PDA

View Full Version : Managerial search over. It's Dusty.



Pages : 1 [2] 3

Aronchis
10-13-2007, 05:03 AM
Homer's pain in his groin would go to his arm very quickly.

Dusty Baker is the bad man acometh.

westofyou
10-13-2007, 11:35 AM
One point glossed over is that Dusty is a "California Man" and has a school age son wh live ins California, this being his second family and he having spent the majority of his past 30 years in the west has to bode well for those wavering at the thought of Dusty in the Reds dugout.

This tidbit was in the SF Chronicle today, Jenkins is a blow hard, but he does know the Bay Area icons and their personalties


The Reds have quietly made a big push to make Dusty Baker their next manager. It's not exactly his dream job - a highly flawed team, far away from his California home - but it's something he has to consider


Also he notes...


Another factor in Bonds hitting the market: Commissioner Bud Selig, a master power broker in his dealings with owners, doesn't want him signing with anyone. Sign Bonds, and you'll be getting no favors from the commissioner ... One point where we're in agreement with Bonds and his handlers: He shouldn't take one cent of a pay cut. He means notoriety and gate appeal, and he's the all-time home-run leader, for crying out loud. CEOs don't take pay cuts. They get raises every year ... Along those lines, there is talk that if Joe Torre returns as the Yankee manager, he'll have to take a salary hit. How petty is that? ... If you're wondering about the delay on Torre's fate, it's that the Yankees can no longer be sure if 77-year-old owner George Steinbrenner is lucid at any time. They have to make sure it's a majority decision within the organization, not some idle Steinbrenner rant.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/13/SPS8SP3L3.DTL

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 01:44 PM
Torre a paycut? from the team that never losses money at anything?

Hysterical.

Matt700wlw
10-13-2007, 02:34 PM
Another name

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071012&content_id=2262930&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin

Phil Garner

OnBaseMachine
10-13-2007, 02:38 PM
Give me Ken Macha or Davey Johnson or even Mackanin. Just anyone but Baker or Garner.

Matt700wlw
10-13-2007, 02:48 PM
Maybe they'll never announce anybody...

This speculation is much more fun :D

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 02:52 PM
Another name

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071012&content_id=2262930&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin

Phil Garner

Any other NL central managers who were fired that we can go after?

RedsManRick
10-13-2007, 03:01 PM
My God. How about we start interviewing some good managers instead of crappy ones with name recognition. I'm very quickly losing faith.

KoryMac5
10-13-2007, 03:10 PM
Garner has interest in the job, I have interest in running Microsoft. We both are never going to get a sniff at either.

RFS62
10-13-2007, 03:16 PM
My God. How about we start interviewing some good managers instead of crappy ones with name recognition. I'm very quickly losing faith.



Simma' down now.


Garner, who was dismissed as Astros skipper on Aug. 27, hasn't been contacted by Cincinnati to fill its managerial vacancy.



http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i92/a69animal4u/snl.jpg

Cyclone792
10-13-2007, 03:34 PM
My God. How about we start interviewing some good managers instead of crappy ones with name recognition. I'm very quickly losing faith.

That's how old baseball men operate. They'd rather hire a big name idiotic manager than a little known manager or a complete unknown manager who could provide intelligence and innovation.

My take now, with all that said, is that while I wasn't the biggest Pete Mackanin supporter this past season, he's A) better than Narron was, B) better than Miley was, C) better than Boone was, and D) better than just about every big name idiot whose name has been rumored to have interviewed and/or be interested in the Reds' opening.

It's sad that it has to be that way, but unfortunately that seems to be the case. I wish the Reds would throw a potential manager through the same process Boston did with Terry Francona, but unfortunately that doesn't appear to be happening, or even close to happening.

RANDY IN INDY
10-13-2007, 05:25 PM
In some people's minds, everyone ends up being an idiot.

Cyclone792
10-13-2007, 05:39 PM
In some people's minds, everyone ends up being an idiot.

The Reds have a .453 winning percentage over the last seven seasons. Are you interested in that same winning percentage over the next seven seasons?

The Reds had a .592 winning percentage in the 1970s, and they were in an organization back then who operated as if they were ahead of their time. I'd say it's long overdue for the Reds of today to operate in that same manner of being ahead of their time.

fearofpopvol1
10-13-2007, 05:41 PM
I'd rather have Garner than Dusty. I don't know that that's saying much, though.

I'm honestly cool with just bringing Pete back, but that's just me.

Matt700wlw
10-13-2007, 05:54 PM
Waiting game?


More time means more choices
BY JOHN FAY | JFAY@ENQUIRER.COM



The Reds aren't saying anything about their managerial search.

So we're left to interpret their actions to figure out what's going on behind the walls of 100 Main Street.

For example, when the Reds didn't make it official with interim manager Pete Mackanin before the season ended, it was a clue they would look outside the organization.


The team has talked to at least one outside candidate, Dusty Baker. If Baker or another manager isn't named soon, it's a signal the Reds will wait to see if other candidates become available.

Two accomplished managers could come into play soon: Joe Torre of the New York Yankees and Tony La Russa of the St. Louis Cardinals. If the Reds want to take a shot at either, it makes sense to wait.

Of the three teams that have openings - Pittsburgh and Kansas City are the other two - the Reds seemingly have the most attractive situation. The picture gets muddier if La Russa replaces Torre in New York and the St. Louis job opens up.

It's clear the Reds have more than a cursory interest in Baker. He was at the Reds' facility in Sarasota, Fla., last week and has talked to Bob Castellini, the team's chief executive officer, several times.

But it's not necessarily a slam dunk that Baker will take the job if it's offered. He lives in California, and he has young children.

But he has told people close to him that he'd like to manage again, and he prefers the National League.

Baker's final season as a manager was his worst. He went 66-96 with the Chicago Cubs in 2006. He might want to show he's more like the manager who did so well in San Francisco, where he worked from 1993 through 2002 before leaving for Chicago.

Baker, 58, took the Giants to the World Series in 2002, and they finished in first place twice and second five times in his 10 years there. His teams won at least 90 games five times in his eight full seasons as Giants manager.

Former Red Rich Aurilia played for Baker during his San Francisco stint and is a huge fan.

"Anybody who gets him is lucky," Aurilia said of Baker.

Baker is known as a player's manager.

"Having Dusty is like having another player," Aurilia said. "He'd go out and play if he could. He's great to play for. He's a player's guy."

Is Baker the kind of guy the Reds are looking for?

We might know the answer to that soon.

pedro
10-13-2007, 06:02 PM
I'd rather have Garner than Dusty. I don't know that that's saying much, though.



I'm no big Dusty fan but I just can't agree with that.

fearofpopvol1
10-13-2007, 08:58 PM
I'm no big Dusty fan but I just can't agree with that.

oh what basis?

Chip R
10-13-2007, 09:03 PM
Heard some guys on CHI radio today say that if Torre is fired, Lou is interested.

Matt700wlw
10-13-2007, 09:03 PM
Heard some guys on CHI radio today say that if Torre is fired, Lou is interested.

I heard that as well last night.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 09:08 PM
Heard some guys on CHI radio today say that if Torre is fired, Lou is interested.

No way, it'll be Don Mattingly

Wheelhouse
10-13-2007, 09:11 PM
Heard some guys on CHI radio today say that if Torre is fired, Lou is interested.

The cubs would have to let Lou out of his contract I assume.

pedro
10-13-2007, 09:15 PM
oh what basis?

I just think Dusty is a better manager. Scary handler of pitchers that he may be, he still has a solid track record of success and has always seemed to be pretty good at getting the most out of his roster. Garner, OTOH, is a horrible manager IMO.

pedro
10-13-2007, 09:16 PM
No way, it'll be Don Mattingly

Not until he cuts those side burns.

Chip R
10-13-2007, 09:19 PM
The cubs would have to let Lou out of his contract I assume.


Oh, sure, unless he has some kind of out. I'd think they would demand compensation.

Chip R
10-13-2007, 10:48 PM
ESPN has just reported Dusty Baker has accepted the Reds offer to be their new manager. Pray.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 10:50 PM
ESPN has just reported Dusty Baker has accepted the Reds offer to be their new manager. Pray.

The Reds just got a lot less fun.

RFS62
10-13-2007, 10:54 PM
Wow.

In Dusty we Trusty

redsfan30
10-13-2007, 11:01 PM
Well, he's a Red now so there's nothing left to do but get behind him and support him.

paulrichjr
10-13-2007, 11:07 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3062658

Dusty Baker has agreed to a three-year deal to manage the Cincinnati Reds, beginning with the upcoming season, ESPN has learned.

Baker, a former Cubs and Giants manager and current ESPN analyst, will continue to work with ESPN through this season's League Championship Series and World Series.

Baker is expected to be introduced at a news conference in Cincinnati on Monday.

The 58-year-old Baker was fired by the Cubs after they finished last in 2006. Lou Piniella replaced him and led the Cubs to the division title this season. Chicago was swept in its first-round playoff series against Arizona.

Baker managed the Giants for 10 years, leading them to the World Series in 2002. He left San Francisco after a falling out with ownership and went to the Cubs, leading them to the NL championship series in his first season.

Chicago had another winning record in 2004, its first back-to-back winning seasons in more than three decades. But the team unraveled in his last two years, and the Cubs didn't renew his contract after an NL-worst record of 66-96 in 2006.

joshnky
10-13-2007, 11:07 PM
He has had some success. Maybe he learned from his mistakes with Prior and Wood.

reds44
10-13-2007, 11:07 PM
Oh wow.

Well that's a "big name" I guess.

Break out the tooth picks!

Kc61
10-13-2007, 11:09 PM
Three year deal for Baker.

Very interesting.

Have to believe lots of personnel, coaching and perhaps front office (Jocketty?) changes are coming.

BoydsOfSummer
10-13-2007, 11:10 PM
That makes my chest hurt.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:10 PM
Three years?

Yikes.

Cyclone792
10-13-2007, 11:11 PM
This organization is run by clowns, and Cosmo Kramer had good reason to be terrified of clowns.

Team Clark
10-13-2007, 11:14 PM
Hope Mackanin enjoys his vacation. Nice job by Krivsky keeping his word by giving Mack that interview he promised. People wonder why there are good baseball people turning down opportunities and more money to come work in the Reds FO.

Cyclone792
10-13-2007, 11:14 PM
He has had some success. Maybe he learned from his mistakes with Prior and Wood.

When one (or more) of Aaron Harang, Bronson Arroyo, Homer Bailey, Johnny Cueto, or any other promising Reds pitcher and/or prospect walks off a mound holding his throwing arm, you'll know better.

And that scenario is going to happen, guaranteed.

guttle11
10-13-2007, 11:14 PM
Grrrrrrrrrrrrr.

reds44
10-13-2007, 11:15 PM
And we all thought Narron was bad with pitchers.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:17 PM
Either very sadly or quite hilariously, firedustybaker.com is already in use by a cub fan.

edabbs44
10-13-2007, 11:17 PM
This is gonna be bad.

I guess the silver lining has to be that this regime pulled the plug on Narron 1/4 of the way through his 2 year extension.

RedFanAlways1966
10-13-2007, 11:17 PM
Oh well. Welcome to the REDS, Dusty. Good luck. I wasn't for your selection, but you're the manager and I'll support you.

Blitz Dorsey
10-13-2007, 11:19 PM
I like it. His Giants teams were usually overachievers if anything. And that was on a consistent basis. I noticed a trend of getting everything he could out of his teams (usually).

Blitz Dorsey
10-13-2007, 11:21 PM
And we all thought Narron was bad with pitchers.

Comparing Narron to Baker is like comparing Turk Schonert to Carson Palmer. OK, maybe not that extreme, but you get the point. One never should have been a MLB manager (and his W-L record proves it), the other has a track record of success (and his W-L record proves it).

MWM
10-13-2007, 11:22 PM
I'ts not so much Dusty managing the team that worries me. It's what it signals about the organization that is so troubling. I have a feeling it's going to be a long time until we see a Reds organization capable of competing in the modern age of baseball.

Reds4Life
10-13-2007, 11:23 PM
This organization is run by clowns, and Cosmo Kramer had good reason to be terrified of clowns.

A 3 year deal for him as well. I seriously give up, I can't take it anymore. My days as a Reds fan are about to come to an end. :thumbdown

flyer85
10-13-2007, 11:23 PM
old school baby ... WK better give him a good bullpen.

GullyFoyle
10-13-2007, 11:24 PM
Disappointed... :(

BuckeyeRedleg
10-13-2007, 11:25 PM
This organization is run by clowns, and Cosmo Kramer had good reason to be terrified of clowns.

Exactly.

Just when I start thinking this organization is getting somewhere, it poops down it's leg....again.

Well done, boys.

Bye, Wayne.

Homer Bailey and Johnny Cueto....RUN. Run away!




Our owner is clueless, by the way.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:26 PM
This is kind of like Eric Milton, the first big "name" who would say yes to us.

Stormy
10-13-2007, 11:26 PM
First time since I adopted the Reds at 5 years of age that I've been tempted to temporarily turn my back on the franchise. How utterly, and totally, disheartening. This is a telltale that BCast likes to make an indiscriminate splash, not based on merit but upon name recognition. No wonder we shell out for past their prime vets with name recognition, over more talented, less expensive alternatives.

Cleveland might be headed to the World Series with youngsters, and a guy named Wedge as their head coach. We need innovation in the F.O. and amidst the scouting ranks, not a splashy manager and an antiquated F.O. philosophy.

My optimism for this team steadily heading in the right direction the past 3-4 months is utterly dashed, and I'm guessing we'll now hit rock bottom before ever rebounding. I'm sorry in advance for Harang and Arroyo (thanks for the good years), and for Bailey's imminent demise.

Puffy
10-13-2007, 11:27 PM
I'ts not so much Dusty managing the team that worries me. It's what it signals about the organization that is so troubling. I have a feeling it's going to be a long time until we see a Reds organization capable of competing in the modern age of baseball.

Well, on the plus side - I just saved a bunch of money by switching to Geico :thumbup:

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:27 PM
Well, on the plus side - I just saved a bunch of money by switching to Geico :thumbup:

I want a Caveman for manager

flyer85
10-13-2007, 11:28 PM
clueless, by the way.what I have been siggesting all along. If the Reds ever win is will be in spite of the leadership.

Redsfaithful
10-13-2007, 11:28 PM
You only get so many years, Cubs fans can certainly attest to that.

I know it's just sports, but it's really upsetting to have your favorite team just pissing years and years and years away like this. And there's nothing I can do about it. I can't just root for Cleveland or someone else, I really wish to hell I could.

Thank god for Ohio State, because the Reds and Bengals are just too much sometimes.

Sea Ray
10-13-2007, 11:28 PM
It's very important who the pitching coach is. I'd like to see a strong pitching coach that will strongly sway Dusty on how to handle pitchers. i'd like to say Mazzone but actually he was a guy who thought that high pitch counts were good for building up arm strength.

BuckeyeRedleg
10-13-2007, 11:28 PM
First time since I adopted the Reds at 5 years of age that I've been tempted to temporarily turn my back on the franchise. How utterly, and totally, disheartening. This is a telltale that BCast likes to make an indiscriminate splash, not based on merit but upon name recognition. No wonder we shell out for past their prime vets with name recognition, over more talented, less expensive alternatives.

My optimism for this team steadily heading in the right direction the past 3-4 months is utterly dashed, and I'm guessing we'll now hit rock bottom before ever rebounding. I'm sorry in advance for Harang and Arroyo (thanks for the good years), and for Bailey's imminent demise.

Well said, as always.

What a total inferiority complex this organization has. To sign a name.

I didn't think this franchise could get much lower. It's still sinking.

edabbs44
10-13-2007, 11:28 PM
A 3 year deal for him as well. I seriously give up, I can't take it anymore. My days as a Reds fan about about to come to an end. :thumbdown

Maybe you should change your name to "Reds4Now"? :)

But I agree...this is too much. This off-season might be too much for me to handle.

Tom Servo
10-13-2007, 11:30 PM
Oh, god no.

flyer85
10-13-2007, 11:30 PM
It's very important who the pitching coach is.it will be very important who the pitchers are. I would bet they will go strongly with the veteran stench.

Stormy
10-13-2007, 11:30 PM
Personally, I don't care about big names. I'd truthfully like to see how it would be to go one season without even knowing the name of the guy managing my favorite teams.... :cool:


:thumbup: Right on, bro. The Reds are turning back the clock and staring in the rearview mirror, exactly at a time when the road map calls for a visionary ability to look ahead.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:30 PM
It's very important who the pitching coach is. I'd like to see a strong pitching coach that will strongly sway Dusty on how to handle pitchers. i'd like to say Mazzone but actually he was a guy who thought that high pitch counts were good for building up arm strength.

Considering Pole worked with Baker in SF I'd say he has a good shot at keeping his job.

edabbs44
10-13-2007, 11:31 PM
At least Dusty will keep this board....lively?


March 15, 2004
The Week In Quotes
March 8-14


by Ryan Wilkins

AFTERNOON CONSTITUTIONAL (A.K.A., THE DUSTY BAKER QUOTE EXTRAVAGANZA BEGINS)

"I think walks are overrated unless you can run... If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, that helps. But the guy who walks and can't run, most of the time they're clogging up the bases for somebody who can run."
--Dusty Baker, Cubs manager (Chicago Daily Herald)

"Who's been the champions the last seven, eight years? ...Have you ever heard the Yankees talk about on-base percentage and walks? Walks help. But you ain't going to walk across the plate. You're going to hit across the plate. That's the school I come from."
--Baker

"It's called hitting, and it ain't called walking. Do you ever see the top 10 walking? You see top 10 batting average. A lot of those top 10 do walk. But the name of the game is to hit."
--Baker

PAGING WILL CARROLL...

"Sooner or later, somebody is going to get hurt, and then they are going to blow it all out of proportion... But go back and look at the overall picture. For a guy who is supposed to have run pitchers into the ground, look around and see our track record of how healthy our pitchers have stayed. Who has had healthier pitchers?"
--Baker, on his handling of young pitchers (Chicago Sun-Times)

"I'm really tired of people always picking at what I don't do... There's a whole bunch of them out there that haven't done what I have done. I don't pay no attention to that criticism. Why don't people leave me alone? Why do they always talk [bleep] on me?"
--Baker

"People [always] have been trying to bring me down. Very rarely do I hear what I have done. That's OK, that's how it is. Actually, that makes me stronger. It's OK. What are you going to say when I kick somebody's [rear]?"
--Baker

"You are damned if you do, damned if you don't. But you can't take away the fact that I've won. For the people who aren't down here doing our job, it's easy to sit up there and type the stuff over the computer. They say, 'Don't stick with your starters as long,' but when you bring in this guy or that guy, it's 'Why did you bring him in?'"
--Baker

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2669

RedLegSuperStar
10-13-2007, 11:32 PM
I hear shipments of toothpicks and wristbands will be delivered in time for the press conference Monday. I think the only thing negative that can be said about Dusty is that he over works his pitching. Hopefully defense and offense can be provided so that the pitching doesn't have to be used more then it should. I wonder if Pete ever got his interview.. and hopefully offered his old job or another within the organization.

edabbs44
10-13-2007, 11:32 PM
Fay chimes in:


It's Baker

The Reds and Dusty Baker agreed to a three-year deal. The formal announcement will come Monday.

I think it broke late Saturday because Baker probably had to tell ESPN what he was doing -- since he was under contract with them. One of the his friends told me Baker would have had some sort of penalty if he quit the network before the season ended.

Not surprisingly, he's going to work for ESPN through the end of the season.

CTA513
10-13-2007, 11:32 PM
I want a Caveman for manager

Maybe Joel is available?

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g205/CTA513/joel2.jpg

Sea Ray
10-13-2007, 11:33 PM
Obviously Redszone is not high on this guy but i think it's fair to say there was no concensus choice out there either. In fact all the candidates had major weaknesses, kinda like the Presidential candidates at this time. So is Dusty really worse than what was available, i.e. Brenly, Girardi etc?

BuckeyeRedleg
10-13-2007, 11:34 PM
I want to know, if this is Wayne's call.

If so, I want him gone more than I ever wanted him gone. More than I wanted him gone after Juan Castro. More than I wanted him gone after "the trade". More than I wanted him gone after Mike Stanton. In fact, if this is his doing, he's worse than Dan O'Brien. Oooooh. Yeah, that's right.

If this is our owners call, there is still hope for Krivsky, but we need a new owner. Quick like.

RedLegSuperStar
10-13-2007, 11:34 PM
It's very important who the pitching coach is. I'd like to see a strong pitching coach that will strongly sway Dusty on how to handle pitchers. i'd like to say Mazzone but actually he was a guy who thought that high pitch counts were good for building up arm strength.

Smoltz, Maddux, and Glavin are all still pitching..

edabbs44
10-13-2007, 11:35 PM
Obviously Redszone is not high on this guy but i think it's fair to say there was no concensus choice out there either. In fact all the candidates had major weaknesses, kinda like the Presidential candidates at this time. So is Dusty really worse than what was available, i.e. Brenly, Girardi etc?

1) He was hired before the WS contestants were even known.

2) He got a 3 year deal.

Those are not the markings of settling for someone. They wanted him.

MWM
10-13-2007, 11:35 PM
"I think walks are overrated unless you can run... If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, that helps. But the guy who walks and can't run, most of the time they're clogging up the bases for somebody who can run."
--Dusty Baker, Cubs manager (Chicago Daily Herald)

"Who's been the champions the last seven, eight years? ...Have you ever heard the Yankees talk about on-base percentage and walks? Walks help. But you ain't going to walk across the plate. You're going to hit across the plate. That's the school I come from."
--Baker

"It's called hitting, and it ain't called walking. Do you ever see the top 10 walking? You see top 10 batting average. A lot of those top 10 do walk. But the name of the game is to hit."
--Baker


Thanks for that. Baker managing is worst case scenarion for the Reds' best offensive player in Adam Dunn. I have a feeling he's going to make another attempt to "fix" him. I wouldn't have minded seeing Pete get the chance over a full year.

flyer85
10-13-2007, 11:36 PM
So is Dusty really worse than what was available, i.e. Brenly, Girardi etc?probably not, for me it just shows an organization stuck in the past that isn't interested in thinking outside the box. If the Reds are to have any success it will come from a rejuvenated farm system.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:36 PM
I want to know, if this is Wayne's call.


The press conference should be interesting, wonder if it will be Bob leading the way, doing all the introductions with Wayne just off to the side.

This has ownership written all over it, but maybe Wayne likes him Dusty

Reds Fanatic
10-13-2007, 11:37 PM
Obviously Redszone is not high on this guy but i think it's fair to say there was no concensus choice out there either. In fact all the candidates had major weaknesses, kinda like the Presidential candidates at this time. So is Dusty really worse than what was available, i.e. Brenly, Girardi etc?What to me makes Dusty worse than the others is his well known abuse of his pitching staffs in the past.

BuckeyeRedleg
10-13-2007, 11:37 PM
probably not, for me it just shows an organization stuck in the past that isn't interested in thinking outside the box. If the Reds are to have any success it will come from a rejuvenated farm system.

or just plain luck.

MWM
10-13-2007, 11:37 PM
So is Dusty really worse than what was available, i.e. Brenly, Girardi etc?

Whoever decided the only people "available" are big names who have coached before? Hell, there are hundreds of people "available." And there's a reason why these guys are so available.

Reds4Life
10-13-2007, 11:38 PM
So is Dusty really worse than what was available, i.e. Brenly, Girardi etc?

Yes. I would have taken either over Baker. Even though the idea of keeping yet another interim manager sickened me, I'd take Mac over Baker.

It can't be stressed enough how truly awful this hire is, especially on a 3 year deal.

guttle11
10-13-2007, 11:38 PM
Lord, beer me strength.

flyer85
10-13-2007, 11:38 PM
I want to know, if this is Wayne's call. the fact that Jocketty has been offered a job to be WKs boss I can't imagine that this wasn't more Castellini then Krivsky. If BC trusted WK he wouldn't be looking to bring in Jocketty.

Sea Ray
10-13-2007, 11:39 PM
1) He was hired before the WS contestants were even known.

2) He got a 3 year deal.

Those are not the markings of settling for someone. They wanted him.


I agree they wanted him. They can tell you was going to be available after the WS and they grabbed Dusty now. I agree with most of you...I don't know what they see in him...

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:39 PM
So is Dusty really worse than what was available, i.e. Brenly, Girardi etc?

Brenly actually has a ring, so I'd prefer him if the logic is "past success"

Team Clark
10-13-2007, 11:39 PM
the fact that Jocketty has been offered a job to be WKs boss I can't imagine that this wasn't more Castellini then Krivsky. If BC trusted WK he wouldn't be looking to bring in Jocketty.

EXACTAMUNDO!! I wonder if that idea started to creep into Castellini's mind after his meeting with Almaraz? "I support you Wayne"... (But do I trust you?)

smith288
10-13-2007, 11:39 PM
Maybe Joel is available?

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g205/CTA513/joel2.jpg
Dude... sapes only!

Always Red
10-13-2007, 11:40 PM
What a disappointment.

And I thought the offseason was a time of hope and promise for the year to come?

This is a really hard team to root for.

Mostly I'm just disappointed with Castellini; I think when he said "we want to win now" that was all he had, nothing more than wanting to win.

So now what? Get behind Baker? Don't be so sure Bellhorn is gone, it's not too late to resign him. Bruce, Cueto and Bailey will all be in AAA next year, all year long. Get used to Gonzalez hitting leadoff or 2nd next year.

I'm a big Bearcat fan, and I didn't think it could get any worse tonight, until I heard this news on the way home.

This organization is literally going backwards, IMHO.

Stormy
10-13-2007, 11:40 PM
What a total inferiority complex this organization has. To sign a name.

I didn't think this franchise could get much lower. It's still sinking.

That pretty much nails it. With the influx of youthful talent starting to produce, they were arguably just a #2-3 Starter, and a couple of bullpen arms away from contention in the NL Central. Then, just keep the focus on perpetuating the farm system and you might be on the road to building an annual contender in a few years, especially given the way that the young pups produced under Petey Mac.

So, our first offseason move is to hire a big name manager for big bucks, and one who just recently lost more games in a season than any Reds manager not named Bob Boone, who runs arms into the ground, favors underproductive vets to more talented youngsters, has a completely anti-statistical bent, and a totally bass ackwards approach to the values of an OBP driven offense, to player roles and matchups, and to player development.

Well played, you rubes.

Tom Servo
10-13-2007, 11:41 PM
I even just realized another horrible aspect of this is the mocking and laughter by Cubs fans.

Sea Ray
10-13-2007, 11:42 PM
Clearly things didn't work out for Dusty in Chicago but that's true for a lot of managers. Dusty had a pretty good rep as a manager before the fiasco in Chicago.

Having said that I still think the Reds could have done better. I'd rather have a young, energetic no name like the Tribe got with Eric Wedge given the names bandied about.

Aronchis
10-13-2007, 11:42 PM
1.Cast is scaring me
2.If Bailey puts it together next year, Dusty will run him hard. It isn't the way it should be, but will be. Homer's shelf life is going to be small. Maybe that groin will act up again.

Puffy
10-13-2007, 11:42 PM
Well, all those who wanted Junior traded can now kiss that goodbye.

I wasn't one of those people, but I at least saw the logic. Forget it now though.

LoganBuck
10-13-2007, 11:42 PM
Nuts

BuckeyeRedleg
10-13-2007, 11:43 PM
Honestly, I hate Tony LaRussa. And I'm not a big fan of Krivsky.

But, I was hoping that we could go into 2008 with Mack and I was ok to give Krivsky another year to work everything out. I was thinking that maybe there is a method to his madness and maybe he's a year away. I didn't want LaRussa and I didn't want Jocketty, especially if it meant bringing in LaRussa and messing up whatever plan Krivsky was working on.

Now, I wish we had LaRussa.

That's how much I think of Dusty Baker.

letsgojunior
10-13-2007, 11:44 PM
I think Jennifer Love Hewitt (as suggested by Redsbaron) would have been a better option.

Team Clark
10-13-2007, 11:45 PM
I even just realized another horrible aspect of this is the mocking and laughter by Cubs fans.

I can hear the laughter now when there is 10,000 of them in the stands! Never fails that there are as many cub fans as Reds fans at GABP.

Seriously, I am not against the move. There are worse Managers out there (Tracy, Girardi, Perlozzo) but there were better ones too. I didn't see Dusty's name popping up for other vacancies so why the rush?

flyer85
10-13-2007, 11:45 PM
Well, all those who wanted Junior traded can now kiss that goodbye.

I wasn't one of those people, but I at least saw the logic. Forget it now though.I find it hard to forecast anything because I have no idea who is in charge. I am guessing it isn't Krivsky. Jocketty may shortly be calling the shots and WK will just be carrying out his marching orders.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:46 PM
Well, all those who wanted Junior traded can now kiss that goodbye.

I wasn't one of those people, but I at least saw the logic. Forget it now though.

That option might get picked up now.;)

flyer85
10-13-2007, 11:47 PM
That option might get picked up now.;)and the Dunn option passed on.

RBA
10-13-2007, 11:47 PM
Seriously considering giving my lifetime obsession with the Reds up.

KronoRed
10-13-2007, 11:48 PM
and the Dunn option passed on.

What a disaster this could turn out to be.:(

flyer85
10-13-2007, 11:50 PM
What a disaster this could turn out to be.:(everyone has said that picking up the option is a no-brainer. If that is the case then why hasn't it happened yet. Every day that passes makes it more likely of the Reds will not pick up that option.

corkedbat
10-13-2007, 11:50 PM
I'm too busy reveling in the UK FB team's win over #1 LSU to let another stupid, stupid move by this train wreck of a franchise get me down tonight. I'm sure tomorrow though, I will be one honked-off Reds fan. Blech!

Reds4Life
10-13-2007, 11:50 PM
I find it hard to forecast anything because I have no idea who is in charge. I am guessing it isn't Krivsky. Jocketty may shortly be calling the shots and WK will just be carrying out his marching orders.

Personally, I think this move means you can forget Jocketty. I don't see Castillini pulling the trigger on a new manager without Jocketty already in place if he felt he was going to be apart of the organization.

Doc K is probably grinning from ear to ear right now, his business is about to double.

Stormy
10-13-2007, 11:55 PM
Seriously considering giving my lifetime obsession with the Reds up.

I know. Now they're finding ways to ruin my day even in the midst of a good football season for my other teams. :( It's not bad enough that they ruin every summer??

Phhhl
10-13-2007, 11:58 PM
We bought him, now we have to live with him. Let's hope he learned something during his catastrophic tenure in Chicago.

Anybody that gives up on the Reds because of this wasn't needed in the first place. Maybe it indicates the club will open the coffers a little this winter. Just looking for the bright side....

BuckeyeRedleg
10-13-2007, 11:59 PM
everyone has said that picking up the option is a no-brainer. If that is the case then why hasn't it happened yet. Every day that passes makes it more likely of the Reds will not pick up that option.

If they pass on Dunn and now with the Dusty Baker move, I will be done.

I can't put my heart into it anymore. It's too painful.....and frustrating.

SirFelixCat
10-14-2007, 12:04 AM
I know. Now they're finding ways to ruin my day even in the midst of a good football season for my other teams. :( It's not bad enough that they ruin every summer??

So I've been sick most of this week...I've been in the worst downswing ever in poker...


But today, I started feeling better. I had my first real winning session for the month. I was really having a good day. My Ducks won HUGE at home...my Cowboys are undefeated. LSU lost...I was dozing off in my Lazyboy...I wake up...


And now I feel like someone has seriously punched me in the gut.

I'm not sure who would have been worse to root for: Larussa or Baker.


Those quotes are the epitome of the anti-Dunn. Not to mention guys like EdE, Votto, Bailey, and Cueto are seriously hamstrung now.


God, I'm physically ill and wanna cry. It's been a bad month and it just won't stop. :cry:

jmcclain19
10-14-2007, 12:08 AM
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/79/dustybakertombox5.jpg

TeamBoone
10-14-2007, 12:08 AM
Just one question (okay, three)... why on earth would Castellini do this? I honestly can not comprehend why.

Why in the world were they so hell bent on a big name, even if he isn't all that great?

And why so quickly? It's only been two weeks since the season ended!

Stormy hit the nail on the head, several times. If fans can see all these things, I can't understand why ownership can not.

I'm unable to express how disappointed I am with this choice. I just have this horrible horrible feeling that it's a huge mistake.

MrCinatit
10-14-2007, 12:08 AM
This makes me want to torch my baseball card collection.

Seriously, Dusty was nowhere near my top pick. In fact, he was quite near the bottom - I would much rather have had Pete at the helm (and I do hope that Pete is given a job in the organization, but that is doubtful).
But, the deed is done. Like a goofy basset hound that was just spanked, I will still faithfully follow the Reds hoping for another doggy biscuit.

Spitball
10-14-2007, 12:09 AM
... i'd like to say Mazzone but actually he was a guy who thought that high pitch counts were good for building up arm strength.

Wait, wait, wait. Show us a link or some proof of this. I'm not saying you are wrong, but I have never seen him espouse this philosophy. He has advocated the four man rotation and his philosophy does involve an extra day of throwing between starts to cement the necessary unconscious rote memory of arm movement. However, his philosophy on pitch counts has been very logistic. He believes the universal 100 number is very arbitrary and that other factors should be factored into the decision as to when to remove a pitcher. But, where is your proof of this claim?

No pitching coach that I know of can claim a flawless record for health, but Mazzone's pitchers have typically been quite healthy. You can't point to a prolonged record of abuse by Mazzone pitchers.

Phhhl
10-14-2007, 12:10 AM
Just one question (okay, three)... why on earth would Castellini do this? I honestly can not comprehend why.

Why in the world were they so hell bent on a big name, even if he isn't all that great?

And why so quickly? It's only been two weeks since the season ended!

Stormy hit the nail on the head, several times. If fans can see all these things, I can't understand why ownership can not.

Because ownership is in this thing over it's head, apparently. They do not seem to have a clue.

MrCinatit
10-14-2007, 12:10 AM
Just one question (okay, three)... why on earth would Castellini do this? I honestly can not comprehend why.

Why in the world were they so hell bent on a big name, even if he isn't all that great?

And why so quickly? It's only been two weeks since the season ended!

Stormy hit the nail on the head, several times. If fans can see all these things, I can't understand why ownership can not.

After the last couple of years of "You're doing a great job _____" and "We're only a couple of arms away" from the ownership, I am beginning to believe Bob lives in a giant bubble, where the cries of the masses are unheard.

LoganBuck
10-14-2007, 12:10 AM
If they pass on Dunn and now with the Dusty Baker move, I will be done.

I can't put my heart into it anymore. It's too painful.....and frustrating.

Maybe we can all be Indians fans, they are a fundamentally sound organization. They hire up and coming managers, they bring in young talent. They can tell the difference between

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/0/02/Character_of_the_donkey_from_Shrek_2.JPG

and a

http://www.heritage.nf.ca/environment/images/sinkhole.jpg

jmcclain19
10-14-2007, 12:11 AM
Per Castellini - the Reds are close - I think he honestly thinks this is the last piece the Reds need. I honestly would not be shocked if the Reds did little in the offseason due to this ridiculous optimism.

BuckeyeRedleg
10-14-2007, 12:11 AM
Maybe we can all be Indians fans, they are a fundamentally sound organization. They hire up and coming managers, they bring in young talent. They can tell the difference between

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/0/02/Character_of_the_donkey_from_Shrek_2.JPG

and a

http://www.heritage.nf.ca/environment/images/sinkhole.jpg


Go Tribe.

Aronchis
10-14-2007, 12:13 AM
I forgot about Arroyo. We saw what Narron did to him, just think what Dusty will do!!:confused:

paintmered
10-14-2007, 12:14 AM
Per Castellini - the Reds are close - I think he honestly thinks this is the last piece the Reds need. I honestly would not be shocked if the Reds did little in the offseason due to this ridiculous optimism.

Castellini is delusional. This entire franchise has no sense of reality.

I need a break from baseball.

George Anderson
10-14-2007, 12:16 AM
Im guessing Harang and Arroyo wont be pitching any day games!!





:Baker stands by heat comments
By Chuck Johnson, USA TODAY
Chicago Cubs manager Dusty Baker, dismissing suggestions he made a racist assertion when speaking with reporters about day baseball, stands by his comments that black and Hispanic players are better suited to playing in the sun and heat than white players.

Cubs manager Dusty Baker didn't back down from his comments, but he also won't address it any further after this.
By Aynsley Floyd, AP

"I'm not playing the race card. I'm telling it like it is," Baker said by telephone Monday.

"What I meant is that blacks and Latins take the heat better than most whites, and whites take the cold better than most blacks and Latins. That's it, pure and simple. Nothing deeper than that."

Harry Edwards, a sports sociologist who served on the faculty at the University of California-Berkeley for 30 years, called the comments "unfortunate and not totally informed" but said they weren't malicious.

"Dusty and I go back a long way, and Dusty by no means is enamored with ethnic or racial stereotypes," Edwards said. "If we didn't have a race issue in this country, that statement would have little or no consequence. But we do have a race issue."

Baker, whose Cubs play a majority of their home games in the daytime, made his comments Saturday.

"It's easier for most Latin guys and it's easier for most minority people because most of us come from heat," Baker said. "You don't find too many brothers in New Hampshire and Maine and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. ... We were brought over here for the heat, right? Isn't that history? Weren't we brought over because we could take the heat?"

Tony Bernazard, a former major leaguer from Puerto Rico who is special assistant for the players union, didn't think anything was wrong with the comments.

"It's somebody's opinion," Bernazard said. "I don't think anybody can accuse Dusty Baker of being a racist because Dusty Baker is not a racist."

Baker's comments were ripe fodder for the talk shows Monday. Some charged that a white manager would be under fire if he made similar statements.

"If a white manager made those statements, there's no question he would find himself in a group that includes Al Campanis and Jimmy 'The Greek' Snyder," Edwards said.

Baker, one of four African-Americans among seven minority managers in the major leagues, agrees. "But as a black manager, I can say things about blacks that a white manager can't say, and whites can say things about whites that blacks can't say."

Baker said he won't address the issue any further. "People have accused me of being sensitive, but maybe they're too sensitive," he said. "I'm not elaborating on it any more. End of topic. I said what I mean."

M2
10-14-2007, 12:41 AM
I'm going to go on record as saying I don't mind this one bit.

I wouldn't have hired Baker and I'm sure this portends a slew of moves that I won't agree with one iota. That said, I've spent the past seven years disagreeing with what the Reds have been doing, so this is nothing new from my perspective.

What is different about it is that Baker probably means the Reds have concerted commitment to winning over the next three seasons. Moves are going to be made. Money is going to be spent. We're going to get the kind of go-for-it effort we haven't seen since the Jr. trade. It could be a disaster, but when you've got an old school owner and an old school GM you shouldn't expect them to act like the Red Sox braintrust. I don't have any argument with most of the criticisms made here about Dusty Baker, but he's close to the top of the heap when it comes to getting your 1970s on (and you can bet Bob Castellini goes to sleep counting big red mechanical sheep).

As edabbs astutely pointed out, this is THE guy they wanted. They have followed their instincts. While those aren't my instincts, for the first time in a long time I can at least recognize this isn't some sorry half measure. The Cincinnati Reds are going after it, hard. We knew who these guys were. For all the style points you might want to deduct, the commitment is impressive. And sometimes wanting it is more than half the battle.

MartyFan
10-14-2007, 12:46 AM
I'm going to go on record as saying I don't mind this one bit.

I wouldn't have hired Baker and I'm sure this portends a slew of moves that I won't agree with one iota. That said, I've spent the past seven years disagreeing with what the Reds have been doing, so this is nothing new from my perspective.

What is different about it is that Baker probably means the Reds are going to make a concerted commitment to winning over the next three seasons. Moves are going to be made. Money is going to be spent. We're going to get the kind of go-for-it effort we haven't seen since the Jr. trade. It could be a disaster, but when you've got an old school owner and an old school GM you shouldn't expect them to act like the Red Sox braintrust. I don't have any argument with most of the criticisms made here about Dusty Baker, but he's close to the top of the heap when it comes to getting your 1970s on (and you can bet Bob Castellini goes to sleep counting big red mechanical sheep).

As edabbs astutely pointed out, this is THE guy they wanted. They have followed their instincts. While those aren't my instincts, for the first time in a long time I can at least recognize this isn't some sorry half measure. The Cincinnati Reds are going after it, hard. We knew who these guys were. For all the style points you might want to deduct, the commitment is impressive. And sometimes wanting it is more than half the battle.

I agree...

RFS62
10-14-2007, 12:50 AM
I'm going to go on record as saying I don't mind this one bit.

I wouldn't have hired Baker and I'm sure this portends a slew of moves that I won't agree with one iota. That said, I've spent the past seven years disagreeing with what the Reds have been doing, so this is nothing new from my perspective.

What is different about it is that Baker probably means the Reds are going to make a concerted commitment to winning over the next three seasons. Moves are going to be made. Money is going to be spent. We're going to get the kind of go-for-it effort we haven't seen since the Jr. trade. It could be a disaster, but when you've got an old school owner and an old school GM you shouldn't expect them to act like the Red Sox braintrust. I don't have any argument with most of the criticisms made here about Dusty Baker, but he's close to the top of the heap when it comes to getting your 1970s on (and you can bet Bob Castellini goes to sleep counting big red mechanical sheep).

As edabbs astutely pointed out, this is THE guy they wanted. They have followed their instincts. While those aren't my instincts, for the first time in a long time I can at least recognize this isn't some sorry half measure. The Cincinnati Reds are going after it, hard. We knew who these guys were. For all the style points you might want to deduct, the commitment is impressive. And sometimes wanting it is more than half the battle.


Interesting take. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!!

jmcclain19
10-14-2007, 12:55 AM
Interesting take. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!!

Every year for as long as I can remember, football starting in August is a welcome break from the boring drag Reds baseball is every season.

If anything else, is sure as heck isn't going to be boring.

We may be talking rubbernecking the trainwreck here, but he beggars can't be too choosy.

westofyou
10-14-2007, 12:59 AM
At least he's not a former catcher... nor a a Mauch disciple.

First Reds manager since Lou to have played the OF throughout his career.

Has a record of having really good first seasons with his teams.

OnBaseMachine
10-14-2007, 01:00 AM
Goodbye Jay Bruce and Joey Votto. It was nice knowing you, but we don't like young players. Goodbye to the arms of Homer Bailey and Johnny Cueto. Goodbye Adam Dunn, your high OBP just clogs up the bases. Hello Juan Castro, the new starting 3B.

Phhhl
10-14-2007, 01:02 AM
I'm going to go on record as saying I don't mind this one bit.

I wouldn't have hired Baker and I'm sure this portends a slew of moves that I won't agree with one iota. That said, I've spent the past seven years disagreeing with what the Reds have been doing, so this is nothing new from my perspective.

What is different about it is that Baker probably means the Reds are going to make a concerted commitment to winning over the next three seasons. Moves are going to be made. Money is going to be spent. We're going to get the kind of go-for-it effort we haven't seen since the Jr. trade. It could be a disaster, but when you've got an old school owner and an old school GM you shouldn't expect them to act like the Red Sox braintrust. I don't have any argument with most of the criticisms made here about Dusty Baker, but he's close to the top of the heap when it comes to getting your 1970s on (and you can bet Bob Castellini goes to sleep counting big red mechanical sheep).

As edabbs astutely pointed out, this is THE guy they wanted. They have followed their instincts. While those aren't my instincts, for the first time in a long time I can at least recognize this isn't some sorry half measure. The Cincinnati Reds are going after it, hard. We knew who these guys were. For all the style points you might want to deduct, the commitment is impressive. And sometimes wanting it is more than half the battle.

I don't want to go all in like you, but that is kind of how I prefer to look at it. Maybe it portends comittment in other areas of the organization as well. I can only hope Baker was told there would be some money/philosophical changes coming. Otherwise, I can't understand why he would find this situation attractive to him at all. He's a west coast guy, he likes older players, used to a larger payroll, etc...

On the surface, I certainly don't disagree with anyone who believes this guy to be a horrible fit.

Stormy
10-14-2007, 01:07 AM
What is different about it is that Baker probably means the Reds are going to make a concerted commitment to winning over the next three seasons. Moves are going to be made. Money is going to be spent. We're going to get the kind of go-for-it effort we haven't seen since the Jr. trade. It could be a disaster, but when you've got an old school owner and an old school GM you shouldn't expect them to act like the Red Sox braintrust.

What you are advocating as the upside of this move, a concerted effort to 'go for it', is exactly my primary rationale for disliking the move. In this market, with this personnel, and in this current division the recipe for success should be to follow through with the development of the youthful talent that was already paying dividends.

Following Mac's ascent, we posted one of the better records in the division and league, and that was with heavy contributions from the young talent that should be counted upon to improve and replicate similar production (and which had already demonstrated an ability to shine under Pete). In a division where 10 games over .500 ball runs away and hides with the crown, Pete's 2 games over .500 with a previously 20 games under club, was positive traction.

A franchise like the Reds should be looking to clubs like Cleveland for innovative and forward thinking approaches to rebuilding, and as a how to guide to competing with the larger market competitors. Instead, we went 180 degrees in the opposite direction, favoring retro-backwards thinking, and the common man appeal of a familiar name and nostalgia, to good baseball philosophy.

The problem with this Owner and F.O. 'going for it' is precisely the fact that this is the type of signing that happens when they 'go for it'... Sign a manager who was 34 games under .500 in his last 2 NL Central seasons with a superiorly funded team, over a manager who just went 2 games over with the a lesser team in the same division. When these guys 'go for it' what do we get? When we went for it in mid-2006 Majewski was the center piece of wining now, along with Cormier, and Guardado. When we were ready to contend again going into 2007, it was the addition of Stanton, and Gonzo and Conine etc...

The right track was staying the course with allowing the young positional players, and bullpen hands to continue to blossom (Hamilton, Phillips, EdE, Votto, Bruce, Bailey, Cueto, Burton, Cout, Salmon etc...) and to then augment them with a little veteran rotation help, and a more stalwart bullpen enforcer or two. That, and good health, and we're in contention in the volatile NL Central. Instead, where will the shakeup lead? How far will we backtrack? How many bad moves, and how much youth development impeded, will take place in favor of veteran filler who plays Dusty's old school style of ball? Given Dusty's atrocious sense of pitcher/batter matchups, flat earth concepts of lineup construction, and starter usage, will anyone be placed in an optimal position to succeed?

My guess is that Pete handled the bullpen much better, cared for the arms of our key investments (Harang and Arroyo) much better, and handled youth development much better, than Baker ever will. And that the small, incremental gains we made throughout 2007 were likely all just flushed for the splash of a PR move that will go terribly awry.

IslandRed
10-14-2007, 01:09 AM
Someone who paid more attention back then than I did, tell me: Was Baker considered a hates-young-players pitcher-killer with the Giants, or did the bulk of the ridicule start with the Cubs?

M2
10-14-2007, 01:10 AM
I don't want to go all in like you,

I don't want the team to go all in. I'm pro rebuilding.

But the club needed to decide between the two and I'd say it's made its choice. Can't fault them for sitting on the fence.


Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!!

In a nutshell, yes. Figure out what it is you do and then do the hell out of it. If they fail at least they can say they gave it their best shot.

SteelSD
10-14-2007, 01:11 AM
Dusty Baker. Heh.

I wish I had no words. But I do. The Reds' new manager is a complete and total Milo in the worst way. He burns pitchers. The guy has no clue how offense actually works. To call him a narcissist would be kind. Frankly, I think this move speaks volumes about how completely clueless the current ownership and front office actually is.

Dusty Baker. Yeah. This is a guy who couldn't survive with a soulmate in Jim Hendry at the helm with a higher payroll franchise. The move here is idiotic at best. At best. At worst, it's a franchise killer.

The Reds ownership and management have now screwed things up because, as usual, they have no idea where they really are.

At this point, they are teh suck.

D-Man
10-14-2007, 01:12 AM
Four thoughts/questions:

1.) I don't see Bailey, Cueto, and Maloney living up to their hype at this point. Talented young pitchers like Jerome Williams and Kurt Ainsworth crapped out under Baker's watch. My hope is that the Reds cash in on the young pitchers now, trading them for key components of a championship team.

I am far less concerned with Arroyo and Harang because of their age and proven ability to handle 200+ innings. Jason Schmidt had several healthy ace-like years in SF; no reason to believe Arroyo and Harang can't carry a staff again.

2.) If you look at the history of final four basketball teams, whether the head coach had been in the final four was one of the big predictors of a team's chances of making it to the Final Four. I believe the same is true for baseball. . . Maybe not a direct analogy, but teams with more experienced managers generally perform better against pythogorean projected W-Ls. Baker has managed a team to the World Series, and he has had several successful years. I hope there is some residue of his experiences still left in this elixor.

3.) M2, I don't see how this move guarantees the Reds will spend cash. Has there been reports of increasing payroll? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this issue. If anything, I see them going with the young guys and churning them through the meat grinder rather than increasing payroll.

4.) Is the Dusty/bullpen mix toxic too? I recall he built some interesting bullpens in SF.

BuckeyeRedleg
10-14-2007, 01:13 AM
Dusty Baker. Heh.

I wish I had no words. But I do. The Reds' new manager is a complete and total Milo in the worst way. He burns pitchers. The guy has no clue how offense actually works. To call him a narcissist would be kind. Frankly, I think this move speaks volumes about how completely cluesless the current ownership and front office actually is.

Dusty Baker. Yeah. This is a guy who couldn't survive with a soulmate in Jim Hendry at the helm with a higher payroll franchise. The move here is idiotic at best. At best. At worst, it's a franchise killer.

The Reds ownership and management have now screwed things up because, as usual, they have no idea where they really are.

At this point, they are teh suck.

Amen.

M2
10-14-2007, 01:17 AM
What you are advocating as the upside of this move, a concerted effort to 'go for it', is exactly my primary rationale for disliking the move. In this market, with this personnel, and in this current division the recipe for success should be to follow through with the development of the youthful talent that was already paying dividends.

Following Mac's ascent, we posted one of the better records in the division and league, and that was with heavy contributions from the young talent that should be counted upon to improve and replicate similar production (and which had already demonstrated an ability to shine under Pete). In a division where 10 games over .500 ball runs away and hides with the crown, Pete's 2 games over .500 with a previously 20 games under club, was positive traction.

A franchise like the Reds should be looking to clubs like Cleveland for innovative and forward thinking approaches to rebuilding, and as a how to guide to competing with the larger market competitors. Instead, we went 180 degrees in the opposite direction, favoring retro-backwards thinking, and the common man appeal of a familiar name and nostalgia, to good baseball philosophy.

The problem with this Owner and F.O. 'going for it' is precisely the fact that this is the type of signing that happens when they 'go for it'... Sign a manager who was 34 games under .500 in his last 2 NL Central seasons with a superiorly funded team, over a manager who just went 2 games over with the a lesser team in the same division. When these guys 'go for it' what do we get? When we went for it in mid-2006 Majewski was the center piece of wining now, along with Cormier, and Guardado. When we were ready to contend again going into 2007, it was the addition of Stanton, and Gonzo and Conine etc...

The right track was staying the course with allowing the young positional players, and bullpen hands to continue to blossom (Hamilton, Phillips, EdE, Votto, Bruce, Bailey, Cueto, Burton, Cout, Salmon etc...) and to then augment them with a little veteran rotation help, and a more stalwart bullpen enforcer or two. That, and good health, and we're in contention in the volatile NL Central. Instead, where will the shakeup lead? How far will we backtrack? How many bad moves, and how much youth development impeded, will take place in favor of a veteran sack who plays Dusty's old school style of ball.

My guess is that Pete handled the bullpen much better, cared for the arms of our key investments (Harang and Arroyo) much better, and handled youth development much better, than Baker ever will. And that the small, incremental gains we made throughout 2007 were luikely all just flushed for the splash of a PR move that will go terribly awry.

Stormy, I don't disagree with any of that. What I'm saying is, that's not how Castellini and Krivsky think and they aren't going to start thinking that way even if it's 100% correct.

Honestly, what were the chances this franchise was going down a path I'd have chosen? Somewhere around nil would be my guess. But if they're going this way, Baker beats the pants off of Narron, Miley and Boone.

Aronchis
10-14-2007, 01:18 AM
Three thoughts:

1.) I don't see Bailey, Cueto, and Maloney living up to their hype at this point. Talented young pitchers like Jerome Williams and Kurt Ainsworth crapped out under Baker's watch. My hope is that the Reds cash in on the young pitchers now, trading them for key components of a championship team.

I am far less concerned with Arroyo and Harang because of their age and proven ability to handle 200+ innings. Jason Schmidt had several healthy ace-like years in SF; no reason to believe Arroyo and Harang can't carry a staff again.

2.) If you look at the history of final four basketball teams, whether the head coach had been in the final four was one of the big predictors of a team's chances of making it to the Final Four. I believe the same is true for baseball. . . Maybe not a direct analogy, but teams with more experienced managers generally perform better against pythogorean projected W-Ls. Baker has managed a team to the World Series, and he has had several successful years. I hope there is some residue of his experiences still left in this elixor.

3.) M2, I don't see how this move guarantees the Reds will spend cash. Has there been reports of increasing payroll? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this issue. If anything, I see them going with the young guys and churning them through the meat grinder rather than increasing payroll.

You cash them in and then they go on to stardom while the "cash" fails.

Maybe it is the young players themselves that got Baker's interest. That would be something. But guys like Bailey and Bruce are considered franchise talents. Something Ainsworth and crowd never were.

RedsManRick
10-14-2007, 01:18 AM
There are times when I hear people rag on the Reds and I want to fight back, defend their honor. As of today, I'm joining them. I've just lost all hope that this management team was intelligent and had a good plan. Just... uggh.

I'm embarrassed by this decision. It's like voting for a candidate only to find out later he's a KKK member and neo-nazi who kills kittens in his spare time. Now excuse me while I go cry myself to sleep.

BuckeyeRedleg
10-14-2007, 01:19 AM
Baker beats the pants off of Narron, Miley and Boone.

What about Mackanin?

RFS62
10-14-2007, 01:22 AM
Stormy, I don't disagree with any of that. What I'm saying is, that's not how Castellini and Krivsky think and they aren't going to start thinking that way even if it's 100% correct.

Honestly, what were the chances this franchise was going down a path I'd have chosen? Somewhere around nil would be my guess. But if they're going this way, Baker beats the pants off of Narron, Miley and Boone.



They're running the T Formation. We want the pro set. Ain't gonna happen, it appears.

I see both sides. M2, you and Stormy have summed it up extremely well, IMO.

RedsManRick
10-14-2007, 01:28 AM
Here's the problem with them "going for it", M2.

The Reds are throwing a Hail Mary and don't realize they're down 14, it's the middle of the 2nd quarter, and it's 3rd and 1 from their own 17.

I guess I see the positive in them choosing a direction and pursuing it. But I take no positive out of them pursuing a crappy direction.

M2
10-14-2007, 01:32 AM
Four thoughts/questions:

1.) I don't see Bailey, Cueto, and Maloney living up to their hype at this point. Talented young pitchers like Jerome Williams and Kurt Ainsworth crapped out under Baker's watch. My hope is that the Reds cash in on the young pitchers now, trading them for key components of a championship team.

I am far less concerned with Arroyo and Harang because of their age and proven ability to handle 200+ innings. Jason Schmidt had several healthy ace-like years in SF; no reason to believe Arroyo and Harang can't carry a staff again.

2.) If you look at the history of final four basketball teams, whether the head coach had been in the final four was one of the big predictors of a team's chances of making it to the Final Four. I believe the same is true for baseball. . . Maybe not a direct analogy, but teams with more experienced managers generally perform better against pythogorean projected W-Ls. Baker has managed a team to the World Series, and he has had several successful years. I hope there is some residue of his experiences still left in this elixor.

3.) M2, I don't see how this move guarantees the Reds will spend cash. Has there been reports of increasing payroll? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this issue. If anything, I see them going with the young guys and churning them through the meat grinder rather than increasing payroll.

4.) Is the Dusty/bullpen mix toxic too? I recall he built some interesting bullpens in SF.

1) It may not bode well for the long term success of those young pitchers, but Baker might be their ticket to one hit wonder status. Though don't count out one or more of them getting traded for veteran talent. Just a guess, but I'd imagine he'll prefer Cueto (who's a heady and composed pitcher by all accounts) to Bailey.

3) Nothing guarantees more money spent, but do you think Dusty Baker came to the Reds to manage a $60M roster? I don't. As for young players, that's not Baker's M.O. Probably the last thing you want is to bring in Dusty Baker and ask him not to be himself. I'm sure he's told this organization what he thinks he needs to win and I'm equally sure they've agreed to supply it.

4) I can't see Baker making the Reds bullpen worse. Over the past four seasons it's been the worst most of us have ever seen from this franchise.

M2
10-14-2007, 01:36 AM
Here's the problem with them "going for it", M2.

The Reds are throwing a Hail Mary and don't realize they're down 14, it's the middle of the 2nd quarter, and it's 3rd and 1 from their own 17.

I guess I see the positive in them choosing a direction and pursuing it. But I take no positive out of them pursuing a crappy direction.

Absolutely nowhere have you seen me say that I think this is going to work. I don't. Chances are it will be a spectacular and painful failure.

But even if the show sucks, at least they've got amps turned up to 11. It beats the unplugged sets we've endured in the 21st century.

I hear Cincinnati wants to party.

cincinnati chili
10-14-2007, 01:42 AM
This is a guy who a few years ago was discussed as being the best manager in the game:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/neyer_rob/1449940.html

As Rob Neyer points out in the link above, that was hyperbole. He wasn't THAT good.

But the hyperbole on this thread is worse. The Reds have hired their best manager since Davey Johnson. Baker has a .527 career winning percentage.

I would have chosen someone else, but I do think the Reds will be a better than .500 team by 2009.

RedsManRick
10-14-2007, 01:43 AM
Absolutely nowhere have you seen me say that I think this is going to work. I don't. Chances are it will be a spectacular and painful failure.

But even if the show sucks, at least they've got amps turned up to 11. It beats the unplugged sets we've endured in the 21st century.

I hear Cincinnati wants to party.

Heh, fair enough. I suppose this way either we lose and all feel vindicated saying that the team is run by a bunch of idiots or we win and... well... we'd win.

As a Chicagoan, I don't look forward to the incoming ridicule...

acredsfan
10-14-2007, 01:45 AM
Wow, you can really tell it's football season, whats with all the football references? Anyway, as a fan, this worries me. having said that, my love of the team is just that, for the team. I don't have to be a fan of the management or ownership to be a fan, this game is bigger than any of that, and my favorite team will be around for longer than any one human will run the team. I love this country, but I don't agree with the politicians that run it most of the time. I still follow and respect the fact that they are the leaders. Same goes for the Reds. We've endured Jimbo, Miley, Narron, Boone, and many many more people who were far from satisfactory, but I didn't lose my love for the reds. Hey, faces change and if Dusty fails then he will be gone with time, one thing that won't be gone as long as I have a say in it is my support of the Reds.

Also, I realize that I am not the one who made all the money to buy the team, and I don't have a position such as GM. There are reasons for that... Maybe I will be one of those some day, not likely, but whatever. Maybe I don't have a job as a GM because I don't have the "right connections" or maybe I just can't do that job. More likely it is because I am choosing a different career path. Anyway my point is, at some point you just have to come to the realization that even thought it may be simple from our point of view, we really don't know all the things that go into these decisions. If you want to have a say in it, then start building your resume and become a baseball executive, but until you do that you just have to go with it. If you are a fair weather fan then fine, it doesn't bug me, but man, people are acting like the world is ending when in 3 years we will have started a new chapter or we will be on top of the baseball world. Some people take the short term, pessimistic view but I will stick to my optimistic views and realize that if this turns into a nightmare it will be over soon in the big scheme of things.

M2
10-14-2007, 01:45 AM
As a Chicagoan, I don't look forward to the incoming ridicule...

At least they'll recognize the Reds exist for the first time in a long time.

Cyclone792
10-14-2007, 01:47 AM
But the hyperbole on this thread is worse. The Reds have hired their best manager since Davey Johnson. Baker has a .527 career winning percentage.

It's much easier to win when you have this in your lineup:


BARRY BONDS

1993-2002

YEAR TEAM AGE G AB R H 2B 3B HR HR% RBI BB SO SB CS AVG SLG OBA OPS
1993 Giants 28 159 539 129 181 38 4 46 8.53 123 126 79 29 12 .336 .677 .458 1.136
1994 Giants 29 112 391 89 122 18 1 37 9.46 81 74 43 29 9 .312 .647 .426 1.073
1995 Giants 30 144 506 109 149 30 7 33 6.52 104 120 83 31 10 .294 .577 .431 1.009
1996 Giants 31 158 517 122 159 27 3 42 8.12 129 151 76 40 7 .308 .615 .461 1.076
1997 Giants 32 159 532 123 155 26 5 40 7.52 101 145 87 37 8 .291 .585 .446 1.031
1998 Giants 33 156 552 120 167 44 7 37 6.70 122 130 92 28 12 .303 .609 .438 1.047
1999 Giants 34 102 355 91 93 20 2 34 9.58 83 73 62 15 2 .262 .617 .389 1.006
2000 Giants 35 143 480 129 147 28 4 49 10.21 106 117 77 11 3 .306 .688 .440 1.127
2001 Giants 36 153 476 129 156 32 2 73 15.34 137 177 93 13 3 .328 .863 .515 1.379
2002 Giants 37 143 403 117 149 31 2 46 11.41 110 198 47 9 2 .370 .799 .582 1.381
TOTALS 1429 4751 1158 1478 294 37 437 9.20 1096 1311 739 242 68 .311 .664 .461 1.126
LG AVERAGE 4473 633 1211 232 28 139 3.10 598 459 812 98 44 .271 .428 .342 .770
POS AVERAGE 4503 689 1229 241 30 177 3.92 668 517 874 113 49 .273 .458 .350 .808

YEAR TEAM RC RCAA RCAP OWP RC/G TB EBH ISO SEC BPA IBB HBP SAC SF GIDP OUTS PA POS
1993 Giants 172 108 99 .856 11.97 365 88 .341 .629 .740 43 2 0 7 11 388 674 LF
1994 Giants 115 62 57 .799 10.93 253 56 .335 .598 .738 18 6 0 3 3 284 474 LF
1995 Giants 133 66 59 .772 9.38 292 70 .283 .581 .671 22 5 0 4 12 383 635 LF
1996 Giants 162 90 80 .813 11.45 318 72 .308 .677 .729 30 1 0 6 11 382 675 LF
1997 Giants 151 77 76 .782 10.12 311 71 .293 .635 .696 34 8 0 5 13 403 690 LF
1998 Giants 152 77 77 .779 9.79 336 88 .306 .592 .682 29 8 1 6 15 419 697 LF
1999 Giants 91 40 34 .739 9.00 219 56 .355 .603 .696 9 3 0 3 6 273 434 LF
2000 Giants 154 88 83 .821 11.91 330 81 .381 .648 .745 22 3 0 7 6 349 607 LF
2001 Giants 228 169 153 .922 18.65 411 107 .536 .935 .907 35 9 0 2 5 330 664 LF
2002 Giants 206 161 150 .942 21.23 322 79 .429 .943 .869 68 9 0 2 4 262 612 LF
TOTALS 1564 938 868 .840 12.16 3157 768 .353 .680 .748 310 54 1 45 86 3473 6162
LG AVERAGE 665 0 0 .500 5.17 1915 398 .157 .282 .473 43 43 29 39 100 3473 5043
POS AVERAGE 740 74 0 .543 5.76 2060 448 .185 .325 .507 53 40 16 39 94 3473 5116

RedsManRick
10-14-2007, 01:48 AM
At least they'll recognize the Reds exist for the first time in a long time.

And we don't have listen to Dusty on baseball tonight. Oh wait... I stopped watching BBTN a long time ago...

I just want to get Baker and Morgan in the same room. Between their egos and complete lack of understanding on how baseball actually works, there could be some real fireworks. Maybe they'd think they were looking in a mirror and just get lost gazing in to each other's eyes.

Stormy
10-14-2007, 01:49 AM
Here's the problem with them "going for it", M2.

The Reds are throwing a Hail Mary and don't realize they're down 14, it's the middle of the 2nd quarter, and it's 3rd and 1 from their own 17.

Agreed, it's about the context of going for it. To take your analogy a step further: They're down 14 deep in their own territory, but they've just cut the lead in half by establishing their ground game, and are now opting to proceed to the hail mary route in short yardage situations. Such a move potentially negates every ounce of positive momentum gained since the jettison of Narron, and compounds it by reversing course and setting a new tack just as you're starting to make the first forward progress the franchise has seen in years.

Even if you don't think the reds were on the right track, or that they had made any strides in the past months, or that this signals a reversal of direction... even then, Dusty is a terrible fit for our personnel, and embodies every outdated and debunked managerial and organizational philosophy that this franchise should be moving away from like the plague. It only makes sense to me in the context of a visionless 'win now' owner who's out of his depths, hoping that making bold, sweeping gestures equals progress.

Sometimes it's better to tread water than it is to swim back in the direction of the wreckage that's taking everything under with it.

Stormy
10-14-2007, 01:51 AM
At least they'll recognize the Reds exist for the first time in a long time.

Which is about as vapid a concept as the value of Lou bringing recognition to Tampa Bay. This is an empty gesture towards winning from an owner who doesn't know the first thing about sound baseball strategy, but it might get highlights of our losses bumped into the first segment of Baseball Tonight. ;)

top6
10-14-2007, 01:51 AM
As others have said, I think I'm done with the Reds. This is the worst possible move they could have made. I really think that if Wayne and Cast had held a press conference and said, "to save money, we are not going to have a manager this year, and we are just going to have Scott Hatteberg be the manager," in all seriousness, that would have been a better move.

Our team just hired someone who thinks walks clog up the bases, and who thinks the Yankees teams of the 1990s didn't care about on base percentage. Just think about that. Seriously, that's totally indefensible.

I don't think I can spend money and support people who are this dumb. It's even worse than Mike Brown, in a way, because Mike Brown just cares about money, not winning. He's not dumb. He's a cheap sob, but if he could choose between two coaches who cost the same amount of money, all other things being equal he would take the coach who had the best chance to win. Cast, on the other hand, just spent far more money on a coach who gives them less chance to win. That's dumber than anything Mike Brown ever did.

I guess I'm just dragging this post on because it's probably the last think I'll post about the Reds for a while. I haven't followed them as much in recent years, but I have always cared. But I'm definitely done for now. Hopefully they'll trade Dunn and I can just root for whatever team he goes to. I guess I'll pull for the As next year if that doesn't happen - I'd like to see Billy Beane win one.

Anyway, good bye Reds, for now.

Cyclone792
10-14-2007, 01:54 AM
Absolutely nowhere have you seen me say that I think this is going to work. I don't. Chances are it will be a spectacular and painful failure.

But even if the show sucks, at least they've got amps turned up to 11. It beats the unplugged sets we've endured in the 21st century.

I hear Cincinnati wants to party.

Well I guess tanking with flair certainly is more exciting than tanking with boredom. :lol:

Then again, they're both still tanking anyway so the bottom line doesn't change.

Dusty Baker himself is actually less than half the reason why I can't stand this move. The larger reason is this move is a massive symbol of what the Reds organization really is. It's becoming clear to me that there's no forward thinking, there's no innovation, there's no positive visionary action.

This is precisely the type of move I'd expect from an organization that lives in the past, and if there's any one organization (and fanbase) that lives in the past in big league baseball today, it's the Cincinnati Reds.

KronoRed
10-14-2007, 01:58 AM
Per Castellini - the Reds are close - I think he honestly thinks this is the last piece the Reds need. I honestly would not be shocked if the Reds did little in the offseason due to this ridiculous optimism.

If so then Bob is a looney, could he really think that this group of players just needs the right coach and they will suddenly be a competitive bunch? :eek:

Stormy
10-14-2007, 02:01 AM
But the hyperbole on this thread is worse. The Reds have hired their best manager since Davey Johnson. Baker has a .527 career winning percentage.

I would hope so. Being blessed with a Top 3-5 Offense in every year between 1997-2002 with San Francisco, at the hands of multiple MVP candidates, and the NL's player of the decade, tends to help one's winning%.

M2
10-14-2007, 02:07 AM
Which is about as vapid a concept as the value of Lou bringing recognition to Tampa Bay. This is an empty gesture towards winning from an owner who doesn't know the first thing about sound baseball strategy, but it might get highlights of our losses bumped into the first segment of Baseball Tonight. ;)

I didn't say that's why the Reds hired him, just that Cubs fans will pay some attention the Reds as a byproduct of the move. I'm sure the Reds think this is really going to work, that good baseball will ensue.

I'm going to want to see who's on the team that takes the field in 2008 before I make any definitive pronouncements on that matter, but if pure old school can work then Baker's a good choice. He's no Jerry Narron. I'm willing to allow for "so crazy it might work" in this case, which is something I haven't been willing to put on the table for most other moves this century.


Dusty Baker himself is actually less than half the reason why I can't stand this move. The larger reason is this move is a massive symbol of what the Reds organization really is. It's becoming clear to me that there's no forward thinking, there's no innovation, there's no positive visionary action.

This is precisely the type of move I'd expect from an organization that lives in the past, and if there's any one organization (and fanbase) that lives in the past in big league baseball today, it's the Cincinnati Reds.

Didn't we already know that?

Cyclone792
10-14-2007, 02:20 AM
Didn't we already know that?

Sure we did, but at some point it has to change. Whether it's now, five years from now, 10 years from now, or 50 years from now. Even the Kansas City Royals appear to at least be taking baby steps to positive progress.

At some point the Reds have to take a turn for forward thinking, and until they do, they're likely to get their brains beat in by the teams willing to make that leap. Obviously continuing to get their brains beat in isn't any different than what we've seen for the past seven years, but it gets to a point where enough is enough. Watching an organization consistently lose is bad enough, but watching an organization actively taking steps to try to continue losing is even worse.

Wheelhouse
10-14-2007, 02:20 AM
Well, say hello to the absolute cellar. At least I'll save $200 not having to buy MLB Extra Innings next year. What a disappointment.

Cedric
10-14-2007, 02:20 AM
It's a terrible decision. Why are people acting surprised though? I had some hope with Krivsky until this though.

I still can't believe the people ditching the Reds though. I'm not one to brag about my fanship, but you aren't much of a Reds fan if that thought ever crossed your mind, IMO.

Ron Madden
10-14-2007, 02:22 AM
This is bad news.


It is also par for the course. :(

M2
10-14-2007, 02:28 AM
Cedric, Wheelhouse, I'm surprised you guys don't like the move. It would seem to be up your alley. You've both been fairly complimentary of the Dusty Baker wannabes the Reds have cycled through the manager's office, I'd figure getting the real thing would be seen as a positive move.

What is it you guys think is lacking in Baker's approach to the game?

Cedric
10-14-2007, 02:36 AM
Cedric, Wheelhouse, I'm surprised you guys don't like the move. It would seem to be up your alley. You've both been fairly complimentary of the Dusty Baker wannabes the Reds have cycled through the manager's office, I'd figure getting the real thing would be seen as a positive move.

What is it you guys think is lacking in Baker's approach to the game?

I hope I'm not lumped into a certain category here. I can't think of one good thing I said about Jerry Narron, Dave Miley, or Bob Boone's baseball philosophy. Their philosophy was against everything I believe in baseball. I wanted everyone one of them gone probably before 90% of the fan base.

I don't think I should be lumped into the old tobacco spitting, play the game the right way group. But whatever.

I guess some of us that that don't lean 100% new age get a label whether it's factual or not.

Sorry if that sounds defensive. But I frankly don't know what the hell you are talking about.

redsfan4445
10-14-2007, 02:38 AM
maybe Baker took the job ONLY because BOB promised to spend some money to win!!

wheels
10-14-2007, 02:38 AM
I'd never revoke my fanship, but this doesn't make me laugh one bit.

There is nothing funny about this move. Not even a little bit.

I'm also not much into praying, but if there is some kinda devine spirit, I would hope someone could invoke the name so the next annoncement will be that they've hired Jocketty.

I'm as despondant as I've ever been. It seems hopeless at this point.

This is worse than the Milton signing by leaps and bounds, and I'm struggling for something to say.

The Power of Tradition, they say.

I say......Bffftttttt!

M2
10-14-2007, 02:47 AM
I hope I'm not lumped into a certain category here. I can't think of one good thing I said about Jerry Narron, Dave Miley, or Bob Boone's baseball philosophy. Their philosophy was against everything I believe in baseball. I wanted everyone one of them gone probably before 90% of the fan base.

I don't think I should be lumped into the old tobacco spitting, play the game the right way group. But whatever.

I guess some of us that that don't lean 100% new age get a label whether it's factual or not.

Sorry if that sounds defensive. But I frankly don't know what the hell you are talking about.

My apologies, I always thought your bent was fundamentals based, situational hitting, slap some leather around, run the bases aggressively, play the game don't overthink it.

And I'm not using those ideas as pejoratives, quite the opposite in fact.

I'm looking through your past posts and I notice you recently praised the direction Krivsky was taking the franchise. Aren't those things I just typed that direction in a nutshell?

Wheelhouse
10-14-2007, 02:51 AM
Cedric, Wheelhouse, I'm surprised you guys don't like the move. It would seem to be up your alley. You've both been fairly complimentary of the Dusty Baker wannabes the Reds have cycled through the manager's office, I'd figure getting the real thing would be seen as a positive move.

What is it you guys think is lacking in Baker's approach to the game?

How about the fact that Baker was a loser with a very powerful Cubs roster his last two years there. The Cubs board is rolling in the aisles over this one. Baker is not a smart manager and he appeases players. Not "old school" in my book. I'm not praising this move. Especially with the possibility Torre or LaRussa could be available and the fact that Girardi is.

wheels
10-14-2007, 02:51 AM
My apologies, I always thought your bent was fundamentals based, situational hitting, slap some leather around, run the bases aggressively, play the game don't overthink it.

And I'm not using those ideas as pejoratives, quite the opposite in fact.

I'm looking through your past posts and I notice you recently praised the direction Krivsky was taking the franchise. Aren't those things I just typed that direction in a nutshell?


I'm not reading him that way.

Mainly, he calls things as he sees them, and he doesn't really have a specific bent.

He's brutally honest and he has no sacred cows.

But really. This is a move that transcends methodoligy and dogma. We shouldn't be surprised by any amount of rancor portrayed here.

pedro
10-14-2007, 02:54 AM
You know, I'm not as upset about this as I thought I'd be. Considering the options on the table anyway. I'm frightful of the way he handles pitchers, but I've always generally liked the way he was able to get the most out of his fringe players a la Earl Weaver.

Cedric
10-14-2007, 02:55 AM
My apologies, I always thought your bent was fundamentals based, situational hitting, slap some leather around, run the bases aggressively, play the game don't overthink it.

And I'm not using those ideas as pejoratives, quite the opposite in fact.

I'm looking through your past posts and I notice you recently praised the direction Krivsky was taking the franchise. Aren't those things I just typed that direction in a nutshell?

Whatever, I don't need to hijack the thread with my sensitivity. But you said I was fairly complimentary of the crapiness of Bob Boone, Dave Miley, and Jerry Narron. That is offensive to anyone with half a brain.

I do believe in taking the extra base and playing fundamental baseball. I'm also in favor of Norris Hopper never leading off and Adam Dunn never hitting 6th. I'd also never pinch hit Scott Hatteberg for Edwin Encarnacion with the bases loaded like Narron did in 06. I almost charged the dugout.


I have no idea what that has to do with Wayne Krivsky and the way I feel he is actually developing talent in the minor league system.

M2
10-14-2007, 03:11 AM
How about the fact that Baker was a loser with a very powerful Cubs roster his last two years there.

Oh, that was a dog of roster. Bad pitching, an OB-free lineup. Those clubs were born to lose. Mind you, they were what Baker asked for.

gm
10-14-2007, 03:42 AM
They were who we THOUGHT they were, and we let 'em off the hook!

Nutty Perfesser flashback.

As a lifelong Reds/Vikings fan, the Baker hire takes me back a few years to the Denny Green era. You could always count on Green's team making it to the playoffs. Heck, they even had a helluva regular season in '98. But when push came to shove, Denny would get that "deer in the headlights look" and take a knee when the situation called for Cunningham to Moss.

It's not the inevitable old school arguments that trouble me. It's knowing I've been down this road before and how it feels to get your hopes up, only to have your heart ripped out and handed back to you.

Brace yourselves, Red's fans. This roller coaster ride has started before the maintenance crew had time to finish their inspection.

Tom Servo
10-14-2007, 03:43 AM
I did a little digging and rather quickly found some something from Dusty's SF days that goes as more evidence of his pitcher-killer reputation.


Russ Ortiz and Livan Hernandez are holding up bravely but perilously against Dusty Baker's macho arm-slagging. Both are quiet warriors and good soldiers, and as such Dusty will reward them with a suicide mission of 130-pitch outings.

M2
10-14-2007, 03:53 AM
Just as an aside, if you're small market team perhaps it makes sense to ride whip hand on your pitchers. You're probably going to lose a lot of guys via free agency (if they're good). If so, then why not use 'em like crazy while you've got them and let someone else pay for the aftermath?

Obviously rookies and guys with lengthy contracts don't fit into that mix so well, but say Matt Belisle took a leap forward or that the Reds traded for a guy who has two years until free agency. In those cases it would seem that getting a peak season would be the ideal.

pedro
10-14-2007, 03:55 AM
Just as an aside, if you're small market team perhaps it makes sense to ride whip hand on your pitchers. You're probably going to lose a lot of guys via free agency (if they're good). If so, then why not use 'em like crazy while you've got them and let someone else pay for the aftermath?

Obviously rookies and guys with lengthy contracts don't fit into that mix so well, but say Matt Belisle took a leap forward or that the Reds traded for a guy who has two years until free agency. In those cases it would seem that getting a peak season would be the ideal.

THAT, is a pretty interesting perspective.

fearofpopvol1
10-14-2007, 03:58 AM
for some fun, read here...

http://myespn.go.com/s/conversations/show/story/3062658

pedro
10-14-2007, 04:07 AM
You know no one has said it here but I'd just like to say that on a certain level I couldn't be more pleased that the Reds hired a man of color to be their manager. In fact Cincinnati might be the first city (I can't think of any others anyway) to have non white managers/coaches for both it's professional sports teams and that's not an awful thing IMO.

gm
10-14-2007, 04:15 AM
You know no one has said it here but I'd just like to say that on a certain level I couldn't be more pleased that the Reds hired a man of color to be their manager. In fact Cincinnati might be the first city (I can't think of any others anyway) to have non white managers/coaches for both it's professional sports teams and that's not an awful thing IMO.


Cubs, Baker
Sox, Guillen
Bears, Smith

I'm sure there's more, but the Windy City came to mind

Razor Shines
10-14-2007, 04:19 AM
You know no one has said it here but I'd just like to say that on a certain level I couldn't be more pleased that the Reds hired a man of color to be their manager. In fact Cincinnati might be the first city (I can't think of any others anyway) to have non white managers/coaches for both it's professional sports teams and that's not an awful thing IMO.

While not at the same time, the Pacers had Isaiah Thomas and have Tony Dungy, but honestly I could not care less about their color. I want the best coaches for the job, and it doesn't appear that either guy in Cincinnati is that. It's not an awful thing that they're both black, it's awful that they both seem to be bad coaches. (I'm not a Bengals fan so it's not awful to me)

Caveat Emperor
10-14-2007, 04:41 AM
It's worse...

I've spent the last few nights watching playoff baseball -- you know, the thing where teams that post top records get to play additional games after the end of the regular season...and it seems to me that Boston, Cleveland, Colorado, and Arizona are all doing just fine with guys that were never "Big Name" managers prior to getting their gigs.

Being a fan of this franchise is beyond frustrating. It's like everyone else in the major leagues is playing Monopoly and the Reds are the moronic cousin shouting out "You sunk my Battleship!" every time their turn comes. Whenever an opportunity arises for this team to follow the path that other small/mid markets have traveled to success they choose to wander in the opposite direction.

Welcome to Cincinnati, Dusty. Another in a long line of self-inflicted gunshot wounds to the face.

Ltlabner
10-14-2007, 07:39 AM
With the execptions of the injuries to Dunn, Jr and Hamilton, I really felt the end of the 07 season showed some signs of hope for the team. There were positive signs of advancement for the orginization. They might have been small signs, and certinaly don't guarentee actuall sucess, but the Reds felt like they had some "momentum" going into the offseason. Very hard to measure, I admit, but it seemed like they had something to work with.

All of Bakers short-commings have been clearly spelled out. My biggest sense of dissapointment centers around a couple of things...

The presser will be so full of faux-excitment it will make you gag. It's sorta like when a couple that has no business even considering marriage and then decide to get married. The people at the ceremony all pretend to be happy and wishing them the best, while the pall in the air is "this is a disaster". I fail to see how having a manager with a big name will be any reason for the fan-base at large to get excited. Yet, we'll be told over and over how excited we should be, and how this move will vault us into competition, etc etc.

Speed of the process. Certinatally it shouldn't linger until a day before spring training, but we were promised a complete and exaustive search. Yet, the world series hasn't even started, let alone ended and we are done. Apparently PMac was never even interviewed (based on the information available). And you don't know what other managers might become availble in early off-season moves. Just seems very implusive.

Lastly, I agree with M2. I think this portends a flurry of moves. Unfortunatley I suddenly have no trust that they will be *good* moves. I also agree that this smacks of a BCast move, which signals a lack of confidence in Krivsky. It's also protraying BCast as a more medelsome owner than he did previously. If this is actually the case, then Dusty will likely have some serrious pull in what players we target. That doesn't instill any confidence.

traderumor
10-14-2007, 07:54 AM
Aaron Harang better start doing some arm strengthening exercises.

Toothpick manufacturers all over the Tri-State area are working now on presentations to become the official toothpick of the Cincinnati Reds. I bet you there will be a container, Red ones with Mr. Red on the side, right next to the sunflower seeds in the dugout, plus replicas on sale in the souvenier stands.

traderumor
10-14-2007, 08:01 AM
Another thing to consider: Dusty did have some horses that could get guys out, which is part of why he rode them hard. Here, that shouldn't be such a problem because no one can get anyone out, save for Harang.

Other thoughts: Mark Prior is made of glass, he probably comes up lame anywhere. Kerry Wood is the one I think Dusty is most responsible for from that crew. He had a known injury history and accumulated high pitch counts very fast. I consider Dusty to be more culpable on that one.

sonny
10-14-2007, 08:06 AM
I'm not terribly put off by this move. Perhaps The FO knows something we don't. We did not sit in on the interview process, BCast and WK know what we know about Dusty (even more) and Dusty does have a certain degree of success at this level. My main concern is the coaches that he'll be bringing along with him. That will be paramount in the development of a winning team.

Also, the Cincinnati toothpick stock with rise exponentially. Get it now while the price is low.

Ltlabner
10-14-2007, 08:11 AM
Comments from the cubs.com website...


This is great news for the already weak NL Central, I am glad to see there is another idiot GM besides ours.


LOL, absolutely horrible move by the Reds. They could have kept their interim manager and developed their youth while trading away old vets to get better for the future. Sadly, the Baker era has started. Expect him to recreate the Cub fiasco minus the 2 winning seasons.

GAC
10-14-2007, 08:25 AM
That's it for me then. I said this below, and I'm sticking with it.


If they hire Dusty Baker then this longtime Red's fan is finally gonna switch his allegiance to the Indians over the Reds, until the day they fire the guy. I can't stand the man!

That toothpick knawing jerkweed ain't done jack as a manager except misplay, mis-manage, and waste what talent (including arms) that he has had, while making excuses. Nuff said.

I'd rather follow a Wahoo then a Yahoo.

The hiring of Dusty Baker shows me this FO ain't got what it takes, and they ain't getting a dime of my money next year. It's all going north to an organization that seems to know what it's doing.

Dusty Baker? Geez!

I love the Reds, and will still follow them avidly; but I love even more watching the game of baseball (especially quality baseball). And I'm not seeing any indication that it's gonna happen soon in Cincy with this hiring.

Simply assinine.

SunDeck
10-14-2007, 08:25 AM
Maybe the good news here for everyone who's hating this move is that Lou Pinella will be here in 2010 after Dusty runs the ship into an iceberg. Oh wait, this team is already on an iceberg.

I'm not thrilled about this move, but I'm also not convinced it foreshadows a franchise in ruins. Seriously, how much worse should things have to have been over the last seven years to show people that this franchise is a mess? I remain optimistic that the Reds are building a stronger franchise; one that will produce a major league club that hits, pitches and fields well...all things that I don't think any manager can do by himself.

But the real reason I am not particularly thrilled about this move is this- I thought Pete deserved a shot at it. I would prefer that they treat next year as a time to continue heading in the direction that they were, immediately post-Narron. Of course, I suppose that's what we would all say they were doing at the beginning of the last two years, too. I just had a different feel for what Mack brought to the club as opposed to Miley and Narron.

Eric_Davis
10-14-2007, 08:28 AM
Rotoworld's opinion:


"The Reds got the big name they wanted. That’s about the only nice thing we can say about this. The Reds may be more likely to dump Adam Dunn now, as he does nothing more than clog up the bases with his walks. Also, we worry about what will happen to Joey Votto if he doesn’t get off to a hot start next year. Baker values experience about as much as any manager in baseball, and he loves speed, which could mean that Ryan Freel will get a lot of at-bats at the expense of Josh Hamilton or Edwin Encarnacion."

As you can see, disaster looms throughout the organization with this move.

I'd rather have Bob Boone in a heartbeat.

Eric_Davis
10-14-2007, 08:34 AM
I was living in the Bay Area attending Giants games the years Roger Craig was in charge and watched him ruin an organization's entire staff of pitchers, both young and old. Dusty Baker learned to manage the same way. I hated him as a Dodger and hated him more as the inept manager that he is.

Krivsky just lost all my support for not putting his foot down and saying, "Not a chance in hell!". Give me Tom Trebelhorn before Baker. Give me anyone on this planet before Baker.

membengal
10-14-2007, 08:35 AM
I'ts not so much Dusty managing the team that worries me. It's what it signals about the organization that is so troubling. I have a feeling it's going to be a long time until we see a Reds organization capable of competing in the modern age of baseball.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell right there.

StillFunkyB
10-14-2007, 08:37 AM
Poop on a stick I say.

Same old M.O. for this front office.

I love rooting for teams that lose for decades at a time.

membengal
10-14-2007, 08:38 AM
First time since I adopted the Reds at 5 years of age that I've been tempted to temporarily turn my back on the franchise. How utterly, and totally, disheartening. This is a telltale that BCast likes to make an indiscriminate splash, not based on merit but upon name recognition. No wonder we shell out for past their prime vets with name recognition, over more talented, less expensive alternatives.

Cleveland might be headed to the World Series with youngsters, and a guy named Wedge as their head coach. We need innovation in the F.O. and amidst the scouting ranks, not a splashy manager and an antiquated F.O. philosophy.

My optimism for this team steadily heading in the right direction the past 3-4 months is utterly dashed, and I'm guessing we'll now hit rock bottom before ever rebounding. I'm sorry in advance for Harang and Arroyo (thanks for the good years), and for Bailey's imminent demise.

And, as usual, Stormy all over the point as well.

I woke up to this news this morning. It's like being punched square in the unmentionables as you are walking down the street minding your own business.

Unless Baker has been specifically told to handle pitchers differently than he has in the past, this is a border-line undefensible hiring for an organization that counts its pennies and desperately needs pitchers to be good, develop, and live up to contracts.

Bizarre.

Oh, and nice "search".

lollipopcurve
10-14-2007, 08:45 AM
Oh, the squawking.

You don't think Baker is going to want the beat Cubs, bad? If Jocketty comes, you don't think he's going to want to stick it to the Cards?

Castellini is upping the ante, bringing in guys who have chips on the shoulders and winning backgrounds. It's clear to me that he thinks changing the culture of the organization -- from the front office to the field -- is too much for Krivsky to do on his own, and that may or may not be an indictment of the GM, I don't know. So, he's shocking the system with big-name outsiders.

There are questions about Baker, sure, but I look at his track record and see a guy who has done well the majority of the time. Same with Jocketty. I look at the Reds of the last 12 years, and I see a lot of losing. You don't think Castellini knows a thing or two about becoming successful?

I'm all for seeing how this shakes out, because it's seismic.

StillFunkyB
10-14-2007, 08:46 AM
And, as usual, Stormy all over the point as well.

I woke up to this news this morning. It's like being punched square in the unmentionables as you are walking down the street minding your own business.

Unless Baker has been specifically told to handle pitchers differently than he has in the past, this is a border-line undefensible hiring for an organization that counts its pennies and desperately needs pitchers to be good, develop, and live up to contracts.

Bizarre.

Oh, and nice "search".

Yeah, the "punch" reference is what I felt like when I got home from KI last night and read this.

GAC
10-14-2007, 08:57 AM
Oh, the squawking.

You don't think Baker is going to want the beat Cubs, bad? If Jocketty comes, you don't think he's going to want to stick it to the Cards?

There's a difference between wanting to and being able to.



I'm all for seeing how this shakes out, because it's seismic.

It's seismic alright. Like straddling the San Andreas Fault. ;)

mth123
10-14-2007, 09:04 AM
Another thing to consider: Dusty did have some horses that could get guys out, which is part of why he rode them hard. Here, that shouldn't be such a problem because no one can get anyone out, save for Harang.

Other thoughts: Mark Prior is made of glass, he probably comes up lame anywhere. Kerry Wood is the one I think Dusty is most responsible for from that crew. He had a known injury history and accumulated high pitch counts very fast. I consider Dusty to be more culpable on that one.

I kind of agree. Wood had already had TJ surgery prior to Dusty's arrival and his career high in innings pitched actually occurred the year before Baker arrived. I think both Prior and Wood would have been hurt whether Baker was there or not.

I'm personally in the wait and see, unsure camp. I know that Dusty has publicly stated his disdain for walks, but Bonds sure walked a lot and on those teams opposing pitchers went straight after everyone else as part of the plan to avoid Bonds. Baker should want them to swing in that situation. I want to wait and see if this is really an issue or a simply an outrageous quote to make a point and slap at some critics.

So what will the implications be?

Will the team raise its payroll to allow its new manager to thrive? If so, overpaying for a vet starter who can log lots of mediocre innings may not be the bad idea we all have been saying it is. Might we see Livan Hernandez, Jon Lieber or even Josh Fogg eating innings in the middle of the rotation? Assuming that no corresponding reductions in payroll will be required, it wouldn't be the worst thing. Of course if it means that Dunn's option is declined to pay for it then it would be a horrible move.

Will we see speedy types at the top of the order? Will Freel and Hopper be manning CF daily as the lead-off options a la Juan Pierre? If so, lets hope we get a rebound in Freel's OBP. If that occurs, what happens to Josh Hamilton?

Do the Reds stick with Griffey an extra year and invoke his option while Jay Bruce languishes in the minors?

Who plays 1B? Hatte is a vet, but he is also a base clogging walk dependent offensive player - something Dusty supposedly disdains. Votto is a "hated" young player who also walks a lot, but is less a base clogger and has some "swing the bat" pop in his favor. If the reputation is true, Baker's head may explode trying to decide between the two.

Does Baker bring in any of his former associates? Does Cincy become a place for a year of Barry Bonds? Do the Reds refuse Dunn's option and give Bonds the money instead? Bonds stated a desire to play with Griffey and with Baker aboard, the commitment probably only for a year and Dunn's money available for financing, it may not be so far out of the realm of possibility. (Let me say I want Dunn long term and Griffey to go with Hammy and Bruce in the OF and the money going toward pitching.)

Does Baker's presence make cincy a player for vet free agents? Baseball is full of cronyism and most players aren't as analytical as the fans on this board. Baker being here may make players consider cincy when they wouldn't look this direction in the past.

Does Baker's hiring put to rest the Jocketty rumors? Seems that Jocketty would want to be involved in the process if he was coming.


If the reputation is true we may see:

1. Dunn's option declined.
2, Bailey, Arroyo and maybe Cueto all on the DL (though Cueto may stay in the minors long enough to esape the overuse until he's built up to it).
3. Votto, Hamilton and Bruce all langusihing in supporting part-time or minor league roles while mediocre vets (Freel, Hopper and Griffey for example) man the OF and Hatte or the like plays 1B.
4. Mike Stanton becomes a centerpiece and gets enough appearances to guarantee his 2009 option is invoked.
5. Eddie Guardado's option invoked.

or maybe its overblown and the Red's young talent is what lured Baker in the first place and we'll see:

1. Griffey and Freel phased out with Bruce and Hamilton taking center stage.
2. Votto at 1B and productive.
3. Bailey and Cueto productive members of the rotation for years to come.
4. A solid vet acquired for the inning eater role to save the pen and make it less necessary to extend the young guys.

I'm guessing we'll probably get a little of column A and a little of column B. I'm not ready to jump ship over this and am kind of excited to see what happens based mostly on my thinking that Baker wouldn't have agreed without some information on the Reds intent to improve. Of course if the very smart people on this board that are calling this a huge mistake are correct, I'll be complaining as loudly as anyone. I think Dunn's option may be the most immediate indication of how things are going to go.

Ltlabner
10-14-2007, 09:15 AM
If Dusty is as anti-walk as his past comments indicate, it's not unreasonable to assume he's going to be whispering into every players ear to go to the plate and swing more.

There's already too many free-swingers, and flail at the first pitch guys on the club. A line up with Freel, Ross and AGon swinging away at every last pitch isn't a good thing. Dunn had a fantastic season in 2007. Assuming he's back in 2008 the last thing he needs is someone pressuring him to swing at more junk and "be more agressive". Brandon Phillips, who has a tendency to swing-for-the-fences anyway, certianlly doesn't need someone pushing him to swing more wildly. Let EE do his thing if he's doing well. But if he gets off to another slow start you can count on him being banished. Except this time it woln't be to get his attention (and the position is his again when he gets his head on straight)...it will likely be for good.

Those most in jeprody; young players with good/decent OBP's. Hamilton and Votto especially. Might as well plan on them being targeted for "taking too many walks" and "not being agressive".

osuceltic
10-14-2007, 09:18 AM
This a move toward legitimacy. They're not swimming in the shallow end anymore. Dusty Baker has a lot of winning on his resume. He has managed some very difficult clubhouses (something that will serve him well in this job) and taken some teams without great talent to the postseason.

This move says "we're not the Pirates."

Everyone seems worried about Dusty preferring veterans over young players. Who cares? Your thinking is the same thing that had Rich Aurilia in a walker when he arguably was the MVP of this team last season. This is the big leagues. You don't get extra credit for doing it with kids. Besides, I'd hazard a guess that Dusty finds room for impact youngsters. I don't think he's going to bury Jay Bruce behind an inferior player.

Everyone against this hire, I hope you're willing to step up and say "I was wrong" if Dusty takes us to the playoffs.

KittyDuran
10-14-2007, 09:24 AM
Everyone against this hire, I hope you're willing to step up and say "I was wrong" if Dusty takes us to the playoffs.FAT CHANCE! But you will hear a lot of crickets chirping...:)

membengal
10-14-2007, 09:25 AM
Sure OSU and Kitty, why not? I've been up front about things I've been wrong on in the past (Milton signing, Aurilia's usage), so why duck it now?

But right back at both of you if works out like I think it will...

KittyDuran
10-14-2007, 09:27 AM
Sure OSU and Kitty, why not? I've been up front about things I've been wrong on in the past (Milton signing, Aurilia' usage), so why duck it now?

But right back at both of you if works out like I think it will...I have NO problem admitting I'm wrong - better yet come up from Memphis and I'll buy you dinner at Arnie's if you're right that Dusty will ruin Dunn, make the pitcher's arms fall off, give the veterans (even if they're awful) more time playing than rookies, etc.

WAIT! Hasn't that already happened??? :)

membengal
10-14-2007, 09:31 AM
I have NO problem admitting I'm wrong - better yet come up from Memphis and I'll buy you dinner at Arnie's if you're right that Dusty will ruin Dunn, make the pitcher's arms fall off, give the veterans (even if they're awful) more time playing than rookies, etc.

WAIT! Hasn't that already happened??? :)

Fair enough, Kitty. As for your last line, I consider that die cast and the path toward that result already being trod...

And if I'm wrong, c'mon down to Memphis and watch the Reds in the their road NLDS game while eating ribs at the Rendeouz with me and the missus.

GAC
10-14-2007, 09:33 AM
FAT CHANCE! But you will hear a lot of crickets chirping...:)

Uh no. Anything is possible. And it's not like I haven't been wrong before either. ;)

But I don't see it with Baker at all. What has Baker got, looking at his history and managerial style, that shows people, buoys their optimism, that he's going to come in here and turn this team around? Because he's "big name"? Knows how to win? Gets players to perform for him?

Did I leave out any cliches that we all endear to? :D

jojo
10-14-2007, 09:33 AM
This is a guy who a few years ago was discussed as being the best manager in the game:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/neyer_rob/1449940.html

As Rob Neyer points out in the link above, that was hyperbole. He wasn't THAT good.

But the hyperbole on this thread is worse. The Reds have hired their best manager since Davey Johnson. Baker has a .527 career winning percentage.

I would have chosen someone else, but I do think the Reds will be a better than .500 team by 2009.

I think people are reading into the hire to see what it says about the Reds "plan" and philosophy. To many in this thread, hiring Baker to run the current version of the Reds is something like hiring Jeff Gordon to drive Ms Daisy. Basically Baker seems miscast for what appeared to be a role where the Reds go forth with a youth movement that includes significant playing time (and probably significant growing pains) for some highly thought of prospects.

Dusty has proven he can win with talent. That said, I tend to think the impact of managers is generally overrated. Most will win with talent and struggle with flawed rosters. I'm not sure many in history have been able to consistently win with no talent. So it boils down to whether your manager has a style that fits with where you roster currently is (and where you see yourself going) or does he have tendencies that could hurt what you're trying to do? Dusty has never been known as a guy who puts up with growing pains and he has a well-earned reputation as a butcher of pitching staffs. It's possible that he'll have no choice but to play youth and he could always pull a Piniella (another arm butcher) and abdicate his control of the staff to a quality pitching coach. This doesn't have to be disaster but it does seem like forcing a square peg into a round hole (in part for the sake of signaling a commitment to winning?). Will he adapt to the Reds roster? Will he decimate it by killing the Reds young arms and stagnating their youth (how about Bruce as a defensive replacement in '08?) or will the Reds reshape their roster via trade and free agency to suit Dusty?

To many, this is a frustrating hire. The Reds had a chance to go a new direction, "new school" in a sense where they follow models like Cleveland, Boston etc. But now with Baker's hire and talk of reshaping the FO with Jocketty, it seems clearer that the Reds are more apt to chase a more traditional approach which at least IMHO, is full of inefficiencies that many smart clubs have recognized and begun to exploit expertly.

What happened the last time a Baker-run team had bullpen issues? The Cubs dramatically overreached in free agency to give him a retooled, expensive pen he still couldn't win with....Jocketty was basically forced out of St Louis because they have begun emphasizing a melding of stats and scouting while decidedly relying more on player development.

Where does this leave Cincy? They've made some strides with player development (but are they sustainable ones?), picked up some nice additions for their 25 man roster by exploiting undervalued commodities (Arroyo, Phillips, Hamilton) but have been clueless regarding free agency. On the whole, I think we should wonder if they have a coherent organisational philosophy in place that will lead to consistent winning (TeamClark has eloquently questioned (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1479721&postcount=20) this multiple times) or are they simply pecking around at the margins in what amounts to jogging on a treadmill as other teams are running full steam ahead?

I'm thinking that we're looking at a franchise that may get lucky once in a while (i suck at darts but still hit the bullseye occasionally), but I'm not convinced that they'll make their own luck consistently...

GAC
10-14-2007, 09:40 AM
I'm going out and buy a dog just so I have something to kick!

Krusty
10-14-2007, 09:59 AM
I can live with Dusty Baker as a manager as long as he doesn't have pitchers throwing 150 pitches in a game.

If I'm Krivsky the first question I ask is how many pitches Baker should allow a pitcher to throw in a game even if that pitcher is pitching solidly.

KittyDuran
10-14-2007, 10:00 AM
I think people are reading into the hire to see what it says about the Reds "plan" and philosophy. To many in this thread, hiring Baker to run the current version of the Reds is something like hiring Jeff Gordon to drive Ms Daisy. Basically Baker seems miscast for what appeared to be a role where the Reds go forth with a youth movement that includes significant playing time (and probably significant growing pains) for some highly thought of prospects.

Dusty has proven he can win with talent. That said, I tend to think the impact of managers is generally overrated. Most will win with talent and struggle with flawed rosters. I'm not sure many in history have been able to consistently win with no talent. So it boils down to whether your manager has a style that fits with where you roster currently is (and where you see yourself going) or does he have tendencies that could hurt what you're trying to do? Dusty has never been known as a guy who puts up with growing pains and he has a well-earned reputation as a butcher of pitching staffs. It's possible that he'll have no choice but to play youth and he could always pull a Piniella (another arm butcher) and abdicate his control of the staff to a quality pitching coach. This doesn't have to be disaster but it does seem like forcing a square peg into a round hole (in part for the sake of signaling a commitment to winning?). Will he adapt to the Reds roster? Will he decimate it by killing the Reds young arms and stagnating their youth (how about Bruce as a defensive replacement in '08?) or will the Reds reshape their roster via trade and free agency to suit Dusty?

To many, this is a frustrating hire. The Reds had a chance to go a new direction, "new school" in a sense where they follow models like Cleveland, Boston etc. But now with Baker's hire and talk of reshaping the FO with Jocketty, it seems clearer that the Reds are more apt to chase a more traditional approach which at least IMHO, is full of inefficiencies that many smart clubs have recognized and begun to exploit expertly.

What happened the last time a Baker-run team had bullpen issues? The Cubs dramatically overreached in free agency to give him a retooled, expensive pen he still couldn't win with....Jocketty was basically forced out of St Louis because they have begun emphasizing a melding of stats and scouting while decidedly relying more on player development.

Where does this leave Cincy? They've made some strides with player development (but are they sustainable ones?), picked up some nice additions for their 25 man roster by exploiting undervalued commodities (Arroyo, Phillips, Hamilton) but have been clueless regarding free agency. On the whole, I think we should wonder if they have a coherent organisational philosophy in place that will lead to consistent winning (TeamClark has eloquently questioned (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1479721&postcount=20) this multiple times) or are they simply pecking around at the margins in what amounts to jogging on a treadmill as other teams are running full steam ahead?

I'm thinking that we're looking at a franchise that may get lucky once in a while (i suck at darts but still hit the bullseye occasionally), but I'm not convinced that they'll make their own luck consistently...Good post! It's not like this team has ever had a clue to where they want to go and that goes back to Marge and Leatherpants. But I like to reserve judgement.

KittyDuran
10-14-2007, 10:01 AM
I'm going out and buy a dog just so I have something to kick!Nah... same the money... kick the moles! :D

GAC
10-14-2007, 10:03 AM
Good post! It's not like this team has ever had a clue to where they want to go and that goes back to Marge and Leatherpants. But I like to reserve judgement.

That is all true; but should they continue to follow the same path of bad decisions?

I was really holding out hope, after the last FO left and we got this new regime, that they'd start to break that trend and start thinking/acting more responsible and making sound decisions. Not always perfect decisions; but my Gawd, even a stray dog finds a bone every once in awhile.

edabbs44
10-14-2007, 10:06 AM
Everyone against this hire, I hope you're willing to step up and say "I was wrong" if Dusty takes us to the playoffs.

Depends on if there are major additions made or if Dusty takes the current team to the playoffs.

Big difference, IMO.

KittyDuran
10-14-2007, 10:09 AM
Depends on if there are major additions made or if Dusty takes the current team to the playoffs.

Big difference, IMO.But of course! [good out...] ;)

Krusty
10-14-2007, 10:15 AM
If Baker learned a lesson in Chicago in handling pitchers (like Prior and Wood), I have no problem with the hiring.

But the first time he has Harang, Arroyo and Bailey throwing 150 pitches in a game, fans should get a noose and hang him in Fountain Square.

LINEDRIVER
10-14-2007, 10:33 AM
I think the Reds front office lacks vision if they are satisfied to have Dusty Baker as a field manager. I believe it to be clearly a step in the wrong direction... another setback for the ballclub.

As I suspected, Castellini is a 'fan' and not a baseball man, as was Aunt Marge and Uncle Carl. He came in and said he was gonna do what it takes to win, etc. etc. They all say that and then time goes by and it is realized how difficult it is to win with so many pieces having to be in the right place at the right time. A 'fan' can not be the one to put major influence on those pieces that have to be at the right place and time. Castellini had to of signed off on this deal and it seems he must of been to easily persuaded or just flat out conned.

It seems that Jocketty must of turned the Reds down, if in fact an offer was actually made. He would of been a part of the approving process for the hiring of the next field manager. So, all in all, it shows that a Jocketty type is needed in this organization... a baseball man who makes the major baseball decisions.

Krusty
10-14-2007, 10:37 AM
On the otherhand, I can't recall Baker burning out pitchers when he was with the Giants. There was a question about Wood's mechanics and Prior wouldn't be the first pitcher with a history of injuries. So how much of the blame do you attribute to Baker for those two flameouts?

westofyou
10-14-2007, 10:38 AM
On the otherhand, I can't recall Baker burning out pitchers when he was with the Giants. There was a question about Wood's mechanics and Prior wouldn't be the first pitcher with a history of injuries. So how much of the blame do you attribute to Baker for those two flameouts?

You could blame the pitching coach in both organizations.... oh wait he was already here.

Krusty
10-14-2007, 10:42 AM
You could blame the pitching coach in both organizations.... oh wait he was already here.

I am sure the conversation came up between Krivsky and Baker in regards to Prior and Wood in Chicago. The answer Baker gave Krivsky in regards to handling of pitchers must have been satisfactory for Wayne K. and Bob C.

It will be interesting to see how Baker handles the Cincy media on Monday in regards questions about his handling of pitchers when he was with the Cubs.

westofyou
10-14-2007, 10:45 AM
It will be interesting to see how Baker handles the Cincy media on Monday in regards questions about his handling of pitchers when he was with the Cubs.

The Cincinnati media has the teeth of 2 month old baby, he'll twirl them around his finger.

edabbs44
10-14-2007, 10:53 AM
On the otherhand, I can't recall Baker burning out pitchers when he was with the Giants. There was a question about Wood's mechanics and Prior wouldn't be the first pitcher with a history of injuries. So how much of the blame do you attribute to Baker for those two flameouts?

Back in the 90s, the burning of pitchers wasn't on the radar as much as it is now.

Shawn Estes - 19-5, 3.18 ERA in his first year. Never came close to that form the rest of his career.

Kirk Reuter, 13-6, 3.45 ERA in his first year in SF. 2 years later, 5.41 ERA.

I don't know what their pitch counts looked like back then, but those are 2 potential examples.

I also don't remember many pitchers in SF of the Wood/Prior pedigree, so a burning out of Estes would make less noise than a burning of Prior.

westofyou
10-14-2007, 11:01 AM
Back in the 90s, the burning of pitchers wasn't on the radar as much as it is now.

Shawn Estes - 19-5, 3.18 ERA in his first year. Never came close to that form the rest of his career.

Kirk Reuter, 13-6, 3.45 ERA in his first year in SF. 2 years later, 5.41 ERA.

I don't know what their pitch counts looked like back then, but those are 2 potential examples.

I also don't remember many pitchers in SF of the Wood/Prior pedigree, so a burning out of Estes would make less noise than a burning of Prior.


I was there, both guys are soft tossing lefties who throw breaking pitches as their first pitch, both got to play in the cold air of Candlestick early on and both were eventually figured out by the league. Sometimes that's what happens (Gene Bearden prime example)

mth123
10-14-2007, 11:09 AM
I am sure the conversation came up between Krivsky and Baker in regards to Prior and Wood in Chicago. The answer Baker gave Krivsky in regards to handling of pitchers must have been satisfactory for Wayne K. and Bob C.

It will be interesting to see how Baker handles the Cincy media on Monday in regards questions about his handling of pitchers when he was with the Cubs.

Here is the thing though, Wood had TJ surgery in 1999 and missed the 2000 season before Baker was involved. After coming back, he'd gotten his IP back to 213.2 in 2002 - the year before Baker arrived. The 211 he pitched in 2003 don't seem out of line. I'm guessing that Wood's fate was set in motion before Baker arrived. Many times TJ surgery is a precursor to a later shoulder problem or a result of chronic shoulder issues (Eddie Guardado is a good current example and I hope this is considered in the option decision).

Prior threw 129 Innings at U.S.C. at age 19, followed by 138 Innings at age 20. In his first year in the Cub's organization he threw 167 and 2/3 innings at three levels at age 21. At age 22 he threw 211 and 1/3 innings and then the problems appeared. The progression doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. I'd have probably backed off by 15 innings or so in 2003, but the Cubs were in a race and can see how it happened. Cyclone posted earlier about the number of high pitch games Prior threw at age 22 and those counts may well have something to do with it. But I also remember that Prior was considered a freak of nature with perfect mechanics and mature beyond his years. I'm guessing that the organization thought the normal rules didn't apply to him and with a chance for a rare Chicago postseason on the line, the rode him hard. Maybe the same won't happen with Bailey and Cueto.

The other pitchers on Dusty's abuse lists are primarily Livan Hernandez and Carlos Zambrano. Those guys are freaks of nature that seem to be able to handle it. Actually the biggest mishandling may have been Zambrano who threw 118 Innings in 2002 and jumped to 214 in 2003 at age 22. Given Bailey's limited innings in 2007 due to the groin injury lay-off, a similar scenario is developing. I hope the organization continues to protect him. They babied him for the last few years. I don't see WK abandoning that simply because he hired Baker.

I'm as concerned as everybody that he'll do damage to Bailey, Cueto and even Arroyo, but I'm not ready to conclude it's inevitable. I'm in the wait and see camp.

LvJ
10-14-2007, 11:20 AM
Not sure if I continue to watch this team.

mbgrayson
10-14-2007, 11:21 AM
Interesting web site: "Fire Dusty Baker (http://firedustybaker.blogspot.com/)!"

OnBaseMachine
10-14-2007, 11:37 AM
Norris Hopper will be the starting CF next year. Bet on it. Hamilton will be traded or Dunn's option will not be picked up.

westofyou
10-14-2007, 11:39 AM
Norris Hopper will be the starting CF next year. Bet on it. Hamilton will be traded or Dunn's option will not be picked up.

Maybe... and perhaps monkeys will fly out of Marty's butt too.

Jpup
10-14-2007, 11:39 AM
I root for laundry, but this is pushing it. I'll give him a fair chance.

Strikes Out Looking
10-14-2007, 11:39 AM
Well see you in October...of 2020.

Maybe he wasn't the worst candidate (Bob Boone is still lurking out there), but c'mon, there are better people to manage this team.

I'm willing to hope that he can learn new things (like not overwork young pitchers, teach and have your team play fundementals and don't look the other way when steroids are involved), but I'm not hopeful.

edabbs44
10-14-2007, 11:41 AM
Norris Hopper will be the starting CF next year. Bet on it. Hamilton will be traded or Dunn's option will not be picked up.

1) I don't believe Dusty would have the pull to make those decisions.

2) Hamilton being traded wouldn't be the worst case scenario, especially if he got some young pitching in return.

westofyou
10-14-2007, 11:44 AM
Seriously though... I've read numerous times here on Redszone that the manager doesn't matter, that it's all about talent period. I'm getting whiplash.

edabbs44
10-14-2007, 11:46 AM
Seriously though... I've read numerous times here on Redszone that the manager doesn't matter, that it's all about talent period. I'm getting whiplash.

I come from that school...except most anti-Dustys on here are worried about the future health of the pitching staff and not the W/L record.

Give anyone the talent and they have a better chance at succeeding.

Strikes Out Looking
10-14-2007, 11:49 AM
Seriously though... I've read numerous times here on Redszone that the manager doesn't matter, that it's all about talent period. I'm getting whiplash.

Not from me you didn't. The manager matters, as do the 25 players in the roster, the 40 man, the GM, the farm system, and I also believe the fans.

This manager just doesn't seem to be the right fit for this organization, IMO. Of course, the right fit of a manager hasn't happened much the last 25 years, and when it does, the Reds find away to run the manager out of town (Pinella, Johnson, McKeon).

VR
10-14-2007, 11:50 AM
gm and I share the same sickness....being Reds and Vikes fans. (I like the Sixers too, so I should get more sympathy.) I'm in the middle of the trifecta every fan dreads. Your team is THE most embarrassing in every pro sport.

However, for all of you threatening dropping your allegience, EI subscription, season tickets etc....let me share with you what I've already come to realize.

"I can't quit you"

And really, that's what makes it the most painful. You could't walk away if you wanted to.

Matt700wlw
10-14-2007, 11:51 AM
Awaiting a call from my old college roommate....born and raised in Chicago....DIE HARD Cubs fan (an actual Cubs fan)....works in the Chicago TV market....left him a message last night to give me one good reason to like this move....

We'll see if he calls back.


I'm going to go into this with an open mind....maybe Dusty will prove us all wrong. Win me some games, and chances are I'll forget about this conversation.

He's now the manager of my baseball team....and I've decided not to move :)





Enjoy your Sunday.

membengal
10-14-2007, 11:52 AM
Seriously though... I've read numerous times here on Redszone that the manager doesn't matter, that it's all about talent period. I'm getting whiplash.

Not from this fan you have not.

And Baker's potential negatives make this move frightening. He's pretty much the opposite from what I was hoping for this organization.

I, as ever, am the north-going Zax. The Reds front office are south-going Zax's. Regime after regime. The thing is, compromise is only required from me. Dr. Suess' lesson is lost on them.

Tom Servo
10-14-2007, 11:54 AM
Awaiting a call from my old college roommate....born and raised in Chicago....DIE HARD Cubs fan (an actual Cubs fan)....works in the Chicago TV market....left him a message last night to give me one good reason to like this move....

We'll see if he calls back.


I'm going to go into this with an open mind....maybe Dusty will prove us all wrong. Win me some games, and chances are I'll forget about this conversation.

He's now the manager of my baseball team....and I've decided not to move. :)
I'm with you, Matt. I don't love it, but atleast Dusty has won before. I'm just hoping this signing means that Bob, Wayne, and the Reds will be active this winter to legitamitely improve the club.

RedsManRick
10-14-2007, 12:04 PM
How long before Norris starts everyday in CF, Freel at 3B, and Cantu at first? How long before Burton gets buried?

edabbs44
10-14-2007, 12:08 PM
How long before Norris starts everyday in CF, Freel at 3B, and Cantu at first? How long before Burton gets buried?

I can't see Cantu starting at 1st vs RHPs, unless Votto bombs the first month or 2.

The others won't shock me.

jojo
10-14-2007, 12:18 PM
Here is the thing though, Wood had TJ surgery in 1999 and missed the 2000 season before Baker was involved. After coming back, he'd gotten his IP back to 213.2 in 2002 - the year before Baker arrived. The 211 he pitched in 2003 don't seem out of line. I'm guessing that Wood's fate was set in motion before Baker arrived. Many times TJ surgery is a precursor to a later shoulder problem or a result of chronic shoulder issues (Eddie Guardado is a good current example and I hope this is considered in the option decision).

Prior threw 129 Innings at U.S.C. at age 19, followed by 138 Innings at age 20. In his first year in the Cub's organization he threw 167 and 2/3 innings at three levels at age 21. At age 22 he threw 211 and 1/3 innings and then the problems appeared. The progression doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. I'd have probably backed off by 15 innings or so in 2003, but the Cubs were in a race and can see how it happened. Cyclone posted earlier about the number of high pitch games Prior threw at age 22 and those counts may well have something to do with it. But I also remember that Prior was considered a freak of nature with perfect mechanics and mature beyond his years. I'm guessing that the organization thought the normal rules didn't apply to him and with a chance for a rare Chicago postseason on the line, the rode him hard. Maybe the same won't happen with Bailey and Cueto.

The other pitchers on Dusty's abuse lists are primarily Livan Hernandez and Carlos Zambrano. Those guys are freaks of nature that seem to be able to handle it. Actually the biggest mishandling may have been Zambrano who threw 118 Innings in 2002 and jumped to 214 in 2003 at age 22. Given Bailey's limited innings in 2007 due to the groin injury lay-off, a similar scenario is developing. I hope the organization continues to protect him. They babied him for the last few years. I don't see WK abandoning that simply because he hired Baker.

I'm as concerned as everybody that he'll do damage to Bailey, Cueto and even Arroyo, but I'm not ready to conclude it's inevitable. I'm in the wait and see camp.

Ignoring injuries, I don't think it's necessary to wait and see in order to have concerns about Baker's ability (or seeming inability) to manage a staff.

It's a given Reds starters will have higher pitch counts if Baker is running the staff rather than delegating the responsibility to the pitching coach-Baker is old school in that regard. That said I absolutely agree though that its an open question as to whether Baker caused injuries to Woods and Prior. But this much we know-he's going to ride his horses hard and when he does put them in the barn, he has no clue how to manage whats in the corral (i.e. the bullpen).

Joseph
10-14-2007, 12:34 PM
I'm ok with it, right now.

Put me in the Dusty camp.

redsmetz
10-14-2007, 12:34 PM
Well I can't read the entire thread that exploded yesterday with the leak of the hiring. I was in Columbus to see Bob Dylan at the Schottenstein Center. I heard the report while driving back to my motel and listening to the Red Sox/Indians game.

Perhaps it was appropriate that Dylan led off with Rainy Day Women #12 & 35. I'm not sure Dusty's not going to get stoned at every corner from some. As I've said all along, I'm a Reds fan. If I can learn to live with Davey Johnson (who did well), I can live with Dusty Baker. [BTW, good show over all; opened with Amos Lee and then Elvis Costello]



Well, they'll stone ya when you're trying to be so good,
They'll stone ya just a-like they said they would.
They'll stone ya when you're tryin' to go home.
Then they'll stone ya when you're there all alone.
But I would not feel so all alone,
Everybody must get stoned.

Well, they'll stone ya when you're walkin' 'long the street.
They'll stone ya when you're tryin' to keep your seat.
They'll stone ya when you're walkin' on the floor.
They'll stone ya when you're walkin' to the door.
But I would not feel so all alone,
Everybody must get stoned.

They'll stone ya when you're at the breakfast table.
They'll stone ya when you are young and able.
They'll stone ya when you're tryin' to make a buck.
They'll stone ya and then they'll say, "good luck."
Tell ya what, I would not feel so all alone,
Everybody must get stoned.

Well, they'll stone you and say that it's the end.
Then they'll stone you and then they'll come back again.
They'll stone you when you're riding in your car.
They'll stone you when you're playing your guitar.
Yes, but I would not feel so all alone,
Everybody must get stoned.

Well, they'll stone you when you walk all alone.
They'll stone you when you are walking home.
They'll stone you and then say you are brave.
They'll stone you when you are set down in your grave.
But I would not feel so all alone,
Everybody must get stoned.

Red in Chicago
10-14-2007, 12:47 PM
My father (lifelong Cub fan) is already laughing at me. I remember when the Cubs first signed Baker, my father and the entire north-side all thought they were locks for at least three world series rings. We all know how that ended.

I only wish I could so blindly believe in Dusty, but nothing could be further from the truth. As RMR previously stated, as a Chicagoan, I'm embarrassed by this decision and will honestly have a very hard time watching this team as long as he's in the dugout.

I guess the sewer lines from Chicago to Cincinnat have been completed now and Wrigleyville just took one hell of a dump.

Shame on you BC. Shame on you.

lollipopcurve
10-14-2007, 12:56 PM
I guess the sewer lines from Chicago to Cincinnat have been completed now and Wrigleyville just took one hell of a dump.

And that would make you a green fly, wouldn't it?

pedro
10-14-2007, 01:01 PM
Norris Hopper will be the starting CF next year. Bet on it. Hamilton will be traded or Dunn's option will not be picked up.

pshaw.

GullyFoyle
10-14-2007, 01:22 PM
Why this is disappointing to me is that beyond wether Dusty Baker ends up being a good or bad manager, this is the clearest indication yet of the direction that upper management wants to go.

And that direction is old school baseball that typically requires lots of money to do successfully. I was holding out hopes that management was secretly looking for new ways to think creatively about putting a team together on a budget. Dusty does not seem to be a manger that thinks in new ways.

(sorry for the cross post... meant for this to be here and not the Poll thread.)

mbgrayson
10-14-2007, 01:35 PM
Dusty Baker is the 'Anti-Bill James':

Dusty Baker’s record with the Cubs:
2003: 88-74, Pthag record 85-77, .323 OBP(13th in NL) 492 BBs(14th)
2004: 89-73, Pthag record 94-68, .328 OBP(11th in NL) 489 BBs(14th)
2005: 79-83, Pthag record 80-82, .324 OBP(11th in NL) 419 Bbs(16th )
2006: 66-96, Pthag record 70-92, .319 OBP(16th in NL) 395 BBs(16th)

Other than his 1st year, actual record was worse than pthag record every year. Number of walks declined each year.

These stats are from http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/2003.shtml

traderumor
10-14-2007, 01:37 PM
Seriously though... I've read numerous times here on Redszone that the manager doesn't matter, that it's all about talent period. I'm getting whiplash.:cool:

M2
10-14-2007, 01:42 PM
Basically Baker seems miscast for what appeared to be a role where the Reds go forth with a youth movement that includes significant playing time (and probably significant growing pains) for some highly thought of prospects.

I think you should be angrier at yourself for having engaged in self-deception than at the Reds for having hired Baker. Objectively speaking, the youth movement was never this organization's plan and it was fairly outspoken on that point. It was an option consistently not chosen.


To many, this is a frustrating hire. The Reds had a chance to go a new direction, "new school" in a sense where they follow models like Cleveland, Boston etc. But now with Baker's hire and talk of reshaping the FO with Jocketty, it seems clearer that the Reds are more apt to chase a more traditional approach which at least IMHO, is full of inefficiencies that many smart clubs have recognized and begun to exploit expertly.

Seriously, did you think that had a snowball's chance in hell? Bob Castellini? Wayne Krivsky? New school?

As for how well "a more traditional approach" will work, let's cut some of the hyperbole. It can be done with great success. Whether the Reds have the leadership and talent to do it is another matter, but it's hardly a given that traditionalists will fail.

vaticanplum
10-14-2007, 01:51 PM
Well, crap.

Most of my thoughts have been summed up pretty well, especially by Stormy, Cyclone et al. M2, I applaud your maturity and open-mindedness; I wish I had more of it myself to calm me down. But I can't help thinking that this move is symbolic of precisely the opposite in the Reds' organization. Hiring this particular manager smacks of immaturity and bullheadedness; it's the six-year-old kid on the playground who wants the biggest and shiniest piece of candy even though everyone knows it tastes bad.

Which is only fitting, because immaturity and bullheadedness are two qualities I'd put down as the primary motivators of one Dusty Baker. Besides being a manager who makes pretty clueless managerial decisions as outlined in this thread, I find him personally intolerable. The list of people in baseball whom I actively dislike is pretty short: it's Dusty Baker and Curt Schilling. Baker is the primary reason why I have such a hatred for the Cubs. i moved to Chicago to research the Cubs; I had nothing against them when I moved there. And I watched Dusty Baker fall apart as the team did. The worse they got, the faster his emotional age fell. I saw him every night on TV blaming someone else, anyone else, for the failures of the team. Hendry didn't care enough. All his players were injured. His young kids couldn't handle the pressure. I'm not making this up. He is a narrow-minded, short-sighted, egotistical, irresponsible and immature crybaby, and nothing in his career convinces me that the Cincinnati Reds are a team about which he can feel excited and nurturing.

There's a word that has gotten thrown around a lot with the Reds the last few years, and that is creativity, ie. lack thereof. I see this as pretty much the most uncreative move the Reds could have made here. Dusty Baker comes in here with his own well-documented philosophies and unwillingness to adjust, and he comes to a team that is particularly in need of serious adjustments and creative moves, both in the front office and on the field. This is not an untalented team, but one of the reasons it has been so bad is because no one has yet shown the desire or the ability to make the pieces fit together (although Mackinin did come close). You've got an offensive powerhouse that needs to be treated delicately to produce his best, a riff-raff relief crew, quite a handful of young players whose production will be largely determined by how they're handled over the next couple of years, and a couple of very good starting pitchers who would probably pitch 20 innings straight given the chance. How much faith do I have that the person able to successfully put these pieces together and fill in the gaps is one who thinks walks are silly and 150 pitches is legitimate -- someone who, more to the point, thinks that any strategical part of baseball can be summed up as simply as "[blank] are silly"? Yeah, way less than zero faith, I'd say.

I think M2 is right in some sense -- this speaks to a direction, albeit a moronic one, and shows commitment to the team, albeit a hollow one. The thing is, though, if by chance the Reds spent $100 million and come up with a free agent team that can win for a period of months, and maybe make the playoffs, and Dusty Baker happens to have the luck not to completely run it into the ground, put me down as not interested in seeing them play. Dusty Baker gets the glory while assembling an utterly uncreative team that wins by happenstance -- the kind of team that can win just as easily as it can lose. I am not someone who would rather be lucky than good. I feel that this is a team with great possibilities given a few brilliant moves, and I was excited by the possibility that this could be a true chance for the Reds to grab someone who could identify what those moves could be. I even still think Krivsky shows potential of falling into that category provided that he was surrounded by others who have it too. Well, Baker sure as hell doesn't, and the fact that Castellini hired him says to me that he doesn't either, and I've got to believe that if there were any truth to the Jocketty rumors at all, they've just been obliterated by this hiring. If everything goes their way, do the Reds stand a chance of winning? Sure. Is it going to be a sustained, well-considered, smart kind of winning? Not a chance in hell. And I can't help thinking in my heart of hearts that a Reds world series title just got delayed about ten years regardless -- and that delay isn't from a starting point anytime soon.

I know myself better than to say that I'll quit following the Reds, especially when they're right in my own backyard at the moment. But the bitterness I've begun to taste as a baseball fan the last couple of years just became a whole lot more palpable. Damn you stupid Reds for hacking apart another piece of my naive optimism.

pedro
10-14-2007, 01:55 PM
Many here like to point to Cleveland as an example of how a good franchise should be run and they're right. Regardless though, I think many here miss the point of what has made Cleveland successful. It isn't some "new school" revelation. It's the fact that they've had management continuity for the past 16 years between John Hart and Mark Shapiro which has given them the time to build a successful organization where everyone is pulling in the same direction. The idea that the Reds could could simply fire their management and hire people that are more like "those guys in cleveland" kind of misses the point IMO. Without the patience to allow them to see their plan through, Hart & Shapiro would have never been successful either. This stuff takes time.

traderumor
10-14-2007, 01:58 PM
I think you should be angrier at yourself for having engaged in self-deception than at the Reds for having hired Baker. Objectively speaking, the youth movement was never this organization's plan and it was fairly outspoken on that point. It was an option consistently not chosen.



Seriously, did you think that had a snowball's chance in hell? Bob Castellini? Wayne Krivsky? New school?

As for how well "a more traditional approach" will work, let's cut some of the hyperbole. It can be done with great success. Whether the Reds have the leadership and talent to do it is another matter, but it's hardly a given that traditionalists will fail.

I'm not sure if you have recently read Bill James' classic article about his days as a fan of the Royals that WOY kindly publishes periodically, but that is exactly what I hear in your posts. It is becoming ever more commonplace for fandom to look for a model franchise or method that they wish their team would adopt, then rail when decision-making is approached in a manner different than what they would do. I blame real estate mogul infomercials more than sabrmetrics, though ;)

reds44
10-14-2007, 02:08 PM
From the Reds


CINCINNATI - At a press conference at noon tomorrow at Great American Ball Park, Cincinnati Reds president and chief executive officer Bob Castellini and executive vice president and general manager Wayne Krivsky will introduce Dusty Baker as field manager.

Baker, 58, has agreed to a 3-year contract through the 2010 season. He becomes the 60th field manager in club history, the 50th skipper since 1900 and the first hired outside the organization since Lou Piniella in 1990.

In 2007 the fifth-place Reds went 72-90 under managers Jerry Narron (31-51) and Pete Mackanin (41-39). Mackanin replaced Narron on July 1.

Baker has been named National League Manager of the Year 3 times by the Baseball Writers' Association of America (1993, 1997, 2000), twice by The Sporting News (1997, 2000) and once by The Associated Press (1993). His teams finished first or second 9 times and won at least 90 games in a season 5 times.

In 14 seasons as a Major League manager he has produced a 1,162-1,041 record (.527), including 840-715 (.540) in 10 years with the San Francisco Giants (1993-2002) and 322-326 (.497) in 4 campaigns with the Chicago Cubs (2003-06). His 1,162 career victories tie Lou Boudreau for 38th on the all-time list, and his .527 career winning percentage also ranks 38th all-time.

Baker skippered his team into the playoffs 4 times, into the National League Championship Series twice and in 2002 guided the Giants to the NL pennant. In 2003 and 2004, he led the Cubs to consecutive winning seasons for the first time since 1971-72. His 1998 Giants club lost to the Cubs in a tiebreaker, and in 1993 the Giants won 103 games but finished second in the West Division to the Atlanta Braves, who won 104.

Baker has been to the playoffs 9 times overall during his baseball career, including 4 times as a manager, 4 times as a player and once as a coach. As an outfielder he helped the Los Angeles Dodgers win the 1981 World Series title. He has participated in 5 World Series overall, including 3 as a player (1977, 1978, 1981), as manager in 2002 and as a coach in 1989.

In 19 seasons and 2,039 games as a player (1968-86) Baker hit .278 with 242 HR and 1,013 RBI for the Braves, Dodgers, Giants and Oakland Athletics. He was an All-Star twice (1981, 1982), won a pair of Silver Slugger Awards (1980, 1981) and earned a Rawlings Gold Glove Award (1981).

M2
10-14-2007, 02:12 PM
I'm not sure if you have recently read Bill James' classic article about his days as a fan of the Royals that WOY kindly publishes periodically, but that is exactly what I hear in your posts. It is becoming ever more commonplace for fandom to look for a model franchise or method that they wish their team would adopt, then rail when decision-making is approached in a manner different than what they would do. I blame real estate mogul infomercials more than sabrmetrics, though ;)

Yeah, that sort of sums it up.

I've long recognized the Reds don't share my view of the game. What's been annoying is the franchise has been so wishy-washy about employing its own view of the game, so commitment averse.

I still reserve the right to disagree with the particulars, but at least they're maximizing on doing what they do. It should be noted that Phillips (in particular) and Arroyo were not sabermetric-inclined moves and they worked out awfully well.

KronoRed
10-14-2007, 02:18 PM
FAT CHANCE! But you will hear a lot of crickets chirping...:)

I doubt it, if Dusty gets this team a world series banner in 3 years people will be happy to be proven wrong.

Some here actually root for the Reds and not just being right :D

KronoRed
10-14-2007, 02:20 PM
It will be interesting to see how Baker handles the Cincy media on Monday in regards questions about his handling of pitchers when he was with the Cubs.

The cincy media ask about that? more likely they ask why Baker doesn't go to the 3 man rotation, because players are wimps compared to yesteryear ;)

RedsManRick
10-14-2007, 02:23 PM
Many here like to point to Cleveland as an example of how a good franchise should be run and they're right. Regardless though, I think many here miss the point of what has made Cleveland successful. It isn't some "new school" revelation. It's the fact that they've had management continuity for the past 16 years between John Hart and Mark Shapiro which has given them the time to build a successful organization where everyone is pulling in the same direction. The idea that the Reds could could simply fire their management and hire people that are more like "those guys in cleveland" kind of misses the point IMO. Without the patience to allow them to see their plan through, Hart & Shapiro would have never been successful either. This stuff takes time.

Fair point. But the time and continuity required to execute a plan only matters if it's the right plan -- they aren't sufficient in and of themselves.

traderumor
10-14-2007, 02:30 PM
Fair point. But the time and continuity required to execute a plan only matters if it's the right plan -- they aren't sufficient in and of themselves.e.g. Dave Littlefield

Kc61
10-14-2007, 02:47 PM
I'm going to go on record as saying I don't mind this one bit.

I wouldn't have hired Baker and I'm sure this portends a slew of moves that I won't agree with one iota. That said, I've spent the past seven years disagreeing with what the Reds have been doing, so this is nothing new from my perspective.

What is different about it is that Baker probably means the Reds have concerted commitment to winning over the next three seasons. Moves are going to be made. Money is going to be spent. We're going to get the kind of go-for-it effort we haven't seen since the Jr. trade. It could be a disaster, but when you've got an old school owner and an old school GM you shouldn't expect them to act like the Red Sox braintrust. I don't have any argument with most of the criticisms made here about Dusty Baker, but he's close to the top of the heap when it comes to getting your 1970s on (and you can bet Bob Castellini goes to sleep counting big red mechanical sheep).

As edabbs astutely pointed out, this is THE guy they wanted. They have followed their instincts. While those aren't my instincts, for the first time in a long time I can at least recognize this isn't some sorry half measure. The Cincinnati Reds are going after it, hard. We knew who these guys were. For all the style points you might want to deduct, the commitment is impressive. And sometimes wanting it is more than half the battle.

Haven't read the entire thread, but this one sums up my feelings. This is not business as usual for the Reds. It indicates that Castellini wants to win very soon. Dusty isn't the type you hire to build for 2015.

Smart people learn from their mistakes. Dusty has managed in the big leagues for many years and I think he's a smart person who will avoid some of his mistakes. Krivsky is very protective of his young players and I'm sure this point has been made to Dusty.

I've wanted a name manager for a long time because the Reds often hire guys who, it seems, are "just happy to be there." So I can't complain about hiring Dusty.

I like the message Castellini is sending here. No more "business as usual." Hope Cast, Kriv, and Dusty now produce some good results.