PDA

View Full Version : Why is Bowden a liar?



Red Thunder
12-06-2002, 11:59 AM
In some threads I have read that Bowden can't be trusted when he opens his mouth up to that he "is one of the biggest Machiavellian liars/schemers the game has seen in recent memory".

Personally I'm happy with the way Bowden has worked for the Reds during his 10 year tenure with the club so far, but that's not the point. The thing is that I only remember two incidents, where Ron Oester and the other time Pokey Reese said in public that he lied (to them). But in these two cases their word stands against Bowden's - so I guess it's everyones own choice whom to believe more. Not to speak that both Oester and Reese were disappointed back then, as they didn't receive what they wanted from Bowden (the Reds).

If someone remembers other incidents, when Bowden obviously lied to the public, to players, reporters or anyone else, I would be happy to hear about it.

traderumor
12-06-2002, 12:07 PM
Another voice of reason, Red Thunder. But, oh boy, I can't wait to hear all the stories about when Bowden lied about this or that. One I'm sure I'll see was the Larkin deal with the Mets. He has been blasted for his deceit of the NY management many times over. I think Bowden has brought some exciting players to the Reds and has went from a genius in 1999 (missed playoffs by a playoff) and the Griffey trade winter 2000. The Reds have had injuries plague them ever since, and somehow Bowden is responsible for circumstances beyond his control. He gets the players here, but he cant waive his magic wand and keep them healthy. But of course, so many think they can do his job, so the criticism continues.

cincinnati chili
12-06-2002, 12:12 PM
Collins and Young didn't elaborate as much as Oester and Reese. But if you read between the lines of comments such as "you wouldn't believe some of the things that go on here..." I attribute that to Bowden.

But it goes beyond honesty to an utter lack of tact.

-The Tony Perez firing over the phone
-publicly criticizing his bosses for not increasing the payroll, and making comments like "so-and-so priced himself out of Cincinnati"
-The September 11th comment
-I'm sure folks here can come up with others

Another possible honesty thing was Accusing Kremchek of misdiagnosing injuries, when Kremchek says he told Bowden the extent of the injuries all along (Griffey in '01).

Another was his outright lying to the fans saying that the Reds put forth a good faith effort to sign Jeremy Sowers. While I AGREE with this strategy, the plan was to take a "bye" from the beginning. They KNEW Sowers wanted to go to college.

Whether it's a lack of honesty and/or judgment, the guy is not trustworthy. And this comes from someone (me) who thinks he's a good x's and o's GM.

letsgojunior
12-06-2002, 12:16 PM
I made the statement, so I will respond.

Anyone who knows anything about Bowden knows he is one of the most lying, deceitful people around. He is a good baseball GM. It stops there. You asked for examples. Here are a few.

“We had a handshake deal that he wasn't going to trade me. Three months later, he traded me ... If I had been in the room with him, I would have killed him.”
- Jeff Shaw, Dodgers reliever

“They say what goes around comes around. If that be the case, then he's going to get his some day.”
- Dave Collins, ex-Reds coach

Jim Bowden is “one of the worst people in the world.”
- Ron Oester, Reds coach

One National League general manager, asked if Mr. Bowden is the most disliked man in baseball, replied, “He's in a league of his own.”

Mr. Quinn won a World Series with the 1990 Reds, but his deliberate style clashed with Mrs. Schott's notorious impatience, and their relationship deteriorated rapidly. Mr. Bowden, meanwhile, was aggressively cultivating the Reds' quirky owner as administrative assistant for scouting and player development.

Some front-office members believed he was her spy. To trap him, player development director Howie Bedell told Mr. Bowden - and no one else - he had rented a Cadillac during spring training in 1991, confident the story would get back to Mrs. Schott. Soon enough, Mr. Quinn was ordered to demand an explanation of the fake extravagance.

By August, Mr. Bowden had replaced Mr. Bedell.

“Jim had a penchant for trying to eliminate people,” Mr. Quinn says, “which is unfortunate as hell. It's almost to the point where the guy can't help himself. If he perceives someone is encroaching on his turf, he takes the (steps) to eliminate them.”

The first impressions Mr. Bowden made as general manager were of a man supremely confident and occasionally shrill. Critics referred to him as “Abner,” as in Doubleday, on the theory Mr. Bowden believed he had invented the game. Subordinates were struck by his high-decibel, highly profane tirades.

Former Reds public relations director Jon Braude says the only time he's come to blows in his life was when he struck Mr. Bowden for screaming at him in an argument over TV coverage. About the same time, Mr. Bowden fired minor-league field coordinator Jim Tracy in a loud and public scene after they failed to reach contract terms.

“He made a great deal with Seattle, but I don't think you have to talk about it,” Mr. Jocketty says. “I would hope to never put another GM in a bad light, and I think that may have happened in that case.”

“I've never been a part of an organization where there was less harmony, less encouragement, (people) not supporting one another, never knowing what the true purpose was,” he says. “You've got to understand the importance of chemistry, and I don't think he does.”

This is all from the Cincinnati Enquirer about a year ago.

cincinnati chili
12-06-2002, 12:20 PM
Let's go junior:

Great stuff. Sooner or later people will realize that this isn't just a skilled GM with a few flaws, but a skilled GM who's also a borderline sociopath.

Getting back to the honesty issue, am I correct that Bowden was fired from one of his early baseball jobs (maybe w/the Yankees) after being accused of stealing computer scouting files? I could have sworn I heard this reported.

letsgojunior
12-06-2002, 12:30 PM
The computer file stealing is somewhere in here, I don't have time to read it.

This article is by our friend Sullivan, but it is damn hard to refute it when almost the entire thing is direct quotes.

http://reds.enquirer.com/2001/04/01/red_bowden_makes_deals_-.html

letsgojunior
12-06-2002, 12:42 PM
We should really call this thread "liar liar leather pants on fire";)

Red Thunder
12-06-2002, 12:46 PM
Thanks for the responses so far. And for letting me know, that I know nothing about JimBo, lgj ;) .

Indeed you and cincinnati chili delivered a lot of examples, why Bowden has a reputation as a bad handler of people and worse. But from your examples, actually only one is a real proof that he lied on a specific occasion (the Jeff Shaw handshake agreement). The others have not much if anything to do with lying but nonetheless are good examples, that you might better take his words with a grain of salt.

Somehow amazing that he is already the Reds GM for 10 seasons. Seems like he knows with whom he has to deal in a honorable fashion to keep his job in Cincinnati.

letsgojunior
12-06-2002, 12:49 PM
I wasn't directing that at you by any means -- I was actually referring to some of my friends who have had dealings with people who have had direct dealings with Bowden. All left with a slimy feeling.

PS - Honorable is not a word I would use. ;) After accusing our team medical director of a huge miscue and comparing Don Fehr to a Kamakazi pilot, the only reason he is still here is because he has a guaranteed contract, and because Lindner hates to eat contracts.

MikeS21
12-06-2002, 12:53 PM
OK, JimBo gets canned/quits (tak your pick).

Who replaces him?

My fear is that it will be a repeat of the Bob Boone hiring - the lowest bidder gets the job. We needed Lou Pinella and ended up with Bob Boone. Well, we need a "Lou Pinella"-type as GM - not a "Bob Boone" type.

Who do you realistically get to replace Bowden?

Red Thunder
12-06-2002, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by letsgojunior
... the only reason he is still here is because he has a guaranteed contract, and because Lindner hates to eat contracts.

Currently this wouldn't surprise me. How about firing JimBo and making Juan Castro GM? This might benefit the Reds in two areas while they would only have to eat up one contract :D

I still think that Bowden is a very good fit for the Reds and I wish myself for christmas, that he reduces his controversial (or just plainly bad) actions in the future, when dealing with employees and baseball people.

westofyou
12-06-2002, 01:01 PM
Why is Bowden a liar?

Because his pants are on fire.

What else can explain the leather trousers?

J "Cooper"
12-06-2002, 01:21 PM
It also has to hurt to hear your name is on the table for a trade. Bowden does a terrible job of keeping this kind of stuff quiet and it has to begin to affect people.

My pick for the next GM would be --Brad Kullman...did i get his name right? He's the young GM assisstant who has a leaning towards sabermetrics. A young guy would give the club a nice PR move. We need some fresh ideas and someone who has a philosophy about how to run a club.

cincinnati chili
12-06-2002, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by J "Cooper"
It also has to hurt to hear your name is on the table for a trade. Bowden does a terrible job of keeping this kind of stuff quiet and it has to begin to affect people.

My pick for the next GM would be --Brad Kullman...did i get his name right? He's the young GM assisstant who has a leaning towards sabermetrics. A young guy would give the club a nice PR move. We need some fresh ideas and someone who has a philosophy about how to run a club.

What do you know about Kullman's people skills? I too have heard his name mentioned by Neyer as a future GM. And hey, Neyer was correct about Theo. He called that when the guy was 25.

I agree with others on this thread who say we should be careful what we wish for. I was certain the Schott regime was as bad as it could get. Lindner's regime has its problems as well.

M2
12-06-2002, 01:47 PM
Coop, nifty idea on Kullman.

As for JimBo's trousers, maybe he should try asbestos instead of leather.

Chip R
12-06-2002, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by MikeS21
OK, JimBo gets canned/quits (tak your pick).

Who replaces him?

My fear is that it will be a repeat of the Bob Boone hiring - the lowest bidder gets the job. We needed Lou Pinella and ended up with Bob Boone. Well, we need a "Lou Pinella"-type as GM - not a "Bob Boone" type.

Who do you realistically get to replace Bowden?

Mike, I like Bowden but I'm not afraid to say that the emperor may not not be wearing any pants - leather or otherwise. I am not going to say that if JimBo goes the Reds will go into the toilet. JimBo has made some good trades but he also has made some stinkers too, just like all GMs. JimBo's best perceived talent, it seems, is the ability to assemble a roster at bargain basement prices. This is especially in regards to pitching. JimBo goes out and finds guys on the scrap heaps of other teams and turns them over to Don Gullett and hope he can resurrect them from the dead. If they stink, sayonara. If they do well, they usually go to another team via trade or free agency. If they do OK, they stick around till they get too expensive or they get injured.

Let's pretend that JimBo takes his leave of the Reds. His successor will have his marching orders from John Allen to build as good of a team as he can with a $50M payroll. Now I really don't think it takes a great deal of genius to do that. Billy Beane has been doing the same thing in OAK for about 5 years now. Not to say Beane is an idiot but just using the example to show that JimBo isn't the only GM out there that can win with a small payroll. You and I can go out there and say, "Let's get Jaret Wright and this guy who the Mets released and this person who the Giants non-tendered and so on and so forth and get Gully to work his magic on them." It may not be a team that has the success of the A's. Heck, it may just be a tream that has the Reds' level of recent success - or non success. But putting together a team on a $50M budget can be done.

I know if I were running the show I would look at the Braves, the Padres, the Mets and the As and look at their minor league organizations and see why they can develop good pitchers while the Reds can't. If they are drafting college pitchers, I do the same. If they have them throw twice between starts, that's what I do too. If they coddle their pitchers and put them on pitch counts, I do likewise. If they stand on their heads for a half hour a day, my pitchers are so there. I would also see if I could steal some of their coaches and scouts so I could have the same success as they have had. I know what else I would have done that unfortunately can't be done now. I would have tried to trade for every decent prospect - especially pitchers - that Montreal had last year. They were gonna be contracted - or so the theory went. What did they need prospects for?

JimBo's a pretty good GM but he does have his weak spots. He tends to overrate toolsy players - and acquire them - and underrate pitching. I would think trying to develop young pitching - cheap, young pitching - would make Allen and Lindner turn cartwheels. Instead we get the annual parade of 5 tool prospects and washed up pitchers that other teams have let go. I will give JimBo credit. He has been known to turn one of those guys into a pretty good return now and then. But there is still no one ready to step up to the MLB level in the minors. I don't think replacing JimBo will spell doom and gloom for the Reds if his replacement knows what he's doing.

M2
12-06-2002, 02:00 PM
On the matter of whether JimBo's replacement could be a worse proposition, it's distinctly likely.

Yet, and I posted this last year, sooner or later Lindner/Allen are going to hire their own guy. If the choice turns into a disaster then maybe Allen gets washed out in the next flush or Lindner gets disgusted and sells the team to hopefully a more creative and engaged owner.

Either way, canning JimBo hastens the process.

MikeS21
12-06-2002, 02:17 PM
Oh don't misunderstand me. I was ready ship Bowden out last summer, after the Kremcheck fiasco. You don't need to convince me that he needs to go. But Chip, you said it yourself. The Reds will be fine as long as the new guy "knows what he is doing."

But I fear the replacement because I know how it will go down. And if the Reds bring in a guy who knows nothing about developing minor league talent, or who knows nothing about evaluating major league talent, we're going to be screwed worse than we already are. (And we ARE screwed).

Ideally, I want someone who has actually had some success as a GM. The FO needs a housecleaning - not a whipping boy. But the GM's job will go to the lowest bidder - and that's going to be an inexperienced guy who will learn on the job.

Chip R
12-06-2002, 02:20 PM
Originally posted by MikeS21
Ideally, I want someone who has actually had some success as a GM. The FO needs a housecleaning - not a whipping boy. But the GM's job will go to the lowest bidder - and that's going to be an inexperienced guy who will learn on the job.

How much success as a GM did Beane have when he took over the A's? What about JimBo himself? I'm not saying Carl and John are going to pick a guy who isn't qualified but you never know. They might accidentally stumble on someone who can be a pretty good GM.

M2
12-06-2002, 02:26 PM
Mike, I agree with you. All I'm adding to that really is that if Lindner's going to make that mistake then he might as well make it now instead of next year. It would move us that much closer to someone coming in and cleaning up the mess.

MikeS21
12-06-2002, 02:31 PM
M2, do you have any possible names to throw out?

I've heard Tim Nehring and Doc Rogers mentioned. Since Rogers has gotten demoted, possibly Nehring has the inside track.

Can you think of anyone else?

gm
12-06-2002, 02:33 PM
Has anyone other than me been watching the Speilberg "Taken" series on Sci-Fi this week?

(If so, you'll understand what this means)

Jim Bowden = Owen Crawford

Spring~Fields
12-06-2002, 03:20 PM
Why is Bowden a liar?

I haven't a clue, but he blows enough smoke that the EPA should outlaw him.

So is the author of this thread saying that credibility does not matter in the business world or society?

GAC
12-06-2002, 04:12 PM
I wouldn't want the GM job if John Allen were my boss. Being the GM in Cincy wouldn't be worth the headaches from both ends.

Krusty
12-06-2002, 04:15 PM
Seems funny that Rodgers was demoted when he was rumored to be interim GM if Bowden was canned last year. Seems to me Bowden eliminated Rodgers out of the picture to prevent the Reds having an interim replacement if they decide to can Bowden anytime during next season.

Spring~Fields
12-06-2002, 04:20 PM
I wouldn't want the GM job if John Allen were my boss. Being the GM in Cincy wouldn't be worth the headaches from both ends.

Allen, Bowden, and Boone all work for that ownership group and Lindner the general partner and do what is mandated or dictated to them that signs their check.

They work for $$$ not the fans.

Falls City Beer
12-06-2002, 05:15 PM
Here's my reason for looking for another GM:

10 years, 1 postseason appearance.

That's all I need to know.

And as to the logical fallacy that his replacement WILL be worse, I say this: At least from a PR standpoint, it CAN'T get worse. So if the results on the field don't improve(and they haven't for three seasons), at least we can expect a bit more gentlemanly comportment.

Spring~Fields
12-06-2002, 05:17 PM
Amen!! Falls City

enough said of promises of a greater tomorrow........ten years no cigar or cupie doll is enough for me.

4256 Hits
12-06-2002, 09:40 PM
I don't want the Reds to have a GM that is out to make friends. All the best business men pi$$ other off from time to time. The only way to the top is stepping over/on others.

As for Shaw Jim refused to give him a NTC in his contract, right then he knew there was a good chance he would get traded. If he didn't like it he should have not signed to contract so he has no one to blame but himself.

cincinnati chili
12-06-2002, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by 4256 Hits
All the best business men pi$$ other off from time to time. The only way to the top is stepping over/on others.


There's a huge difference between a tough negotiator and an unprincipled one. What comes around goes around, especially when you work in an industry with only 30 entities.

letsgojunior
12-28-2002, 02:17 PM
There's a huge difference between a tough negotiator and an unprincipled one. What comes around goes around, especially when you work in an industry with only 30 entities.

CC, I was thinking about you saying this when I was reading Peter Gammons archive and searched for this thread.

Check this out, circa 2001:

Q: Some folks were surprised at how hard Jim Bowden was marketing Scott Williamson during the offseason, suggesting that a GM as good as Bowden wouldn't try so hard to move such a great young pitcher unless he knew something wasn't right. Now, two games into the season, it turns out that Williamson will require season-ending surgery because of a torn elbow ligament. How, if at all, should this reflect on Bowden? Does he get credit for recognizing something wasn't right, or does he take a hit for (possibly knowingly) peddling damaged goods? -- Don Money, Andover, Mass.
PWG: That was the subject of several conversations between general managers Thursday, and the A's should be darned happy they got Johnny Damon, not Williamson, for Ben Grieve. Bowden was trying hard to deal Williamson at the end of spring training and offered him for Daryle Ward and Russell Branyan.

Red Thunder
12-28-2002, 02:27 PM
What a lot of people tend (or like) to forget is, that Bowden was MLB executive of the year in '99. Let's not make him worse than he is.

How unhappy must Orioles, Red Sox, Rangers or Dodgers fans have to be with their GM's, considering all the money those teams can spend each season.

letsgojunior
12-28-2002, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by Red Thunder
What a lot of people tend (or like) to forget is, that Bowden was MLB executive of the year in '99. Let's not make him worse than he is.

How unhappy must Orioles, Red Sox, Rangers or Dodgers fans have to be with their GM's, considering all the money those teams can spend each season.

Red Thunder, you asked us (and in particular, me) in this thread why Bowden was a liar. Not whether we thought he was a good GM. I think he is a pretty good one, potentially cracking the top 10 on a good day. However, you asked about his other side, not whether he was ever executive of the year or had made some random trade steals.

Knowlingly peddling an injured player (which I am trying to find the link to, I believe he admitted to dealing John Smiley knowing he was hurt), is unethical and immoral. You asked me to name known incidences, I am merely complying.

red-in-la
12-28-2002, 03:27 PM
My son-in-law was teling me over Christmas how he still gets cold sweats thinking of Kevin Malone as the Dodger's GM. By any measure, Bowden is at least very good at his job.

Team Tuck
12-28-2002, 03:56 PM
Wait a minute. On the Williamson thing, we're criticizing Bowden for recognizing that Williamson was injury prone because he threw so hard and had bad mechanics? Sounds like a good GM to me. I mean, how would Bowden have known for certain that something was wrong when an MRI wasn't even done until after the reg season began. And it seems to me that Williamson had a decent spring that year, but Reitsma had such a great spring that they gave the starting job to Reitsma. Plus Reitsma had better control, so they figured Reitsma was better suited for the rotation. It wasn't until Willy's second appearance of the reg season that it became obvious something was wrong, when he fired several pitches over LaRue's head or 2 feet outside.

Red Thunder
12-28-2002, 03:56 PM
lgj,

I know that my last response was a bit off-topic. So were a couple of posts from other people who have responded and at which my executive of the year statement was aimed. If you look at other posts (chili, Chip and also from yourself) you will realize, that there are a couple of arguments against Bowden which don't have something to with him being a liar or not. I just added another part to this discussion.

Concerning the liar statement: I still question if what Oester and Pokey said can be trusted more than Bowden's word - it's their word against his and nobody knows for sure who is right and who is wrong.

That leaves the "Shaw handshake agreement" as the only obvious lie which was named in this thread so far. I'm still curious to hear about more of his lies ... otherwise one lie over ten years of his tenure as Reds GM doesn't make JimBo a liar to me.

Team Tuck
12-28-2002, 04:03 PM
On the Kremchek thing, give me a break. Kremchek clearly stated several times that Griffey 'might be ready by Opening Day'. I'll go find the articles if you want me to. Direct quotes from the Doc himself. Kremchek is the one who listed him as day-to-day in March. He wasn't playing every day until what, June? If that's not a mis-diagnosis of the severity of the injury, then what the hell is? Kremchek should have been fired for that one.

Kremchek needs to focus on his job and quit worrying about being on TV and radio all the time. I think Kremchek considers himself a local celebrity.

KittyDuran
12-28-2002, 04:16 PM
On the Kremchek thing, give me a break. Kremchek clearly stated several times that Griffey 'might be ready by Opening Day'. Throw all reason out when dealing with issues on Junior... How do we know that the diagnosis as stated did not come from someone higher up or from Junior himself? We are talking about a major superstar on the team who wants to play, who makes the most money, brings people to the ballpark solely to see him, etc. I guess the Reds feel that you need to give the fans a little hope at the cost of the truth.;)

Team Tuck
12-28-2002, 04:18 PM
I don't think Bowden is well-liked or that he exercises much tact. But, some of these stories reek of jumping on a bandwagon.

I also agree with the poster who suggested that being the GM who works for Lindner and Allen, given their lack of creativity, would be a tough job.

Allen is the guy I'd like to see fired. He has done nothing to help this organization. Where is the marketing, where is the creativity, where is the enthusiasm? We need somebody in that position who can sell tickets and grow the revenue line, rather than somebody who is forever concerned about cutting the cost line. Uncle Carl's budget is the same every year - break even. But there's more than one way to accomplish that. How 'bout focusing on revenues, selling more tickets, advertising, improving the game environment, being creative like minor league clubs, making it more fan friendly, having nice ushers, etc etc etc. Even with a new stadium, I have a zero confidence in John Allen to make it work. And if that's not his job, then what is Allen's job? Does the marketing director not report to him?

icehole3
12-28-2002, 04:18 PM
I agree Tuck...Kremchek is a nut.

I would rather have Jimbo playing poker for me 10 days a week.

He's a liar, damn good GM though.

Team Tuck
12-28-2002, 04:34 PM
I understand what you're saying Kitty, but then Bowden is no more a liar than John Allen and Doc Kremchek. Kremchek's the team doctor and the guy the media turns to for injury updates. Did he mis-diagnose the severity of the injury or did he flat out say things to the media that he didn't believe himself? We will never know for sure, but in either case, I'm hard pressed to feel sorry for him.

KittyDuran
12-28-2002, 04:48 PM
He has done nothing to help this organization. Where is the marketing, where is the creativity, where is the enthusiasm? Well, he did have some at the beginning when the reins of the club were taken away from Marge - gave away grab bags, had $1 hotdogs and sodas for certain games, started RedsFest, and retired uniform numbers and put them on the wall. What has happened since then has been a puzzle, tho' I believe Lindner probably put the reins on Allen...

Redsfaithful
12-28-2002, 06:27 PM
"Q: Some folks were surprised at how hard Jim Bowden was marketing Scott Williamson during the offseason, suggesting that a GM as good as Bowden wouldn't try so hard to move such a great young pitcher unless he knew something wasn't right. Now, two games into the season, it turns out that Williamson will require season-ending surgery because of a torn elbow ligament. How, if at all, should this reflect on Bowden? Does he get credit for recognizing something wasn't right, or does he take a hit for (possibly knowingly) peddling damaged goods? -- Don Money, Andover, Mass.
PWG: That was the subject of several conversations between general managers Thursday, and the A's should be darned happy they got Johnny Damon, not Williamson, for Ben Grieve. Bowden was trying hard to deal Williamson at the end of spring training and offered him for Daryle Ward and Russell Branyan."

I'm certainly happy we still have Scott Williamson and not Ben Grieve. Williamson had a heck of a year last year, and he's still only going to be 27 next season. Trying to trade Williamson shouldn't be counted as a knock on Bowden, since his injury wasn't career threatening.

Larkin Fan
12-28-2002, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by KittyDuran
Throw all reason out when dealing with issues on Junior... How do we know that the diagnosis as stated did not come from someone higher up or from Junior himself? We are talking about a major superstar on the team who wants to play, who makes the most money, brings people to the ballpark solely to see him, etc. I guess the Reds feel that you need to give the fans a little hope at the cost of the truth.;)

No doctor worth his weight in salt is going to throw out a less than accurate diagnosis knowingly, regardless of what a superstar or someone else wants. As a doctor, your reputation depends on things like that. Kremchek botched the Griffey (and several other cases) miserably and Bowden was right on. It's pretty obvious. Maybe that's just because medicine is my thing, but still...

Team Tuck
12-28-2002, 08:46 PM
I'm not sure what happened in the Oester ordeal, although IMO, I'll agree that that was a Bowden mistake. It should have been clear to Oester that the $300k was a final offer, no bargaining room. At the same time, Oester is a short fuse and is bitter - his comments regarding Griffey (when he mentioned Casey as having complained about Griffey) showed very little class and hurt his credibility. Even if Casey had those talks with Oester, Ronnie should have NEVER shared that publicly. Those talks happen all the time behind closed doors and are not meant to be made public. If I were Casey, I would have pulled Oester aside at the Cinergy celebration and chewed his ass.

The Shaw thing - didn't Shaw later admit that it was his mistake for not including a no trade clause in his contract and that he didn't blame Bowden for trying to rebuild. He said he was pissed at the time, but later forgave Bowden. And it was Shaw who wanted to come back last year?

GAC
12-29-2002, 06:24 AM
There was an excellent article on Bowden in the Columbus Dispatch last year, just prior to the 2002 season. I wish I had saved it.

In this article alot of what you all are saying was listed. But it also did list some of the positive contributions he has also done (which so many who hate him seem to want to omit ;) ).

Bowden readily acknowledged that when it comes to the GM job, that he is an S.O.B. and a tough negotiator. I loved the quote where he said... "If someone's blood has to be split, it's better that it's the other guys".

And some of the remarks that some of you post in this thread, attributed to Bowden, weren't "lies" technically speaking... just stupid, incensitive remarks.

And I would never take the words of anything Pokey, DY, or Oester says as reliable, and "gospel".

And I'd say the same thing about sportswriter Sullivan. Since his relocation, he has shown he still has an "axe to grind" ;)

And good point TeamTuck. Shaw sure is anxious to want to come back to this organization.

REDREAD
12-30-2002, 02:45 PM
More Bowden's lies:

That he wanted Larkin to finish his career in Cincy, while he was aggressively trying to dump him.

That he would never trade Jr.

The Cards GM accused him of lying about Brantley's health, in the Dimitri trade.

Bowden has claimed to have offered several players very specific deals in the press, and then the players say those deals were never made... it happens too often to not be fishy.

That we would be competitive in 2003 ;)

letsgojunior
12-30-2002, 02:50 PM
Bowden has claimed to have offered several players very specific deals in the press, and then the players say those deals were never made... it happens too often to not be fishy.

Casey, Reese deny $10 million demands
By Tony Jackson, Post staff reporter
Reds first baseman Sean Casey and second baseman Pokey Reese disputed a published report that they were seeking contract extensions that would pay them in the neighborhood of $10 million annually.

The report appeared in this week's issue of USA Today Baseball Weekly. Although a source wasn't named, both Casey and Reese were reasonably sure the statement had come from Reds general manager Jim Bowden.

''It's a blatant lie,'' Casey said. ''I would think he would try not to make this a whole media thing, but whatever. It's just absurd. I never asked for $10 million. That's why you can't believe what you read until you know the full story.''

Casey will earn $3 million this season after winning in arbitration. Reese will earn $3.2 million after agreeing in spring training to that figure. Bowden would like to sign both players, along with Aaron Boone, Danny Graves and Dmitri Young, to long-term deals, but the negotiations have stalled.
''That is so false,'' Reese said. ''Ten million? Come on. That's a bunch of bull.''


That he would never trade Jr.

Griffey doesn't have a no-trade clause in his contract. As far as Bowden is concerned, he doesn't need one.
“He has an "untouchable' clause with me,” Bowden said. “That's stronger than a no-trade clause.”

REDREAD
12-30-2002, 03:02 PM
Thanks lgj,

I also remember Bowden saying he offered Dimitri X dollars for a certain number of years, and then Dimitri saying the offer was never made.

I seriously think that if Bowden knows he can't resign a player, he goes out of his way to make that player look greedy/disloyal.

Kent Mercker said he'd take less to come back to Cincy, and then when he signed elsewhere, Bowden proclaimed him a hypocrite.
For some reason, Bowden thinks players will take 80-90% less for the privillege of being a Red.

Actually, I think part of the reason that Bowden's trade bounty has be declining is because now nobody trusts him. Remember that story about the failed JR to Padres. After the Padres GM found out that the Reds offered Nevin a big bonus to waive the no trade clause, he said he became suspicious and was relieved the trade did not go through.

I think some/most GMs assume that if Bowden is shopping a guy, something is wrong with that player. Thus, they don't offer much to Bowden.

GAC
12-30-2002, 03:08 PM
Sure Bowden said he wanted Larkin to finish his career in Cincy. He didn't lie when he said that.

So what is he suppose to do when Lark, and his agent, then present them with a salary demand that they knew would handcuff this team financially?

Bu then trying to trade Larkin does not make him out to have lied. He WANTED him to stay and finish his career; but saw it would not be financially feasible to this organization.

Bowden may be a cad at times, but lets not exaggerate/twist some of the circumstances. especially when John Allen had his hands heavily involved in this partivular scenario. Remember the trip to Detroit? ;)

REDREAD
12-30-2002, 03:41 PM
WEll, Bowden did tell the NY GM that there was that "atmosphere of negativity" that made Bowden confident Larkin would accept the trade.

Bowden did a lot to create that atmosphere of negatively. Although, I agree Allen was deep into it also.

If Bowden wanted to Larkin to finish his career as a Red, he could've gotten Uncle Carl involved and signed him before the season began.. Remember, after Jr was signed, Bowden said that LArkin was next to get signed.

Bowden preferred to dump Larkin. Obviously, Carl had no problem keeping Larkin... IF Bowden wanted to keep Larkin, he could've gone straight to Carl and gotten the deal done.

Let me ask you this.. Bowden offered Kevin Brown 1 million/year for 7 years. Do you consider it to be truthful if Bowden said he pursued Kevin Brown? I mean, that is a joke offer that had no chance of working.

It's like me writing Pamela Anderson a fan letter, and then claiming we had some kind of romance.

Bowden might've "tried to keep Larkin here" in such a matter, but Bowden was not sincere. It was a lie to the fans. Bowden never passed up a chance to say he wanted Larkin to finish his career here, but when it came time to do the work, he tried a lot harder to get rid of him.

letsgojunior
12-30-2002, 04:04 PM
From the Dispatch 7/2000

The day's ending was far happier than its beginning. Both Larkin and New York Mets general manager Steve Phillips said Bowden had misled the Mets about Larkin's insistence on receiving a contract extension to accept the trade.

"We went into this thing saying I would accept a trade if the parameters were correct, if it was a multiyear deal,'' Larkin said. "All parties knew that. Or at least that's what we told Jim. He obviously didn't relay that to the Mets.

Phillips told the same story.

"It seems there was a misunderstanding from my discussions with Eric (Goldschmidt) and Jim,'' Phillips said. "They were not on the same page with what was going to happen with his contract.''

Reached last night for his reaction to Larkin's contract extension, Phillips said, "Astonishment, only because Jim Bowden told me they were not going to sign him. I guess we helped Barry Larkin get a contract.''

And, what REDREAD was alluding to

Larkin said that Bowden failed to tell the Mets in advance about his conditions for approving the trade. Larkin wanted a multiyear extension, but the Mets were only interested in him as a stopgap for this season with shortstop Rey Ordonez sidelined by a broken arm.

"Yeah, I'm disappointed," Mets general manager Steve Phillips. "But at this point, we've got to move forward."

Larkin would have liked New York -- he named his oldest daughter Brielle D'Shea, after the Mets' stadium -- but made it clear he wouldn't go there for only a half-season.

"This whole time, we went into this thing saying that I would accept a trade if the parameters were correct -- if it was a multiyear deal," Larkin said. "All the parties knew that -- at least, that's what we told Jim. But he obviously didn't relay that to the Mets. I guess they didn't realize what was going on with this entire thing."

Larkin's relationship with Bowden was strained by the developments of the last few weeks. Phillips confirmed that the Mets agreed to talk to Larkin on the assumption he would accept a trade for this season only.

New York offered to let Larkin finish the season with the Mets, then pay him a bonus if he didn't get a contract extension within 10 days after the World Series. Agent Eric Goldschmidt told them that Larkin wanted a multiyear extension to move -- the same thing he told Bowden.

"I called Jim (on Friday) and said, 'Where is Barry on this?"' Phillips said. "Jim told me, 'Oh, don't worry, he'll accept the deal.' Jim said he might be talking a little bit, but he was convinced he would want to get out of the negativity in Cincinnati.

"It seems there was a misunderstanding. From my discussions with Eric and Jim, they were not on the same page with what was going to happen with his contract."

Bowden said he didn't tell the Mets about Larkin's contract conditions because he didn't learn about them until Thursday, after New York agreed to the tentative deal.

"That's correct because we were not told until after the deal was consummated," Bowden said.

Phillips said the Mets weren't interested in offering a long-term deal because it would limit their options in the offseason. Ordonez has three years left on a $19 million contract he signed in January, and Seattle shortstop Alex Rodriguez might be a free agent.

"It's going to be an appealing free-agent class out there and we didn't want to make all the decisions today, not knowing what the future is going to be like," Phillips said.

red-in-la
12-30-2002, 04:53 PM
I read this article again and find it mind-boggling that between Alllen, Larkin's agent, Bowden and Larkin himself, Bowden is being labeled the sleeze.....unbelieveable.

Here is just another circumstance where a GM tries to give a player whatever he wants, and the player and the agent are jerks.

I really cannot wait until ST 2004 of only to know that Barry Larkin will NOT be there.

Larkin Fan
12-30-2002, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by red-in-la
I read this article again and find it mind-boggling that between Alllen, Larkin's agent, Bowden and Larkin himself, Bowden is being labeled the sleeze.....unbelieveable.

Look, this constant character assassination of Larkin is getting old and it's completely uncalled for. You don't like the fact that he's a Red and that's fine, but quit attacking his character.

Larkin is a stand-up guy and a class act. This "sleeze" (sic) has made the days of countless sick and dying kids, who's only wish has been to meet him. He's not only simply visited them, he's literally spent hours with them and has also taken other Reds players to meet these unfortunate kids. And let's not forget the millions of dollars that he has raised for underpriveleged children and the done countless things he's for the city of Cincinnati. For example, purchasing over 100 air conditioners during a heat wave so that the poor could at least have a little comfort. The list goes on and on for this guy. What have those of you that have been attacking him done?

Quite honestly, these comments say a lot more about the Larkin attackers, than they do him.

GAC
12-30-2002, 06:02 PM
Bowden preferred to dump Larkin. Obviously, Carl had no problem keeping Larkin... IF Bowden wanted to keep Larkin, he could've gone straight to Carl and gotten the deal done.

Lindner had no problem keeping Larkin? He controls the money. Why didn't he "step up" then from the very onset,sign him, and put an end to all the friction the situation was creating? How can you say that if Bowden wanted to keep Larkin he could've gone straight to Carl and gotten the deal done?

Bowden's never been able to do it any other time whenever he's needed the $$$'s to get a player. Lindner always says "It's not in the budget".

It wasn't until Lindner saw the outrage of the local fans that he finally stepped up and "caved" to Lark's demands.

Spring~Fields
12-30-2002, 06:22 PM
Interesting review, and quite a long list on Mr. Bowden. Can anyone readily name me ten professionals with as long of a list or longer?

red-in-la
12-30-2002, 06:30 PM
I find it interesting LF, that you made no comment about those who assail Bowden's character constantly. I will give you your point. I have tried to stay away from getting on Larkin's case.....but this darned article was reposted and the apparent attempt was to make Bowden out to be the bad guy.

I will attempt to stay off Barry's case until October of 2003...gulp!

letsgojunior
12-30-2002, 06:57 PM
R-I-L, if you consider character assassination merely posting links of known incidents of bad behavoir in response to a question posed to me, well I don't know what to say.

The following people have openly ripped Bowden: Ron Oester, Sean Casey, Dmitri Young, Pokey Reese, Dave Collins, Steve Phillips, Barry Larkin, Bob Quinn, Walt Jocketty, Jeff Shaw, Scott Williamson, Brian Goldberg, Howard Lincoln, Dan Evans. Quinn accused Bowden for having a penchant for eliminating people. Oester called him the worst person in the world. Sean Casey said Bowden's tales about $10 M demands were blatant lies. Phillips claims that Bowden misled him with the whole Larkin story, and confirmed that Larkin's agent said all along that Larkin would only accept a trade if there was an extension involved.

I don't understand how people say that Ron Oester isn't credible, or that so and so is not credible with their stories about Bowden. What makes them less credible than Bowden himself? Fourteen people have come out of the woodwork to speak of Bowden's deceits. It is extremely far-fetched to propose that they are all conspiring together or just lying for the heck of it. And I know of a number of people who are too classy but have PLENTY to say about the working environment of the Cincinnati Reds.

People may wonder what this has to do with the Reds. A lot. Bowden was openly willing to deal Scott Williamson days before he had season-ending surgery for assorted crap like Ben Grieve. If I were a rival GM, I wouldn't go anywhere near this guy because I would know that there was a decent chance that I was getting something broken in return. I am not saying that GM's avoid him, but as a rival I would go someplace else first.

If it's character assassination to report the things Bowden has done (when asked by another poster), while drawing obvious conclusions based on the volume and disgust in the responses, well I am guilty as charged.

I hardly understand how a person with fourteen known detractors (and plenty more who won't come out), compares to a person who has represented himself largely with class and dignity throughout his career. Larkin has taken many guys like Pokey Reese and showed him the ropes and helped him get acclimated to middle infield positions. In contrast, Bowden has largely eliminated anyone with skill underneath him (see Rogers, Hughes, McKeon). I just don't see the comparison at all.

red-in-la
12-30-2002, 07:40 PM
Well, lgj, this may all be true. But since what you point to has ALL happened in the media, and I have never seen a single person sit down with Jim and confront him with any of this, I still have to wonder.

REDREAD
12-30-2002, 08:20 PM
red-in-la,

I think it's mindleboggling to assume Bowden didn't exactly know what Larkin's terms for a trade were.

Bowden was trying to shop a 10/5 guy that could block a trade.
It was well documented that Allen and Bowden had several conversations with Lark before the Mets trade. I'm sure since Bowden + Allen wanted to dump Lark really badly, that they knew EXACTLY what Larkin wanted (a multiyear deal).

Bowden lied to the Mets. Pure and simple. The Mets just wanted a rental.. Bowden knew Lark wouldn't accept a rental but tried to work it anyway.

Bowden did tell Phillips he thought Lark was a lock to accept the trade to get out of the "atmosphere of negativity" in Cincy.

Bowden gambled, and ended up looking like a fool.

And the circumstances of the trade don't change the fact that Bowden was harping for years how he wanted Lark to retire as a Red, but in reality the plan was to dump Larkin the whole time.

You don't have to like Larkin, but you are pretty naive if you believe it was a huge misunderstanding. The GMs just said that after the fact to avoid looking stupid. You can bet Bowden knew which teams Larkin would go to and what his terms were. Bowden is a liar, but not an idiot.

REDREAD
12-30-2002, 08:25 PM
but red-in-la, they all have confronted Bowden about this..

I'd love to see Bowden and Dimitri duke it out on Jerry Springer.. but what is Dimitri supposed to do? (For example?) All he can do is tell his side of the story to the press, which he did.

Just how are all these people supposed to confront Bowden.

If I remember correctly, Jocketty said he'd never trade with bowden again after the Brantley deal. What else is he supposed to do?

CougarQuest
12-30-2002, 08:57 PM
I'll add this.

How absolutely ignorant does a top executive have to be not to make a condition of a trade that the person you want to trade for passes a physical?

Aren't the other GM a low down sleezy scoundral too? Seems to me Bowden has traded for a couple of pitchers that went to the DL quickly afterwards. Neagle, Etherton, Silva...

Oh and I forgot this, I think Bowden was right on Kremchek. Kremchek blew it. His words in the newsprint, not Bowden speaking for him. But Kremchek is looked upon as the sweet lovable clown around guy.

Bowden lacks the "pc" tact. Allen isn't any better. From the sounds of some of the comments in here, it sounds like the media relations guy is lacking the "pc" skills also.

Larkin Fan
12-30-2002, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by red-in-la
I find it interesting LF, that you made no comment about those who assail Bowden's character constantly. I will give you your point. I have tried to stay away from getting on Larkin's case.....but this darned article was reposted and the apparent attempt was to make Bowden out to be the bad guy.

I will attempt to stay off Barry's case until October of 2003...gulp!

I didn't say anything regarding Bowden because I don't consider this thread character assassination. LGJ and others have made a great case for Bowden's character (or lackthereof) and have provided numerous examples to illustrate their position. That isn't character assassination. I just have a problem with assaulting the character of a stand-up guy like Barry Larkin and associating the word sleaze with him. I would have had the same problem if the subject was Sean Casey or any other Reds player.

Team Tuck
12-30-2002, 08:58 PM
blah, blah, blah. Oh no, 14 people don't like Jim Bowden. What are we going to do? I've heard that an average of only 9 people in the entire world dislike other GMs - I sure wish we could have one of those guys, you know, a Mr. Homecoming King type, running our club.

Bowden rules. If somebody has to split blood, make it the other guy.

Falls City Beer
12-31-2002, 12:13 AM
"Bowden rules."

Except that he doesn't.

He rules insofar as he's been given more second chances than any other GM in history.

Redsfaithful
12-31-2002, 12:23 AM
Falls City I asked you in another thread to please state what deals you feel Bowden has wrongly made, and what deals he has made to make him be a bad GM.

You never responded.

Please back up your statement and your belief that Bowden is a bad GM. I really don't care if someone doesn't like him, but I'd like to have something to read that tells me why you feel that way.


he's been given more second chances than any other GM in history.

When has he been given second chances?

Falls City Beer
12-31-2002, 12:37 AM
Neagle trade

Walker trade

Konerko for Cameron

Dessens trade

Casey's contract

the fact that Aaron Boone still hasn't been traded

giving 9 years to a player who was 30 and having knee complaints in Seattle

Hammonds for Bichette

his utter disregard for signing pitchers to LTC

his obsession with drafting high school pitchers (not entirely his fault)

His tenure is ten years old; he has one post season appearance. Check the books. Has there ever been a GM given that much rope?

Redsfaithful
12-31-2002, 01:16 AM
Neagle trade
Neagle has not pitched well since leaving Cincinnati, but he was pitching quite well while here, so I agree that we should have held onto him. The only way this trade really ends up working is if Wily Mo ends up being a quality player.

Walker trade
This trade is similar to Dessens, if the prospects pan out then it works. If they don't then it was salary dumping. Part of the reality of being GM for a small market team is that he has to decide what's worth paying for. And I agree that he doesn't seem to feel that pitching is worth paying for.

Konerko for Cameron
Led to Ken Griffey Jr. If you don't like acquiring Ken Griffey Jr, then there's no GM in baseball that's going to satisfy you.

Dessens trade
Too early to tell, this trade could be genius, it could be idiocy. All depends on how Lopez turns out. Dessens is what he is, he's not going to get better, so the trade value rests on Lopez.

Casey's contract
I agree, but Casey has been hurt, and Bowden isn't alone in being unable to forecast injury.

the fact that Aaron Boone still hasn't been traded
Third base is a weak position in the NL, both offensively and defensively. Boone is above average defensively and offensively. May as well keep above average players around.

giving 9 years to a player who was 30 and having knee complaints in Seattle
His knee isn't the problem, its his hamstring. If you were saying what a bad acquisition Ken Griffey Jr was in '99 then you're either psychic or ... I don't even know because I personally don't know anyone that didn't like this deal. If you don't like this deal then no GM will satisfy you, because every GM in baseball would have loved to have Jr, especially at the terms of his contract.

Hammonds for Bichette
Led to Reitsma. Plus Hammonds is a terrible player who had one decent year in Colorado. Decent offensive years in Colorado don't carry much weight with me.

his utter disregard for signing pitchers to LTC
I agree somewhat, but I don't like signing anyone to LTC of more than three years. I think its (nearly) always a bad idea.

his obsession with drafting high school pitchers (not entirely his fault)
I agree 100%, and I'd add that he doesn't allocate enough money to be able to draft at will. The Reds really hurt themselves by not signing their picks, or picking only players they can sign.

A couple of good points, but I have real issue with some of your problems with Bowden. Have you read Doc. Scott's Trade Scorecard in the archives?

Ga_Red
12-31-2002, 01:51 AM
2/09/07

GAC
12-31-2002, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by Redsfaithful
Neagle trade
Neagle has not pitched well since leaving Cincinnati, but he was pitching quite well while here, so I agree that we should have held onto him. The only way this trade really ends up working is if Wily Mo ends up being a quality player.

Walker trade
This trade is similar to Dessens, if the prospects pan out then it works. If they don't then it was salary dumping. Part of the reality of being GM for a small market team is that he has to decide what's worth paying for. And I agree that he doesn't seem to feel that pitching is worth paying for.

Konerko for Cameron
Led to Ken Griffey Jr. If you don't like acquiring Ken Griffey Jr, then there's no GM in baseball that's going to satisfy you.

Dessens trade
Too early to tell, this trade could be genius, it could be idiocy. All depends on how Lopez turns out. Dessens is what he is, he's not going to get better, so the trade value rests on Lopez.

Casey's contract
I agree, but Casey has been hurt, and Bowden isn't alone in being unable to forecast injury.

the fact that Aaron Boone still hasn't been traded
Third base is a weak position in the NL, both offensively and defensively. Boone is above average defensively and offensively. May as well keep above average players around.

giving 9 years to a player who was 30 and having knee complaints in Seattle
His knee isn't the problem, its his hamstring. If you were saying what a bad acquisition Ken Griffey Jr was in '99 then you're either psychic or ... I don't even know because I personally don't know anyone that didn't like this deal. If you don't like this deal then no GM will satisfy you, because every GM in baseball would have loved to have Jr, especially at the terms of his contract.

Hammonds for Bichette
Led to Reitsma. Plus Hammonds is a terrible player who had one decent year in Colorado. Decent offensive years in Colorado don't carry much weight with me.

his utter disregard for signing pitchers to LTC
I agree somewhat, but I don't like signing anyone to LTC of more than three years. I think its (nearly) always a bad idea.

his obsession with drafting high school pitchers (not entirely his fault)
I agree 100%, and I'd add that he doesn't allocate enough money to be able to draft at will. The Reds really hurt themselves by not signing their picks, or picking only players they can sign.

A couple of good points, but I have real issue with some of your problems with Bowden. Have you read Doc. Scott's Trade Scorecard in the archives?

All very good points.

You have to look at each situation on an individual basis.

Neagle did himself in by publically playing the "PR" game when he's in Cleveland by making statements, while still a Red, that he'd love to play for the Inidans. His character/actions during this time is never seemed to be questioned. And there was no way he was worth the 10 MIl/yr he was demanding

Jeffrey Hammonds? Talk about a guy with bad knees/hamstrings who, with the exception of 1 yr with the Rockies, is a "picture" of underachieving. I'm sure the Brewers would love to unload him though ;)

The Walker trade was to free up money. I'll withhold judgment until I see what they do with it before the season starts. I think they are trying to work some deals for a pitcher, and having that money sure can't hurt.

And as far as Dessens goes. I again, think think was done to free up salary. And while I acknowledge Dessens accomplished alot more last year, I wasn't that keen on him. But I did hate to see us lose a pitcher (unless their intent is to acquire one to fill that role). Elmer's win-loss % and innings pitched per game wasn't nothing to howl about.

It's a wonder no one mentioned Greg Vaughn :p

Sometimes hindsight is everything.

KittyDuran
12-31-2002, 09:11 AM
to be labeled a "liar" is NOT character assignation but
if one's namesake is called a "sleeze" , then that is?

Apples to oranges, GA... Since Bowden is not a player, part of Rule #5 doesn't apply, so it's open season. (One of the subtle (sp?) rules to the Redszone). ;)

GAC
12-31-2002, 09:34 AM
To be portrayed as a liar is not attacking someone's character?

Since when? And if so, then we need to apologize to our former President! :lol:

919191
12-31-2002, 09:40 AM
But can those without character suffer character assassination?

Old Red Guard
12-31-2002, 10:06 AM
Just an observation - but have you noticed that the GMs that Bowden seems to get along with and trade with are the young brash ones - Beane, Epstein, Cashman etc. Older ones like Ash, Jocketty, Gillick all seem to despise him. It has been my experience in life that young adults - those in their 20s and 30s especially value results, period. Anything short of criminal behavior is alright if the results are good - its one reason many corporations skew hiring toward younger executives and salespeople for front line jobs. They are more aggressive, more competitive and ruthless in general. Around 40, when middle age and spare tires begin to settle around us and claim us in that generation we were "never going to become one of" (how many of us in our arrogance of youth have told our fathers "I'll never let myself get in THAT shape") we begin to value other things equally with success. Money and success in our profession becomes much less of a measuring stick to judge others by - and the guy we would have fired forthwith a decade earlier we give a second chance. Bowden himself mentioned in an interview that he feels he is beginning to mellow (perhaps part of the reason for his silence this off season although I think a gag order was in effect).
Older GMs that value absolute honesty, like Gord Ash and Jocketty, despise Bowden's machinations, they look at his open one-upping of Gillick, and Malone, to name just two, the same way us older fans look at guys who swagger and dance and show up pitchers after hitting a homer. Unsportsmanlike, obnoxious, arrogant. Younger fans in general (I know generalizations are dangerous - to you younger Zoners who find these "in your face" displays obnoxious, I apologize for including you) think its exciting, its flashy, showy and adds to the game. In much the same way, Bowden is viewed by younger GMs as doing whatever it takes to get a job done. Older Gms know you can get the job done with integrity, too. Personally, I am less impressed by Bowden each year - I believe Marty Schottenheimer was right when he said, as he resigned from the Chiefs, "ten years is long enough to get the job done - if you haven't then its time to move on."

Falls City Beer
12-31-2002, 10:50 AM
"A couple of good points, but I have real issue with some of your problems with Bowden."

Oh I have more, but I'd rather not scan the archives for all of my posts; I've trammeled that ground so many times before you ever showed up (no offense) I'm just a little tired of going over it again. But a few points to add:

1. You neglected to respond to the most damning piece of criticism I leveled at Bowden: 10 years, one playoff appearance.
Can you honestly name a GM kept that long with only ONE playoff appearance?

2. Why is Dr. Scott's OPINION ultimately more reliable than mine?

3. For an excellent recapitulation of points against Bowden, read M2's posts in the "Edskin's column" thread (the sticky).

RFS62
12-31-2002, 10:54 AM
Outstanding post, Old Red Guard, as usual.

:beerme:

RANDY IN INDY
12-31-2002, 11:00 AM
I'll second that!:beerme:

creek14
12-31-2002, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by RFS62
Outstanding post, Old Red Guard, as usual.

:beerme:

Ditto

letsgojunior
12-31-2002, 11:19 AM
Just as a side note, the White Sox GM made it pretty clear that he would accept either Casey or Konerko for Cameron. McKeon and Bowden decided they liked Casey better.

As for ORG's recent statements, I totally agree. Here is a list of the teams Bowden has traded with in the last three baseball seasons (from Doc Scott's Tradecard):

1. Yankees (3)
2. Boston (2)
3. Colorado (3)
4. Indians (2)
5. Anaheim (1)
6. Toronto (1)
7. KC (1)
8. Cubs (1)
9. Texas (1)
10. Detroit (2)
11. Pitt (1)
12. Philly (1)
13. Montreal (1)
14. Marlins (1)
15. Mets (1)

Not too many STL or Sea on there.

M2
12-31-2002, 11:59 AM
I think the mistake folks make is viewing each trade in isolation rather than evaluating the total effect of two-plus years of activity. You can parse it to death, but the end result of Bowden's moves beginning with the Gabe White-Manny Aybar swap is that the Reds have less talent in the majors AND less talent in the minors.

Compare it to his work in '97 and '98 and he falls flat on his face.

So, I agree with FCB for the most part here.

That said, there is one trade FCB listed that I'd like to vociferously disagree with - the Konerko-Cameron deal.

Since that deal Paul Konerko has a .356 OB, .499 SLG, 328 R, 104 HR, 381 RBI.

Cameron has a .361 OB, .457 SLG, 372 R, 90 HR, 339 RBI.

Now let's park adjust Cameron to match Konerko's condidtions. Konerko was .356, .499 for a .855 OPS. Cameron becomes .372, .472 for a . 844 OPS. In other words, they're pretty much the same hitter, Cameron being slightly better at getting on base, Konerko having slightly more power.

Yet Cameron will swipe you 30+ bases a year and play Gold Glove defense at a critical defensive position. If I weren't feeling lazy I'd compare Cameron to the production of the average CF and Konerko to the production of the average 1B and then you'd probably get to see the truly formidable qualitative difference between them.

But, far from being a bad move, Cameron for Konerko was a great trade. They gave up quality, but they most certainly got quality back. And the Reds would have been wise to put someone other Cameron in the Jr. deal (and they did have that option - Reese, Dawkins, Reyes).

REDREAD
12-31-2002, 12:23 PM
Aren't the other GM a low down sleezy scoundral too? Seems to me Bowden has traded for a couple of pitchers that went to the DL quickly afterwards. Neagle, Etherton, Silva...

But we don't know the whole story here.

My memory is foggy, but didn't even us fans know that Etherton was hurt when we got him? If not, perhaps the Anahiem GM told Bowden that Etherton was hurt, and since the asking price was only Carcares (who wasn't in our plans anyhow), Bowden took the chance that Etherton could get better. In my opinion, this was a good trade. Whenever you can trade something useless for something potentially useful, that is a good trade. It just didn't work out. Etherton never got better.

I know that Silva had a history of injury problems when we got him. Again, it was a gamble.

As far as Neagle goes, we will never know. But I'm guessing Atlanta told Bowden everything they knew. Maybe Atl did tell him everything he knew. In any event, we got plenty of good usage out of Neagle.

Remember when Bowden claimed Tim Scott off Waivers from SF and raised holy h*ll because SF didn't tell him he was hurt. Bowden demanded his 50k be refunded, etc. I'm sure if Atlanta (or anyone else) would've withheld info or lied, Bowden would've been furious and let them have it in the press, just like he did with Tim Scott.. who was a freaking waiver claim for crying out loud.. I see no need why the Giants were obligated to give Bowden a full medical disclosure on a waiver claim.

And on top of that, I have never heard the Atlanta GM being accused of anything underhanded. He's one of the most respected GMs in the league. Unlike Bowden, who has had other GMs accuse him of being a liar.

I think the younger/newer GMs are willing to deal with Bowden because they can get good deals (Walker/Dessens) and haven't been burned yet. I'm sure a new GM is kind of cocky and thinks no one is going to pull the wool over them.

What about Bowden and the Shaw deal? His buddy LaSorda obviously didn't know all the rules of the game, yet Bowden certainly let him believe that Shaw was locked up cheap for LA. Certainly didn't mention about how Shaw could demand a trade.
Bowden basically took advantage of the trust from their friendship. Instead Bowden laughed at him, and publicly said "He didn't ask (about Shaw being able to demand a trade)". Whether that's ok or sleazy is debatable, but after a few stunts like that, I would not be surprised if Bowden's trading partners are limited.

As I said before, after Bowden offered Nevin a bonus to accept the trade, Towers immediately became suspicious and was relieved the Jr trade fell through.. That's what happens when you get a reputation for lying.

REDREAD
12-31-2002, 12:46 PM
You can parse it to death, but the end result of Bowden's moves beginning with the Gabe White-Manny Aybar swap is that the Reds have less talent in the majors AND less talent in the minors.

This is probably the most damning thing to Bowden. If he had been winning trades, how come neither the minors or majors have been improving.

A bigger question is: Are we better off than we were in 1997?
That was the beginning of the grand 2003 plan. The team sacrificed 6 seasons to supposedly build a juggernaut for 2003.
Instead, our farm system is ranked 26th, and our rotation is thin.
We do have some good position players, but for how long?
It seems like we have been emulating the Expos, not the Jacob's field Indians model that we were promised. You know, every year dump the highest paid couple of players. But we fail to restock the farm like Montreal has.

CougarQuest
12-31-2002, 01:24 PM
My memory is foggy, but didn't even us fans know that Etherton was hurt when we got him? If not, perhaps the Anahiem GM told Bowden that Etherton was hurt, and since the asking price was only Carcares (who wasn't in our plans anyhow), Bowden took the chance that Etherton could get better. In my opinion, this was a good trade. Whenever you can trade something useless for something potentially useful, that is a good trade. It just didn't work out. Etherton never got better.

Don't get me wrong, I really liked that trade when it happened. I thought Etherton was going to be one of the surprises that year for the Reds pitching (he was a surprise for me, just not how I touted him to be). In fact, I made several posts that year that people should not overlook Etherton. I don't recall having prior knowledge about his injury. Then last year I thought he was going to be healthy enough to be the forgotten one and surprise people again. I'm not going to say anything this year, because I am starting to feel like a jinx to this guy.



I know that Silva had a history of injury problems when we got him. Again, it was a gamble.

But don't you remember how much Bowden was touting this guy in the off season after he got him and at the beginning of spring training? I don't think Bowden had a clue he was injured goods. Should he have? I think a medical exam before the trade was completed would have told the story, but maybe not. Perhaps he did know and thought it was worth a gamble for the 24 yr old, single A, rhp Ben Shaffar, who he got in the Tucker trade.


As far as Neagle goes, we will never know. But I'm guessing Atlanta told Bowden everything they knew. Maybe Atl did tell him everything he knew. In any event, we got plenty of good usage out of Neagle.

To me the Neagle situation was just like the Williamson situation. Bowden suspected that Williamson was a game away from being on the DL as well as Atlanta suspected that Neagle was on his way. Did either have prior official medical knowledge, maybe not. I was not and will not say that I was unhappy about the trade to get Neagle. It was disheartening to see Neagle need medical help so quickly though. Would a medical exam have shown Neagle's problem before the trade was consumated. It should have, since they found it so quickly in the spring training medical exam. Would that have made a difference in the trade? Maybe the trade would have still gone through, but it may have affected how many or what calibre players were sent to the Braves.

Trading for players is like buying a used car. You should have them checked out before you buy, in my opinion. If you did have them checked out beforehand, and the problem arises that quickly that you didn't know about, then perhaps you need a new mechanic or doctor. If you didn't have them checked out beforehand, then you need to look in the mirror and blame the person you see. I just don't see Bowden as any worse than any other GM in this situation. They're all used car salesman. Now his mouth and his people skills compared to other GM's is another situation.

REDREAD
12-31-2002, 01:40 PM
MAybe my memory was wrong on Etherton. But I was not surprised to find out he was injured. That deal seemed too good to be true. To trade a nobody for a pitcher with a decent rookie season?

I do recall Silva being hurt (at least historically), but again, since we gave up zero to get him, it was a good risk.

Bowden always touts his new acquisions out the wazoo, so I ignore Bowden's post trade hype. I mean, Chris Booker was supposed to be the next Lee Smith, but I'm not holding my breath.

I recall Mike Neu being hyped, but then Bowden doesn't even protect him on Rule V.

I chalk up Silva and Etherton to bowden taking a chance on a hurt guy. And I don't disagree with these risks. I don't think the other GMs lied to him. And I think if they did lie to Bowden, he would've made a big stink about it.

If I recall, Neagle only missed about 6-8 weeks? Is that right? It seemed like Neagle was healthy for 1.5 of the 2 seasons he was here. That's not too shabby.

Redsfaithful
12-31-2002, 02:20 PM
Falls City - You're right, we should expect more than three good seasons (I say three because we were in first when the strike hit in '94, and we tied for a playoff spot in '99) in ten years. I just personally feel he's done the best with what he has.

As for the Doc Scott remark, I didn't mean it that way, I just wondered if you realized how some of the trades connected (Konerko leading to Junior being the most obvious). Don't take offense to that, I value everyone's opinion!

ORG, I'm twenty one, and I do believe that in a business such as baseball there's not really much point in taking it easy on the opposition. Crowing about it in the media if you "win" a trade, yeah I don't respect that either, but if Bowden can take another GM for all he's worth then I don't have a problem with that. I'd much rather have an unsavory GM and win then have a polite, goodhearted businessman and lose. But I would also rather have a polite goodhearted businessman and win. :beerme: