PDA

View Full Version : Continuation of Doc says Kriv is fired



REDREAD
04-25-2008, 05:39 PM
Since Chip invited us to continue this on another thead, I will. :)

My point about DanO being fired was to illlustrate that he was signed to a 3 year deal, but only got two years to institute his changes. There was no uproar about how unfair it was for him to be canned, becuase the majority of the board did not like him, for various reasons which were certainly justifiable.

However, since most of the board is unhappy with Wayne firing (per the poll), it's now considered dirty and unfair to can a GM before he can finish off his entire 3 years.

Wayne got just as long as DanO did to convince the Reds of his vision.

That's all I was trying to point out. Ironically, many consider Wayne's big strength to be the youth infusion, and that was also DanO's relative strength.
I think Wayne > Dan, but I think it is an interesting inconsistency.

Chip R
04-25-2008, 05:48 PM
One of the differences is that DanO was hired by different ownership while Wayne was hired by the current owner.

HumnHilghtFreel
04-25-2008, 05:54 PM
I haven't read through the other thread because I was late to the party and it was massive, so my talking points here will probably be repetitive.

I didn't love all of Wayne's moves, but I recognize that he did some things well. I think it's absolutely ridiculous to give someone so very little time, especially with a team that was really not very good, as much as it hurts to say. That's really my only problem with it. I don't think that he got a fair shake to get anything real rolling.

Hopefully Jocketty's namesake will at the least keep him around more than 2 full seasons if this team doesn't start winning(and let's be honest, it's probably going to take longer for this team to put up consistent W's), because the revolving door in UPPER MANAGEMENT, not to mention at manager, is embarrassing. Give us a little bit of stability, PLEASE.

REDREAD
04-25-2008, 05:59 PM
One of the differences is that DanO was hired by different ownership while Wayne was hired by the current owner.

Not so sure that is relevant if people are arguing that 2.1 -2.3 years is not enough time for Wayne to implement his plan. It seems like a lot of the press that is sympathetic to Wayne are using the same argument about "lack of patience, etc".

Cast looked at DanO's 2 year record and gave him the ax. Wayne got the same length of audition. Neither of them were lined up with Cast's vision, apparently.

So I guess the big question is: In general terms, how long should a GM be given before he is fired? What is a fair audition period if 2 years is not enough for a GM (if people feel that way). Some people favor stability, so I'm curious here.

Wasn't it Littlefield that took over the Pirates when they got their new stadium (If the name is wrong, someone correct me). The Pirates gave him many many years to learn on the job and get it right. In hindsight, doesn't that seem like a huge mistake? Wouldn't it have been better to cut bait much quicker?

In my opinion, there should be no minimum trial period for a GM at all. Competence is more important than stability, but I am curious what other people's thought are.

reds44
04-25-2008, 06:01 PM
Since Chip invited us to continue this on another thead, I will. :)

My point about DanO being fired was to illlustrate that he was signed to a 3 year deal, but only got two years to institute his changes. There was no uproar about how unfair it was for him to be canned, becuase the majority of the board did not like him, for various reasons which were certainly justifiable.

However, since most of the board is unhappy with Wayne firing (per the poll), it's now considered dirty and unfair to can a GM before he can finish off his entire 3 years.

Wayne got just as long as DanO did to convince the Reds of his vision.

That's all I was trying to point out. Ironically, many consider Wayne's big strength to be the youth infusion, and that was also DanO's relative strength.
I think Wayne > Dan, but I think it is an interesting inconsistency.
O'Brien brought some GREAT talent into the organization. Cueto, Bruce, and Homer are all his, as well as others.

I want to say Krivsky has a much better handle on acquiring major league talent, but his 72-90 and the Reds worst start in 5 years doesn't really agree with me. The one chance he had to win, 2006, he turned

Felipe Lopez: .268/.355/.394
9 HR/30 RBI
23 SB/6 CS
343 AB

Austin Kearns: .271/.351/.492
16 HR/50 RBI
323 AB

into

Gary Majewski: 15 IP, 8.40 ERA
Bill Bray: 27.7 IP, 4.23 ERA
Royce Clayton: .235/.290/.329 (149 AB)
Brendan Harris: .200/.273/.500 (10 AB)

When you consider the fact the Reds were 2 games out on the final Saturday of the season, that trade could have costs the Reds a playoff spot. Especially when you consider the west coast trip in late August/early September when the team just could not hit. Who knows what would have happend, but when he had his chance to win he traded two productive offensive players for one average RP and garbage.

Maybe if Krivsky turned Kearns and Lopez into something productive, he wouldn't of had to deal Hamilton for Volquez (and yes, I like that trade for the Reds).

Krivsky has plenty of chances to satisfy BCast, and blew it.

Spring~Fields
04-25-2008, 06:01 PM
However, since most of the board is unhappy with Wayne firing (per the poll), it's now considered dirty and unfair to can a GM before he can finish off his entire 3 years.

I don’t think that is was about firing the GM, Krivsky, or whether or not that he was allowed to finish his 3 years. I think it more about a question of ethics on Castellini’s handling and the appearance of backdoor techniques that blindside what appears to be decent employees and whether or not we can continue to have faith in Castellini’s running the organization.

I think that the majority of us thought that Castellini was going to make Jocketty the GM and he did, but the way he went about it was almost like your complaints about how Krivsky handled his personnel on and off the field.



Ironically, many consider Wayne's big strength to be the youth infusion, and that was also DanO's relative strength.


I keep perceiving from what you write that you under estimate or devalue the minor league feeder system and how valuable of a resource that is to a small market team. Since they don't have the cash cow of the big city teams, then they need to be able to trade off quality players to get what they want instead of using cash or to grow their own, either/or. I get from you like I did from reading about Marge Schott and how she thought, that the minor league prospects are meaningless? Pitchers if you can develop them are worth millions to a team.

reds44
04-25-2008, 06:04 PM
I donít think that is was about firing the GM, Krivsky, or whether or not that he was allowed to finish his 3 years. I think it more about a question of ethics on Castelliniís handling and the appearance of backdoor techniques that blindside what appears to be decent employees and whether or not we can continue to have faith in Castelliniís running the organization.

I think that the majority of us thought that Castellini was going to make Jocketty the GM and he did, but the way he went about it was almost like your complaints about how Krivsky handled his personnel on and off the field.



I keep perceiving from what you write that you under estimate or devalue the minor league feeder system and how valuable of a resource that is to a small market team. Since they don't have the cash cow of the big city teams, then they need to be able to trade off quality players to get what they want instead of using cash or to grow their own, either/or. I get from you like I did from reading about Marge Schott and how she thought, that the minor league prospects are meaningless? Pitchers if you can develop them are worth millions to a team.
I don't think he was devaluing the minor league system, as much as he was pointing out that Krivsky and O'Brien had the same strength.

HumnHilghtFreel
04-25-2008, 06:05 PM
Not so sure that is relevant if people are arguing that 2.1 -2.3 years is not enough time for Wayne to implement his plan. It seems like a lot of the press that is sympathetic to Wayne are using the same argument about "lack of patience, etc".

Cast looked at DanO's 2 year record and gave him the ax. Wayne got the same length of audition. Neither of them were lined up with Cast's vision, apparently.

So I guess the big question is: In general terms, how long should a GM be given before he is fired? What is a fair audition period if 2 years is not enough for Wayne (if people feel that way). Some people favor stability, so I'm curious here.

Wasn't it Littlefield that took over the Pirates when they got their new stadium (If the name is wrong, someone correct me). The Pirates gave him many many years to learn on the job and get it right. In hindsight, doesn't that seem like a huge mistake? Wouldn't it have been better to cut bait much quicker?

In my opinion, there should be no minimum trial period for a GM at all. Competence is more important than stability, but I am curious what other people's thought are.

I think it should be a lot like a college football coach. If you bring in a new guy to turn around a program, do you think that 2 years is enough time to be able to do it?

I certainly don't. That's hardly even enough time to get in some strong recruiting classes... or in this case draft classes.
I think a window of closer to maybe 4 years is just about right to see if the guy has things headed in the right direction. I think it's definitely impatience on BCast's part. I LOVE that he wants to win now, but there aren't a lot of people that could right the ship handed over that quickly given what there was to work with, IMO

reds44
04-25-2008, 06:07 PM
Here's something Fay posted on his blog.

But one thing that occurred to me today: What if the big-trade with Nationals had worked out? If Gary Majewski was healthy and pitched like he was capable of, if Royce Clayton was better than marginal, and if Bill Bray was more consistent? (I know that's a lot of ifs) But the Reds would have likely finished above .500 two years, maybe even won the division. Instead, they finished 80-82.
If the trade works out different or if the trades not made at all, and the Reds finish above .500 and win the divison, more than likely Krivsky is still the GM. His biggest blunder turned out to be the reason he was fired.

Matt700wlw
04-25-2008, 06:29 PM
Have we had a thread reach it's 1,000 post limit before like the other thread? I don't know if I've ever seen that...

REDREAD
04-25-2008, 06:36 PM
I donít think that is was about firing the GM, Krivsky, or whether or not that he was allowed to finish his 3 years. I think it more about a question of ethics on Castelliniís handling and the appearance of backdoor techniques that blindside what appears to be decent employees and whether or not we can continue to have faith in Castelliniís running the organization.

I'm not sure there was anything backdoor about it. Can you elaborate on this? Cast decided to fire Wayne, so he called him into the office and gave him the news. He apparently was polite enough to give Wayne an hour to fight for his job. Most bosses would not give an employee that luxury.
Now granted, I'm sure Wayne could say nothing to change Cast's mind, but it was certainly gracious to listen to Wayne for that hour. I haven't been extended the same courtesy when I've been laid off.







I think that the majority of us thought that Castellini was going to make Jocketty the GM and he did, but the way he went about it was almost like your complaints about how Krivsky handled his personnel on and off the field.


Please be more specific. What was wrong with how it was handled?





I keep perceiving from what you write that you under estimate or devalue the minor league feeder system and how valuable of a resource that is to a small market team..

I think the question is "how much of the credit goes to Wayne"
This was discussed on the other thread. I agree that DanO's quirky ideas had to go, but any GM would've done that. I'm not sure how much credit Wayne gets for Ceuto, Votto, Bruce, and Homer. I'm also not sure how much blame to give Wayne for EdE's inconsistency (vs Narron vs EdE himself)..

I think in a few years, we'll have a chance to evaluate Wayne's draft class.

I agree that the farm is important. I'm just not sure how what Wayne's actual impact was.

nate
04-25-2008, 07:25 PM
I think the question is "how much of the credit goes to Wayne" This was discussed on the other thread. I agree that DanO's quirky ideas had to go, but any GM would've done that.

You keep saying that but I believe the current Reds GM employed some of those "quirky" ideas (tandem starters) in the minors. So, it stands to reason that no, not _any_ GM would've done what Wayne did.

Screwball
04-25-2008, 08:45 PM
Have we had a thread reach it's 1,000 post limit before like the other thread?

Yeah. The Bedard thread from the offseason almost got up to 90 pages, IIRC.

Reds Fanatic
04-25-2008, 08:46 PM
This is from Fay's blog tonight:


just spoke to Walt Jocketty for the first time since he took over as GM. It sounds like he's in the gathering information mode. But moves will come.

"I think they will come eventually," he said. "It's a little early yet."

Jocketty is taking that approach on what to do about Ken Griffey Jr. and Adam Dunn. Dunn becomes a free agent after this season. The club holds an option on Griffey for 2009. Jocketty says he hasn't made a call on either.

"Not yet," he said. "Again, this all came pretty fast. I was getting to know the organization. That's something I'm going to listen to a lot people in the organization on before moving forward on anything."

Jocketty pointed to driving in runs in key situations as one of the Reds' big problems. That's pretty apparent. But are there things a GM can do during the season to change that?

"Hopefully," Jocketty said. "The other thing I hope to do is talk to players, get their thoughts on different things. Give them an opportunity to speak their minds."

Jocketty saw the club through spring training. He's been at nearly every home game and he was on most of the last road trip. So he's seen some things he doesn't like. But, again, he says he's taking a patient approach.

"I had some ideas. But I want to get the ideas of other people," he said.

That's what he's been doing since taking over.

"I've been very busy just trying to get with people," Jocketty said. "I had some conference calls and set up some meetings. I've got some (Reds front office people) coming into St. Louis. I"m being brought up to speed on a lot of things.”

bucksfan2
04-25-2008, 09:10 PM
Redread I have read most of what you have to say on both threads now and I have come to the realization that you didn't not care for Krivsky. That is your stance and I respect that.

The problem with us fans is that we don't know who made the ultimate decisions. I remember reading an article a few years back about the Yankees and it was talking about Cashman and Steinbrenner and who actually made the calls on certain moves. When Krivsky took over he had the bad contracts of Milton and LaRue as well as the big contract of Jr. and Dunn, who many believe was Cast. call. They had 4 similar outfielders who had power but the propensity to stirke out a lot. We can argue as much as we want about the now infamous trade but it looks like no one won that deal. The reds may win if Thompson keeps developing.

Here is the thing three year ago when Krivsky inherited the club the pitching was awful. There is one, count it one, SP who is still pitching in the majors whom Krivsky had his first year on the reds. If you can't tell me the SP has drastically improved since WK took over you are fooling yourself. IMO the main problem over the past 3 years and still today has been the situation of the corner outfielders. Too very similar players who take up a large portion of the payroll. These two players couldn't be moved for any value whats so every. Jr's popularity and star power made it even more difficult to move.

My question is what would you have done? Where was there room to make a trade. Is it about value or making the team better? At this point I would almost stretch to say that having Kearns in the outfield would make a better team than having Dunn. The team needed a complete, Florida style, overhall, but the owner wanted to "bring winning baseball back to Cincinnati".

IslandRed
04-25-2008, 09:12 PM
I agree that the farm is important. I'm just not sure how what Wayne's actual impact was.

A key part of his job was to turn that around. It happened and it happened fast, so how does that not reflect well on him? The farm system went to a train wreck to one of the best in baseball; from a system where few emerged unscathed to one that's about to (fingers crossed) go 4-for-4 in delivering premium prospects to the show with health and talent intact. If you want to apply a discount because the big four prospects were already in-house, that's your right, but I'll remind you that it was considered a considerably lesser four at the time. As a group, their stock shot up over the last two seasons as they climbed the ladder. Isn't that what happens in good systems?

There's plenty to argue with in terms of how he put the big club together and the moves he made outside his core competency of finding good young players. It's reasonable to doubt whether he could make the leap from collecting talent to forming a cohesive winning roster. Hiring Jocketty may well end up being the right move. Probably will, if I had to guess. But I just can't go along with trying to discredit the one thing that went smashingly well under Krivsky's watch.

Caveat Emperor
04-25-2008, 09:13 PM
If the trade works out different or if the trades not made at all, and the Reds finish above .500 and win the divison, more than likely Krivsky is still the GM. His biggest blunder turned out to be the reason he was fired.

Daryl Thompson struck out 10 more batters tonight (and counting) in Chattanooga. Even if you think the Reds lost the battle on "the trade," they might still end up winning the war.

And you know what -- I'm a patient man, and I love me some starting pitching. I'd be completely cool with winning the deal this way.

Highlifeman21
04-25-2008, 11:02 PM
O'Brien could draft well in the 1st round, but in all subsequent rounds, not so much.

Krivsky could draft well in any round but the 1st round.

O'Brien couldn't develop talent, and had weird organizational mandates.

Krivsky gave new life to the development, but couldn't drastically speed up O'Brien's snail-pace, so 2008 was optimistic for Krivsky, but 2009 was more realistic for the talent developing.

We could judge Jocketty on what he did in St. Louis, but he had completely different rosters and farm systems.

Let's give Jocketty a clean slate, and hope that he doesn't punt the 2008 1st round draft pick.

2008 was a lost cause, and has no hope to improve. Let's hope that Jocketty can right the ship by 2009.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-25-2008, 11:35 PM
Krivsky could draft well in any round but the 1st round.

I think it's too early to judge this and even if it was, two picks in two years is an incredibly small sample size to determine anything.

Highlifeman21
04-25-2008, 11:49 PM
I think it's too early to judge this and even if it was, two picks in two years is an incredibly small sample size to determine anything.

He was 0 for his only 1st round draft picks.

0 for any number is still bad, regardless of sample size.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-25-2008, 11:51 PM
He was 0 for his only 1st round draft picks.

0 for any number is still bad, regardless of sample size.

Krivsky was "0 for" based on what?

One and half years of Drew Stubbs and a half season from a high school kid (Mesoraco)?

MikeS21
04-26-2008, 12:06 AM
Team Clark,

Chip closed the other thread, so I'll just post my thanks for your insights here. Earlier in this thread, someone posted John Fay's blog where he talked to Jocketty, and Walt told him that he was planning doing a lot of listening to folks who are already here in the organization before he makes any radical moves. That is a definite change of pace from what we heard about Krivsky, so I feel better about this.

Someone also conjectured in the first thread that Jocketty may be looking at this from more of an "interim" mindset than Castellini is. After all, in addition to GM, he was given the fancy sounding title of "President of Baseball Operations." I readily admit, I don't have a clue what that means, other than it sounds fancy. The way I see it is that Bob C recognizes that he may have all the money, but in the end, he is still just a fan. Castellini's expertise is not baseball, but cabbage and lettuce. He doesn't know how to put a baseball team together, but if you want a salad made, he's your guy.

Stop and think about it a second. What does Castellini know about baseball that qualifies him to interview a prospective GM?

I wonder if in Walt's mind, he may hang on as GM, possibly through the end of 2009, and then "retire" so that he can retain the fancy title of "President of Baseball Operations?" He would then sit in on the selection process to bring in someone who can come in and build on what has been started, rather than coming in and tearing down and starting all over.

I don't know, but I get the impression Jocketty may not even desire a long term tenure.

reds44
04-26-2008, 12:18 AM
I really want to hear someone attempt to defend what Wayne Krivsky has done to the Reds offense. He took the offense from one of the best in the league, to one of the worst in the league, in two years.

That's impressive.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-26-2008, 12:28 AM
I really want to hear someone attempt to defend what Wayne Krivsky has done to the Reds offense. He took the offense from one of the best in the league, to one of the worst in the league, in two years.

That's impressive.

Pretty much the same guys are here that were here two years ago.

How did he screw that up?

The only difference is Kearns is out of the OF replaced by Patterson. At this point, that is not what's keeping this offense from scoring runs.

BP, Dunn, and Jr. are not hitting and they were here two years ago.

Kc61
04-26-2008, 12:30 AM
This isn't that complicated. Rough as it was, Castellini's decision makes perfect sense for two reasons.

First, the Reds ballclub on the field continues to be poor. Forget AA talent and all that. Look at the Reds. If you can bear it.

Second, a highly experienced, respected, winning, proven GM was available for hire. Jocketty. Somebody Castellini respects and likes.

Why aren't these factors enough to justify the move?

Why is it more complicated than that?

If you owned a badly performing ball club and a proven winner was available and willing to serve as your GM, wouldn't you hire him?

reds44
04-26-2008, 12:31 AM
Pretty much the same guys are here that were here two years ago.

How did he screw that up?

The only difference is Kearns is out of the OF replaced by Patterson. At this point, that is not what's keeping this offense from scoring runs.

BP, Dunn, and Jr. not hitting are and they were here two years ago.
Phillips wasn't here when Krivsky took over. Phillips pretty much represented every offense player Krivsky brought in, with the exception of Hamilton, he doesn't walk.

Pena, Kearns, Lopez, Hamilton, Harris, Ross all were sent packing on his watch. That netted him Arroyo, who he gave an awful contract too, and Edinson Volquez. Other than that he got nothing.

reds44
04-26-2008, 12:32 AM
This isn't that complicated. Rough as it was, Castellini's decision makes perfect sense for two reasons.

First, the Reds ballclub on the field continues to be poor. Forget AA talent and all that. Look at the Reds.

Second, a highly experienced, respected, winning, proven GM was available for hire. Jocketty. Somebody Castellini respects and likes.

Why aren't these factors enough to justify the move?

Why is it more complicated than that?

If you owned a badly performing ball club and a proven winner was available and willing to serve as your GM, wouldn't you hire him?
Seems simple enough.

The team Krivsky currently has isn't exacting a ringing endorsement for him.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-26-2008, 12:51 AM
Phillips wasn't here when Krivsky took over. Phillips pretty much represented every offense player Krivsky brought in, with the exception of Hamilton, he doesn't walk.


Phillips was here in 2006. If you are talking about 2005, would you rather have Aurilia, Freel, and Jimenez playing 2B over Phillips? Because that's who played 2B in '05


Pena, Kearns, Lopez, Hamilton, Harris, Ross all were sent packing on his watch. That netted him Arroyo, who he gave an awful contract too, and Edinson Volquez. Other than that he got nothing.

Hamilton and Cody Ross were his won acquisitions and they didn't contribute to any great run production in 2005 because they weren't here. Kearns has been replaced by Patterson in the OF and having Kearns right now would not make that big a difference. Besides, Bruce will up here soon, so it doesn't matter.

Votto replaces Casey. No drop off there.

Kepp is replacing Lopez. Advantage Kepp.

David Ross replaces Larue. Advantage Ross.

Wily Mo? Seriously, how are they missing him? And the Arroyo extension has nothing to do with the Reds offensive struggles. It was a good trade, extension or not.

Not to get in the way of a good rant, because nobody could be more frustrated in this team than I, but I'm not seeing how WK contributed to the discrepancy offensively between 2005 and 2008. He's built a crappy bullpen and bench, but the eight positions out there are pretty much the same unless you blame him for slumps and aging. It wasn't like he traded away or failed to re-sign a big-bopper. In fact, he brought him back - Dunn.

Kc61
04-26-2008, 12:59 AM
Phillips was here in 2006. If you are talking about 2005, would you rather have Aurilia, Freel, and Phillips playing 2B over Phillips? Because that's who played 2B in '05




but the eight positions out there are pretty much the same unless you blame him for slumps and aging. It wasn't like he traded away or failed to re-sign a big-bopper. In fact, he brought him back - Dunn.

Krivsky did some good things, but why does he get credit for keeping together a core of players that has consistently lost since day one?
You are right, he kept the offensive core together. Why is that a plus?

The Griffey/Dunn offensive core has been in place from Bowden to O'Brien to Krivsky. The team has never won. Maybe other things were to blame, but these players haven't exactly carried the team on their shoulders to victory.

Maybe it's time for a GM who is willing to make more fundamental changes to the ballclub.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-26-2008, 01:04 AM
Krivsky did some good things, but why does he get credit for keeping together a core of players that has consistently lost since day one?
You are right, he kept the offensive core together. Why is that a plus?

The Griffey/Dunn offensive core has been in place from Bowden to O'Brien to Krivsky. The team has never won. Maybe other things were to blame, but these players haven't exactly carried the team on their shoulders to victory.

Maybe it's time for a GM who is willing to make more fundamental changes to the ballclub.

Kc, 44 was saying WK single-handedly destroyed the juggernaut offense of 2005.

I was just pointing out that he didn't. I of all people wouldn't be giving WK credit for much of anything. I never have been a supporter of his.

What a GM of the Cincinnati Reds needs is a manager that understrands how to construct a batting order and an owner to back the ____ off.

WVRedsFan
04-26-2008, 01:08 AM
Krivsky did some good things, but why does he get credit for keeping together a core of players that has consistently lost since day one?
You are right, he kept the offensive core together. Why is that a plus?

The Griffey/Dunn offensive core has been in place from Bowden to O'Brien to Krivsky. The team has never won. Maybe other things were to blame, but these players haven't exactly carried the team on their shoulders to victory.

Maybe it's time for a GM who is willing to make more fundamental changes to the ballclub.

Abso-tootin-lutely. Time for change. Krivsky's teams finished 80-82, 72-90, and now 9-14. Winning percentage wise, maybe worse than in 2005. Saint Krivsky may prove to be the great corrector in the future, but as for now, it looks worse than when he came. Evil Bob will remian Evil Bob for his duration as CEO, and the great minor league system maybe be better, but the wins and losses aren't any better and maybe worse. Yeah, it's my rant. I'm sick of all of it. So love the Krivsky years and lament about his passing all you want, but this flawed bunch is doing the same thing (maybe worse) than the last 7 years. You can have all the potential you want, but spit in one hand and have potential in the other and you still lose.

Spring~Fields
04-26-2008, 02:04 AM
Hey Bob remember this?

Mr. Castellini Reportedly, Said

"The Fans should assume that the Reds will be just as aggressive in pursuing players this winter as they were in targeting two national broadcasters?"

"Absolutely," Castellini said, without hesitation. "Absolutely."


How long has it been now Bob?

I am still waiting and I am not a "patient" man Bob.

Caveat Emperor
04-26-2008, 03:22 AM
Pena, Kearns, Lopez, Hamilton, Harris, Ross all were sent packing on his watch. That netted him Arroyo, who he gave an awful contract too, and Edinson Volquez. Other than that he got nothing.

Cody Ross -- we're really gonna pick nits that small?

Wily Mo Pena was, at best, an out-machine with a bit of pop. He's not even a starting OF, and he certainly wouldn't be pushing anyone on this team for regular PT. Even as a platoon hitter, he's still only in the low .800s OPS against LHP. Spinning him into Arroyo was genius work.

Lopez couldn't field at SS and can't hit well enough to justify being spotted at a corner infield or outfield position. He certainly wouldn't help the team's LHP problem with his .702 OPS as a righty.

Brendan Harris might've been worth keeping as a bench player, but who would you sit right now to play him? Kepp? Phillips? Encarnacion? Sorry, not seeing it.

Austin Kearns is a good RF, but the team doesn't need another corner OF. Kearns in RF was killing overall team defense because it was forcing Griffey to play out of position. If Kearns is on this team, does he even play? He can't play center, he isn't going to put Dunn or Griffey on the bench -- at best, you're talking about a platoon OF situation. And that's not even getting into the nagging health issues or the fact that Jay Bruce is ready to come up and clog the outfield even more...

Josh Hamilton is a special talent, but so is Edinson Volquez. With the horrors this team has gone through developing pitching, I'm OK with sending a good bat to get a good arm back in return.

There's you "dismantling" right there -- not a single guy in the bunch (save for Hamilton) that would be starting for this team right now. The only guy that Krivsky cut loose during his time here that was making a major offensive impact was Rich Aurilia -- and it's not like anyone is confused about that move not being made at the right time, given how sharply his numbers dived in '07.

RedlegJake
04-26-2008, 04:47 AM
I agree with CE, WK didn't trade off any notable offense outside of Hamilton and I'd do that deal over and over again. On the flip side he didn't help the offense much either. Outside of BP he basically let it vegetate while he concentrated his efforts on pitching, especially a lot of flailing to fix the pen.

I don't know since I am not privy to inner circles but the whole thing looks like to me -
Krivsky was stupid in boxing Jocketty out instead of bringing him in and making him an ally.

It was handled poorly and seems rash but I'm coming to some conclusions about this team that are starting to seem inescapable. The pitching and the farm are better than when WK came in but the defense and offense are worse, and there is nothing past Jay Bruce for a couple of years at least that can help the O from the farm.

Jocketty takes over with an easier job than WK had, imo. He has pretty good makings of a pitching staff, an ace, 2 young studs in the rotation, a closer and a young power arm, a couple young starters in the minors and a bevy of pen arms on the farm. The pieces are there for areally good staff. He needs to fix the offense but the parts are there for a nice core, too. But this team needs a big piece for the offense beside Bruce, and Dunn and Junior's deals need to be resolved. I feel a lot better with Walt handling those issues than Krivsky. This team is one or two correct moves from being very good. It's also a bad move - or no move - away from being lousy for a lot longer.

westofyou
04-26-2008, 10:00 AM
Funny.. the Reds traded all their offense eh?

Yet the two teams that have the guys who are supposed to be all the Reds offense (Hamilton/Lopez/Kearns) all play on teams that have worse records than the Reds do at this time.

Go figure.... you'd think they'd be unbeaten.

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 10:28 AM
He was 0 for his only 1st round draft picks.

0 for any number is still bad, regardless of sample size.

Fortunately we all have opinions, and that's yours.

reds44
04-26-2008, 10:58 AM
I agree with CE, WK didn't trade off any notable offense outside of Hamilton and I'd do that deal over and over again. On the flip side he didn't help the offense much either. Outside of BP he basically let it vegetate while he concentrated his efforts on pitching, especially a lot of flailing to fix the pen.

I don't know since I am not privy to inner circles but the whole thing looks like to me -
Krivsky was stupid in boxing Jocketty out instead of bringing him in and making him an ally.

It was handled poorly and seems rash but I'm coming to some conclusions about this team that are starting to seem inescapable. The pitching and the farm are better than when WK came in but the defense and offense are worse, and there is nothing past Jay Bruce for a couple of years at least that can help the O from the farm.

Jocketty takes over with an easier job than WK had, imo. He has pretty good makings of a pitching staff, an ace, 2 young studs in the rotation, a closer and a young power arm, a couple young starters in the minors and a bevy of pen arms on the farm. The pieces are there for areally good staff. He needs to fix the offense but the parts are there for a nice core, too. But this team needs a big piece for the offense beside Bruce, and Dunn and Junior's deals need to be resolved. I feel a lot better with Walt handling those issues than Krivsky. This team is one or two correct moves from being very good. It's also a bad move - or no move - away from being lousy for a lot longer.
The numbers don't lie when it comes to the offense. The Reds have an offense at least 50 runs worse than they did when Krivsky took over. A majority of that is Kearns and Lopez. I could really care less what they ended up doing in D.C., when they were here they produced. I have a hard time believing they would have stopped if they were not traded.

The Hamilton trade I would still do, I agree.

WVRedsFan
04-26-2008, 11:11 AM
The numbers don't lie when it comes to the offense. The Reds have an offense at least 50 runs worse than they did when Krivsky took over. A majority of that is Kearns and Lopez. I could really care less what they ended up doing in D.C., when they were here they produced. I have a hard time believing they would have stopped if they were not traded.

The Hamilton trade I would still do, I agree.

I'm on board with this line of thinking, but you know we could argue this for eons and no one's changing their minds. The offense is horrible. It needs to be fixed. It doesn't matter if Krivsky or the evil Castellini did it. It needs to be fixed.

pedro
04-26-2008, 11:23 AM
The numbers don't lie when it comes to the offense. The Reds have an offense at least 50 runs worse than they did when Krivsky took over. A majority of that is Kearns and Lopez. I could really care less what they ended up doing in D.C., when they were here they produced. I have a hard time believing they would have stopped if they were not traded.

The Hamilton trade I would still do, I agree.

And where are you going play Lopez? He's an even worse defensive SS than Keppinger.

Kearns is a double play machine currently slugging .298. Are you going to sit Griffey or Dunn for him?

You're premise is just off.

WVRedsFan
04-26-2008, 11:36 AM
And where are you going play Lopez? He's an even worse defensive SS than Keppinger.

Kearns is a double play machine currently slugging .298. Are you going to sit Griffey or Dunn for him?

You're premise is just off.

Of course, that's something to consider, but where do you draw the line concerning offense and defense? It's tough. I really don't covet Lopez anymore. I saw too many mental lapses in his game, but Kearns is another matter. I'd like to have his bat, but I'm offensive minded (though Kearns' defense was nothing to sneeze about).

pedro
04-26-2008, 11:52 AM
Of course, that's something to consider, but where do you draw the line concerning offense and defense? It's tough. I really don't covet Lopez anymore. I saw too many mental lapses in his game, but Kearns is another matter. I'd like to have his bat, but I'm offensive minded (though Kearns' defense was nothing to sneeze about).

Kearns is clearly a better defender than Griffey in RF but his bat has been pretty silent since he left Cincinnati. Would he be a good option on a team that didn't have Ken Griffey and his large immovable contract anchored in RF? Sure. But that hand was dealt a long time ago and there's no going back now.

The Reds biggest offensive problems this year have centered around the over reliance that Phillips was a middle of the order bat, the wasting of AB's at the top of the order, and the fact that other than EE, Keppinger, Votto and Bako, no one is off to a good start. Coupled with the fact that they were a marginal offensive team in the first place it has been a disaster so far.

corkedbat
04-26-2008, 12:06 PM
If Pants would take Majewski and Freel for Kearns I'd take him back as a fourth OF and RH'd bat. There's no way I'd deal Bray or Thompson for him though and I want nothing to do with FeLo at any price. That pretty much tells me there's nothing substantial to regret about "THE TRADE"

WVRedsFan
04-26-2008, 12:14 PM
If Pants would take Majewski and Freel for Kearns I'd take him back as a fourth OF and RH'd bat. There's no way I'd deal Bray or Thompson for him though and I want nothing to do with FeLo at any price. That pretty much tells me there's nothing substantial to regret about "THE TRADE"


There are regrets in my mind. Like could we have received more for those two? I don't know who, but I think so. Could Krivsky been more diligent in his investigation of Gary Majewski? Absolutely. Could he have had the insight to know Brenden Harris was just not a throw-in. Certainly. Lots of regrets.

For no more good than the tandem of Majewski and Bray have done the Reds, we would have let Lopez go for fodder, Kearns would probably be roaming somewhere in the outfield at times, and this team would have been a run better overall. Or else Keans could have been moved for substantionally more, but who knows?

I just know that a team that has a left handed hitting outfield and first baseman, traditional power bats, really cripples us with left-handed pitching. It was always that way after the departure of Kearns, and nothing's been done about it. It needs to be fixed.

WVRedsFan
04-26-2008, 12:16 PM
The Reds biggest offensive problems this year have centered around the over reliance that Phillips was a middle of the order bat, the wasting of AB's at the top of the order, and the fact that other than EE, Keppinger, Votto and Bako, no one is off to a good start. Coupled with the fact that they were a marginal offensive team in the first place it has been a disaster so far.
Absolutely. Phillips, as I've said before is fool's gold in that he had a season last year offensively that he may never have again. He's too impatient at the plate. The top of the order was bound to fail with Patterson and sometimes Freel there--both impatient hitters and hitting the slumping Phillips behind Griffey has given Junior nothing to hit. Same with Dunn. Teams know that's all we have so they're pitching around those guys.

It's a sad situation.

pedro
04-26-2008, 12:34 PM
If Pants would take Majewski and Freel for Kearns I'd take him back as a fourth OF and RH'd bat. There's no way I'd deal Bray or Thompson for him though and I want nothing to do with FeLo at any price. That pretty much tells me there's nothing substantial to regret about "THE TRADE"


He's going to make too much money for that role.


In agreeing to the contract, Kearns avoids two years of arbitration and gives up two years of free agency. He will earn $3.5 million this season ($150,000 less than the club offered in arbitration), $5 million in 2008 and $8 million in 2009. The club option for 2010 is worth $10 million, with a $1 million buyout.

Highlifeman21
04-26-2008, 12:34 PM
Krivsky was "0 for" based on what?

One and half years of Drew Stubbs and a half season from a high school kid (Mesoraco)?

Based on Stubbs being a bust, and Krivsky drafting Mesoraco b/c of need. Mesoraco might have arguably been the best talent on the board, but he still took him b/c he was a C, and we lack a long-term C prospect.

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 12:38 PM
Based on Stubbs being a bust, and Krivsky drafting Mesoraco b/c of need. Mesoraco might have arguably been the best talent on the board, but he still took him b/c he was a C, and we lack a long-term C prospect.

Stubbs is already a bust? News to me.

No offense, but I've never seen a poster hold such a grudge against a prospect as you do him. Same with Homer Bailey.

Highlifeman21
04-26-2008, 12:45 PM
Stubbs is already a bust? News to me.

What did he do to you? I've never seen a poster hold such a grudge against a prospect as you do him. Same with Homer Bailey. If the Reds don't draft who you want then bash them non-stop and call them busts.

Based on what he's done to date, Stubbs is bust, considering his age, his 3 years @ Texas, and the fact that he's only in AA.

Had he been a kid drafted out of HS, and was 20 in AA, that'd be a completely different animal altogether, but he's not.

I don't hold a grudge against Stubbs. No one liked the pick when it happened, and Stubbs' performance to date has only confirmed that he was a bad pick for the Reds.

As for Bailey, I hope he gets it turned around, but I just refuse to buy into the hype after being a HUGE Ty Howington supporter and watching how that unfolded. The Reds have a history of pitching prospects either getting hurt, or not living up to the hype. I don't want Bailey to follow that trend, but bringing him up last year only set his development back. I root for Bailey, but I think we all need to see him develop more before he's going to become a major positive contributor for the MLB club.

pedro
04-26-2008, 12:50 PM
Stubbs is still in High A ball.

He's off to a pretty good start though

http://sarasota.reds.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Drew%20Stubbs&pos=&sid=t535&t=p_pbp&pid=453211

BRM
04-26-2008, 12:51 PM
I have a Stubbs jersey that has BUST written across the front of it. I can't wait to wear it to GABP when he's starting in CF in a couple of years. Boy, won't I look like an idiot?

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 12:55 PM
Based on what he's done to date, Stubbs is bust, considering his age, his 3 years @ Texas, and the fact that he's only in AA.

Had he been a kid drafted out of HS, and was 20 in AA, that'd be a completely different animal altogether, but he's not.

I don't hold a grudge against Stubbs. No one liked the pick when it happened, and Stubbs' performance to date has only confirmed that he was a bad pick for the Reds.

As for Bailey, I hope he gets it turned around, but I just refuse to buy into the hype after being a HUGE Ty Howington supporter and watching how that unfolded. The Reds have a history of pitching prospects either getting hurt, or not living up to the hype. I don't want Bailey to follow that trend, but bringing him up last year only set his development back. I root for Bailey, but I think we all need to see him develop more before he's going to become a major positive contributor for the MLB club.

Stubbs is in High-A, not AA. And he's hitting .333/.411/.487 in a very pitcher friendly league. He's also 11-for-11 in the stolen base department while also playing gold glove defense. He should end the season in AA Chattanooga and possibly earn an invite to big league camp next spring. If Stubbs continues to hit like that then he'll fill two big needs for the Reds - a RH bat and a gold glove caliber center fielder.

Highlifeman21
04-26-2008, 12:56 PM
Stubbs is still in High A ball.

He's off to a pretty good start though

http://sarasota.reds.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Drew%20Stubbs&pos=&sid=t535&t=p_pbp&pid=453211

I thought I had read he was playing in Chattanooga.

If he's still at Sarasota, then all I can do is shake my head. It's ridiculous.

BRM
04-26-2008, 12:57 PM
Stubbs is in High-A, not AA. And he's hitting .333/.411/.487 in a very pitcher friendly league. He's also 11-for-11 in the stolen base department while also playing gold glove defense. He should end the season in AA Chattanooga and possibly earn an invite to big league camp next spring. If Stubbs continues to hit like that then he'll fill two big needs for the Reds - a RH bat and a gold glove caliber center fielder.

Give it up OBM. The kid is a bust and there's nothing you can do to change that.

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 12:58 PM
Give it up OBM. The kid is a bust and there's nothing you can do to change that.

I know, I know.

I was also told that Cueto would be a bust. ;)

BRM
04-26-2008, 12:59 PM
I know, I know.

I was also told that Cueto would be a bust. ;)

You mean he's not? How did that happen?

edabbs44
04-26-2008, 01:01 PM
Stubbs is in High-A, not AA. And he's hitting .333/.411/.487 in a very pitcher friendly league. He's also 11-for-11 in the stolen base department while also playing gold glove defense. He should end the season in AA Chattanooga and possibly earn an invite to big league camp next spring. If Stubbs continues to hit like that then he'll fill two big needs for the Reds - a RH bat and a gold glove caliber center fielder.

In all honesty, does .333/.411/.487 really excite you for a 23 year old top 10 pick in High A? Obviously he has made strides but come on. Let's not get too excited here.

Highlifeman21
04-26-2008, 01:01 PM
Stubbs is in High-A, not AA. And he's hitting .333/.411/.487 in a very pitcher friendly league. He's also 11-for-11 in the stolen base department while also playing gold glove defense. He should end the season in AA Chattanooga and possibly earn an invite to big league camp next spring. If Stubbs continues to hit like that then he'll fill two big needs for the Reds - a RH bat and a gold glove caliber center fielder.

I love Stubbs' range, speed and glove. He's easily the best defensive CF in the organization, and I think very highly of Patterson.

Unfortunately, Stubbs struggled for 1.5 years, had a better 2nd half last year, and is off to a good start this year, but he's still in High-A (I really thought he was in AA, oops).

He easily could be the type of guy that jumps from AA to the bigs, but will he be able to OPS North of .750 at the bigs? That's what we'll need from him to be our everyday CF, IMO.

Highlifeman21
04-26-2008, 01:02 PM
My question is how will Jocketty's reign influence our kids?

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 01:04 PM
In all honesty, does .333/.411/.487 really excite you for a 23 year old top 10 pick in High A? Obviously he has made strides but come on. Let's not get too excited here.

If it were up to me Stubbs would be in AA right now.

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 01:08 PM
I love Stubbs' range, speed and glove. He's easily the best defensive CF in the organization, and I think very highly of Patterson.

Unfortunately, Stubbs struggled for 1.5 years, had a better 2nd half last year, and is off to a good start this year, but he's still in High-A (I really thought he was in AA, oops).

He easily could be the type of guy that jumps from AA to the bigs, but will he be able to OPS North of .750 at the bigs? That's what we'll need from him to be our everyday CF, IMO.

I definitely think he can be a .750 OPS guy. He'll probably walk 80+ times a season with his great eye at the plate. So if he only hits about .250-.260 then you'll probably get a .350+ OBP from him. Scouts seem to like his power potential, factor in where he'll play half his games and I think he's a near lock to SLG .400+. A .350 OBP + .400 SLG = .750 OPS. But I think he'll slug closer to .450 if his power develops as expected. I think he can be a Mike Cameron type player for the Reds, and I'll take that.

pedro
04-26-2008, 01:09 PM
In all honesty, does .333/.411/.487 really excite you for a 23 year old top 10 pick in High A? Obviously he has made strides but come on. Let's not get too excited here.

He's only had one full year in professional ball and seems to be off to a good start this year so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's not yet a bust. Now that doesn't mean he was good pick considering the Reds seem intent on competing in the short term but if he continues to get on base at a high rate (currently .411) he's still got a solid chance of being a decent major leaguer considering his defensive prowess in CF. Unfortunately for the Reds it doesn't seem likely that if he does pan out it will be before 2010.

edabbs44
04-26-2008, 02:02 PM
If it were up to me Stubbs would be in AA right now.

I agree but logic would tell us that he wouldn't be having as much "success" as he is now.

edabbs44
04-26-2008, 02:05 PM
He's only had one full year in professional ball and seems to be off to a good start this year so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's not yet a bust. Now that doesn't mean he was good pick considering the Reds seem intent on competing in the short term but if he continues to get on base at a high rate (currently .411) he's still got a solid chance of being a decent major leaguer considering his defensive prowess in CF. Unfortunately for the Reds it doesn't seem likely that if he does pan out it will be before 2010.

Agreed here...he might very well be a servicable CFer. He might even be better than that. But he should be a little further along than he is.

He also had over 200 PAs in pro ball the year he was drafted, so the "one full year" thing means a little less for me.

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 02:07 PM
I agree but logic would tell us that he wouldn't be having as much "success" as he is now.

I don't know. The FSL is a tough league to hit in. A bump to AA may see a rise in a power but a drop in batting average.

pedro
04-26-2008, 02:09 PM
Agreed here...he might very well be a servicable CFer. He might even be better than that. But he should be a little further along than he is.

He also had over 200 PAs in pro ball the year he was drafted, so the "one full year" thing means a little less for me.

I'm not too sure that he's all that much behind. Regardless, that doesn't mean it was a good pick for a team that wasn't rebuilding and clearly needed help in CF quicker than it's getting it.

Spring~Fields
04-26-2008, 02:14 PM
If it were up to me Stubbs would be in AA right now.

Yes.

I would like to see him moved up too along with the following to Chattanooga while moving the aged out of AAA Louisville

Sarasota to Chattanogga
Drew Stubbs OF
Chris Valaika SS
Justin Turner 2B
Juan Francisco 3B

Dayton to Sarasota
Frazier
Waring
Jones

Chattanooga to Louisville
Thompson
Roenicke

There is a lot that Krivsky and his staff did not mess up and has good potential, so Krivsky and staff were doing a lot of things right.

Highlifeman21
04-26-2008, 03:03 PM
I know, I know.

I was also told that Cueto would be a bust. ;)

Not by me you weren't.

I was always higher on Cueto than I was Bailey.

I just hope we continue to handle Cueto cautiously.

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 03:10 PM
Not by me you weren't.

I was always higher on Cueto than I was Bailey.

I just hope we continue to handle Cueto cautiously.

No, I wasn't talking about you. And I agree about handling him cautiously. My hope is he's kept under 100 pitches and has an innings limit of somewhere around 180 or in that area. He's currently on pace to throw 223 innings but that shows how efficient he's been as opposed to Dusty riding him in the ground.

fearofpopvol1
04-26-2008, 03:51 PM
I definitely think he can be a .750 OPS guy. He'll probably walk 80+ times a season with his great eye at the plate. So if he only hits about .250-.260 then you'll probably get a .350+ OBP from him. Scouts seem to like his power potential, factor in where he'll play half his games and I think he's a near lock to SLG .400+. A .350 OBP + .400 SLG = .750 OPS. But I think he'll slug closer to .450 if his power develops as expected. I think he can be a Mike Cameron type player for the Reds, and I'll take that.

Good eye at the plate? I don't know that I'd go that far. The dude still strikes out a LOT.

OnBaseMachine
04-26-2008, 03:54 PM
Good eye at the plate? I don't know that I'd go that far. The dude still strikes out a LOT.

He's got an excellent eye at the plate. He's walked 10 times in 78 atbats. Last year he walked 69 times in 497 atbats. That is a very strong walk rate.

Highlifeman21
04-26-2008, 04:49 PM
He's got an excellent eye at the plate. He's walked 10 times in 78 atbats. Last year he walked 69 times in 497 atbats. That is a very strong walk rate.

Walk rate and strikeout rate are mutually exclusive.

Dunn walks by the truckloads, and strikes out by the same unit of measure.