PDA

View Full Version : Walt Jocketty Poll Time



Raisor
12-27-2008, 11:49 PM
Grade time for Walt.

Since his hiring, how do you grade Walt?

TRF
12-27-2008, 11:55 PM
D.

Haven't been enamored of any of his moves. Trading Dunn accomplished nothing, especially since he did not replace his production. He's following suit with Krivsky in hiring old relievers and hoping for production long since past.

membengal
12-27-2008, 11:59 PM
He sure seems to have a fundamental lack of awareness of what has ailed this club in the years before his arrival, that's for sure. Because he is singing from the same song book with the Taveras move.

Falls City Beer
12-28-2008, 12:03 AM
None of the principal prospects gone. No pitching lost. Upgraded catcher. Well, most important of all, he's not even had one offseason.

I'm not going to jump off a bridge because he acquired a .700 OPS CF without losing any prospects in the bargain.

TRF
12-28-2008, 12:07 AM
None of the principal prospects gone. No pitching lost. Upgraded catcher. Well, most important of all, he's not even had one offseason.

I'm not going to jump off a bridge because he acquired a .700 OPS CF without losing any prospects in the bargain.

He also gave up a .900 OPS bat for well, just about nothing.

Falls City Beer
12-28-2008, 12:09 AM
He also gave up a .900 OPS bat for well, just about nothing.

Not a great trade, but he wasn't going to re-sign here. That's becoming more and more obvious. Time to move on.

membengal
12-28-2008, 12:10 AM
So, why not have a plan for when he moves on? Because it is becoming painfully clear that Walt did/does not. Fail.

flyer85
12-28-2008, 12:12 AM
please send Wayne back

Falls City Beer
12-28-2008, 12:12 AM
So, why not have a plan for when he moves on? Because it is becoming painfully clear that Walt did/does not. Fail.

If he doesn't have a big bat before ST, I'll change my mind. Ton of bats still on the market.

membengal
12-28-2008, 12:13 AM
And how to explain bumping Dickerson for Taveras? Even if Dickerson bottom'd out in 2009, he still puts up better numbers than Taveras...

Ron Madden
12-28-2008, 12:14 AM
The Reds Must score more runs in 2009 than they did in 2008.

They Must allow fewer runs in 2009 than they did in 2008.

Seems to me Walt has them headed in the wrong direction, both ways.


:(

Boss-Hog
12-28-2008, 12:14 AM
Not a great trade, but he wasn't going to re-sign here. That's becoming more and more obvious. Time to move on.
That can't be emphasized enough.

Falls City Beer
12-28-2008, 12:16 AM
And how to explain bumping Dickerson for Taveras? Even if Dickerson bottom'd out in 2009, he still puts up better numbers than Taveras...

It's a dumb move, but it's one move. It doesn't preclude improvement in other areas.

membengal
12-28-2008, 12:18 AM
It's a dumb move, but it's one move. It doesn't preclude improvement in other areas.

The problem, as you know, is that they were already in a hole b/c of Dunn moving on. So, yeah, it's a dumb move, because it just makes the shoveling that must be done to dig out of this particular hole that much more difficult. I am aghast that Jocketty doesn't grasp that.

Again, no Pujols here (that we know of) to cover this kind of bad decision. No Duncan as pitching coach either...

Falls City Beer
12-28-2008, 12:20 AM
The problem, as you know, is that they were already in a hole b/c of Dunn moving on. So, yeah, it's a dumb move, because it just makes the shoveling that must be done to dig out of this particular hole that much more difficult. I am aghast that Jocketty doesn't grasp that.

Again, no Pujols here (that we know of) to cover this kind of bad decision. No Duncan as pitching coach either...

The guy's got a sweet spot for the scrappy speedy leadoff guy (Eckstein, Womack). But he's made his living finding middle of the order guys.

KronoRed
12-28-2008, 12:54 AM
I for incomplete, so far I'm not sold this guy is that much better then Wayne.

M2
12-28-2008, 12:56 AM
It's not fair to grade Jocketty. He's proven himself capable in the past. The hopelessness of the Cincinnati Reds overwhelms all. Branch Rickey would be a disaster with this franchise.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-28-2008, 12:56 AM
Feeling generous (and desperately hoping he's not in over his head) so I gave him a C.

Probably more like a C- (if it were an option).

Just what this organization needs. Sweet.

AmarilloRed
12-28-2008, 01:28 AM
I have to give him a D for his moves so far. He needs some improvement quick.

fearofpopvol1
12-28-2008, 01:38 AM
None of the principal prospects gone. No pitching lost. Upgraded catcher. Well, most important of all, he's not even had one offseason.

I'm not going to jump off a bridge because he acquired a .700 OPS CF without losing any prospects in the bargain.

I agree with this. This entire thread is based almost exclusively around the Taveras move.

I don't think it's really fair to grade Jocketty until spring training starts. All of the players the Reds realistically hoped to possibly acquire are still without homes at this point.

This poll should absolutely have an option that would indicate it's too early to say.

Vada Pinson Fan
12-28-2008, 01:51 AM
None of the principal prospects gone. No pitching lost. Upgraded catcher. Well, most important of all, he's not even had one offseason.

I'm in the same group as Falls City Beer and Buckeye Redleg. I'm not ready to call it a lost season by a long shot but I previously thought (3 months ago) Jocketty would have a very good offseason. I didn't expect Mark Teixeira to be brought to the Reds by WJ and I most certainly didn't expect Taveras here either but that's what we have;Taveras, like it or not. How can Bob Castellini be so impatient for a winner and now witness a move like this?

So I continue to hold out hope, wish for the best and give Walt Jocketty an incomplete grade as of today. Let's hope the Reds GM signs or trades for a proven OPS guy to hit cleanup. As good as Brandon Phillips is, he is not a 4th place hitter.

GAC
12-28-2008, 05:35 AM
It's not fair to grade Jocketty. He's proven himself capable in the past. The hopelessness of the Cincinnati Reds overwhelms all. Branch Rickey would be a disaster with this franchise.

Agreed. I'm not going to be so quick to judge at this stage. The FA market, looking at our needs and what "ails" us wasn't offering up much in those specific areas. That is not Jocketty's fault. Where, so far, have we seen a lot of movement going on within this market?

It's nice, as fans, to be able to sit back and look at your Sears "wish book" and talk about how you'd like to have this or that player, and how they would be a good fit for this team; but quite a different thing when it comes to the other variables we, as fans, don't always take into consideration, or have any control over. GMs have to though.

He's let some "dregs' walk from this roster, held onto our younger players/prospects, and not saddled this team with bad, guaranteed, long-term contracts.

You have to "pick n choose" your moments, and right now those moments really haven't presented themselves. You don't make moves just for the sake of making moves.

Caveat Emperor
12-28-2008, 06:06 AM
In all fairness, I can't give a grade until the roster is set going to spring training.

It doesn't fill me with warm and fuzzy feelings, though, to hear the name Norris Hopper being thrown around as a candidate for LF. Walt needs to go get himself a masher for the middle of the lineup. As has been pointed out, he's been historically good at acquiring big bats (see: Edmonds, Pujols, Rolen).

If he can find a .850+ OPS bat, I'll think about issuing a passing mark for the offseason.

mth123
12-28-2008, 06:49 AM
So far, the best player he has acquired is Nick Masset and he's screwed the pooch on that one by bringing in other bullpen mediocrities to push him off the roster or to try some ill fated idea of making him a starter. He's done some good in the addition by subtraction department, but negated much of that with the Willy T acquisition.

Not giving away his prospects keeps him off the F-List, but some improvement is needed to upgrade from "D."

edabbs44
12-28-2008, 07:19 AM
He also gave up a .900 OPS bat for well, just about nothing.

1.5 months of said bat

wheels
12-28-2008, 09:51 AM
So far, the best player he has acquired is Nick Masset and he's screwed the pooch on that one by bringing in other bullpen mediocrities to push him off the roster or to try some ill fated idea of making him a starter. He's done some good in the addition by subtraction department, but negated much of that with the Willy T acquisition.

Not giving away his prospects keeps him off the F-List, but some improvement is needed to upgrade from "D."

Wow.

That is something I hadn't thought about. The best player's he's accquired in his tenure is Nick Masset.

I'm gonna cry.

Raisor
12-28-2008, 09:56 AM
I can see any grades from B-F, I really can. I just don't get the idea that two of you (so far) think he's done an Amazing job.

Really?

macro
12-28-2008, 10:22 AM
A grade at this point in the off-season is similar to a midterm grade in college - it's an indicator, but likely to be deemed insignificant when the final grades are issued in March. FCB summed it up pretty well for me.

membengal
12-28-2008, 10:30 AM
Agreed. I'm not going to be so quick to judge at this stage. The FA market, looking at our needs and what "ails" us wasn't offering up much in those specific areas. That is not Jocketty's fault. Where, so far, have we seen a lot of movement going on within this market?

It's nice, as fans, to be able to sit back and look at your Sears "wish book" and talk about how you'd like to have this or that player, and how they would be a good fit for this team; but quite a different thing when it comes to the other variables we, as fans, don't always take into consideration, or have any control over. GMs have to though.

He's let some "dregs' walk from this roster, held onto our younger players/prospects, and not saddled this team with bad, guaranteed, long-term contracts.

You have to "pick n choose" your moments, and right now those moments really haven't presented themselves. You don't make moves just for the sake of making moves.

In fairness, GAC, whether the market lined up or not, I would have expected Jock to NOT bring in one of the worst players in baseball to "fill a need". The phrase that keeps running through my head is "first do no harm". Fail.

Even if they bagel'd on the FA market and came up small, this team is better off rolling the dice with Dickerson. I still can't fathom why the Reds have bought into a player who, if everything breaks right, OPS's way up at .720 or so. I mean, it boggles the mind.

Just out of curiosity, would people be defending a move to bring in Juan Castro to fill the SS hole? Because that is essentially what the Reds have done with Taveras.

Man, speed must really seduce. Unseemly.

Mario-Rijo
12-28-2008, 10:32 AM
I'd have to say C at best if I look at it from an unbiased perspective. If I do the opposite then there is no "C" there is only A or bust and in that regard he's a bust.

I'm not so sure I feel all that comfortable judging him though because there is no way to judge him completely fairly. He has someone to answer and so far the lip service from ownership has not matched up to the actions made by either of his GM's. So what's the problem? I hardly doubt 2 different GM's have purposely ignored his pleas for the losing to stop now. Or that they were both too incompetent to get the job done. What I am starting to see is an owner who is one clever salesman who has now hired a competent gm in terms of managing expectations. Walt gives us enough info to let us believe we are on the right track but tempers expectations with convenient and even somewhat logical excuses. So that when he carries out their actual plan he can blame it on something other than intent without completely losing his credibility.

Wayne's biggest mistake seems more apparent than ever, he didn't allow for us to believe in immediate contention because he didn't believe it. Walt doesn't believe it either but understands how important it is to create the illusion that they are trying. Krivskys style be it difficult to follow was in retrospect a lot less cruel and unusual at least.

kpresidente
12-28-2008, 10:35 AM
I gave him an D. All he had to do was not replace our crappy players with more crappy players. That's all. It's not that I think the season hinges on Willie Tavares and Ramon Hernandez. I think it hinges on the middle of the order and the starting pitching. But he's basically replaced two .350 OBP guys in the lineup (Freel and Hanigan) with two .320 OBP guys. If these are indicators of the kind of moves he's going to be making in the future, it could easily become an F.

wheels
12-28-2008, 10:52 AM
I'd have to say C at best if I look at it from an unbiased perspective. If I do the opposite then there is no "C" there is only A or bust and in that regard he's a bust.

I'm not so sure I feel all that comfortable judging him though because there is no way to judge him completely fairly. He has someone to answer and so far the lip service from ownership has not matched up to the actions made by either of his GM's. So what's the problem? I hardly doubt 2 different GM's have purposely ignored his pleas for the losing to stop now. Or that they were both too incompetent to get the job done. What I am starting to see is an owner who is one clever salesman who has now hired a competent gm in terms of managing expectations. Walt gives us enough info to let us believe we are on the right track but tempers expectations with convenient and even somewhat logical excuses. So that when he carries out their actual plan he can blame it on something other than intent without completely losing his credibility.

Wayne's biggest mistake seems more apparent than ever, he didn't allow for us to believe in immediate contention because he didn't believe it. Walt doesn't believe it either but understands how important it is to create the illusion that they are trying. Krivskys style be it difficult to follow was in retrospect a lot less cruel and unusual at least.

Excellent post.

Redhook
12-28-2008, 11:14 AM
I gave him a D.

Whether Castellini deserves the D more than Walt is up for debate. I think they both deserve a D as of right now.

I'm really disappointed right now with the Reds. I am generally very optimistic about the team and I believe this team WAS not far from being a playoff team. I thought they should've traded Homer for Dye. Then spend some money on Lowe. Those 2 moves alone would've made the team a decent contender.

Now, we're looking at Taveras, Bruce, and Hairston/Dickerson in the outfield. You've got to be kidding me? How does Walt even make that comment? He better be lying.

top6
12-28-2008, 11:42 AM
I gave Walt a D. I would have given him a B or C or - preferably - incomplete, but the Taveras signing is the first move I can really, fairly judge him on. And it is abysmal.

I think Redhook is right and Castellini may be the bigger problem. You simply cannot be the GM of this team if you only have 2 years to turn them into a winner lest you be fired.

westofyou
12-28-2008, 11:47 AM
Grading a man in the middle of his first off season is Reds fan manna, it's not only unfair to him, but to the organic nature involved in making a team into your idea of what it should be.

GAC
12-28-2008, 12:15 PM
In fairness, GAC, whether the market lined up or not, I would have expected Jock to NOT bring in one of the worst players in baseball to "fill a need". The phrase that keeps running through my head is "first do no harm". Fail.

Even if they bagel'd on the FA market and came up small, this team is better off rolling the dice with Dickerson. I still can't fathom why the Reds have bought into a player who, if everything breaks right, OPS's way up at .720 or so. I mean, it boggles the mind.

I agree to a point with what you're saying, but we have not only some dire needs but holes that HAD to be filled. There was no option of simply doing nothing. Prior to Willy, what was our set (starting) OF? Bruce and a possible question mark in Dickerson? Who else?

And I've definitely not defended the Taveras signing. Can I be the first to coin the phrase "He gives me the Willys". :lol:

He had to do something at this stage. He couldn't simply stand pat on nothing, meaning, we currently don't have anyone near ready in our system to fill that gaping hole in our OF.

When I look at those OF FAs that are available - and not too many other teams are dashing after these guys either - other then Baldelli, not too much stands out to me, other then either a bunch of over-the-hill aging vets, or high priced players wanting the moon and the stars.

On the other thread some are throwing out Edmonds name. :eek:

Unassisted
12-28-2008, 12:42 PM
Grading a man in the middle of his first off season is Reds fan manna, it's not only unfair to him, but to the organic nature involved in making a team into your idea of what it should be.I agree. The roster's a work-in-progress, and Walt hasn't finished his semester yet. The final exam for this semester is scheduled for the day pitchers and catchers report. Let's wait and see what grade he gets on the final before we give him his semester grade.

Reds1
12-28-2008, 01:40 PM
Some credit for getting some people for Griffey and Dunn because both wouldn't be here anyways. He hasn't made that big move yet this year, but seems focused on defense and more small ball and vet leadership at catcher. Just not sure how thing will go yet

Ltlabner
12-28-2008, 03:03 PM
While the Tavaras move is unmitigated stink-pile, it's way to early to be pronouncing a judgement.

I can give him a grade of "hasn't done anything to excite me" thus far but it doesn't mean much.

Give him a review for the offseason when the offseason is actually over.

HokieRed
12-28-2008, 06:02 PM
Absolute A. He is doing just exactly what I had hoped: not compromising the team's 2010 and beyond possibilities for the illusion of competitiveness in 2009. Couldn't ask him to do something harder and he's doing it beautifully. We'll get a .500 team for 2009, one good enough defensively to allow the young pitchers to get to where they need to be by the end of the year. Then 2010 we add what we need and we are going to be right there--with five not just promising but accomplished starting pitchers.

Will M
12-28-2008, 06:23 PM
he got the White Sox to pay 1/2 of Jr's 2008 salary & 1/2 his buyout.

Dunn was a goner as BC wasn't going to pay him. not only did he get three players who may have a major league career he got the DBacks to pay 1/2 of Dunn's salary.

the Freel trade was a GREAT trade for the Reds.

His #1 pick in the 2008 draft seems on the fast track to the bigs.

Yet he gets a "C" or "D" from most because he signs Taveras.

Actaully my only complaint about Walt is bringing Weathers back.

I think Walt's doing a fine job with the constraints placed on him by B.>

Big Klu
12-28-2008, 09:12 PM
A buddy of mine is a Cardinals fan, and he seemed dumbfounded when I told him that much of RedsZone is up in arms about Walt Jocketty. He has a very high opinion of Jocketty, and said that, "Walt is a bargain shopper. Just because he hasn't made a big acquisition yet, doesn't mean he can't or isn't going to make one. He is waiting for the moment when the market is most favorable." My buddy is convinced that Walt will pick up a middle-of-the-order bat for the Reds, and he will do it more cheaply than anyone would expect.

As for Willy Taveras, I'm not concerned about him. He is basically the second coming of Brian L. Hunter. Every now and then, you get infatuated with the speed. (I think I am one of the few RedsZoners who actually liked Deion Sanders.) Either he comes through and has a decent year, or he flops--in which case he will almost invariably find his way to the bench. Guys like Willy Taveras, Brian L. Hunter, Deion Sanders, Chuckie Carr, and Curtis Goodwin have always been like the "summer flings" of baseball--there isn't much substance to them, but if you catch them at the right time, when they are going well, it can be quite enjoyable and "fun while it lasts". (Just don't fall in love with them.)

durl
12-28-2008, 10:09 PM
A lot of people here seem to be ready to give up on the Reds but I believe I'm about to give up on this board.

Walt has made a couple of moves and there's a poll option for FIRING the man?? Geez, people.

Krivsky was ripped because he lacked experience. People here wanted Jocketty. Well, now you got Jocketty, a GM who's proven that he can build a World Series Champion, and people are ready to group him with Bowden and Krivsky after a couple of moves. For crying out loud, I don't believe any GM can make people here happy. If you want to root for a team with tons of cash that gets the top names, become a Yankees fan.

I want the Reds to become a winning franchise again as much as the next guy. I just believe Jocketty has tons more experience in building that franchise than probably everyone here. He has scouts, we have the internet. He has contacts, we have rumors. He has first-hand experience, we have experience with Fantasy leagues.

Thanks for letting me rant.

Raisor
12-28-2008, 10:11 PM
Walt has made a couple of moves and there's a poll option for FIRING the man?? Geez, people.

.

Well, to be fair, there's an option for him doing an "amazing" job too.

"F" needs to be the end of the line, right?

durl
12-28-2008, 10:14 PM
Well, to be fair, there's an option for him doing an "amazing" job too.

"F" needs to be the end of the line, right?

My rant is that there's even an OPTION for firing the man before Spring Training.

We're not talking about a novice to the game. He's built a winner before but, to fans here, a couple of questionable moves completely wipes out his prior success.

remdog
12-28-2008, 10:25 PM
A lot of people here seem to be ready to give up on the Reds but I believe I'm about to give up on this board.

Walt has made a couple of moves and there's a poll option for FIRING the man?? Geez, people.

Don't give up on the board Durl. Just mostly ignore the polls. Generally, they are poorly thought out, seldom offer apppropriate responses and, bye and large, are knee-jerk reactions to a particular point. That's not to knock anyone that wants to start a poll but, generally, I recognize them for what they are and avoid them. I may make a comment but there are only a few polls that I actually vote in.

Rem

remdog
12-28-2008, 10:27 PM
So, now to my comment on this poll: as disappointed I am that Walt chose to sign Tavaras I think it's way too early to grade Walt.

I'll wait to see who shows up on the field at ST.

Rem

Raisor
12-28-2008, 10:27 PM
Don't give up on the board Durl. Just mostly ignore the polls. Generally, they are poorly thought out, seldom offer apppropriate responses and, bye and large, are knee-jerk reactions to a particular point.

You can come and kick my dog while you're at it if you want.

Ron Madden
12-28-2008, 10:31 PM
A lot of people here seem to be ready to give up on the Reds but I believe I'm about to give up on this board.

See Ya.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-28-2008, 10:33 PM
I guess I'm not really sure what ther big deal is.

It's a message board discussing baseball.

Someone started a poll with a valid question for fans to discuss and weigh in on.

Again, what is the big deelio?

remdog
12-28-2008, 10:34 PM
You can come and kick my dog while you're at it if you want.


Why would I want to kick your dog? I acknowledged in my original post, which you convenietly deleated, that you, or anyone, can start a poll. They just aren't usually very well thought out or presented. (famous shrug)

BTW, I love dogs and have actually worked for/with a Nobel Peace Prize winner. How about you?

Rem

marcshoe
12-28-2008, 11:23 PM
The rubric says that a D means "Need improvement, quick". This summarizes my feelings about the team right now succinctly. Get a big bat, and I can up the grade.

Ron Madden
12-28-2008, 11:24 PM
The rubric says that a D means "Need improvement, quick". This summarizes my feelings about the team right now succinctly. Get a big bat, and I can up the grade.


Ditto. :beerme:

durl
12-29-2008, 12:29 AM
Someone started a poll with a valid question for fans to discuss and weigh in on.

Again, what is the big deelio?

The question is, indeed, valid. The option to fire the GM before he even fields a team at Spring Training is, quite frankly, absurd.

I'm not trying to be argumentative and I hope I don't come across as blasting the OP. It's just my opinion that firing the GM at this stage is inconceivable and illogical. In other words, it ain't gonna happen. So why even bring it up?

BuckeyeRedleg
12-29-2008, 02:39 AM
The question is, indeed, valid. The option to fire the GM before he even fields a team at Spring Training is, quite frankly, absurd.

I'm not trying to be argumentative and I hope I don't come across as blasting the OP. It's just my opinion that firing the GM at this stage is inconceivable and illogical. In other words, it ain't gonna happen. So why even bring it up?

I guess I feel that saying Walt's done an "amazing" job (grade A) is equally absurd, so at least the absurity goes both ways.

It is a grade card though, and what would a grade card be without an "A" or an "F"?

GAC
12-29-2008, 06:35 AM
What I want to know is why are we just grading Jocketty?

Why not some of this "love" being directed at Mr "Win Now" who I place a majority of the blame on?

It's like going after the dog because the cat's litter box stinks. :lol:

Topcat
12-29-2008, 06:45 AM
Jocketty has done nothing, Krivsky showed a talent to find hidden jewels in other teams systems. Sorry but the man has done what exactly? Show me how beyond riding the coat tails of his previous realm's gm's he has made this team better" FCB this is a direct call out since you have gushed how he was so special as the Card's gm.

The man is non progressive and has the equal mind of Dusty Baker and that sir is not good.

GAC
12-29-2008, 06:46 AM
"Walt is a bargain shopper. Just because he hasn't made a big acquisition yet, doesn't mean he can't or isn't going to make one. He is waiting for the moment when the market is most favorable."

Bingo! The market right now is not favorable to a GM like Jocketty. Here is an evaluation of Jocketty that I saved after he succeeded Krivsky....

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/04/brian-gunn-on-w.html

Jocketty built arguably the premier National League franchise of this decade. Since 2000, the Cardinals own more regular-seasons wins than any other NL team, won more playoff games, won more league titles, and, of course, won it all in 2006.

How did Jocketty do it? First of all, he was fearless. A master wheeler-dealer, nobody did a better job turning lemons into lemonade, often flipping questionable talent for marquee players.

Consider:

Jocketty landed, via trade, Mark McGwire, Jim Edmonds, Edgar Renteria, Darryl Kile, Scott Rolen, Dennis Eckersley, Todd Stottlemyre, Fernando Vina, Larry Walker, Will Clark, Adam Wainwright, and Woody Williams.

Here are the most notable players he gave up to get them: Eric Ludwick, T.J. Mathews, Kent Bottenfield, Adam Kennedy, Braden Looper, Pablo Ozuna, Manny Aybar, Jose Jimenez, Placido Polanco, Bud Smith, Steve Montgomery, Jay Witasick, Juan Acevedo, Chris Narveson, Jose Leon one year of J.D. Drew, and the waning days of Ray Lankford’s career.

It’s an astonishing haul. Generally Jocketty would use the same formula: go after some established but under appreciated star, give up a few middling prospects for him, let him soak in the cozy St. Louis fan experience, win ballgames, re-sign the guy to an extension (often with a hometown discount), win more ballgames, then repeat the whole process as one big feedback loop. Jocketty was a master at that (and he was probably the best trading-deadline dealer there ever was – that’s how he got McGwire, Clark, Williams, Rolen, Walker, Chuck Finley, and Fernando Tatis).

Jocketty’s other big strength? Cobbling together a pitching staff on the cheap. It took him a while to get the hang of it – Cards’ hurlers in the ‘90s were usually awful. But Jocketty, along with rehab specialists Tony La Russa and pitching coach Dave Duncan, were able to buy low for arms like Chris Carpenter, Jeff Suppan, and Darryl Kile, and let them succeed in front of those reliable St. Louis infielders. At its best it worked beautifully. For example, in 2005 the Cards led the majors in ERA with a starting rotation that cost, altogether, $17 million – or less than what Roger Clemens alone made that year.

JOCKETTY’S WEAKNESSES

He was never that great at developing talent from within. Oh sure, he had his moments – he drafted and signed both Rick Ankiel and J..D. Drew when other teams wouldn’t touch ‘em for fear of being out-negotiated by Scott Boras. And of course, Jocketty was responsible for Albert Pujols, merely the best player in the league, if not all of baseball. But by and large the Cards’ cupboard ran rather bare during the Jocketty years. Baseball America has recently ranked them near the bottom of all major-league farm systems, and the Cards have been especially weak locating talent overseas. Perhaps that’s the flipside of Jocketty’s wheeling-and-dealing prowess – it gave him a sense that the team didn’t need to develop from within in order to succeed.

Jocketty’s other big weakness was that he tended to construct rather shallow rosters. Often the ballclub would be led by big shots like Pujols, Edmonds, and Rolen, while the margins were raggedy at best. Cards fans no doubt remember some of the team’s biggest playoff games left in the hands of shlubs like Craig Paquette, Garrett Stephenson, or Jason Marquis. To be fair, however, Jocketty improved in this area over the last couple years. The Cards’ bench and bullpen were among the best in the league this past year, and role players were crucial to winning the World Series in 2006.

---------------

The problem is.... Cincinnati is not St Louis East. ;)

WebScorpion
12-29-2008, 12:44 PM
How can you possibly grade a guy whose first product has yet to take the field? I'll answer the poll in Nov 2009...at most, I'd give him a mid-season evaluation. I've abstained.

Mario-Rijo
12-29-2008, 01:02 PM
Bingo! The market right now is not favorable to a GM like Jocketty. Here is an evaluation of Jocketty that I saved after he succeeded Krivsky....

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/04/brian-gunn-on-w.html

Jocketty built arguably the premier National League franchise of this decade. Since 2000, the Cardinals own more regular-seasons wins than any other NL team, won more playoff games, won more league titles, and, of course, won it all in 2006.

How did Jocketty do it? First of all, he was fearless. A master wheeler-dealer, nobody did a better job turning lemons into lemonade, often flipping questionable talent for marquee players.

Consider:

Jocketty landed, via trade, Mark McGwire, Jim Edmonds, Edgar Renteria, Darryl Kile, Scott Rolen, Dennis Eckersley, Todd Stottlemyre, Fernando Vina, Larry Walker, Will Clark, Adam Wainwright, and Woody Williams.

Here are the most notable players he gave up to get them: Eric Ludwick, T.J. Mathews, Kent Bottenfield, Adam Kennedy, Braden Looper, Pablo Ozuna, Manny Aybar, Jose Jimenez, Placido Polanco, Bud Smith, Steve Montgomery, Jay Witasick, Juan Acevedo, Chris Narveson, Jose Leon one year of J.D. Drew, and the waning days of Ray Lankford’s career.

It’s an astonishing haul. Generally Jocketty would use the same formula: go after some established but under appreciated star, give up a few middling prospects for him, let him soak in the cozy St. Louis fan experience, win ballgames, re-sign the guy to an extension (often with a hometown discount), win more ballgames, then repeat the whole process as one big feedback loop. Jocketty was a master at that (and he was probably the best trading-deadline dealer there ever was – that’s how he got McGwire, Clark, Williams, Rolen, Walker, Chuck Finley, and Fernando Tatis).

Jocketty’s other big strength? Cobbling together a pitching staff on the cheap. It took him a while to get the hang of it – Cards’ hurlers in the ‘90s were usually awful. But Jocketty, along with rehab specialists Tony La Russa and pitching coach Dave Duncan, were able to buy low for arms like Chris Carpenter, Jeff Suppan, and Darryl Kile, and let them succeed in front of those reliable St. Louis infielders. At its best it worked beautifully. For example, in 2005 the Cards led the majors in ERA with a starting rotation that cost, altogether, $17 million – or less than what Roger Clemens alone made that year.

JOCKETTY’S WEAKNESSES

He was never that great at developing talent from within. Oh sure, he had his moments – he drafted and signed both Rick Ankiel and J..D. Drew when other teams wouldn’t touch ‘em for fear of being out-negotiated by Scott Boras. And of course, Jocketty was responsible for Albert Pujols, merely the best player in the league, if not all of baseball. But by and large the Cards’ cupboard ran rather bare during the Jocketty years. Baseball America has recently ranked them near the bottom of all major-league farm systems, and the Cards have been especially weak locating talent overseas. Perhaps that’s the flipside of Jocketty’s wheeling-and-dealing prowess – it gave him a sense that the team didn’t need to develop from within in order to succeed.

Jocketty’s other big weakness was that he tended to construct rather shallow rosters. Often the ballclub would be led by big shots like Pujols, Edmonds, and Rolen, while the margins were raggedy at best. Cards fans no doubt remember some of the team’s biggest playoff games left in the hands of shlubs like Craig Paquette, Garrett Stephenson, or Jason Marquis. To be fair, however, Jocketty improved in this area over the last couple years. The Cards’ bench and bullpen were among the best in the league this past year, and role players were crucial to winning the World Series in 2006.

---------------

The problem is.... Cincinnati is not St Louis East. ;)

Reading this all the while knowing in the back of my head that LaRussa has a pretty sound philosophy for the most part and that Dave Duncan has a reputation for getting something out of nothing I have a real hard time with giving Walt too much of that credit. So far all I see is a guy that is good at trusting those around him, who is good at seeing obvious talent. I think his value to a club lies in his ability to communicate to the press, fans, and more importantly his peers both inside and out of the organization.

He just comes off as the kind of guy you hire to manage a car lot but not rely on him selling any cars himself but to put people in place who can and help them do their job. But I will admit I am not 100% sure of that, but it's a hunch I have and one he hasn't dispelled yet IMO.

REDREAD
12-29-2008, 04:31 PM
He also gave up a .900 OPS bat for well, just about nothing.

Probably a situation he inherited though.

Dunn was polite about it, but he had already made up his mind to get out of here. Looks like Dunn is tired of playing on a losing team and wants to go to a contender, based on what has been said about him liking LA and Chicago.

IMO, given the situation Walt inherited, it was the right move to trade him. I'd rather have the 3 players we got for Dunn than the 2 draft picks as well (assuming the Reds did offer him arb, knowing he'd decline).

Highlifeman21
12-29-2008, 11:12 PM
I can see any grades from B-F, I really can. I just don't get the idea that two of you (so far) think he's done an Amazing job.

Really?

6 now.

Methinks 6 people either are mocking your poll, or clearly didn't understand the questions.

Only 2 answers I can think of...

Caveat Emperor
12-29-2008, 11:20 PM
6 now.

Methinks 6 people either are mocking your poll, or clearly didn't understand the questions.

Only 2 answers I can think of...

There's only one explanation:

http://www.gamerevolution.com/images/misc/galactus.jpg

HokieRed
12-29-2008, 11:27 PM
6 now.

Methinks 6 people either are mocking your poll, or clearly didn't understand the questions.

Only 2 answers I can think of...
I voted A, and I'm certainly A. not mocking the poll, and B. smart enough to understand the question. I stated my reasons earlier but will give a brief version here. To me, the overwhelming issue of this offseason--let's call it a matter qualitatively different from the other possible moves--was for Walt not to get caught up in the illusory idea that we have some chance to compete in 2009 and to make a move or moves that would compromise our much greater ability to compete in 2010. He's done just that. And he also drafted Alonso.

Mario-Rijo
12-30-2008, 06:55 AM
I voted A, and I'm certainly A. not mocking the poll, and B. smart enough to understand the question. I stated my reasons earlier but will give a brief version here. To me, the overwhelming issue of this offseason--let's call it a matter qualitatively different from the other possible moves--was for Walt not to get caught up in the illusory idea that we have some chance to compete in 2009 and to make a move or moves that would compromise our much greater ability to compete in 2010. He's done just that. And he also drafted Alonso.

I agree with that part of what Walt's done to some extent. But there was and to some extent still is enough out there for us to actually compete without hurting the future. Would we make the playoffs? Don't know that but there is definitely enough available to truly be a potential playoff team as much or more than beyond '09. But even if he acquires that big bat now the Taveras signing has hurt the potential we had to make this a real competitive team next season (all miracles withstanding).

Here's the real issue though Bob Castellini has already risen the expectations but stating again and again that he wants to win now & has even fired a GM to drive his point home and for that reason Walt has failed him and us all. The only reason I'm not harder on Walt is because I'm hoping he is just blowing smoke in order to drive down prices of guys who can actually make a difference and that I'm not so sure that Bob isn't just blowing smoke.

The only good news is that if Taveras is in CF and Hairston is in LF to start the season then those 2 and Dusty are that much closer to unemployment (depending on Taveras' dollars). Walt's not necc. a bum IMO but I have to wonder what his true intentions are. At any rate however an A grade is completely out of the question.

HokieRed
12-30-2008, 09:36 AM
I thought somehow it was an opinion poll, and that views could be proposed and defended withouth some being ruled "completely out of the question." Sorry to have an opinion different than someone else's.

GAC
12-30-2008, 09:42 AM
I thought somehow it was an opinion poll, and that views could be proposed and defended withouth some being ruled "completely out of the question." Sorry to have an opinion different than someone else's.

Your opinion is allowed. Just as long as it lines up with everyone else's. :D

Falls City Beer
12-30-2008, 11:07 AM
I can see an A rating much sooner than an F.

Mario-Rijo
12-30-2008, 12:11 PM
I thought somehow it was an opinion poll, and that views could be proposed and defended withouth some being ruled "completely out of the question." Sorry to have an opinion different than someone else's.

Maybe we have a different opinion of what an A or an F vote means. To me when you vote A it says he has done as good a job as possible and that borders more on a statement of fact than opinion. I don't really have a problem with your opinion just your vote. I just can't see how anyone could vote for A or F at this point, because he could have done better (acquired Holliday) or he could have done worse (traded away Bruce & Cueto to get him).

I certainly didn't mean to bury your opinion. In fact when I read your initial post I felt you had done a good job of bringing up some valid points.

Highlifeman21
12-30-2008, 12:25 PM
I can see an A rating much sooner than an F.

He's certainly closer to an A than a F, I'll give you that.

I'm still waiting to see the complete direction Walt's pushing this team, however.

That's why in the short-term, I voted C.

Highlifeman21
12-30-2008, 12:28 PM
I voted A, and I'm certainly A. not mocking the poll, and B. smart enough to understand the question. I stated my reasons earlier but will give a brief version here. To me, the overwhelming issue of this offseason--let's call it a matter qualitatively different from the other possible moves--was for Walt not to get caught up in the illusory idea that we have some chance to compete in 2009 and to make a move or moves that would compromise our much greater ability to compete in 2010. He's done just that. And he also drafted Alonso.

I could understand a B, but an A is just unfathomable to me.

But I do sincerely appreciate that you defended your position.

I guess when I thought A, that equated to he had completely removed all of DanO's and most of Wayne's fingerprints from this team.

Raisor
12-30-2008, 12:29 PM
So far, after 102 votes, he's got a 1.87 GPA on the 4 point scale.

Spitball
01-01-2009, 10:03 AM
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but in a three week period in April-May of 2004, he acquired Tony Womack, Brian Hunter, and Roger Cedeno in seperate deals. Eeee-gads! :eek:

Big Klu
01-01-2009, 01:27 PM
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but in a three week period in April-May of 2004, he acquired Tony Womack, Brian Hunter, and Roger Cedeno in seperate deals. Eeee-gads! :eek:

You neglect to mention that Brian L. Hunter (who Walt signed on 3/29/04) never actually made an appearance for the Cardinals, and was released two months later on 5/29/04 after putting up a line of .204/.271/.204/.475 with no HR's, 6 RBI's, and 1 SB in 3 attempts at Memphis.

Spitball
01-01-2009, 04:49 PM
You neglect to mention that Brian L. Hunter (who Walt signed on 3/29/04) never actually made an appearance for the Cardinals, and was released two months later ...

Actually, I believe Hunter was acquired via trade for Kerry Robinson. Hunter never played for the Cards but Jocketty still went out and brought the guy on board. I imagine LaRussa had more to do with Hunter not making the team than did Jock.

Big Klu
01-01-2009, 10:25 PM
Actually, I believe Hunter was acquired via trade for Kerry Robinson. Hunter never played for the Cards but Jocketty still went out and brought the guy on board. I imagine LaRussa had more to do with Hunter not making the team than did Jock.

Hunter was acquired only a week before Opening Day. I find it very hard to believe that Jocketty was set on having Hunter make the trip north, and that LaRussa had to prevent him from putting Hunter on the team. I find it very easy to believe that Hunter was acquired by Walt to provide AAA depth at Memphis. When he didn't pan out, Walt cut him.

edabbs44
04-04-2009, 07:07 PM
Thought that it would be interesting to bump this up...anyone change their mind on Walt's tenure since they voted on this poll?

Seems as if the Dunn trade looks much better now and Cincy is becoming the trendy surprise team selection among the so-called experts based on a lot of Walt's work. I would be interested to hear your thoughts since we are on the cusp of Opening Day and the last post was on Jan 1.

Go.

Team Clark
04-04-2009, 07:18 PM
Thought that it would be interesting to bump this up...anyone change their mind on Walt's tenure since they voted on this poll?

Seems as if the Dunn trade looks much better now and Cincy is becoming the trendy surprise team selection among the so-called experts based on a lot of Walt's work. I would be interested to hear your thoughts since we are on the cusp of Opening Day and the last post was on Jan 1.

Go.

I am more than pleased. To me, it seems like he has the reigns.

Redhook
04-04-2009, 07:42 PM
I'm still pi**ed. This team could've been great if the offseason was planned and executed properly. Instead of Taveras, Lincoln, and Weathers the Reds could've added a decent LF bat and probably acquired a SS via trade. Neither of those two very important moves happened.

RedlegJake
04-04-2009, 08:21 PM
I'm very happy with the job Walt's done. Still, this poll isn't timed right. As of this moment all anybody has is their own opinion of the job without a single result to back that opinion.
Nothing any of us say means a thing right now and won;t until the season gets going. If the kids Walt's betting on improve and step up, if Taveras OBPS over .350 and keeps that high steal rate and the pitching is as good as expected then the job he's done suddenly looks like genius for NOT going out and spending big or trading a Bailey. If Bailey gets hammered around, the offense really stinks, the bullpen blows up, Bruce struggles and Volquez and Cueto regress then it'll look like he made dumb decisions. Personally I like everything he did and if Bailey pitches like he has this spring then I'm even okay with not getting Dye. So basically, I'm takingthe same gamble with my opinion of Walt's job so far that he has in doing it. I figure by July I'll feel stupid or brilliant and I don't see a lot of middle ground this year.

jojo
04-04-2009, 08:32 PM
I'm very happy with the job Walt's done. Still, this poll isn't timed right. As of this moment all anybody has is their own opinion of the job without a single result to back that opinion.
Nothing any of us say means a thing right now and won;t until the season gets going. If the kids Walt's betting on improve and step up, if Taveras OBPS over .350 and keeps that high steal rate and the pitching is as good as expected then the job he's done suddenly looks like genius for NOT going out and spending big or trading a Bailey. If Bailey gets hammered around, the offense really stinks, the bullpen blows up, Bruce struggles and Volquez and Cueto regress then it'll look like he made dumb decisions. Personally I like everything he did and if Bailey pitches like he has this spring then I'm even okay with not getting Dye. So basically, I'm takingthe same gamble with my opinion of Walt's job so far that he has in doing it. I figure by July I'll feel stupid or brilliant and I don't see a lot of middle ground this year.

I've argued this before so hopefully this won't sound like a broken record...

The proper way to evaluate a decision is by analyzing the likelihood it should work out based upon what was known at the time of the decision. Waiting for the results to come in can actually often lead to poorer analysis (i.e. if Taveras does have an OBP over .350).

wally post
04-04-2009, 08:40 PM
I am very pleased so far. Trades and moves aren't like rotisserie leagues, where you go to battle with an armed lineup. re: the poll, I have to say "incomplete" - meaning that this is a work in progress. I am a believer at this point in a good future - I think Walt is working little deals and huge deals simultaneously. we are better than we were - bottom line, and we are also in position to make trades, which we were not able to do with other GMs. Yes, much of the back up came from the past GM(s) - but I'm all in so far with Walt.

WMR
04-04-2009, 08:41 PM
See Stormy Quote

edabbs44
04-04-2009, 09:15 PM
I've argued this before so hopefully this won't sound like a broken record...

The proper way to evaluate a decision is by analyzing the likelihood it should work out based upon what was known at the time of the decision. Waiting for the results to come in can actually often lead to poorer analysis (i.e. if Taveras does have an OBP over .350).

While I agree with what you are saying to an extent, who is to say that something is likely or not likely to happen? Walt believes that this roster is likely to be improved from last year. Others on this board do not believe that.

For example, see this quote:


“We’ve added speed to our club and added defense,” said general manager Walt Jocketty. “He fills a lot of needs for us and what I like he is genuinely excited about coming to the Reds.”

Taveras comes to the Reds on the recommendation of Jamie Quirk, Colorado manager Clint Hurdle’s bench coach last year and now a member of Jocketty’s staff in Cincinnati.

“We tried to do a trade with Colorado for Taveras earlier, but it didn’t work out,” said Jocketty. “When the Rockies didn’t tender him (offer him a contract after the season), we called his agent and got this done.”

About his fallen batting average and on base percentage in 2008, Jocketty said, “Jamie Quirk believes Willy got away from his game plan. He needs to bunt more and keep the ball on the ground and get some infield hits. I don’t know if he tried to hit home runs, or what, but Jamie think he changed his approach and that we can get him back on track.”


If the FO thought this through and believes it to be true and then it actually happens (i.e. WT providing a .350+ OBP), can anyone say that it was unlikely to happen? While you may have believed that it wasn't likely, it sounds like they thought it was.

Now I think some things do fall into the category of what you are saying (i.e. obtaining lottery ticket type players and having them blow up), but Taveras providing an OBP in the range of .350 wouldn't take a miracle.

Falls City Beer
04-04-2009, 09:18 PM
No longterm commitments, a starter who will likely outpitch Harang and Arroyo, and a long reliever for the worst salary/performance-ratio player in baseball.

Yeah, I'd like to have gotten a high-upside shortstop, but let's be square: they're the rarest commodity in baseball. Besides, they have an elite defender in Janish.

jojo
04-04-2009, 09:31 PM
Now I think some things do fall into the category of what you are saying (i.e. obtaining lottery ticket type players and having them blow up), but Taveras providing an OBP in the range of .350 wouldn't take a miracle.

But the point is that, given Taveras' track record and what he's projected to do going forward (i.e. based upon his true skill level), building your team with an expectation that he'll OPS over .350 would be poor judgment.

He may do it, it's not impossible. But the decision would be more lucky than sound. While luck is just as good as "sound" in the context of a season, "sound" tends to be much more repeatable and portends better for the future.

Jocketty has a track record but he's also got a different system in Cincy so while he's ultimately making the decisions, his inputs could be less reliable. Unfortunately just because Walt is at the helm, we can't assume the Reds are now the Cardinals on the Ohio.

Caveat Emperor
04-04-2009, 09:40 PM
But the point is that, given Taveras' track record and what he's projected to do going forward (i.e. based upon his true skill level), building your team with an expectation that he'll OPS over .350 would be poor judgment.

Yeah, but it strikes me as a little myopic to say that just because Taveras' track record is poor that Walt will deserve no credit for making a good decision if he has a good season.

I'm sure there was a lot that went into the decision to acquire Taveras -- some of that information probably not known to most of us. Odds are, the information we know (the numbers) outweigh the value of any information we don't (scouting reports, the ability of coaches to fix perceived flaws in his game, deployment and usage) and Taveras will do what we're all thinking he will -- but I don't think you chalk it all up to good luck if it works out.

edabbs44
04-04-2009, 09:52 PM
But the point is that, given Taveras' track record and what he's projected to do going forward (i.e. based upon his true skill level), building your team with an expectation that he'll OPS over .350 would be poor judgment.

"What he's projected to do going forward" by whom? The FO projects him to do better than last year. That's the one that should matter most to them.

HokieRed
04-04-2009, 09:55 PM
I gave him an A earlier and I'm sticking with that. I don't expect this team to be a contender, I did not think contention was reasonbly in reach in the offseason, and I continue to think what Walt has done is to keep together the core of what can be very much better teams in 2010 and beyond. He drafted our number 1 prospect, got more in return for the Dunn rental than I at least expected, and has strengthened the defense. I now watch keenly as he seeks to strengthen the last couple of places we're going to need for the real runs we can make starting next year and beyond.

Scrap Irony
04-04-2009, 10:01 PM
I've argued this before so hopefully this won't sound like a broken record...

The proper way to evaluate a decision is by analyzing the likelihood it should work out based upon what was known at the time of the decision. Waiting for the results to come in can actually often lead to poorer analysis (i.e. if Taveras does have an OBP over .350).

I just can't see that. The proper way to evaluate a decision is whether it makes your team better. Period. If Taveras OBPs 350, Jocketty deserves major props for signing him. Especially if the team wins.

Raisor
04-04-2009, 10:04 PM
I just can't see that. The proper way to evaluate a decision is whether it makes your team better. Period. If Taveras OBPs 350, Jocketty deserves major props for signing him. Especially if the team wins.

Except Taveras will need to OBP .450 to make up for his SLG to even be an average leadoff hitter or CFer.

edabbs44
04-04-2009, 10:15 PM
Except Taveras will need to OBP .450 to make up for his SLG to even be an average leadoff hitter or CFer.

How much money would someone with Taveras' speed and defense command if he were to post an "average" OPS?

The guy costs $3MM per year and cost nothing to obtain him. Let's look at him with that in mind as well. It's only fair.

pahster
04-04-2009, 10:35 PM
How much money would someone with Taveras' speed and defense command if he were to post an "average" OPS?

The guy costs $3MM per year and cost nothing to obtain him. Let's look at him with that in mind as well. It's only fair.

Who cares how much he would cost? Performance is what matters and Taveras isn't likely to do too well in that regard.

edabbs44
04-04-2009, 10:45 PM
Who cares how much he would cost? Performance is what matters and Taveras isn't likely to do too well in that regard.

Were there any plus leadoff hitters/CFers available to Cincy this offseason? They got a guy in his "prime years" who they believe can be an asset who will also play in Cincy for a price that won't stop them from acquiring a replacement or benching him if he isn't.

Not awful.

pahster
04-04-2009, 11:14 PM
Were there any plus leadoff hitters/CFers available to Cincy this offseason? They got a guy in his "prime years" who they believe can be an asset who will also play in Cincy for a price that won't stop them from acquiring a replacement or benching him if he isn't.

Not awful.

They spent part of their limited resources on a guy who's about as easily replaceable as they come. So easy to replace, in fact, that the Reds had two in house options who are at worst equivalent to Taveras. If you take into account the second year it looks even worse.

jojo
04-04-2009, 11:17 PM
Were there any plus leadoff hitters/CFers available to Cincy this offseason? They got a guy in his "prime years" who they believe can be an asset who will also play in Cincy for a price that won't stop them from acquiring a replacement or benching him if he isn't.

Not awful.

Jay Bruce was not only available but he was cheaper and cost nothing to acquire.... He's a better bet to OPS over .350 too.... :cool:

jojo
04-04-2009, 11:33 PM
Yeah, but it strikes me as a little myopic to say that just because Taveras' track record is poor that Walt will deserve no credit for making a good decision if he has a good season.

I'm sure there was a lot that went into the decision to acquire Taveras -- some of that information probably not known to most of us. Odds are, the information we know (the numbers) outweigh the value of any information we don't (scouting reports, the ability of coaches to fix perceived flaws in his game, deployment and usage) and Taveras will do what we're all thinking he will -- but I don't think you chalk it all up to good luck if it works out.

I'm sure that the FO has much better data than we do. That said, the only time Taveras has topped an OBP of .350 as a major leaguer his BABIP took a wild swing in his favor.

I don't think it's myoptic to suggest that isn't something that is easily predicted nor is it something that should be "banked upon" happening again.

TheNext44
04-05-2009, 12:31 AM
Except Taveras will need to OBP .450 to make up for his SLG to even be an average leadoff hitter or CFer.

My view of Taveras is the because he has such a low SLG, he can never OBP .350 again. He is a slap hitter, who gets a large number of his hits via the bunt or infield singe, the type of hits that do drive in runners. Because of this, pitchers will always pound the strike zone with him. The only reason to nibble is to prevent extra base hits, but if the hitter is not an extra base hit threat, there is no reason to nibble. The worst he can do is get a slap hit, which is the same as a walk.

I think the reason why he fell off last year was that pitchers figured this out, and stopped nibbling. Until Taveras learns to drive the ball and gets his SLG up, he will never get enough walks to OBP .350.

Chip R
04-05-2009, 01:04 AM
Except Taveras will need to OBP .450 to make up for his SLG to even be an average leadoff hitter or CFer.


All we need from Tavaras is to get on base. I don't care if he only hits hit 1 home run as long as he gets on base. I'm not so sure OPS is a good stat to use when judging a guy like Tavaras just like stolen bases aren't a good stat to use in judging Albert Pujols. If Tavaras can get on base and score runs while playing decent OF defense, then he's worth every penny the Reds are paying him and then some. Granted these are pretty big ifs but if he can do it, it'll be worth it.

As for the original question, I'd have to give him an incomplete. It's not a good time to ask the question. What I do like is that he's not giving in to veteran-love that other GMs have been guilty of. Guys like Rosales, Dickerson, Homer, Owings, Janish and Herrera are all going to be given excellent chances of making the team. We're so used to other GMs bringing in guys like Fogg to fill that 5th starter's role. That's the very thing Dusty's been accussed of. Now, who knows if Dusty's begging Walt to set him up with some vets and Walt's telling him that we have to go with the young guys. Maybe it's the other way around. Who knows? But in the past, a guy like Keppinger would have been as secure as Jay Bruce is of making the team no matter how poorly he hit in ST. And Keppinger doesn't make much more than a rookie does. I was skeptical that Dickerson would even be given much more than a token chance to make the club. I thought for sure someone like Luis Gonzalez or Moises Alou would be brought in. But they weren't. Maybe it was economic factors and those guys were asking for too much money. But it looks like as of this moment, Dickerson is going to be the left handed part of a platoon. He may not start every day in CF like a lot of us wanted but it's better than nothing. For whatever reason, this organization is putting their faith in young players and it's certainly a breath of fresh air.

remdog
04-05-2009, 02:39 AM
...What I do like is that he's not giving in to veteran-love that other GMs have been guilty of. Guys like Rosales, Dickerson, Homer, Owings, Janish and Herrera are all going to be given excellent chances of making the team. We're so used to other GMs bringing in guys like Fogg to fill that 5th starter's role. That's the very thing Dusty's been accussed of. Now, who knows if Dusty's begging Walt to set him up with some vets and Walt's telling him that we have to go with the young guys. Maybe it's the other way around. Who knows? But in the past, a guy like Keppinger would have been as secure as Jay Bruce is of making the team no matter how poorly he hit in ST. And Keppinger doesn't make much more than a rookie does. I was skeptical that Dickerson would even be given much more than a token chance to make the club. I thought for sure someone like Luis Gonzalez or Moises Alou would be brought in. But they weren't.

Good point. And, long-term, it's a step up for the organization. I guess things hinge on whether or not you think the Reds had/didn't have a shot at the playoffs this year. I thought they did, if they made the right moves. When they traded for Hernandez I thought they were on the scent but it suddenly went cold and, more and more, I think it was about money/the economy more than any belief that the Reds would contend this year.

Perhaps it's all for the better because, as per the Bailey/Dye trade rumor, some of the kids are starting to show that they should be kept around. I don't know if they are blooming enough to make a run at the playoffs in '10 but.....(famous shrug)

Rem

WVRedsFan
04-05-2009, 02:53 AM
Good point. And, long-term, it's a step up for the organization. I guess things hinge on whether or not you think the Reds had/didn't have a shot at the playoffs this year. I thought they did, if they made the right moves. When they traded for Hernandez I thought they were on the scent but it suddenly went cold and, more and more, I think it was about money/the economy more than any belief that the Reds would contend this year.

Perhaps it's all for the better because, as per the Bailey/Dye trade rumor, some of the kids are starting to show that they should be kept around. I don't know if they are blooming enough to make a run at the playoffs in '10 but.....(famous shrug)

Rem

Spot on. The Reds are not going to compete this year. My concern has been the lack of offense, but I'm kidding myself. Even if we had acquired Dye or Sheffield or kept Adam Dunn, it would have made no difference. I think Walt Jocketty knew that and stood pat. Sure, he would have taken a Sheffield for league minimum, but apparently Gary wanted a starting job and there is none available. I would have liked to have signed a big bopper mainly because it would make the long summer more enjoyable, but I'll look to the future and not get so morbid. I'd much rather lose 11-9 than 2-1, but this is the way it's going to be until players develop. I think we are on the right track and Willy T or anyone else will not sink this season. We just have to be patient and hope the promise that we see comes to fruition.

AtomicDumpling
04-05-2009, 03:10 AM
The Reds are still relying largely on the pre-Jocketty players.

Jocketty has made just three important moves in his tenure:
1. Traded Adam Dunn for Micah Owings
2. Traded Ryan Freel for Ramon Hernandez
3. Spent the off-season Free Agent budget on Willy Taveras

You can say the signings of Latin-American youngsters is an important move, but that won't affect the Reds for several years.

Since Walt Jocketty took over the team he has brought in Ramon Hernandez, Micah Owings, Willy Taveras, Laynce Nix, Jonny Gomes, Daniel Herrera, Nick Masset and Arthur Rhodes.

Jocketty has shipped out Adam Dunn, Ken Griffey Jr., Jeff Keppinger, Jeremy Affeldt, Ryan Freel, Javy Valentin, Corey Patterson, Paul Bako, and Gary Majewski.

Hernandez is an improvement over Bako/Valentin.
Owings is an improvement over last year's group of 5th starters.
Taveras was one of the worst players in MLB last year, but still might be a slight improvement over Patterson.

The rest of the newbies are roster filler that wouldn't make many MLB rosters.

I don't think any of those moves are worth getting excited about. They slightly improve the team.

So Walt has really done very little to improve the team since he took over.

If the Reds are to win more games than last year it will be due to last year's players simply playing better than they did last year. We should see lots of improvement from Bruce and Cueto. Some amount of improvement from Votto and Encarnacion. Harang might return to form. Gonzalez might stay healthy. Hopefully these improvements will not only compensate for the loss of Dunn but will lead to extra wins. There are a lot of Ifs and Maybes that must come to fruition for this team to be better than last year.

If any of those core players get hurt we are looking at another dismal season because the team has no depth.

GAC
04-05-2009, 05:24 AM
It's not fair to grade Jocketty. He's proven himself capable in the past. The hopelessness of the Cincinnati Reds overwhelms all. Branch Rickey would be a disaster with this franchise.

True. But I think Branch would also do a far better job at perfecting our farm system then Walt would. IMO, Richey would be ideal for today's game.

As far as Walt's overall grade? If I thought it was unfair to grade WK after his first year, due to his shortness of time in the GM job, and looking at what needed to be accomplished within this organization, then it is likewise unfair to grade Walt at this stage.

But Walt did take over an organization that was making some headway, especially in the farms, and not completely devoid of talent. There were better building blocks here.

What gets me with BobC and Walt though is.... I really don't know what their plan is?

GAC
04-05-2009, 05:40 AM
The Reds are still relying largely on the pre-Jocketty players.

True. But It's not Walt's fault that they were here prior to his taking over the GM job. It is to his credit though that, for the most part, he's not given up or sacrificed some of those young, quality players for this "win now" mantra. And Walt also can't do much with most of them due to contracts. A majority of our really big money contracts are with pitchers like Harang, Arroyo, and Cordero, who also all got raises in '09 too. Even if he wanted to, was there a trade market for them?

As for the additions?...


Jocketty has made just three important moves in his tenure:
1. Traded Adam Dunn for Micah Owings
2. Traded Ryan Freel for Ramon Hernandez
3. Spent the off-season Free Agent budget on Willy Taveras

IMO, two of those trades (#1 and #2) were good moves. Yeah, I'm a fan of Dunn; but he most likely wasn't going to resign here, and no one could predict what was going to happen to the market and value of players like Dunn, Abreu, and others in this past off-season, and that they would end up signing for less then they wanted.


You can say the signings of Latin-American youngsters is an important move, but that won't affect the Reds for several years.

But still good moves. It doesn't lessen their importance just because they won't make an immediate impact. They have to continue to strengthen this farm system.


Jocketty has shipped out Adam Dunn, Ken Griffey Jr., Jeff Keppinger, Jeremy Affeldt, Ryan Freel, Javy Valentin, Corey Patterson, Paul Bako, and Gary Majewski.

I think there are also some other players too (like Belisle?). But it was addition via subtraction.


If the Reds are to win more games than last year it will be due to last year's players simply playing better than they did last year. We should see lots of improvement from Bruce and Cueto. Some amount of improvement from Votto and Encarnacion.

Nothing wrong with that. That's all any GM can do when it comes to those younger players - show patience and hope for continual improvement.

Jpup
04-05-2009, 08:07 AM
The Reds are still relying largely on the pre-Jocketty players.

Jocketty has made just three important moves in his tenure:
1. Traded Adam Dunn for Micah Owings
2. Traded Ryan Freel for Ramon Hernandez
3. Spent the off-season Free Agent budget on Willy Taveras

You can say the signings of Latin-American youngsters is an important move, but that won't affect the Reds for several years.

Since Walt Jocketty took over the team he has brought in Ramon Hernandez, Micah Owings, Willy Taveras, Laynce Nix, Jonny Gomes, Daniel Herrera, Nick Masset and Arthur Rhodes.

Jocketty has shipped out Adam Dunn, Ken Griffey Jr., Jeff Keppinger, Jeremy Affeldt, Ryan Freel, Javy Valentin, Corey Patterson, Paul Bako, and Gary Majewski.

Hernandez is an improvement over Bako/Valentin.
Owings is an improvement over last year's group of 5th starters.
Taveras was one of the worst players in MLB last year, but still might be a slight improvement over Patterson.

The rest of the newbies are roster filler that wouldn't make many MLB rosters.

I don't think any of those moves are worth getting excited about. They slightly improve the team.

So Walt has really done very little to improve the team since he took over.

If the Reds are to win more games than last year it will be due to last year's players simply playing better than they did last year. We should see lots of improvement from Bruce and Cueto. Some amount of improvement from Votto and Encarnacion. Harang might return to form. Gonzalez might stay healthy. Hopefully these improvements will not only compensate for the loss of Dunn but will lead to extra wins. There are a lot of Ifs and Maybes that must come to fruition for this team to be better than last year.

If any of those core players get hurt we are looking at another dismal season because the team has no depth.

Herrera was brought in by Krivsky in the Hamilton trade. Good post and, as usual, I agree with you on most of it.

Redhook
04-05-2009, 09:05 AM
I gave him an A earlier and I'm sticking with that. I don't expect this team to be a contender, I did not think contention was reasonbly in reach in the offseason, and I continue to think what Walt has done is to keep together the core of what can be very much better teams in 2010 and beyond. He drafted our number 1 prospect, got more in return for the Dunn rental than I at least expected, and has strengthened the defense. I now watch keenly as he seeks to strengthen the last couple of places we're going to need for the real runs we can make starting next year and beyond.

Wow, you have low expectations. You give an A because he didn't trade part of the core.

And how has he improved the defense? Just because JR and Dunn are gone doesn't mean he's improved the defense. Taveras isn't as good as CP in center. Dickerson was already here. Hernandez is decent at catcher but not great. The SS situation is going to be a disaster. EE still stinks at 3rd. Walt didn't do a thing to improve the defense. It's only going to be better because the two corner outfielders will be better by subtraction.

HokieRed
04-05-2009, 10:59 AM
I think we'll see improved overall defense because Dickerson will get the majority of time in LF, Taveras is reasonably capable in center, and Bruce will be in right. Surely the decision to go Taveras-Dickerson rather than, say, Dickerson-Abreu must be credited to Walt. He's also traded Keppinger making it clear that K was not an acceptable alternative at SS. As to giving him an A, I think you've always got to estimate performance from within a reasonable expectation about what's possible and what is not. I also think a consistent problem of this organization has been to be deluded about the quality of its talent and the possibility of competing. This leads to bad short term moves with long term negative consequences. Current cases in point: contracts of Cordero, Gonzalez etc. Walt seems to have resisted that pressure.

cincrazy
04-05-2009, 11:54 AM
I give him a B-. I like his patience. And I also think he got a good deal for Dunn, as much as it was criticized at the time. I think considering the circumstances he did a good job. I still think he's just biding his time until he can make a big move. For example, if this team is right in the thick of it come June and July, I can see him making a deal to swing it our way.

nate
04-05-2009, 01:48 PM
My position remains the same: C. He didn't do anything to dramatically alter the course (negatively or positively) the Reds were already on.

Highlifeman21
04-05-2009, 02:39 PM
"What he's projected to do going forward" by whom? The FO projects him to do better than last year. That's the one that should matter most to them.

So it should matter most that the FO is in all likelihood absolutely wrong about Taveras projecting better than he really is?

Seems like a bad FO philosophy, IMO.

Mario-Rijo
04-05-2009, 03:11 PM
My position remains the same: C. He didn't do anything to dramatically alter the course (negatively or positively) the Reds were already on.

Agreed. Unless of course maybe Owings breaks out, I might have to give him a little love for that. I am still not convinced that not trading Bailey was a good thing but Homer has certainly started to make me wonder, so that too may play to Walts advantage. Although I think Homer would have been gone had the Sox chipped in enough $$$.

*BaseClogger*
04-05-2009, 04:21 PM
D-Need improvement, quick

Quick-er-ly please!

Highlifeman21
04-05-2009, 04:42 PM
How much money would someone with Taveras' speed and defense command if he were to post an "average" OPS?

The guy costs $3MM per year and cost nothing to obtain him. Let's look at him with that in mind as well. It's only fair.

Taveras brings speed, not defense. IMO, Dickerson is a better CF defender than Taveras, and Patterson was probably better than Dickerson, but definitely better than Taveras.

The other problem with Taveras is that he won't give you league average OPS for a CF, so essentially it's a burned pile o cash for a guy we didn't need...

But he's fast, so he's got that goin' for him...

edabbs44
04-05-2009, 05:01 PM
Taveras brings speed, not defense. IMO, Dickerson is a better CF defender than Taveras, and Patterson was probably better than Dickerson, but definitely better than Taveras.

The other problem with Taveras is that he won't give you league average OPS for a CF, so essentially it's a burned pile o cash for a guy we didn't need...

But he's fast, so he's got that goin' for him...

I admit that I'm not a defensive stat guru by any stretch, but Erardi claims that Taveras is comparable to Patterson. FWIW.

And if Taveras sucks it up, I believe that Jocketty is smart enough to ensure that the guy should be, at a minimum, dropped in the order. If not benched completely.

Then we would have a speedster/above average defender vet on the bench at $3MM per year. Not the optimal situation for this team, but not completely awful as he does provide certain value to the club.

Everyone was pimping Dickerson to be the answer in CF this year. I guess he'll get a decent amount of time to prove it, but he has a career minor league OPS of .778. He's no lock. If Taveras sucks and Dickerson is producing, I think Walt is smart enough to ensure that the right thing happens.

OnBaseMachine
04-06-2009, 11:29 PM
I originally gave Jocketty a C, but after sending Gomes down in favor of McDonald, I'd probably have to drop his grade to a C-.

HokieRed
04-07-2009, 03:47 PM
Actually yesterday's game reinforces my sense of what a good job Walt is doing. IMHO we're not one player away from anything--we are four or five players away from being a contender. We have those players coming, and the most important thing Walt is doing now is conserving that group of players for 2010 and after. An interesting question to ask would be how many of this year's starting position players will start next year on opening day. My answer would be 2 (since CD didn't start yesterday): Bruce and Votto. I believe next year's opening day lineup will include those two plus Frazier, Valaika, Alonso or Dorn, Stubbs or Heisey (or CD), plus a SS and C (who could still be Craig Tatum). The bullpen may also be very different; it may include Roenicke, Fisher, Viola, Thompson, Ramirez and others. Apart from the rotation, we're on the verge of having a very substantially different team, and I think Walt's performance has to be assessed on how he's moving us toward that team and not on whether he chooses Gomes or McDonald to be the 25th guy (though I'd have preferred Gomes like most everybody else.)

WMR
04-07-2009, 04:26 PM
Actually yesterday's game reinforces my sense of what a good job Walt is doing. IMHO we're not one player away from anything--we are four or five players away from being a contender. We have those players coming, and the most important thing Walt is doing now is conserving that group of players for 2010 and after. An interesting question to ask would be how many of this year's starting position players will start next year on opening day. My answer would be 2 (since CD didn't start yesterday): Bruce and Votto. I believe next year's opening day lineup will include those two plus Frazier, Valaika, Alonso or Dorn, Stubbs or Heisey (or CD), plus a SS and C (who could still be Craig Tatum). The bullpen may also be very different; it may include Roenicke, Fisher, Viola, Thompson, Ramirez and others. Apart from the rotation, we're on the verge of having a very substantially different team, and I think Walt's performance has to be assessed on how he's moving us toward that team and not on whether he chooses Gomes or McDonald to be the 25th guy (though I'd have preferred Gomes like most everybody else.)

The prospects will save us, that's the ticket.

Haven't heard that story ever before.

cincrazy
04-07-2009, 04:41 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if Jocketty's strategy was to wait until May or June of this year to acquire the big bat we need. Maybe he feels that our pitching can keep us in it for a while, and that teams like the Tigers will crumble and may be willing to sell low on Magglio Ordonez (just using that as an example).

bucksfan2
04-07-2009, 04:42 PM
Actually yesterday's game reinforces my sense of what a good job Walt is doing. IMHO we're not one player away from anything--we are four or five players away from being a contender. We have those players coming, and the most important thing Walt is doing now is conserving that group of players for 2010 and after. An interesting question to ask would be how many of this year's starting position players will start next year on opening day. My answer would be 2 (since CD didn't start yesterday): Bruce and Votto. I believe next year's opening day lineup will include those two plus Frazier, Valaika, Alonso or Dorn, Stubbs or Heisey (or CD), plus a SS and C (who could still be Craig Tatum). The bullpen may also be very different; it may include Roenicke, Fisher, Viola, Thompson, Ramirez and others. Apart from the rotation, we're on the verge of having a very substantially different team, and I think Walt's performance has to be assessed on how he's moving us toward that team and not on whether he chooses Gomes or McDonald to be the 25th guy (though I'd have preferred Gomes like most everybody else.)

I have it at 4-5. Barring any health issues Votto and Bruce will be in the lineup come opening day next season. I also think Phillips will be in the lineup. I just don't see them moving him nor should they. I also think you may see either Encarnacion or Taveras in the lineup opening day next season. Both could be supplanted by Fraizer or Stubbs respectively but I see Dusty going to with vet on opening day, similar to Votto and Hatteburg last season.

HokieRed
04-07-2009, 08:18 PM
The prospects will save us, that's the ticket.

Haven't heard that story ever before.

Does the appearance of Bruce and Votto suggest that maybe there's something more to it this time?

WMR
04-07-2009, 11:04 PM
Does the appearance of Bruce and Votto suggest that maybe there's something more to it this time?

I sincerely hope so.

Weren't our "can't miss" prospects who arrived on the major league scene several years ago to supposedly be quickly followed by reinforcements named Austin Kearns and Adam Dunn?

I hope you're right and that the minor league options we're counting on to come to fruition all actually pan out in time to coincide with our current talent on the major league roster. I am, however, quite jaded when it comes to us, as fans, expecting for our minor league players to "save us" so to speak.

Highlifeman21
04-07-2009, 11:43 PM
Actually yesterday's game reinforces my sense of what a good job Walt is doing. IMHO we're not one player away from anything--we are four or five players away from being a contender. We have those players coming, and the most important thing Walt is doing now is conserving that group of players for 2010 and after. An interesting question to ask would be how many of this year's starting position players will start next year on opening day. My answer would be 2 (since CD didn't start yesterday): Bruce and Votto. I believe next year's opening day lineup will include those two plus Frazier, Valaika, Alonso or Dorn, Stubbs or Heisey (or CD), plus a SS and C (who could still be Craig Tatum). The bullpen may also be very different; it may include Roenicke, Fisher, Viola, Thompson, Ramirez and others. Apart from the rotation, we're on the verge of having a very substantially different team, and I think Walt's performance has to be assessed on how he's moving us toward that team and not on whether he chooses Gomes or McDonald to be the 25th guy (though I'd have preferred Gomes like most everybody else.)

Are you and I watching the same Cincinnati Reds?

HokieRed
04-08-2009, 12:32 AM
The Reds I watched yesterday were well below average in LF and CF, average at best at 3rd, SS, 2b, and C. I think different people will start in all those positions on opening day 2010, though there's some chance yesterday's second baseman might still move, or be moved, to SS where his offensive numbers would be much better than they are at 2b, especially with the kind of crippling platoon differential he has. So I look forward to seeing 2 or maybe three of yesterday's starters in the lineup in April, 2010: Bruce and Votto for sure, Phillips maybe with a position change.

dfs
04-08-2009, 03:33 PM
Grade time for Walt.

Since his hiring, how do you grade Walt?
If he thinks this year's team will contend....That's an F.

If he is trying to build his team and still assembling pieces?....I'll give him a B.

Falls City Beer
04-08-2009, 04:24 PM
Jocketty needs to trade Arroyo or Harang and Roenicke + cash to the Nats for Zimmerman; then move EdE to left and platoon Dickerson/Taveras in center.

Then I'll give him an A.

membengal
04-08-2009, 04:39 PM
I like the aggression. I don't like the target. I don't know that Zimmerman is remotely what his advance pub said he was with the stick.

pahster
04-08-2009, 05:49 PM
I like the aggression. I don't like the target. I don't know that Zimmerman is remotely what his advance pub said he was with the stick.

For his career, Zimmerman has a line of .282/.341/.462/.803 with an OPS+ of 110. That's through his age 23 season. Add in what I think is a plus glove at third base, and it seems to me that the sky's the limit for him.

membengal
04-08-2009, 09:01 PM
pahster, you may be right, but he regressed somewhat signficantly in power last year, and I would like to see a bounce-back from him this year to think he will fulfill expecations that accompanied him when he came up...

HokieRed
04-08-2009, 09:47 PM
WJ didn't trade Josh.

pahster
04-09-2009, 12:13 AM
pahster, you may be right, but he regressed somewhat signficantly in power last year, and I would like to see a bounce-back from him this year to think he will fulfill expecations that accompanied him when he came up...

His SLG in 2008 was .016 lower than it was in 2007.

hebroncougar
04-09-2009, 12:35 AM
His SLG in 2008 was .016 lower than it was in 2007.

Yeah, but it should have went up by at least a decent margin by moving out of RFK, and into Nats Park. Instead, it regressed. Not sure what the Nats would want either of those pitchers for, they aren't contending anytime soon. I think the Angels would make a better trading partner if the Reds decide to go that route, but folks we are 2 games into a long season.

membengal
04-09-2009, 08:31 AM
What hebron said.

pahster
04-09-2009, 08:57 AM
What hebron said.

Doesn't at all concern me. He was 23 and hurt that year. His RC/G actually went up by a bit: in 2007 it was 4.9 and in 2008 it was 5. If only Encarnacion had Zimmerman's upside.

membengal
04-09-2009, 09:19 AM
That's fine pahster. But it was sitll a disappointing year from a guy who the jury is out on whether he will be the next big thing. His OPS corrects to .825 or so this year, with 20 homerun power etc.? Fine, I buy in. But I wouldn't bet the house on that either.

cincrazy
04-09-2009, 12:58 PM
That's fine pahster. But it was sitll a disappointing year from a guy who the jury is out on whether he will be the next big thing. He OPS correct to .825 or so this year, with 20 homerun power etc.? Fine, I buy in. But I wouldn't bet the house on that either.

Well he may not be the next big thing, but I still think he's a better play than Edwin, and will be for the long term also.

membengal
04-09-2009, 01:01 PM
His glove certainly is. Not sure on the bat.

OnBaseMachine
04-29-2009, 12:53 AM
Walt's grade continues to drop for me. He's had an awful first year on the job, IMO. Let's look at some of the moves he's made:

-Traded Adam Dunn. The jury is still out on the return. If Owings develops into a solid starter and/or Dallas Buck reaches his potential then it's a good trade.

-Traded Ken Griffey Jr. No complaints.

-Re-signed Mike Lincoln (2 year deal) and Jerry Hairston Jr. Awful moves IMO. Lincoln has been awful so far and Hairston looks like the sub .700 hitter he always was before his nice half season last year. There were better options available in the minors, IMO.

-Signed Willy Taveras to a 2-year deal. Again, another unnecessary move, IMO. Chris Dickerson would've been a better option instead of wasting six million dollars on Taveras. Yeah, Dickerson is unproven but I'd still take him over Taveras.

The biggest disappointment with Jocketty was his failure to improve the team this offseason. The Reds needed a big bat for left field and a shortstop. Walt failed to upgrade those two positions. With a solid pitching staff in place, upgrading those two positions could have made this team a legit contender, at least in my opinion.

Right now, I'm thinking two things:

1.) Walt has either lost it

or

2.) Albert Pujols and the coaching staff in St. Louis made him look better than he was.

WVRedsFan
04-29-2009, 01:17 AM
Walt's grade continues to drop for me.
Same here. I am flabergasted

He's had an awful first year on the job, IMO. Let's look at some of the moves he's made:

-Traded Adam Dunn. The jury is still out on the return. If Owings develops into a solid starter and/or Dallas Buck reaches his potential then it's a good trade.
Maybe so, but we sure could use that offense this year. Remember we lost a solid 100 RBI's when Dunn was traded and no one has even come close to being able to duplicate that


-Traded Ken Griffey Jr. No complaints.

I hate to say this, but I agree.


-Re-signed Mike Lincoln (2 year deal) and Jerry Hairston Jr. Awful moves IMO. Lincoln has been awful so far and Hairston looks like the sub .700 hitter he always was before his nice half season last year. There were better options available in the minors, IMO.
It's as if he was so removed from the actual on field activities he couldn't see that both players were mirages last year.


-Signed Willy Taveras to a 2-year deal. Again, another unnecessary move, IMO. Chris Dickerson would've been a better option instead of wasting six million dollars on Taveras. Yeah, Dickerson is unproven but I'd still take him over Taveras.
I might have said that two weeks ago, but I'm wondering now. I'm not so sure that Dickerson might have had a career year last year and never duplicate it again. Traveras was a good stop gap, but for two years? Ridiculous.


The biggest disappointment with Jocketty was his failure to improve the team this offseason. The Reds needed a big bat for left field and a shortstop. Walt failed to upgrade those two positions. With a solid pitching staff in place, upgrading those two positions could have made this team a legit contender, at least in my opinion.
The Reds didn't want to part with the potential of Homer Bailey or spend the money to sign a real shortstop (if there really was one better available). More on that later.


Right now, I'm thinking two things:

1.) Walt has either lost it

or

2.) Albert Pujols and the coaching staff in St. Louis made him look better than he was.

I think it's the money situation. They (meaning Buffalo Bob and Walt) thought they could "get by" with Gonzo at short and Hairston in left for bargain basement prices, never considering that you get what you pay for. I also wouldn't discount the waiting game of waiting for the young talent to blossom in the minors if it weren't for the Lincoln, Hairston, and Traveras signings. That baffles me, so it has to be $$, something he had a lot of in St. Louis.

OnBaseMachine
04-29-2009, 01:26 AM
Maybe so, but we sure could use that offense this year. Remember we lost a solid 100 RBI's when Dunn was traded and no one has even come close to being able to duplicate that.

I was all for locking Dunn up long term.


I might have said that two weeks ago, but I'm wondering now. I'm not so sure that Dickerson might have had a career year last year and never duplicate it again. Traveras was a good stop gap, but for two years? Ridiculous.

Dickerson is struggling right now, but he's still got a higher OPS than Taveras. Dickerson is no where near as good as he played in Cincy last year, but he's not as bad as he's playing right now either. I think he's a .725-.750 OPS bat, which would be fine in CF.



The Reds didn't want to part with the potential of Homer Bailey or spend the money to sign a real shortstop (if there really was one better available). More on that later.

I actually liked the decision to hang on to Homer Bailey. He's still only 22 years old and has a ton of potential. Here's my problem with Walt: There were a few bats available via trade for very little (Willingham, Swisher) and in free agency (Abreu, Dunn) and Walt failed to bring one in. Swisher would have been a perfect fit, IMO. He's a local boy, switch hitter, and solid defender, and the Yanks got him for hardly nothing. Walt missed the boat there.

TheNext44
04-29-2009, 02:01 AM
Walt's grade continues to drop for me. He's had an awful first year on the job, IMO. Let's look at some of the moves he's made:

-Traded Adam Dunn. The jury is still out on the return. If Owings develops into a solid starter and/or Dallas Buck reaches his potential then it's a good trade.

Trading two months of Dunn for a solid back of the rotation starter and a solid starting pitching prospect is a steal. And Dunn was my favorite player, so no bias here.

The real question was should Jocketty have offered more than the 2 year $20M deal Dunn took from the Nats. Clearly Cast said that the money was not there, since the Reds could have had Abreu at a fraction of that and passed too. Hard to blame Jocketty for that one.


-Traded Ken Griffey Jr. No complaints.

It was time.


-Re-signed Mike Lincoln (2 year deal) and Jerry Hairston Jr. Awful moves IMO. Lincoln has been awful so far and Hairston looks like the sub .700 hitter he always was before his nice half season last year. There were better options available in the minors, IMO.

Never would have signed Lincoln if he knew that Weathers would accept arbitration. With Fischer and Roenicke almost ready, probably a waste of a few million either way, even if he does end up having a decent year. I still like Hairston, but again, no need to pay a guy with his talent anything above the minimum. Hard to call those terrible, just deals that did not need to be made.


-Signed Willy Taveras to a 2-year deal. Again, another unnecessary move, IMO. Chris Dickerson would've been a better option instead of wasting six million dollars on Taveras. Yeah, Dickerson is unproven but I'd still take him over Taveras.

Not a big Taveras fan, but he has impressed me so far. He hits the ball a lot harder than I thought. He is not a slap hitter, he can drive the ball with his swing, but just is not strong enough to hit homers. Still, I too would have rather put Dickerson in CF and spent money to get a decent LF.


Swisher would have been a perfect fit, IMO. He's a local boy, switch hitter, and solid defender, and the Yanks got him for hardly nothing. Walt missed the boat there.

I would have loved it if the Reds picked up Swisher, but he is owed $20m over the next 3 years. That is why the Yankees got him for nothing. Remember the Reds passed on Abreu and Rivera for less money.



The biggest disappointment with Jocketty was his failure to improve the team this offseason. The Reds needed a big bat for left field and a shortstop. Walt failed to upgrade those two positions. With a solid pitching staff in place, upgrading those two positions could have made this team a legit contender, at least in my opinion.

Couldn't disagree more with the first sentence. This is an improved team over last year, and I believe that it will show in the record.

Jocketty did not acquire a SS, but waited to see if Gonzalez was healthy, and now that he is, I am very happy that no resources were burned on getting a one year fix at SS. This team does need a SS for the future, but good ones are rare and very expensive. If Gonzo can be a one year, or even two year stop gap, that will give Jocketty more time to find the right guy to play SS for the Reds in the future.

By just being wise enough to not panic and get a SS that the Reds now do not need for at least this year, he improved the team. Granted Jocketty did not make any great move that improved this team in the offseason, (unless you count signing Rhodes), but not making bad moves, and not panicking is also a way to improve a team with good developing talent.

VR
04-29-2009, 02:28 AM
Wj's biggest challenges in signing players is to be reminded that he's not putting them in LaRussa and Duncan's system. Mike Lincoln would probably save 45 games for the Cardinals.

edabbs44
04-29-2009, 09:20 AM
The biggest disappointment with Jocketty was his failure to improve the team this offseason. The Reds needed a big bat for left field and a shortstop. Walt failed to upgrade those two positions. With a solid pitching staff in place, upgrading those two positions could have made this team a legit contender, at least in my opinion.

Who should Walt have acquired via free agency? Let's go through this list of available "big bats" from 2009:

Furcal - .241/.326/.316 with 1 HR. Not a great start. Signed with a contender.

Abreu - .368/.430/.434 with zero HRs. Signed with the Angels (contender) at a cheap price. I think it is fair to say that he wasn't coming to Cincy unless they gave him pre-2009 money and multi-year deal, which wasn't happening.

Burrell - .238/.364/.317 with 1 HR. Same story with him as he went to a contender that happened to play in his home state. No shot at him coming to Cincy unless, of course, they offered him a ridiculous contract.

Baldelli - .231/.286/.231 with zero HRs and 1 DL stint. Signed with a contender.

Rivera - .310/.355/.414 with 1 HR. Re-signed with LA so doubtful he would have come to Ohio unless Cincy outbid the Angels by a decent margin. Most didn't like him on this board, I was actually pro-Rivera due to low risk. Surprisingly, signed with a contender.

My favorite, Milton Bradley - .107/.324/.214 with 1 HR, 1 RBI, 1 suspension, 1 lashing out at the media and 1 groin injury in the first 3 weeks of the season. Again, went to a contender so he probably would have needed a multi-year deal for good money to even consider coming to Cincy. Thank the Lord he didn't get that.

So the FA choices haven't gotten off to great starts. Obviously it is early but I am sure that this board would be up in arms if Walt signed these guys to big numbers and they were putting up these stats.


I think the main thing that people refuse to acknowledge is that Cincy had no shot at getting these guys unless they ponied up a buttload of years and money for these guys. Abreu's price tag for Cincy definitely wasn't 1 year, $5MM. IIRC, Walt kind of hinted that one of the FAs who signed (was it Abreu?) did so for less than Cincy offered.

How about trades? Obviously we can think that "everyone" is available in trade, but who actually was and what did Cincy need to give up for those "big bats"? SS is a premium position and a good, young SS will not come cheap. Maloney won't get one, Stubbs won't either. If you want a good one, be prepared to get rid of someone who will hurt the ML product. Cueto, Volquez, Bruce, Votto, Harang, etc. LF would probably be easier to acquire, but again, who fits the bill of "big bat LFer who was available through trade"?

I am glad that Walt didn't hurt the future while chasing the semi-impossible dream of 2009. I am hoping that he pumps a lot of money into this year's draft and takes advantage of a depressed market.

bucksfan2
04-29-2009, 09:37 AM
Walt's grade continues to drop for me. He's had an awful first year on the job, IMO. Let's look at some of the moves he's made:

-Traded Adam Dunn. The jury is still out on the return. If Owings develops into a solid starter and/or Dallas Buck reaches his potential then it's a good trade.

Adam Dunn wasn't going to be back. Him taking the highest FA contract offered to him should be evidence of that. Owings looked great in his last start and adds value to the bench. Don't sleep on Dallas Buck either. Guy could be the steal in that trade.


-Traded Ken Griffey Jr. No complaints.

Me neither. Masset isn't too bad.


-Re-signed Mike Lincoln (2 year deal) and Jerry Hairston Jr. Awful moves IMO. Lincoln has been awful so far and Hairston looks like the sub .700 hitter he always was before his nice half season last year. There were better options available in the minors, IMO.

Liked the Lincoln deal and still do. You can't count on young, unproven arms to step right in and have success. We saw that a couple of year ago when the pen was awful. Nothing is worse than scrambling to get good arms in the pen midway through the season. Thats when you end up with Estaban Yan.

Hariston hasn't gotten regular at bats yet. A one year deal for Hariston isn't awful.


-Signed Willy Taveras to a 2-year deal. Again, another unnecessary move, IMO. Chris Dickerson would've been a better option instead of wasting six million dollars on Taveras. Yeah, Dickerson is unproven but I'd still take him over Taveras.

I guess you have been watching Dickerson through rose colored glasses. Dickerson has been awful both at the plate and in the field. If after the first 20 games of the season you think he deserves the CF spot then we are in a serious disagreement.

I can't really say anything bad about Taveras right now. His defense has been good and he has been getting on base.


The biggest disappointment with Jocketty was his failure to improve the team this offseason. The Reds needed a big bat for left field and a shortstop. Walt failed to upgrade those two positions. With a solid pitching staff in place, upgrading those two positions could have made this team a legit contender, at least in my opinion.

Who was out there? Not hypothetical trades or players you want him to target, in reality who was out there, that the Reds could have signed to a reasonable contract (not Abreu) or traded for, that would have made this club better in both the short term and the long run?


Right now, I'm thinking two things:

1.) Walt has either lost it

or

2.) Albert Pujols and the coaching staff in St. Louis made him look better than he was.

Albert Pujols makes everyone look better. But Walt built the organization into a perennial winner before Albert arrived. Making snap judgments based upon a 10-10 start is the wrong way to go about things. Hell the best thing Walt may have done is not traded Votto and Cueto for Berdard or Blanton.

jojo
04-29-2009, 10:08 AM
I can't really say anything bad about Taveras right now. His defense has been good and he has been getting on base.

Here's Taveras: .242/.329/.306;

Here's the average CFer for mlb so far: .265/.346/.430;

An OBP of .329 is below average.

OnBaseMachine
04-29-2009, 12:20 PM
Who was out there? Not hypothetical trades or players you want him to target, in reality who was out there, that the Reds could have signed to a reasonable contract (not Abreu) or traded for, that would have made this club better in both the short term and the long run?

I've already answered that. Nick Swisher was available for next to nothing. Swisher would have been a great fit for this offense. Josh Willingham was another option. Bobby Abreu could've probably been had if the Reds were willing to give him an extra year.


Albert Pujols makes everyone look better. But Walt built the organization into a perennial winner before Albert arrived. Making snap judgments based upon a 10-10 start is the wrong way to go about things. Hell the best thing Walt may have done is not traded Votto and Cueto for Berdard or Blanton.

Krivsky turned down the Cueto/Votto for Bedard/Blanton offers.

I'm ready for a new GM. I'd love to have Paul DePodesta, Jed Hoyer, or Chris Antonetti.

bucksfan2
04-29-2009, 12:31 PM
I've already answered that. Nick Swisher was available for next to nothing. Swisher would have been a great fit for this offense. Josh Willingham was another option. Bobby Abreu could've probably been had if the Reds were willing to give him an extra year.

I agree on Swisher. I would have loved to see the Reds acquirer him but I doubt they were ever involved. As for Bobby Abreu he would have taken a two year investment of at lease $15M. Would you rather have Alonso, Duran, and Rodriquez or Abreu?

nate
04-29-2009, 12:33 PM
I agree on Swisher. I would have loved to see the Reds acquirer him but I doubt they were ever involved. As for Bobby Abreu he would have taken a two year investment of at lease $15M.

How do we know this?


Would you rather have Alonso, Duran, and Rodriquez or Abreu?

Why is it one or the other?

Homer Bailey
04-29-2009, 12:35 PM
Who was out there?


You can't tell me you wouldn't like this lineup better:


Furcal SS
EE 3B
Votto 1B
Dye LF
Bruce RF
Phillips 2B
Hernandez C
Dickerson CF

Furcal would have been expensive, sure. But how much are we paying Tavaras/Hairston/Lincoln? These signings were all unnecessary.

I understand not wanting to give up Homer for Dye. However, I'm tired of taking the "wait and see their potential route." It simply has not worked for the Reds. I think Bailey is at best a #3-4 starter in the MLB, and we could have had Dye for this season and next. Expensive? Yes. However, with those two bats in the lineup, this team just made itself a contender in the central without giving up anyone from their rotation. That would lead to more butts in the seats, and more money to fit the payroll.

OnBaseMachine
04-29-2009, 12:38 PM
I agree on Swisher. I would have loved to see the Reds acquirer him but I doubt they were ever involved. As for Bobby Abreu he would have taken a two year investment of at lease $15M. Would you rather have Alonso, Duran, and Rodriquez or Abreu?

What does Alonso, Duran, and Rodriguez have to do with Abreu? Nothing. I would rather have Abreu over Mike Lincoln, Jerry Hairston Jr., and Willy Taveras.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-29-2009, 01:07 PM
Obviously, I would have loved to never have gone after Taveras. Let Dickerson and Stubbs platoon in CF and re-sign Dunn. Getting Owings (and Buck) and still getting Dunn back would have been a win-win all the way around

Of course, with the draft of Alonso, it created a logjam between LF-1B and there was no way Dunn was going to be re-signed. I still wonder if Votto will be moved to LF or if Alonso will be dealt at some point.

RedsManRick
04-29-2009, 01:13 PM
From a BP chat yesterday



Waker (Brooklyn): I've heard from a very credible source (i.e., front office) that the Yankees had a deal in place with the Reds: Francisco Cordero for Xavier Nady (killed by the Reds' owner). Should the Yankees revisit that trade and plug in a different name to help solve their bullpen issues? They could go Mets-style and us Cordero as the 8th inning guy

If this is true, my opinion of Castellini just dropped considerably. Getting Cordero's contract off the books would have been a big win in and of itself. Adding a legitimate, if not ideal, bat in LF would have been icing on the cake. If Jocketty is getting shut down by ownership, presumably because Cast thought it would have been perceived as a salary dump and that fans would have been upset, then I to give Jocketty a bit more slack.

Owners really need to realize that they aren't GMs and with rare exception, fans show up to cheer for the names on the front of the jersey, not the names on the back. Let your GM build a winning team and the fans will show.

KoryMac5
04-29-2009, 01:20 PM
From a BP chat yesterday



If this is true, my opinion of Castellini just dropped considerably. Getting Cordero's contract off the books would have been a big win in and of itself. Adding a legitimate, if not ideal, bat in LF would have been icing on the cake. If Jocketty is getting shut down by ownership, presumably because Cast thought it would have been perceived as a salary dump and that fans would have been upset, then I to give Jocketty a bit more slack.

Owners really need to realize that they aren't GMs and with rare exception, fans show up to cheer for the names on the front of the jersey, not the names on the back. Let your GM build a winning team and the fans will show.


I don't think that Walt would work for Cast if he was going to overrule him on major trades like this reported one.

bucksfan2
04-29-2009, 01:22 PM
You can't tell me you wouldn't like this lineup better:


Furcal SS
EE 3B
Votto 1B
Dye LF
Bruce RF
Phillips 2B
Hernandez C
Dickerson CF

Furcal would have been expensive, sure. But how much are we paying Tavaras/Hairston/Lincoln? These signings were all unnecessary.

I understand not wanting to give up Homer for Dye. However, I'm tired of taking the "wait and see their potential route." It simply has not worked for the Reds. I think Bailey is at best a #3-4 starter in the MLB, and we could have had Dye for this season and next. Expensive? Yes. However, with those two bats in the lineup, this team just made itself a contender in the central without giving up anyone from their rotation. That would lead to more butts in the seats, and more money to fit the payroll.

Of course I would have liked that lineup much better than the one being run out in Cincy on a daily basis. But I would like it even more if you place Furcal with Hanley Ramirez. Back to your lineup. Furcal would have been a huge risk for the Reds to sign. 3 years $30M to a SS who missed almost all of last season with a bad back. I doubt Furcal would have signed that contract in Cincinnati. LA is a WS contender this season and also has a much higher hispanic population.

Dye should have an expiring contract, he has an option year left, at $12M for this season. He would be a one year rental but at what cost? I doubt it was just Homer because I think the Reds would have pulled the trigger on that move. It probably was Homer + another prospect but that is just my thinking.

Dye's contract I wouldn't have a problem with. It is expiring and it won't have any long term effects on the club. Furcal on the other hand could have some serious repercussions. Would he produce for the full length of his contract. Would that contract hinder the clubs efforts to extend Votto, Bruce, or Cueto? The money spent isn't in a vacuum and the reality is the Reds aren't able to swallow many big, unproductive contracts.

edabbs44
04-29-2009, 01:26 PM
From a BP chat yesterday



If this is true, my opinion of Castellini just dropped considerably. Getting Cordero's contract off the books would have been a big win in and of itself. Adding a legitimate, if not ideal, bat in LF would have been icing on the cake. If Jocketty is getting shut down by ownership, presumably because Cast thought it would have been perceived as a salary dump and that fans would have been upset, then I to give Jocketty a bit more slack.

Owners really need to realize that they aren't GMs and with rare exception, fans show up to cheer for the names on the front of the jersey, not the names on the back. Let your GM build a winning team and the fans will show.

Does anyone know "Waker" from Brooklyn? Is he in the know? ;)

durl
04-29-2009, 02:02 PM
Here's Taveras: .242/.329/.306;

Here's the average CFer for mlb so far: .265/.346/.430;

An OBP of .329 is below average.

What's the average salary for CF this year? I'm curious where Taveras fits in the range.

M2
04-29-2009, 02:15 PM
What's the average salary for CF this year? I'm curious where Taveras fits in the range.

Does it really matter?

Value engineering has nothing to do with actual winning. If Tavares is going to play he needs to play well, no matter what he costs.

ochre
04-29-2009, 02:21 PM
This team needs its Greg Vaughn.

RedsManRick
04-29-2009, 02:26 PM
Does it really matter?

Value engineering has nothing to do with actual winning. If Tavares is going to play he needs to play well, no matter what he costs.

Yep.

Especially with the way arbitration and free agency work, average salary is a virtually meaningless number.

Here's one way to think of it.
- A replacement level team would win ~50 games.
- To buy a marginal win in free agency costs ~$4.5M.
- Given an $80M payroll, you can afford only ~16 marginal wins through free agency.
- To buy a 90+ win team in free agency would require a payroll pushing $180M..

Obviously this is grossly simplified, but the point is that every team this side of New York has to have cost efficiencies through underpriced pre-arb and arb players. Simply getting average production at average price leaves the Reds south of .500. The Reds reality is they have about $80M to build a 90 win squad. If they're spending that money and not putting enough talent on the field, that's a problem. The Reds calculus of what investments make sense is specific to their circumstance. The question with Taveras is whether his marginal cost justifies his marginal production compared to other internal solutions.

TheNext44
04-29-2009, 02:33 PM
You can't tell me you wouldn't like this lineup better:


Furcal SS
EE 3B
Votto 1B
Dye LF
Bruce RF
Phillips 2B
Hernandez C
Dickerson CF

Furcal would have been expensive, sure. But how much are we paying Tavaras/Hairston/Lincoln? These signings were all unnecessary.

I understand not wanting to give up Homer for Dye. However, I'm tired of taking the "wait and see their potential route." It simply has not worked for the Reds. I think Bailey is at best a #3-4 starter in the MLB, and we could have had Dye for this season and next. Expensive? Yes. However, with those two bats in the lineup, this team just made itself a contender in the central without giving up anyone from their rotation. That would lead to more butts in the seats, and more money to fit the payroll.

I think that it is clear from this homestand's attendance figures, that a better team would not put butts in the seats. Even if they doubled the attendance from these last few games, it still would be pathetic numbers.

The economy is hurting everyone and everyone is cutting back. The Yankees just announced that they are reducing prices on their tickets for a brand new stadium.

Money is a huge issue this year and you just can't ignore it. No one is spending more money on payroll this year, not even the Yankees. Even with all their big signings, their payroll is less than it was last year.

I would have loved to have either Furcal or Dye, but it is clear that the Reds just could not afford any big salaries this year.

flyer85
04-29-2009, 02:36 PM
I would have loved to have either Furcal or Dye, but it is clear that the Reds just could not afford any big salaries this year.is it?

Or is it clear that not operating in the red is higher priority than winning on the field?

TheNext44
04-29-2009, 02:47 PM
is it?

Or is it clear that not operating in the red is higher priority than winning on the field?

Cast had no problems spending money to chase a championship in his first few years, he had no problem operating in the red then, probably to a fault.

Jocketty was all go on all fronts to get a big bat for the middle of the lineup, talked about it in every interview, then, abruptly, he said he couldn't afford one.

Every beat reporter, reported that the Reds were going to increase payroll to over $80M, then the Reds made the announcement that they were cutting payroll.

Only Cast knows what his true motivations are, but facts and logic point to the economy being the number one factor in the Reds decreasing their payroll.

Homer Bailey
04-29-2009, 02:59 PM
From a BP chat yesterday



If this is true, my opinion of Castellini just dropped considerably. Getting Cordero's contract off the books would have been a big win in and of itself. Adding a legitimate, if not ideal, bat in LF would have been icing on the cake. If Jocketty is getting shut down by ownership, presumably because Cast thought it would have been perceived as a salary dump and that fans would have been upset, then I to give Jocketty a bit more slack.

Owners really need to realize that they aren't GMs and with rare exception, fans show up to cheer for the names on the front of the jersey, not the names on the back. Let your GM build a winning team and the fans will show.

Cordero has a full no trade clause for 2009. I doubt he'd want to go somewhere where he wouldne be closing.

flyer85
04-29-2009, 03:11 PM
I have yet to see any evidence the Reds have lost money since Castellini has been running the team.

The only fact that I can see is that the Reds have decreased their payroll. My conclusion is simply that there are priorities higher than "the losing stops now".

bucksfan2
04-29-2009, 03:20 PM
I have yet to see any evidence the Reds have lost money since Castellini has been running the team.

The only fact that I can see is that the Reds have decreased their payroll. My conclusion is simply that there are priorities higher than "the losing stops now".

Its a privately held company. The Reds don't have to show anyone their books to anyone except for the handful of owners. So neither you or I have seen evidence that Castellini has made or lost money while he has been running the team.

durl
04-29-2009, 03:22 PM
Does it really matter?

Value engineering has nothing to do with actual winning. If Taveras is going to play he needs to play well, no matter what he costs.

I thought it mattered because he was being compared to other CFs in the majors and one of the biggest gripes against Taveras was the amount of his contract.

I don't know if he's cheap or not, I just thought the question was relative since there's a lot talk about how the Reds need good bang-for-the-buck for each player they put on the field.

princeton
04-29-2009, 03:24 PM
Cordero has a full no trade clause for 2009. I doubt he'd want to go somewhere where he wouldne be closing.

"Add a year to my client's contract and he'll go wherever you want him"

--Bean Stringfellow, agent de Coco

flyer85
04-29-2009, 03:42 PM
Its a privately held company. The Reds don't have to show anyone their books to anyone except for the handful of owners. So neither you or I have seen evidence that Castellini has made or lost money while he has been running the team.And seeing that they aren't likely to open their books and show us that they were forced into making these financial decisions because their are bleeding on the bottom line I am not one who will believe that Castellini is running the team at a loss. If that was the case all Uncle Bob has to do is open the books and show everyone the data.

Big Klu
04-29-2009, 03:53 PM
"Add a year to my client's contract and he'll go wherever you want him"

--Bean Stringfellow, agent de Coco

But who pays for that year, the Reds or the Yankees?

jojo
04-29-2009, 04:14 PM
I thought it mattered because he was being compared to other CFs in the majors and one of the biggest gripes against Taveras was the amount of his contract.

I don't know if he's cheap or not, I just thought the question was relative since there's a lot talk about how the Reds need good bang-for-the-buck for each player they put on the field.

One of my biggest gripes is that Taveras isn't likely to be all that good and the Reds needed an infusion of "high ceilingness" in order to max their chances of making the playoffs.

I think there is little doubt that the Reds will get what they paid for...he's projected to be roughly a 1 to 1.5 win player (that's worth about $4-$6M on the open market).

As M2 suggests, getting a good deal on below average production is a hollow victory.

membengal
05-10-2009, 09:51 AM
Doesn't at all concern me. He was 23 and hurt that year. His RC/G actually went up by a bit: in 2007 it was 4.9 and in 2008 it was 5. If only Encarnacion had Zimmerman's upside.

27 games in a row with a hit.

One for you pahster. Acutally, 27 for you, pahster. I yield.

RED VAN HOT
05-16-2009, 07:29 PM
Is it time to run this poll again? I think the success of the personnel decisions has surprised most of us.

I was in the Taveras camp, but must admit that he has exceeded my expectations by far. It appears that Dickerson was not ready to take over CF.

Hernandez has produced well giving Hanigan the opportunity to work in and become the starting catcher next year.

Of the candidates that were signed for LF in the off season, I was surprised that Nix was kept on the roster. It looks like a good decision.

Keeping Owings over Bailey looks like the right decision. Homer still needs work. Owings is doing a better job of keeping the ball down. With 22% of the season behind us, we have only used five different starters.

Arthur Rhodes and David Weathers were good signings. Both can be used in the setup role. I still have questions about re-signing Lincoln, but that may also prove out. Moreover, with the starting pitchers consistently going seven, the bull pen is strong and deep.

Janish has been an adequate back-up at SS.

Re-signing Hairston looked to be a bad move for a while. It appears now that he only needed to build up his strength after the WBC.

WJ is rebuilding this team without succumbing to the temptation to trade a top minor league prospect for a middle of the road veteran player.

wheels
05-16-2009, 08:19 PM
Its may.

westofyou
05-19-2009, 01:12 PM
Hey a poll!!

Wonder what George Brett would say about that?

http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/19/bleep-you-believe-me/


Every manager
takes criticism. Every
manager
is gonna take criti …
I don’t give a (bleep)
if you are
Joe
(Bleeping)
Torre
You’re gonna take criticism

I think the problem
is in this town
we’ve lost so many (bleeping) years in a row
that people don’t have any
patience
so as soon as he does
something
that the media
doesn’t like
they explode on him
(Bleep) you and
(Bleep) them.
Believe me.

There’s thirty teams in Major League Baseball.
Thirty.
No one’s ever called these guys
to manage
Have they?
No one’s ever called them
to be the general manager.
Why?
‘Cause they don’t know
what they’re talking about
sometimes.
And I’m sick and tired
of listening to it.
OK?
I’m sick and tired
of listening to it.
Believe me.