PDA

View Full Version : Unrealistic expectations



Pages : 1 [2]

Always Red
08-07-2007, 01:19 PM
On Redszone and in New Jersey right?

Because from what I surmise from my recent trip to Cincinnati and talking to the locals there and the fact that attendance is exactly where it was last year that if he hasn't "instilled" confidence it's yet to hit the locals and their plans to go to the game.

Now when the season tickets sales dive and they burn him in effigy like the Dodger Fans did to Alston in 1960 I'll fully believe that the locals are up in arms about his brief tenure.

The local media are trying their best to stir up the masses against both Dunn (first) and Krivsky (of late). TV, radio (heck, even Reds radio in Dunn's case), and especially WLW and HOMER all seem to be on the warpath, at least IMHO.

edabbs44
08-07-2007, 01:31 PM
On Redszone and in New Jersey right?

Because from what I surmise from my recent trip to Cincinnati and talking to the locals there and the fact that attendance is exactly where it was last year that if he hasn't "instilled" confidence it's yet to hit the locals and their plans to go to the game.

Now when the season tickets sales dive and they burn him in effigy like the Dodger Fans did to Alston in 1960 I'll fully believe that the locals are up in arms about his brief tenure.

I didn't say that the "locals" were "up in arms." What I said is that he has done little to instill confidence in the fan base.

If taking a team and turning them into one of the worst teams in the league in one year doesn't concern the "locals", then I'm scared.

redsmetz
08-07-2007, 01:55 PM
I guess that's the way it is when you hire people who have to have "on the job training."

But my comment was on Castellini. I have to believe he's looking at someone else because of his impatience. Just a hunch.

I'm not sure you could say WK's had "on the job training", although I think even I've used that term. The fact is, he had practically six times the amount of experience Billy Beane had when he became Oakland's GM. What we forget is that Beane came into an organization that was very well run and kept it that way.

Krivsky has come into an organization that has been on a downward trend for a good bit of the last twenty years. We're still paying the price for the pathetic stripping away of the Reds infrastucture from scouting and the farm system to broadcasting. We gave up so much of our fan base just at the time Cleveland was assending and we still haven't regained much of it.

As much as folks on RZ desperately want this ship righted, no one will have a quick fix - no one.

RedsManRick
08-07-2007, 02:12 PM
Mario, your breakdown of the "problem" is a familiar red herring. The Reds don't have a systemic lack of talent, it's the fault of a few bad apples. If the team could just get rid of Todd Van Poppel, Mike Matthews, Gabe White, Juan Padilla, Brian Reith, Jimmy Haynes and Jose Acevedo everything would be hunky dory.

It's real easy to replace bad pitchers with more bad pitchers. Replacing them with good pitchers takes a concerted effort, far beyond the scattershot practices Reds GMs have employed during the 21st century. The key is to get the two or three arms who can truly make a difference rather than grabbing a dozen random guys and hoping to get lucky.

Exactly. Getting rid of Joe Mays is great. However, the reason you were able to get him in the first place is a commentary on his availability. There is what amounts to a free pool of pitching talent that can go out and give you a 5.50 ERA in middle relief. That doesn't mean that you should go out and get guys like that however. It's one thing to cycle through young guys at the back of end the staff, waiting for a few to pan out. Young guys are usually inconsistent, but when they also have the possibility of turning in to consistent league average or better pitchers, you ride the ups and downs.

But when you cycle through retread talent that has proven track records of an upside of mediocrity with a likely case of replacement level, wishing for improvement is pointless. When you replace that sort of talent with multi year contracts for guys like Cormier and Stanton, you should know what you're getting -- and more importantly what you aren't. And when that talent proves that it isn't even mediocre any more, cut freaking bait to open a spot for somebody with a ceiling.

Caveat Emperor
08-07-2007, 02:44 PM
I don't think many dispute what you are saying, but Wayne has not shown much in the way of improving the team to be given more of a grace period. In the short time he has had here, he has done little to instill much confidence in the fan base.

I genuinely don't understand what you're expecting out of a guy 18 months on the job who took over a franchise in roughly 10 years worth of disrepair. To call that a "grace period" is to almost humorous.

edabbs44
08-07-2007, 02:58 PM
I genuinely don't understand what you're expecting out of a guy 18 months on the job who took over a franchise in roughly 10 years worth of disrepair. To call that a "grace period" is to almost humorous.

I expect a team not to be fighting for last place when you didn't have a fire sale. Even worse, the team is fighting for last place after raising payroll by roughly 16%.

Wayne has shown me little to no reason for me to look forward to giving him a couple of more years. I agree, I do not expect this team to be in contention right now. Never did expect that. But I have no reason to believe that Wayne will right the ship if given 2-3 years longer. That's the crux of my problem with this regime.

RedsManRick
08-07-2007, 02:59 PM
I genuinely don't understand what you're expecting out of a guy 18 months on the job who took over a franchise in roughly 10 years worth of disrepair. To call that a "grace period" is to almost humorous.

Ok, let's put it your way then. It's been 18 months. We can't expect him to turn have turned around the ship completely. Where has he made progress exactly?

1.) Not made any franchise killing signings
2.) Shepparded Dan O'Brien's good draft picks
3.) Acquired two high potential guys on the cheap

That's all I can come up with. Is that a good set of accomplishments in 18 months? I don't know. What should our expectation be CE?

Ltlabner
08-07-2007, 03:04 PM
I'm not sure why Kriv is being dogged for reciving the benefit of Obrians draft picks. Every other new GM on the planet recieves the reward or curse of the former GM's draft picks. Also, the likely will not recieve benefit of their own draft picks unless they are able to stay in the job 4 years or more unless the pick is a fast-track stud.

How is this a black eye on Krivsky?

edabbs44
08-07-2007, 03:15 PM
Ok, let's put it your way then. It's been 18 months. We can't expect him to turn have turned around the ship completely. Where has he made progress exactly?

1.) Not made any franchise killing signings
2.) Shepparded Dan O'Brien's good draft picks
3.) Acquired two high potential guys on the cheap

That's all I can come up with. Is that a good set of accomplishments in 18 months? I don't know. What should our expectation be CE?

Based on Arroyo's schitzophrenic season so far, I'm going to hold my decision on #1 for a while. #2-3 are on the money.

RedsManRick
08-07-2007, 03:22 PM
I'm not sure why Kriv is being dogged for reciving the benefit of Obrians draft picks. Every other new GM on the planet recieves the reward or curse of the former GM's draft picks. Also, the likely will not recieve benefit of their own draft picks unless they are able to stay in the job 4 years or more unless the pick is a fast-track stud.

How is this a black eye on Krivsky?

It's not a black eye on him at all. The point is that he is not responsible for the success of Bailey, Bruce, et. al. and when we look at his accomplishments, they should not be on his list. Rather, as Stubbs, Moreseco, etc. develop (or don't) that will be the group from which we can evaluate his contributions of the development of our minor leagues.

Caveat Emperor
08-07-2007, 03:26 PM
That's all I can come up with. Is that a good set of accomplishments in 18 months? I don't know. What should our expectation be CE?

Thats a good question, and its because I don't have a good answer that I've stayed largely out of the "Fire Wayne!" debate.

Certainly the ballclub isn't winning and certainly the prospects for winning baseball in the future don't seem any better than they did a year ago or even two years ago. Whatever Krivsky's plan was for 2007, it failed miserably. That isn't even up for debate at this point. I think where most people are behaving shortsightedly is in not even giving the man a chance to learn from his first set of mistakes.

Ltlabner
08-07-2007, 03:43 PM
It's not a black eye on him at all. The point is that he is not responsible for the success of Bailey, Bruce, et. al. and when we look at his accomplishments, they should not be on his list. Rather, as Stubbs, Moreseco, etc. develop (or don't) that will be the group from which we can evaluate his contributions of the development of our minor leagues.

I agree...to a point.

Certinally if previous ragimes draft pick is wildly sucessfull any credit Wayne recieves should be heavily adjusted since it was DanO's pick. However, if Wayne's policies are instrumental in helping said draftee to develop into a stud then he should get *some* credit, IMO. Greatly reduced credit relative to actually drafting the guy, but credit none the less.

Now, if Wayne is instrumental in calling up a pitching prospect too early and it results in long-term harm to the young pitchers development, that's a different story.

WVRedsFan
08-07-2007, 04:19 PM
Regardless of how any of us feel about player A or player B or this or that manager and GM, the truth is this team is a mess from top to bottom. Last year's near return to respectability fooled most of us. If you go position by position, it's apparent that the parts don't mesh well. We platoon two old guys at first. Our shortstop is a streaky one-time defensive whiz (and not so much anymore). Our 3rd sacker is not living up to his reputation on offense and, though better, is not good defensively. Our outfield of Dunn-Freel/Hamilton, and Griffey is the bright spot of the team, though Freel hasn't produced much since his concussion.

Our catching corps is simply abysmal at the plate (Javier is streaky) and won't win any gold gloves on defense either. The starting pitching remains Harang and 4 others. The bullpen is horrible. So where do we go from here? It's gone far beyond hoplessness for me because I do not see anything that makes me feel good about the future. The kids in the minors could help or be a bust--that's the nature of minor leaguers. Although Castellini has spent more, it's been mostly on band-aids.

RedsManRick
08-07-2007, 04:22 PM
I agree...to a point.

Certinally if previous ragimes draft pick is wildly sucessfull any credit Wayne recieves should be heavily adjusted since it was DanO's pick. However, if Wayne's policies are instrumental in helping said draftee to develop into a stud then he should get *some* credit, IMO. Greatly reduced credit relative to actually drafting the guy, but credit none the less.

Now, if Wayne is instrumental in calling up a pitching prospect too early and it results in long-term harm to the young pitchers development, that's a different story.

Precisely, hence point 2. He's done well to sheppard DO's picks through the system. I'm not sure how I could've given him appropriate partial credit any more clearly.

I think the frustration CE is that WKs mistakes were things that many people on the board recognized as mistakes from the get go. As somebody who's been in baseball management for 20 years, we'd hope he'd have a keener sense of good and bad than a bunch of amateurs.

Clearly, there are lots of things that a GM does that we don't know about. But in terms of roster management, trades, and player signings, can we afford to have a GM who has to learn that trading away prospects for the likes of Rheal Cormier (requiring an extension) and Jeff Conine isn't a good idea?

I agree that ultimately it's too early to judge him. However, what he's done to date suggests a few gaping holes in his thought process that may very well not be filled by experience.

bucksfan2
08-07-2007, 05:06 PM
I think the frustration CE is that WKs mistakes were things that many people on the board recognized as mistakes from the get go. As somebody who's been in baseball management for 20 years, we'd hope he'd have a keener sense of good and bad than a bunch of amateurs.

See I think many people disagree with some of the moves that WK has made but it doesn't necessarily mean they are mistakes. Every GM view players differently, especially players playing in the minor leauges. I would be willing to bet that all of the minor leauge players that Krivsky traded he saw little to no value at the major league level. He probably thought that they would be lucky to make it to the majors and if they did they their value would be minimal. The Conine deal has come under some serious pressure as of late. Maybe, just maybe Krivsky saw the team fall apart down the stretch last year during a penant race and saw Conine's 2 world series rings and thought if they are in a similar position this year he would be a valuable resource to have. It is real easy being critical when looking at a deal on the surface but you need to look very indepth to begin to understand the reasons a deal is or is not made.

Ltlabner
08-07-2007, 05:08 PM
I'm not sure how I could've given him appropriate partial credit any more clearly..

I guess when I read the following from your previous post I'm not sure where you are giving any credit, let alone partial credit....


The point is that he is not responsible for the success of Bailey, Bruce, et. al. and when we look at his accomplishments, they should not be on his list.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-07-2007, 05:11 PM
Maybe, just maybe Krivsky saw the team fall apart down the stretch last year during a penant race and saw Conine's 2 world series rings and thought if they are in a similar position this year he would be a valuable resource to have.

If that's the case, Krivsky is more clueless than I thought he was.

Johnny Footstool
08-07-2007, 05:46 PM
If that's the case, Krivsky is more clueless than I thought he was.

Indeed.

RedsManRick
08-07-2007, 06:20 PM
I guess when I read the following from your previous post I'm not sure where you are giving any credit, let alone partial credit....

From my first post which you commented on:

"2.) Shepparded Dan O'Brien's good draft picks"

That means Bruce & Bailey. WK should not get any credit for drafting them. He should get credit for seeing them advance through the system, whatever credit of that goes to a GM.

RedsManRick
08-07-2007, 06:22 PM
The Conine deal has come under some serious pressure as of late. Maybe, just maybe Krivsky saw the team fall apart down the stretch last year during a penant race and saw Conine's 2 world series rings and thought if they are in a similar position this year he would be a valuable resource to have. It is real easy being critical when looking at a deal on the surface but you need to look very indepth to begin to understand the reasons a deal is or is not made.

I think you're very close to it. I do think that experience and leadership play a role in winning it all. But if WK thought that this team was in position, from a talent and production standpoint, such that a character guy would provide real dividends, I think my point may be made all more clearly.

I'm scared of any GM who thinks having rings is a significant pre-requisite to acquiring them. If Jeff Conine was a FA who signed for 750K and shored up the bench, awesome. But as half of a first base platoon that costs $2M and prospects to acquire, yikes.

Ltlabner
08-07-2007, 06:31 PM
From my first post which you commented on:

"2.) Shepparded Dan O'Brien's good draft picks"

That means Bruce & Bailey. WK should not get any credit for drafting them. He should get credit for seeing them advance through the system, whatever credit of that goes to a GM.

Oh...my bad.

Yes, I agree 100%.

mth123
08-07-2007, 07:30 PM
I would say those people that you mentioned, rem, are very demanding but also willing to put their money where their mouth is. If Castellini is going to be that kind of impatient with his ballclub, he better be ready to pour the money in (in more than a few area's) to make it work.

Good post:beerme:

mth123
08-07-2007, 07:40 PM
I'm not sure why Kriv is being dogged for reciving the benefit of Obrians draft picks. Every other new GM on the planet recieves the reward or curse of the former GM's draft picks. Also, the likely will not recieve benefit of their own draft picks unless they are able to stay in the job 4 years or more unless the pick is a fast-track stud.

How is this a black eye on Krivsky?

Of course when people defend him they point to the lack of talent he inherited. Wouldn't that make it fair game to point out that much of the hope for the future is also not his doing?

Ltlabner
08-07-2007, 07:56 PM
Of course when people defend him they point to the lack of talent he inherited. Wouldn't that make it fair game to point out that much of the hope for the future is also not his doing?

A couple people in this thread pointed out that Wayne is only working with what DanO gave him. As if that is somehow newsworthy or different than what every other GM in baseball faces when they take over a team.

I don't think anybody has made a case that Wayne deserves credit for drafting Votto, Bruce, Bailey and Ceuto (generally, "the future") have they? Folks have commented that he's strengthened the farm system, but thats usually aimed more at how players have progressed, removing silly no-swing rules, pitch counts etc.

RedsManRick
08-07-2007, 08:10 PM
A couple people in this thread pointed out that Wayne is only working with what DanO gave him. As if that is somehow newsworthy or different than what every other GM in baseball faces when they take over a team.

I don't think anybody has made a case that Wayne deserves credit for drafting Votto, Bruce, Bailey and Ceuto (generally, "the future") have they? Folks have commented that he's strengthened the farm system, but thats usually aimed more at how players have progressed, removing silly no-swing rules, pitch counts etc.

Given how stupid those rules are in the first place, and how obvious getting rid of them was, I don't think that's much of a positive contribution to Wayne's VORGM (Value Over Replacement General Manager).

MWM
08-07-2007, 09:10 PM
I definitely don't buy the "you can't get rid of a GM because that would be too much turnover int he past 5 years. You need some stability or else who would want the job." I agree with the sentiment that it's tough to be successful with that much turnover, but it's even tougher to be successful when incompetent people are in important roles. The problem is being diagnosed inaccurately by some folks, IMO. The problem isn't in jettisoning underperforming employees, it's in hiring the wrong people to begin with. If you hire the wrong people, the you find yourself stuck in a situation where you're searching for ANOTHER replacement for a key position when you've already done so 3 times in 5 years.

There was talk of well-known business leaders and their expectations and so on. Of course they didn't become successful by firing people right and left. They become successful by hiring the right people to begin with. But I guaran-damn-tee you they were never afraid to pull the trigger when someone clearly wasn't cut out for a position. You admit your mistake, cut ties and move on and do a better job of hiring next time. I promise you they never said to themselves, "I'm concerned that we've already fired a couple of people in this role recently, so no one will want the role." Keeping people on board just for the purpose of stability is bad business if said person is in an important position and severely underperforming.

Besides, I wouldn't go anywhere near someone who was afraid to take the job because they were afraid they would get canned if things didn't go very well. Anyone worth anything wouldn't hesitate to take the opportunity to give it a shot. The only exception would be if it was a poor working environment such as an owner not willing to pony up any cash (not the case with Cast), or a meddling owner or COO who wouldn't leave you alone to do the job (also not the case with Cast from what we know). A situation where you didn't think you'd get the support you need to do your job is different. But being scared by expectations and because others who didn't meet those expectations were jettisoned quickly is no excuse not to take a job. But if you're afraid that you won't be given time, you better be damn honest in the interview process and tell them what you have in mind. If they buy into it and you fail, you have no one to blame but yourself.

I'm not saying Krivsky should or shouldn't be fired, but if it's determined that he's done a poor job in the role and that he's not the guy who's going to turn around the major league franchise, then keeping him around one day longer just for the sake of stability is just poor business, IMO. Whether he stays or goes should rest solely on the evaluation of his ability to finish the job he set out trying to accomplish.

SteelSD
08-08-2007, 01:10 AM
Well, we will have to sit through the remainder of the games to see how it plays out. It would only take about 7 wins above their current record for this year's team to play to last year's Pythag.

That's just a "wait and see" approach when all the indicators point away from "wait and see". And I'm not sure you completely understand what would have to happen going forward for the current version of the Reds to play to their 2006 Pythag at this point. Let's just say that when the word "miracle" could be used to get this team back to a projected 76-Win Pythag, things aren't looking so good.

nate
08-08-2007, 07:03 AM
That's just a "wait and see" approach when all the indicators point away from "wait and see". And I'm not sure you completely understand what would have to happen going forward for the current version of the Reds to play to their 2006 Pythag at this point. Let's just say that when the word "miracle" could be used to get this team back to a projected 76-Win Pythag, things aren't looking so good.

But Eddie Guardado is back!

sonny
08-08-2007, 07:12 AM
FWIW, the SD poll has 63% of members backing Wayne.