.

I won't argue that the Padres haven't taken advantage of two weak NL West divisions in 2005 and 2006 (though that's no longer the case anymore). But they've been a mid-range payroll team for several seasons now, and they've been on an ascension for the last several seasons. It doesn't matter how they've accomplished that by building a park and generating lights out pitching, the point is they've gone out and done it.

edabbs44
06-24-2007, 08:30 PM
That's some pretty revisionist history vis. the Tigers. What Dave Dombrowski inherited 4 years ago was every bit as bad as what Krivsky inherited; in 3 years time his team was in the World Series.

But what's more important than getting into the World Series in 3 years' time is the clear, easily-traceable plan that he began implementing almost immediately. He worked aggressively, drafted circles around any single thing that Krivsky's drafted, traded for just the right pieces (Bonderman), and didn't shy away from spending money to nail it down (Sheffield, Ordonez). What he did in Detroit is textbook, and they now have so much pitching they CAN be set for the next 3-5 seasons. What Dombrowski did is nothing short of amazing, and what makes it so frustrating to watch as a Reds' fan is that it's doable. And, unlike the Twins fits, starts, and stubbornnesses, it's a PLAN.

Bingo...Krivsky has no plan. That's been my #1 gripe since last year. And that's what makes it so frustrating. Who ups payroll by 16% and has the worst record in baseball? How does that happen?

Aronchis
06-24-2007, 08:32 PM
That's some pretty revisionist history vis. the Tigers. What Dave Dombrowski inherited 4 years ago was every bit as bad as what Krivsky inherited; in 3 years time his team was in the World Series.

But what's more important than getting into the World Series in 3 years' time is the clear, easily-traceable plan that he began implementing almost immediately. He worked aggressively, drafted circles around any single thing that Krivsky's drafted, traded for just the right pieces (Bonderman), and didn't shy away from spending money to nail it down (Sheffield, Ordonez). What he did in Detroit is textbook, and they now have so much pitching they CAN be set for the next 3-5 seasons. What Dombrowski did is nothing short of amazing, and what makes it so frustrating to watch as a Reds' fan is that it's doable. And, unlike the Twins fits, starts, and stubbornnesses, it's a PLAN.

More than 3 years. Dombrowski won 57,43,72,72 games before last season after taking over as GM in spring 2002. They had some really bad teams during his early tenure. Just like the Braves did in the 80's and the Indians did in the early 90's. Maybe the key is really sucking and investing within?

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 08:33 PM
That's some pretty revisionist history vis. the Tigers. What Dave Dombrowski inherited 4 years ago was every bit as bad as what Krivsky inherited; in 3 years time his team was in the World Series.

But what's more important than getting into the World Series in 3 years' time is the clear, easily-traceable plan that he began implementing almost immediately. He worked aggressively, drafted circles around any single thing that Krivsky's drafted, traded for just the right pieces (Bonderman), and didn't shy away from spending money to nail it down (Sheffield, Ordonez). What he did in Detroit is textbook, and they now have so much pitching they CAN be set for the next 3-5 seasons. What Dombrowski did is nothing short of amazing, and what makes it so frustrating to watch as a Reds' fan is that it's doable. And, unlike the Twins fits, starts, and stubbornnesses, it's a PLAN.

There's the rub ... who here believes that Wayne Krivsky can match what Dave Dombrowski did in Detroit within four years?

The Tigers stunk horribly during Dombrowski's first season, were mediocre (but better) in seasons two and three, then went out and won the AL flag in season four. Now in season five, it's obvious they're a powerhouse. That is a league pennant and one of the best organizations in all of baseball within four years.

That's a plan, and that's what I want to see from the Reds. Will it happen though?

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 08:33 PM
More than 3 years. Dombrowski won 57,43,72,72 games before last season after taking over as GM in spring 2002. They had some really bad teams during his early tenure. Just like the Braves did in the 80's and the Indians did in the early 90's. Maybe the key is really sucking and investing within?


Right. 4 years. Nevertheless, the plan was taking shape from the get-go.

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 08:42 PM
More than 3 years. Dombrowski won 57,43,72,72 games before last season after taking over as GM in spring 2002. They had some really bad teams during his early tenure. Just like the Braves did in the 80's and the Indians did in the early 90's. Maybe the key is really sucking and investing within?

Randy Smith was still the general manager in 2002, not Dombrowski. Dombrowski was hired by the Tigers as President/CEO for 2002, but he retained GM Randy Smith for that season. Then when the Tigers were still horrible in 2002, Dombrowski fired Smith and just took over the general manager's job himself from that point.

Randy Smith was probably one of the worst general managers in the last dozen years. He was Allard Baird bad for the Tigers.

Aronchis
06-24-2007, 08:44 PM
Randy Smith was still the general manager in 2002, not Dombrowski. Dombrowski was hired by the Tigers as President/CEO for 2002, but he retained GM Randy Smith for that season. Then when the Tigers were still horrible in 2002, Dombrowski fired Smith and just took over the general manager's job himself from that point.

Randy Smith was probably one of the worst general managers in the last dozen years. He was Allard Baird bad for the Tigers.

Dombrowski took over a week into the 2002 season and had been with the Tigers since the previous fall.

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 08:46 PM
Dombrowski took over a week into the 2002 season and had been with the Tigers since the previous fall.

You're right, and the Wiki entry is wrong then (not really surprising). As it is, Smith had control of the 2001-2002 offseason, but Dombrowski had control of the team during the 2002 season.

traderumor
06-24-2007, 08:52 PM
Cyclone,

The strength of a division is not measured by the win totals of the top two teams, vis a vis the NL West of the 70s when the Reds and Dodgers sat atop a division with the Giants, Braves, and Pads struggling to get 70 wins a year. Looking at the entire divisions shows top heavy divisions, with an occasional third party coming to the table some years in the 21st century. Regardless, my point is that Minny's "overrated" success (as it was put by another, might have even been in this thread) is the type of problem I want the Reds to have. Let the naysayers spit on the ground and say "yea, the Reds have been winning in a weak Central." There will always be a way to make one's subjective point appear objective when minds are made up.

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 09:06 PM
Cyclone,

The strength of a division is not measured by the win totals of the top two teams, vis a vis the NL West of the 70s when the Reds and Dodgers sat atop a division with the Giants, Braves, and Pads struggling to get 70 wins a year. Looking at the entire divisions shows top heavy divisions, with an occasional third party coming to the table some years in the 21st century. Regardless, my point is that Minny's "overrated" success (as it was put by another, might have even been in this thread) is the type of problem I want the Reds to have. Let the naysayers spit on the ground and say "yea, the Reds have been winning in a weak Central." There will always be a way to make one's subjective point appear objective when minds are made up.

You and I are making two separate arguments here it appears.

My argument is simply I want the organization to build a team that is able to generate 90+ pythag wins each season. With the exception of last season, the Twins and their model wasn't able to accomplish that, mostly because their offense wasn't quite good enough. Luckily for them, nobody else in their division was even close to accomplishing that so the Twins were still able to nab a few division crowns with sub 90 pythag win teams. The problem is that doesn't happen too often, which is precisely why I want the Reds to develop 90+ pythag win teams.

A second potential problem with the Twins model, and I'm not even sure I've ever seen this discussed, is I'm not sure how well their model will play in GABP. The Reds just built a new stadium; they're not getting another one, and it's just about impossible to alter what they've currently got. They play in a stadium friendly to the home run, but not-so-friendly to the single, double, and triple. The Twins play in a dome on turf. They play in a neutral park for the home run, but a friendly park for the single.

I've got no qualms with excellent pitching and defense. Excellent pitching and defense is phenomenal, though I'm not sure the current direction indicates Krivsky has a grasp on excellent pitching and defense given where the runs allowed total has ventured this season. But in this park, a singles/batting average driven offense that's below average to average may not work too well.

REDREAD
06-24-2007, 09:15 PM
Tigers: Suck it hard for the better part of 2 decades and accumulate enough high draft picks to eventually build a contending ballclub.



Actually, the Tigers were a lot like the Lindner Reds for years. They didn't care. Then they figured out that if they won games, they might actually make more money. So they had a change in philosphy. They took some chances on possible impact free agents.. Ordonez, IRod, etc. Some worked out, some didn't, but the point is that they were high upside guys.. unlike Stanton, Castro, Gonzo, etc.. who have an upside of average at best.

Then they really did start pouring money into the farm system. This year, they grabbed that Boras kid in the first round that no one else wanted to pay, because they thought he was the best player available. Any other team in baseball could've done the same thing, if they were truly willing to spend money on the draft. A lot of teams talk big about investing in the draft. Few actually do. The tigers are one. The Indians are another. There's probably a handful of others, but most clubs look to spend the minimum in the draft.

edabbs44
06-24-2007, 09:19 PM
More than 3 years. Dombrowski won 57,43,72,72 games before last season after taking over as GM in spring 2002. They had some really bad teams during his early tenure. Just like the Braves did in the 80's and the Indians did in the early 90's. Maybe the key is really sucking and investing within?

I think the issue here is that Cincy is going to be hard-pressed to match what Detroit has been doing.

1) Dombrowski dealt their "franchise" pitcher, Jeff Weaver, in his first year as GM. Who'd he get? Jeremy Bonderman. This would be equivalent to Krivsky's pending Adam Dunn trade. The make-or-break deal for the future of the organization.

2) Drafting. 3 of their last 4 1st rounders were big money starters. Verlander, Miller and Porcello. I cannot see Krivsky finding the testicular fortitude to pull that off, since the drafting of pitching seems to be somewhat of an afterthought for this regime.

3) Free agency and veteran trades. I just cannot see this team going out and adding payroll for guys like Sheffield, Pudge and Maggs. That takes $$$ and until the fans start coming in droves, I can't see Bob laying out that kind of coin.

Mario-Rijo
06-24-2007, 09:23 PM
There's the rub ... who here believes that Wayne Krivsky can match what Dave Dombrowski did in Detroit within four years?

The Tigers stunk horribly during Dombrowski's first season, were mediocre (but better) in seasons two and three, then went out and won the AL flag in season four. Now in season five, it's obvious they're a powerhouse. That is a league pennant and one of the best organizations in all of baseball within four years.

That's a plan, and that's what I want to see from the Reds. Will it happen though?

He can't possibly unless Castellini starts shelling out the big bucks. Detroit has been able to draft w/o regard to $$$. And likewise have paid out more money to players (Pudge, Magglio) than anyone else was willing to pay. And those were some seriously calculated risks. Yeah they have produced but what if they hadn't, where would they be now (or better yet last yr) with Magglio still having the injury issues he came to them with.

REDREAD
06-24-2007, 09:26 PM
Bingo...Krivsky has no plan. That's been my #1 gripe since last year. And that's what makes it so frustrating. Who ups payroll by 16% and has the worst record in baseball? How does that happen?

That's probably the single best reason to give him an F. He had a 500 team last year, he was given a lot of money to improve it. He was given a lot of latitude to bring in his players. Since he took over, Wayne has turned over the entire pen except Coffey and Weathers. He has turned over (or chosen) 6 of the eight starting position players (everyone but Dunn and Jr). He's turned over most of the bench (I think Valentine is the only holdover). He's turned over the entire rotation other than Harang or Milton.. Maybe I'm forgetting a few holdovers, but it appears that Wayne has hand picked about 18-20 of the players on this roster.. He's made a boatload of moves, most of which have been bad..

And what's the result? The worst team in baseball. He really can't blame it on DanO, because most of the team is HIS guys. Ironically, most of the best performers (Dunn, Jr, Weathers, Harang) are the in the small group of guys he didn't bring in or pick himself.

I think if I could vote again, I'd say he earned an F as well. Hamliton and Philips were nice pickups, but that's not enough to save him. He's flushed millions of dollars down the toilet and added very little young talent to this team. He's burdened the team with multiyear contracts to marginal players that are going to be headaches for the next couple of years.

Cyclone792
06-24-2007, 09:40 PM
He can't possibly unless Castellini starts shelling out the big bucks. Detroit has been able to draft w/o regard to $$$. And likewise have paid out more money to players (Pudge, Magglio) than anyone else was willing to pay. And those were some seriously calculated risks. Yeah they have produced but what if they hadn't, where would they be now (or better yet last yr) with Magglio still having the injury issues he came to them with.

The Tigers combined a great plan with efficient spending. If a team can accomplish that, then there's a good chance they'll be a successful organization. Detroit's payroll in 2005 was only $69 million, and then they bumped it up to $82 million in 2006 to help them take that giant step and make a big push. That giant step and big push quickly developed into a full stadium, a playoff berth, and a trip to the World Series. Now the park is full, more money is flowing in, and the Tigers are still being efficient with their dollars by making good decisions. That's the sound of an excellent organization.

The Reds, on the other hand, bumped up their payroll this season and they're on pace to lose 35 runs in overall run value. Draft-wise, they've signed Mesoraco already, but they've got plenty of other interesting draft selections remaining that the team better be planning on inking to a deal.

Mario-Rijo
06-24-2007, 09:44 PM
The Tigers combined a great plan with efficient spending. If a team can accomplish that, then there's a good chance they'll be a successful organization. Detroit's payroll in 2005 was only $69 million, and then they bumped it up to $82 million in 2006 to help them take that giant step and make a big push. That giant step and big push quickly developed into a full stadium, a playoff berth, and a trip to the World Series. Now the park is full, more money is flowing in, and the Tigers are still being efficient with their dollars by making good decisions. That's the sound of an excellent organization.

The Reds, on the other hand, bumped up their payroll this season and they're on pace to lose 35 runs in overall run value. Draft-wise, they've signed Mesoraco already, but they've got plenty of other interesting draft selections remaining that the team better be planning on inking to a deal.

Oh I agre, I wish BCast would go out and make a well thought out splash. I guess just have programmed myself to trying to make the most out of little. But you really have to make wise decisions nowadays, good players who are gonna give you everything they have on and off the field are fewer and further between.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 09:48 PM
He can't possibly unless Castellini starts shelling out the big bucks. Detroit has been able to draft w/o regard to $$$. And likewise have paid out more money to players (Pudge, Magglio) than anyone else was willing to pay. And those were some seriously calculated risks. Yeah they have produced but what if they hadn't, where would they be now (or better yet last yr) with Magglio still having the injury issues he came to them with.

If you're not willing to ever spend on the draft or FAs, you're probably going to lose forever. You can choose not to spend on one or the other, but if you don't spend on at least one, you're doomed. The draft issue is totally bogus because all we ever hear about is how you have to win through drafting and developing. Now we have to hear about how drafting good players costs too much? Come on.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 09:50 PM
The Reds, on the other hand, bumped up their payroll this season and they're on pace to lose 35 runs in overall run value. Draft-wise, they've signed Mesoraco already, but they've got plenty of other interesting draft selections remaining that the team better be planning on inking to a deal.

This draft was better, but nothing to get really excited about, like a Verlander or a Porcello.

edabbs44
06-24-2007, 09:53 PM
This draft was better, but nothing to get really excited about, like a Verlander or a Porcello.

Exactly...I don't know if this regime (or even franchise) would ever lay it on the line for a front of the line talent who costs $4 million or more. Next year will be interesting, as the struggles of 2007 will bear a top 5 draft pick.

fearofpopvol1
06-24-2007, 09:53 PM
To me, what is going to make or break Krivsky is what he does with Griff and Dunn. It's clear that beyond next year, neither will be here and you'd think they're going to be traded. The returns he gets for them are very important in my opinion for the future direction of this club.

Aronchis
06-24-2007, 09:56 PM
Exactly...I don't know if this regime (or even franchise) would ever lay it on the line for a front of the line talent who costs $4 million or more. Next year will be interesting, as the struggles of 2007 will bear a top 5 draft pick.

Miller would have been a Red if available, per Krivsky himself. Ditto for Verlander if the Reds had a top pick. Porcello was a greedy HS pitcher who Borus inflated his value worth. Gruler would probably be a better example, or taking Sowers when he wasn't thinking of signing.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 10:00 PM
Miller would have been a Red if available, per Krivsky himself. Ditto for Verlander if the Reds had a top pick. Porcello was a greedy HS pitcher who Borus inflated his value worth. Gruler would probably be a better example, or taking Sowers when he wasn't thinking of signing.

Porcello and Lincecum were available.

edabbs44
06-24-2007, 10:02 PM
Miller would have been a Red if available, per Krivsky himself. Ditto for Verlander if the Reds had a top pick. Porcello was a greedy HS pitcher who Borus inflated his value worth. Gruler would probably be a better example, or taking Sowers when he wasn't thinking of signing.

It's easy for Krivsky to say that when Miller wasn't available. There's no way they would have drafted Miller, unless he was signing for Stubbs money.

Aronchis
06-24-2007, 10:03 PM
It's easy for Krivsky to say that when Miller wasn't available. There's no way they would have drafted Miller, unless he was signing for Stubbs money.

Nah, my man, he said it BEFORE the draft.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 10:05 PM
Nah, my man, he said it BEFORE the draft.

Honestly, who cares? He's not drafted a single impact arm. That's all that matters.

edabbs44
06-24-2007, 10:12 PM
Honestly, who cares? He's not drafted a single impact arm. That's all that matters.

It's really disturbing how true that statement is.

edabbs44
06-24-2007, 10:19 PM
Honestly, who cares? He's not drafted a single impact arm. That's all that matters.

From Gammons' blog. This is why drafting pitching is so important, even if it is the highest risk. Cincy will never get impact arms unless they draft them or get lucky through a trade (i.e., Harang).

And by the way...since when did Brackman need surgery? Did I miss something?


Injured pitchers adding up

The Dodgers did every bit of their due diligence on Jason Schmidt. His MRI was clean, and Dodgers trainer Stan Conte not only has the industry's highest regard but he knew Schmidt from San Francisco from when he was the Giants' trainer, and he and Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti believed that if Schmidt could throw 90-92 mph, he could and would win.
But it was one win and out for Schmidt this season.

On the other hand, Randy Wolf is the winningest free-agent pitcher in the National League, one victory behind the game's winningest free agent, Daisuke Matsuzaka. Joe Borowski and Al Reyes are the free-agent relievers with the most saves, with 20 and 16, respectively. And, in case you did not notice, since the Braves traded for Bob Wickman in July 20 and re-signed him to keep him off the market, Wickman has more saves than any reliever other than Trevor Hoffman. The Angels had to outbid several teams to sign reliever Justin Speier to a four-year, $18 million deal, and Hideki Okajima, for a third of the cost of Jamie Walker, has been the best left-handed set-up man in the American League this year.

When one looks at the potential offseason free-agent list, the first reaction is that this is a good time in the lives of Carlos Zambrano and Mark Buehrle to be going onto the market, if they do. Or, even with some physical problems and a 4.38 ERA since the 2004 World Series, Curt Schilling will find someone willing to come close to his $13 million asking price, especially if it's a one-year deal. Or that it is nearly impossible for the Indians to even think about keeping C.C. Sabathia off the market after the 2008 season.

One look at the disabled list, and there is Toronto paying more than $20 million for A.J. Burnett and B.J. Ryan. Baltimore lost Adam Loewen and Kris Benson, the Yankees Phil Hughes, the Tigers Nate Robertson and the Rangers Kevin Millwood. Oakland is just now getting back Rich Harden, who was supposed to be their co-No. 1 starter with Dan Haren, while trying to rehab closer Huston Street and Esteban Loaiza. The Mets hold their breath on the comebacks of Pedro Martinez and Duaner Sanchez, the Phillies are surviving without Brett Myers, Tom Gordon and Freddy Garcia. The Braves traded Adam LaRoche for Mike Gonzalez, who is out for the season after undergoing ligament reconstruction surgery on his left elbow a few weeks ago. Florida has lost a half-dozen pitchers, including last year's phenom Anibal Sanchez (who missed two full seasons while pitching in the Boston farm system), and the Nationals have one win from their Opening Day starting pitcher, John Patterson, as well as promising Jason Bergmann.

The Cardinals had to replace Jason Marquis and Jeff Weaver by signing Kip Wells and moving Braden Looper out of the bullpen and into the rotation; Wells hasn't worked, and Looper is on the disabled list. GM Walt Jocketty did get his team a little help by acquiring Mike Maroth from the Tigers on Friday.

One former Cy Young Award winner, Chris Carpenter, is still on the disabled list, and three others -- Roy Halladay, Randy Johnson and Bartolo Colon -- have been there, as has the winningest American League pitcher of the past two years, Chien-Ming Wang.

All of which puts up a caution sign for the Reds, Nationals, Mariners, Rangers, Royals and Devil Rays, which are hoping to score a young pitcher or three between now and the July 31 deadline: It will not be easy because the cost of acquiring pitching is so expensive.

Yankees GM Brian Cashman is trying to build a warehouse of pitchers, not only because Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte and Mike Mussina are all old enough to enter the New Hampshire primary but also to avoid another round of Carl Pavanos and Jaret Wrights. Hughes was an unfortunate loss because his ceiling is so high, but the Yankees now have pitchers Ian Kennedy, Joba Chamberlain, Alan Horne and Jeffrey Marquez knocking on the door at Double-A; Ross Ohlendorf (who could end up being an important seventh- and eighth-inning pitcher for the Yanks come September); and by this time next year will have Humberto Sanchez and Andrew Brackman back from surgery and on the road to reaching the big leagues. Cashman might trade one or two of the pitching prospects to make the playoffs this season, but Hughes will not be available in any trade, including any deals involving Mark Teixeira or Alex Rios.

Boston won't trade Jon Lester, Clay Buchholz or Michael Bowden. The Dodgers also will not move Chad Billingsley. The Indians might have needs, but they won't trade Adam Miller, and the Twins won't move Matt Garza or Kevin Slowey.

"Now, more than ever, being able to evaluate your own players -- particularly pitchers -- is more important than ever," says one NL GM. "If you don't sign and develop your own, and you don't evaluate them, then you have to pay $126 million for Barry Zito or $33 million for Vicente Padilla."

So when Teixeira comes off the disabled list after the All-Star break, whether Rangers GM Jon Daniels can find an acceptable market in the three weeks leading up to the trade deadline remains to be seen. Reds GM Wayne Krivsky would love to get pitching and youth for Adam Dunn, but the market might not be enough to justify the move. White Sox GM Ken Williams likely will get a young position player for Buehrle, but will he get pitching for Jermaine Dye? Not likely.

It's also likely that Cleveland will not be able to trade for a power set-up man and instead might have to make the stretch run with Miller and Rafael Perez (lefties are hitting .083 with a .362 OPS against him at Triple-A), who has dominated left-handed hitters, with Rafael Betancourt in front of Borowski. Tampa Bay is thinking seriously of holding on to Reyes, not only because they want to hold on to leads their young players have earned but because he has an option for 2008 for less than $2 million, depending what levels he reaches this season.

The Tigers right now appear to be one of the two or three best teams in the game, possibly headed to the World Series for the second straight year. Their best pitcher, Justin Verlander, was their own 2004 first-round draft pick. Jeremy Bonderman was acquired through good scouting and a three-way deal involving established commodities Weaver and Ted Lilly, who, by the way, are making nearly $20 million between them this season. Miller was their own 2006 first-round draft pick. And Robertson was a great trade they made with the Marlins.

And as both Verlander and Miller were signed for more than the commissioner's office mandated slot, the message is also clear that if you want to rebuild quickly, the answer is pitching, and that a college arm such as Verlander or Miller has to be signed, no matter how many times the commissioner calls your owner to threaten you about artificial prices.

It's called the market, and if you don't spend the added millions for Verlander or Miller, you might end up spending $9 million to $126 million on someone on the chart below.

FREE-AGENT STARTERS
PITCHER CONTRACT 2007 2006
Barry Zito, SFO 7-$126M 6-8, 4.83 ERA 14-11, 4.05 ERA
Daisuke Matsuzaka, BOS 6-$52M 9-5, 4.01 ERA Japan
Gil Meche, KAN 5-$55M 4-6, 3.21 ERA 9-8, 4.82 ERA
Jason Schmidt, LAD 3-$48M 1-4, 6.31 ERA 14-8, 3.67 ERA
Jeff Suppan, MIL 4-$42M 8-7, 4.90 ERA 15-9, 3.95 ERA
Ted Lilly, CHC 4-$40M 5-4, 3.90 ERA 12-11, 4.52 ERA
Vicente Padilla, TEX 3-$33.75M 3-8, 6.69 ERA 10-10, 4.57 ERA
Roger Clemens, NYY 1-$28M 1-2, 4.86 ERA 13-6, 2.39 ERA
Adam Eaton, PHI 3-$24.5M 7-4, 5.33 ERA 10-8, 4.58 ERA
Jason Marquis, CHC 3-$21M 5-4, 3.38 ERA 14-12, 4.65 ERA
Andy Pettitte, NYY 1-$16M 4-5, 3.28 ERA 12-9, 3.38 ERA
Woody Williams, HOU 2-$12.5M 3-10, 5.75 ERA 11-8, 5.25 ERA
Orlando Hernandez, NYM 2-$12M 3-3, 3.08 ERA 9-7, 4.53 ERA
Greg Maddux, SDG 1-$10M 6-4, 3.84 ERA 15-13, 4.15 ERA
Jeff Weaver, SEA 1-$8.35M 1-6, 8.56 ERA 12-9, 4.57 ERA
Randy Wolf, LAD 1-$8M 8-5, 4.24 ERA 5-4, 4.58 ERA

FREE-AGENT RELIEVERS
PITCHER CONTRACT 2007 2006
Danys Baez, BAL 3-$19M 0-4, 6.52 ERA 5-5, 3.60 ERA
Hideki Okajima, BOS 2-$4M 2-0, 0.98 ERA Japan
Justin Speier, LAA 4-$19M 0-0, 1.69 ERA 3-3, 3.18 ERA
Jamie Walker, BAL 3-$12M 1-1, 3.29 ERA 2-3, 3.24 ERA
Scott Schoeneweis, NYM 3-$10.8M 0-1, 5.88 ERA 4-5, 4.84 ERA
Eric Gagne, TEX 1-$6M 2-0, 0.47 ERA 3-1, 2.21 ERA
Mike Stanton, CIN 2-$5.5M 1-2, 4.44 ERA 1-1, 1.93 ERA
Joe Borowski, CLE 1-$4.25M 0-3, 6.33 ERA (20 SV) 2-4, 4.65 ERA (15 SV)
Al Reyes, TAM 1-$750K 1-1, 3.26 ERA (16 SV) 1-1, 1.93 ERA

Caveat Emperor
06-24-2007, 11:09 PM
More than 3 years. Dombrowski won 57,43,72,72 games before last season after taking over as GM in spring 2002. They had some really bad teams during his early tenure. Just like the Braves did in the 80's and the Indians did in the early 90's. Maybe the key is really sucking and investing within?

You can add the Marlins to that list too -- sucking bad and accumulating lots of young talent throughout the organization.

Really, the predicament the Reds find themselves in right now is neither surprising nor unforeseen. The knock on the Reds farm system for years has been that the talent drop-off was incredible once you got by 2 or 3 guys who were all-world at the top of the system.

Now, surprise surprise, the Reds are struggling in areas that would be filled by those guys who only the BA subscribers and Minor League Forum readers would know about -- the guys who man the #4 and #5 spots in the rotation, the guys who makeup the middle relief corps, the guys who come off the bench to pinch hit and make the occasional spot start.

If you aren't going to spend top dollar (and even if you are, since the guys you target to fill those spots are often guys who have roller-coaster careers of good years in between several bad ones) at the major league level, you've got to string together 3 or 4 good draft years to build a new crop of players in the minor and major leagues to give yourself a chance at success. You combine that with a few good for-value trades of major league players and you get a good method for success.

But, to expect a GM to come in and have that program working overnight? Foolish.

If you're going to take Krivsky to task, you've really only got two places to do it -- either you don't like his drafting or you don't like the return he has gotten in trades. In reality, those are the ONLY two things he needs to be doing well for the long term health of this ballclub. If you think he's doing a bad job at that (and I'd say he's doing a mediocre to mildly bad job at that), then you should want his head. If you think he's doing an OK job at that, you should be in favor of a few more seasons.

Really, the fact that the ballclub is in dead last place is the least of my concerns at the moment. This team is exactly where it should be right now.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 11:12 PM
You can add the Marlins to that list too -- sucking bad and accumulating lots of young talent throughout the organization.

Really, the predicament the Reds find themselves in right now is neither surprising nor unforeseen. The knock on the Reds farm system for years has been that the talent drop-off was incredible once you got by 2 or 3 guys who were all-world at the top of the system.

Now, surprise surprise, the Reds are struggling in areas that would be filled by those guys who only the BA subscribers and Minor League Forum readers would know about -- the guys who man the #4 and #5 spots in the rotation, the guys who makeup the middle relief corps, the guys who come off the bench to pinch hit and make the occasional spot start.

If you aren't going to spend top dollar (and even if you are, since the guys you target to fill those spots are often guys who have roller-coaster careers of good years in between several bad ones) at the major league level, you've got to string together 3 or 4 good draft years to build a new crop of players in the minor and major leagues to give yourself a chance at success. You combine that with a few good for-value trades of major league players and you get a good method for success.

But, to expect a GM to come in and have that program working overnight? Foolish.

If you're going to take Krivsky to task, you've really only got two places to do it -- either you don't like his drafting or you don't like the return he has gotten in trades. In reality, those are the ONLY two things he needs to be doing well for the long term health of this ballclub. If you think he's doing a bad job at that (and I'd say he's doing a mediocre to mildly bad job at that), then you should want his head. If you think he's doing an OK job at that, you should be in favor of a few more seasons.

Really, the fact that the ballclub is in dead last place is the least of my concerns at the moment. This team is exactly where it should be right now.

Of course results (team record) are secondary to executing a plan (right now)--which he's doing miserably, as his plan is all but absent or inscrutable.

Think about what a bust his drafting and trading have been thus far.

Caveat Emperor
06-24-2007, 11:19 PM
Think about what a bust his drafting and trading has been thus far.

I honestly don't think his trading has been horrible. He dumped 3 major league starters via trade (Pena, Kearns, Lopez), acquired 3 major league starters via trade (Arroyo, Phillips, Hamilton). In between those deals, he's done a lot of fiddling and tinkering that I could do without (acquiring Cormier when every peripheral screamed "stay away", for example), but really I think his trading has been, at worst a zero-sum game.

His drafting I'm less enamored with. I thought at the time, and continue to think, that Drew Stubbs was a horrific pick, but I like quite a few of the later round talents that he drafted last year. I think Sean Watson can be an impact arm if he continues his development.

So yeah -- drafting probably a bust thus far, but trading hasn't been horrible. I think if you're going to can him, you can him because his drafts haven't been up to snuff.

Aronchis
06-24-2007, 11:22 PM
Buckley handles the drafts and is suspect, I think we can agree on that. I don't know the last time the Reds had a highly thought of assistant on that part of the operation.

Falls City Beer
06-24-2007, 11:25 PM
I honestly don't think his trading has been horrible. He dumped 3 major league starters via trade (Pena, Kearns, Lopez), acquired 3 major league starters via trade (Arroyo, Phillips, Hamilton). In between those deals, he's done a lot of fiddling and tinkering that I could do without (acquiring Cormier when every peripheral screamed "stay away", for example), but really I think his trading has been, at worst a zero-sum game.

His drafting I'm less enamored with. I thought at the time, and continue to think, that Drew Stubbs was a horrific pick, but I like quite a few of the later round talents that he drafted last year. I think Sean Watson can be an impact arm if he continues his development.

So yeah -- drafting probably a bust thus far, but trading hasn't been horrible. I think if you're going to can him, you can him because his drafts haven't been up to snuff.

If Phillips, Hamilton, and an iffy Arroyo are what you have to hang your hat on after 18 months, well....I really don't know what to say. I feel like I'm splitting some of Rip Taylor's hairs to call Wayne just slightly less than horrible at trading.

Caveat Emperor
06-24-2007, 11:26 PM
If Phillips, Hamilton, and an iffy Arroyo are what you have to hang your hat on after 18 months, well....I really don't know what to say. I feel like I'm splitting some of Rip Taylor's hairs to call Wayne just slightly less than horrible at trading.

I suppose you wouldn't be swayed by my pointing out that none of the guys they've given up have been very good either. ;)

Rojo
06-26-2007, 02:34 AM
Think about what a bust his drafting and trading have been thus far.

I'm still on the bubble about both. I'm more concerned about his need to hand out contracts. Fringy player like Ross, Freel, Stanton are important parts of a ball club (when they perform) but you've got to day-trade players like that, not buy and hold.

Ron Madden
06-26-2007, 03:19 AM
I originally gave Wayne a (D).

I've been kicking myself everyday since. Should'a gave him an (F).

Everyday that goes by with Jerry Narron at the helm and Wayne K. still in his corner is more painful than the day before.