PDA

View Full Version : Why no Bruce??



Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 04:30 PM
Pete Mackanin's response to the Bruce question was..."He's what, 20 years old? There is your answer".



That's the best you can do?

flyer85
09-04-2007, 04:32 PM
My gut feeling is they don't wait to lock down a spot on the 40 man roster by calling him up.

RedsManRick
09-04-2007, 04:34 PM
Do you take at bats from Hamilton, Griffey, or Dunn to work him in? The only argument I can see is to expose him to the lifestyle, but I'm not sure that merits starting his clock. Besides, what do you really learn from 50 at bats? I'm only in favor of bringing guys up if they're clearly past due, are going to play every day, or increase your likelihood of making the playoffs. Bruce is 0-3 in that regard.

pedro
09-04-2007, 04:35 PM
My gut feeling is they don't wait to lock down a spot on the 40 man roster by calling him up.

which makes total sense going into the off season. Bruce will have his chance to win a spot in spring training IMO, no sense creating roster inflexibility for now....

fearofpopvol1
09-04-2007, 04:35 PM
I'm fine with keeping him down if that's what they choose to do. He is only 20 and really didn't spend much time at AAA. I'm sure he'll be fine, but he'll be up next season.

GAC
09-04-2007, 04:38 PM
Do you take at bats from Hamilton, Griffey, or Dunn to work him in? The only argument I can see is to expose him to the lifestyle, but I'm not sure that merits starting his clock. Besides, what do you really learn from 50 at bats? I'm only in favor of bringing guys up if they're clearly past due, are going to play every day, or increase your likelihood of making the playoffs. Bruce is 0-3 in that regard.

Exactly!

"I talked to Jay last Tuesday night," Krivsky said. "I brought him into [Louisville manager] Rick Sweet's office. We had a great talk. He fully understands our position in terms of the ability to get at-bats here, or the lack thereof."

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070903&content_id=2186443&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin

Who doesn't play in the OF so that this 20 yr old can? Hasn't he been playing RF for the Bats? Who's gonna tell Jr he's benched and give justification? ;)

Why are we in such a mode of trying to rush our youngsters through the system?

redsmetz
09-04-2007, 04:41 PM
I'm glad to see the very measured responses to this question. Matt, why the huge dissatisfaction with Mackanin's answer. It feels like there's nothing that he or Krivsky can say or do that doesn't rub you the wrong way.

I'll just repeat what most everyone else said. Why on earth would we needlessly start Bruce's clock? Why bring him up when we've got three outfielders in place now. I'm not fan of bringing kids up to let them sit and absorb the ML experience. He'll have that soon enough. My guess he's here sometime next year and that's early enough.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 04:45 PM
I'm glad to see the very measured responses to this question. Matt, why the huge dissatisfaction with Mackanin's answer. It feels like there's nothing that he or Krivsky can say or do that doesn't rub you the wrong way.

I'll just repeat what most everyone else said. Why on earth would we needlessly start Bruce's clock? Why bring him up when we've got three outfielders in place now. I'm not fan of bringing kids up to let them sit and absorb the ML experience. He'll have that soon enough. My guess he's here sometime next year and that's early enough.


It's just a dumb answer. That's all.

It makes it sounds like there's an age requirement to be a big league ball player.



Krivsky's answer is better...although I don't completely buy it, it at least has some substance.

Chip R
09-04-2007, 04:46 PM
I'm glad to see the very measured responses to this question. Matt, why the huge dissatisfaction with Mackanin's answer. It feels like there's nothing that he or Krivsky can say or do that doesn't rub you the wrong way.

I'll just repeat what most everyone else said. Why on earth would we needlessly start Bruce's clock? Why bring him up when we've got three outfielders in place now. I'm not fan of bringing kids up to let them sit and absorb the ML experience. He'll have that soon enough. My guess he's here sometime next year and that's early enough.


Not only are you starting his clock but you are burning options and he is taking the spot of someone else on the 40 man that you may need to protect over the winter.

Mackanin's answer is a dumb one though.

RedsManRick
09-04-2007, 04:48 PM
It's just a dumb answer. That's all.

It makes it sounds like there's an age requirement to be a big league ball player.

Krivsky's answer is better...

Fair point. That it's justified isn't the point. Why be so flip?

KronoRed
09-04-2007, 04:49 PM
Why the rush to bring him up from people is a better question.

osuceltic
09-04-2007, 04:54 PM
Why are we in such a mode of trying to rush our youngsters through the system?
It's only rushing him if he isn't ready.

I understand all the reasons for not bringing him up and don't disagree. But there's a pretty compelling reason to bring him up: If you find out he's ready, it can influence your offseason decisions regarding Dunn and Junior. And this franchise faces HUGE decisions on those two players.

They have to address the pitching staff. To do that, they're going to have to trade some legitimate talent. If you have a guy banging down the door in the minors at a given position, it makes it easier to decide who to trade for pitching.

Now ... They may very well feel they know all they need to know about Jay Bruce. That's fine. But this is a huge offseason ...

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 04:54 PM
Fair point. That it's justified isn't the point. Why be so flip?

I think I'm just worn out....this team will do that.



I could find him some at bats.....maybe not a ton, but some.

pedro
09-04-2007, 04:57 PM
I think I'm just worn out....this team will do that.

Perhaps I might suggest not being so caught up in the parsing of the detailed minutia that surrounds the everyday operation of the team?

When you dig through the garbage looking for trash don't be surprised that's what you find.

dougdirt
09-04-2007, 04:57 PM
Exactly!

"I talked to Jay last Tuesday night," Krivsky said. "I brought him into [Louisville manager] Rick Sweet's office. We had a great talk. He fully understands our position in terms of the ability to get at-bats here, or the lack thereof."

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070903&content_id=2186443&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin

Who doesn't play in the OF so that this 20 yr old can? Hasn't he been playing RF for the Bats? Who's gonna tell Jr he's benched and give justification? ;)

Why are we in such a mode of trying to rush our youngsters through the system?

Jay has actually spent a majority of his time in Louisville as a centerfielder (81.3% of his AAA at bats came with him as a centerfielder).

dougdirt
09-04-2007, 04:59 PM
It's only rushing him if he isn't ready.

I understand all the reasons for not bringing him up and don't disagree. But there's a pretty compelling reason to bring him up: If you find out he's ready, it can influence your offseason decisions regarding Dunn and Junior. And this franchise faces HUGE decisions on those two players.

They have to address the pitching staff. To do that, they're going to have to trade some legitimate talent. If you have a guy banging down the door in the minors at a given position, it makes it easier to decide who to trade for pitching.

Now ... They may very well feel they know all they need to know about Jay Bruce. That's fine. But this is a huge offseason ...

I think the Reds know exactly what they have in Jay Bruce and they don't believe they need him to get at bats right now to know what he can do next season. This offseason is huge in terms of the future, I just hope the Reds make the right decisions.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 05:00 PM
Perhaps I might suggest not being so caught up in the parsing of the detailed minutia that surrounds the everyday operation of the team?

When you dig through the garbage looking for trash don't be surprised that's what you find.

Maybe so.

The offseason may do me some good :)

puca
09-04-2007, 05:03 PM
Not only are you starting his clock but you are burning options and he is taking the spot of someone else on the 40 man that you may need to protect over the winter.

Mackanin's answer is a dumb one though.

Surely that is the reason.

There is no need to put Bruce on the 40 man until he makes the team. It will allow them to protect/claim another player in the rule V draft. And like others have said, between Hamilton, Votto, Griffey and Dunn, they don't exactly have a lot of ABs to spread around.

Cyclone792
09-04-2007, 05:31 PM
I'm probably one of the few people that's actually quite content with Bruce not getting called up, and that has nothing to do with trying to prevent his service clock from kicking into gear.

Bruce has already performed at three different levels in the minor leagues this season, and while he's crushed the ball, he's still had to go through a number of adjustments in a very short period of time with the different levels of play. Considering he'll also be playing a few weeks with Team USA, he'll be getting more reps in with that squad against yet another level of competition.

Additionally, while he has crushed the ball this season, he still does only have ~250 plate appearances total in the upper minors in his career. Yes, he's an absurd talent. Yes, he's taken multiple huge steps forward this season. But people still need to quell their expectations for him a bit, otherwise they'll just set themselves up for disappointment. The dude's still only 20-years-old, and I'm sure this season has been a whirlwind for him. There's no indications that calling him up would wear him down, but I'm sure the time off should hopefully help him in the long run, both physically and mentally.

Considering all that, plus knowing he'll be playing with Team USA shortly, I'm fine with giving him a little bit of rest for a few weeks right now.

RedsManRick
09-04-2007, 05:31 PM
I think I'm just worn out....this team will do that.



I could find him some at bats.....maybe not a ton, but some.

Don't worry Matt. I was referring to Mac. Though I'm sure he feels the same way...

redsmetz
09-04-2007, 05:33 PM
Cyclone, very well said. This kid's day will come and soon enough. We don't need him now for the dog and pony show.

BTW, I give Krivsky some credit for talking with the kid personally and laying out the club's rationale. Likewise, I give Bruce credit for his mature response. I like that alot.

Reds1
09-04-2007, 05:43 PM
You have to play DUNN to get his number up so you can trade him and they want Hamilton, Griffey, Kepp, Hopper to play. Just not enough ab. Why bring him up and start his clock.

KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 05:50 PM
Good thing no one told that to Junior when he started out... ;)wasn't he 20 years old or younger as a rookie and a 1st round draft choice as well???

KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 05:53 PM
Of course, Dunn was 21 years old with only so many at bats with Louisville - but 2001 was a very lost season - he was the only thing that kept me going to the games with season tickets...:(

VR
09-04-2007, 05:53 PM
Challenge thy hitters/ coddle thy pitchers.

Isn't that a Redzone mantra?

Seems like the Reds have it backwards this year with Bailey/ Bruce.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 05:54 PM
Good thing no one told that to Junior when he started out... ;)wasn't he 20 years old or younger as a rookie and a 1st round draft choice as well???

19

Chip R
09-04-2007, 05:55 PM
Surely that is the reason.

There is no need to put Bruce on the 40 man until he makes the team. It will allow them to protect/claim another player in the rule V draft. And like others have said, between Hamilton, Votto, Griffey and Dunn, they don't exactly have a lot of ABs to spread around.


You forgot Hopper and Ellison. :p:

Hamilton needs as many ABs and innings in the field as he can get. Jr. is going for 600 HRs and Dunn is going for 40 HRs and 100 RBIs. Plus you could make the argument that Dunn needs time in the field anyway to improve his defense.

If you had to protect Bruce this year, I wouldn't have too much a problem with it even if he just sat on the bench. But they don't need to protect him and if he goes on the 40 man roster, when the guys on the 60 day DL come off, you are going to have to make some tough decisions on who to take off the 40 man roster.

IslandRed
09-04-2007, 06:01 PM
I'm perfectly fine with him not coming up yet. Cyclone said it well -- he's had a big year and he'll be playing with Team USA soon. Let him catch a breather. We don't really have at-bats for him right now, and this is the time to be smart about setting up the 40-man roster for the offseason. Considering how our last fishing trip to the Rule V pond went, I want to keep a couple of spots open, and that's easier to do if we don't add guys to the 40 who don't have to be there.

gonelong
09-04-2007, 06:10 PM
I'm probably one of the few people that's actually quite content with Bruce not getting called up, and that has nothing to do with trying to prevent his service clock from kicking into gear.

I'm fine with him not coming North this fall.

On a somewhat related thought ...

One of the problems with kids progressing this fast through the system is that the opponent never really gets a good "book" on you. Eventually you'll get to MLB and they will certainly get one on you. If you haven't been trained to make adjustments, then you'll likely struggle and lose some measure of confidence. I like my players teaming with confidence.

Does this apply to Bruce? I'd say it applies to everyone. The question is how much training would one need to be able to make these adjustments? I think with his rise through the levels nobody really will have an answer to that. He might hit like a monster from day one and never falter, me might crash and burn never really having been forced to make adjustments at any level, much less the MLB level. Likely he'll fall in between, but which will he be closer too?

Conversly, I think we can expect a bit of an adjustment period from Votto, as we have seen a pattern of it from level-to-level with him. I think it also shows he has the ability to make those adjustments.

GL

RedsManRick
09-04-2007, 06:15 PM
Bruce would be taking away at bats from Adam Dunn, Ken Griffey Jr., or Josh Hamilton. Bailey took away starts from Phil Dumatrait. You do the math. Bringing up Bruce also sends the message to other teams that we're anxious to get rid of one of those aforementioned OF. Perhaps we are, but no reason to lose leverage.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 06:21 PM
Jason Ellison will be getting at bats and spot starts that Jay Bruce could get...

It works both ways

Chip R
09-04-2007, 06:25 PM
One of the problems with kids progressing this fast through the system is that the opponent never really gets a good "book" on you. Eventually you'll get to MLB and they will certainly get one on you. If you haven't been trained to make adjustments, then you'll likely struggle and lose some measure of confidence. I like my players teaming with confidence.

Does this apply to Bruce? I'd say it applies to everyone. The question is how much training would one need to be able to make these adjustments? I think with his rise through the levels nobody really will have an answer to that. He might hit like a monster from day one and never falter, me might crash and burn never really having been forced to make adjustments at any level, much less the MLB level. Likely he'll fall in between, but which will he be closer too?



Ecxcellent point. But they are going to get a book on him sooner or later. Still, you'd like to see him playing on a regular basis to make those adjustments rather than pinch hitting every 3rd game or platooning.

pedro
09-04-2007, 06:27 PM
Jason Ellison will be getting at bats and spot starts that Jay Bruce could get...

It works both ways

yeah but once the season is over ellison can just be cut from the 40 man roster with no repercussions.

once Bruce is on the 40 man roster I believe he must stay there otherwise the Reds would risk losing him. it just doesn't make sense to add him to the 40 man prior to the off season when the Reds will need as much flexibility with the 40 man as possible.

Jpup
09-04-2007, 06:33 PM
No need to bring him up now. Even though I would love to watch him play, it's just doesn't make any sense to do it. It's not clear to me that Jay will make the club next spring either. It will all depend on Jr. and Dunn. If both are here, I can't see Bruce coming up that soon. The Reds have to trade someone or not pick up Dunn's option, which is a horrible idea. Trade Jr.

PuffyPig
09-04-2007, 06:55 PM
Good thing no one told that to Junior when he started out... ;)wasn't he 20 years old or younger as a rookie and a 1st round draft choice as well???


And Griffey was brought up out of Spring Training when he won a job at that time. He was not brought the previous September.

So, applying the same logic to the Bruce situation, they are handling him like the Mariners handled Griffey, and that worked out OK.

:D

KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 07:46 PM
And Griffey was brought up out of Spring Training when he won a job at that time. He was not brought the previous September.

So, applying the same logic to the Bruce situation, they are handling him like the Mariners handled Griffey, and that worked out OK.

:DThat is IF he could win a spot in next year's OF - if Junior is kept, they pick up Dunn's option and then you have Hamilton... where does Bruce go... stay in Louisville till the middle of the year?

Personally, I really don't care if he gets ANY at bats. I just think it's important for a 1st round draft choice to get the feel of being in the major leagues.

Team Clark
09-04-2007, 07:53 PM
The kid has played a lot of baseball with great success? Why put a bump in the road. Not to mention he is going to the AFL and play for Team USA correct? He's got plenty on his plate. 15 Big league AB's can wait.

paulrichjr
09-04-2007, 08:03 PM
Not only are you starting his clock but you are burning options and he is taking the spot of someone else on the 40 man that you may need to protect over the winter.

Mackanin's answer is a dumb one though.


Actually I believe that an option is not used if he is brought up after Sept 1.

pedro
09-04-2007, 08:11 PM
Actually I believe that an option is not used if he is brought up after Sept 1.

yeah but he does have to be put on the 40 man roster.

Danny Serafini
09-04-2007, 08:20 PM
Bringing someone up does not use an option, only sending them down does.

vaticanplum
09-04-2007, 08:44 PM
Bruce would be taking away at bats from Adam Dunn, Ken Griffey Jr., or Josh Hamilton. Bailey took away starts from Phil Dumatrait. You do the math.

I've no indication that the Reds' front office understands this distinction ;)

Reds Nd2
09-04-2007, 10:00 PM
Bringing someone up does not use an option, only sending them down does.
A player can be called up and sent down as many times as the club chooses for three seasons after that player begins his optional assignment (being added to the forty man roster but not the twenty-five man active roster).

paulrichjr
09-04-2007, 10:52 PM
yeah but he does have to be put on the 40 man roster.

I understand that. I was just responding to the comment that we would be using an option which I do not believe is the case after Sept 1. I personally think the Reds are doing just right with him. I honestly think that they might have a tough time protecting some guys this year. I remember times when everyone got mad because we hadn't protected a couple of guys who were our top prospects and people got up in arms over it only to find out that no one wanted them. That just shows how bad this farm system was 2 -3 years ago. Leaving him off as long as we can is smart in my opinion. I fully expect to see him in the middle of next year though.

johngalt
09-05-2007, 01:00 AM
Jason Ellison will be getting at bats and spot starts that Jay Bruce could get...

It works both ways

Maybe, but Jason Ellison is mostly going to start against left-handers on the few instances he does start.

You've already got Griffey, Dunn, Hamilton and Hopper you're trying to get at-bats for. And with Hamilton in particular, you want him to keep getting as many as absolutely possible.

Bruce has played at three minor league levels this year. He's going to play in instructional league and then for team USA. Give the kid some time off. Let him rest. He'll be in spring training next year and get all this "experience" with the big leaguers then without taking up a roster spot that could be very valuable this offseason.

pedro
09-05-2007, 01:11 AM
I understand that. I was just responding to the comment that we would be using an option which I do not believe is the case after Sept 1. I personally think the Reds are doing just right with him. I honestly think that they might have a tough time protecting some guys this year. I remember times when everyone got mad because we hadn't protected a couple of guys who were our top prospects and people got up in arms over it only to find out that no one wanted them. That just shows how bad this farm system was 2 -3 years ago. Leaving him off as long as we can is smart in my opinion. I fully expect to see him in the middle of next year though.

I agree.

dougdirt
09-05-2007, 02:01 AM
The kid has played a lot of baseball with great success? Why put a bump in the road. Not to mention he is going to the AFL and play for Team USA correct? He's got plenty on his plate. 15 Big league AB's can wait.

He isn't going to the AFL. He is playing for Team USA in November though. As a part of the Team USA schedule though, they will play each of the AFL teams.

Redsland
09-05-2007, 11:51 AM
Not only does keeping Bruce off the 40-man give the Reds greater flexibility, it also greatly enhances Bruce's tradeability.

When you trade a guy who is on your 40-man, he has to go onto his new team's 40-man, as well. When you trade a guy who is not on the 40-man, the team receiving him does not have to open a place for him on their 40-man.

Food for thought.

flyer85
09-05-2007, 12:13 PM
Bruce really needs more time in the minors. That .34 BB/K(47/135) ratio is troubling and would likely morph into a sub .2 ratio(30bb/160+k) if he spends 2008 in the majors.

Chip R
09-05-2007, 04:44 PM
Actually I believe that an option is not used if he is brought up after Sept 1.

Even so, you bring him up and if he doesn't make the 25 man roster out of ST, you burn an option year.

Everybody said about Homer that when he's up, he's up to stay and you don't have to worry about options. Now he's on the 40 man and if he doesn't pitch well in ST, you either keep him on the 25 man roster or burn an option year. So that's 2 option years you will use on him and he's only got one more left.

redsmetz
09-07-2007, 07:13 AM
I just found this over on Lonnie Wheeler's blog from the other day


Wayne Krivsky said that the reason Jay Bruce wasn’t called up to the Reds, now that Louisville's season is over, was that there weren’t enough at-bats available to make it worthwhile. And that’s probably true. And it’s probably okay as far as this year is concerned, because Bruce is only 20 and will be playing in the Arizona Fall League and then for Team USA in Taiwan. So he’ll be challenged and pitched to, plenty.

But it’s not okay if the same situation faces him next spring. Bruce is already the best player in all of the minor leagues, and he belongs in the Cincinnati outfield in April. That won’t happen if Josh Hamilton, Adam Dunn and Ken Griffey Jr. are still around.

Hamilton will be for certain. Dunn will be if the Reds pick up the $13 million option on his contract. Griffey will be unless the Reds trade him in the offseason.

Of course, they’re unlikely to do that if Junior has not hit the eight more home runs he needs to reach 600. Which is another reason why there wouldn’t be many at-bats available for Bruce in September. Griffey needs them.

If he makes the most of them, and arrives at 600, it might accomplish several things. It might make him tradable to a team that is otherwise ready for the 2008 postseason, and enable him to play out his career in style. It might enable the Reds to swap for an accomplished pitcher. It might, with the money saved, enable them to sign one in the free-agent market. It might shake up the chemistry on a club that has been losing for seven straight years.

And it surely would, as noted, make room for the best player in the minor leagues. Which Griffey himself once was. (Also the majors.)

mth123
09-07-2007, 07:50 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't get all the fuss over JR's 600th HR?

Its not an unprecedented feat anymore and the attendance bump would hardly offset the $16.5 Million it would cost to keep him around ($12.5 Million in 08 and a $4 Million option buyout).

It seems like trading him and using the cash to help reshape the roster (i.e. trading a young cheap player for a needed starter w/o dollars getting in the way or financing whatever moves that lead to acquiring the depth to deal as needed) would be better for attendance then the temporary bump the chase for 600 will bring. After 600 is struck the attendance bump will be over and shortly afterwards (at latest end of 2008) Griffey will be gone anyway.

There is also the possibility that the injury bug pops up again as Griffey gets more years and miles on his body. That would be a scenario where the Reds have no Griffey, no salary relief and no talent returned back for him.

There is an heir apparent for RF ready to go. The Defense in RF is awful (I think Dunn has more range than Griffey these days) and could immediately be improved with a residual favorable impact on every pitcher on the roster, and the reshaping could begin. I just don't see why anyone is kept around in order to achieve what is now a relatively minor milestone.

I like Griffey and wish him well. But it isn't like we're seeing the end of a guy who played like a Hall of Famer here. He played like a Hall of Famer in Seattle. In Griffey's case Cincy is Vegas and Seattle is Memphis. It isn't Griffey's fault and its very unfortunate, but Cincinnati got the fat Elvis version of Griffey for the last 8 years while Seattle got the guy that made him a legend to begin with.

Its time for Jay Bruce and Josh Hamilton to share the CF and RF positions that Griffey has manned during this decade.

Ltlabner
09-07-2007, 08:07 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't get all the fuss over JR's 600th HR?

I just don't see why anyone is kept around in order to achieve what is now a relatively minor milestone. .

Minor milestone? Huh? 5 players have hit 600 home runs. 5 out of the thousands who have played MLB baseball over the years. In a game with an average player carear length of what....4 or 5 years?

Arod will likely acheive 600 (has 512) as will Manny (490). There are a couple others (Thome, Thomas and Sheffield) still playing that *might* possibly reach it, although I doubt it. Even if all 5 reach 600 that's 10 total players who've reached 600 homers in a carear.

Guys who have not hit 600? Jackson, Schmitt, Killabrew, Foxx, Mantle, Williams. Those are some monster players, yet they couldn't hit the 600 mark.

Minor milestone? Wow.

Not saying that justifies keeping Jr, and you are right that the "chase for 600" isn't likely to boost attendence except in the last few games. I'm not saying I want to see them trade Jr, but you have a point that once again there is a log jam out there, and someone has to be traded if we want Bruce to see any playing time.

But 600 homers is a minor milestone? Come on.

RANDY IN INDY
09-07-2007, 08:55 AM
No kiddin' Ltlabner.:beerme:

Danny Serafini
09-07-2007, 10:19 AM
A milestone isn't near as exciting when it's the third time in the past couple years someone hits it. 600 is impressive, no doubt, but the more people pass it the less magic it holds.

redsmetz
09-07-2007, 10:34 AM
A milestone isn't near as exciting when it's the third time in the past couple years someone hits it. 600 is impressive, no doubt, but the more people pass it the less magic it holds.

Some might consider it passe given it's frequent recent occurance, but as Ltlabner pointed out, it's no small feat.

RANDY IN INDY
09-07-2007, 10:57 AM
With only 5 players in the club, anyone with an ounce of respect for baseball history would hardly consider it passe, most notably because it is being done by a player with no steroid accusations.

Redsland
09-07-2007, 12:11 PM
Am I the only one who doesn't get all the fuss over JR's 600th HR?
Nope.

I certainly don't think it's enough of a reason to keep him around if the right trade comes along.

IslandRed
09-07-2007, 12:21 PM
I hope Castellini has enough sense not to use Drayton McLane as a role model. McLane, from what I've read, was the one that ordered management to play Biggio all year so he could get to 3,000 hits, and as a result forced a sub-optimal team onto the field. Then he fires the GM and manager because the team didn't contend. Now, Biggio's not all to blame for that by any means, but there needs to be a consistent message coming from the top.

If there is a chance this offseason to trade Griffey somewhere he'd like to go, it's a key opportunity to reshape the club. If Castellini really wants to win, he's got to allow that to happen, even if Griffey's sitting at 599. The alternative is to commit the Reds to another year of Griffey's salary and poor defense and risky wheels and keeping Jay Bruce stuck in the minors for the sake of a "600" photo-op.

Of course, if Griffey does not wish to leave, that's that.

RedsManRick
09-07-2007, 12:34 PM
I hope Castellini has enough sense not to use Drayton McLane as a role model. McLane, from what I've read, was the one that ordered management to play Biggio all year so he could get to 3,000 hits, and as a result forced a sub-optimal team onto the field. Then he fires the GM and manager because the team didn't contend. Now, Biggio's not all to blame for that by any means, but there needs to be a consistent message coming from the top.

Not really a fair comparison at all. Biggio was harming the team by being in the lineup at all, let alone at the top of the lineup. He extended his career for the sole purpose of acheiving the milestone and McLane enabled it. Had Biggio been at 2,800 hits, he wouldn't have been playing.

Junior has been the 2nd most productive offensive player on the Reds and has at least another couple years left in the tank making positive contributions, milestone or not. His milestone would come in the course of helping the team win games. If we're offered Justin Verlander and Cameron Maybin for him and Castellini says, "no way, Junior's gonna hit 600 as a Red", then you have a point. But unlike Biggio, a case can be made for keeping Junior because doing so gives us the best chance to win.

As for the scope of the milestone, can you name all the guys who have hit 3,000 hits? Can you name all the guys who have hit 600 homers? It's a very big milestone and should be celebrated accordingly.

Don't get me wrong, milestones are things that should happen in the course of winning baseball games. They are notable points in the course of the game, not an objective thereof. If the right deal was there, I'd deal Junior. I don't think we should keep him for the sake of the milestone. I think we should keep him because he's a good player and he should only be dealt if doing so improves the club. (and fwiw, I'd be shopping Junior as soon as I possibly could)

IslandRed
09-07-2007, 12:39 PM
It's not meant to be a comparison of the value of Biggio's play versus the value of Griffey's play. It's meant to be a question of, does ownership allow the milestone to take priority over doing what's best for the ballclub. In Griffey's case, "what's best for the ballclub" might be keeping him or might be trading him, we don't know right now. But if trading Griffey was not even allowed to be discussed because #600 hadn't been hit yet, then that's what I'm getting at.

RedsManRick
09-07-2007, 12:40 PM
It's not meant to be a comparison of the value of Biggio's play versus the value of Griffey's play. It's meant to be a question of, does ownership allow the milestone to take priority over doing what's best for the ballclub. In Griffey's case, "what's best for the ballclub" might be keeping him or might be trading him, we don't know right now. But if trading Griffey was not even allowed to be discussed because #600 hadn't been hit yet, then that's what I'm getting at.

Ah, my bad. We're in violent agreement then.

IslandRed
09-07-2007, 12:48 PM
Ah, my bad. We're in violent agreement then.

Re-reading my original post, my comments on Griffey did sound like I considered him a drag on the ballclub. Wasn't my intent, but it's not your fault for reading what I actually wrote.

Roy Tucker
09-07-2007, 12:52 PM
Junior has been the 2nd most productive offensive player on the Reds and has at least another couple years left in the tank making positive contributions, milestone or not.


The tough item on Krivsky's to-do list is to convince other teams that this is true (which I think it is) and get something of equivalent value back in a trade.

I agree with the 600 HRs comments... it's a great milestone and in a perfect world, I'd like Junior to be a Red when he does it. But don't harm the franchise long-term in exchange for a week-long Junior love-fest.

flyer85
09-07-2007, 12:54 PM
The tough item on Krivsky's to-do list is to convince other teams that this is true (which I think it is) and get something of equivalent value back in a trade.

I agree with the 600 HRs comments... it's a great milestone and in a perfect world, I'd like Junior to be a Red when he does it. But don't harm the franchise long-term in exchange for a week-long Junior love-fest.the only place I could see Jr going is back to Seattle, they obviously still love him there and I bet if we knew the truth he feels that leaving to come to Cincy was a mistake.

KronoRed
09-07-2007, 02:29 PM
I think JR would go anywhere on the east coast if it's a team that has a good shot at winning something.

mth123
09-07-2007, 07:36 PM
A milestone isn't near as exciting when it's the third time in the past couple years someone hits it. 600 is impressive, no doubt, but the more people pass it the less magic it holds.

Exactly my point. Anyone remember where they were when Sosa hit number 600?

Not saying it isn't a great feat, but it just won't generate the fanfare to justify keeping Griffey here solely for that purpose. It won't generate enough money to justify his remaining contract and it won't generate any type of buzz to alter the future of the franchise (like McGwire did in St. Louis for example).

Finally, JR hitting 600 as a Red is more a result of timing than the culmination of a series of hall of fame seasons in Cincy. The HOF seasons occurred in Seattle.

Its a minor footnote in the scheme of things, not something to base franchise decisions upon.

Ltlabner
09-07-2007, 11:59 PM
Exactly my point. Anyone remember where they were when Sosa hit number 600?

Not saying it isn't a great feat, but it just won't generate the fanfare to justify keeping Griffey here solely for that purpose. It won't generate enough money to justify his remaining contract and it won't generate any type of buzz to alter the future of the franchise (like McGwire did in St. Louis for example).

Finally, JR hitting 600 as a Red is more a result of timing than the culmination of a series of hall of fame seasons in Cincy. The HOF seasons occurred in Seattle.

Its a minor footnote in the scheme of things, not something to base franchise decisions upon.

You are mixing two issues. The magnitude of hitting 600 versus making stratigic franchise decisions around Jr hitting 600. I agree with you totally on the decision making aspects. There will likely be a spike in attendence (assuming he's close and they are in town) but I don't think it would be significant enough to justify turning down a good trade.

However, I disagree that being one of only 6 guys in the entire history of baseball to reach the milestone has somehow become boring and passe. It certinally isn't a "minor footnote". What rubbish. I don't care if all 5 guys got in last week it's a big milestone and an increadibly exclusive club.

And who cares that his best years were with Seattle? Those home runs in the Reds uni count too. Using that logic, any stat a player gets after they've peeked should be erased from their record. That makes no sense. Lot's of records are a result of a player finding a way to be effective even though they've lost a step or three. That makes them no less valid.

dougdirt
09-08-2007, 12:02 AM
Lets just note that if Griffey gets to 600 as a Red, he will be one of just 8 Reds EVER to hit 200 HR in a Reds uniform. Technically 598 will be his 200th as a Red.

mth123
09-08-2007, 12:44 AM
You are mixing two issues. The magnitude of hitting 600 versus making stratigic franchise decisions around Jr hitting 600. I agree with you totally on the decision making aspects. There will likely be a spike in attendence (assuming he's close and they are in town) but I don't think it would be significant enough to justify turning down a good trade.

However, I disagree that being one of only 6 guys in the entire history of baseball to reach the milestone has somehow become boring and passe. It certinally isn't a "minor footnote". What rubbish. I don't care if all 5 guys got in last week it's a big milestone and an increadibly exclusive club.

And who cares that his best years were with Seattle? Those home runs in the Reds uni count too. Using that logic, any stat a player gets after they've peeked should be erased from their record. That makes no sense. Lot's of records are a result of a player finding a way to be effective even though they've lost a step or three. That makes them no less valid.


My initial post was in response to some posts in this thread that claimed or implied that the Reds can't or won't trade Jr until after number 600 is hit as a red. I think we agree that is foolish but I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't accurate.

As for the best years in Seattle statement, let me elaborate. In this era most of the milestones that players achieve have become quite ordinary. Whether its steroid inflated totals, the fact we get to see so many milestones on TV, or better medicine leading to longer careers (I think a bit of all 3 among other things), these things simply aren't as special as they once were. One area where the appeal is greater IMO is when a player reaches a milestone as a culmination of a body of work that was largely achieved in the city where the milestone occurred. I'd argue that Biggio getting his 3000th hit as an Astro is more meaningful than Sosa or Griffey hitting their 600th in a place that wasn't where the glory occurred. I say that even though I think that 600 HR is a much greater achievement than 3000 hits. For Biggio and the Astro fans his 3000th hit is a cherry on top of a great career that the fans, his teammates and he can reflect back on. For Griffey, number 600 is more a consolation prize to soften the disappointment. When we see number 600 we'll be in awe that he hit so many and we'll look back fondly at Griffey's prime - on another team. Its just my opinion, but Biggio getting number 3000 while still an Astro is a cause for celebration and if the team would have cut ties with him when he was so close would have been a betrayal of the fans and the franchise that he was synonymous with. Griffey is not synonymous with Cincinnati. He is, was and always will be remembered as a Seattle Mariner. Trading him now when he is close to the goal is not anywhere close to the same thing as if he was a lifelong Red whose glory days were here. I just don't see the sense in portraying his milestone as some great celebration of Cincinnati baseball when Griffey's great baseball really didn't involve the Reds anyway.

So for me, where the glory days occurred is very relevant. If Griffey's HOF caliber years were as a Red, I would be against trading him until after 600 is struck no matter what the deal. But Griffey is a Mariner HOF. His Red years are not really HOF caliber so there is nothing compelling to me about him hitting number 600 as a Red. I'd like to see him do it and will be happy for him, but there is no "Red's Pride" involved. He's a Mariner. If circumstances allow it to be done in a Red's uniform, I'll be cheering and as happy as anyone. But if a chance to move the franchise forward is passed upon for the sake of it (not that we would ever really know about it), then it would be a disservice to Red's fans.

As for it being a minor footnote, I guess we disagree on the definition of major. Sosa's was a minor footnote. Number 700 for Bonds was a minor footnote. There were no celebrations. No nation was glued to the TV waiting for it. Maybe our definitions of major and minor are different. I think 30 seconds on sportcenter with a graphic saying Griffey hit number 600 is pretty minor. We won't remember the call like Aaron's 715th, McGwire's 62nd, Ripken's streak setting game or Rose's 4192. Those were events where the sports world stopped and watched. This won't be.

dougdirt
09-08-2007, 05:02 AM
Griffey will have hit for more than 33% of his home runs as a Red if and when he hits #600. You make it sound like the Reds have had Griffey from like 550 until now, and at that point, I think you would have a point. However Griffey will have hit #400, #500 and soon to be #600 in a Cincinnati Reds uniform if they keep him. You may call that a minor footnote....I disagree.

Ltlabner
09-08-2007, 06:26 AM
As for it being a minor footnote, I guess we disagree on the definition of major. Sosa's was a minor footnote. Number 700 for Bonds was a minor footnote. There were no celebrations. No nation was glued to the TV waiting for it. Maybe our definitions of major and minor are different. I think 30 seconds on sportcenter with a graphic saying Griffey hit number 600 is pretty minor. We won't remember the call like Aaron's 715th, McGwire's 62nd, Ripken's streak setting game or Rose's 4192. Those were events where the sports world stopped and watched. This won't be.

I guess if the amount of airtime a record gets on SportsCenter is the measuring stick of how important an event is you are right that it's minor.

Frankly, that's about the silliest argument I've heard.

6 people out of how many thousands who have played the game have done it (assuming Jr does in fact hit 600)? That's what it boils down to. How much it's discussed on PTI, or how many fans stop and write down where they were when it happens has aboultley nothing to do with guaging the importance of the record.

mth123
09-08-2007, 06:45 AM
Griffey will have hit for more than 33% of his home runs as a Red if and when he hits #600. You make it sound like the Reds have had Griffey from like 550 until now, and at that point, I think you would have a point. However Griffey will have hit #400, #500 and soon to be #600 in a Cincinnati Reds uniform if they keep him. You may call that a minor footnote....I disagree.

This entire discussion is about Jay Bruce and why he isn't here.
The reason that Bruce isn't here is that there is nowhere to play. The Reds also have pitching issues which are exacerbated by a range deficient outfield. Griffey is 38 with some serious health limitations that are only going to get worse and, even with his good season in 2007, his future is mostly behind him. The premise was that he be traded to allow the minor league player of the year a spot to play which should improve the defense dramatically, create payroll room to allow a pitching acquisition and possibly add a prospect or two to boot.

After that, an argument was raised by some one that Griffey can't, won't or shouldn't be traded until after his pursuit of number 600 is over. My point was and still is that being the 6th guy to hit his 600th homerun is a minor footnote in the scheme of things and certainly not worth altering franchise plans for and I stand by it.

Anyone remember who the second guy to run a 4 minute mile was? How about the 3rd guy to clear 10 feet on the pole vault? Who was the 5th black player to cross the color barrier? Who was the second guy to throw a curve ball? These are all major accomplishments and fantastic feats in their own right. But none are opening new ground and as a result are minor footnotes in the scheme of things. From now on, a player hitting his 600th HR is in the same category. Bonds was the first guy in generations to do it, so it was somewhat noteworthy. Sosa was a complete afterthought. Griffey is close but, as the third guy this decade to do it, its old hat by now. That's a minor footnote in my book.

GAC
09-08-2007, 06:46 AM
I think JR would go anywhere on the east coast if it's a team that has a good shot at winning something.

Which narrows the list down to who on the east coast?

Boston, NY, Philly, Pittsburgh, Nationals, Braves, TB, and Marlins.

You can pretty much cross money-conscious teams like the Pirates, TB, and Marlins, off that list.

The Braves just signed their big money contract in Mark Teixeira. They hold no interest (if that interest ever existed) in acquiring Jr. Especially when they have a younger player, and better defensively, named Jones in CF. And I've read rumors they may try to trade him because of his contract. But they certainly aren't going to replace that contract with a Jr's because the Braves have become somewhat money-conscious too, and it really makes no sense.

No way Nat's GM Bowden makes that mistake again. He'd rather acquire Dunn somehow.

So that leaves Boston, Philly, and the two NY teams. And I just don't see it happening. The fans/media would have a field day with an aging, declining, injury-prone Jr in Philly and NY. It would be Jr's worst nightmare IMHO. And their need is like everyone elses - pitching.

Jr is here through 2008.

He seems to think he has a few years left and can contribute; but if he has any common sense (and humility) at all, he will take a reasonable contract that an AL team can afford (because he doesn't need the money), and become the next Edgar Martinez. ;)

mth123
09-08-2007, 06:54 AM
I guess if the amount of airtime a record gets on SportsCenter is the measuring stick of how important an event is you are right that it's minor.

Frankly, that's about the silliest argument I've heard.

6 people out of how many thousands who have played the game have done it (assuming Jr does in fact hit 600)? That's what it boils down to. How much it's discussed on PTI, or how many fans stop and write down where they were when it happens has aboultley nothing to do with guaging the importance of the record.

Again, this discussion is about keeping Griffey around and delaying the time for the Jay Bruce era to begin so that the Reds can "cash in" on the fanfare that Griffey's pursuit of 600 will create. I think the amount of airplay on Sportscenter and the other media coverage and attention surrounding the event is a pretty good measuring stick of how much fanfare there is. The more the hype, the greater the windfall for the organization. I still don't see much hype surrounding it or any major windfall occurring. The organization should not be considering number 600 at all in terms of future roster decisions.

I think you agree.

mth123
09-08-2007, 07:17 AM
Which narrows the list down to who on the east coast?

Boston, NY, Philly, Pittsburgh, Nationals, Braves, TB, and Marlins.

You can pretty much cross money-conscious teams like the Pirates, TB, and Marlins, off that list.

The Braves just signed their big money contract in Mark Teixeira. They hold no interest (if that interest ever existed) in acquiring Jr. Especially when they have a younger player, and better defensively, named Jones in CF. And I've read rumors they may try to trade him because of his contract. But they certainly aren't going to replace that contract with a Jr's because the Braves have become somewhat money-conscious too, and it really makes no sense.

No way Nat's GM Bowden makes that mistake again. He'd rather acquire Dunn somehow.

So that leaves Boston, Philly, and the two NY teams. And I just don't see it happening. The fans/media would have a field day with an aging, declining, injury-prone Jr in Philly and NY. It would be Jr's worst nightmare IMHO. And their need is like everyone elses - pitching.

Jr is here through 2008.

He seems to think he has a few years left and can contribute; but if he has any common sense (and humility) at all, he will take a reasonable contract that an AL team can afford (because he doesn't need the money), and become the next Edgar Martinez. ;)

Now this a legit argument as to why Griffey will still be here. I think the market is pretty limited too, but could see a scenario or two where something could happen (though I don't believe it likely). Possibly an exchange of bad contracts at an area of need. The Yankees will probably let Abreau walk. They'll have an opening in RF (assuming Johnny Damon doesn't take over there) and if A-Rod bolts George will be looking to make a big name splash. Mussina is aging and similarly paid while the Yankees have young pitching knocking at the door. I could see a Griffey for Mussina deal as a realistic possibility. Even a declining Mussina would be the 3rd best starter in Cincy and his first time around the easier NL advantage could make him a nice one year stop gap.

Baltimore could use a big name to try and boost its sagging franchise and could be interested in Griffey for that purpose though I doubt he'd go.

I agree that the Braves probably have no interest, but possibly if Andruw Jones walks the Reds could do something. They may want Griffey's power in LF to compensate for the loss of Jones while guys like Willie Harris and maybe Kelly Johnson (with Escobar taking over at 2B) roam CF. Atlanta has a strong RH bat in Diaz as a ready made partner/caddy. Atlanta would probably want the Reds to take a contract back and the Reds could actually gamble on some one like Mike Hampton ($15 Million in 2008 in the final year of his deal and coming back from TJ surgery) with Atlanta paying a portion and the Reds possibly getting a prospect or two as sweetener.

Those are only examples of how the Reds would have to be creative to move Griffey. IMO a changing of the guard is needed to improve the defense and to open a spot for Bruce. Pitching in return would be an improvement as well.

Ltlabner
09-08-2007, 09:36 AM
Again, this discussion is about keeping Griffey around and delaying the time for the Jay Bruce era to begin so that the Reds can "cash in" on the fanfare that Griffey's pursuit of 600 will create. I think the amount of airplay on Sportscenter and the other media coverage and attention surrounding the event is a pretty good measuring stick of how much fanfare there is. The more the hype, the greater the windfall for the organization. I still don't see much hype surrounding it or any major windfall occurring. The organization should not be considering number 600 at all in terms of future roster decisions.

I think you agree.

Since Sportscenter isn't even sure Cincinnati is a city in the state of Ohio, I'm not sure you can draw any correlation between the amount of airtime given to how the fans in Cincy would react in terms of attendnce.

Doesn't mean there will be a huge groundswell of attendence (I don't think there will be) but drawing any correlation between what is seen on SportsCenter and relality is risky at best. That's like saying if the City goes bonkers and really supports the march to #600 but SportsCenter doesn't air it, it never really happened. All that matters is how many fans walk through the turnstyles at GABP. Again, I agree 100% that the increased attendence will likely pale in stratigic implications of a good trade (assuming one is offered) but I think your logic is faulty in getting there.

And yes, the discussion is about Bruce and what to do with Jr vis a vis the 600 mark. But you were the one who opened the door to the idea that passing 600 was a ho-hum event that didn't mean much to sports history.

redsmetz
09-08-2007, 10:01 AM
Doesn't mean there will be a huge groundswell of attendence (I don't think there will be) but drawing any correlation between what is seen on SportsCenter and relality is risky at best. That's like saying if the City goes bonkers and really supports the march to #600 but SportsCenter doesn't air it, it never really happened. All that matters is how many fans walk through the turnstyles at GABP. Again, I agree 100% that the increased attendence will likely pale in stratigic implications of a good trade (assuming one is offered) but I think your logic is faulty in getting there.

And I think this was the point in Wheeler's column; i.e. that Griffey getting to 600 this season gives the Reds a bit more off-season leeway for moving Griffey. I doubt they expect a surge in attendance should it come down to it, but any spike is a good thing.

Coupling that with the fact that there's no harm in not bringing Bruce up this season (particularly in light of him continuing to play in the offseason, even for a bit) makes this a win/win for the organization, IMO.

mbgrayson
09-08-2007, 11:04 AM
Since Sportscenter isn't even sure Cincinnati is a city in the state of Ohio....

IS Cincinnati in Ohio? Last time I flew into the Cincinnati airport, they said "welcome to Kentucky".....;)

RANDY IN INDY
09-08-2007, 11:41 AM
Griffey certainly hasn't hurt the team this season.

MWM
09-08-2007, 11:51 AM
Griffey certainly hasn't hurt the team this season.

Exactly what I was thinking. This isn't about the fanfare around 600. It's about the fact that Griffey is still a damn good player. What are they going to do with him if Bruce is called up? Sit him on the bench? I don't see the need to get Bruce up here now.

RANDY IN INDY
09-08-2007, 11:56 AM
Agree, MWM. You just can't write off what Griffey has accomplished this season. Bruce is young and there is no need to rush him, not to mention that replacing the kind of numbers that Griffey has put up this season is no small task and full of pressure. I hope Bruce turns into a really good major league player, but there are certainly no guarantees. The Major League game is not easy and full of adjustments.

mth123
09-08-2007, 01:23 PM
Exactly what I was thinking. This isn't about the fanfare around 600. It's about the fact that Griffey is still a damn good player. What are they going to do with him if Bruce is called up? Sit him on the bench? I don't see the need to get Bruce up here now.

I don't disagree that Griffey has had a good year offensively. I've said many times that he and Dunn drive the offense no matter what everyone else is doing right now. But he's gone in a year anyway. All I am saying is if the Reds have a chance to move him and let Bruce play it shouldn't be passed by for some percieved need to let him hit number 600 as a red. Subtracting Griffey also has an immediate positive impact on team defense and will help every pitcher on the staff. The choice is really trade him while his value is better than at any time during his tenure here and hopefully acquire some organizational benefit beyond 2008 or keep him another year and then pay him $4 Million to walk when its done. Seems like a no brainer to me.

dougdirt
09-08-2007, 01:47 PM
Anyone remember who the second guy to run a 4 minute mile was? How about the 3rd guy to clear 10 feet on the pole vault? Who was the 5th black player to cross the color barrier? Who was the second guy to throw a curve ball? These are all major accomplishments and fantastic feats in their own right. But none are opening new ground and as a result are minor footnotes in the scheme of things. From now on, a player hitting his 600th HR is in the same category. Bonds was the first guy in generations to do it, so it was somewhat noteworthy. Sosa was a complete afterthought. Griffey is close but, as the third guy this decade to do it, its old hat by now. That's a minor footnote in my book.
Horrible comparison. You can't begin to try and compare track and field records to baseball ones. I can tell you the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth player to reach almost all big milestones.
Maybe Sosa was an afterthought because of the controversy surrounding him and a lot of his home runs that he hit. Did that ever cross your mind?

Sure, if the right deal comes around for Griffey the Reds have to take it. They know that. I can't imagine Cast or Krivksy are that stupid that they wouldn't understand that.

mth123
09-08-2007, 02:19 PM
Horrible comparison. You can't begin to try and compare track and field records to baseball ones. I can tell you the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth player to reach almost all big milestones.
Maybe Sosa was an afterthought because of the controversy surrounding him and a lot of his home runs that he hit. Did that ever cross your mind?

Sure, if the right deal comes around for Griffey the Reds have to take it. They know that. I can't imagine Cast or Krivksy are that stupid that they wouldn't understand that.

Firstly, there is a difference between remembering Griffey as an elite player with X number of lifetime Home Runs and the actual impact of the specific game where he he hits said homer being anything major. That game will not be one that everyone remembers or IMO goes out of their way to attend. I'm sure some will, but not enough to make Griffey hitting number 600 as any part of marketing strategy or even register as much of a blip on the attendance meter. I guess it would allow them to get a big crowd one day w/o having to bribe the fans and they can save a few bobbleheads or $1 hot dogs for another day. A winning team on the field is the only strategy that should be considered.

Secondly, I agree that if the right deal "comes along" this regime would probably take it. But righting this ship is going to take considerable effort and I hope that the Reds are seeking the right deals rather than waiting for them to "come along." This team needs to leave no stone unturned in its attempts to right itself. For the record, I am concerned that the Reds may not try real hard to move Griffey this offsesason solely for the purpose of letting him hit 600 as a red and in the process could lose the opportunity for improvement that a well transitioned changing of the guard could bring. That would be a failing IMO.