PDA

View Full Version : The second-guessing game



nate
05-04-2009, 07:20 PM
From (http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2009/05/03/the_second_guessing_game/?page=full) Boston.com. A relevant bit about the Reds:


Reds can't pull off a Jermaine Dye deal: He keeps on ticking, off to another great start in a very good career. A deal could have been made by sending pitching prospect Homer Bailey to the White Sox, but it got hung up because the Reds wanted Chicago to pay some of Dye's $12 million salary. The Reds don't have a regular left fielder to speak of.

Thoughts?

OnBaseMachine
05-04-2009, 07:25 PM
As much as Jermaine Dye's bat is needed in left field, I'm glad the Reds didn't make that trade now. I like what I'm reading about Homer Bailey. Everybody that has seen him pitch this year says his stuff and mechanics are back to where they were in 2006 when he dominated in the minors. I'd like to have Dye in left field but not at the expense of Homer Bailey. I like the thought of having three young power arms in the rotation for many years to come.

Joseph
05-04-2009, 07:28 PM
I'd rather keep Homer and try for a 'lesser' name than Dye.

WVRedsFan
05-04-2009, 07:32 PM
Homer Bailey has pitched 5 games at AAA. In 27 innings (5.4 innings per start) he's given up 27 hits and 11 walks. His ERA is 4.61 and his WHIP is 1.39. The only statistic that even impresses is his 31 strikeouts. Allowing an average of 5 runs per game, it really doesn't matter about your strikeouts. they are nice, but I'd rather get them out without allowing a bunch of hits, too.

The trade should have been made. I think Homer will be no better than a 4 starter and maybe a five. And that's a year or two off. We could use Dye's offensive abilities so much this year. it might make the difference in winning 75 or 90 games.

kaldaniels
05-04-2009, 07:40 PM
Homer Bailey has pitched 5 games at AAA. In 27 innings (5.4 innings per start) he's given up 27 hits and 11 walks. His ERA is 4.61 and his WHIP is 1.39. The only statistic that even impresses is his 31 strikeouts. Allowing an average of 5 runs per game, it really doesn't matter about your strikeouts. they are nice, but I'd rather get them out without allowing a bunch of hits, too.

The trade should have been made. I think Homer will be no better than a 4 starter and maybe a five. And that's a year or two off. We could use Dye's offensive abilities so much this year. it might make the difference in winning 75 or 90 games.

I don't know how to run the numbers, but could one player account for 15 wins? That sounds high.

nate
05-04-2009, 07:41 PM
Yeah, I dunno. I'm kind of in the middle. I'm a bit Fox Mulder on Homer in that I want to believe but I'm wondering if he'd be more valuable as a trading chip than a player. I also don't know if Dye is the guy I'd want although the net difference in production between him and what we've had in LF is pretty significant; it might even have us worrying the Cardinals.

_Sir_Charles_
05-04-2009, 07:44 PM
No way in the world I trade Homer for Dye. Yeah, Dye's a good player, but we're simply not going to win this year. Too many young kids to realistically think we'll get to the playoffs. 2010 and beyond is our window in my opinion and Homer's a big part of it. We've got kids coming up that can fill that OF position in the near future. Even if they don't pan out...I'd rather we look in the FA market next year instead of trading away a kid with Homer's potential. Pitching is MUCH more important than an OF'er.

OnBaseMachine
05-04-2009, 07:45 PM
Homer Bailey has pitched 5 games at AAA. In 27 innings (5.4 innings per start) he's given up 27 hits and 11 walks. His ERA is 4.61 and his WHIP is 1.39. The only statistic that even impresses is his 31 strikeouts. Allowing an average of 5 runs per game, it really doesn't matter about your strikeouts. they are nice, but I'd rather get them out without allowing a bunch of hits, too.

The trade should have been made. I think Homer will be no better than a 4 starter and maybe a five. And that's a year or two off. We could use Dye's offensive abilities so much this year. it might make the difference in winning 75 or 90 games.

In his last three starts:

19.1 IP, 15 H, 7 BB, 23 K, 1.88 ERA

He was roughed up in his first two starts but his stuff was very good according to Rick Sweet. My guess is it was a letdown from being sent down despite outpitching his competition in spring training. It happens. David Price and Matt Wieters (the #1 and 2 prospects in baseball) are both off to underwhelming starts in the minors after being sent down. Homer's stuff has been terrific according to everyone who has seen him pitch this season.

I like Dye, but not trading Bailey for Dye may turn out to be the best decision Jocketty has made with the Reds.

kaldaniels
05-04-2009, 07:49 PM
If Homer reaches his alleged potential, the Reds could be a dynasty. At this point, I'll keep him.

_Sir_Charles_
05-04-2009, 07:52 PM
Last year (and early this year) people were so quick to give up on Homer it just astounds me. It's like they expect him to be an ace of the staff at, what is he...22? 23? Good grief. Give the kid some time to mature. He's got the stuff to be a number 1 starter...those don't grow on trees you know.

nate
05-04-2009, 07:56 PM
Total hypothetical:

Homer could be traded for "the missing link" that gets the Reds into the postseason this year but isn't.

What level of performance from Homer would make that "OK" in 2010 and beyond?

acredsfan
05-04-2009, 07:58 PM
Everybody is getting hung up on Bailey vs. Dye when the deal was stopped because of a money issue. The question should be is Dye worth $12M PLUS the loss of Homer. Even if he does end up as only a 4th starter as has been suggested in this thread, that is still a loss in production which you then have to pay another player to replace. Taking the whole picture into account, I would rather try Nix in LF and take my chances with Homer becoming an above average starter.

cincrazy
05-04-2009, 08:09 PM
Last year (and early this year) people were so quick to give up on Homer it just astounds me. It's like they expect him to be an ace of the staff at, what is he...22? 23? Good grief. Give the kid some time to mature. He's got the stuff to be a number 1 starter...those don't grow on trees you know.

I agree with your general point, that it's to early to give up on Homer. But I don't know if I agree with the #1 starter stuff. From what I've seen, both in person and on television, he doesn't have anywhere near the stuff that Volquez or Cueto has. Maybe it's changed, maybe his stuff really is that good this year. But I'll believe it when I see it. The Reds sure aren't going to downplay his stuff if they hope on using him as a potential trading chip at some point.

edabbs44
05-04-2009, 11:48 PM
It seems to me as if many on this board are in "grass is grenner" mode with Homer. He's been nitpicked so much since he was drafted that people consider him a bust and too far gone. But if he was in KC or Minnesota, for example, those same individuals would probably be clamoring to try and deal for him.

Homer is young. I know I am rooting for him to make it big in Cincy.

membengal
05-04-2009, 11:57 PM
Wonder how many people in KC gave up on Grienke three years ago?

AtomicDumpling
05-05-2009, 12:10 AM
This offseason the Reds could have had their choice of players as good as Dye without giving up Bailey. Dunn, Abreu, Burrell and Ibanez were all available to anyone that wanted them. Their salaries are roughly comparable to Dye's and wouldn't have cost us Bailey.

The reason those guys were not brought in was the Reds didn't want to pay them. That is the same reason the Dye-Bailey trade fell through. Bailey wasn't the deal breaker -- it was money.

The Reds decided to slash payroll at the expense of fielding a complete major league baseball team. Profit was more important than winning. As usual.

Mario-Rijo
05-05-2009, 12:11 AM
Wonder how many people in KC gave up on Grienke three years ago?

Whoever did is tearing themselves up right about now, he is flat out filthy.

PuffyPig
05-05-2009, 12:15 AM
Homer Bailey has pitched 5 games at AAA. In 27 innings (5.4 innings per start) he's given up 27 hits and 11 walks. His ERA is 4.61 and his WHIP is 1.39. The only statistic that even impresses is his 31 strikeouts. Allowing an average of 5 runs per game, it really doesn't matter about your strikeouts. they are nice, but I'd rather get them out without allowing a bunch of hits, too.

The trade should have been made. I think Homer will be no better than a 4 starter and maybe a five. And that's a year or two off. We could use Dye's offensive abilities so much this year. it might make the difference in winning 75 or 90 games.


Trading Homer for 1 year of Dye?????

Oh yeah, that's how small market teams build a winner.....

fearofpopvol1
05-05-2009, 01:17 AM
I am convinced Dye would be an upgrade in LF. I am not convinced Dye alone is enough to get the Reds to the postseason.

mbgrayson
05-05-2009, 02:00 AM
Wonder how many people in KC gave up on Grienke three years ago?

That is a very interesting comparison.

Zack Greinke was a first round pick in 2002, chosen with the 6th pick right out of high school. Zack was Baseball America's 2004 #1 prospect for Kansas City. He reached the majors as a 20 year old, and went on go 8-11, with a 3.97 ERA, 6.21 k/9, and a 1.17 WHIP. A very nice rookie campaign for a last place team. Then, in 2005, Greinke went 5-17, with a 5.80 ERA, 5.61 K/9, and a 1.56 WHIP. The Royals basically sent him back to the minors in 2006, where he mostly pitched in AA ball.

By 2007, Greinke had righted himself enough to make it back to the bigs, and went 7-7, 3.69 ERA, 7.82 K/9, and a 1.30 WHIP. In 2008, he went 13-10, a 3.47 ERA, an 8.14 K/9, and a 1.28 WHIP. (Again, for last place KC). This year, he is 5-0, with a .50 ERA, an 11.0 K/9 rate, and a .89 WHIP. He has a real shot at winning the CY Young this year if he stays close to his current start.

Homer Bailey was a first round pick for the Reds in 2004, chosen with the 7th overall pick right out of high school. He was the Baseball America #1 prospect for the Reds in 2007. He reached the majors at age 20. Homer only started 9 games in 2007, and went 4-2, with a 5.76 ERA, a 5.56 K/9 rate, and a 1.57 WHIP. In 2008, Homer went 0-6, with a 7.93 ERA, a 4.46 K/9 rate, and a 2.09(!) WHIP. He was also sent back to the minors.

So far in AAA this year, Homer is 3-2, with a 4.61 ERA, a 10.21 K/9 rate, and a 1.39 WHIP. Of course, the comparison to Greinke is incomplete, and will only be finished once Homer turns the corner and succeeds at the major league level. But the potential is there.

In the 2007 Baseball America Prospect handbook, the final sentence says "In time, he should become a true #1 starter."

We just need some patience here, and remember the part that says "In time....." Homer turned 23 on May 3rd this year. There is still time, and with that kind of potential, I am really glad we held onto him. As they say, you can never have too many good pitchers.

edabbs44
05-05-2009, 07:40 AM
This offseason the Reds could have had their choice of players as good as Dye without giving up Bailey. Dunn, Abreu, Burrell and Ibanez were all available to anyone that wanted them. Their salaries are roughly comparable to Dye's and wouldn't have cost us Bailey.

The reason those guys were not brought in was the Reds didn't want to pay them. That is the same reason the Dye-Bailey trade fell through. Bailey wasn't the deal breaker -- it was money.

The Reds decided to slash payroll at the expense of fielding a complete major league baseball team. Profit was more important than winning. As usual.

This is a myth. They didn't have their choice of those guys. Those guys had their choice of a bunch of teams and happened to choose teams who have won in recent memory. Except Dunn, who wasn't coming back anyway.

LoganBuck
05-05-2009, 08:15 AM
This is a myth. They didn't have their choice of those guys. Those guys had their choice of a bunch of teams and happened to choose teams who have won in recent memory. Except Dunn, who wasn't coming back anyway.

That isn't quite true, for example Abreu, his agent called Walt with an offer, Walt declined, his agent counteroffered, Walt said let me think about it. 24 hours later they decided that yes they wanted Abreu. But at that time the Angels were in the mix and offered $250,000 more. Abreu would have gone to the top bidder. These guys wanted/needed the money, Walt and BCast failed to read what the baseball economy was doing before they signed Weathers, Lincoln, and Taveras. Those three moves cost them from making any run at any hitter. JHJ essentially became a CYA move. They knew better otherwise they wouldn't have waited as long as they did to sign him. They essentially tried to make a sandwich with a nice hearth baked rye bread, a piece of gruyere cheese, a fancy dijon mustard, with aldi brand bologna. Nothing against Aldi, or bologna, but they ruin this sandwich. These games they keep throwing away are going to ruin this team.

They have started throwing the oily rags in the corner, how long until it ignites, and the whole thing burns to the ground?

jojo
05-05-2009, 08:45 AM
I don't know how to run the numbers, but could one player account for 15 wins? That sounds high.

Generally the most valuable player in baseball tops out at a WAR of 9 to 10 (aka Pujols).

Dye is projected to have a wOBA of .355. Thus his bat would be +13 runs above average over 600 PAs. His defense is likely to be something like -18 runs (based upon CHONE projections). He gets dinged another -7.5 runs for playing leftfield. The he gets 20 runs for the difference between average and replacement over 600 PAs.

That would suggest he would be worth about a win (13+20-7.5-18.5).

redsmetz
05-05-2009, 09:01 AM
That isn't quite true, for example Abreu, his agent called Walt with an offer, Walt declined, his agent counteroffered, Walt said let me think about it. 24 hours later they decided that yes they wanted Abreu. But at that time the Angels were in the mix and offered $250,000 more. Abreu would have gone to the top bidder. These guys wanted/needed the money, Walt and BCast failed to read what the baseball economy was doing before they signed Weathers, Lincoln, and Taveras. Those three moves cost them from making any run at any hitter. JHJ essentially became a CYA move. They knew better otherwise they wouldn't have waited as long as they did to sign him. They essentially tried to make a sandwich with a nice hearth baked rye bread, a piece of gruyere cheese, a fancy dijon mustard, with aldi brand bologna. Nothing against Aldi, or bologna, but they ruin this sandwich. These games they keep throwing away are going to ruin this team.

I would quibble with the one line which I've bolded. I think the market changed after they made those moves. I'd have to look at the dates, but I think the FA market had not shifted by that point (although I acknowledge I might be off slightly).

This is the first time I've heard this account of any dealings with Abreau's people. Where was that reported?

For all the "win now" philosphy from the start of Castellini's tenure, I think the action this off season, imperfect as it was, indicates that the expectation was not for 2009 to be the year. While Abreu wouldn't have required giving up a player (nor a draft pick loss), I'm really not sure the market had collapsed when we signed those earlier players. Yes, one could argue they hamstrung the club, I think the club anticipated a somewhat higher budget for salaries and that changed by the time Abreu's agent approached the Reds.

bucksfan2
05-05-2009, 09:25 AM
It seems to me as if many on this board are in "grass is grenner" mode with Homer. He's been nitpicked so much since he was drafted that people consider him a bust and too far gone. But if he was in KC or Minnesota, for example, those same individuals would probably be clamoring to try and deal for him.

Homer is young. I know I am rooting for him to make it big in Cincy.

That is a very interesting take and I tend to agree. This entire off season poster threw out names of prospects they would have liked the Reds to try and trade for. Most were uber talented but had been disappointing in their short career. But I tend to agree that if Homer were in another organization many posters would value him and want the Reds to make a run at Homer.

jojo
05-05-2009, 09:32 AM
That is a very interesting take and I tend to agree. This entire off season poster threw out names of prospects they would have liked the Reds to try and trade for. Most were uber talented but had been disappointing in their short career. But I tend to agree that if Homer were in another organization many posters would value him and want the Reds to make a run at Homer.

But would they use a "buy low" argument?

15fan
05-05-2009, 09:49 AM
The time to have traded for Dye was after the 96 season.

(I suggested Pokey for Dye at the time).

And the time to have dealt Homer (as I astutely noted) was a couple years ago when he was the top prospect in the game.

It's a knockoff of a Warren Buffet phrase, but you buy when others are selling, and sell when others are buying.

bucksfan2
05-05-2009, 09:53 AM
But would they use a "buy low" argument?

"Buy low" is in the eye of the beholder. The "buy low' argument was used on Ervin Santana a few summers ago. What a knowledgeable fan may think as a buy low opportunity may be completely different than what an organization may think.

HokieRed
05-05-2009, 10:12 AM
Seems to me that one way the "failure to get a left-field bat" argument works is to conceal the problems with the offense attributable to the severe underperformance of players currently here: at the top of the list, Brandon Phillips and Edwin Encarnacion.

Blitz Dorsey
05-05-2009, 10:24 AM
Since I don't think Homer Bailey will ever be worth a damn as a Major League pitcher, I would have liked the trade. Then again, I understand why the Reds didn't do it. Dye is overpaid at $12 million and if the Reds were going to give up a "top prospect" (and I use that term loosely) the Pale Hose were going to need to pay some of the salary. I can fully hear the Reds saying, "We'll give you Bailey, but you need to pick up some of the contract or it's a deal-breaker. You won't find anyone else who will give you more than Bailey. Take it or leave it."

The Sox left it. I can't blame the Reds for that. I would have liked the trade -- I would like to have a real left fielder -- but there is no question the Sox would have needed to pick up at least a little bit of Dye's contract. Otherwise, why would it have made sense for the Reds to trade for a LF when they just could have gone out and signed a FA LF.

RedlegJake
05-05-2009, 10:45 AM
I wouldn't have been opposed to the trade entirely but I'd cringe when Homer became an ace, 2009 was gone and so was Dye and the Reds were again without a left fielder and a future ace. Yes, I believe Homer will get there.

IslandRed
05-05-2009, 11:14 AM
I would quibble with the one line which I've bolded. I think the market changed after they made those moves. I'd have to look at the dates, but I think the FA market had not shifted by that point (although I acknowledge I might be off slightly).

Yeah. I can't prove it, but I'm still of the opinion that Jocketty started out with one budget number, making moves with an eye toward leaving enough room to sign a bat for left field, a stated priority going into the offseason. Then one day Castellini walked in and gave him a lower number.

I really don't think Walt is an idiot who had this budget figure all along and can't count, which is what some of RedsZone appears to believe. Nor do I hold him responsible for not foreseeing the cut. His job is to find ballplayers, not keep the books.

RedsManRick
05-05-2009, 01:52 PM
Yeah. I can't prove it, but I'm still of the opinion that Jocketty started out with one budget number, making moves with an eye toward leaving enough room to sign a bat for left field, a stated priority going into the offseason. Then one day Castellini walked in and gave him a lower number.

I really don't think Walt is an idiot who had this budget figure all along and can't count, which is what some of RedsZone appears to believe. Nor do I hold him responsible for not foreseeing the cut. His job is to find ballplayers, not keep the books.

Or he just decided that he didn't want to another good bat, no glove LF, which is what the market was rife with this year. The team had made the decision to prioritize defense and, particularly given the talent in the pipeline, it didn't make sense to invest in somebody that didn't fit the mold of what the team was trying to do. With no LF available who fit both the mold of the team and the budget (at the time, nobody thought Abreu would get just $5M), they decide that the next best thing was upgrading elsewhere.

jojo
05-05-2009, 02:05 PM
Or he just decided that he didn't want to another good bat, no glove LF, which is what the market was rife with this year. The team had made the decision to prioritize defense and, particularly given the talent in the pipeline, it didn't make sense to invest in somebody that didn't fit the mold of what the team was trying to do. With no LF available who fit both the mold of the team and the budget (at the time, nobody thought Abreu would get just $5M), they decide that the next best thing was upgrading elsewhere.

I tend to agree. Given the lack of leftfielders whose defense didn't give back a chunk of their offensive worth, Jocketty decided to created a facsimile via platoon and turn his focus upon other positions.

Philosophically, its not an unsound approach IMHO.

LoganBuck
05-05-2009, 02:15 PM
I would quibble with the one line which I've bolded. I think the market changed after they made those moves. I'd have to look at the dates, but I think the FA market had not shifted by that point (although I acknowledge I might be off slightly).

This is the first time I've heard this account of any dealings with Abreau's people. Where was that reported?



I guess my biggest gripe with those free agents is that similar players were already in house, and available for much less money.

Hopper, Roenicke, and a healthy Bray.

The Abreu dealings were detailed by Paul Daugherty several times right after he signed with the Angels on 700 WLW. There might be something in print at the Enquirer website, or maybe WLW still has the podcast online. (I doubt it since they fired PDoc)

M2
05-05-2009, 02:33 PM
You can argue the Reds didn't need to make the Dye for Bailey swap, but there is no argument that the Reds needed to take the offense seriously.

Whether it was by trade or in the free agent market, the Reds needed a bat. Thanks to Wayne Krivsky the Reds have the best starting rotation the club has seen since 1995. He locked up Harang, he traded for Volquez and Arroyo, he made changes in the developmental system which fostered Cueto's rise to the majors.

And it became a buyer's market for bats this winter.

So the Reds an opportunity to make a serious bid for the postseason given the rotation and there were multiple bats available.

Yet the Reds didn't get so much as one impact bat and the lineup is being sabotaged by multiple below average hitters. What you've got now is pitching that's delivering and an atrocious offense that isn't. I can tell you what Pythagoras has to say about this club and it isn't all that upbeat. Getting outscored by 50 runs isn't a winning strategy.

So feel free to wax poetic about how wonderful Homer Bailey will be (he's got this year to win himself a job with the major league club or he goes bye-bye) or how a guy like Dye isn't a fabulous defender, but the Reds needed some muscle in the middle of the lineup and some more OB distributed around the lineup if they were going to make a serious run this season.

The 2009 Reds ultimately may be a nothing ventured, nothing gained story. The club isn't built to make anything of whatever advantages it has on the mound.

cincrazy
05-05-2009, 02:41 PM
You can argue the Reds didn't need to make the Dye for Bailey swap, but there is no argument that the Reds needed to take the offense seriously.

Whether it was by trade or in the free agent market, the Reds needed a bat. Thanks to Wayne Krivsky the Reds have the best starting rotation the club has seen since 1995. He locked up Harang, he traded for Volquez and Arroyo, he made changes in the developmental system which fostered Cueto's rise to the majors.

And it became a buyer's market for bats this winter.

So the Reds an opportunity to make a serious bid for the postseason given the rotation and there were multiple bats available.

Yet the Reds didn't get so much as one impact bat and the lineup is being sabotaged by multiple below average hitters. What you've got now is pitching that's delivering and an atrocious offense that isn't. I can tell you what Pythagoras has to say about this club and it isn't all that upbeat. Getting outscored by 50 runs isn't a winning strategy.

So feel free to wax poetic about how wonderful Homer Bailey will be (he's got this year to win himself a job with the major league club or he goes bye-bye) or how a guy like Dye isn't a fabulous defender, but the Reds needed some muscle in the middle of the lineup and some more OB distributed around the lineup if they were going to make a serious run this season.

The 2009 Reds ultimately may be a nothing ventured, nothing gained story. The club isn't built to make anything of whatever advantages it has on the mound.


Amen.

It's very disappointing. This team, and I don't think I'm exaggerating, has one of the most talented rotations in the game. And it's all going to waste. It's not even that we have an average offense. We have a very poor offense that is going to end up killing our postseason hopes, and hopefully not our young arms also.

LoganBuck
05-05-2009, 02:43 PM
If you are reading the book "Dont Jump" Do Not click this link!

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/2009.shtml

Chip R
05-05-2009, 02:44 PM
Amen.

We have a very poor offense that is going to end up killing our postseason hopes, and hopefully not our young arms also.


Of course very few of us had postseason hopes during the fall, winter and spring and I think Reds front office people may have been amongst those people.

edabbs44
05-05-2009, 02:59 PM
And it became a buyer's market for bats this winter.

So the Reds an opportunity to make a serious bid for the postseason given the rotation and there were multiple bats available.

Yet the Reds didn't get so much as one impact bat and the lineup is being sabotaged by multiple below average hitters. What you've got now is pitching that's delivering and an atrocious offense that isn't. I can tell you what Pythagoras has to say about this club and it isn't all that upbeat. Getting outscored by 50 runs isn't a winning strategy.

Do you think that it was a true buyer's market, or do you think that it was a buyer's market for teams who could actually sell their team to the FA? I saw teams like the Dodgers, Angels and TB reap the benefits of the market. Other than Washington picking up a guy who Cincy probably wasn't offering anything to, did any non top tier teams clean up in this buyer's market?

M2
05-05-2009, 04:12 PM
Do you think that it was a true buyer's market, or do you think that it was a buyer's market for teams who could actually sell their team to the FA? I saw teams like the Dodgers, Angels and TB reap the benefits of the market. Other than Washington picking up a guy who Cincy probably wasn't offering anything to, did any non top tier teams clean up in this buyer's market?

When established productive hitters are available for a percentage of their former wages, it is a buyer's market. When teams are willing to trade away cogs in the middle of their lineup in order to save money, it is a buyer's market.

I suppose you could argue there's no such thing as a buyer's market for truly pathetic organizations, but the market works outside of a club's ability/willingness to execute.

Looks to me like the Reds, Giants, Braves, Royals, Mariners and White Sox are going to kicking themselves this season for not adding some thunder which was there to get and pretty much anyone could have told you those clubs needed.

Homer Bailey
05-05-2009, 04:22 PM
If you are reading the book "Dont Jump" Do Not click this link!

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/2009.shtml

Granted its a small sample size, but 4 of the 6 bench players have an OPS+ over 100, while only 2 of the 8 starters do. 2 starters are OPS-ing over .667. Two. And they are both 2nd year players.

If only they there was a job in baseball that involved putting the right hitters in the lineup. Granted, there were many things the FO could have done this off season to dramatically help the ball club, but it would also help if the manager knew how to put hot players in the lineup, and not try so hard to not be a "front-runner."

edabbs44
05-05-2009, 04:30 PM
When established productive hitters are available for a percentage of their former wages, it is a buyer's market. When teams are willing to trade away cogs in the middle of their lineup in order to save money, it is a buyer's market.

I suppose you could argue there's no such thing as a buyer's market for truly pathetic organizations, but the market works outside of a club's ability/willingness to execute.

Looks to me like the Reds, Giants, Braves, Royals, Mariners and White Sox are going to kicking themselves this season for not adding some thunder which was there to get and pretty much anyone could have told you those clubs needed.

It's like how the housing market is now a buyer's market. Prices are low, rates are low...except now there is much stricter lending criteria so only the wealthy can get those low rates and cheap prices.

The prices for Abreu, Burrell, etc were for the wealthy. Those prices would have gone up to normal levels if they were to go to a non-winner.

M2
05-05-2009, 04:39 PM
It's like how the housing market is now a buyer's market. Prices are low, rates are low...except now there is much stricter lending criteria so only the wealthy can get those low rates and cheap prices.

The prices for Abreu, Burrell, etc were for the wealthy. Those prices would have gone up to normal levels if they were to go to a non-winner.

Baseball clubs have constant access to credit in the form of fans. Put a winning club on the field and you get your ROI.

Those weren't prices for the wealthy. They were the prices. That a number of teams passed on paying those prices when they needed the talent is something they've got to live with.

Ltlabner
05-05-2009, 04:42 PM
[sad voice] oh....we're a small market team...we'll never get a real FA...they wouldn't want to play here anyway....oh golly......[/sad voice]

That's the mentality of losers.

TheNext44
05-05-2009, 04:44 PM
Granted its a small sample size, but 4 of the 6 bench players have an OPS+ over 100, while only 2 of the 8 starters do. 2 starters are OPS-ing over .667. Two. And they are both 2nd year players.

If only they there was a job in baseball that involved putting the right hitters in the lineup. Granted, there were many things the FO could have done this off season to dramatically help the ball club, but it would also help if the manager knew how to put hot players in the lineup, and not try so hard to not be a "front-runner."

Actually, Rosales is one of the "bench" players and he is the starting 3B.

Janish is out OPS'ing, Gonzalez, but I doubt you would have begged Dusty to start him at the beginning of the year. Anyway it looks like he will be starting some games due to Gonzalez's injury.

Hanigan is hitting better than Hernandez, but he's a rookie and Hernandez was acquired to start this year, while the Reds break in Hanigan for the future.

Nix is really the only guy who should get more playing time and Dusty the other day said he would. Hence the title of Hal's latest article:

"Redsí Nix to get more playing time"

http://www.daytondailynews.com/dayton-sports/cincinnati-reds/reds-nix-to-get-more-playing-time-107009.html

Maybe one reason why they are OPS'ing so well is because they are being used properly, and if over used, their faults would show?

And about putting "hot" players in the lineup, that's the philosophy that Boone and Narron used, and one reason why they are not managing today.

edabbs44
05-05-2009, 04:45 PM
Baseball clubs have constant access to credit in the form of fans. Put a winning club on the field and you get your ROI.

Those weren't prices for the wealthy. They were the prices. That a number of teams passed on paying those prices when they needed the talent is something they've got to live with.

So the fact that the premier FAs this offseason went to the winning teams doesn't have much to do with their recent success?

BRM
05-05-2009, 04:47 PM
So the fact that the premier FAs this offseason went to the winning teams doesn't have much to do with their recent success?

Maybe it's because the "winning teams" were the highest bidders? Maybe that's why they are the "winning teams"?

RichRed
05-05-2009, 04:49 PM
Actually, Rosales is one of the "bench" players and he is the starting 3B.


Was. That job inexplicably belongs to Hairston for the next couple of games (except that now Hairston is playing SS tonight for the injured Gonzalez so Rosales stays in the lineup for now).

BRM
05-05-2009, 04:51 PM
Was. That job inexplicably belongs to Hairston for the next couple of games (except that now Hairston is playing SS tonight for the injured Gonzalez so Rosales stays in the lineup for now).

You just knew that was going to happen.

REDREAD
05-05-2009, 04:54 PM
This is a myth. They didn't have their choice of those guys. Those guys had their choice of a bunch of teams and happened to choose teams who have won in recent memory. Except Dunn, who wasn't coming back anyway.

If the Reds were willing to cough up 12 million, I think some of them would've listened. Probably not Ibanez or Dunn (who both wanted and got multi year deals). Probably Abreau. 7 million more would've probably turned his head.

I agree with Atomic Dumpling. Cast just wasn't willing to put his money where his mouth was (at least for this year). Part of the blame also goes to Wayne for leaving us with relatively overpaid contracts (Freel, Gonzo, Cordero, and even Phillips).

bucksfan2
05-05-2009, 04:58 PM
If the Reds were willing to cough up 12 million, I think some of them would've listened. Probably not Ibanez or Dunn (who both wanted and got multi year deals). Probably Abreau. 7 million more would've probably turned his head.

I agree with Atomic Dumpling. Cast just wasn't willing to put his money where his mouth was (at least for this year). Part of the blame also goes to Wayne for leaving us with relatively overpaid contracts (Freel, Gonzo, Cordero, and even Phillips).

Can't help but get another cheap shot at Wayne can you?

REDREAD
05-05-2009, 04:59 PM
Generally the most valuable player in baseball tops out at a WAR of 9 to 10 (aka Pujols).

Dye is projected to have a wOBA of .355. Thus his bat would be +13 runs above average over 600 PAs. His defense is likely to be something like -18 runs (based upon CHONE projections). He gets dinged another -7.5 runs for playing leftfield. The he gets 20 runs for the difference between average and replacement over 600 PAs.

That would suggest he would be worth about a win (13+20-7.5-18.5).

I agree with the reasoning.. However, the Reds probably won't get average production out of LF. They are probably going to get close to replacement level (if they are lucky).

I think Dye is worth several more wins, just because our LF is so bad.
I agree that Dye isn't worth 15 more wins.. Maybe 4-5, only because our LF is so bad.
I don't think he makes this team a contender though.
I wouldn't mind trading for him, because that makes this year much more entertaining, and I don't care much for Homer.

jojo
05-05-2009, 05:01 PM
Generally it's a buyer's market because there are more sellers than buyers. Generally there is a reason for that too...

BTW, the Ms passed on the "established" hitters with purpose.

edabbs44
05-05-2009, 05:03 PM
If the Reds were willing to cough up 12 million, I think some of them would've listened. Probably not Ibanez or Dunn (who both wanted and got multi year deals). Probably Abreau. 7 million more would've probably turned his head.

I agree with Atomic Dumpling. Cast just wasn't willing to put his money where his mouth was (at least for this year). Part of the blame also goes to Wayne for leaving us with relatively overpaid contracts (Freel, Gonzo, Cordero, and even Phillips).

$12MM? $7MM more than LAA? That's a lot of money. Not sure if it would have been a wise business move.

edabbs44
05-05-2009, 05:03 PM
Maybe it's because the "winning teams" were the highest bidders? Maybe that's why they are the "winning teams"?

Chicken or the egg.

BRM
05-05-2009, 05:06 PM
Chicken or the egg.

I truly believe those guys went to the highest bidder, especially Abreu. The Reds chose not to play with the "big boys" this winter even when prices fell into their range.

REDREAD
05-05-2009, 05:07 PM
[sad voice] oh....we're a small market team...we'll never get a real FA...they wouldn't want to play here anyway....oh golly......[/sad voice]

That's the mentality of losers.

Yes, that's our Cincinnati Reds, unfortunately.

I'm really disappointed in Cast so far. Looks like he's just another windbag owner that talks a big game but wants to stay "small market" and collect a nice revenue sharing check.

I think Walt did an ok job (not great) based on the holes he had and the money he had to spend. We'll do better than the 74 wins we had last year. At least that's some progress. The team is more enjoyable to watch than last year. Last year was truly unbearable.. I pretty much stopped following the team.

REDREAD
05-05-2009, 05:11 PM
Can't help but get another cheap shot at Wayne can you?


Hey, it's the truth. I can criticize Cast and Walt too.

Without Gonzo on the payroll, it becomes a lot easier to make some moves.

Unloading Freel was a minor miracle, but we got stuck with an overpaid catcher.. Not bad, since Freel was a sunk cost, and Hernandez was only a small increment more, but not an optimal situation.

I'd rather have a legitimate cleanup hitter than Cordero.

I never understand why DanO and Bowden are fair game to criticize, yet Wayne is supposed to be immune. Wayne has proven that you can make the team substantially worse, despite upgrading the starting rotation.

REDREAD
05-05-2009, 05:14 PM
$12MM? $7MM more than LAA? That's a lot of money. Not sure if it would have been a wise business move.


I agree. I was speaking hypothetically.
If the Reds were willing to cough up 12 million for Dye, they could've gotten one of the FA LF. That's all I'm saying.

It's hard to say whether it would've been worth it to outbid LAA for Abreu.
It may not have taken 12 million, but would 8-10 million be worth it?
If the franchise was truly interested in creating a culture of winning and was trying to get fans back, then yes, I think it would be worth giving Abreau 8-10 million for probably another 3-5 wins.

bucksfan2
05-05-2009, 05:17 PM
Hey, it's the truth. I can criticize Cast and Walt too.

Without Gonzo on the payroll, it becomes a lot easier to make some moves.

Unloading Freel was a minor miracle, but we got stuck with an overpaid catcher.. Not bad, since Freel was a sunk cost, and Hernandez was only a small increment more, but not an optimal situation.

I'd rather have a legitimate cleanup hitter than Cordero.

I never understand why DanO and Bowden are fair game to criticize, yet Wayne is supposed to be immune. Wayne has proven that you can make the team substantially worse, despite upgrading the starting rotation.

Its just that your arguments against Wayne have been hashed and rehashed time and time again. Im sorry it just seems like every once in a while you get in a "Wayne sucks" and then we get back into this same debate.

OnBaseMachine
05-05-2009, 05:20 PM
Its just that your arguments against Wayne have been hashed and rehashed time and time again. Im sorry it just seems like every once in a while you get in a "Wayne sucks" and then we get back into this same debate.

Yep.

Can you imagine if Wayne Krivsky was still around and had the disastrous offseason that Jocketty had? We would've never heard the end of it, yet Jocketty gets a free pass full of excuses.

REDREAD
05-05-2009, 05:21 PM
Its just that your arguments against Wayne have been hashed and rehashed time and time again. Im sorry it just seems like every once in a while you get in a "Wayne sucks" and then we get back into this same debate.


Wasn't trying to upset anyone. Just saying that Wayne commited a lot of money to the future. That directly impacted the amount of money Walt had to spend last offseason. In other words, it's not 100% Cast's fault for not spending the money.

It's no different than pointing out that Milton's contract handcuffed payflex for 3 years.

REDREAD
05-05-2009, 05:25 PM
Yep.

Can you imagine if Wayne Krivsky was still around and had the disastrous offseason that Jocketty had? We would've never heard the end of it, yet Jocketty gets a free pass full of excuses.


Nope, he does not get a free pass. I gave him a C- this offseason when we were asked. Most of the board seemed to give him a C or a D. How is that a free pass?

Right now, the team seems to be performing above expectations. Walt should be praised for that (at least while it lasts).

I don't think any of Wayne's teams finished above .500. I'm not sure this team will, but if it does, that's a nice accomplishment . IIRC, Wayne's W-L record got worse every year he was here. Even if we can't reach .500, if the W-L record improves despite losing Dunn/Jr and despite having relatively little money to spend this offseason.. that's a step forward at least.

Homer Bailey
05-05-2009, 05:25 PM
Actually, Rosales is one of the "bench" players and he is the starting 3B.

Janish is out OPS'ing, Gonzalez, but I doubt you would have begged Dusty to start him at the beginning of the year. Anyway it looks like he will be starting some games due to Gonzalez's injury.

Hanigan is hitting better than Hernandez, but he's a rookie and Hernandez was acquired to start this year, while the Reds break in Hanigan for the future.

Nix is really the only guy who should get more playing time and Dusty the other day said he would. Hence the title of Hal's latest article:

"Redsí Nix to get more playing time"

http://www.daytondailynews.com/dayton-sports/cincinnati-reds/reds-nix-to-get-more-playing-time-107009.html

Maybe one reason why they are OPS'ing so well is because they are being used properly, and if over used, their faults would show?

And about putting "hot" players in the lineup, that's the philosophy that Boone and Narron used, and one reason why they are not managing today.

If tonight isn't proof that Dusty doesn't know how to fill out a lineup card, I don't know what is.

Hitting JHJ 2nd vs a righty, playing him at a position that he is terrible at, when we have a better defensive and offensive (right now) option in Janish.

Still playing Dickerson over Nix despite the title of a Hal McCoy article. Tonight's lineup is one of the worst I've ever seen from Dusty, and that is saying something.

The 8 and 4 hitters should be switched. What other manager fills out a lineup card where anyone can say that sentence?

redsmetz
05-05-2009, 05:30 PM
If the Reds were willing to cough up 12 million, I think some of them would've listened. Probably not Ibanez or Dunn (who both wanted and got multi year deals). Probably Abreau. 7 million more would've probably turned his head.

I agree with Atomic Dumpling. Cast just wasn't willing to put his money where his mouth was (at least for this year). Part of the blame also goes to Wayne for leaving us with relatively overpaid contracts (Freel, Gonzo, Cordero, and even Phillips).

This continues to be a circular argument. It strikes me as so logical that the clubs course changed as the economy worsened; that management decided it was best to back off the original payroll budget and be more conservative. And yet that's considered not putting his money where his mouth is.

I agree Freel never should have been extended. It was a mistake. Gonzo's signing has been hampered by circumstances and injury but made sense at the time, despite all the protestations here on RZ. Cordero is a legitimate argument and we all know the disagreements. I fully understand the "luxury" argument, but I'll still take him on a staff that is proving to be one of the best. And I'm just baffled by Phillips even being on such a list.

And this will of course bring on the usual rebuttals and the circle will be unbroken.

bucksfan2
05-05-2009, 05:30 PM
Wasn't trying to upset anyone. Just saying that Wayne commited a lot of money to the future. That directly impacted the amount of money Walt had to spend last offseason. In other words, it's not 100% Cast's fault for not spending the money.

It's no different than pointing out that Milton's contract handcuffed payflex for 3 years.

Your sucking me in but its a heck of a lot easier to build a lineup than it is to build a rotation. Wayne built a pretty damn good rotation. Now the onus is on Jocketty to build a lineup to help that rotation out.

OnBaseMachine
05-05-2009, 05:31 PM
I don't think any of Wayne's teams finished above .500. I'm not sure this team will, but if it does, that's a nice accomplishment . IIRC, Wayne's W-L record got worse every year he was here. Even if we can't reach .500, if the W-L record improves despite losing Dunn/Jr and despite having relatively little money to spend this offseason.. that's a step forward at least.

We have been through this 1000 times. Wayne Krivsky inherited an absolute mess and was able to build a strong rotation in just a few years. He acquired Bronson Arroyo and Edinson Volquez. He locked up Aaron Harang. Johnny Cueto developed under his watch. He had this organization moving in the right direction. That's all I'm saying. I don't feel like having this same argument yet again.

Mario-Rijo
05-05-2009, 05:37 PM
Wasn't trying to upset anyone. Just saying that Wayne commited a lot of money to the future. That directly impacted the amount of money Walt had to spend last offseason. In other words, it's not 100% Cast's fault for not spending the money.

It's no different than pointing out that Milton's contract handcuffed payflex for 3 years.

Sorry I disagree with that. 1st off who is to say that Wayne was behind those signings? I'd just about lay money that Cordero, Gonzo, Freel etc. were mostly all Castellini's ideas. I say that knowing that Wayne is one of the few I have seen who actually knows talent when he sees it and has been in an organization that did things cheaply. I just cannot see those as his acquisitions. 2nd only Cordero's salary should be viewed as an amount that is subtantial enough to handcuff any team. I mean what are we playing here major league baseball or bad minton? 3rd Gonzo was a must have at the time IMO and I would do that deal over again if it weren't for the unforseeable injuries to come. 5 Million for a SS who plays above avg. defense and has some power for this team? Hell I'd take that SS right now and pay him more than 5 million, wouldn't you? Ya sure can't trade for one these days.

Mario-Rijo
05-05-2009, 05:38 PM
Nope, he does not get a free pass. I gave him a C- this offseason when we were asked. Most of the board seemed to give him a C or a D. How is that a free pass?

Right now, the team seems to be performing above expectations. Walt should be praised for that (at least while it lasts).

I don't think any of Wayne's teams finished above .500. I'm not sure this team will, but if it does, that's a nice accomplishment . IIRC, Wayne's W-L record got worse every year he was here. Even if we can't reach .500, if the W-L record improves despite losing Dunn/Jr and despite having relatively little money to spend this offseason.. that's a step forward at least.

And it will likely be due to Wayne's acquisitions not Walts if we do better than .500.

nate
05-05-2009, 05:41 PM
Hey, it's the truth. I can criticize Cast and Walt too.

It's more opinion than truth.


Without Gonzo on the payroll, it becomes a lot easier to make some moves.And without Eric Milton on the payroll, it might've been easier for Wayne to go out and get a _________. Without KG Jr., he might've _________.

No GM starts from a clean slate.


Unloading Freel was a minor miracle, but we got stuck with an overpaid catcher.. Not bad, since Freel was a sunk cost, and Hernandez was only a small increment more, but not an optimal situation.

I'd rather have a legitimate cleanup hitter than Cordero.Wasn't there a rumor of a deal to send Cordero to the Yanks for Xavier Nady?


I never understand why DanO and Bowden are fair game to criticize, yet Wayne is supposed to be immune. I don't see any mention of DanO or Bowden here.


Wayne has proven that you can make the team substantially worse, despite upgrading the starting rotation.I don't think any such thing has been "proven."

Chip R
05-05-2009, 05:43 PM
Leave the lineup discussion for the game thread, folks.

BRM
05-05-2009, 05:44 PM
Leave the lineup discussion for the game thread, folks.

Oops. Sorry about that.

TheNext44
05-05-2009, 05:51 PM
If tonight isn't proof that Dusty doesn't know how to fill out a lineup card, I don't know what is.

Hitting JHJ 2nd vs a righty, playing him at a position that he is terrible at, when we have a better defensive and offensive (right now) option in Janish.

Still playing Dickerson over Nix despite the title of a Hal McCoy article. Tonight's lineup is one of the worst I've ever seen from Dusty, and that is saying something.

The 8 and 4 hitters should be switched. What other manager fills out a lineup card where anyone can say that sentence?

Dusty was going to play JHJ at 3b tonight, with Gonzalez's injury, he just moved him to SS. Otherwise it's him and Janish in the lineup, which I am sure everyone would have complained about.

I hate JHJ at SS, and hope it's a one game thing, but I can't blame Dusty for putting him in there for tonight. We'll see if he stays, and then I'll complain.

As for the 8 and 4 hitters, what other manager do you know that has such a lousy group of starting hitters to put in his lineup? I don't like Dusty's lineups any more than you do, but with the hitters he's been given, he's not doing as bad a job as it seems.

And from a statistical point of view, according to Baseball Musings, the difference between the best batting order and the 30th best is 3 runs for the entire season. Basically, lineups just don't matter that much over the course of the season.

I know how frustrating it is to see bad lineups day after day, but to paraphrase Rob Neyer, "Bad lineups don't hurt your team's chances of winning, they hurt your fan's feelings."

BRM
05-05-2009, 05:55 PM
Dusty was going to play JHJ at 3b tonight, with Gonzalez's injury, he just moved him to SS. Otherwise it's him and Janish in the lineup, which I am sure everyone would have complained about.

I hate JHJ at SS, and hope it's a one game thing, but I can't blame Dusty for putting him in there for tonight. We'll see if he stays, and then I'll complain.


Janish and Rosales would be the best combo, offensively and defensively IMO.

Homer Bailey
05-05-2009, 06:29 PM
Dusty was going to play JHJ at 3b tonight

First mistake.


with Gonzalez's injury, he just moved him to SS.

Is it that hard to erase him from the lineup card completely? Rather than put a defensive whiz at SS he just erases the position and changes the 5 to a 6?


Otherwise it's him and Janish in the lineup, which I am sure everyone would have complained about.

As BRM stated, both the offense and defense is better with Rosales/Janish than any other combo.


I hate JHJ at SS, and hope it's a one game thing, but I can't blame Dusty for putting him in there for tonight. We'll see if he stays, and then I'll complain.

Why can't you blame him? What justification can he use to put JHJ at short? I literally can't think of any. The fact that he was going to use JHJ at 3rd isn't justification. It's Dustification. Huge difference.


As for the 8 and 4 hitters, what other manager do you know that has such a lousy group of starting hitters to put in his lineup?

Cant disagree there.


I don't like Dusty's lineups any more than you do, but with the hitters he's been given, he's not doing as bad a job as it seems.

He's being, as he calls it, a "non front-runner." Basically, he is going to stick with it until it works (which in turn, will cause him to say/think "Told you so"), rather than going with what is working. It's his ego that drives me nuts.


And from a statistical point of view, according to Baseball Musings, the difference between the best batting order and the 30th best is 3 runs for the entire season. Basically, lineups just don't matter that much over the course of the season.

I've heard similar stats, and all I can say is, I don't doubt the validity of these "studies", but I believe you can make a world of difference by putting your hitters in the best position to succeed.


I know how frustrating it is to see bad lineups day after day, but to paraphrase Rob Neyer, "Bad lineups don't hurt your team's chances of winning, they hurt your fan's feelings."

And this is where I respectfully disagree. After Votto rips a single I don't want BP coming to plate flailing away and the down and away slider. I want a patient experienced hitter that is going to make the pitcher work. Phillips is hitting behind Votto, who is getting on at a .445 clip, yet he only has 11 RBI? RH has 8 and he's been hitting only from the 6-7-8 holes. In my opinion, RH would have produced more from the 4 hole so far.


Janish and Rosales would be the best combo, offensively and defensively IMO.

It can all be summed by this.

Mario-Rijo
05-05-2009, 07:19 PM
Why can't you blame him? What justification can he use to put JHJ at short? I literally can't think of any. The fact that he was going to use JHJ at 3rd isn't justification. It's Dustification. Huge difference.

Better get a patent on that my friend, it could take you on a vacation very soon. ;)

Oh yeah and I agree with your post!

Mario-Rijo
05-05-2009, 07:27 PM
I hate JHJ at SS, and hope it's a one game thing, but I can't blame Dusty for putting him in there for tonight. We'll see if he stays, and then I'll complain.

Of all nights to use Jerry in the IF at all this is not it. You've got a speedy team who likes to hit the ball on the ground in front of their best hitter. Playing against our best GB inducing pitcher and so we toss a SS out there who has a noodle arm? Janish at SS, Rosales at 3rd and if they must play Hairston put him in LF.

edabbs44
05-05-2009, 07:28 PM
Your sucking me in but its a heck of a lot easier to build a lineup than it is to build a rotation. Wayne built a pretty damn good rotation. Now the onus is on Jocketty to build a lineup to help that rotation out.

What is a fair time frame for Jocketty to accomplish that?

Mario-Rijo
05-05-2009, 07:39 PM
What is a fair time frame for Jocketty to accomplish that?

Last winter! :cool:

But in all seriousness, he's had half the time to do so already as Wayne did to build the rotation (and then some). How long does it take to acquire 1 bat, which might not have been quite enough but would have been the least he should have done.

Homer Bailey
05-05-2009, 07:48 PM
Better get a patent on that my friend, it could take you on a vacation very soon. ;)

Oh yeah and I agree with your post!

Ha. It's not my word, but I wish it was. I've heard it on here before. :beerme:

Mario-Rijo
05-05-2009, 07:55 PM
Ha. It's not my word, but I wish it was. I've heard it on here before. :beerme:

I wasn't sure if I had heard it before or not, but you used it brilliantly there. :thumbup:

M2
05-05-2009, 08:25 PM
What is a fair time frame for Jocketty to accomplish that?

How long is he going to have this rotation? The answer to that is the answer to your question.

My general view is it's patently foolish to squander a solid rotation. Lineup construction is the easiest thing a GM has to do and Jocketty knew going into the offseason his bats weren't up to the task.

The fewest runs per game of any NL playoff team during the past decade is 4.22 by the 2006 San Diego Padres. And that was a team that slipped into the playoffs with 82 wins thanks to a lousy division, and it played in the best pitching park in baseball. The average NL playoff offense during the past decade scores roughly 5 runs per game.

So that's your minimum offensive buy-in. You won't be making the playoffs scoring less than that club.

FWIW, the lowest scoring AL playoff club was the 2005 Chicago White Sox at 4.57.

Anyway, in terms of how long the Reds will have this kind of pitching, it depends on injury, fate and business. Injury and fate (aka how well they perform in the future) are out of the club's hands. Yet if the Reds continue to have a weak gate in a struggling economy, who's to say Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo aren't dealt away? The you're back to rebuilding the rotation. Heck, send Cordero, Weathers and Rhodes out the door too and see where that lands the club.

It is quite possible the current lack of offense will force the club to cull the veterans from the pitching staff and how long the GM has to build the offense will then become a moot point.

I don't think Jocketty deserves tarring and feathering for not doing more in terms of the lineup. IMO, this is an organizational failure. In the right conditions, Jocketty has proven he knows how to build a lineup.

Yet the organizational culture with the Reds always revolves around "maybe we'll get lucky."

15fan
05-05-2009, 09:57 PM
Reds are 4-10 when they score less than 4 runs.

Reds are 9-2 when they score 4+ runs.

There was a tremendous window this past off-season to buy at wholesale prices, whether it was on the FA market or via trade. The Reds got squat for the lineup.

Teams will likely start selling earlier than they ever have this year. If the Reds can stay within a handful of games through the end of May, they will likely be able to pick up bats for a song. That's what the optimist in me says.

The realist, though, says that the Limp Phallus offense is going to negate any margin for error that the pitching has been providing so far this season. Through 6 innings tonight, the Reds have plated 12 runs in their last 47 innings of ball. That isn't going to cut it over 162 games, especially with an unbalanced schedule that requires repeated trips to places like Houston and Wrigley.

TheNext44
05-05-2009, 09:58 PM
Of all nights to use Jerry in the IF at all this is not it. You've got a speedy team who likes to hit the ball on the ground in front of their best hitter. Playing against our best GB inducing pitcher and so we toss a SS out there who has a noodle arm? Janish at SS, Rosales at 3rd and if they must play Hairston put him in LF.

I agree with you on all points. I would never start JHJ at SS if I were manager.

However...

Dusty planned to play JHJ at 3B today and told him two days ago. He felt it was important to keep his word and keep JHJ happy. This is part of Dusty managing the clubhouse, and keeping players happy.

As I have mentioned before, I like a manager that keeps to a long term game plan, even if it drives me crazy on a day to day basis.

edabbs44
05-05-2009, 11:17 PM
Last winter! :cool:

But in all seriousness, he's had half the time to do so already as Wayne did to build the rotation (and then some). How long does it take to acquire 1 bat, which might not have been quite enough but would have been the least he should have done.

If Edwin (.800 OPS) and Phillips (.750-.800 OPS) hit more to their recent history over the first few weeks along with the solid to great starts of Votto and Bruce, does the offense look as bad? If that is the case, are we still complaining about not adding that one hitter? Or are we saying that Walt did a solid job in resigning Weathers, signing Rhodes, improving the defense (4th in all of baseball in defensive effciency, according to Gammons) and staying away from the slow, probably more expensive starts of Burrell, Furcal, Bradley and others? I would think that most of the board would be happy since they'd seem to have enough to stay in the race in order to pick someone up at the deadline, without hurting the long-term payroll flexibility of a young team.

And how would we feel if one of these FAs was signed to a longer and more lucrative contract than we would have wanted? I keep harping on it but does anyone actually think that Burrell would have played in Cincy under the same terms that he is playing for a WS team in his home state? Or Abreu for the Angels? I would bet that we were looking at 3 year deals for these guys.

bucksfan2
05-06-2009, 09:36 AM
What is a fair time frame for Jocketty to accomplish that?

That is a very good question. IMO you have to at least give Jocketty 3-5 years before you can begin to hand out a true judgment.

The first thing Jocketty had to do was assess the major league club. Determine who was going to be here for the long term, who was not going to be here the next, and what were the needs of the club and how to fill those needs.

The second part of the equation, maybe the most important part, is to assess the minor league system and what you have, and when you will have it. Who are the potential impact bats? Who are the potential defenders? Who are the potential 24th man roster type? It would seem counter productive to sign a 3b to a 5 year deal if you think Todd Frazier will be an impact bat at 3b in a years time. A well run team keeps the machine oiled with expiring contracts leaving the books while young players coming up to replace them. Jocketty was hammered for signing Taveras but if the reality of the situation is Jocketty projects Stubbs to be the starting CF by June 2010 then the signing makes sense.

Finally how well does he fill the needs of the club, both present and into the future, while also building the type of team he wants. You also have to consider the financial restrictions that are placed upon him.

jojo
05-06-2009, 09:45 AM
That is a very good question. IMO you have to at least give Jocketty 3-5 years before you can begin to hand out a true judgment.

The first thing Jocketty had to do was assess the major league club. Determine who was going to be here for the long term, who was not going to be here the next, and what were the needs of the club and how to fill those needs.

The second part of the equation, maybe the most important part, is to assess the minor league system and what you have, and when you will have it. Who are the potential impact bats? Who are the potential defenders? Who are the potential 24th man roster type? It would seem counter productive to sign a 3b to a 5 year deal if you think Todd Frazier will be an impact bat at 3b in a years time. A well run team keeps the machine oiled with expiring contracts leaving the books while young players coming up to replace them. Jocketty was hammered for signing Taveras but if the reality of the situation is Jocketty projects Stubbs to be the starting CF by June 2010 then the signing makes sense.

Finally how well does he fill the needs of the club, both present and into the future, while also building the type of team he wants. You also have to consider the financial restrictions that are placed upon him.

I bet Krivsky agrees that a GM should be given at least 5 years. :cool:

membengal
05-06-2009, 09:45 AM
Wow. 3-5 years? Did WK get that? Dan O? And is this team to waste a staff as good as this one waiting five years to find a bat? I don't see that as reasonable.

bucksfan2
05-06-2009, 10:38 AM
Wow. 3-5 years? Did WK get that? Dan O? And is this team to waste a staff as good as this one waiting five years to find a bat? I don't see that as reasonable.

It has been a criticism of this organization because they have no consistency in the front office. And I thought both Dan O and WK should have gotten more time to put their plan into motion. You can't take over day one, with non-Yankee resources, and turn the club around. If you want to see Jocketty put a plan into place and execute that plan then you need to be patient. If you expect it overnight then you are going to be sorely disappointed.

westofyou
05-06-2009, 10:45 AM
Yet the organizational culture with the Reds always revolves around "maybe we'll get lucky."

I prefer, "We'll wear them down and kick their arse and take their candy and pogs and send them home."

westofyou
05-06-2009, 10:48 AM
It has been a criticism of this organization because they have no consistency in the front office. And I thought both Dan O and WK should have gotten more time to put their plan into motion. You can't take over day one, with non-Yankee resources, and turn the club around. If you want to see Jocketty put a plan into place and execute that plan then you need to be patient. If you expect it overnight then you are going to be sorely disappointed.

I agree about WK, Dan O not so much, he planned to build through the draft alone and as GM's go he was the most uninspired baseball men in the world. Coupled with Miley they accomplished the least amount of traction I've seen a baseball organization grab in my life.... aside from the one that has a Pirate as mascot.

bucksfan2
05-06-2009, 11:01 AM
I agree about WK, Dan O not so much, he planned to build through the draft alone and as GM's go he was the most uninspired baseball men in the world. Coupled with Miley they accomplished the least amount of traction I've seen a baseball organization grab in my life.... aside from the one that has a Pirate as mascot.

Unless your team is located in NY, Boston, LA, or the north side of Chicago GM's must be given more rope. Dan O was pretty uninspiring and may have put too much emphasis on the draft but he did do good things. He may not have been GM material but he is a huge asset to any organization. I also wouldn't underestimate the impact that Lindner had on Dan O's tenure as a Red.

What I find somewhat ironic is that any GM during an interview would have to have a plan. Your not going to come into Cincy and say "Im going to build a dynasty right now". The owner would hire a GM based upon his past as well as his plan. The owner basically signs off on a plan and in the Reds case fires a GM before he is able to see results of the plan. IMO its not a very good recipe for success.

Scrap Irony
05-06-2009, 11:01 AM
I'd give a GM two off-seasons before really hammering him on the roster. Jocketty's had one, maybe one and a half (if you believe the whole Jocketty-as-homewrecking-the-happy-Krivsky-Castellini marriage).

That said, his roster this season looks an awful lot like his St. Louis rosters did. Heavy on pitching and pen, light on OF bats, with the assumption one of the OFers catches fire. IF bats carry the team, usually, and strong D all around. (Aside from SS, which is a good-glove, no-range proposition.)

As long as Votto continues his faux-Pujols impersonation, the Red's O should be just good enough to win. If Bruce does indeed catch fire (and that now looks possible), EdE comes back from the DL swinging, and Phillips hits like he did last night, the Reds have as solid an offense as any in St. Louis.

But those are a bunch of if's right there.

Likely, one of BP or EdE gets hot, Bruce yo-yos between awesome and awful, and the Cincinnati offense is below average.

How much below average is the key, though.

westofyou
05-06-2009, 11:05 AM
I also wouldn't underestimate the impact that Lindner had on Dan O's tenure as a Red.

Two weeks after Bob C. took the reigns he asked Dan O what his plan was and he got back the "Build through the draft" reply.

That's why he works for the Brewers now... when your new boss asks for that plan you better have one that can't be written on a slip of paper that could fit in a fortune cookie.


What I find somewhat ironic is that any GM during an interview would have to have a plan.

If you can lay out a "plan" to be employed on your baseball team building philosphy than I would say you shouldn't be a GM.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 11:39 AM
If Edwin (.800 OPS) and Phillips (.750-.800 OPS) hit more to their recent history over the first few weeks along with the solid to great starts of Votto and Bruce, does the offense look as bad? If that is the case, are we still complaining about not adding that one hitter? Or are we saying that Walt did a solid job in resigning Weathers, signing Rhodes, improving the defense (4th in all of baseball in defensive effciency, according to Gammons) and staying away from the slow, probably more expensive starts of Burrell, Furcal, Bradley and others? I would think that most of the board would be happy since they'd seem to have enough to stay in the race in order to pick someone up at the deadline, without hurting the long-term payroll flexibility of a young team.

And how would we feel if one of these FAs was signed to a longer and more lucrative contract than we would have wanted? I keep harping on it but does anyone actually think that Burrell would have played in Cincy under the same terms that he is playing for a WS team in his home state? Or Abreu for the Angels? I would bet that we were looking at 3 year deals for these guys.

Right now those are as you put it "if's". The Reds in the offseason recognized the need for another big bat, said so themselves. Even went so far as to inquire about Nady, Dye & others. Had they gotten one of those guys, those "if's" would have been more palatable. Certainly we expect more from those guys but one of the reasons for the pursuit of said big bat was because of these guys lack of consistency. I know many will point to the record and say hey we are still doing ok with an abysmal offense. But we have played 3 clubs who are good offensively and 2 of them took our lunch money (Atl & NYM) the other we have been tight with (Mil) but missed enough of their bats to win but at their place a more nuetral park (and similiarly vs. Houston). We have yet to play the cream of the NL which are StL, LA, and Philly and 2 of those teams have enough pitching to compensate while we can never seem to stop Philly's offense. Those are a lot of L's coming soon if we don't get that offense figured out. And StL will be kicking our hind parts all season long.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 11:44 AM
If you can lay out a "plan" to be employed on your baseball team building philosphy than I would say you shouldn't be a GM.

Huh, did you mean can't lay out a plan?

westofyou
05-06-2009, 11:46 AM
Huh, did you mean can't lay out a plan?

Yes, if you can not explain to an employer what your vision of a baseball team is besides "build through the draft" then I suggest you buy a strat-to-matic set and get to it.

Falls City Beer
05-06-2009, 11:54 AM
Yes, if you can not explain to an employer what your vision of a baseball team is besides "build through the draft" then I suggest you buy a strat-to-matic set and get to it.

Absolutely. It's the baseball equivalent of saying you'll hire the "best and the brightest." It's meaningless, frankly, as a philosophy, sententious business pieties.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 12:15 PM
Yes, if you can not explain to an employer what your vision of a baseball team is besides "build through the draft" then I suggest you buy a strat-to-matic set and get to it.

Ok, if you meant can then I was going to ask you what you meant by that. And yes even us fans have a vision of the kind of team you want, need to have between what you have in the system and what is a good fit for the park, division & league. My vision for say the Royals would obviously be different than the Astros.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 01:01 PM
It's more opinion than truth.

It is truth that Gonzo, Freel, Cordero, and the other contracts Wayne handed out impeded Walt's ability to make moves. That's the point I was making, before people got oversensitive because I mentioned Saint Wayne.

Likewise Wayne was impeded with Milton, as you said.

I never said Wayne sucked on this thread. Not just you, but people like to read what they want to read. Wayne made some good moves too, but when you look at the declining W-L record and declining talent level of this team under his watch, he wasn't getting the job done. Sure, there are worse GMs out there, and we've had some in Cincinnati. Without getting into specifics, it's pretty clear that his plan was never going to work. I know 1/2 this board is going to disagree, and that's fine.




Wasn't there a rumor of a deal to send Cordero to the Yanks for Xavier Nady?


I didn't hear that one, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Not sure about the point you are making here.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 01:04 PM
Wow. 3-5 years? Did WK get that? Dan O? And is this team to waste a staff as good as this one waiting five years to find a bat? I don't see that as reasonable.


It depends. If Jocketty is able to improve the team each year, he gets more rope. If the team gets worse every year, then then he gets less.

I think every GM is on a year to year plan. It's not realistic to guarantee a GM 3-5 years.. No club does that. What if he stinks?

Chip R
05-06-2009, 01:04 PM
Two weeks after Bob C. took the reigns he asked Dan O what his plan was and he got back the "Build through the draft" reply.

That's why he works for the Brewers now... when your new boss asks for that plan you better have one that can't be written on a slip of paper that could fit in a fortune cookie.



I wonder how much of it was he couldn't stand to hear him talk for more than 5 minutes. I know I always had the urge to put a bullet through my brain when DanO droned on and on.

KoryMac5
05-06-2009, 01:07 PM
It is going to be harder and harder for Walt to make a deal for a bat in the coming months, not because there won't be players available, but because of what teams will be asking for. I would imagine most teams will start the asking price for a proven slugger at Volquez or Cueto.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 01:07 PM
I also wouldn't underestimate the impact that Lindner had on Dan O's tenure as a Red.
.

Yeah, don't forget that DanO was hired largely because he brought in that infamous binder full of ideas to save money. That's what Carl and John Allen
wanted to hear.

nate
05-06-2009, 01:15 PM
It is truth that Gonzo, Freel, Cordero, and the other contracts Wayne handed out impeded Walt's ability to make moves. That's the point I was making, before people got oversensitive because I mentioned Saint Wayne.

"Saint Wayne" is silly. I think there's pretty much equal parts praise and criticism of Wayne Krivsky here.


I never said Wayne sucked on this thread. No, but you get your cheap shots in at every opportunity. He's not GM any more. Time to move on.


Wayne made some good moves too, but when you look at the declining W-L record and declining talent level of this team under his watch, The organization that's playing ball now still has quite a bit of "Wayne" influence in it.


I didn't hear that one, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Not sure about the point you are making here.Didn't you say this?


I'd rather have a legitimate cleanup hitter than Cordero.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 01:15 PM
It is truth that Gonzo, Freel, Cordero, and the other contracts Wayne handed out impeded Walt's ability to make moves. That's the point I was making, before people got oversensitive because I mentioned Saint Wayne.

Likewise Wayne was impeded with Milton, as you said.

I never said Wayne sucked on this thread. Not just you, but people like to read what they want to read. Wayne made some good moves too, but when you look at the declining W-L record and declining talent level of this team under his watch, he wasn't getting the job done. Sure, there are worse GMs out there, and we've had some in Cincinnati. Without getting into specifics, it's pretty clear that his plan was never going to work. I know 1/2 this board is going to disagree, and that's fine.

Declining talent level? Well that explains it for me right there why you don't think Krivsky was any good.

NM---

bucksfan2
05-06-2009, 01:32 PM
It is truth that Gonzo, Freel, Cordero, and the other contracts Wayne handed out impeded Walt's ability to make moves. That's the point I was making, before people got oversensitive because I mentioned Saint Wayne.

Any proof that the Gonzo, Freel, and Cordero contracts have impeded Walt's ability to make moves? IMO it is sheer speculation and the truth behind it is debatable.

As for their contracts Cordero has been living up to his end of the bargain so far. You could also argue that Freel's contract is now a plus for the Reds because it brought them their current starting catcher.

Falls City Beer
05-06-2009, 01:38 PM
Cordero's contract is dead weight. That's pretty inarguable, even if he pitches like Mariano Rivera for the life of the contract. Add to the fact that he hasn't been near Rivera's league, and it's a highly questionable contract.

Gonzalez's contract is pretty bad.

Obviously, Freel's contract is/was no problem at all.

Scrap Irony
05-06-2009, 01:43 PM
It is going to be harder and harder for Walt to make a deal for a bat in the coming months, not because there won't be players available, but because of what teams will be asking for. I would imagine most teams will start the asking price for a proven slugger at Volquez or Cueto.

I disagree. Well, kind of. I think other teams may ask for those guys, but there's no way Jocketty deals those two. No one in baseball would be expected to do that. Nor would anyone in the game expect that back for anything less than the absolute cream of the crop offensively. I'm talking Pujols level talent for young, cheap, ace pitchers.

Other teams will be willing to deal older, expensive near All-Star level offensive talent and/or younger, soon-to-be expensive talent for a combination of solid B and C prospects and one or two A-/B+ prospects.

It has always happened thus and always thus will be.

edabbs44
05-06-2009, 01:47 PM
Right now those are as you put it "if's". The Reds in the offseason recognized the need for another big bat, said so themselves. Even went so far as to inquire about Nady, Dye & others. Had they gotten one of those guys, those "if's" would have been more palatable. Certainly we expect more from those guys but one of the reasons for the pursuit of said big bat was because of these guys lack of consistency. I know many will point to the record and say hey we are still doing ok with an abysmal offense. But we have played 3 clubs who are good offensively and 2 of them took our lunch money (Atl & NYM) the other we have been tight with (Mil) but missed enough of their bats to win but at their place a more nuetral park (and similiarly vs. Houston). We have yet to play the cream of the NL which are StL, LA, and Philly and 2 of those teams have enough pitching to compensate while we can never seem to stop Philly's offense. Those are a lot of L's coming soon if we don't get that offense figured out. And StL will be kicking our hind parts all season long.

My assumption is that the cost of those acquisitions did not fit in the overall plan that Walt has for this team. This team has a lot of young talent. Most of the key stakeholders on the roster are very young. They don't need to win this year.

It's funny...for the past few years, many people on the board have wanted to see progress with the roster. They wanted to see the team improve. They wanted the FO to build the roster with young talent in order to have success over a sustained period of time.

The team is now showing signs of taking those steps in the right direction and now everyone wants to go from 0-60 in 2 seconds. Is there anything wrong with incremental improvement?

Sure it would be nice to have a large bat in the middle of the lineup, but what if it cost a potential front end starter 3 years from now (i.e. Homer) for a guy like Dye who would be gone after this year? Or an albatross of a contract (i.e. if Abreu wanted 3 years @ $10MM per) for when the younger guys really hit their prime?

I think the future looks great and we should enjoy the current success of the team instead of nitpicking their projected failure because of certain metrics and beliefs. They are winning and we haven't had a team with a future like this in quite some time. Enjoy it.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 01:59 PM
My assumption is that the cost of those acquisitions did not fit in the overall plan that Walt has for this team. This team has a lot of young talent. Most of the key stakeholders on the roster are very young. They don't need to win this year.

It's funny...for the past few years, many people on the board have wanted to see progress with the roster. They wanted to see the team improve. They wanted the FO to build the roster with young talent in order to have success over a sustained period of time.

The team is now showing signs of taking those steps in the right direction and now everyone wants to go from 0-60 in 2 seconds. Is there anything wrong with incremental improvement?

Sure it would be nice to have a large bat in the middle of the lineup, but what if it cost a potential front end starter 3 years from now (i.e. Homer) for a guy like Dye who would be gone after this year? Or an albatross of a contract (i.e. if Abreu wanted 3 years @ $10MM per) for when the younger guys really hit their prime?

I think the future looks great and we should enjoy the current success of the team instead of nitpicking their projected failure because of certain metrics and beliefs. They are winning and we haven't had a team with a future like this in quite some time. Enjoy it.

Why do you keep thinking of the worst case scenario? Obviously we don't want an extended contract at a high salary. But paying Abreu a 1 yr deal for more than he is making and even signifcantly more shouldn't hurt the future of the club. Dealing for Dye who is on a 1 yr deal wouldn't have been all that prohibitive either. So we skip pursuing the major Latin american talent for 1 year to help, so what.

I think 10 years is far too long too wait for a contender and 11 seems like 15 right now. Let's win some ball games and pay a little extra in the present to do so, how is that hurting the future of this team? Heck even if they don't make the playoffs it will be worth it to take the chance I guarantee that helps the moral of the fan base.

princeton
05-06-2009, 02:08 PM
I'd give a GM two off-seasons before really hammering him on the roster.

Wayne completely turned around a talentless, farm systemless team in a couple of off seasons, even without much of a free hand. the rest is much easier, IMO. Walt's got so much more to trade than Wayne ever did, plus the hardest thing to obtain (top, economical pitching) is already here. also Walt never had the two albatrosses inherited by Wayne: those being Jr, and the meddling of the owner.

Walt's just really slow. Continental drift slow.

dfs
05-06-2009, 02:13 PM
It is going to be harder and harder for Walt to make a deal for a bat in the coming months, not because there won't be players available, but because of what teams will be asking for. I would imagine most teams will start the asking price for a proven slugger at Volquez or Cueto.

nah. There will be teams looking to shed payroll and that's the kicker. The reds will either need to pony up enough talent that the other teams will take on part of the contract or the reds will be able to trade....oh, say three of "Maloney, Wilton, Bray, Viola and Sutton" for somebody who can hit, but has a contract.

edabbs44
05-06-2009, 02:23 PM
Why do you keep thinking of the worst case scenario? Obviously we don't want an extended contract at a high salary. But paying Abreu a 1 yr deal for more than he is making and even signifcantly more shouldn't hurt the future of the club. Dealing for Dye who is on a 1 yr deal wouldn't have been all that prohibitive either. So we skip pursuing the major Latin american talent for 1 year to help, so what.

I think 10 years is far too long too wait for a contender and 11 seems like 15 right now. Let's win some ball games and pay a little extra in the present to do so, how is that hurting the future of this team? Heck even if they don't make the playoffs it will be worth it to take the chance I guarantee that helps the moral of the fan base.

You have to think of worst case scenario when making certain risky acquisitions. Look at what Milton did to the franchise. Dealing for Dye could be prohibitive b/c of the Bailey factor.

By the way, Abreu currently has a sub .400 SLG. I don't think he is the kind of bat this team would need right now.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 02:26 PM
You have to think of worst case scenario when making certain risky acquisitions. Look at what Milton did to the franchise. Dealing for Dye could be prohibitive b/c of the Bailey factor.

By the way, Abreu currently has a sub .400 SLG. I don't think he is the kind of bat this team would need right now.

Fine I'll give you Dye because of Bailey. But spending money for one year of services I refuse to believe would hurt the future of this franchise. Unless of course we were talking Manny Money.

OnBaseMachine
05-06-2009, 02:27 PM
Abreu also has a .407 OBP and is 11-for-11 in stolen bases. I'd take that in left field. Adding a .400+ OBP bat in front of Joey Votto would be a big boost.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 02:29 PM
No, but you get your cheap shots in at every opportunity. He's not GM any more. Time to move on.

I'm not the one that needs to move on. I mention Walt inherited some bad contracts and a few people get their panties in a wad.




The organization that's playing ball now still has quite a bit of "Wayne" influence in it.

Didn't you say this?

Yes, I have said that many times. Wayne made some good moves too. Unfortunately, as the W-L record showed, he did not understand how to build a team. Counting on guys like Bako, Clayton, Stanton, Maj, Besile, Cormeir, etc for key roles is bad baseball. Unfortunately, Wayne's poor moves negated the effect of some very excellent moves (Burton, Hamilton, Phillips).

Wayne was also way too free in handing out contract extensions (Cormier, Castro, Hat's last deal, Stanton, Freel, AGon, others). There's a couple good players he extended (Phillips, Cordero, maybe even Arroyo) that might really be burdensome in the future. I mean, if the board complained about Larkin and Jr's salary, what is the board going to feel like when Phillips starts making 12 million (or whatever he is slated to make). That's more than Jr made when you account for deferals. I like Phillips, but it's looking like it was unwise to pay him like a franchise player (same for Cordero).

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 02:32 PM
"Didn't you say this?

Ok, I did say that I'd rather have a legit cleanup hitter than Cordero, but I don't see the point you were trying to make. A trade rumor of Cordero for Nady doesn't really mean anything. Was that just wishful thinking of someone? Would the Yankees even consider that? What about the no trade clause? In any event, it didn't happen. We're still stuck with Cordero. I'm glad he's performing, but the Reds overpaid .. in $$, years, and no trade clauses.
Cordero is basically unmovable this year, and will be difficult to move through the life of his contract. I hope he stays healthy and performs at a high level.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 02:38 PM
Declining talent level? Well that explains it for me right there why you don't think Krivsky was any good.

NM---

Yep, the starting pitching improved. Everything else declined. The bullpen was horrible until last year (I give him credit for that). The starting 8 declined big time. There was no plan to replace Dunn or Jr. No plan for CF, SS, or C.
Wayne's comment about "I'm not worried about who plays SS" when Clayton was picked up is very telling about his philosphy. He didn't realize that building a team requires more than a good starting rotation.

Walt inherited a roster which made signing Willy Tavares sound like a reasonable idea, because there weren't any reasonable alternatives in house. (Dickerson is showing that he is not a legitimate everyday OF).


The bottom line is that the W-L record deteriorated each year Wayne ran the show. The run differential did too (IIRC). Isn't that a sign of declining talent?
Wayne didn't have any major FA defections under his watch that I remember. He had a lot of money to spend. If Wayne was making the team better, how come the W-L record didn't reflect that?

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 02:41 PM
Any proof that the Gonzo, Freel, and Cordero contracts have impeded Walt's ability to make moves? IMO it is sheer speculation and the truth behind it is debatable..

Do you think that Walt has a fixed payroll budget every year (for example 70 million)? If you assume he does, then Gonzo, Freel, and Cordero comprised about 20-25 million of that. Don't you think that impacted Walt's ability to acquire players? Don't you believe the reports that Dye and Abreaucost too much $$ for the Reds?
Don't you think Walt spent every cent that he was permitted in order to improve this team?

It's not sheer speculation to assume that Walt had a fixed payroll number to work with. It's common sense.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 02:42 PM
Obviously, Freel's contract is/was no problem at all.

Do you mean it was no problem because it was able to be unloaded?

edabbs44
05-06-2009, 02:43 PM
Abreu also has a .407 OBP and is 11-for-11 in stolen bases. I'd take that in left field. Adding a .400+ OBP bat in front of Joey Votto would be a big boost.

I believe that he was also rated the worst (or one of the worst) defensive outfielders in the entire league last year.

A .400+ OBP would be nice. But would it be worth the iron glove and the amt of money he would have cost?

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 02:50 PM
Wayne completely turned around a talentless, farm systemless team in a couple of off seasons, even without much of a free hand. the rest is much easier, IMO. Walt's got so much more to trade than Wayne ever did, plus the hardest thing to obtain (top, economical pitching) is already here. also Walt never had the two albatrosses inherited by Wayne: those being Jr, and the meddling of the owner.

Walt's just really slow. Continental drift slow.

This farmless team had Votto, Ceuto, Bruce (drafted 2005), Homer (was highly regarded prospect at the time and great trade bait). EdE was a young guy. He had Kearns, Pena, Dunn, and Jr in the OF.

Wayne picking up Phillips, Hamilton, Arroyo, and Burton was absolute genius.
The rest of the moves were either blah or worse.

Wayne transformed a .500 team to a 74 win team over his tenure. Maybe some of his draft picks will turn out good, eventually, but it looks like DanO did a much better job than he did.

tripleaaaron
05-06-2009, 02:58 PM
While watching the Marlins series, I couldn't help second guess our decision to give away Cody Ross and to not resign Jorge Cantu. These two could really thrive with regular playing time at GABP. Both have tremendous power and while neither is the true #4 hitter we desperately need, they would be better options than Phillips (more so Cantu than Ross). Cantu has roared out of the gate this year, hitting .306 with a 1.09 OBP+, 7 homers and 25 RBI through 22 games. Ross has struggled a little bit so far hitting only .224 with a .648 OPS+, 4 homers and 15 RBI, but he will likely snap out of his slump soon as he has a career .245 avg and .726 ops in April.

Rojo
05-06-2009, 02:59 PM
The bottom line is that the W-L record deteriorated each year Wayne ran the show. The run differential did too (IIRC). Isn't that a sign of declining talent?

No.

This team stood to vastly improve through some tinkering at the edges -- outfield defense, 5th starter, catcher. I think Jocketty knew that and also guessed that he could keep his job for another year through an improved W-L.

Rojo
05-06-2009, 03:01 PM
Walt inherited a roster which made signing Willy Tavares sound like a reasonable idea, because there weren't any reasonable alternatives in house. (Dickerson is showing that he is not a legitimate everyday OF).

But, according to Jocketty, Dickerson IS a legitimate everyday OF.

edabbs44
05-06-2009, 03:01 PM
Fine I'll give you Dye because of Bailey. But spending money for one year of services I refuse to believe would hurt the future of this franchise. Unless of course we were talking Manny Money.

Agreed, but you don't know if Abreu (or anyone else) would have come to Cincy for a one year deal. He went to a contender under those terms. He may have wanted additional years and/or money to go to Cincy.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 03:25 PM
Yep, the starting pitching improved. Everything else declined. The bullpen was horrible until last year (I give him credit for that). The starting 8 declined big time. There was no plan to replace Dunn or Jr. No plan for CF, SS, or C.

The starting 8 declined? Let's not speculate on what Krivsky's plan with Dunn was. We haven't the foggiest if he intended to keep him, trade him for his replacement or to fill those positions he needed filling. And frankly we don't have any idea on what he intended to get at SS, CF or C. Phillips wasn't here when he got here and I'd take him over Kearns, Pena or Felipe to this point (although Felipe at 2nd as I and others pined for would have been solid I think).


Wayne's comment about "I'm not worried about who plays SS" when Clayton was picked up is very telling about his philosphy. He didn't realize that building a team requires more than a good starting rotation.

I happen to think that statement meant he wasn't overly concerned about filling a hole that in essence at the time was trivial. SS is a position we all feel is important but in the grand scheme of things at the time was meaningless if you didn't have your pitching. I never read it the way you did and quite frankly I don't think the majority of this board read it that way either. It's sort of like selective hearing, you read that the way you wanted to read it giving little credence to what it most likely meant. Just because you can't rule out an option alltogether doesn't make it the most likely option.


Walt inherited a roster which made signing Willy Tavares sound like a reasonable idea, because there weren't any reasonable alternatives in house. (Dickerson is showing that he is not a legitimate everyday OF).

Again if he was given the time he was promised... Wayne had shown to that point he could find ready major league players in a number of ways. I have no doubt that if given the opportunity this team this year could have been even better than it is now. Perhaps not quite as deep but the starting unit could have been stronger than it is.



The bottom line is that the W-L record deteriorated each year Wayne ran the show. The run differential did too (IIRC). Isn't that a sign of declining talent?
Wayne didn't have any major FA defections under his watch that I remember. He had a lot of money to spend. If Wayne was making the team better, how come the W-L record didn't reflect that?

No the bottom line is he was building a winner a little more methodically than perhaps anyone wanted but until sometime last season or this season it wasn't ready to compete, so why go spend a bunch of money then? Why the W-L record makes any difference to the argument of a team being re-built is beyond fathomable anyway.

Walt dealt your offense off not Wayne. At this point Kearns, Pena and Lopez combined couldn't hang with Dunn.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 03:30 PM
While watching the Marlins series, I couldn't help second guess our decision to give away Cody Ross and to not resign Jorge Cantu. These two could really thrive with regular playing time at GABP. Both have tremendous power and while neither is the true #4 hitter we desperately need, they would be better options than Phillips (more so Cantu than Ross). Cantu has roared out of the gate this year, hitting .306 with a 1.09 OBP+, 7 homers and 25 RBI through 22 games. Ross has struggled a little bit so far hitting only .224 with a .648 OPS+, 4 homers and 15 RBI, but he will likely snap out of his slump soon as he has a career .245 avg and .726 ops in April.

True but Cantu is truely one of the worst defenders in the game. He had no where to play here, even Edwin is better with his throwing problems and all.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 03:33 PM
No.

This team stood to vastly improve through some tinkering at the edges -- outfield defense, 5th starter, catcher. I think Jocketty knew that and also guessed that he could keep his job for another year through an improved W-L.

I need to revise a little of what I said. When Wayne took over in the 2005 offseason, he was great.. Arroyo, Hat (first year), Phillips. That improved the team. Then about midway through 2006, he started slipping.

Entering into the 2008 season, it was apparent that the team needed tinking/improvement in the areas you mentioned. But what did Wayne chose to do? Bako/Valentin as the catchers. Patterson as the CF. Dunn and Jr still at the OF corners. Fogg as the 5th starter.

So, while you identified the weaknesses, it must be pointed out that Wayne failed to address them. Completely missed on them. He also created the problem of the overpaid AGon at SS.

A little bit further. I think that Hamilton-Volquez was a mistake. Not a horrible trade in terms of talent exchange, but Hamilton is exactly the player the Reds could've used. A middle of the order bat that plays a competent CF which can help us win every day. If we kept Hamilton, we avoid having Patterson and Taveras. Volquez has been contributing, but in terms of what this team needs, I think Hamilton filled a bigger need. This paragraph is all my opinion, but I think it was typical of Wayne's thinking. He threw everything into starting pitching, without building a balanced team that could also score runs and play defense. That's why the W-L record suffered after mid-2006.

As other people have pointed out, this nice starting pitching we have likely has an expiration date. Hopefully everyone stays healthy through the life of their contract. As the pitching was hitting its stride, there was no real plans to address the position players.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 03:35 PM
But, according to Jocketty, Dickerson IS a legitimate everyday OF.

That is true. The Reds think he may stick in LF, at least that's what they are saying. That's what we need to find out this year, if he can be a ML OF.

Personally, I have my doubts, but I hope he makes it. However, the Reds didn't seem to have enough confidence in Dickerson to give him the CF job. They also bought in a lot of options for LF as well. (Harriston, Nix, Gomez).

In other words, there's a pretty dramatic difference between the Reds' confidence level in Bruce and Dickerson.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 03:38 PM
I need to revise a little of what I said. When Wayne took over in the 2005 offseason, he was great.. Arroyo, Hat (first year), Phillips. That improved the team. Then about midway through 2006, he started slipping.

Entering into the 2008 season, it was apparent that the team needed tinking/improvement in the areas you mentioned. But what did Wayne chose to do? Bako/Valentin as the catchers. Patterson as the CF. Dunn and Jr still at the OF corners. Fogg as the 5th starter.

So, while you identified the weaknesses, it must be pointed out that Wayne failed to address them. Completely missed on them. He also created the problem of the overpaid AGon at SS.

A little bit further. I think that Hamilton-Volquez was a mistake. Not a horrible trade in terms of talent exchange, but Hamilton is exactly the player the Reds could've used. A middle of the order bat that plays a competent CF which can help us win every day. If we kept Hamilton, we avoid having Patterson and Taveras. Volquez has been contributing, but in terms of what this team needs, I think Hamilton filled a bigger need. This paragraph is all my opinion, but I think it was typical of Wayne's thinking. He threw everything into starting pitching, without building a balanced team that could also score runs and play defense. That's why the W-L record suffered after mid-2006.

As other people have pointed out, this nice starting pitching we have likely has an expiration date. Hopefully everyone stays healthy through the life of their contract. As the pitching was hitting its stride, there was no real plans to address the position players.

RR seriously, I don't even know where to begin with this mess. I hope you don't feel disrespected seriously I don't but frankly that is all hogwash you are trying to sell. You're starting to not even make any sense.

nate
05-06-2009, 04:16 PM
I'm not the one that needs to move on. I mention Walt inherited some bad contracts and a few people get their panties in a wad.

I'm pretty much "commando" on this issue. Every GM inherits bad moves from the previous GM. That's usually why the previous GM is "previous."

As for the rest of your post, I'm not rehashing that debate again.

nate
05-06-2009, 04:26 PM
While watching the Marlins series, I couldn't help second guess our decision to give away Cody Ross and to not resign Jorge Cantu. These two could really thrive with regular playing time at GABP. Both have tremendous power and while neither is the true #4 hitter we desperately need, they would be better options than Phillips (more so Cantu than Ross). Cantu has roared out of the gate this year, hitting .306 with a 1.09 OBP+, 7 homers and 25 RBI through 22 games. Ross has struggled a little bit so far hitting only .224 with a .648 OPS+, 4 homers and 15 RBI, but he will likely snap out of his slump soon as he has a career .245 avg and .726 ops in April.

Ross - was hurt, we had a surplus of outfielders at the time and Wayne said, I believe, that he wanted to give him an opportunity to play every day somewhere else.

Cantu - was headed to arbitration so it was likely to cost the Reds more than what the Marlins signed him for. He had no position either, being blocked by Votto at first and the skillet he wears on his hand at third.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 04:35 PM
The starting 8 declined? Let's not speculate on what Krivsky's plan with Dunn was. We haven't the foggiest if he intended to keep him, trade him for his replacement or to fill those positions he needed filling. And frankly we don't have any idea on what he intended to get at SS, CF or C. Phillips wasn't here when he got here and I'd take him over Kearns, Pena or Felipe to this point (although Felipe at 2nd as I and others pined for would have been solid I think).



But we did see what Wayne tried in those positions while he was here.

Remember that famous comment about how it was "Deno's time" after Kearns was traded, then a few weeks later, Deno was benched and Freel played (despite playing horribly). We saw Patterson. We saw Bako and Valentine at C. We saw Agon and Clayton at SS. We saw Hat resigned every year. We saw Castro resigned every year.

The good position player that Wayne acquired and kept (Phillips) was signed for too much money. The other good position player (Hamilton) was dealt for pitching.. which is not a bad trade in a vacuum, but may not have been best for building a team (again, this take on Hamilton/Volquez is my opinion and debatable).

So what was Wayne's legacy? Phillips, Arroyo, Burton, and Volquez were added. Some bad contracts and holes were left in his wake too. Dunn was not going to resign. If Wayne did decide to resign Dunn, would we have had any money for a catcher, bullpen, and OF depth? Probably not. Letting Dunn walk was the right move, and it is part of the difference between Wayne and Walt's philosphies. (Although perhaps Dunn wanted to leave, and the decision was made for Walt).










I happen to think that statement meant he wasn't overly concerned about filling a hole that in essence at the time was trivial. SS is a position we all feel is important but in the grand scheme of things at the time was meaningless if you didn't have your pitching.

But that was the essense of the trades made during the 2006 season. They were supposed to push a somewhat flawed team to the top of a bad division, but they did more harm than good. Kearns was not a super star, but he was certainly better than Deno/Freel. Lopez was a flawed player, but better than Clayton. Maj, Clayton, and Bray were worthless.

Counting on good innings from Franklin, Cormier, Mays, and an injured Guarado (and Maj, who was fighting tendonitis during the year) .. these moves were just like buying lottery tickets and hoping for the best.






[qiote]
Again if he was given the time he was promised... Wayne had shown to that point he could find ready major league players in a number of ways. I have no doubt that if given the opportunity this team this year could have been even better than it is now. Perhaps not quite as deep but the starting unit could have been stronger than it is.
[/quote]

He was given about 3 offseasons.. Granted, he had a late start prior to the 2006 season. Again, the only good position player he added and kept was Phillips. A lot of dreck ran through the roster under his watch.

It's interesting that Wayne's biggest wins were lottery ticket type of picks.. Phillips, Hamilton, Burton.. Yet a lot of these lottery ticket types also failed.
Not sure that Wayne's method of getting talent was sustainable. Some of his other Rule V picks were kind of bizzare. IMO, the really praiseworthy trade was Pena-Arroyo, since that was a percieved talent for talent move that Wayne won, in constrast to just picking up waiver wire fodder and hoping for the best.








No the bottom line is he was building a winner a little more methodically than perhaps anyone wanted but until sometime last season or this season it wasn't ready to compete, so why go spend a bunch of money then? Why the W-L record makes any difference to the argument of a team being re-built is beyond fathomable anyway.


Fans want to see progress. That's why getting Dye this year at the right cost would've been a good move. Does it get us to the playoffs this year? Probably not, but it helps this year's W-L record, which hopefully re-energizes the fans and sells more tickets next year and makes the franchise healthier.

After the Lindner era, this franchise was pretty dead. And that's reflected in the TV contracts and gate attendence we get. It's a lot more enjoyable to watch an 82 win team vs a 74 win team. Think about how low morale on this board was when Mays or Fogg started a game. Wouldn't it have been worth spending a little bit more to get a better player, even if the team wasn't contending?





Walt dealt your offense off not Wayne. At this point Kearns, Pena and Lopez combined couldn't hang with Dunn.

Don't understand this. Walt dealt Dunn and Jr for what he could get since they were FAs that could not be retained. Wayne dealt most of the offensive players he inherited, which would've been ok if they weren't replaced with inferior players.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 04:37 PM
RR seriously, I don't even know where to begin with this mess. I hope you don't feel disrespected seriously I don't but frankly that is all hogwash you are trying to sell. You're starting to not even make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense. You said the team was on the verge of being good, just needed improvement in CF, C, and 5th starter (IIRC). You said Wayne could do it. Well, the same holes existed prior to the 2008 season, and they weren't addressed by Wayne.

TRF
05-06-2009, 05:11 PM
It makes a lot of sense. You said the team was on the verge of being good, just needed improvement in CF, C, and 5th starter (IIRC). You said Wayne could do it. Well, the same holes existed prior to the 2008 season, and they weren't addressed by Wayne.

At the end of 2008, the Reds needed improvement in the following areas, in order of importance (IMO)



SS
C
5th Starter
LF

2 of those areas were dealt with. Freel was traded for Hernandez and Hanigan was made the backup catcher. 5th starter was dealt with by Owings getting healthy, and Homer's sudden maturity and return to pitching dominance. (ST + his starts in the minors past his 1st two starts)

SS was never addressed. LF became CF in the Reds minds. I don't believe for one minute they ever intended to find an impact bat. I think they overvalued defense from LF and made Dickerson the LH platoon in an effort to improve the defense. Taveras was brought in to... I have no idea. His current OBP is .330, as is his SLG. That's just awful. His speed in the smaller Cincinnati OF makes up for his almost complete lack of defensive instincts. He breaks back on almost every flyball it seems, then has to run forward. He's not walking, not hitting, not bunting effectively and not stilling bases at enough of a clip to overcome his weak bat.

But the real need was SS. Janish had no history of prolonged success at the plate. AGon's injury screamed career ender, and he'd been in a decline prior to 2008. There were moves to be made. A number of SS were available for the right price, including Andino, who might have been the best fit. All Baltimore gave up was Hayden Penn. That's not a lot. Andino could have been a difference maker defensively. Offensively he may not be more than Janish. Andino was not the only SS that could have been pried away. But he was out of options and was acquired cheap.

Had the Reds not gone after Taveras, LF could have been addressed. There were a number of options there as well. M2 has done the legwork and I don't need to rehash, but he's right in that it was, and still is a buyers market.

Really thus far the best thing Walt seems to have done is build a nice bench.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 05:12 PM
Wayne dealt most of the offensive players he inherited, which would've been ok if they weren't replaced with inferior players.

This is the problem with your whole argument IMO, he didn't replace them with inferior players.

He replaced Willy Mo on the Roster with Bronson Arroyo
He replaced Felipe Lopez on the roster with Brandon Phillips
He replaced Austin Kearns on the roster ultimately with Edinson Volquez (via another player better than Austin in Hamilton)
He replaced any number of scrubs you want to bring up with Jared Burton and Bill Bray (who despite some peoples views is a good talent and has been very productive)
And many more.......

He dealt away no one of significance except Hamilton (of which he had little choice) and he kept all his real talent in house.

Now did he have his share of blunders sure he did no one is perfect in that line of work, but go find me any GM in baseball today or anytime that took over a team and by dealing nothing away did that kind of job in 2 years time. Anyone I mean anybody!!! That is what you call a damn fine hot streak or one talented individual. When you have that kind of talent you don't fire him over breaking a few eggs in the kitchen or for making someone else clean it up.

Any other small insignificant details are just that and not worth discussing until we get past that point.

edabbs44
05-06-2009, 05:13 PM
Ross - was hurt, we had a surplus of outfielders at the time and Wayne said, I believe, that he wanted to give him an opportunity to play every day somewhere else.

Cantu - was headed to arbitration so it was likely to cost the Reds more than what the Marlins signed him for. He had no position either, being blocked by Votto at first and the skillet he wears on his hand at third.

I don't want to get into any Wayne/Walt battles but Hatteberg was the choice over Cantu and not Votto. The decision was made to keep 2 LH first basemen, which was highly questionable IMO.

Rojo
05-06-2009, 05:24 PM
RR, you've run down the transaction history many times now. Problem is, your missing the forest, big time.


Walt dealt your offense off not Wayne. At this point Kearns, Pena and Lopez combined couldn't hang with Dunn.

Uhhh, yep.

nate
05-06-2009, 05:32 PM
I don't want to get into any Wayne/Walt battles but Hatteberg was the choice over Cantu and not Votto. The decision was made to keep 2 LH first basemen, which was highly questionable IMO.

Hatte was just a kickstand until Votto was ready.

Chip R
05-06-2009, 05:38 PM
It is truth that Gonzo, Freel, Cordero, and the other contracts Wayne handed out impeded Walt's ability to make moves.


It may have but those are 3 spots on the 25 man roster and they would have had to have been replaced by 3 other players. Gonzo was a bad signing. Was there anyone better at the same or a lesser price? Same with Cordero. They obviously wanted a slick fielding SS and a shutdown closer. They obviously felt that the in-house options weren't what they wanted even though they may have been cheaper options. You can quibble about the need for a closer on a sub .500 team but Cordero has been as good as advertised. You could make a case for Gonzo being a waste of money even if his kid didn't get sick or he wasn't out all of last year. But if they weren't going to get those two they would have gone after someone else and paid them as much if not more than Gonzo and Cordero and then those players would have impeded Wayne's ability to make moves.

As for Freel, he was only making $3M in 08 and $2.65M in 07. That's hardly breaking the bank. He was actually the starting CFer in 07. He was making only a bit more than Tavaras is this year. But if you didn't sign him and replaced him with someone who made just as much if not more, that still would impede Wayne's ability to make moves.

No GM is perfect. Everyone has a few clunkers in their history.

edabbs44
05-06-2009, 05:38 PM
Walt dealt your offense off not Wayne. At this point Kearns, Pena and Lopez combined couldn't hang with Dunn.

Wayne may not have dealt any offense off but he did spend most of his time and financial resources on the pitching staff and basically neglected the offense.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 05:42 PM
Wayne may not have dealt any offense off but he did spend most of his time and financial resources on the pitching staff and basically neglected the offense.

I guess that's a matter of opinion. But too be fair pitching was/is and always will be the place to focus 1st and foremost. Without it offense is meaningless. I happen to think the core offensive players he brought in were just fine ones. And Rome wasn't built in a day, he had time if he were allowed to finish what he started.

princeton
05-06-2009, 05:50 PM
Reds, who were already bad, were heading for a freefall after years of neglect by Bowden, Lindner, DanO. there was really no place to go but down. the only talent was either old or quickly becoming overpriced. couldn't pitch at all, couldn't defend, couldn't run, couldn't think, didn't care.

the real question was how hard the landing was going to be. IMO, this could have been a plane crash. instead, Krivsky gave the fans a very soft landing

the Reds are drafting fairly well again, they are scouting and signing in Latin America, they developed their first pitcher in 20 freaking years, they found talent on the garbage heap. I thought that we were heading for 10 more bleak years. still might get them, in this economy. but things could also get interesting quickly.

OnBaseMachine
05-06-2009, 06:15 PM
A little bit further. I think that Hamilton-Volquez was a mistake. Not a horrible trade in terms of talent exchange, but Hamilton is exactly the player the Reds could've used. A middle of the order bat that plays a competent CF which can help us win every day. If we kept Hamilton, we avoid having Patterson and Taveras. Volquez has been contributing, but in terms of what this team needs, I think Hamilton filled a bigger need. This paragraph is all my opinion, but I think it was typical of Wayne's thinking. He threw everything into starting pitching, without building a balanced team that could also score runs and play defense. That's why the W-L record suffered after mid-2006.


Josh Hamilton is a below average center fielder and he's injury prone. Wayne made a great move by flipping him for a young top-of-rotation starter.

TRF
05-06-2009, 06:32 PM
Josh Hamilton is a below average center fielder and he's injury prone. Wayne made a great move by flipping him for a young top-of-rotation starter.

word.

case in point. this is Hamilton's third DL stint in the last 2 years i believe. one in Cincinnati, one last year in Texas, and he's hurt again.

Great trade for the Reds.

I've seen first had what Hamilton did to his body when I see my own family members. It's what you can't see that's worrisome. He'll never be what he could have been. He's not a horse, and that Texas heat can and will take it's toll.

nate
05-06-2009, 06:33 PM
Josh Hamilton is a below average center fielder and he's injury prone. Wayne made a great move by flipping him for a young top-of-rotation starter.

.242/.282/.379/.660 this year and hasn't played since April 26.

edabbs44
05-06-2009, 09:49 PM
Hatte was just a kickstand until Votto was ready.

That isn't true. And if it is, then that was the worst option pick-up ever.

nate
05-06-2009, 09:51 PM
That isn't true. And if it is, then that was the worst option pick-up ever.

Sure it is.

tripleaaaron
05-07-2009, 12:58 AM
Ross - was hurt, we had a surplus of outfielders at the time and Wayne said, I believe, that he wanted to give him an opportunity to play every day somewhere else.

Cantu - was headed to arbitration so it was likely to cost the Reds more than what the Marlins signed him for. He had no position either, being blocked by Votto at first and the skillet he wears on his hand at third.

While I am aware of the reasoning I am still shocked that we just gave away a player who is now a starting outfielder. While he is nothing spectacular, he is a starting MLB player and we just handed him over to another team. While it was a good gesture to Ross, we are now looking at a glaring hole in left and with no prospect (no matter how minor).
I will agree that the Cantu situation was more of a matter of finances, etc. But I second guess it because we traded Shackelford and Medlock (I could care less about the former) for 1/6th of a season of Cantu and Shaun Cumberland, who will probably never contribute at the Major league level. Not only did we trade a talented reliever for 27 meaningless games (we were far out of contention) and we didn't even attempt to resign him.
I second guess because both of these guys are producing for their respective teams and we show nothing for it.

mth123
05-07-2009, 05:04 AM
Wayne completely turned around a talentless, farm systemless team in a couple of off seasons, even without much of a free hand. the rest is much easier, IMO. Walt's got so much more to trade than Wayne ever did, plus the hardest thing to obtain (top, economical pitching) is already here. also Walt never had the two albatrosses inherited by Wayne: those being Jr, and the meddling of the owner.

Walt's just really slow. Continental drift slow.

Yep.

IMO it doesn't take 3 to 5 years to size up what you have and do something about it. It doesn't have to be Hoiliday, Ordonez or even Dye. Josh Willingham and Nick Swisher were both moved over the off-season for little in terms of talent. The team knew that Dunn was gone and that the offense was going to have a gaping hole in the middle. Its the choices of a .650ish OPS Taveras, a .700ish OPS Hairston and doing nothing about the left side of the IF that cost this team.

Personally, I think Dusty is calling the shots. The team is made in his image and the players acquired have Dusty ties or Dusty style all over them, not Walt's. My theory is that Dusty has Cast's ear, is laying out the parameters and its Walt's job to operate along those lines while minding the budget in the process.

Walts' teams had guys like Edmonds, Rolen and of course Pujols. When Walt needed a LF bat, he reached down and grabbed a no field, high power and high on base guy like Chris Duncan to give him a boost, not handing LF to an offensively challenged platoon who never projected to be LF material. Walt rotated productive, but reasonably priced vets in and out of the OF. The likes of Eric Davis, Reggie Sanders, Larry Walker, J.D. Drew and even Juan Encarnacion rotated through to provide competent production out there (guys like previously mentioned Willingham and Swisher fit that mold IMO). He never settled for guys like Taveras and Hairston. Whoever said this is a lot like Walt's teams are simply wrong IMO. These look a lot like Dusty's teams with guys like Juan Pierre, Daryl Hamilton, Marvin Benard, Stan Javier, and Calvin Murray holding down major roles in the OF. Of course this team doesn't have Barry Bonds to make up for it.

edabbs44
05-07-2009, 08:47 AM
Sure it is.

The move made no sense no matter how you slice it.

membengal
05-07-2009, 09:01 AM
1000 mythcial rep points to mth for that exegesis.

nate
05-07-2009, 09:40 AM
The move made no sense no matter how you slice it.

I'm just explaining what happened. I don't really care to rehash the argument.

bucksfan2
05-07-2009, 10:09 AM
The move made no sense no matter how you slice it.

Actually I think it made more sense than you think. I heard numerous reports from Votto last season how he learned how to be a big league ball player from Hatty. Hatty was on that team to hold down 1b until Votto got his feet wet in the bigs. IMO the Reds thought they would get more out of Hatty as a PH than they actually did. If Hatteberg's sole accomplishment was tutoring Votto as how to become a professional baseball player then his $1.8M contract for 2008 was a good deal.

westofyou
05-07-2009, 10:37 AM
While I am aware of the reasoning I am still shocked that we just gave away a player who is now a starting outfielder. While he is nothing spectacular, he is a starting MLB player and we just handed him over to another team.

Kind of how the Reds got Brandon Phillips and Hamilton too eh?

M2
05-07-2009, 11:06 AM
Wayne completely turned around a talentless, farm systemless team in a couple of off seasons, even without much of a free hand. the rest is much easier, IMO. Walt's got so much more to trade than Wayne ever did, plus the hardest thing to obtain (top, economical pitching) is already here. also Walt never had the two albatrosses inherited by Wayne: those being Jr, and the meddling of the owner.

No doubt about it, Krivsky overhauled the franchise. He made some mistakes too, no one's perfect. The Trade set him back on his heels (right guys to deal, wrong return). Gonzalez never was what the club needed at SS, and it still hasn't found that. People like to grouse about the Cordero because he's paid a lot of money, but any chance the Reds have of doing something this season goes through him.


Walt's just really slow. Continental drift slow.

The odd thing is that wasn't how he operated in St. Louis. Over there Walt was quick to figure out his needs and he almost never failed to address those needs. He tore it down and put it back together a half dozen times when he was running the Cardinals.

lollipopcurve
05-07-2009, 11:23 AM
The odd thing is that wasn't how he operated in St. Louis. Over there Walt was quick to figure out his needs and he almost never failed to address those needs. He tore it down and put it back together a half dozen times when he was running the Cardinals.

I don't really subscribe to the notion that GMs have a single style. I think Jocketty recognized that this team needed a lot of holes plugged this offseason, and so, given how the markets were evolving, he managed the sizeable risk the club faced by spreading the available $$$ around to get the team shored up in several places first (bullpen setup, C, CF), hoping maybe the big bat would drop in their laps late. Remember that this year there has been a lot of speculation about there being a new in-season trade market, developing sooner rather than later, for high priced productive players. Maybe he's waiting to see if that happens -- and if it would make sense for the 09 Reds to commit to going for it. Seems like pretty safe risk management to me.

But my sense is that there's as good a chance that the Reds look to sell (Arroyo or Harang) than there is they will buy.

princeton
05-07-2009, 11:31 AM
I don't really subscribe to the notion that GMs have a single style. I think Jocketty recognized that this team needed a lot of holes plugged this offseason, and so, given how the markets were evolving, he managed the sizeable risk the club faced by spreading the available $$$ around to get the team shored up in several places first (bullpen setup, C, CF), hoping maybe the big bat would drop in their laps late. Remember that this year there has been a lot of speculation about there being a new in-season trade market, developing sooner rather than later, for high priced productive players. Maybe he's waiting to see if that happens -- and if it would make sense for the 09 Reds to commit to going for it. Seems like pretty safe risk management to me.

zzzzz

sorry, I must have Walted off

traderumor
05-07-2009, 11:35 AM
Yep.
Personally, I think Dusty is calling the shots. The team is made in his image and the players acquired have Dusty ties or Dusty style all over them, not Walt's. My theory is that Dusty has Cast's ear, is laying out the parameters and its Walt's job to operate along those lines while minding the budget in the process.

Walt a lackey? I'm pretty sure you would have been reading an article about his resignation and then hearing from some anonymous "insiders" with the inside story if this was the current decision making MO.

westofyou
05-07-2009, 11:39 AM
How can Dusty have Cast's ear when Jocketty is the man he knew, chased and caught for the GM job?

Dusty has some power for a manager within the organization as opposed to say, Manny Acta but he's not driving the bus or giving the directions.

M2
05-07-2009, 11:52 AM
But my sense is that there's as good a chance that the Reds look to sell (Arroyo or Harang) than there is they will buy.

I'll go you one better, I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell the Reds will buy. If, come June, the Cardinals, Cubs and Brewers pop off the front of the division and the Reds are below .500, I think you're looking at open season on Harang and Arroyo. I came into this season expecting Harang to wind up in a Mets uniform and nothing that has happened so far has changed my mind.

As for Jocketty, you may be right that GMs don't have a single style, but the Reds need the guy who ran the Cardinals. The guy who's running the Reds looks like he's prepared to wait and see how the 21st century unfolds before he makes a critical move.

Chip R
05-07-2009, 12:01 PM
I'll go you one better, I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell the Reds will buy. If, come June, the Cardinals, Cubs and Brewers pop off the front of the division and the Reds are below .500, I think you're looking at open season on Harang and Arroyo. I came into this season expecting Harang to wind up in a Mets uniform and nothing that has happened so far has changed my mind.


I have said all winter that I think due to the economic crisis, teams will sell off earlier than normal. I could see the Reds being one of those teams considering their home attendance. The only thing that will keep them from doing that is if the Reds are still in the thick of it.

I think those are the two guys the Reds would look to sell off. Brandon, maybe but he's the "face of the franchise."


As for Jocketty, you may be right that GMs don't have a single style, but the Reds need the guy who ran the Cardinals. The guy who's running the Reds looks like he's prepared to wait and see how the 21st century unfolds before he makes a critical move.


Walt doesn't have the money to work with here that he did in StL. It's easier to be a wheeler-dealer when you have 3M people coming into your stadium every year. I wonder when was the last time StL drew under 10K for a game?

lollipopcurve
05-07-2009, 12:10 PM
Walt doesn't have the money to work with here that he did in StL. It's easier to be a wheeler-dealer when you have 3M people coming into your stadium every year. I wonder when was the last time StL drew under 10K for a game?

Yep. Big difference in the 2 markets. Jocketty also spent a lot of time in Oakland, and I'm guessing that he's finding more parallels to that experience than to his time in St. Louis.

westofyou
05-07-2009, 12:13 PM
I wonder when was the last time StL drew under 10K for a game?


1978 was the last time the Cards averaged less than 16K a year

Here's a bad day

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1978/B04170SLN1978.htm

westofyou
05-07-2009, 12:14 PM
Yep. Big difference in the 2 markets. Jocketty also spent a lot of time in Oakland, and I'm guessing that he's finding more parallels to that experience than to his time in St. Louis.

A's were players when Walt was there though, they were stocked and like St. Louis he had Duncan turning straw into gold at a minimal cost, allowing the A's to target dollars at other resources.

REDREAD
05-07-2009, 12:15 PM
This is the problem with your whole argument IMO, he didn't replace them with inferior players.

He replaced Willy Mo on the Roster with Bronson Arroyo
He replaced Felipe Lopez on the roster with Brandon Phillips
He replaced Austin Kearns on the roster ultimately with Edinson Volquez (via another player better than Austin in Hamilton)
He replaced any number of scrubs you want to bring up with Jared Burton and Bill Bray (who despite some peoples views is a good talent and has been very productive)
And many more.......




Reds rank in runs scored

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75494

Rank in runs scored:

08: 23rd
07: 14th
06: 22nd (749 Runs)
05: 4th (820 runs)

So Wayne obviously did something negative to impact the offense, because it went from 4th to 22nd.

We can say that Phillips offsets the loss of Lopez, etc.. But that still doesn't justify bringing in guys like Clayton. The team lost a lot of runs. That's a quanitative measurement.. Just saying "Phillips > Lopez", etc is not quantitative.






He dealt away no one of significance except Hamilton (of which he had little choice) and he kept all his real talent in house.

Now did he have his share of blunders sure he did no one is perfect in that line of work, but go find me any GM in baseball today or anytime that took over a team and by dealing nothing away did that kind of job in 2 years time. Anyone I mean anybody!!! That is what you call a damn fine hot streak or one talented individual. When you have that kind of talent you don't fire him over breaking a few eggs in the kitchen or for making someone else clean it up.

Any other small insignificant details are just that and not worth discussing until we get past that point.[/QUOTE]

princeton
05-07-2009, 12:18 PM
It's easier to be a wheeler-dealer when you have 3M people coming into your stadium every year.

good wheeler-dealers tend to work that way due to an economic disadvantage.

I think that Walt feels how marginal the whole enterprise is, and doesn't want to err. it's understandable but a bit boring.

jojo
05-07-2009, 12:22 PM
Walt did the best he could. The 2009 Reds is his best shot this year.

Mario-Rijo
05-07-2009, 12:31 PM
While I am aware of the reasoning I am still shocked that we just gave away a player who is now a starting outfielder. While he is nothing spectacular, he is a starting MLB player and we just handed him over to another team. While it was a good gesture to Ross, we are now looking at a glaring hole in left and with no prospect (no matter how minor).

We didn't give him away we did recieve pile o' cash, which points at the reasoning IMO. I believe it was 500K but it wasn't confirmed by he club how much they got. For all the crap Wayne took for blowing money people don't credit him for times he was also getting it back when said player didn't fit the current or (in his future with the club) future puzzle.

Homer Bailey
05-07-2009, 12:34 PM
I really hope the Reds don't ship out Harang. Arroyo on the other hand, is a contract I want off the books BADLY. If someone wants Harang they better really blow us away.

Mario-Rijo
05-07-2009, 12:47 PM
Yep.

IMO it doesn't take 3 to 5 years to size up what you have and do something about it. It doesn't have to be Hoiliday, Ordonez or even Dye. Josh Willingham and Nick Swisher were both moved over the off-season for little in terms of talent. The team knew that Dunn was gone and that the offense was going to have a gaping hole in the middle. Its the choices of a .650ish OPS Taveras, a .700ish OPS Hairston and doing nothing about the left side of the IF that cost this team.

Personally, I think Dusty is calling the shots. The team is made in his image and the players acquired have Dusty ties or Dusty style all over them, not Walt's. My theory is that Dusty has Cast's ear, is laying out the parameters and its Walt's job to operate along those lines while minding the budget in the process.

Walts' teams had guys like Edmonds, Rolen and of course Pujols. When Walt needed a LF bat, he reached down and grabbed a no field, high power and high on base guy like Chris Duncan to give him a boost, not handing LF to an offensively challenged platoon who never projected to be LF material. Walt rotated productive, but reasonably priced vets in and out of the OF. The likes of Eric Davis, Reggie Sanders, Larry Walker, J.D. Drew and even Juan Encarnacion rotated through to provide competent production out there (guys like previously mentioned Willingham and Swisher fit that mold IMO). He never settled for guys like Taveras and Hairston. Whoever said this is a lot like Walt's teams are simply wrong IMO. These look a lot like Dusty's teams with guys like Juan Pierre, Daryl Hamilton, Marvin Benard, Stan Javier, and Calvin Murray holding down major roles in the OF. Of course this team doesn't have Barry Bonds to make up for it.

That has been my claim about Walt all along. Not that he is a lackey perse' but that even in St. Louis he did his job and allows his Mgr to do his. I happen to think one of the reasons he is a respected guy is because he allows for the manager to build the kind of club he wants within reason. LaRussa asked for what he wanted and Walt went out and found it and acquired it and the same here. Any Mgr would love to work for him.

bucksfan2
05-07-2009, 12:50 PM
While I am aware of the reasoning I am still shocked that we just gave away a player who is now a starting outfielder. While he is nothing spectacular, he is a starting MLB player and we just handed him over to another team. While it was a good gesture to Ross, we are now looking at a glaring hole in left and with no prospect (no matter how minor).


I don't get the lamenting over the loss of Cody Ross. When the Reds picked him up there really wasn't a spot for him. He got all of 2 starts and then was sold to the Marlins. He wasn't going to play over Hamilton, Griffey, or Dunn at that time and IIRC Bruce was rocketing up the prospect charts at that time. IMO Ross is a boarder line starting outfielder. In Ross only full season he had 33 BB's, 116K's, and an OBP of .316. He really isn't that good of a player.

Mario-Rijo
05-07-2009, 12:51 PM
Reds rank in runs scored

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75494

Rank in runs scored:

08: 23rd
07: 14th
06: 22nd (749 Runs)
05: 4th (820 runs)

So Wayne obviously did something negative to impact the offense, because it went from 4th to 22nd.

We can say that Phillips offsets the loss of Lopez, etc.. But that still doesn't justify bringing in guys like Clayton. The team lost a lot of runs. That's a quanitative measurement.. Just saying "Phillips > Lopez", etc is not quantitative.






He dealt away no one of significance except Hamilton (of which he had little choice) and he kept all his real talent in house.

Now did he have his share of blunders sure he did no one is perfect in that line of work, but go find me any GM in baseball today or anytime that took over a team and by dealing nothing away did that kind of job in 2 years time. Anyone I mean anybody!!! That is what you call a damn fine hot streak or one talented individual. When you have that kind of talent you don't fire him over breaking a few eggs in the kitchen or for making someone else clean it up.

Any other small insignificant details are just that and not worth discussing until we get past that point.

I knew you would come back with #'s which shows a complete lack of vision. I don't think it's fair to ask a guy to in essence take a blank canvas and create his perfect picture and tell him he has 3 years to do so. Then come back in 2 years take the canvas away and critique it despite a brilliant start. Apparently you can't see the big picture or in this case the big portrait.

M2
05-07-2009, 01:21 PM
good wheeler-dealers tend to work that way due to an economic disadvantage.

I think that Walt feels how marginal the whole enterprise is, and doesn't want to err. it's understandable but a bit boring.

Bingo. This is culture, not finance.

dfs
05-07-2009, 01:36 PM
Dusty has some power for a manager within the organization as opposed to say, Manny Acta... or Dave Miley or Jerry Narron.

I know the biggest role a manager has is to allocate playing time correctly, but After the games of front office musical chairs the reds have been playing, I still think the single biggest asset Dusty brings to the job is that in some way he acts as a counterweight to the GM.

TRF
05-07-2009, 01:55 PM
Reds rank in runs scored

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75494

Rank in runs scored:

08: 23rd
07: 14th
06: 22nd (749 Runs)
05: 4th (820 runs)

So Wayne obviously did something negative to impact the offense, because it went from 4th to 22nd.

We can say that Phillips offsets the loss of Lopez, etc.. But that still doesn't justify bringing in guys like Clayton. The team lost a lot of runs. That's a quanitative measurement.. Just saying "Phillips > Lopez", etc is not quantitative.

2005 was a perfect storm of offense for the Reds. Jr's best year since his first year as a Red, 9 players in double digits in HR's, and EE's first year as a Red hitting 9 HR's.

What Wayne did was see that the pitching was a priority. He got a league average innings eater in Arroyo. The Reds hadn't had a leaguer average SP in quite some time. BA got off to a great start. As M2 stated, WK changed the minor league system in such a way as to foster the development of Cueto. He had Votto as his ONLY minor league hitter worth half a crap, and promoted him accordingly. Getting Volquez for Hamilton is going to be a steal. Josh got all the headlines last year. Meanwhile Volquez keeps getting better. Want to wager on whether or not the Rangers would make that trade again?

The drafts from 2004-2007, (yep, two years of DanO in there) plus international signings under Krivsky (Duran was a WK signing, not a Walt signing), shrewd trades with some misses in there are what has turned this franchise from a path of losing.

But Krivsky's misses, SS, CF, were not addressed properly. 1st I don't believe WK wanted Patterson last year. I think he missed at SS, because his SS was in house (BP). There were better options available for CF in 2008. Catcher fell apart on him, and the Reds had only just begun to address the glaring lack of depth in the system.

He needed more time. This is WK's team far more than it is Walt's, and he doesn't get enough credit IMO.

And this is from a guy that unmercifully bashed him when he started. I failed to see the larger picture.

M2
05-07-2009, 03:39 PM
2005 was a perfect storm of offense for the Reds. Jr's best year since his first year as a Red, 9 players in double digits in HR's, and EE's first year as a Red hitting 9 HR's.

What Wayne did was see that the pitching was a priority. He got a league average innings eater in Arroyo. The Reds hadn't had a leaguer average SP in quite some time. BA got off to a great start. As M2 stated, WK changed the minor league system in such a way as to foster the development of Cueto. He had Votto as his ONLY minor league hitter worth half a crap, and promoted him accordingly. Getting Volquez for Hamilton is going to be a steal. Josh got all the headlines last year. Meanwhile Volquez keeps getting better. Want to wager on whether or not the Rangers would make that trade again?

The drafts from 2004-2007, (yep, two years of DanO in there) plus international signings under Krivsky (Duran was a WK signing, not a Walt signing), shrewd trades with some misses in there are what has turned this franchise from a path of losing.

But Krivsky's misses, SS, CF, were not addressed properly. 1st I don't believe WK wanted Patterson last year. I think he missed at SS, because his SS was in house (BP). There were better options available for CF in 2008. Catcher fell apart on him, and the Reds had only just begun to address the glaring lack of depth in the system.

He needed more time. This is WK's team far more than it is Walt's, and he doesn't get enough credit IMO.

And this is from a guy that unmercifully bashed him when he started. I failed to see the larger picture.

Good stuff. Krivsky ran into what seems to be slowing down Jocketty, namely that the Reds organization is averse to the kind all-in mentality it takes to make a dramatic season-to-season leap forward. It always seems like the Reds decide to implement the easiest 50% of a plan and see how far that takes them.

Krivsky also ran into what (as princeton astutely noted) Jocketty is trying to avoid, the big mistake. Krivsky looked to pull a rabbit out of a hat with The Trade and it set the club back. Had he done what he did in pretty much every other trade he made, get talent in return for his player, it might have put the club into contention (if not immediately in 2006, then in 2007 or 2008). When you only get a little over two years on the job, a setback like that can be fatal.

lollipopcurve
05-07-2009, 04:31 PM
Krivsky also ran into what (as princeton astutely noted) Jocketty is trying to avoid, the big mistake.

Krivsky ran into a lot more than that -- namely, losing Johnny Almaraz and having Jocketty out there without a job.

Castellini will never fire Jocketty, so I really doubt Jocketty is on eggshells trying not to screw up. Every GM on the planet is trying to avoid a big mistake, unless they have the full backing/prodding of ownership, which Jocketty has and will have if the team is in contention late this year. I'd say he'd more inclined to bust out a big trade than most other GMs, given Castellini's impatience for a winner. But it will not be a move that clears out their best minor league assets for a one-time run.

M2
05-07-2009, 04:40 PM
Krivsky ran into a lot more than that -- namely, losing Johnny Almaraz and having Jocketty out there without a job.

Castellini will never fire Jocketty, so I really doubt Jocketty is on eggshells trying not to screw up. Every GM on the planet is trying to avoid a big mistake, unless they have the full backing/prodding of ownership, which Jocketty has and will have if the team is in contention late this year. I'd say he'd more inclined to bust out a big trade than most other GMs, given Castellini's impatience for a winner. But it will not be a move that clears out their best minor league assets for a one-time run.

And it won't be a dozen other things either. In fact, with the Reds there's so many things it won't be that it almost can't ever happen. Left to his own devices, Jocketty almost surely would take some risks, but he works for the Reds, a risk-allergic organization, a place where big ideas get whittled down.

My theory on Jocketty is he'll walk away from the Reds gig at some point when he decides he's had enough of constantly performing the mental gymnastics involved in determining all the things he can't do.

lollipopcurve
05-07-2009, 04:45 PM
And it won't be a dozen other things either. In fact, with the Reds there's so many things it won't be that it almost can't ever happen. Left to his own devices, Jocketty almost surely would take some risks, but he works for the Reds, a risk-allergic organization, a place where big ideas get whittled down.

My theory on Jocketty is he'll walk away from the Reds gig at some point when he decides he's had enough of constantly performing the mental gymnastics involved in determining all the things he can't do.

I don't see it that way. Castellini is a type A owner. Lindner and the Allen interregnum were type B. I think things are different now. The crashing economy may have spooked them this winter, but if they're firmly in it at the deadline (pretty doubtful, in my opinion), I think they'll look to buy -- maybe not THE marquee purchase on the market, but a purchase nonetheless.

tripleaaaron
05-07-2009, 04:55 PM
Kind of how the Reds got Brandon Phillips and Hamilton too eh?

Not really. We picked up Ross off waivers for what, 5 at-bats, and we traded for Cantu for only 25 games worth of play. Both Phillips and Hamilton were prospects that were given up on. Their respective teams had control of them for many seasons, they weren't just added, and then handed off. (Except the Cubs selection and trade of Hamilton).
While I understand that prospects are given up on all of the time, these guys were added for no apparent reason, played well (Cantu) or didn't play at all (Ross), and then were just shipped out for no return. They were backwards moves. We lost a prospect for nothing in return, and now have a glaring hole.

tripleaaaron
05-07-2009, 05:36 PM
I don't get the lamenting over the loss of Cody Ross. When the Reds picked him up there really wasn't a spot for him. He got all of 2 starts and then was sold to the Marlins. He wasn't going to play over Hamilton, Griffey, or Dunn at that time and IIRC Bruce was rocketing up the prospect charts at that time. IMO Ross is a boarder line starting outfielder. In Ross only full season he had 33 BB's, 116K's, and an OBP of .316. He really isn't that good of a player.

While I agree that Ross is more of a 4th outfielder, you are off on your time-line. We got Ross in 2006, Hamilton wasn't here and Bruce wasn't even close to ready. We had just traded Wily Mo, we then traded Kearns later that year, and Griffey got hurt again as should have been expected. We suffered through Quinton McCracken, DeWayne Wise and we gave 33 year old Todd Hollandsworth extended time in RF.

Its not so much the loss of him as a player that I didn't so much like, I do agree that he is a border line starter. It was the lack of forward thinking by Krivsky, as he later traded Kearns and knew the clock was ticking on Jr, and in a way, Dunn. With that in mind I will digress though, as I now see that we did in fact receive $500,000 for him, and since we only gave up Its not so much the loss of him as a player that I didn't so much like, and I do agree that he is a border line starter. Its the fact that we signed him and for no reason and then passed him along. I guess that if we did in fact receive $500,000 for him, then it was a net gain since we only gave up Ben Kozlowski, it was a net gain.

M2
05-07-2009, 05:41 PM
Castellini is a type A owner. Lindner and the Allen interregnum were type B.

I'd say you got that close to backwards. Lindner got involved with contracts and blocked trades, while Allen consistently meddled in the running of the ballclub and, at Lindner's behest, scrutinized every cent before it got spent. They were type A on steroids.

The hope for Castellini is he can be a type B who'll let the professionals do their jobs.

mth123
05-07-2009, 09:58 PM
How can Dusty have Cast's ear when Jocketty is the man he knew, chased and caught for the GM job?

Dusty has some power for a manager within the organization as opposed to say, Manny Acta but he's not driving the bus or giving the directions.

Dusty is the one with the big dollar contract. Walt is the one who reluctantly took the job as a favor to his friend. Seems like Dusty was calling the shots when WK was here and Walt simply agreed to assume the role when Cast tired of WK.

mth123
05-07-2009, 10:08 PM
Walt a lackey? I'm pretty sure you would have been reading an article about his resignation and then hearing from some anonymous "insiders" with the inside story if this was the current decision making MO.

I never said he's a lackey. Dusty signed the big contract and I'd guess was given some control over personnel in the process. I have no way to know the inter-relationships of all these guys, but I'd say Walt is more of a caretaker who doesn't view this job as a long term proposition. These acquisitions have been more in line with the types that Dusty has given a lot of time to over the years than it has been anything that Walt has done. I'd guess Walt probably called the shots on the Dunn deal and took what he could get for Griffey. The Hairston, Patterson and I'd bet Taveras acquisitions have the look of Baker's history not Walt's.

traderumor
05-07-2009, 11:54 PM
I never said he's a lackey. Dusty signed the big contract and I'd guess was given some control over personnel in the process. I have no way to know the inter-relationships of all these guys, but I'd say Walt is more of a caretaker who doesn't view this job as a long term proposition. These acquisitions have been more in line with the types that Dusty has given a lot of time to over the years than it has been anything that Walt has done. I'd guess Walt probably called the shots on the Dunn deal and took what he could get for Griffey. The Hairston, Patterson and I'd bet Taveras acquisitions have the look of Baker's history not Walt's.

You're right, you didn't use the word, but that is what you described. I am going to give him a little respect that he would not assume the role you are describing. Dan O'Brien, yes, Walt Jocketty, no way. Dusty may give a lead and recruit, that is documented. I would hope that he considers his manager's input regarding players, but he certainly is not rubber stamping acquisitions that Dusty orchestrates.

westofyou
05-08-2009, 12:26 AM
Dusty is the one with the big dollar contract. Walt is the one who reluctantly took the job as a favor to his friend. Seems like Dusty was calling the shots when WK was here and Walt simply agreed to assume the role when Cast tired of WK.

Walt's building the roster and Dusty has input, but Dusty's not building the roster with Walt's input.

klw
08-27-2013, 04:05 PM
Sometimes we second guess Reds management.

traderumor
08-27-2013, 04:08 PM
really? dredging up from 2009 to make that comment?

Norm Chortleton
08-27-2013, 04:10 PM
really? dredging up from 2009 to make that comment?

Are you second-guessing his decision?

:p

Tom Servo
08-27-2013, 04:11 PM
I really hope the Reds don't ship out Harang. Arroyo on the other hand, is a contract I want off the books BADLY. If someone wants Harang they better really blow us away.
:p


I approve of periodically topping old threads to show how dumb all of us are. All of us.

OC_Red
08-27-2013, 04:12 PM
Necro threads are the best. :lol:

klw
08-27-2013, 04:16 PM
Sorry for the ancient bump. I was looking for a post someone made a few years ago in which a photoshop was done of Walt sleeping on the beach in a lounger. I couldn't find it and bumped this as it has lots of fun moments. I completely forgot about the whole Jermaine Dye era. I saw another great thread titled Reds searching for RH bat. From 2009. Good times.

I probably should have just said bump with that being what I was doing.

Tom Servo
08-27-2013, 04:22 PM
I was looking for a post someone made a few years ago in which a photoshop was done of Walt sleeping on the beach in a lounger.

I have this if it helps.

http://i.imgur.com/JFbJNYb.jpg

Homer Bailey
08-27-2013, 06:56 PM
:p


I approve of periodically topping old threads to show how dumb all of us are. All of us.

Seriously, what an idiot!

In my defense, at the time, Arroyo was one of, if not the Reds highest paid player, and the Reds were not contenders at the time. Since that comment was made, the Reds have paid approximately $50M for a 4.5 WAR. Considering the financial restrictions the team was working under at the time, I would not have signed up for $50M for that type of production over this time, so was it really that dumb of a comment?

Rojo
08-27-2013, 07:11 PM
I've consistently underestimated Arroyo. Probably because I'm guilty of a fairly common mistake -- underestimating durability.

Falls City Beer
08-27-2013, 07:13 PM
The Pirates got Marlon Byrd for peanuts. Second guessing continues?

westofyou
08-27-2013, 08:04 PM
The Pirates got Marlon Byrd for peanuts. Second guessing continues?

I heard that when he hurt his leg he ballooned up to 314 pounds, not that has anything to do with anything, but still damn.

He's an ex Cub

Danger Danger Danger Will Robinson