PDA

View Full Version : The Mackanin factor...



Matt700wlw
07-29-2007, 11:54 AM
Permanent fixture?
Former Brother Rice star Mackanin hopes to shed 'interim' tag with Reds

July 29, 2007
By Jeff Vorva Staff writer

CINCINNATI -- Pete Mackanin will turn 56 on Wednesday, and the perfect birthday gift for him is not something he would receive.

It would be something that would be taken away from him.

The former Brother Rice High School baseball standout is the Cincinnati Reds' interim manager, which is a pretty impressive accomplishment. However, it's just a shade shy of his ultimate goal.

But what if on Wednesday, under the craziest of circumstances, Reds general manager Wayne Krivsky woke up and decided to take away the "interim" tag and let Mackanin run the show for the next couple of years?

"Without a question and without a doubt that would be a great birthday present," Mackanin said. "But I can honestly say I don't think about it and I don't worry about it, because it doesn't do me any good to project that far. I just need to concentrate as much as I can on the daily grind."

It hasn't been much of a grind around the Reds lately. Under Jerry Narron, the club hoped to be a contender this season. But on July 1, the team fell to 31-51 and was 16 games out of first place in the National League Central. Narron was fired as manager the next day.

Enter Mackanin, who'd managed 1,766 minor league games over the years and 26 games with Pittsburgh as an "interim" skipper in 2005 after Lloyd McClendon was fired.

Mackanin played in the majors from 1973-81, and while the infielder didn't have a Hall of Fame career -- .226, 30 homers and 141 RBI in 548 games with Texas, Montreal, Philadelphia and Minnesota -- he learned some of his managing skills from some of the best in the business.

Ted Williams. Dick Williams. Gene Mauch. Whitey Herzog. Dallas Green. Just to name a few.

And before the Bronx was burning, Billy Martin managed Mackanin when Mackanin was a 21-year-old rookie with the Texas Rangers in 1973.

Mackanin said he learned from all of his managers and has thrown in his own style in what has turned out to be a pretty good mixture so far. Heading into the series vs. the Cubs, the Reds were 13-8 and had won four of six series since Mackanin took over.

He had some tough-guy mentors in Martin, Mauch and Co. Lock those guys in a room full of angry snakes and bears and someone better call for help -- for the snakes and bears.

Mackanin, too, has brought some much-needed fun into the Reds clubhouse.

"He goes out of his way to be humorous," first baseman Scott Hatteberg said. "He tries to keep things light when things are going bad. It's his personality. It's more relaxed here."

"He lets us play," star outfielder Ken Griffey Jr. added. "He lets us do our thing."

Mackanin hasn't lost sight of his roots. The 1969 Brother Rice graduate was proud to receive, from a Crusader supporter, a "Final Four" baseball jersey, commemorating Brother Rice's successful 2007 baseball season. The Crusaders were Class AA state semifinalists this year.

While national icons such as Ted Williams and Martin helped shape Mackanin's baseball life, the Reds manager still has fond memories of his high school coaches, George Sedlacek and Cliff Petrak.

"They were just good, solid people," Mackanin said. "When I was 15, 16, 17 years old, I didn't evaluate my coaches. But looking back on those years, I realize how well-intentioned both of them were and how much I enjoyed playing for them and how lucky I was to play for them. Some guys were taskmasters and had their thumb on you. These guys were great to play for."

So now the big question: Will "Mack" ever get that darned "interim" tag removed? He has through the end of the season to prove himself. And recent Reds trends favor a nice finish, according to Griffey.

"We obviously played bad enough to get a manager fired," Griffey said. "But if you look over the last four years, we've been a second-half team for some strange reason."

"I don't think of him as 'interim,' " Hatteberg said. "I know he is, but that's not how I look at it. He's been aggressive. That breeds confidence in a team. More importantly, he's been positive in what's been a gloomy clubhouse all year."

There are rumors the Reds are seeking a big-name manager. Former Arizona manager Bob Brenly (who's the Cubs' TV analyst), former Florida skipper Joe Girardi and even current St. Louis Cardinals manager Tony La Russa have been mentioned.

"When I managed the Pirates, there wasn't a day that went by when there were three or four new names and the same old names conjectured about who would get the job," Mackanin said. "Fortunately, now, I haven't heard anything. It's not rampant in the paper, which is nice because I don't like to read that kind of thing. If people want to speculate, that's fine. I don't think it's appropriate for anybody who wants the job to express that to the media because I'm sitting here."

Mackanin said he's not sure what's going to play out in the next couple of months.

But after the initial "Pete who?" from some segments of the media, he's gaining a few friends with each victory.

Cincinnati Post columnist Lonnie Wheeler wrote recently that Mackanin could be the guy the Reds are looking for.

"Maybe the interim's on to something. ... Maybe the guy's as good a fit as the Reds are likely to find. But still, doggone it, there's the name thing. A big one seems to be in order. Nearly everyone agrees on that point. And so, in deference to it, may we offer a suggestion to Mr. Mackanin? Flaunt the first name. Around here, it doesn't get any bigger than Pete."

Wheeler was referring to Pete Rose.

So it appears that come Wednesday, Mackanin will not receive the ultimate birthday gift in the form of a multiyear contract to manage the club.

But if the Reds keep playing .619 ball under his watch, he may be receiving a pretty sweet belated birthday gift come October.

KoryMac5
07-29-2007, 12:26 PM
I do like Mack for the full time gig, I love his style and the way he communicates with the players. With Narron you never knew he had a heartbeat in that dugout. With Pete you know he has a certain way he wants things done and he gets the message accross to his players.

Matt700wlw
07-29-2007, 12:27 PM
I do like Mack for the full time gig, I love his style and the way he communicates with the players. With Narron you never knew he had a heartbeat in that dugout. With Pete you know he has a certain way he wants things done and he gets the message accross to his players.

This team played well under Narron and Miley to start as well....

KronoRed
07-29-2007, 12:32 PM
This team played well under Narron and Miley to start as well....

Yep, no more long term plans based on short term results

RedlegJake
07-29-2007, 01:13 PM
Its simple. If he keeps this team on its current pace then you have to consider a one year deal. I've never bought the "big name" manager - I think its mostly BS and its no different for Mac - if he has the players he can win over the long haul - if he doesn't it aint gonna matter if his name is John McGraw. I don't believe managers win pennants - but the wrong manager can lose it.

Matt700wlw
07-29-2007, 01:15 PM
Its simple. If he keeps this team on its current pace then you have to consider a one year deal. I've never bought the "big name" manager - I think its mostly BS and its no different for Mac - if he has the players he can win over the long haul - if he doesn't it aint gonna matter if his name is John McGraw. I don't believe managers win pennants - but the wrong manager can lose it.

1 year deal can work, if the team plays like this the rest of the year...that way they can see if there's carry over into next season.

If not, there's no obligation to keep him around longer than they have to.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2007, 01:17 PM
Its simple. If he keeps this team on its current pace then you have to consider a one year deal. I've never bought the "big name" manager - I think its mostly BS and its no different for Mac - if he has the players he can win over the long haul - if he doesn't it aint gonna matter if his name is John McGraw. I don't believe managers win pennants - but the wrong manager can lose it.

I totally agree with this.

WVRedsFan
07-29-2007, 01:31 PM
Its simple. If he keeps this team on its current pace then you have to consider a one year deal. I've never bought the "big name" manager - I think its mostly BS and its no different for Mac - if he has the players he can win over the long haul - if he doesn't it aint gonna matter if his name is John McGraw. I don't believe managers win pennants - but the wrong manager can lose it.

And thus you get trapped into the destructive behavior we faced over the last several years. Examples:

Dave Miley finished out the 2003 season for Bob Boone and went 22-35 (.386). Somehow, someone decided Miley needed to take over the club. The result was 76-86 (.469) in 2004 and 27-43 (.386) when he was fired. Big mistake.

Jerry Narron replaced Miley and went 46-46 (.500) in 2005. That warranted him the job and he got an extension in 2007. In 2006, he managed a lucky, late-season faltering team to 80-82 (.494) and in 2007, he was 31-51 (.378).

If we're going to follow the same pattern, why yes, go ahead and give Pete the job. Today. Then we can replace him either next year or the next when the club is faltering. The intelligent thing to do is to find a winning manager. You know, one who has a track record of winning, something these three gentleman do not have.

If we do not study history, we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over and over...

Matt700wlw
07-29-2007, 01:33 PM
And thus you get trapped into the destructive behavior we faced over the last several years. Examples:

Dave Miley finished out the 2003 season for Bob Boone and went 22-35 (.386). Somehow, someone decided Miley needed to take over the club. The result was 76-86 (.469) in 2004 and 27-43 (.386) when he was fired. Big mistake.

Jerry Narron replaced Miley and went 46-46 (.500) in 2005. That warranted him the job and he got an extension in 2007. In 2006, he managed a lucky, late-season faltering team to 80-82 (.494) and in 2007, he was 31-51 (.378).

If we're going to follow the same pattern, why yes, go ahead and give Pete the job. Today. Then we can replace him either next year or the next when the club is faltering. The intelligent thing to do is to find a winning manager. You know, one who has a track record of winning, something these three gentleman do not have.

If we do not study history, we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over and over...


My preference is an outside voice, a "name" manager with credentials....

If they choose not to go that route, and give Pete the job, I only want a 1 year deal

WVRedsFan
07-29-2007, 01:40 PM
I repeat...

Any consideration of giving the permanent job to Macklanin is unacceptable unless to want to repeat the last 3+ seasons.

And I like Pete a lot, but it's time to go with a proven winner at the Major League Level.

Unassisted
07-29-2007, 01:41 PM
I had no idea that Mackanin grew up in Cincinnati. That really tips the scales in his favor in the court of public opinion. I wonder how many Brother Rice alumni are twisting Bob Castellini's arm at the country club or at charity fundraisers? Every time that happens, it offsets about 1,000 letters or phone calls from fans who want a big-name manager.

VR
07-29-2007, 01:41 PM
This team played well under Narron and Miley to start as well....


I think they were 11-13 in Narron's first 24.

Miley was 22-35 to finish out 2003.

nate
07-29-2007, 01:42 PM
And thus you get trapped into the destructive behavior we faced over the last several years. Examples:

Dave Miley finished out the 2003 season for Bob Boone and went 22-35 (.386). Somehow, someone decided Miley needed to take over the club. The result was 76-86 (.469) in 2004 and 27-43 (.386) when he was fired. Big mistake.

Jerry Narron replaced Miley and went 46-46 (.500) in 2005. That warranted him the job and he got an extension in 2007. In 2006, he managed a lucky, late-season faltering team to 80-82 (.494) and in 2007, he was 31-51 (.378).

If we're going to follow the same pattern, why yes, go ahead and give Pete the job. Today. Then we can replace him either next year or the next when the club is faltering. The intelligent thing to do is to find a winning manager. You know, one who has a track record of winning, something these three gentleman do not have.

If we do not study history, we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over and over...

That the 3 previous managers came from the organization has about as much to do with their lack of success as the fact that they all have two-syllable last names.

Choose the manager that gets the best results out of the team, regardless of his pedigree.

Always Red
07-29-2007, 02:15 PM
I had no idea that Mackanin grew up in Cincinnati. That really tips the scales in his favor in the court of public opinion. I wonder how many Brother Rice alumni are twisting Bob Castellini's arm at the country club or at charity fundraisers? Every time that happens, it offsets about 1,000 letters or phone calls from fans who want a big-name manager.

Pete did not grow up in Cincinnati.

I think the Brother Rice HS that Pete Mackanin went to is in Chicago, where he was born.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Mackanin

There is also another Brother Rice HS that I know of, in Michigan. I think they played Moeller in football a time or two?

Unassisted
07-29-2007, 03:42 PM
Pete did not grow up in Cincinnati.

I think the Brother Rice HS that Pete Mackanin went to is in Chicago, where he was born.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Mackanin

There is also another Brother Rice HS that I know of, in Michigan. I think they played Moeller in football a time or two?

The article is poorly written, then. It certainly gives the impression that the high school is there in Cincinnati. Thanks for setting the record straight. :thumbup:

gm
07-29-2007, 04:50 PM
"We obviously played bad enough to get a manager fired," Griffey said. "But if you look over the last four years, we've been a second-half team for some strange reason."

Too bad that wasn't the case in '06

Chip R
07-29-2007, 06:09 PM
The article is poorly written, then. It certainly gives the impression that the high school is there in Cincinnati. Thanks for setting the record straight. :thumbup:


Unfortunately Matt didn't supply a link to the article. Had he have done that, I'm sure it would have been to a Chicago area paper and it would have made more sense that way.

Stormy
07-29-2007, 06:09 PM
Too bad that wasn't the case in '06

No doubt that when it counted in 2006, they rolled over like a tired dog. Regardless, it's a pretty lame statement to call this a 'second-half' team under any circumstances. The Reds aren't really a 1st or 2nd half team, unless Griffey meant that his Reds typically play poorly enough to go 20 games under by the break, getting their manager fired in the process, then briefly rebound long enough to get the interim hired. Unfortunately, Griffey hasn't played on a single Reds team that's worth a #@#$ since the Neagle trade, and that isn't likely to change anytime soon. We're on our way to an entire wasted decade in terms of 'contention' it would appear. That's sad. As much as I like Pete Mackanin, he sure isn't enough of a 'factor' to make much of a difference in that regard.

RedLegSuperStar
07-29-2007, 06:20 PM
I may or may not be the only one.. but I'm not sold on Pete Mackanin. I want a big name proven manager. A big name guy definitely sends a message that this team is dedicated to winning. Where as in the past it has been the best choice for a certain dollar amount.. mostly taking the interm manager after the current manager has been let go. Now i'm not saying that this team isn't dedicated to winning.. just they have not perform to that level on a consistent basis.

RedsManRick
07-29-2007, 06:52 PM
I want a talented team that can get on base and not run in to outs. If those problems are attributable to management, then fine. However, I have yet to see a team win because of a manager. Yes, a manager can hurt your team, particularly through the mismanagement of pitchers.

Harang went 118 and 121 pitches in his last two starts, prior to this last one which saw him have back problems. Plus, Mac might be more in love with Weathers than Narron was. Mac is trying to manage himself in to a long term job by eeking out a few extra wins at the cost of the long term health of the club. Benching EE. Letting BP think he's a cleanup hitter and doesn't need to worry about his OBP. I don't care what his name is, but I want a manager who simply won't screw things up. I have yet to be convinced Mac is that guy.

redsrule2500
07-29-2007, 07:33 PM
This team played well under Narron and Miley to start as well....

Not really. I think they were .500 under Narron the season he took over.

I say if he keeps playing .600+ baseball, go for it. Anyone that can take a sub .400 club and turn it to .600+ deserves the job.

Mario-Rijo
07-29-2007, 10:28 PM
Not really. I think they were .500 under Narron the season he took over.

I say if he keeps playing .600+ baseball, go for it. Anyone that can take a sub .400 club and turn it to .600+ deserves the job.

I agree saying they played well under Narron at or near a .500 clip and Miley at well under a .500 clip isn't the same as Mack's team going from playing at a below .400 clip to above a .600 clip is world's apart. Now it's not likely the team will play this well for the rest of the season but if they do how is that anything remotely close to the jobs Narron and Miley done.

I never was on board for keeping Narron under any circumstances, I could tell he wasn't the answer pretty early on.

Miley was a special case as he got the most out of the team he had (young kids), but once the "Vets" got hold of him and basically took over the team then it was over. I'll be honest I didn't see that coming when I rooted for Miley to get the job after that horrible season. His failure was he had never, ever managed Vets before and they took complete advantage.

Could Pete fall prey to the same? Maybe but I doubt it, but he needs to seriously re-consider his willingness to overwork the players he's got that are performing. Problem is if he doesn't overuse them he has Narron's record and everyone's calling for his head.

Wayne needs to go and perhaps overpay for a guy who can actually pitch in the 8th and/or 9th. Maybe he should deal Lohse to the Royals for Dotel. And toss in Paul Janish to get it done, then Pete could put Weathers in the setup role and have Dotel close or vice versa.

Unassisted
07-29-2007, 11:11 PM
Miley was a special case as he got the most out of the team he had (young kids), but once the "Vets" got hold of him and basically took over the team then it was over. I'll be honest I didn't see that coming when I rooted for Miley to get the job after that horrible season. His failure was he had never, ever managed Vets before and they took complete advantage.

Could Pete fall prey to the same?

When I read that section of your post, which struck me as being on the mark about Miley, I immediately thought of these quotes from the article.

"He goes out of his way to be humorous," first baseman Scott Hatteberg said. "He tries to keep things light when things are going bad. It's his personality. It's more relaxed here."

"He lets us play," star outfielder Ken Griffey Jr. added. "He lets us do our thing."

:help:

WVRedsFan
07-29-2007, 11:17 PM
When I read that section of your post, which struck me as being on the mark about Miley, I immediately thought of these quotes from the article.

"He goes out of his way to be humorous," first baseman Scott Hatteberg said. "He tries to keep things light when things are going bad. It's his personality. It's more relaxed here."

"He lets us play," star outfielder Ken Griffey Jr. added. "He lets us do our thing."

:help:

I noticed the same thing. Sounds like a guy trying to be the most popular teacher in the school. In the meantime, some kid starts a fight in the back of the room and gets hurt and it's too late to do anything about it. No thanks.

Patrick Bateman
07-29-2007, 11:28 PM
Wayne needs to go and perhaps overpay for a guy who can actually pitch in the 8th and/or 9th. Maybe he should deal Lohse to the Royals for Dotel. And toss in Paul Janish to get it done, then Pete could put Weathers in the setup role and have Dotel close or vice versa.

This doesn't make any sense for really either team.

Both are free agents to be, and neither team is contending. Both players should be dealt for young players/prospects that can help the teams in the future.

If the Reds really want Dotel that badly, they should wait until free agency and show him the money (which they will need to do anyways if they want to sign him past this season).

This does for the Royals too. They would have zero interest in Lohse. He's a free agent. If they want him bad enough they can sign him later. What they need to do is find a team willing to offer a collection of prospects.

In reggrds to the thought of using Lohse to pick up a good reliever, I would suggest that's wishful thinking. Any team looking to acquire Lohse is trying to make the playoffs, and I can guarantee will not be looking to trade their pen away.

Mario-Rijo
07-29-2007, 11:29 PM
When I read that section of your post, which struck me as being on the mark about Miley, I immediately thought of these quotes from the article.

"He goes out of his way to be humorous," first baseman Scott Hatteberg said. "He tries to keep things light when things are going bad. It's his personality. It's more relaxed here."

"He lets us play," star outfielder Ken Griffey Jr. added. "He lets us do our thing."

:help:

Yeah and I have been watching for signs of this type of stuff. Of course OTOH you have reports like the one that states Dunn addressed Mack on a decision of pulling him in the 7th inning and then Mack in turn did it again. I am starting to wonder but I am not yet ready to put him in that Miley mold.

But I'm watching Pete, I'm watching you! :cool:

Mario-Rijo
07-29-2007, 11:37 PM
This doesn't make any sense for really either team.

Both are free agents to be, and neither team is contending. Both players should be dealt for young players/prospects that can help the teams in the future.

If the Reds really want Dotel that badly, they should wait until free agency and show him the money (which they will need to do anyways if they want to sign him past this season).

This does for the Royals too. They would have zero interest in Lohse. He's a free agent. If they want him bad enough they can sign him later. What they need to do is find a team willing to offer a collection of prospects.

In reggrds to the thought of using Lohse to pick up a good reliever, I would suggest that's wishful thinking. Any team looking to acquire Lohse is trying to make the playoffs, and I can guarantee will not be lloking t trade their pen away.

Nah, I disagree to an extent. If he's in the fold the rest of this season (Dotel) you can get an up close and personal look at him and make the determination based on that. Things like how will this Dotel pitch in this park come into play. I think it would be nice to know in advance and perhaps get a deal done before FA starts so you can keep from getting into a bidding war for him (there won't be much to choose from).

The Royals still need starting pitching for the short-mid-long term and they could have the same approach with Lohse as, again there won't be much to choose from which makes Lohse more attractive.

Of course if you can get something good for Lohse now go for it, but I would certainly consider this if not.

Patrick Bateman
07-29-2007, 11:51 PM
Nah, I disagree to an extent. If he's in the fold the rest of this season (Dotel) you can get an up close and personal look at him and make the determination based on that. Things like how will this Dotel pitch in this park come into play. I think it would be nice to know in advance and perhaps get a deal done before FA starts so you can keep from getting into a bidding war for him (there won't be much to choose from).

The Royals still need starting pitching for the short-mid-long term and they could have the same approach with Lohse as, again there won't be much to choose from which makes Lohse more attractive.



What if Dotel comes here and hates it in Cincy?

Then you have basically thrown away Lohse when he would have netted a decent prospect or 2. That's really not a risk the Reds need to be taking. They shuld be concerned about building for the future rather than in the next couple of years.

The same thing with the Royals. Any team as bad as them is not looking to pick up any free agents to be, especially when they could get something really good for Dotel. I agree that there is an advantage in being able to negotiate with a guy before anyone else and giving him a taste for your team, but for Kyle Lohse? That would be an awful trade. A good prospect for the right to negotiate for Lohse? That's just a terrible way of trying to rebuild a team.

Sure the Reds could potentially save a buck or two by negotiating early with Dotel, but I can tell you two things for sure:

1. A contending team is going to offer something KC actually wants, and that will be far more than Lohse and Janish.

And

2. The Reds are going to have to pay a lot of money for any good FA reliever regardless if they have them for the final couple months of the season. I highly doubt Dotel will offer any kind of worthwhile discount. Knowing how well the guy is suited for the ballpark is really something statistical analysis can do without ever seeing the guy pitch in the park.

I think with this idea, you are basically throwing away what you could get for Lohse from a contender. However modest the return for Lohse may be, it would be an absolute waste to throw it away when the potential benefit in the other scenario is really quite small.

Small market teams that are not contending need to jump at the chance to grab any kind of young talent. Throwing it away for marginal short term benefits is not a smart way for a team like the Reds to conduct business.

KoryMac5
07-29-2007, 11:55 PM
Many of us want a big name manager to run this club. Some of the names floating out there seem to have as many question marks as Mack does. Brenly, Girardi, and Baker don't really get me too excited when I think of the possibilities for our next skipper. Now if Larussa shakes free from the Cards that might be a different story.

Mario-Rijo
07-30-2007, 12:21 AM
What if Dotel comes here and hates it in Cincy?

Then you have basically thrown away Lohse when he would have netted a decent prospect or 2. That's really not a risk the Reds need to be taking. They shuld be concerned about building for the future rather than in the next couple of years.

The same thing with the Royals. Any team as bad as them is not looking to pick up any free agents to be, especially when they could get something really good for Dotel. I agree that there is an advantage in being able to negotiate with a guy before anyone else and giving him a taste for your team, but for Kyle Lohse? That would be an awful trade. A good prospect for the right to negotiate for Lohse? That's just a terrible way of trying to rebuild a team.

Sure the Reds could potentially save a buck or two by negotiating early with Dotel, but I can tell you two things for sure:

1. A contending team is going to offer something KC actually wants, and that will be far more than Lohse and Janish.

And

2. The Reds are going to have to pay a lot of money for any good FA reliever regardless if they have them for the final couple months of the season. I highly doubt Dotel will offer any kind of worthwhile discount. Knowing how well the guy is suited for the ballpark is really something statistical analysis can do without ever seeing the guy pitch in the park.

I think with this idea, you are basically throwing away what you could get for Lohse from a contender. However modest the return for Lohse may be, it would be an absolute waste to throw it away when the potential benefit in the other scenario is really quite small.

Small market teams that are not contending need to jump at the chance to grab any kind of young talent. Throwing it away for marginal short term benefits is not a smart way for a team like the Reds to conduct business.

But if it's modest enough why even bother? The marginal short term benefit might be greater than said return. If we are going to get a guy who can help, by all means get him. If you arenn't getting those offers and the Royals would do it, and you need a back of the pen arm, why wouldn't you? I just don't get it, if you need a piece and somebody is willing to deal it to you, just quit beating around the bush looking for what might be and make the deal.

It may not be ideal, but after watching this pen this year you gotta go get someone who can actually produce. I'm all for maximizing your return but if the guy who we get for Lohse has little chance to be a piece of the puzzle, why do it?

Of course I agree that KC can get better for Dotel than we will get for Lohse. And they would likely not even be interested but who knows, have ya seen that current rotation? Meche and Bannister and nothing else remotely good and/or experienced.

Mario-Rijo
07-30-2007, 12:24 AM
As a matter of fact I changed my mind. After looking at Dotel's #'s I don't think he can help all that much after all. Lohse actually might be too much for him.

Patrick Bateman
07-30-2007, 12:58 AM
If you arenn't getting those offers and the Royals would do it, and you need a back of the pen arm, why wouldn't you? I just don't get it, if you need a piece and somebody is willing to deal it to you, just quit beating around the bush looking for what might be and make the deal.


Because you can get the exact same thing without giving up anything.

If the Reds really wanted Dotel, they can sign him as a free agent. I don't think Dotel is going to take a discount if we trade for him, so I see zero incentive in giving up anything for him.

The Reds may not get a prized jewel for Lohse, but they should get a decent prospect that I would prefer to have rather than nothing. The benefit in simply having time to negotiate with Dotel or any other free agent to be is not worth that IMO.

If the Reds have money to spend, then they can wait until the offseason. Trading for a guy in hopes (it's not even a guarantee) that you can save a couple of millions instead of getting a decent prospect makes zero sense. Why throw Lohse's return away? I see basically no benefit in bringing Dotel in right now. Considering his contract situation, he should be the last type of player the Reds should be considering trading for. You can get that piece at a later date without giving away any talent. So why is trading away prospects for unnecessary reasons a good idea?

fearofpopvol1
07-30-2007, 01:37 AM
For what it's worth, I really don't think Pete is around next year. I just don't see him fitting in BCast's plan. For better or worse, I don't know.