PDA

View Full Version : You Play to Win The Game



forfreelin04
04-07-2010, 10:38 PM
I thought Chris Welsh made a great point about Tony Larussa tonight.

Keels asked him why Franklin pitched the 9th on Monday when it wasn't a save situation. Welsh said he didn't think Larussa cared about what players wanted and that he "played to win the game" above all other things.

He said "winning" comes first.... players come second" to Larussa.

It was noticeable to me that it was quite tongue and cheek when Welsh said it. Obviously, to teh Dust his players come first and winning comes second. I'm sure he would tell you differently, but is whole career he's been pegged a solid "player manager."

I despise Tony "Evil Genius" Larussa just as much as the next guy. But the guy wins year in and year out. I'm starting to come around to FCB land. The Cards are a great team.

*Please cue Herm Edwards now: "YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME"

Screwball
04-07-2010, 10:44 PM
Honestly, I can't help but think that if Dusty managed the Cards and LaRussa managed the Reds tonight, the Reds win hands down. Probably a lot of bias in that after a nasty loss, but I can't shake the feeling it's the truth.

Homer Bailey
04-07-2010, 10:51 PM
It's just the little things that drive me crazy about this team. The things that well coached teams just don't do. The infield debauchery tonight, making Wainwright put in zero work for 6 innings, swinging at poor pitches, etc. I just think the general Dusty "clogging up the bases" philosophy of hit the ball and don't take the walk has had a huge negative impact on this team.

Caveat Emperor
04-07-2010, 10:54 PM
Dusty ain't out there flailing wildly at Wainwright's curveball (which he hung more than a few times) or throwing 93 MPH fastballs right down the middle of the plate to the heart of the Cardinals order.

It all starts with executing, and the Reds aren't executing on offense or on the mound right now.

nate
04-07-2010, 10:57 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMk5sMHj58I

Will M
04-07-2010, 11:00 PM
I thought Chris Welsh made a great point about Tony Larussa tonight.

Keels asked him why Franklin pitched the 9th on Monday when it wasn't a save situation. Welsh said he didn't think Larussa cared about what players wanted and that he "played to win the game" above all other things.

He said "winning" comes first.... players come second" to Larussa.

It was noticeable to me that it was quite tongue and cheek when Welsh said it. Obviously, to teh Dust his players come first and winning comes second. I'm sure he would tell you differently, but is whole career he's been pegged a solid "player manager."

I despise Tony "Evil Genius" Larussa just as much as the next guy. But the guy wins year in and year out. I'm starting to come around to FCB land. The Cards are a great team.

*Please cue Herm Edwards now: "YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME"

i was going to post something like this but though i would get pelted with rotten fruit.

my wife said the EXACT same thing after watching Lincoln pitch on opening day. she said 'its nice for Lincoln for Dusty to show some confidence in him but it seems like Dusty is more interested in keeping players happy than winning. he doesn't have the fire in the belly.'

forfreelin04
04-07-2010, 11:02 PM
Dusty ain't out there flailing wildly at Wainwright's curveball (which he hung more than a few times) or throwing 93 MPH fastballs right down the middle of the plate to the heart of the Cardinals order.

It all starts with executing, and the Reds aren't executing on offense or on the mound right now.

But isn't it the manager's job to get in the ear-hole of those that don't execute? Certainly this is a much better tactic then "get em next time dude."

How can you even trust a manager that uses the word "dude" in everyday language?:p:

WMR
04-07-2010, 11:04 PM
Dusty makes me nauseous.

OnBaseMachine
04-07-2010, 11:04 PM
The bullpen and the defense was supposed to be two of the Reds strong points this season. So far, both have been terrible. The bullpen has allowed 11 runs in two games.

My spring optimism has quickly worn off after these first two games. I forgot how frustrating Dusty Baker can be. He's already got me pulling my hair out after two games. First, he brings in Mike Lincoln in a two run game on Opening Day. Then tonight he brings in the rookie Ondrusek in a tie game and that move backfired just like it did with Lincoln. I also hated the move to attempt a steal with Phillips with a 3-1 count on Rolen. Even though he appeared to be safe, that caught stealing ruined a potentially big inning.

As for the defense, it's been disappointing so far. On Opening Day, Aaron Harang gave away a run with a poor pickoff throw. Chris Dickerson had a runner out at the plate by 20 feet but airmailed the throw over Hernandez's head, and Orlando Cabrera showed well below average range. Tonight, Votto botched a routine grounder that led to a run. It was ruled a hit but it was clearly an error. More on that in a minute.

In that same inning a routine grounder somehow made it in to left field because of Cabrera's poor range. Back to the the Votto error. I find it hilarious that the official scorer ruled that a hit. It was a routine groundball. If that's a hit then baseball just needs to abandon the error and rule everything a hit. Some of these official scorers are an embarrassment to baseball.

On the brightside, Johnny Cueto pitched well. Only one of those two runs should have been earned, and a couple of the hits were bloopers. He did walk three hitters but a couple of them could've easily been strikeouts, IMO. I thought Cueto and Wainwright were both squeezed at times tonight.

Hopefully Arroyo can pitch well tomorrow and the Reds come away with a win. You don't want to start the season out 0-3.

Caveat Emperor
04-07-2010, 11:08 PM
But isn't it the manager's job to get in the ear-hole of those that don't execute? Certainly this is a much better tactic then "get em next time dude."

So shouting at players on night 2 of a 162 game season is what a good manager should be doing?

Sorry, I just don't see it.

Yachtzee
04-07-2010, 11:10 PM
Let's go pound some Budweisers.

forfreelin04
04-07-2010, 11:18 PM
i was going to post something like this but though i would get pelted with rotten fruit.

my wife said the EXACT same thing after watching Lincoln pitch on opening day. she said 'its nice for Lincoln for Dusty to show some confidence in him but it seems like Dusty is more interested in keeping players happy than winning. he doesn't have the fire in the belly.'

Smart Lady.

My wife said the same thing about bringing in a rookie to face Pujols and Holiday in a tie ballgame.

I don't know Baker personally and for all intensive persons he sounds like a great baseball personality. But give me Larussa on a bad day before Dusty Baker.

Some will say "well if Ondrusek throws a perfect inning" then Dusty looks like a genius. No he doesn't. Half of the ballpark is already mumbling about this move before it even happens. The booth is mumbling about it before it happens.

It wasn't the only poor thing he did all night. The first thing was starting Gomes over Dickerson. He wanted to start Gomes and Stubbs not because they were better at the position but he was trying to keep everyone happy in the outfield. We're not talking about Clemente, Bonds, and Ruth out there. We're talking about guys like Laynce freaking Nix, Chris "almost 28" Dickerson, and Johnny "Nobody but the Reds wanted me" Gomes. These guys don't have egos to smooth over, their lucky to be on a major league club!

All I ask is to field the best 9 you have day in and day out, give pitchers a chance to succeed, and TRY to look at the numbers. He does neither time and time again.

reds44
04-07-2010, 11:19 PM
Just don't get swept and everything is fine.

KronoRed
04-07-2010, 11:24 PM
Just don't get swept and everything is fine.

1 out of every 3 is a golden ticket to 60 wins

WOO! :D

forfreelin04
04-07-2010, 11:27 PM
So shouting at players on night 2 of a 162 game season is what a good manager should be doing?

Sorry, I just don't see it.

And I don't need to convince you because I wasn't saying a yelling manager immediately gets good results.

And does Night 2 really differ from 162? They all count.

Spring~Fields
04-08-2010, 12:47 AM
1 out of every 3 is a golden ticket to 60 wins

WOO! :D

:bowrofl::bowrofl::bowrofl:

Poor Dusty, you guys are just too rough on him. Me, I would never say such things about him like that. :rolleyes:



My spring optimism has quickly worn off after these first two games. I forgot how frustrating Dusty Baker can be. He's already got me pulling my hair out after two games.

I think the projection and prediction, polls are closed. :oops:

fearofpopvol1
04-08-2010, 02:16 AM
I think a lot of these criticims of Dusty are unfair and I'm hard on the guy myself. Outside of Lincoln yesterday, who I don't think he should've put in, I don't blame him for any of the bullpen issues last night or tonight. The bullpen stunk both nights. I don't blame him for errors and poorly executed defensive plays nor do I blame him for Wainwright throwing 6 pitches in the first inning and recording 3 outs.

BUT...

I would agree that the original point made about LaRussa throwing out "conventional wisdom" and playing by his own rules is true and it's hard to deny that his ideas don't work. Granted, he's got better players than the Reds do, but I do think Dusty has a big blind spot in putting players before the team. Dusty is far too big on "conventional wisdom."

On the bright side, if you're a "fire" Dusty supporter, he's not going to get an extension if the Reds stink up the joint this year.

Ron Madden
04-08-2010, 03:18 AM
Dusty ain't out there flailing wildly at Wainwright's curveball (which he hung more than a few times) or throwing 93 MPH fastballs right down the middle of the plate to the heart of the Cardinals order.

It all starts with executing, and the Reds aren't executing on offense or on the mound right now.


All very true and I agree CE.

But.. If I had a choice between Baker or LaRussa to manage my club, it wouldn't be Dusty.

GAC
04-08-2010, 04:52 AM
It's two games vs the team that won the division last year (91-71), and is favored to win it this year. I agree with what Welsh said last night - we faced probably the best 1-2 pitching combo in the NL in Carpenter and Wainwright. Where did they finish in the NL Cy Young voting last year? Hmmmm.

Now having said that....

Yeah, our BP hasn't had a good start to the season. Not worried yet. It's a long season. But why in the world did Baker allow Ondrusek to come into the game in that particular situation? Yeah, I know the kid had a good Spring, but he still has never pitched in a regular season game.

He allows Herrera to start the 7th, and he gives up a single to the leadoff batter. You're now getting into the heart of the Card's batting order in a game where you've regained some momentum in the last inning. So what does Baker do? Instead of giving the ball to someone who has been in that situation before (pressure), he instead gives the ball to a kid who hasn't in Ondrusek. He walks the next batter on 4 pitches. You can see the kid was nervous because he was rearing back and over-throwing the ball as hard as he could. So veteran Pujols comes to the plate KNOWING this kid has got to get the ball over the plate, and will probably come to him with a fast ball. Sure enough - one right over the heart of the plate and the rest is history.

But does Baker pull the kid? He pulled Herrera after he faced only one batter and gave up a single. Nope. He lets this inexperienced kid who put the two men he faced on, while relinquishing the lead, then face Holliday, whom he makes another mistake pitch to, and he doubles to the CF wall.... 5-2 Cards. Now Dusty decides it's time to pull him and bring in veteran Rhodes.

This is what Dusty Baker does best. :rolleyes:

edabbs44
04-08-2010, 07:33 AM
By the way, Monday's game was a save situation going into the 9th, IIRC. That likely had more to do with Big Tony's decision than anything else since Franklin was already warming.

Carry on.

Eric_the_Red
04-08-2010, 09:09 AM
I wish threads created for the sole purpose of bashing Dusty Baker could either be designated with some sort of icon (a toothpick perhaps?), or maybe just create one "Bash Dusty" thread. That way I know what I'm getting into when I click on them.

edabbs44
04-08-2010, 09:11 AM
I wish threads created for the sole purpose of bashing Dusty Baker could either be designated with some sort of icon (a toothpick perhaps?), or maybe just create one "Bash Dusty" thread. That way I know what I'm getting into when I click on them.

Very good.

westofyou
04-08-2010, 09:13 AM
All this time in MLB and Dusty has been playing to lose... wow I feel duped.

Tommyjohn25
04-08-2010, 09:29 AM
I wish threads created for the sole purpose of bashing Dusty Baker could either be designated with some sort of icon (a toothpick perhaps?), or maybe just create one "Bash Dusty" thread. That way I know what I'm getting into when I click on them.

Agreed. Rule number 1 people, remember.

_Sir_Charles_
04-08-2010, 10:09 AM
*sigh* Let the bashing begin! *sigh*

I admit I was baffled by the choice of Lincoln in the first game, but hey...Walt's the one who put the guy on the team. Dusty's got to use him sometime...and early relief work or late mop-up work are really the only options. But whatever.

As for last night...I really don't see anything wrong with the moves Dusty made. Did anybody have a problem with bringing in Hererra to start the 7th? In terms of the lefty/righty matchups, Dusty played it right there IMO. Danny to face the lone lefty. Then Logan to face the righties. Now many here blame Dusty for bringing in Logan. And some even said that the kids' never even pitched in the majors before. Ondrusek had been absolutely lights out since the start of spring. He also threw in the first game against the Cards on opening day. He sure hasn't exhibited nerves up to then. His control sure hasn't been shaky up to then. Why in the world would Dusty think NOW is the time he's going to lose it? Personally, I think if he's going to show nerves...it would've been on opening day. But regardless, he throws 4 straight balls and it's obvious he's overexcited. Price goes out to calm him down. He throws a good solid strike to Albert, who simply hits it. But he'd calmed down and threw a strike. Why pull him yet? He gave up a hit to Albert? Who hasn't? Pull him then and you're only hurting the rook's confidence. The double to Holliday...first hard hit ball he allowed. But it's 3 batters reaching in a row. Time for the hook.

Some will say he should've brought in Masset. I would've been fine with that too. But we've still got the lefty righty splits at the beginning of that inning. AND he was absolutely hammered the game before. But he's got to get back on the horse as it were. I would've been fine with either route. But since it didn't work out, hindsight being 20/20 and all, it's all Dusty's fault. None of it is on the players who unfortunately didn't excecute.

The porous defense...that's all on Dusty too I suppose. If he had better defenders out there there's no chance they would've made any mistakes. If he had coached those defenders better, they wouldn't have made any mistakes. Nope, this is on the players for failing to excecute. The attempted steal by Phillips on the 3-1 count? Bad move by dusty to send him there. OR, Phillips went on his own. I'd think the latter has the better odds of being correct.

I'm not trying to make excuses for Baker, far from it. I'm simply trying to point out that it's far from being all his fault. Yes he made the choices, but the players have to excecute those choices.

forfreelin04
04-08-2010, 10:22 AM
All this time in MLB and Dusty has been playing to lose... wow I feel duped.

Yeah, that's exactly what everyone was saying. :rolleyes:

Playing not to lose? Maybe. There is a difference and I'll explain it with a PM if you like. :)

Dusty lays a blueprint out for each game. The blueprint says things like SS bats second, make sure platoons get equal playing time, save Coco for the 9th, Masset/Rhodes pitch the 8th, lefties get other lefties out, and Phillips bats 4th.

Why does he do this? I don't know. I have a theory though.

I think he coddles players personalities and holds them in higher esteem than other managers do. He plays the respect thing to a nauseating level. This ties his hands in situations where you need your best pitcher pitching against their best hitter. It happens when you need your hottest hitter in the lineup everyday.

No one is saying this team is WS bound. There simply isn't enough talent on the roster. However the difference between .500 and the WC could be some clever managing.

I'm not basing this on two games. I'm basing it on Baker's body of work. He's great at handling the personalities of great players, but he's lackluster at bringing the best out of mediocre or young ballplayers. And let's face it so long as the Reds have a low payroll this team will have mediocre players.

Falls City Beer
04-08-2010, 10:28 AM
Dusty has definitely created some problems for himself that have nothing to do with in-game decisions: he's got a bullpen with three guys he can't go to at all (Ondrusek, Lincoln, and Owings). Now every bullpen nowadays will have a mop-up type, but having three severely--severely--limits the choices of a manager and stresses the productive members. Bring up Burton for Lincoln. That's one problem resolved. I'd prefer to keep Owings for the long man mop up role. So who do you bring up for Ondrusek? Or do you go with an 11 man staff?

westofyou
04-08-2010, 10:33 AM
Yeah, that's exactly what everyone was saying. :rolleyes:

Playing not to lose? Maybe. There is a difference and I'll explain it with a PM if you like. :)

Don't bother I'm not worth the time.

nate
04-08-2010, 10:49 AM
I think the "freak out" meter is reading a little hot after just two games.

Falls City Beer
04-08-2010, 10:54 AM
I think the "freak out" meter is reading a little hot after just two games.

Probably. But the gonelong prediction thread suggests that expectations for this season are up. I guess it makes sense.

Hoosier Red
04-08-2010, 10:56 AM
I think he coddles players personalities and holds them in higher esteem than other managers do. He plays the respect thing to a nauseating level. This ties his hands in situations where you need your best pitcher pitching against their best hitter. It happens when you need your hottest hitter in the lineup everyday.

I'm not basing this on two games. I'm basing it on Baker's body of work. He's great at handling the personalities of great players, but he's lackluster at bringing the best out of mediocre or young ballplayers. And let's face it so long as the Reds have a low payroll this team will have mediocre players.

If you want to bang on him for following conventional baseball wisdom to a high degree, that's a valid criticism.
The SS bats second because for the most part in his time, SS's have been light hitting guys who he could count on to not strike out.
There's some value in that positive and negative, but it's not like the idea started in his office.

There's also some value in reliever's knowing there role like Cordero not coming in before the 9th.

I'd really like to know if a)Dusty coddles players personalities and tries to put a rookie's confidence ahead of the team's success or b) Dusty screws over young guys like Dickerson and Francisco.

My guess is Gomes is going to play the majority of games in LF, the hardest RHP will be reserved for Dickerson and Nix.

As for Lincoln, the problem wasn't Lincoln coming in, rather the problem was Lincoln coming out for a second inning. I'm sure Dusty had his reasons(I admittedly don't understand them) but I don't think Lincoln needed a 2nd inning for his confidence.

forfreelin04
04-08-2010, 10:58 AM
Dusty has definitely created some problems for himself that have nothing to do with in-game decisions: he's got a bullpen with three guys he can't go to at all (Ondrusek, Lincoln, and Owings). Now every bullpen nowadays will have a mop-up type, but having three severely--severely--limits the choices of a manager and stresses the productive members. Bring up Burton for Lincoln. That's one problem resolved. I'd prefer to keep Owings for the long man mop up role. So who do you bring up for Ondrusek? Or do you go with an 11 man staff?

Bring up Burton for Lincoln is a quick remedy. Burton is certainly seasoned. Whether or not he can return to old form, remains to be seen.

I don't think we can just drop Ondrusek without giving him a fair shake. I love the fact he isn't prone to the long ball. Now, putting him in situations where he must face the greatest hitter in the Major Leagues may be a problem. Ease him in.

Am I crazy to think the team may need a loogy? Denis Reyes was nails last night against Votto. I don't see that person in the bullpen. I like Herrera but if I recall correctly his numbers are virtually the same verse lefties and righties.

Kc61
04-08-2010, 10:59 AM
Dusty has definitely created some problems for himself that have nothing to do with in-game decisions: he's got a bullpen with three guys he can't go to at all (Ondrusek, Lincoln, and Owings). Now every bullpen nowadays will have a mop-up type, but having three severely--severely--limits the choices of a manager and stresses the productive members. Bring up Burton for Lincoln. That's one problem resolved. I'd prefer to keep Owings for the long man mop up role. So who do you bring up for Ondrusek? Or do you go with an 11 man staff?

The Reds have never replaced Weathers. Last year, it was Coco, Masset, Weathers and Rhodes. Four guys for the late innings. Occasionally Herrera too. That's depth.

Take away Weathers and the right handed contingent is thin.

It's not a disaster if Burton, Ondrusek, Del Rosario, or some other right hander emerges and fills the role. But over 162 games facing tough righty hitters you need late inning relief and plenty of it. Masset and Coco alone are not enough from the right side.

This is an area the Reds did not address this winter.

Spring~Fields
04-08-2010, 11:00 AM
I wish threads created for the sole purpose of bashing Dusty Baker could either be designated with some sort of icon (a toothpick perhaps?), or maybe just create one "Bash Dusty" thread. That way I know what I'm getting into when I click on them.

It does seem to be more about the differences of opinions than about baseball.

I often think that the façade or pretense in analysis of celebrity and individuals views, opinions, choices, decisions and the critiquing of them might belong on the Non-Sports Chatter. It has contained threads on pet peeves, things that drive you crazy, and there is even one now on theories.

People make decisions in the present moment, we all do, they and we don’t get to see the replay, first, and then make the decision.

Perhaps it is wrong to expect more from professionals in a given field with decades of experience, ones that it would be normal to define them as experts in a given field. There has been a growing awareness now for years, that even if one has the letters PhD after their name, that mistakes are made, one is about a life, this on Mr. Baker is about just another game.

Blame and ridicule can become a delusion, deceptive and a habit that confounds as if it leads to a solution or a problem solved, blames does little if anything to fix, repair, recover, adapt, or let alone be a solution to whatever the problem might be. It just indicates that there is a problem, it does not solve the problem.

The problem requires an adaptable solution, adaptable in that it allows for the latent effects that arise from and within the problem solving and implementation processes.

In this case those are Cincinnati Reds organizational decisions, not ours, that are not even the towel or water boys within the organization, or if it is a RedsZone issue, then their administrators will deal with it by giving us corrective guidance.

membengal
04-08-2010, 11:00 AM
Probably. But the gonelong prediction thread suggests that expectations for this season are up. I guess it makes sense.

This.

I think expectations are running high, and early stumbles are going to get more scrutiny on the board as a result.

For folks who guessed a below .500 record, it's easy to be a bit sanguine at this point. For my part, I can't wait to see Bailey tomorrow night, Leake on Sunday, and Chapman in June. It's a transition year for this team.

Falls City Beer
04-08-2010, 11:02 AM
Now, putting him in situations where he must face the greatest hitter in the Major Leagues may be a problem. Ease him in.


Ease him in? How do you do that? I'm not being flippant. Reserve him for crappy hitters? Can a manager really do that and have a meaningful bullpen/team?

gonelong
04-08-2010, 11:03 AM
I think the "freak out" meter is reading a little hot after just two games.

Someday I hope we have a "freak out" meter. I proposed something like it in this thread (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81151), but don't have the time to pursue it for this season.

I'd love to see the 3 day results on that thing.

Day 0: - 35% making the playoffs.
GM 1: 15% making the playoffs
Gm 2: 1 % making the playoffs.

GL

forfreelin04
04-08-2010, 11:08 AM
Probably. But the gonelong prediction thread suggests that expectations for this season are up. I guess it makes sense.

If you go back and read through my posts, you don't see me saying the season is over and my hopes are dashed.

I want them to finish a few games over .500, anything more than that is a pipe dream. Valid discussion about Baker and his decisions are just as valid now, as they are in September during meaningful baseball. Every game counts. The problem is they don't play meaningful games in September.

Falls City Beer
04-08-2010, 11:11 AM
If you go back and read through my posts, you don't see me saying the season is over and my hopes are dashed.

I want them to finish a few games over .500, anything more than that is a pipe dream. Valid discussion about Baker and his decisions are just as valid now, as they are in September during meaningful baseball. Every game counts. The problem is they don't play meaningful games in September.

It may be Dusty's fault; I don't really have a horse in this particular race. Important stat: Two games, Avg. 8.5 RA.

osuceltic
04-08-2010, 11:14 AM
So we can't use Lincoln or Ondrusek in tight games, right? Even if it's in the sixth or seventh inning? Masset's the guy, then. Only he got hammered Monday. Then it's Owings? I thought he was the long guy?

If these guys are on the roster, they have to perform. We can't have anyone we're afraid to insert into a tight spot. Most games are tight. You can't hold Lincoln and Ondrusek and Owings out and only use them in blowouts. If Ondrusek isn't ready, get him ready in Louisville.

This isn't a Dusty problem. He's just everyone's favorite target.

And on the original subject, one of the great strengths of Dusty in my mind is his determination to play every game to win. Everyone killed him for it when he ran Harang out there in San Diego a couple of years ago. Remember?

bucksfan2
04-08-2010, 11:17 AM
And on the original subject, one of the great strengths of Dusty in my mind is his determination to play every game to win. Everyone killed him for it when he ran Harang out there in San Diego a couple of years ago. Remember?

I thought he ran Harang out there to blow up his arm and ruin the season ;)

forfreelin04
04-08-2010, 11:27 AM
Ease him in? How do you do that? I'm not being flippant. Reserve him for crappy hitters? Can a manager really do that and have a meaningful bullpen/team?

FCB, I appreciate you asking questions.

I look at Ondrusek as a player that needs confidence. He sped through the system last year. Last year, he was playing baseball in front of 500 people. Does that mean he needs to sit on the bench until we play in Washington? No! He just needs to face hitters farther down in the lineup which builds his confidence on the mound. I don't consider any ML hitters crappy, there are just All-Stars and the rest.

If you pitch Masett or Rhodes in the 7th, the likelihood of success is much improved. They've faced Pujols before and faced him in tough situations. If Pujols or someone gets on you have your best arm throwing against Holliday.

So I save Ondrusek for the 8th. Chances are he faces the likes of Ludwick, Rasmus, and Molina. I also insert Ondrusek leading off the inning rather than in the middle. This is less pressure on a young ballplayer. Gives him better chance to be physically and mentally prepared.

Certainly, your going to want Ondrusek to face the likes of Pujols, Lee, and Berkman eventually. But let him gather some killer instinct against the Ludwicks of the world first. Ludwick isn't a slouch.

dfs
04-08-2010, 11:33 AM
Honestly, I can't help but think that if Dusty managed the Cards and LaRussa managed the Reds tonight, the Reds win hands down. Probably a lot of bias in that after a nasty loss, but I can't shake the feeling it's the truth.

Bring over LaRussa, Pujols, Carpenter and Wainwright and we'll talk.

redsmetz
04-08-2010, 12:36 PM
Bring over LaRussa, Pujols, Carpenter and Wainwright and we'll talk.

I think Ondrusek would reply, "Horsehocky!" frankly. Either he's ready for the big leagues or he isn't. In this morning's paper, he said “It’s a learning experience. I know I’ve got to come in throwing strikes right away and make better pitches.” Anybody who walks Ryan on four pitches risks the same fate throughout this season. Trot him out there again today. He's not a baby and doesn't sound fragile. Back on the horse, Logan!

dougdirt
04-08-2010, 01:17 PM
Ease him in? How do you do that? I'm not being flippant. Reserve him for crappy hitters? Can a manager really do that and have a meaningful bullpen/team?

You don't bring him in to face Albert Pujols in a tie game after the 5th inning would be a good start. The position last night was a spot for one of your shutdown guys (Cordero or Masset), regardless of the fact that it was the 7th inning. The game was on the line when Ondrusek was brought in. That isn't a spot for a rookie with 1 inning under his belt. As for the last question.... of course a manager can really do that. It is why the same guys always pitch before the 7th inning on every team.... the managers don't have 5 shutdown guys in the bullpen. You have guys you count on when the game is on the line and then you have the guys who you throw in the middle innings hoping to not blow the game open.

edabbs44
04-08-2010, 01:21 PM
You don't bring him in to face Albert Pujols in a tie game after the 5th inning would be a good start. The position last night was a spot for one of your shutdown guys (Cordero or Masset), regardless of the fact that it was the 7th inning. The game was on the line when Ondrusek was brought in. That isn't a spot for a rookie with 1 inning under his belt. As for the last question.... of course a manager can really do that. It is why the same guys always pitch before the 7th inning on every team.... the managers don't have 5 shutdown guys in the bullpen. You have guys you count on when the game is on the line and then you have the guys who you throw in the middle innings hoping to not blow the game open.

Are we really going to fault Dusty for not using Cordero in that spot? No one in baseball does that. No one. Remember when statistically advanced Boston tried the "floating closer" thing, disputing the old time notion of saving one guy for the ninth? That went well.

This is going to be a long season on this board. I thought last year was bad, but this year we have already seen Walt skewered for Ramon and Cabrera after one game and also Baker's decision to bring in a pitcher in the 7th inning instead of his closer.

Roy Tucker
04-08-2010, 01:24 PM
If these guys are on the roster, they have to perform. We can't have anyone we're afraid to insert into a tight spot. Most games are tight. You can't hold Lincoln and Ondrusek and Owings out and only use them in blowouts. If Ondrusek isn't ready, get him ready in Louisville.



Yep. I think a manager has to look at both the micro in-game decisions and the macro season-long ones.

Dusty needs to know what a guy has. These are the big leagues. Guys don't get coddled much at all. If Ondrusek is on the roster and is going to be used, best that Dusty finds out *now* if he has what it takes. If after 2-3-4 outings he's getting hammered, then ship him down to AAA.

Having said that, I'd like the season to get off to a good start. There is a reason why you start your best starter on Opening Day (that's the theory at least). I'd like to see the frontline guys out there from day 1.

bucksfan2
04-08-2010, 01:24 PM
You don't bring him in to face Albert Pujols in a tie game after the 5th inning would be a good start. The position last night was a spot for one of your shutdown guys (Cordero or Masset), regardless of the fact that it was the 7th inning. The game was on the line when Ondrusek was brought in. That isn't a spot for a rookie with 1 inning under his belt. As for the last question.... of course a manager can really do that. It is why the same guys always pitch before the 7th inning on every team.... the managers don't have 5 shutdown guys in the bullpen. You have guys you count on when the game is on the line and then you have the guys who you throw in the middle innings hoping to not blow the game open.

How many pitches did Masset throw on Monday? Its the 7th inning and you need at least 3 innings of pitchers one going to Cordero if the Reds are in the lead. If Masset was limited to one inning then it wouldn't have made sense to use you set up man in the 7th inning.

I was surprised by the move but that is the spot Ondrusek is going to pitch in all year long. Ideally Burton will take over that role but he needs to find his game again.

Eric_the_Red
04-08-2010, 02:43 PM
http://ramsey.mlblogs.com/archives/2010/04/a-friendly-reminder.html

GAC
04-09-2010, 05:07 AM
Are we really going to fault Dusty for not using Cordero in that spot? No one in baseball does that.

Obviously Cordero shouldn't have been used in that situation. To me it wasn't the "end of the world" or a time to panic since it was only the second game of a very long season. I just think it was a bad decision, in this particular situation and with a tie game on the line, to bring a very inexperienced rookie relief pitcher in, when a guy like veteran Rhodes was available.

It doesn't mean that Baker is an absolute fool and doesn't know what he is doing. I just think it was a poor decision at that time.


http://ramsey.mlblogs.com/archives/2010/04/a-friendly-reminder.html

Everyone is very well aware of Dusty's overall record as a manager. No one, including me, is criticizing that, nor his experience or knowledge. But because he has accomplished all that, and we, the fans never have, that means he should then be exempt from criticism if some think he makes a bad or dumb decision during a game?

If that's the case, does that then hold true for players? We, the fans, have never played the game so we are in no position to critique or criticize since we've never been in their shoes and know what it's like?

I'm not saying it's always right, or that it can't get excessive either; but this is what fans do as we live "vicariously" through these managers/players.

I understand that people can be overly critical of Baker simply because they just don't like the guy as a manager. I'm certainly no fan of his. But I've never let that influence me to the partisan degree that I'm blinded to what he has accomplished over his baseball career, or that he is an idiot who doesn't know what he is doing either.

But there isn't a manager, or a player for that matter, in baseball, on a daily basis, who doesn't get questioned and criticized by fans everywhere.

I use to screasm and criticize the crap out of Sparky. Especially his handling of pitchers! Did that make me a Sparky basher? :p:

If managers managed each game to perfection, and every player played likewise on that field, this forum wouldn't either exist or would be very, very boring.

I'll go to work today and the discussion about last night's 9th inning win will be a "microcosm" of the same discussions that go on this very forum where we'll agree, disagree, and even argue about various happenings during that game and about the team as a whole.

This is what fans do.

WMR
04-09-2010, 07:40 AM
http://ramsey.mlblogs.com/archives/2010/04/a-friendly-reminder.html

I was disappointed to not find any Hank Aaron references in that blog. :(

Eric_the_Red
04-09-2010, 09:01 AM
Everyone is very well aware of Dusty's overall record as a manager. No one, including me, is criticizing that, nor his experience or knowledge. But because he has accomplished all that, and we, the fans never have, that means he should then be exempt from criticism if some think he makes a bad or dumb decision during a game?

If that's the case, does that then hold true for players? We, the fans, have never played the game so we are in no position to critique or criticize since we've never been in their shoes and know what it's like?

I'm not saying it's always right, or that it can't get excessive either; but this is what fans do as we live "vicariously" through these managers/players.

I understand that people can be overly critical of Baker simply because they just don't like the guy as a manager. I'm certainly no fan of his. But I've never let that influence me to the partisan degree that I'm blinded to what he has accomplished over his baseball career, or that he is an idiot who doesn't know what he is doing either.

But there isn't a manager, or a player for that matter, in baseball, on a daily basis, who doesn't get questioned and criticized by fans everywhere.

I use to screasm and criticize the crap out of Sparky. Especially his handling of pitchers! Did that make me a Sparky basher? :p:

If managers managed each game to perfection, and every player played likewise on that field, this forum wouldn't either exist or would be very, very boring.

I'll go to work today and the discussion about last night's 9th inning win will be a "microcosm" of the same discussions that go on this very forum where we'll agree, disagree, and even argue about various happenings during that game and about the team as a whole.

This is what fans do.

Criticism is one thing. Sure, every manager warrants criticism at one point or another. But the constant calling for his termination and belittling him gets old. Like really, really old.

So Dusty keeps his players happy...is that a crime? I'd actually say that fact deserve accolade, because it is probably very difficult to keep players happy when they lose more than they win.

I think that now, maybe this year but certainly by next year, most of the pieces will be in place to contend. If the Reds don't get it done, then maybe I'd consider getting rid of Dusty. I don't think Sparky Anderson, Tony LaRussa or John McGraw could have gotten more wins out of this team over the last few years.

forfreelin04
04-09-2010, 10:17 AM
Criticism is one thing. Sure, every manager warrants criticism at one point or another. But the constant calling for his termination and belittling him gets old. Like really, really old.

So Dusty keeps his players happy...is that a crime? I'd actually say that fact deserve accolade, because it is probably very difficult to keep players happy when they lose more than they win.

I think that now, maybe this year but certainly by next year, most of the pieces will be in place to contend. If the Reds don't get it done, then maybe I'd consider getting rid of Dusty. I don't think Sparky Anderson, Tony LaRussa or John McGraw could have gotten more wins out of this team over the last few years.

And obviously many on the board, think those managers could have. Just a difference of opinion.

I think the losing gets old. Criticism is a big part of the game; fans are entitled to it. They pay their hard earned money for games, caravans, and shirts/caps etc. If the Reds were a corporation, the season ticket holders would have a vote on trades, free agent signings, and sushi at the ballpark. I don't think anyone here was bad mouthing Dusty, some just don't like his style. Most of these same people felt the same way about Dusty when he was signed.

Personally, I just get tired of the tomato throwing when someone is actually trying to make a point instead of just saying "Dusty sucks." If someone says that, its deserved, but not when their trying to back it up with theory or stats.

Spring~Fields
04-09-2010, 01:21 PM
It doesn't mean that Baker is an absolute fool and doesn't know what he is doing.

Seems right to me.


Everyone is very well aware of Dusty's overall record as a manager. No one, including me, is criticizing that, nor his experience or knowledge. But because he has accomplished all that, and we, the fans never have, that means he should then be exempt from criticism if some think he makes a bad or dumb decision during a game?

If that's the case, does that then hold true for players? We, the fans, have never played the game so we are in no position to critique or criticize since we've never been in their shoes and know what it's like?

Seems right and reasonable to me.



I'm not saying it's always right, or that it can't get excessive either; but this is what fans do as we live "vicariously" through these managers/players.

I understand that people can be overly critical of Baker simply because they just don't like the guy as a manager. I'm certainly no fan of his. But I've never let that influence me to the partisan degree that I'm blinded to what he has accomplished over his baseball career, or that he is an idiot who doesn't know what he is doing either.

But there isn't a manager, or a player for that matter, in baseball, on a daily basis, who doesn't get questioned and criticized by fans everywhere.

Perhaps all that is true, then again, maybe some make it harder and more difficult to "criticize" them by handling things and speaking about them differently? Without excuses, and with better results? :dunno:



I use to screasm and criticize the crap out of Sparky. Especially his handling of pitchers! Did that make me a Sparky basher? :p:

Oh so you’re the one, I always wondered who that one was. :)


If that's the case, does that then hold true for players? We, the fans, have never played the game so we are in no position to critique or criticize since we've never been in their shoes and know what it's like?

We never played the game so we are not qualified to have an opinion?


But because he has accomplished all that, and we, the fans never have, that means he should then be exempt from criticism if some think he makes a bad or dumb decision during a game?

We who have witnessed, and experienced champions, should also be exempt from criticism too. ;)

Further:
So then under the modern era in paradigms of thinking, I think the unqualified fans should have at least seen and lived through Cincinnati Reds championships to even voice an opinion as a qualified fan, plus most of these guys are too young, they can’t be skilled enough, I mean they never even witnessed a champion in Cincinnati or the building of those championship teams. They are going to have to stay over in the minor league section and non-baseball chats until they have experience. Before they can post opinions like us that have lived and seen true champions in Cincinnati. We were there when Hank and Dusty was, after all, watching, observing championship Reds, and learning to be qualified to give an opinion. :devil: :help: Incoming !!

Could you just imagine: :yikes:
If the current tactician was managing or was the general manager back in the day? Remembering that one thing leads to another, that opens the door for another and another.
What would have maybe never been, one piece or part after another?

Hey could you imagine Cesar Geronimo and Dave Concepcion batting one, two in their early days? I wonder if they would have been even playing and being able to develop and become what they did under the theories of the present tactician. :nono:

Could you imagine:
Johnny Bench drafted in 1965 actually getting to make the Reds team and getting playing time just two years later in 1967, at age 19?
Could you imagine the catcher, Johnny Bench batting eighth? Actually getting playing time over the more experienced Johnny Edwards or Don Pavletich? Or at age 20, playing a 154 games and getting 607 PA, with the more experienced Pat Corrales on board in 1968? :shocked:

Could you imagine:
Pete Rose being played out of position, after all he was a second baseman, is there even room for a Joe Morgan, they couldn’t move Rose out of position, or to have him leading off when he did not play shortstop or centerfield and not being a speedster? :nono:

Could you imagine: :dunno:
Gary Nolan 1967, age 19 ?
Johnny Bench 1967, age 19 ?
1967 Tony Perez, moving out of position to play third base?
1968 Lee May actually starting at first base, does he start first over Tony Perez, and if he did not? Who are they going to trade for Joe Morgan? That won’t be able to play second base, because way back when, they could never move Rose out of his normal position. Tommy Helms ?
1969 Pete Rose, right field ? Great defense? Speed?
1969 Bobby Tolan in centerfield, at age 23?

Could you imagine: :fineprint Check the stats
Winning manager, Dave Bristol, who actually had a winning record every year he managed, 1966 - 1969 with teams averaging, 1967 av’g age 26.5, 1968 av’g age 27.0, 1969 av’g age 26.1. Oh by the way the current Reds are marketed heavily as a young team, even with the team being an average age of 29.
Dave Bristol win pct. .506, .537, .512, .549

Dave Bristol 1969 age 36 (89-73) with a young team, younger than today’s Reds being fired and replaced in 1970 (it can’t be done) by an unknown Sparky Anderson :bang: who at the age of 36 accomplishes 102 wins and 60 losses with a win pct of .630 and an even younger team with the average age of 25.9

Could you imagine: :bowrofl::bowrofl: Must be out of our minds. :)
In 1970 with the current tactician? Grooming these guys for a word that is commonly used today, “the future” ? Sure, some became trade bait.
Wayne Simpson age 21 ?
Don Gullet age 19 ?
Gary Nolan age 22?
Dave Concepcion age 22 ?
Johnny Bench age 22 ?
Bernie Carbo age 22 ?
Darrel Chaney age 22 ?
Bill Plummer, age 23?
Hal McRae age 24 ?
Bobby Tolan age 24 ?
:scared: Way too young, not enough major league experience. :cool:

Could you imagine: :eek:
1971 George Foster age 22 playing CF? and not leading off ?
Ross Grimsley age 21 relief pitcher in the majors?
Milt Wilcox age 21 relief pitcher in the majors?
With these truly young starting pitchers, Wayne Simpson 22, Don Gullet 23, Gary Nolan 23 ? Would any of those truly young players have been in the position to achieve what they did to begin with under the current tactician? What if he had been the general manager ? Or the manager?

One hit wonder, at the time of 1971, “Sparky” who replaced the winning manager Bristol, Sparky goes 79-83, see you just can’t play those inexperienced younger players. Av’g age 26.7 :rolleyes:

Pete Rose in left field? He’s a second baseman for gods sake and leading off, a left fielder? You can’t be changing these guys positions like that. He has to bat sixth or seventh, he doesn’t have enough speed to leadoff. Aging declining vet at 33 leading off with other’s having more speed, and the guy doesn’t even play CF or SS. :sleep:

1974 Ken Griffey age 24 a left handed bat, your not going to bat Morgan and Griffey back to back are you, they are both left handed batters. :doh::bash:
Rawley Eastwick age 23 ?

Dan Driessen age 22 ? Ray Knight age 21 ? Will McEnaney age 22 ? Just can’t happen

1975 the CF Geronimo and the SS Dave Concepcion are not batting one two. Why?
1975 the average age is now 29.3, the average age of today’s Reds young team?
1976 av’g age 29.3 of a veteran Cincinnati Reds team, wins 102 games
1977 Mario Soto age 20 ? Tom Hume age 24 ? A closer?

You can’t play guys this young over more experienced players, you have to show respect for the experienced player, you can’t move players out of position, centerfield and shortstop has to bat one two, speed must leadoff, and replace a winning manager, a young winning manager who at 36 was around the age of many of the Reds current players, being replaced by an unknown named “Sparky” :runaway:

It can’t be done, that was a different era, back then they had four arms, and four legs, and they were still slow and too young, inexperienced.

Young guys throughout riding the bench? They have to get their playing time in the minors don’t they? It just won’t work any other way.

1971 Dusty Baker age 22 ? :luvu:
1972 Dusty Baker age 23 CF ? .383 .504 .888

GAC did you see all that? :all_cohol I won’t tell anyone what we saw if you don’t, :all_cohol they will have the white coat guys coming out to take us away, as if we were reporting flying saucers and Martians. It never happened, it couldn’t have. We must have been watching too much “Leave It To Beaver”. :beerme:

*Disclaimer, there might be overstatements, exaggerations, omission, and blatant errors up above. I might have made obvious poor decisions, a bad choice over and over again. Don't be critiquing me, or criticizing me, I was there when the Reds were true champions. Along with Hank and Dusty. I think GAC might have been around when the Babe and Gehrig was hitting the town too. We're qualified fans, true Reds fans :lol:

westofyou
04-09-2010, 01:28 PM
Trying to compare the amazing talent the Reds had in the 60's and early 70's to now is useless task, the talent gap is immense, plus you have to note all the talent they traded away then too.. Robnson, Tolan, Harper, Johnson, Carbo, May and on and on... It's apples and watermelons.

Spring~Fields
04-09-2010, 01:34 PM
Trying to compare the amazing talent the Reds had in the 60's and early 70's to now is useless task, the talent gap is immense, plus you have to note all the talent they traded away then too.. Robnson, Tolan, Harper, Johnson, Carbo, May and on and on... It's apples and watermelons.

I wasn't trying to be impeccable WOY, it's an impossibility. :)

Hoosier Red
04-09-2010, 01:47 PM
SF, I have little doubt that if Dusty had the Reds talent from the late 60's and early 70's he would have played it.

Yes over the veterans. This argument is so old and irrational.

Votto played over Hatteberg
Cueto made the team at age 22 and hasn't ever been taken out of the rotation.
Jay Bruce made the team at age 21 and hasn't been taken out of the lineup for any stretch that didn't involve injury.
Edinson Volquez made the team at age 24 and quickly became the #1 starter.
Edwin Encarnacion saw his first consistent playing time under Dusty despite having other steadier(if less spectacular) fielders available like Hairston and Keppinger.

The problem isn't that Dusty doesn't play young guys. The problem is that the young guys are closer to Clint Hurdle and Paul Householder than Concepcion and Foster.

The Reds can win with these guys, young and old, but they'll have to play over their head to do it.
Having a manager who's 100 games over .500 for his career should probably be considered a help rather than a hinderance.

Spring~Fields
04-09-2010, 01:51 PM
irrational.



Your qualifications for implying that one is irrational ? Or previously posting that they are ranting? Mind reading, and you want to speak of rational?

I'll pass on further response.

Hoosier Red
04-09-2010, 03:07 PM
Your qualifications for implying that one is irrational ?
I'll pass on further response.

Actually I said the ARGUMENT is irrational. But if you want to take offense and believe that Dusty wants what's best for the veterans but not for the young players that's fine. But everytime the argument is stated as if it's fact, it should be challenged until it can be proven. From everything I've seen it has in fact been disproven in the overwhelming majority of cases. If one continues to trot out an argument even though the facts run counter than yes the argument is IRRATIONAL. No mind reading required.

GAC
04-09-2010, 04:11 PM
But the constant calling for his termination and belittling him gets old. Like really, really old.

I agree, but I didn't see where that was occurring on this thread.


So Dusty keeps his players happy...is that a crime? I'd actually say that fact deserve accolade, because it is probably very difficult to keep players happy when they lose more than they win.

It depends on what he's doing, I guess, in order to keep player's happy. But I think most don't have a big problem with it.


I think that now, maybe this year but certainly by next year, most of the pieces will be in place to contend. If the Reds don't get it done, then maybe I'd consider getting rid of Dusty.

He's in the last year of his contract, so the pressure is on him to at least see some improvement from this team and/or indications that HE is the guy to take this team to the next level. But that will be Jocketty's decision.

jojo
04-09-2010, 04:24 PM
This is going to be a long season on this board. I thought last year was bad, but this year we have already seen Walt skewered for Ramon and Cabrera after one game and also Baker's decision to bring in a pitcher in the 7th inning instead of his closer.

Well Walt should've been skewered for Ramon and Cabrera a lot sooner...