PDA

View Full Version : Grade Our Owner - Mr "Win Now"



GAC
12-30-2008, 06:28 AM
I'm not going to start a poll. Just wanted to hear member's feelings on this guy with all the current discussion about rating Jocketty, the signing of Wee Willy Winkle, and the lack of movement (improvement) during this off-season, I think Bob C has been getting a pass.

I have no problem with the criticism of Jocketty. He is the GM. I think some of it is a little overboard; but everyone has the right to their opinion.

But Walt, even though he is the GM, works for Bob C and the ownership group who controls/sets the payroll budget and what is to be spent.

The opening payroll for '08 was 74 mil.

By the end of the season they rid themselves of contracts such as Dunn (13M) and Jr (8.2M). They also fulfilled the last year of the Milton contract (10 mil). And they also let some other "dregs" go too, which, if totaled up, may come to another few mil. So I think it's somewhat safe to assume they cut around 35M there.

Their probable commitments for 2009 (including new acquisitions and raises due):

C - Ramon Hernandez - $8MM
C - Ryan Hanigan - $400K
C - Wilkin Castillo - $400K
1B - Joey Votto - $400K
2B - Brandon Phillips - $4.75MM
SS - Alex Gonzalez - $5.375MM
3B - Edwin Encarnacion - $450K+
IF - Jeff Keppinger - $403K
LF - Chris Dickerson - $400K
RF - Jay Bruce - $400K
CF - Willy Taveras - ??? (lets say he gets 2.5M for '09)
OF - Norris Hopper - $403K

SP - Aaron Harang - $11MM
SP - Bronson Arroyo - $9.5MM
SP - Edinson Volquez - $400K
SP - Johnny Cueto - $400K
SP - Micah Owings - $402K
RP - Francisco Cordero - $12MM
RP - Jared Burton - $400K
RP - Mike Lincoln - $2MM
RP - Arthur Rhodes - $2MM
RP - Bill Bray - $400K
RP - Nick Masset - $400K


Other commitments: Yonder Alonso - $400K Rotation candidates: Daryl Thompson - $400K, Homer Bailey - $400K, Ramon Ramirez - $400K

2009 payroll obligations to former players (buyouts):

Stanton .5M, Ross .375M, Castro .1M total = .975M

We have to pay half of the 4 mil buyout on Jr's trade to the Sox. But we also got 2 mil from the Orioles in the Hernandez deal. So that is a trade-off.

Weathers accepted arbitration (1 yr deal). He got 2.75 last season. Lets assume he gets a raise to 3.2M

Now I realize that my math may not be an exact science; but I think it's in the "ballpark", and we're looking at a payroll commitment right now of 70.425M

If there are omissions or errors, then please feel free to correct me. There are still some arb cases right? Also - what about deferred monies to Jr, which we are obligated for til around 2024. Shouldn't that be figured into that '09 figure above?

Now Bob C said the payroll will raise to somewhere in the range of 80M+.

They say they are still looking for the RH's power hitting LFer.

There just ain't much wiggle room there folks.

I'm excited! :cool:

Mario-Rijo
12-30-2008, 06:57 AM
I hate to be generic here but this was my post on Walt initially. If I had to grade Bob right now I would go with a C -. He talks a good game but I have seen him replace a Mgr. (Mackanin) and GM (Krivsky) with guys who are arguably worse and he hasn't stopped the losing. I think his heart is in the right place so I give him the benefit of the doubt but is he duping me? I don't think he is duping me but I have to wonder. I also have to wonder if he will ever figure it all out.


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.

mth123
12-30-2008, 07:24 AM
I think your numbers for Encarnacion are off by about $3.5 Million bucks. Your Weathers numbers are low as well IMO - probably would add another $1 Million there. Mike Lincoln will only make $1.5 Million in '09. Assuming the rest of your math is right, that puts the team at about $75 Million. You also need to figure on a couple million for the rest of the 40 Man roster. Even at AAA Salaries with some guys spending part time at the big league level while guys are on the DL, those guys won't be free. At one point I read that the team may be willing to go as high as mid-80s. I'm guessing the economy, and lower season ticket projections, may have scaled that back to $80 Million or lower. There is also the matter of new stadium exemptions from revenue sharing for both of the NY teams. That surely will lower the amount of money coming in.

If the team passes on Lincoln and Taveras and goes with the likes of Roenicke and Dickerson in those positions, they would have $8 to $10 Million. That is more than enough to help the offense in LF. It may not get the ideal MVP candidate RBI man, but would get them some run production. By squandering even that seemingly small chunk of the budget, I'm guessing we're stuck with Jerry Hairston JR for a couple million instead (more squandering IMO).

I'm guessing they may end up with some insurance money on Gonzalez because I think the idea of him actually playing is still a huge uncertainty. Unfortunately it won't be anything they can plan on having when planning the roster. Hopefully they can deal a couple of the minimum making Rotation/Pen candidates for a young defensive SS with offensive upside. Another idea may be to deal Weathers and his arb case to free up some room. Teams are always looking for decent middle guys and the commitment would only be for a year which might be attractive. I think a deal with the Yankees (who really need a guy like Weathers) for one of the excess OF (Swisher? Nady?) might be a way to redistribute some of the budget to some offense without taking on much additional money. The Reds have plenty of kids or starter alternates to plug into the bullpen.

As for my grade on Cast? I think he's a lot of hot air, but I don't blame anyone for holding the spending down to the revenue levels. I would not expect any owner to take money out of his/her pocket beyond their initial investment in the team to finance the team's operations. Since this is a partnership, I think the minority owners would also have to agree to put in their proportional amount or the decision would be in violation of the partnership agreement. If I understand it, Cast can make the decision to break-even, but he can not knowingly allow a budget that would require additional investment without approval of the other partners. If the Reds have a line of credit available, Cast could make the decision to borrow from it to increase the payroll. If they did that, I'd call that a stupid decision and I hope they haven't.

So, I guess I give him an F for speaking out of ignorance and another F for meddling in the Managerial decision last year. But the budget is not as flexible as many here would believe and the allocation is largely on the GMs IMO. He gets an A for stepping up and allowing a portion of the budget for investment in the international signings (Duran, Rodriguez, Arias, Guillon, etc.) and the money poured into the farm system by signing late round picks like Sulbarren to early round money. I give him a B for bringing back some former Reds and getting them involved in Spring Training (about time Jim Maloney got some respect). Overall I give him a C-.

edabbs44
12-30-2008, 08:03 AM
Total payroll has risen from $60MM in 2006 to $74MM in 2008.

Median salary has risen from $550K in 2006 to $1.25MM in 2008.

Bob has put some money into this franchise. I think a big problem is that it was spent on the wrong people. And I wouldn't put that on him.

GAC
12-30-2008, 08:37 AM
I think your numbers for Encarnacion are off by about $3.5 Million bucks.

Where are you getting that figure from? You have to have 3 years of service time to be arb eligible, and according to Cot's Baseball Page he only has a little over 2 years after the '08 season. Now they still have to offer him a contract for '09; but knowing this FO he'll get a modest raise most likely for '09, and then deal with him after the season.

Some of the other numbers you inject are probably true. So we're still looking somewhere in the area of the low 70's as far as committed monies so far.

I'd love to see them get rid of the Cordero contract, which they can't do till after the '09 season thanks to a no-trade clause. I'm still amazed (and appalled) at the contract we gave this guy. 12M/yr for the next three years.

As far as other big money contracts that end after the '09 season, you got Hernandez and Gonzo. After the '10 season, you're looking at Harang, Arroyo, Taveras, Lincoln, Rhodes.

It's one of the reasons why I'm not so hard on Jocketty, because he wasn't here and had nothing to do with guaranteed contracts. I'm not saying they are al bad contracts, but only that they are still committed monies on the books that he can do little about unless he is able to work out a trade somewhere.

And right now the climate (attitude) is that teams are holding fast onto their propects for the most part, which is usually a keymark part of the demand in most trade scenarios. So if you're unwilling to part with prospects in order to make a trade, then that only leaves you with the avenue of spending on the FA market.

I fully agree that this FO - and again the finger of blame shoud go to Bob C and the other owners - when it comes to wisely spending their money, and getting the most "bang" for their bucks. When the highest paid player on your team is the closer then IMHO something is askewer.

Jocketty, IMHO, is in a scenario right now that I don't think he ever faced while with the Cards. Especially when it comes to a FO management.

Of course if he gets frustrated and leaves - because he only has a gentleman's agreement with Bob - then that leaves us with Bavasi as the back-up.

Now someone tell me there isn't something wrong with the thinking (approach) of this current FO? How is it better then the former?

GAC
12-30-2008, 08:38 AM
Total payroll has risen from $60MM in 2006 to $74MM in 2008.

Median salary has risen from $550K in 2006 to $1.25MM in 2008.

Bob has put some money into this franchise. I think a big problem is that it was spent on the wrong people. And I wouldn't put that on him.

Why wouldn't you put that on him?

bucksfan2
12-30-2008, 08:50 AM
Now Bob C said the payroll will raise to somewhere in the range of 80M+.

They say they are still looking for the RH's power hitting LFer.

There just ain't much wiggle room there folks.

I'm excited! :cool:

Spending money just because you want to increase payroll is a bad way to go about it. Eric Milton is the result of that philosophy.

I have no doubt that Cast wants to win and is committed to do so. He also seems to have more knowledge on how to do so than owners in the past. He has pored money into Latin America and the Draft. I think the "Win Now" is more window dressing than reality. What are you going to tell a fan base that has seen a decade plus of losing? How much patience are those fans going to have? He still needs to sell seats, boxes, TV, Radio, and Advertisement in order to generate income.

None of us really know what the trade market holds right now. No one knows what each team and each player demands. I would be fine for a Homer Dye trade but only if the Sox throw in some money. But what if the trade is held up because the Sox don't want to throw in any money and Dye wants his option picked up? I don't think that would be a very good trade for the Reds.

It seems to me that most trades tend to come out of left field. Nothing is really known until the terms are pretty much agreed upon. But as for Mr "Win Now" he has done nothing to interrupt our young core of players. He has kept that intact resisting to trade Cueto for Blanton or include Votto and Cueto for Berdard. He has continued to develop the minors and hasn't Schotted the system. In reality he has done everything I would have hoped for when he bought the club. Over his off season and next off season I expect to see a big splash.

mth123
12-30-2008, 08:50 AM
Where are you getting that figure from? You have to have 3 years of service time to be arb eligible, and according to Cot's Baseball Page he only has a little over 2 years after the '08 season. Now they still have to offer him a contract for '09; but knowing this FO he'll get a modest raise most likely for '09, and then deal with him after the season.

Some of the other numbers you inject are probably true. So we're still looking somewhere in the area of the low 70's as far as committed monies so far.

I'd love to see them get rid of the Cordero contract, which they can't do till after the '09 season thanks to a no-trade clause. I'm still amazed (and appalled) at the contract we gave this guy. 12M/yr for the next three years.

As far as other big money contracts that end after the '09 season, you got Hernandez and Gonzo. After the '10 season, you're looking at Harang, Arroyo, Taveras, Lincoln, Rhodes.

It's one of the reasons why I'm not so hard on Jocketty, because he wasn't here and had nothing to do with guaranteed contracts. I'm not saying they are al bad contracts, but only that they are still committed monies on the books that he can do little about unless he is able to work out a trade somewhere.

And right now the climate (attitude) is that teams are holding fast onto their propects for the most part, which is usually a keymark part of the demand in most trade scenarios. So if you're unwilling to part with prospects in order to make a trade, then that only leaves you with the avenue of spending on the FA market.

I fully agree that this FO - and again the finger of blame shoud go to Bob C and the other owners - when it comes to wisely spending their money, and getting the most "bang" for their bucks. When the highest paid player on your team is the closer then IMHO something is askewer.

Jocketty, IMHO, is in a scenario right now that I don't think he ever faced while with the Cards. Especially when it comes to a FO management.

Of course if he gets frustrated and leaves - because he only has a gentleman's agreement with Bob - then that leaves us with Bavasi as the back-up.

Now someone tell me there isn't something wrong with the thinking (approach) of this current FO? How is it better then the former?

EdE is on Cots Arb eligible list and Rotoworld also shows him as arb eligible. He'll get near $4 Million IMO.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-30-2008, 09:42 AM
Where are you getting that figure from? You have to have 3 years of service time to be arb eligible, and according to Cot's Baseball Page he only has a little over 2 years after the '08 season.

Cott's hasn't been updated through 2008. It has Encarnacion at 2.085, but he should be 3.085. He is arb eligible.

GAC
12-30-2008, 10:04 AM
Spending money just because you want to increase payroll is a bad way to go about it. Eric Milton is the result of that philosophy.

Certainly wasn't advocating that. But since Bob has become owner, we've also given out monies that we shouldn't have IMO.


I have no doubt that Cast wants to win and is committed to do so. He also seems to have more knowledge on how to do so than owners in the past. He has pored money into Latin America and the Draft.....

But as for Mr "Win Now" he has done nothing to interrupt our young core of players. He has kept that intact resisting to trade Cueto for Blanton or include Votto and Cueto for Berdard. He has continued to develop the minors and hasn't Schotted the system. In reality he has done everything I would have hoped for when he bought the club. Over his off season and next off season I expect to see a big splash.

I'm certainly in agreement there and give him that. He has kept our core young talent, while investing in player development in other markets. But some of those Latin players they signed are at a minimum of 5-7 years away. I look at our farm system overall, and while they may be better talent there then previously, there are still question marks in various areas, and the near-ready talent is slim.

And the guy who acquired a vast majority of that talent is gone.

We've had this discussion last year; but this FO, as far as direction/approach, seems to be turning in circles with really no set sense of where they are trying to take this organization.

If you are still several years away, due to developing youth in the farms, then why spend (waste?) the large amounts of money you have on some of these contracts when that window is closing fast on them (2010) as far as developing that supporting cast?

I really have no idea as to what "model" they are trying to follow. We know it's can't be that of the big market teams. Yet it's really not like similar franchises like the As, Twin, Marlins, and Tampa.

bucksfan2
12-30-2008, 10:33 AM
I'm certainly in agreement there and give him that. He has kept our core young talent, while investing in player development in other markets. But some of those Latin players they signed are at a minimum of 5-7 years away. I look at our farm system overall, and while they may be better talent there then previously, there are still question marks in various areas, and the near-ready talent is slim.

And the guy who acquired a vast majority of that talent is gone.

We've had this discussion last year; but this FO, as far as direction/approach, seems to be turning in circles with really no set sense of where they are trying to take this organization.

If you are still several years away, due to developing youth in the farms, then why spend (waste?) the large amounts of money you have on some of these contracts when that window is closing fast on them (2010) as far as developing that supporting cast?

I really have no idea as to what "model" they are trying to follow. We know it's can't be that of the big market teams. Yet it's really not like similar franchises like the As, Twin, Marlins, and Tampa.

I would submit that the organization to model is the Twins. The A's build to blow up philosophy has put them in a rut over the last 5 years. The Fish while successful will only succeed in a non baseball town such as Miami. Tampa built their team by being awful, more awful than the Reds and collecting high draft picks. If you want to model your team after the Rays it would take 3 years or more of finishing as one of the worst teams in baseball.

The size of the Reds payroll doesn't mean much to me until it prohibits them from making the proper move. I didn't see the Reds being players in the CC, Tex, or Burnett markets nor did I want them to sign them for as expensive or as long term as the teams did. Payroll will become an issue for me if the Reds aren't willing to fork over 5M or 10M in order to put them over the top. Thats when the alarm will sound for me and this current Reds organization.

I think the appearance of spinning their wheels is due to the Reds trying to remain competitive while also building for 2009, 2010, and on. Fire sale wasn't really an option for the Reds because their commodities weren't marketable. IMO an A's type fire sale wouldn't have brought the Reds much in return.

REDREAD
12-30-2008, 11:06 AM
Right now, I'd give Bob a B grade.

Let me explain. I don't blame the owner for any player acquisions, unless they are very meddling, like Stienbrenner who forced the Yanks to sign Sheffield when the GM wanted Vald Guerrero.

IMO, the owners' job is to let the GM do his job, not to be a tightwad, hire the right people, etc.

BobC seemed to be very free with giving money to Wayne. Wayne spent it on the wrong people.

So far, Walt has not made a big move yet that involved money. In all fairness to Bob, we should wait until Walt is able to pull off a good move that would require more money and then see what BobC's reaction is. BobC was willing to take on approximately 2-3 million (I forget the exact amount) for Hernandez. That's a good sign. He was also willing to let the Reds go to arb with Weathers. I am going to assume that he was willing to absorb at least a big chunk of Dye's salary as well.

There's no doubt that BobC has spent more money on the draft and Latin America than probably any owner in my lifetime. Sure, some of that is due to inflation, but last year he had an incredible investment there. Hopefullly, that investment will bear fruit so that the Reds will continue to fund that way of talent acquision. It's so nice to see the Reds draft the guy they thought was the best player available (Yonder), despite his big salary demands, etc.

If the Reds surprise me with a major FA acquision or a trade where they take on significant salary, I'd probably move Cast up to an "A" at this point. I really can't think of anything to criticize him on. He made a mistake (IMO) of hiring Wayne, but Wayne was certainly a reasonable choice. I know some people here hate the Dusty move. Maybe it wasn't the wisest use of funds, but IMO, Dusty is certainly a reasonable choice, and I like the fact that BobC didn't want to go the "lowest bidder" route on manager, as the Reds have done historically.

GAC
12-30-2008, 11:15 AM
I would submit that the organization to model is the Twins.

In thorough agreement there too.


The size of the Reds payroll doesn't mean much to me until it prohibits them from making the proper move.

But don't you think it has in some sense? We obviously couldn't afford an Adam Dunn, yet we forked out 12M/year for the next 3 years to a closer. We extended Bronson Arroyo needlessly IMO. We've spent money on peripheral (marginal) players - and still are - which takes away from an already limited budget to either acquire or hold onto quality players.

I can remember when we use to spend the money on the position players, while trying to patch together a pitching staff on shoe strings. Now it appears it's the other way around.

I'm a firm believer - though I don't put as much into as some on here do - in statistical analysis for evaluating, acquiring, and building your farm system (team). You have to have the right people in that FO though who adhere to it (buy in), and do their homework.

I don't think this FO does that at all. Not when I hear not just Baker, but now Jocketty, gush over speed, and how he is excited to have Taveras at the top of this order.

This is another area where I have problems with Jocketty. He heavily relies on underlings for advice and player evaluation. Jamie Quirk, a new member of this FO, watched Taveras last year while working as a bench coach for the Rockies. In fact, it was Quirk who pushed Reds General Manager Walt Jocketty toward acquiring the 27-year-old Dominican.

He WATCHED him. :rolleyes:

"We tried to do a trade with Colorado for Taveras earlier, but it didn't work out," Jocketty said. "When the Rockies didn't tender him (offer him a contract), we called his agent and got this done." About his fallen batting average and on-base percentage, 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 thinks he changed his approach and that we can get him back to where he was in 2007."


http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/content/oh/story/sports/pro/reds/2008/12/28/ddn122808sptaveras.html?cxntlid=inform_sr

Hey Walt! Why do you think the Rockies basically non-tendered this guy?

So can we call the Taveras signing a "quirk"? :lol:



I didn't see the Reds being players in the CC, Tex, or Burnett markets nor did I want them to sign them for as expensive or as long term as the teams did.


They never will. Which is why I agree with you that they need to follow the model of a Twins and/or As, where your farm system is strong enough, and you keep it strong, by turning over those productive players that are pricing themselves out of your market at some point.


Jocketty has always been the type of GM that primarily is on the other end of that spectrum, looking to snap those players up at the opportune time - not having to deal with trading them away (or lose them), while getting a good return in the form of prospects. I don't think that's his forte.

Jpup
12-30-2008, 11:33 AM
The Twins model is about right. The Twins owner is a billionaire and the 2nd richest owner in baseball. He puts the profits in his pocket.

bucksfan2
12-30-2008, 11:55 AM
But don't you think it has in some sense? We obviously couldn't afford an Adam Dunn, yet we forked out 12M/year for the next 3 years to a closer. We extended Bronson Arroyo needlessly IMO. We've spent money on peripheral (marginal) players - and still are - which takes away from an already limited budget to either acquire or hold onto quality players.

We don't really know the reason the Reds didn't sign Adam Dunn. To say that it is monetarily is pure speculation.



I'm a firm believer - though I don't put as much into as some on here do - in statistical analysis for evaluating, acquiring, and building your farm system (team). You have to have the right people in that FO though who adhere to it (buy in), and do their homework.

I am in agreement here. The FO needs to take full advantage of all the tools at its disposal. While I don't necessarily agree or like the Jamesian philosophy of baseball it is important to have a few disciples on every FO staff. You need to build a FO with all different types of ideas, opinion, and tactics that have a good working relationship. I would be surprised if the Reds FO discarded a sabermetric approach when making FO moves.


I don't think this FO does that at all. Not when I hear not just Baker, but now Jocketty, gush over speed, and how he is excited to have Taveras at the top of this order.

This is another area where I have problems with Jocketty. He heavily relies on underlings for advice and player evaluation. Jamie Quirk, a new member of this FO, watched Taveras last year while working as a bench coach for the Rockies. In fact, it was Quirk who pushed Reds General Manager Walt Jocketty toward acquiring the 27-year-old Dominican.

He WATCHED him. :rolleyes:

The Reds also picked up Phillips because some scout watched him. Liked what he saw, thought he would be a good risk. Jamie Quirk may have noticed something mechanically wrong with his swing or batting approach. He may have found something that Taveras does when he is struggling and something he doesn't do when he is successful. To completely throw watching, analysis, dissection of the human element of the game is wrong as well.


They never will. Which is why I agree with you that they need to follow the model of a Twins and/or As, where your farm system is strong enough, and you keep it strong, by turning over those productive players that are pricing themselves out of your market at some point.

Jocketty has always been the type of GM that primarily is on the other end of that spectrum, looking to snap those players up at the opportune time - not having to deal with trading them away (or lose them), while getting a good return in the form of prospects. I don't think that's his forte.

From what I have seen both Jocketty and Cast are committed to the farm system. They have pumped in a ton of money into Latin American and signed Alonso over slot something that previous front offices have failed to do. To be honest I don't really want the Reds to operate like the A's. Ever since Moneyball came out Billy Beane has been christened as the great, new era GM when in reality his results have been lackluster. His building of the farm system but ever since the Tejada, Giambi, Mulder, Hudson, and Zito teams (steroid era) the A's haven't had much success. I really think its even money as to whether Holliday is on the A's after the all star break.

From what Jocketty has done in the past and to what he has said in public I think he has a firm understand of the sabermetric approach. Again I would highly doubt if he completely discounted it when making baseball decisions. Jocketty in his tenure with the Cards seemed to always be on the better end of trades. The only trade where he looked like he got fleeced was the Mulder for Haren trade. If your talking about trades then I am fully confident in him I just hope that he lest the minor league staff operate freely. It looks so far like Jocketty has let the minor league staff do what they want which is promising.

membengal
12-30-2008, 11:56 AM
Ability to spin a pleasing bedtime story (we're a'gonna win!)? A

Money meets mouth? D

Ability to articulate a vision for how we're a'gonna win? D-

edabbs44
12-30-2008, 01:12 PM
Why wouldn't you put that on him?

That's the GM's job.

cincrazy
12-30-2008, 01:52 PM
I give Bob a C+. The desire and commitment is there, he just needs to be more patient. His lack of patience will hurt the franchise in the long run if he doesn't get it under control.

Always Red
12-30-2008, 02:06 PM
I give him a B.

His heart is in the right place, he wants to win and is a fan of the game. He cares about winning, which is better than we've had here in the past.

He's learning the ropes as an owner; the last few years experience will come in handy in the future.

KronoRed
12-30-2008, 03:17 PM
That's the GM's job.

Who gave the GM the ok to do those deals?

So far Bob isn't that much different then Carl was, he just talks differently.

flyer85
12-30-2008, 04:23 PM
I would say RC is the main impediment to seeing a turnaround. As long as this team is in a win now mode they will push out actually becoming a winning franchise indefinitely.

edabbs44
12-30-2008, 04:39 PM
Who gave the GM the ok to do those deals?

So far Bob isn't that much different then Carl was, he just talks differently.

Come on...if the roster was Bob's call then he wouldn't have needed to pay a GM, since he is so cheap and all.

Bob has increased payroll 25% in 2 years. He also paid the most money in the history of baseball for a relief pitcher.

"Tight" isn't a word I would use to describe him.

flyer85
12-30-2008, 04:44 PM
"Tight" isn't a word I would use to describe him.I would agree but I can think of some other words that would be an apt description. :D

AtomicDumpling
12-30-2008, 05:04 PM
Come on...if the roster was Bob's call then he wouldn't have needed to pay a GM, since he is so cheap and all.

Bob has increased payroll 25% in 2 years. He also paid the most money in the history of baseball for a relief pitcher.

"Tight" isn't a word I would use to describe him.

The payroll is still way too low. Given that the payroll during the Lindner years the payroll was criminally low it doesn't say much for Castellini that he has only increased it 25% so far -- especially considering the huge profits the team is making.

Cordero is the only big-money free agent signed under Castellini, and that was a very unintelligent signing.

edabbs44
12-30-2008, 05:34 PM
The payroll is still way too low. Given that the payroll during the Lindner years the payroll was criminally low it doesn't say much for Castellini that he has only increased it 25% so far -- especially considering the huge profits the team is making.

Cordero is the only big-money free agent signed under Castellini, and that was a very unintelligent signing.

Huge profits?

AtomicDumpling
12-30-2008, 05:39 PM
Huge profits?

Yes.

Forbes and other independent reviews show the Reds have made $10-22 million per year from 2005-2007 and in addition to that the team's value as a franchise has increased significantly since Castellini bought the Reds. Bob C. has made an absolute fortune on the team already.

Topcat
12-30-2008, 05:45 PM
Impatience has hindered a good thing that was in place. Mackanin and Krivsky would serve this organization far better the the current regime.

Unassisted
12-30-2008, 05:48 PM
I have long suspected that Bob is more hands-on than anyone with the Reds lets on. We probably won't know for sure until his regime is over or until Wayne Krivsky opens up to a reporter.

If I'm right, I have no problem giving him a "C."

Ltlabner
12-30-2008, 07:01 PM
I give Bob a C+. The desire and commitment is there, he just needs to be more patient. His lack of patience will hurt the franchise in the long run if he doesn't get it under control.

Very well said.

I think he really, really, really wants a winner in Cincy. Far more than Lindner ever did. I give him props for heart.

But his rash movements behind the scenes will continue to do more harm than good.

GAC
12-31-2008, 04:50 AM
We don't really know the reason the Reds didn't sign Adam Dunn. To say that it is monetarily is pure speculation.

True. But pretty good speculation looking at this organization and how they have spent money.


I am in agreement here. The FO needs to take full advantage of all the tools at its disposal. While I don't necessarily agree or like the Jamesian philosophy of baseball it is important to have a few disciples on every FO staff.

It's more like BranchRicheyian. ;)


The Reds also picked up Phillips because some scout watched him. Liked what he saw, thought he would be a good risk. Jamie Quirk may have noticed something mechanically wrong with his swing or batting approach. He may have found something that Taveras does when he is struggling and something he doesn't do when he is successful. To completely throw watching, analysis, dissection of the human element of the game is wrong as well

That all may be true about Taveras. Anything is possible. We can only hope this is true for our advantage.

As for Phillips, it was a far different scenario. This was a kid that was really heralded as a top prospect in the Indian's organization. But like any 21/22 yr old kid he showed inconsistency. Only natural. They jerked him around pretty good, really screwed him up IMO, after "knighting" him the heir-apparent at 2B. They had him up and down so much that they lost the options on him and had to deal him or lose him.

He was still a "diamond in the rough" at age 25 when we snapped him up. I don't see that in Taveras. Prior to '06, Phillips was only given a viable starting role in 2003 (112 games). He appeared in 6 games respectively in the following two years as he was jerked around (124 games total over 3 years) .

Yet since 2005, Taveras was pretty much given the starting job with the Rockies and has played in 541 games.


From what Jocketty has done in the past and to what he has said in public I think he has a firm understand of the sabermetric approach. Again I would highly doubt if he completely discounted it when making baseball decisions. Jocketty in his tenure with the Cards seemed to always be on the better end of trades. The only trade where he looked like he got fleeced was the Mulder for Haren trade. If your talking about trades then I am fully confident in him I just hope that he lest the minor league staff operate freely. It looks so far like Jocketty has let the minor league staff do what they want which is promising.

But I don't think sabermetrics had anything at all to do with a majority of Jocketty's acquisitions/trades. It was about being in the right place at the right time, and being able to take advantage of the situation, such as with McGwire, Edmonds, and Rolen.

Walt is known as being pretty "old school"....

http://crosleyfieldterrace.wordpress.com/2008/01/13/reds-hire-ex-cardinal-gm-walt-jocketty/

One of the major factors in his firing by the Cardinals and Chairman Bill DeWitt was the conflict of how to develop young talent and the use of a more analytical approach. Farm director Jeff Luhnow was promoted from his position of scouting director. This clash of approaches was documented in Baseball America’s preview of the NL Central (Issue 0725 Dec. 3-16 2007)
“Luhnow was hired as a consultant to reboot the Cardinals’ use of statistical analysis.”

The statistical analysis used lead Luhnow to draft Colby Rasmus, the Cardinals’ top prospect, during the 2005 draft. This rubbed Jocketty the wrong way. Jocketty is a noted “old school” baseball guy, going by gut instinct and a master at acquiring veteran talent. However, when Luhnow was given increasing power, Jocketty was not happy.

“Some in the organization said Jocketty considered the move as an erosion of his power.” Obviously it was.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9805EFD71131F937A25753C1A9619C8B 63

In 13 years under Jocketty, the Cardinals reached the playoffs seven times and won the World Series once. That Series conquest made his departure all the more curious because it came only a year later. Jocketty, 56, said he wasn't the victim of a power struggle, but was caught in a difference in strategic approach to building the team. Bill DeWitt Jr., the managing partner, sided with the vice president for player development and amateur scouting, Jeff Luhnow. ''It was probably more philosophical differences over the direction they wanted to take the club that I wasn't necessarily comfortable with,'' Jocketty said. ''He wanted to do things that were different from my philosophy. We felt the best way to resolve it was to go our separate ways.''


The schism between Jocketty and DeWitt epitomizes the debate in baseball that has raged with increasing passion and disagreement: the traditional method of building a club (scouting) versus the newer method of statistical analysis, the player procurement method popularized in the book ''Moneyball.''

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

Jocketty is described as a quintessential baseball man, albeit one equipped with the more daring killer instinct to make the right trades at the deadline. In part, that was a reflection on a generally weak player development program; the Cardinals depended on free agents and trades for the most part, and Jocketty's willingness to gamble.

cincrazy
12-31-2008, 12:58 PM
To elaborate a little further on my earlier post, I think the 2006 season did more harm than good. It tricked Bob into thinking we were closer than we actually are. He got a little bit of "pennant fever." A 90 loss season probably would have been better that year, so he could have said to himself "Man, this team has a LONG ways to go, and we need to rebuild."

Spring~Fields
12-31-2008, 05:42 PM
Ability to spin a pleasing bedtime story (we're a'gonna win!)? A

Money meets mouth? D

Ability to articulate a vision for how we're a'gonna win? D-

membengal A+

Castellini all air dip and wind pudding. Sell it Bob, Sell it Bob keep those dollars coming in, it doesn't matter that you don't have the product, just keep selling it.

All hale the budget, profit margin and net effect. Product value be damned

WebScorpion
01-02-2009, 11:13 AM
How do you grade an owner? Um, he owns the team and doesn't make it impossible for the GM and/or manager to succeed... I guess that's harder than it looks, so I give Bob an 'A'! Really, I don't think it would be so hard for a person with a normal sized ego to be a successful baseball team owner, but then none of the owners have normal sized egos. :rolleyes: