PDA

View Full Version : Reds extend manager Dusty Baker's contract for 2 seasons, through 2014.



Tom Servo
10-15-2012, 02:26 PM
Press conference at 3:00 at GABP.

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 02:30 PM
At least he won't go the way of other successful managers in Cincinnati: Sparky, Lou, Davey, & Jack.

Unassisted
10-15-2012, 02:35 PM
At least he won't go the way of other successful managers in Cincinnati: Sparky, Lou, Davey, & Jack.You misspelled "unfortunately." ;)

I look forward to hearing the rationale for this move in the presser.

kaldaniels
10-15-2012, 02:36 PM
You misspelled "unfortunately." ;)

I look forward to hearing the rationale for this move in the presser.

In the real world, 2 division titles in 3 years (especially for a team that hadn't won one in 15 years) is reason enough.

I totally understand the desire for a more "intelligent" manager, and would not have complained had they got one. But the reality is the 2 division titles put coming back in Dusty's hands.

redsfan30
10-15-2012, 02:39 PM
This is Dusty's team and there is unfinished business. I am glad he will get the chance.

I(heart)Freel
10-15-2012, 02:41 PM
After perusing the "next manager" threads and being completely underwhelmed with the options, I am not opposed to this agreement at all.

Take some bad fruit off his plate and he'll be hard-pressed to eat them. That's on Walt.

mattfeet
10-15-2012, 02:41 PM
I can't really be upset with this. The players love playing for him and this is the best Reds team we've seen in a LONG time.

Dan
10-15-2012, 02:41 PM
Oh, joy. Two more seasons of catchers batting 8th and not having too many players clogging the basepaths.

Reds/Flyers Fan
10-15-2012, 02:42 PM
I hope there is some willingness on Dusty's part to look into a new hitting coach. Unfortunately, he's far too loyal to do that to Jacoby. And the team is worse off for it.

westofyou
10-15-2012, 02:44 PM
You misspelled "unfortunately." ;)

I look forward to hearing the rationale for this move in the presser.

8th most wins in a season in team history good enough?

Franchises don't dump guys for that

AtomicDumpling
10-15-2012, 02:44 PM
Looks like Castellini overruled Jocketty... No surprise there.

Going to be plenty of snickers around the league over this one.

Hopefully Walt and the research staff can have better luck teaching Dusty the importance of On-Base Percentage and Run Expectancy tables this year. Somehow I doubt it.

This was a blown opportunity to improve the team by upgrading at manager. I guess the Reds chose to concentrate on public relations instead of improving the product on the field. Its a shame, but the Reds will still be fine even with the strategically-challenged manager.

I(heart)Freel
10-15-2012, 02:46 PM
Looks like Castellini overruled Jocketty... No surprise there.

Going to be plenty of snickers around the league over this one.

Hopefully Walt and the research staff can have better luck teaching Dusty the importance of On-Base Percentage and Run Expectancy tables this year. Somehow I doubt it.

This was a blown opportunity to improve the team by upgrading at manager. I guess the Reds chose to concentrate on public relations instead of improving the product on the field. Its a shame, but the Reds will still be fine even with the strategically-challenged manager.

Curious: who would have been an upgrade?

It seems beyond argument that Dusty was a great clubhouse manager. In the other hand, his in-game management is extremely debatable.

But who on the market is slam-dunk good at both aspects? And why aren't they managing right now?

HotCorner
10-15-2012, 02:47 PM
Oh, joy. Two more seasons of catchers batting 8th and not having too many players clogging the basepaths.

This is on Walt. He needs to give Dusty better hitting options than Stubbs, Valdez, Cairo and Rolen.

AtomicDumpling
10-15-2012, 02:48 PM
This is on Walt. He needs to give Dusty better hitting options than Stubbs, Valdez, Cairo and Rolen.

This topic has been discussed a lot. Dusty has a lot more influence regarding which players are on the roster than you think. Jocketty isn't forcing Dusty to use players he doesn't want on the roster. Those guys are there because Dusty wants them there.

redsfan30
10-15-2012, 02:50 PM
Going to be plenty of snickers around the league over this one.

Two division championships in three years.

Took a team that was one of the laughing stocks of sports and turned them into yearly contenders.

His team would take a bullet for him.

97 wins with half of Votto or no Votto at all for half the season.

I snicker at anyone who would snicker at this.

reds44
10-15-2012, 02:53 PM
97 wins, clearly the 3 game sample size in October is grounds to not bring him back.

/saidnobodyever

mattfeet
10-15-2012, 02:54 PM
People on Facebook are freaking out commenting on the MLBTR announcement. :lol:

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 02:55 PM
This topic has been discussed a lot. Dusty has a lot more influence regarding which players are on the roster than you think. Jocketty isn't forcing Dusty to use players he doesn't want on the roster. Those guys are there because Dusty wants them there.

Maybe you missed Dusty's effort to trade Stubbs this summer? He and Walt are about on the same exact page on that one.

Didn't Walt sign that 2 year deal with Cairo?

What we saw when it was available was that Dusty had Phillips leading off, the preferred leadoff guy for most Reds fans. Batting Hanigan 2nd was the only option that wasn't ever tried that would indict Dusty's lineups. Oh darn.

Reds/Flyers Fan
10-15-2012, 02:59 PM
Dusty's fine ... I don't really even have a problem with his in-game decisions, because a lot of the head-scratchers ultimately do work. But it's his reluctance or downright unwillingness to part with pieces (player/coaches) that are clearly holding the team back. He's too close with his guys and that results in his overplaying them, trying to play them out of extended slumps, etc.

AtomicDumpling
10-15-2012, 03:05 PM
Curious: who would have been an upgrade?

It seems beyond argument that Dusty was a great clubhouse manager. In the other hand, his in-game management is extremely debatable.

But who on the market is slam-dunk good at both aspects? And why aren't they managing right now?

That's a good question. Dave Martinez and John Farrell would be my two top choices. Martinez is waiting for the perfect opportunity to come along (Reds would likely qualify) and Farrell is the Blue Jays' manager whom other teams are chasing right now.

It shouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Reds at manager. Dusty makes a lot of big mistakes that have cost the team some wins, especially with regard to the offense.

Dusty might be a good clubhouse manager, but from what I have seen and heard he spends most of his time in his office and really doesn't interact all that much with the players. He is a hands-off manager who let's the players do their thing without a lot of in-your-face college football-style coaching. I think most MLB managers are like that, which is fine. Dusty's handling of the players off the field is his strong suit.

It is the in-game strategy and lineup construction that proves to a lot of people that Dusty simply doesn't know what he is doing as a modern manager. Something as ultra-basic as his batting order shows that he hasn't been paying attention to statistical developments that have become proven facts in the information age and are now fundamental concepts of successful managing.

Dusty is the same guy that led the Reds to a losing record last year with a playoff-caliber roster.

The addition of 5 very good players (Latos, Ludwick, Frazier, Cozart and Marshall) to the team this year has convinced a lot of people with short memories that Dusty is a great manager all of a sudden.

The strength of the team is the pitching staff led by Bryan Price. Of course Dusty has the final word on all decisions, but by all reports Dusty has entrusted Bryan Price to run the pitching staff as he sees fit, and that is exactly what he should have done so Dusty made the right call there. Price is a fantastic pitching coach and I have said that the Reds should make it their highest priority to sign Price to a long-term contract. I don't blame Dusty when there are situations late in games when it is a tough call whether or not to make a pitching change. Some people give him grief for that, but I don't. Those decisions are made by Bryan Price.

AtomicDumpling
10-15-2012, 03:08 PM
Two division championships in three years.

Took a team that was one of the laughing stocks of sports and turned them into yearly contenders.

His team would take a bullet for him.

97 wins with half of Votto or no Votto at all for half the season.

I snicker at anyone who would snicker at this.

If you think Dusty Baker is the reason the Reds won 97 games you aren't paying attention.

If you think the only criteria for judging a manager is the win total, why didn't they fire him after last year's collapse from a playoff team to a losing record? Same manager managing the same way. Proof positive that Dusty Baker isn't a great manager.

SirFelixCat
10-15-2012, 03:09 PM
After perusing the "next manager" threads and being completely underwhelmed with the options, I am not opposed to this agreement at all.

Take some bad fruit off his plate and he'll be hard-pressed to eat them. That's on Walt.

Pretty much my take. Walt, help Dusty help us, please.

lollipopcurve
10-15-2012, 03:13 PM
He deserves it. Hope he can hold up and be a little more adaptable than he has been. The challenge for a team that will have this much continuity is not to get stale. Dusty has to bring something new to the table, just like Jocketty does on the roster side.

medford
10-15-2012, 03:13 PM
I'm sure fans in Pittsburgh are snickering over this extension.

Love Dusty or hate dusty, Dusty is part of the equation that got Votto, Cueto, Bruce & Phillips to sign extensions.

redsmetz
10-15-2012, 03:16 PM
Looks like Castellini overruled Jocketty... No surprise there.

Going to be plenty of snickers around the league over this one.

Hopefully Walt and the research staff can have better luck teaching Dusty the importance of On-Base Percentage and Run Expectancy tables this year. Somehow I doubt it.

This was a blown opportunity to improve the team by upgrading at manager. I guess the Reds chose to concentrate on public relations instead of improving the product on the field. Its a shame, but the Reds will still be fine even with the strategically-challenged manager.


This topic has been discussed a lot. Dusty has a lot more influence regarding which players are on the roster than you think. Jocketty isn't forcing Dusty to use players he doesn't want on the roster. Those guys are there because Dusty wants them there.

Just out of curiosity, how is it that you're so omniscient regarding the inner workings of the Reds front office?

Reds/Flyers Fan
10-15-2012, 03:16 PM
I'm sure fans in Pittsburgh are snickering over this extension.

Love Dusty or hate dusty, Dusty is part of the equation that got Votto, Cueto, Bruce & Phillips to sign extensions.

I'm not sure fans in Pittsburgh have the right to snicker over anything, considering their team's epic futility.

MartyFan
10-15-2012, 03:16 PM
I don't love this move (or stillness) and I don't hate it.

I don't love this because of all the players I ever saw play, Dusty Baker was one of my least favorite players EVER...goes back to when he was with the Dodgers and he and Concepcion got in a mix up.

When he managed the Giants, I was ok with that because it was the Giants...a west coast team and not in our division (anymore) when he took the gig as the Cubs manager, it sealed the deal with me...

1) One of my LEAST favorite players of all time...
2) Managing my second most hated team...

Since he became the manager of the Reds, I've been neutral on him (aside from my "Fire Dusty Now" thread earlier this seaso) even though it kills me to hear his name mentioned alongside of other legendary Reds Managers.

The players love him and play hard for him.

He has not been an embarrassment to the team or organization.

I like him as a human being and find him interesting but Ihate him being the manager of my baseball team.

Ahh, the conflicted life and mind of being MartyFan!

medford
10-15-2012, 03:21 PM
I'm not sure fans in Pittsburgh have the right to snicker over anything, considering their team's epic futility.

That was my point, someone said there would be snickering all over the league, when in reality over half of MLB would be happy to have the Reds track record over Dusty's tenure.

alloverjr
10-15-2012, 03:24 PM
Never really thought anything different would happen. I don't really care if he's the manager or not - which I don't know if that's a plus or a minus.

If the entirety of the coaching staff comes back, I'll feel much differently.

MartyFan
10-15-2012, 03:26 PM
I'm sure fans in Pittsburgh are snickering over this extension.

Love Dusty or hate dusty, Dusty is part of the equation that got Votto, Cueto, Bruce & Phillips to sign extensions.

ummmm....maybe a part of the equation but certainly all those numbers to the left of the decimal point were the real influence.

Votto said he wanted to be the highest paid athlete in Canada...the reds made it happen.

Phillips signing his extension was a result of his own PR campaign...I absolutely think the Reds would have let him walk if he were not such a high profile media entity of his own creation.

dougdirt
10-15-2012, 03:27 PM
That was my point, someone said there would be snickering all over the league, when in reality over half of MLB would be happy to have the Reds track record over Dusty's tenure.

But they can't because they don't have the Reds players.

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 03:27 PM
If you think Dusty Baker is the reason the Reds won 97 games you aren't paying attention.

If you think the only criteria for judging a manager is the win total, why didn't they fire him after last year's collapse from a playoff team to a losing record? Same manager managing the same way. Proof positive that Dusty Baker isn't a great manager.

Lineup construction is also not the only criteria. For example:

#1 lineup OBP

TB - .315, 21st in baseball
Toronto - .294, 26th in baseball

#2 lineup OBP

TB - .304, 26th in baseball
Toronto - .319, 15th in baseball

Just looking at the teams of the 2 candidates you mentioned.

MartyFan
10-15-2012, 03:28 PM
That was my point, someone said there would be snickering all over the league, when in reality over half of MLB would be happy to have the Reds track record over Dusty's tenure.

But I thought Snickers satisfied?????

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 03:28 PM
That's a good question. Dave Martinez and John Farrell would be my two top choices. Martinez is waiting for the perfect opportunity to come along (Reds would likely qualify) and Farrell is the Blue Jays' manager whom other teams are chasing right now.

It shouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Reds at manager. Dusty makes a lot of big mistakes that have cost the team some wins, especially with regard to the offense.

Dusty might be a good clubhouse manager, but from what I have seen and heard he spends most of his time in his office and really doesn't interact all that much with the players. He is a hands-off manager who let's the players do their thing without a lot of in-your-face college football-style coaching. I think most MLB managers are like that, which is fine. Dusty's handling of the players off the field is his strong suit.

It is the in-game strategy and lineup construction that proves to a lot of people that Dusty simply doesn't know what he is doing as a modern manager. Something as ultra-basic as his batting order shows that he hasn't been paying attention to statistical developments that have become proven facts in the information age and are now fundamental concepts of successful managing.

Dusty is the same guy that led the Reds to a losing record last year with a playoff-caliber roster.

The addition of 5 very good players (Latos, Ludwick, Frazier, Cozart and Marshall) to the team this year has convinced a lot of people with short memories that Dusty is a great manager all of a sudden.

The strength of the team is the pitching staff led by Bryan Price. Of course Dusty has the final word on all decisions, but by all reports Dusty has entrusted Bryan Price to run the pitching staff as he sees fit, and that is exactly what he should have done so Dusty made the right call there. Price is a fantastic pitching coach and I have said that the Reds should make it their highest priority to sign Price to a long-term contract. I don't blame Dusty when there are situations late in games when it is a tough call whether or not to make a pitching change. Some people give him grief for that, but I don't. Those decisions are made by Bryan Price.

Can you explain how Dusty had a playoff caliber roster last year that simply needed 5 huge upgrades to get to 97 wins this year?

AtomicDumpling
10-15-2012, 03:38 PM
Just out of curiosity, how is it that you're so omniscient regarding the inner workings of the Reds front office?

You don't have to be omniscient to understand how it works. Dusty and Jocketty are in this together. They are on the same team. They work together to build a good roster. They are not working in isolation on opposite sides of the planet.

Managers and General Managers work together throughout baseball. Walt and Dusty have telephones they can use to communicate with each other. Walt's office is in the same building as Dusty's office. They can talk with each other.

Do you honestly think Jocketty goes out and makes personnel moves without discussing them with Dusty first? That would be ridiculous.

I am not going to re-post here all the previous threads where we discussed this topic, but I will say a few words again. Dusty and Jocketty communicate almost every day. Both of them have mentioned this to the media several times this year and in previous years. They discuss the roster. They talk about their options. They discuss the minor league players that could come and help. They discuss players in other organizations that could be upgrades for the Reds and hence potential trade targets. In the off-season they discuss which players they want to re-sign and which players they should let walk. They discuss the free agents that they would like to sign. Dusty and Walt come to a consensus on players they both like and want, then Walt goes out and tries to obtain them. Sometimes he is successful and sometimes not. This results in a roster that is full of players both Jocketty and Dusty want on the team.

Of course they can't get everyone they want. Other teams want many of the same players the Reds want after all. You can't get them all. But what is certain is that Jocketty is not going rogue and bringing in a bunch of bad players that Dusty never wanted. Jocketty is not forcing Dusty to use players he doesn't want. If Dusty really wants a player I am sure Jocketty will make an effort to obtain that player, Corey Patterson for example. Patterson was Dusty's centerfielder and leadoff hitter in Chicago. I would bet good money that Dusty is the one that lobbied for the Reds to go out and and sign Corey Patterson and Jocketty obliged. It is a team effort. Jocketty brings in players that Dusty has expressed interest in. Jocketty isn't cramming players down Dusty's throat.

durl
10-15-2012, 03:38 PM
I'm torn about this.

2 division titles in 3 years, followed by embarrassing exits in the first round.

Granted, the Phillies pitching staff was incredible but the Reds never threatened. This year, after thrashing the Giants for two games, they couldn't must a third win in 3 attempts at home.

Jocketty built this team. And they did pretty well while Dusty was not in the clubhouse.

AtomicDumpling
10-15-2012, 03:40 PM
Can you explain how Dusty had a playoff caliber roster last year that simply needed 5 huge upgrades to get to 97 wins this year?

Because they were in the playoffs the previous season with the same personnel?

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 03:59 PM
Because they were in the playoffs the previous season with the same personnel?

Ok, well, minus Laynce Nix and a healthy Rolen and a healthy Arroyo. Stubbs and Bruce fell back a bit. We saw 2010 was a team that surprised but did not belong. Upgrades all over the roster were called for and never delivered...until 2012.

jojo
10-15-2012, 04:02 PM
Oh, joy. Two more seasons of catchers batting 8th and not having too many players clogging the basepaths.

As a Mariners fan who has seen multiple managerial changes since Sweet Lou was traded to the Rays, I can say this without hesitation. The problem with wishing for change is that often you get an even worse pair of hands at the helm. And it can be maddening.

We've reached an equilibrium with Dusty in Cincy that I'm comfortable with at least comfortable enough to fear what might come with a replacement. We know what we got. And, yes it could be worse-alot worse. At least Price is allowed to smooth over one of Dusty's biggests failings-managing the pitching staff.

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 04:02 PM
You don't have to be omniscient to understand how it works. Dusty and Jocketty are in this together. They are on the same team. They work together to build a good roster. They are not working in isolation on opposite sides of the planet.

Managers and General Managers work together throughout baseball. Walt and Dusty have telephones they can use to communicate with each other. Walt's office is in the same building as Dusty's office. They can talk with each other.

Do you honestly think Jocketty goes out and makes personnel moves without discussing them with Dusty first? That would be ridiculous.

I am not going to re-post here all the previous threads where we discussed this topic, but I will say a few words again. Dusty and Jocketty communicate almost every day. Both of them have mentioned this to the media several times this year and in previous years. They discuss the roster. They talk about their options. They discuss the minor league players that could come and help. They discuss players in other organizations that could be upgrades for the Reds and hence potential trade targets. In the off-season they discuss which players they want to re-sign and which players they should let walk. They discuss the free agents that they would like to sign. Dusty and Walt come to a consensus on players they both like and want, then Walt goes out and tries to obtain them. Sometimes he is successful and sometimes not. This results in a roster that is full of players both Jocketty and Dusty want on the team.

Of course they can't get everyone they want. Other teams want many of the same players the Reds want after all. You can't get them all. But what is certain is that Jocketty is not going rogue and bringing in a bunch of bad players that Dusty never wanted. Jocketty is not forcing Dusty to use players he doesn't want. If Dusty really wants a player I am sure Jocketty will make an effort to obtain that player, Corey Patterson for example. Patterson was Dusty's centerfielder and leadoff hitter in Chicago. I would bet good money that Dusty is the one that lobbied for the Reds to go out and and sign Corey Patterson and Jocketty obliged. It is a team effort. Jocketty brings in players that Dusty has expressed interest in. Jocketty isn't cramming players down Dusty's throat.

Walt and his staff of scouts amount to a lot more than Dusty's fetching dogs. But yeah, they all work together for sure. No one knows to what extent one guy or another pushes for the players that are acquired, except those in the room.

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 04:11 PM
As a Mariners fan who has seen multiple managerial changes since Sweet Lou was traded to the Rays, I can say this without hesitation. The problem with wishing for change is that often you get an even worse pair of hands at the helm. And it can be maddening.

We've reached an equilibrium with Dusty in Cincy that I'm comfortable with at least comfortable enough to fear what might come with a replacement. We know what we got. And, yes it could be worse-alot worse. At least Price is allowed to smooth over one of Dusty's biggests failings-managing the pitching staff.

I've seen this mentioned a few times...what kind of evidence do we have that Dusty was managing the staff before and not this year? Because they were good?

klw
10-15-2012, 04:13 PM
.

Jocketty built this team. And they did pretty well while Dusty was not in the clubhouse.

If I am reading this right, by the same logic, the Reds should dump that Votto fella because the Reds were great when he was out of the lineup.

Vottomatic
10-15-2012, 04:13 PM
If they'd have had a good manager, they would have won 110 games this year. Dusty held them back. ;)

Okay, I made it a joke, but sometimes I think it's true.

Good man. Poor strategist.

1. Low OBP guys in the 1 & 2 -holes. Ridiculous. Patterson. Taveras. Stubbs. Cozart. Give me a break. How in the crap does Votto (when healthy) not knock in 120+ rbi's? Should be a given. It's not with a Dusty lineup.

2. Overly aggressive hitters. What's the Dusty quote? Something like "nobody walks but the mailman"????? Is that the quote? These guys are always behind in the count giving the pitcher the advantage. I'm nearly 50 years old and I've seen alot of baseball. The hitting approach of this team is one of the worst I've ever seen. If they actually had a hitting plan.......they might win 110+ games. Seriously.

3. Dusty cannot see the wheels coming off of his pitcher to save his soul. See Leake - Game 4. See Latos - Game 5. See plenty of games during the last 4 or 5 seasons. Drives me up a wall.

4. Dusty has no sense of urgency to win. He is always thinking about tomorrow's game. I think in Game 5 with Latos on the mound he was thinking about Opening Day 2013 and saving his bullpen for the winter. :laugh:

I guess I'll have to live with 2 more years of Dusty driving me crazy. He's a good guy. But he can't win the big one.

jojo
10-15-2012, 04:17 PM
I've seen this mentioned a few times...what kind of evidence do we have that Dusty was managing the staff before and not this year? Because they were good?

Brian Price has always had control of his staffs. He ran Lou's staffs in Seattle for much the same reason as he does what he does in Cincy.

And for the record, the staff was good this year because of Jocketty-i.e. it had better pitchers.

VR
10-15-2012, 04:23 PM
I just wish he'd quit giving up grand slams, getting injured, and not getting hits with the tying or winning runs on base.

Wheelhouse
10-15-2012, 04:26 PM
Boo. Reds have no chance in playoff situation against top managerial strategists. I'll say it again: kings of the NL Central, joke of the playoffs.

MikeS21
10-15-2012, 04:28 PM
After living through a handful of managers over the last 10-12 years, I can emphatically state that ANY replacement manager would have you scratching your head six weeks into a new season. Bellyaching about line-ups. Complaining about sacrifice bunts. You name it, the same complaints would rise up.

The garbage Dusty gets called on is the same garbage every manager has been called on. Go back over the last 15 seasons: Mackanin, Narron, Miley, Boone - all got ragged on for in-game decisions, playing certain players, etc. Jack McKeon was the last manager who got positive reviews - mainly because he had AAAA players and still managed to cobble together a winning record.

To me, Dusty's return never has been a question of the FO not wanting him back, but a matter of Dusty's health.

This is not a bad thing.

WildcatFan
10-15-2012, 04:31 PM
I'm fine with it. If someone could tell me how a different manager would have gotten his players to hit the ball in the home playoff games, then maybe I could be swayed.

Hard to argue with 97 wins after the potentially disastrous injuries this season.

Always Red
10-15-2012, 04:31 PM
After living through a handful of managers over the last 10-12 years, I can emphatically state that ANY replacement manager would have you scratching your head six weeks into a new season. Bellyaching about line-ups. Complaining about sacrifice bunts. You name it, the same complaints would rise up.

The garbage Dusty gets called on is the same garbage every manager has been called on. Go back over the last 15 seasons: Mackanin, Narron, Miley, Boone - all got ragged on for in-game decisions, playing certain players, etc. Jack McKeon was the last manager who got positive reviews - mainly because he had AAAA players and still managed to cobble together a winning record.

To me, Dusty's return never has been a question of the FO not wanting him back, but a matter of Dusty's health.

This is not a bad thing.

Yep, there is no perfect manager. All have warts, but in different places.

This thread, and the Dusty bashing is more depressing to me than the playoff loss.

I almost wish they would have hired someone else, just so I wouldn't have to read the Dusty bashing on a daily basis. :eek:

CesarGeronimo
10-15-2012, 04:32 PM
If they'd have had a good manager, they would have won 110 games this year. Dusty held them back. ;)

Okay, I made it a joke, but sometimes I think it's true.

Good man. Poor strategist.

1. Low OBP guys in the 1 & 2 -holes. Ridiculous. Patterson. Taveras. Stubbs. Cozart. Give me a break. How in the crap does Votto (when healthy) not knock in 120+ rbi's? Should be a given. It's not with a Dusty lineup.

Oh, c'mon man. Let's not forget Orlando Cabrera and his .303 OBP in 2010. :lol:

Redsfan320
10-15-2012, 04:39 PM
I'm very disappointed in this, but I don't have much original thought there.

However, I will say this. Somewhere, Drew Stubbs is on his knees thanking God.

320

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 04:39 PM
Dusty meet Billy. Billy meet Dusty. (trumpets sound)

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 04:40 PM
I'm very disappointed in this, but I don't have much original thought there.

However, I will say this. Somewhere, Drew Stubbs is on his knees thanking God.

320

Dusty wasn't Drews biggest fan. I'd say this pushes Stubbs closer to the door.

Caveat Emperor
10-15-2012, 04:43 PM
After living through a handful of managers over the last 10-12 years, I can emphatically state that ANY replacement manager would have you scratching your head six weeks into a new season. Bellyaching about line-ups. Complaining about sacrifice bunts. You name it, the same complaints would rise up.

The garbage Dusty gets called on is the same garbage every manager has been called on. Go back over the last 15 seasons: Mackanin, Narron, Miley, Boone - all got ragged on for in-game decisions, playing certain players, etc. Jack McKeon was the last manager who got positive reviews - mainly because he had AAAA players and still managed to cobble together a winning record.

To me, Dusty's return never has been a question of the FO not wanting him back, but a matter of Dusty's health.

This is not a bad thing.

All managers make head-scratching moves. Great managers infuriate fans in their own cities because they deal with the idiosyncrasies on a nightly basis.

That's not the issue, though.

Dusty Baker has done great things with this club, but merely winning games in the regular season isn't enough. This team has a tremendous amount of talent, but a limited window in which to make use of it. The reality is that these precious few years may be the only time in the next 10-20 years the Reds have the ability to compete for a World Series.

Is Dusty Baker the right guy to make that happen? His record in elimination games screams "NO!" His results over the last 3 seasons underlines the "NO!" and puts a star next to it.

kbrake
10-15-2012, 04:43 PM
I'm pretty indifferent on this. I can see both sides of it. Dusty had a GREAT regular season and made a great move in G1 when Cueto went down. That being said Dusty was WAY too slow pulling Leake or Latos and it cost his team a chance to move on. I'm just hoping he has learned from G4 and G5.

George Anderson
10-15-2012, 04:45 PM
I had no problem with Dusty till this years playoffs when he was horribly outmanaged. Having said that I am not sure who they could have gotten to replace him that was that much better. Once Francona went to the Indians it seemed the pickings were slim.

I do have confidence in Bob and Walt because more often than not they have made the right decisions.

NJReds
10-15-2012, 04:46 PM
Yep, there is no perfect manager. All have warts, but in different places.

This thread, and the Dusty bashing is more depressing to me than the playoff loss.

I almost wish they would have hired someone else, just so I wouldn't have to read the Dusty bashing on a daily basis. :eek:

I have to agree, and I don't mind this move at all. Even if Dusty left, the next manager would probably get similar treatment unless things went perfectly. Even Joe Torre got ripped at times for his "x's" and "o's" managing style in NY.

Dusty isn't perfect, but based on his track record in Cincinnati, I don't see many available better alternatives waiting on the unemployment line.

Patrick Bateman
10-15-2012, 04:48 PM
Boo. Reds have no chance in playoff situation against top managerial strategists. I'll say it again: kings of the NL Central, joke of the playoffs.

Why does strategy not come into play during the regular season?

reds1869
10-15-2012, 04:53 PM
I can't complain too much. If there were a sure fire improvement waiting in the wings it might be different. As it is I'm pretty comfortable with Dusty at the helm even though his in game decisions make me insane.

dsmith421
10-15-2012, 04:55 PM
He's one of the best guys in baseball and the players love him. His teams have always done very well in the regular season. This is good.

His teams routinely tank in the postseason and he seems to have no clue how to tactically manage a do-or-die game. This is bad.

I have no idea what I would do. Tough to fault the FO either way they went with this one, in my opinion.

Wonderful Monds
10-15-2012, 04:56 PM
Why does strategy not come into play during the regular season?

It's probably not as important playing against non playoff quality teams who good teams shouldn't have a lot of trouble beating up on.

I don't think it doesn't matter, but you could say the strategy is different. In the regular season you're managing for a marathon, and the playoffs are a sprint. Maybe Dusty is better at managing the marathon than the sprint.

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 04:58 PM
Dusty's "due" in elimination games. :)

bucksfan2
10-15-2012, 05:02 PM
I had no problem with Dusty till this years playoffs when he was horribly outmanaged. Having said that I am not sure who they could have gotten to replace him that was that much better. Once Francona went to the Indians it seemed the pickings were slim.

I do have confidence in Bob and Walt because more often than not they have made the right decisions.

I think Dusty was outmanaged when he needed to win one game and Bochy was on the brink of elimination. Bochy wasn't afraid to go out there one batter too soon instead of one batter too late. I think in Game 5 Dusty made two tactical errors that really hurt the team.

The goal of winning a WS is a real one for this team. In order to win the WS you have to navigate a 162 game season and get into the playoffs. Dusty gives them as good of a shot as any manager of making it to the post season. He used 5 pitchers for the entire regular season and then a healthy Cueto throws 8 pitches and is out of the playoffs. Joey Votto injuries his knee and it zaps him of his power.

Its on Walt to get Dusty a better option in CF. Dusty may have gone too long with Stubbs this season but he led them to a 97 win season. I don't think anyone would have had an issue all season long with the order Dusty ran out there for the playoffs.

Reds Fanatic
10-15-2012, 05:03 PM
I don't have any issue with Dusty being extended. I question some of his moves but I really did not see many better options out there right now. The Indians made a really good hire in Francona but other available names I don't think would make much difference and could actually set the team back.

Whether this team goes to the next level is going to be more determined by what moves Walt makes to fix holes more than Dusty still being manager.

_Sir_Charles_
10-15-2012, 05:14 PM
8th most wins in a season in team history good enough?

Franchises don't dump guys for that

Yeah, I'm not understanding the rationale for people wanting to dump Dusty. Say what you want about him, but he creates happy, successful teams. If he drive me and the fan-base nuts...who cares as long as we win.

REDREAD
10-15-2012, 05:22 PM
The garbage Dusty gets called on is the same garbage every manager has been called on. Go back over the last 15 seasons: Mackanin, Narron, Miley, Boone - all got ragged on for in-game decisions, playing certain players, etc. Jack McKeon was the last manager who got positive reviews - mainly because he had AAAA players and still managed to cobble together a winning record.
.

Heck Jack McKeon wasn't exactly popular either.. I remember people calling him "Traitor Jack" here.. Similiar complaints about how Jack was clueless, and he was just lucky to have players have career years all at the same time.

I'm thrilled to have Dusty back. "Be careful what you wish for".. When Dusty retires, there's no guarantee that his replacement will be better.

If we continue to contend for the NL Central title every year, I can handle that.
Sure, I'd love to win the WS, but it's so nice to watch a contending team over the course of the long regular season. 2012 got off to a rough start, but it was very enjoyable overall.

_Sir_Charles_
10-15-2012, 05:34 PM
After living through a handful of managers over the last 10-12 years, I can emphatically state that ANY replacement manager would have you scratching your head six weeks into a new season. Bellyaching about line-ups. Complaining about sacrifice bunts. You name it, the same complaints would rise up.

The garbage Dusty gets called on is the same garbage every manager has been called on. Go back over the last 15 seasons: Mackanin, Narron, Miley, Boone - all got ragged on for in-game decisions, playing certain players, etc. Jack McKeon was the last manager who got positive reviews - mainly because he had AAAA players and still managed to cobble together a winning record.

To me, Dusty's return never has been a question of the FO not wanting him back, but a matter of Dusty's health.

This is not a bad thing.

Spot on. And even going back to Sparky. People seem to automatically assume that Sparky was a great manager. I'm not sure I agree with that. A trained monkey could've won with that lineup he had. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying he was a bad manager...just not what the hype tends to create.

Always Red
10-15-2012, 05:41 PM
Heck Jack McKeon wasn't exactly popular either.. I remember people calling him "Traitor Jack" here.. Similiar complaints about how Jack was clueless, and he was just lucky to have players have career years all at the same time.

I'm thrilled to have Dusty back. "Be careful what you wish for".. When Dusty retires, there's no guarantee that his replacement will be better.

If we continue to contend for the NL Central title every year, I can handle that.
Sure, I'd love to win the WS, but it's so nice to watch a contending team over the course of the long regular season. 2012 got off to a rough start, but it was very enjoyable overall.

It was Trader Jack, from his time as a GM for the Pads, before he took the Reds managing job. :)

cincrazy
10-15-2012, 05:43 PM
I love it. And I love Dusty. Can't wait to get him that ring.

westofyou
10-15-2012, 05:45 PM
It was Trader Jack, from his time as a GM for the Pads, before he took the Reds managing job. :)

And Jack lost all his jobs mostly because what he did in the clubhouse (had favorites, ignored others, complained about players to the press) eventually made his job harder and harder to accomplish in today's game.

RedEye
10-15-2012, 05:50 PM
Since he became the manager of the Reds, I've been neutral on him (aside from my "Fire Dusty Now" thread earlier this season)

Classic RedsZone commentary here...

westofyou
10-15-2012, 06:02 PM
Classic RedsZone commentary here...

I liked him a bunch... till I punched him in the face

REDREAD
10-15-2012, 06:06 PM
It was Trader Jack, from his time as a GM for the Pads, before he took the Reds managing job. :)

Yea, I know, people were calling him "traitor" when they got mad at him.
He got criticized for being clueless on in game decisions too.
He obviously wasn't clueless.. just people claimed he was.

Kc61
10-15-2012, 06:36 PM
I'm surprised. Looks like the Reds blinked by going to two years.

Not concerned about Dusty's managing at all, it's a certain style, but I think it can work as the personnel improves.

Hope Dusty's health is good.

Reds/Flyers Fan
10-15-2012, 06:54 PM
Never really thought anything different would happen. I don't really care if he's the manager or not - which I don't know if that's a plus or a minus.

If the entirety of the coaching staff comes back, I'll feel much differently.

No changes there either, apparently:

Details are still being worked out, but Jocketty expects to sign all the coaches to two-year deals as well.

“That was important to Dusty and myself,” Jocketty said. “They all work hard. We’ve seen improvement.”

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121015/SPT04/310150099/

Tom Servo
10-15-2012, 06:59 PM
“That was important to Dusty and myself,” Jocketty said. “They all work hard. We’ve seen improvement.”[/I]
2010 - Division champs, out in first round
2012 - Division champs, out in first round

Sure some elements may have changed, but the result was the same: no improvement :bash:

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 07:00 PM
2010 - Division champs, out in first round
2012 - Division champs, out in first round

Sure some elements may have changed, but the result was the same: no improvement :bash:

If you think there hasn't been improvement then you are mistaken.

Reds/Flyers Fan
10-15-2012, 07:05 PM
The Reds shouldn't be looking for merely "improvement" right now. That sounds like Astros and Cubs talk.

The Reds should be looking to win - big.

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 07:05 PM
Brian Price has always had control of his staffs. He ran Lou's staffs in Seattle for much the same reason as he does what he does in Cincy.

And for the record, the staff was good this year because of Jocketty-i.e. it had better pitchers.

So are you saying that all of the RZ ulcers caused by Dusty leaving pitchers in too long, taking them out too soon, trusting Ondrusek too much, putting Chapman in the pen, leaving Leake in too long in the playoffs, etc etc etc were all for naught since the blame should have been pointed directly at Price?

Ok.

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 07:05 PM
The Reds shouldn't be looking for merely "improvement" right now. That's for the Astros and Cubs. They should be looking to win big.

Is anyone saying that they haven't tried to improve?

Always Red
10-15-2012, 07:06 PM
Yea, I know, people were calling him "traitor" when they got mad at him.
He got criticized for being clueless on in game decisions too.
He obviously wasn't clueless.. just people claimed he was.

Ah...got it now. I failed to read between the lines! :beerme:

oneupper
10-15-2012, 07:19 PM
I would have preferred a change. A move towards a strategist rather than the father figure the team has in Dusty.
I still think this is money better invested in players.
That said, I've also come to appreciate the positive intangibles that Baker brings with him.
So Dusty it is. Hopefully he can get that ring and make us all happy.

In the meantime, he'll toy with my sanity on a nightly basis.

Patrick Bateman
10-15-2012, 07:25 PM
2010 - Division champs, out in first round
2012 - Division champs, out in first round

Sure some elements may have changed, but the result was the same: no improvement :bash:

Although winning the playoffs is the ultimate goal, it is a terrible means for decision making purposes. I'll focus on the 162 games, not 5 (in which the Reds actually had a good run differential).

Vottomatic
10-15-2012, 07:28 PM
Ah yes. 2 more years of postseason failure. Good job Reds. 162 games of cheering. 3 to 5 games later until we're crying.

REDREAD
10-15-2012, 07:28 PM
2010 - Division champs, out in first round
2012 - Division champs, out in first round

Sure some elements may have changed, but the result was the same: no improvement :bash:

You don't think the 2012 team was better than the 2010 team?

If nothing else winning 2 playoff games is better than being swept.
If the Reds defense didn't evaporate or if the pitching was better in the later games, we could've easily advanced. I guess I don't see Dusty or the organization being at fault.. The players failed, although losing Cueto was bad luck.

cincrazy
10-15-2012, 07:34 PM
Some of the greatest teams ever have flopped in the playoffs. It's all a crapshoot. And the Reds had bad luck on top of that.

PuffyPig
10-15-2012, 07:38 PM
Just so you know (becuase apparently many don't), you cannot design a team that is guaranteed to win in the playoffs.

Oh you may have the best team in baseball, and increase your chances of winning each round to 55% or so, but the randomness of baseball guarantees it will always be a crap shoot in the playoffs.

The Reds chances this year were better than in 2010. Whether or not we won a round doesn't change the improvement in the team.

And if you cannot honestly see that, you must a missed watching one great season.

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 07:39 PM
Ah yes. 2 more years of postseason failure. Good job Reds. 162 games of cheering. 3 to 5 games later until we're crying.

These are the best types of posts when brought up next fall.

_Sir_Charles_
10-15-2012, 08:25 PM
Classic RedsZone commentary here...


I liked him a bunch... till I punched him in the face

Nice. :p

_Sir_Charles_
10-15-2012, 08:28 PM
You don't think the 2012 team was better than the 2010 team?

If nothing else winning 2 playoff games is better than being swept.
If the Reds defense didn't evaporate or if the pitching was better in the later games, we could've easily advanced. I guess I don't see Dusty or the organization being at fault.. The players failed, although losing Cueto was bad luck.

Agree 100%

2010 the team was inexperienced, young and simply put...not ready.
2012 the team had some crappy luck and some poor timing for poor play. Not on Dusty.

Tom Servo
10-15-2012, 08:31 PM
The players failed, but Dusty still got out-manged by Bruce Bochy, who isn't exactly a MENSA member.

Raisor
10-15-2012, 08:31 PM
I'd rather have Dusty then Bobby Valentine, so at least this saves us from that.

steig
10-15-2012, 08:32 PM
The players failed, but Dusty still got out-manged by Bruce Bochy, who isn't exactly a MENSA member.

Compared to Dusty, Bruce Bochy is Albert Einstein.

corkedbat
10-15-2012, 08:34 PM
This is on Walt. He needs to takeaway hitting options like Stubbs, Valdez, Cairo and Rolen or Dusty will use them - repeatedly and often.



Fixed. :evil:

VR
10-15-2012, 08:37 PM
Compared to Dusty, Bruce Bochy is Albert Einstein.

I just don't get that? Based on what?

traderumor
10-15-2012, 08:45 PM
I just don't get that? Based on what?I imagine because his bullpen overperformed in Cincy, which made him look like a genius. He managed the bullpen in games 4 and 5 against a lot of odds and somehow no one came out there on the given days without their stuff. Genius, a genius I tell you.

Always Red
10-15-2012, 08:47 PM
Compared to Dusty, Bruce Bochy is Albert Einstein.

Compared to Dusty and Bochy, Einstein is like an omnipotent god.

They're baseball guys, for Pete's sake. Not a single one of them remotely qualifies to be an intellectual, not even Joe Maddon, with his professorish eyewear.

I like to keep these things in perspective.

kaldaniels
10-15-2012, 08:48 PM
These are the best types of posts when brought up next fall.

I'm sorry but that same poster says it is trolling to bring up old posts. Yet he gets away with posting stuff like that. How is that justifiable?

Patrick Bateman
10-15-2012, 08:49 PM
The players failed, but Dusty still got out-manged by Bruce Bochy, who isn't exactly a MENSA member.


How come Bochy hasn't been questioned for using struggling starting pitchers over Tim Lincecum?

I'm thinking most of the criticisms on Baker are hindsight based, nor are the flaws put forward by other teams being fairly analyzed.

kaldaniels
10-15-2012, 08:51 PM
I'm gonna ask you guys to put them on the table.

Playoffs. Crapshoot or not?

I think they are a crapshoot.

But of course a manager can have an effect on the outcome. Yet in 2010 and 2012 I can't say Dusty was way out of bounds with any moves...so I can't hold him responsible for the 2 series losses.

But that's me.

Tom Servo
10-15-2012, 09:00 PM
How come Bochy hasn't been questioned for using struggling starting pitchers over Tim Lincecum?

I'm thinking most of the criticisms on Baker are hindsight based, nor are the flaws put forward by other teams being fairly analyzed.
Bochy didn't leave his struggling starting pitchers in to put the games out of reach like Dusty did.

dougdirt
10-15-2012, 09:04 PM
Compared to Dusty, Bruce Bochy is Albert Einstein.

So, brain dead?

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 09:18 PM
Bochy didn't leave his struggling starting pitchers in to put the games out of reach like Dusty did.

I'm confused. Some posters believe that Price controls the staff. Others think Dusty does. With something as definitive as this, you would think we could reach a consensus.

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 09:19 PM
I'm sorry but that same poster says it is trolling to bring up old posts. Yet he gets away with posting stuff like that. How is that justifiable?

Who, me?

edabbs44
10-15-2012, 09:20 PM
I'm gonna ask you guys to put them on the table.

Playoffs. Crapshoot or not?

I think they are a crapshoot.

But of course a manager can have an effect on the outcome. Yet in 2010 and 2012 I can't say Dusty was way out of bounds with any moves...so I can't hold him responsible for the 2 series losses.

But that's me.

Mix.

westofyou
10-15-2012, 09:38 PM
Compared to Dusty and Bochy, Einstein is like an omnipotent god.

They're baseball guys, for Pete's sake. Not a single one of them remotely qualifies to be an intellectual, not even Joe Maddon, with his professorish eyewear.

I like to keep these things in perspective.

No kidding, it's not a think tank designing economic theories.

And as dumb as they all are ten minutes of baseball talk with them would probably raise the opinions of most of the posters here

kaldaniels
10-15-2012, 09:39 PM
Who, me?

No, the one you referenced, who shall not be named.

kaldaniels
10-15-2012, 09:40 PM
No kidding, it's not a think tank designing economic theories.

And as dumb as they all are ten minutes of baseball talk with them would probably raise the opinions of most of the posters here

But....Joe Maddon has glasses with REALLY thick frames. ;)

Wonderful Monds
10-15-2012, 09:47 PM
Compared to Dusty and Bochy, Einstein is like an omnipotent god.

They're baseball guys, for Pete's sake. Not a single one of them remotely qualifies to be an intellectual, not even Joe Maddon, with his professorish eyewear.

I like to keep these things in perspective.

Dusty at least seems like a cultured guy, based on that profile that somebody did on him recently for one of the papers.

SunDeck
10-15-2012, 09:47 PM
2010 - Division champs, out in first round
2012 - Division champs, out in first round

Sure some elements may have changed, but the result was the same: no improvement :bash:

2010 - Division Champs, completely outclassed, got run over by a truck in the NLDS
2012 - Division Champs, went to five games without their ace.

westofyou
10-15-2012, 09:48 PM
No, the one you referenced, who shall not be named.

Baseballs Beetlejuice

Tom Servo
10-15-2012, 10:20 PM
No kidding, it's not a think tank designing economic theories.

And as dumb as they all are ten minutes of baseball talk with them would probably raise the opinions of most of the posters here
I have no doubts about any of this. But the facts is the facts, that Dusty is a baseball guy (who I generally like) who has gained a reputation for not being able to finish the job.

Revering4Blue
10-15-2012, 10:20 PM
I'm gonna ask you guys to put them on the table.

Playoffs. Crapshoot or not?

I think they are a crapshoot.

But of course a manager can have an effect on the outcome. Yet in 2010 and 2012 I can't say Dusty was way out of bounds with any moves...so I can't hold him responsible for the 2 series losses.

But that's me.

That's the way that I view it. I'm not discounting managerial decisions like lineup construction or decisions by the base coaches at all. But, ultimately, it all comes down to how the players perform on the field--positively or negatively. I'll admit that this is a simplistic view, to say the least, but I have to call it as I see it.

Corollary, IMHO, PuffyPig is spot-on about the randomness of the game.

westofyou
10-15-2012, 10:38 PM
I have no doubts about any of this. But the facts is the facts, that Dusty is a baseball guy (who I generally like) who has gained a reputation for not being able to finish the job.

Gene Mauch as well, every dance has wallflowers, prom queens and the underachievers

Hopefully that rep changes

Sea Ray
10-15-2012, 10:44 PM
I think Dusty was outmanaged when he needed to win one game and Bochy was on the brink of elimination. Bochy wasn't afraid to go out there one batter too soon instead of one batter too late. I think in Game 5 Dusty made two tactical errors that really hurt the team.

The goal of winning a WS is a real one for this team. In order to win the WS you have to navigate a 162 game season and get into the playoffs. Dusty gives them as good of a shot as any manager of making it to the post season. He used 5 pitchers for the entire regular season and then a healthy Cueto throws 8 pitches and is out of the playoffs. Joey Votto injuries his knee and it zaps him of his power.

Its on Walt to get Dusty a better option in CF. Dusty may have gone too long with Stubbs this season but he led them to a 97 win season. I don't think anyone would have had an issue all season long with the order Dusty ran out there for the playoffs.

I sure don't blame Dusty for losing the playoffs. After Cueto went down, Bochy had better cards to play. Dusty had Mike Leake, Bochy had Tim Lincecum. It's not Dusty's fault that the Reds could only manage one hit after the 1st inning in game 3. it wasn't his fault that Phillips made a bone headed running play on the bases nor was it his fault that Rolen bobbled that ball in Game 3. I think Dusty got an awful lot out of a weak bench this year. How'd he ever get what he did from Navarro, Paul and Ludwick? He was a master of mixing these guys in and coming out with wins. I'd argue that a few long/middle relievers also overachieved under Dusty

I'm glad he's back. I could do w/o Brooke Jacoby but oh well

WMR
10-15-2012, 11:04 PM
Not having LeCure up and warm and inserting him after the first hit when Leake was trying to make it through their order one more time in game 4 was/is one of the worst managerial gaffes I've ever seen... everyone and his mother saw that coming, but Dusty just sat in the dugout twiddling his thumbs until the game was out of reach.

I hate this decision. Dusty will continue to get outmanaged in the playoffs for the next 2 years and make the prospects of the Reds winning the World Series that much more remote.

jojo
10-15-2012, 11:20 PM
Bud Selig doesn't allow intelligent people to be hired. That's his genius.

Tadasimha
10-15-2012, 11:21 PM
But....Joe Maddon has glasses with REALLY thick frames. ;)

Baseball Geek Chic is SO in this year!

757690
10-15-2012, 11:21 PM
Not having LeCure up and warm and inserting him after the first hit when Leake was trying to make it through their order one more time in game 4 was/is one of the worst managerial gaffes I've ever seen... everyone and his mother saw that coming, but Dusty just sat in the dugout twiddling his thumbs until the game was out of reach.

I hate this decision. Dusty will continue to get outmanaged in the playoffs for the next 2 years and make the prospects of the Reds winning the World Series that much more remote.

http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=231016110

Not even close to as bad as this one.


But Little sent him back out for the bottom of the eighth, after David Ortiz homered to give Boston a 5-2 lead.
Derek Jeter smashed a line drive toward right field for a double.
Bernie Williams lashed a single over shortstop, driving home Jeter, cutting Boston's lead to 5-3. It was the 115th pitch thrown by Martinez and Little emerged from the Red Sox dugout, the right-hander Timlin and the left-hander Alan Embree were warmed up and ready to come in.
Several of the Yankees said afterward that it appeared Martinez was becoming more vulnerable.
Hideki Matsui, the next hitter for the Yankees, had good swings against Martinez in this series, hitting a ground-rule double off the Red Sox ace in Game 3, smashing another double in the fourth inning of Game 7.
An easy decision for Little, it seemed.
Little went to the mound, spoke to Martinez and patted him with encouragement, but then turned and stepped back to the dugout, not knowing that he was about to join Bill Buckner in Red Sox lore.
"Pedro wanted to stay in there," Little said after the game. "He wanted to get the job done just as he has many times for us all season long and he's the man we all wanted on the mound.
"Pedro Martinez has been our man all year long and in situations like that, he's the one we want on the mound over anybody we can bring in out of that bullpen."
Martinez threw two quick strikes to Matsui, and then fired a fastball inside -- and Matsui turned on it, pulling the ball down the right field line, just fair; it skipped into the stands for a ground-rule double. Williams was at third, Matsui at second, the tying runs on base.
Timlin and Embree were ready, and Jorge Posada was coming to bat for the Yankees, still wearing a large chip on his shoulder from his screaming confrontations with Martinez in Game 3.
Martinez had thrown 118 pitches. Little remained in his dugout seat; he was sticking with Martinez.
"He had enough left in his tank to finish off Posada," said Little.
Martinez threw a fastball inside and Posada's bat seemed to crumble under its weight; he had not hit it very hard. But the ball rose over second base, shortstop Nomar Garciaparra and second baseman Todd Walker racing for it, reaching for it, in vain.
Williams scored, and Matsui sprinted around third and ran for home, and a handful of Yankees came out of the dugout to meet them at the plate. The score was tied. Little came out of the Boston dugout, to replace Martinez.

757690
10-15-2012, 11:27 PM
I have no doubts about any of this. But the facts is the facts, that Dusty is a baseball guy (who I generally like) who has gained a reputation for not being able to finish the job.

Bobby Cox, Sparky Anderson, Charlie Manuel, and Leo Durocher had that rep too... Until they didn't.

dabvu2498
10-15-2012, 11:31 PM
Bobby Cox, Sparky Anderson, Charlie Manuel, and Leo Durocher had that rep too... Until they didn't.

Joe Torre was dog meat until 1996.

dougdirt
10-15-2012, 11:34 PM
Joe Torre won the World Series in 4 of his first 6 trips to the playoffs.

Tom Servo
10-15-2012, 11:34 PM
All of those guys listed did it in less time than Dusty's 19 years. :dunno:

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 11:35 PM
I like what I heard from Walt about sitting down with Dusty to talk about what the philosophy would be going forward, acknowledging there is still work to do, and then comes the 2 year deal. I think this can mean there is a good chance this offseason will involve further improvements to the team. I think we can all agree with the right additions this team could really be amazing next year.

dougdirt
10-15-2012, 11:37 PM
I like what I heard from Walt about sitting down with Dusty to talk about what the philosophy would be going forward, acknowledging there is still work to do, and then comes the 2 year deal. I think this can mean there is a good chance this offseason will involve further improvements to the team. I think we can all agree with the right additions this team could really be amazing next year.

Until there are improvements made, I don't believe they are coming. I project the 2013 roster, as it is right now, without Ludwick and without the Madson buyout, being about $93M.

kaldaniels
10-15-2012, 11:43 PM
Not having LeCure up and warm and inserting him after the first hit when Leake was trying to make it through their order one more time in game 4 was/is one of the worst managerial gaffes I've ever seen... everyone and his mother saw that coming, but Dusty just sat in the dugout twiddling his thumbs until the game was out of reach

Dusty removed Leake 2 batters after the circumstance you describe (the first hit the second time thru the order). And the one batter after the second hit sacrificed.

The narrative and the facts aren't matching up here.

And look I hate the way things went down as much as you do. But Leake went 3 up 3 down in the 3rd. Allowed 1 walk no hits in the 4th. Allowed back to back doubles to start the 5th and was yanked after the sacrifice, with 4 runs on the board against him at that point, down 2.

Worst mangerial gaffe ever....that's a bit much I'd say.

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 11:46 PM
Until there are improvements made, I don't believe they are coming. I project the 2013 roster, as it is right now, without Ludwick and without the Madson buyout, being about $93M.

The thing about Stubbs is he'll cost a few million and upgrade the offense when he's gone. I think Bailey and Leake will be on the block to avoid their raises as well. Basically, anyone not named Latos who is up for arbitration will probably be on some lists as trade bait. I expect they will look around, although finding a match is usually hard.

Do you have some arb estimates you'd like to share? I'm not great at it, but I figured right about where you did for payroll next year a while back. Are you subtracting he deferments to Arroyo and others?

Redsfan320
10-15-2012, 11:53 PM
Dusty wasn't Drews biggest fan. I'd say this pushes Stubbs closer to the door.


Really? Among the batting lead-off for so long ("because he's fast"), staying in the lineup for so long ("We need his D"), and even starting all 5 playoff games, even the 3 in our small park, you think he's not his biggest fan?? What are you basing this off?

320

mdccclxix
10-15-2012, 11:56 PM
There were some not so subtle hints before the trade deadline from Dusty that certain players have had their chance and it's time to look at trades, which they did when they almost got Span from the Twins to play CF.

757690
10-16-2012, 12:12 AM
All of those guys listed did it in less time than Dusty's 19 years. :dunno:

Not so much when you look at playoff appearances.

dougdirt
10-16-2012, 12:23 AM
The thing about Stubbs is he'll cost a few million and upgrade the offense when he's gone. I think Bailey and Leake will be on the block to avoid their raises as well. Basically, anyone not named Latos who is up for arbitration will probably be on some lists as trade bait. I expect they will look around, although finding a match is usually hard.

Do you have some arb estimates you'd like to share? I'm not great at it, but I figured right about where you did for payroll next year a while back. Are you subtracting he deferments to Arroyo and others?

I had Stubbs, Heisey and Bailey getting a combined $5M in arbitration. I don't see them being moved because of raises. They will be getting very moderate raises. I simply used cots for the payroll, but I don't think the deferments are going to make much difference at all. The Reds may have a few million to spend. Enough to maybe get a poor starting caliber player or a quality bench player or two.

dfs
10-16-2012, 12:29 AM
Dusty removed Leake 2 batters after the circumstance you describe (the first hit the second time thru the order). And the one batter after the second hit sacrificed.

The narrative and the facts aren't matching up here.

And look I hate the way things went down as much as you do. But Leake went 3 up 3 down in the 3rd. Allowed 1 walk no hits in the 4th. Allowed back to back doubles to start the 5th and was yanked after the sacrifice, with 4 runs on the board against him at that point, down 2.

Worst mangerial gaffe ever....that's a bit much I'd say.

I don't know about worst managerial gaffe ever, but you've got 11 guys over there and you probably don't want to use your game 5 starter, but don't you think you would have somebody warm?

It was even more comical in game 5. 5th inning with 2 runs in the bases loaded and the likely NL mvp at the plate...wouldn't you have somebody warm?

Now....you don't have to use the guy, but wouldn't you like the option? I see that maybe not having somebody warming up looks like confidence in his guys and everything but.....it's the post season and you've got 11 guys on your pitching staff.....why not use them?

In the long run I guess this gets back to using relievers in high leverage situations instead of in defined roles. Wouldn't it have been something if Buster Posey came to the plate and Aroldis Chapman was there standing on the hill?

Superdude
10-16-2012, 12:53 AM
The thing about Stubbs is he'll cost a few million and upgrade the offense when he's gone. I think Bailey and Leake will be on the block to avoid their raises as well. Basically, anyone not named Latos who is up for arbitration will probably be on some lists as trade bait. I expect they will look around, although finding a match is usually hard.

Do you have some arb estimates you'd like to share? I'm not great at it, but I figured right about where you did for payroll next year a while back. Are you subtracting he deferments to Arroyo and others?

This roster's gonna get awfully cumbersome if we can't fill in some positions at minimum wage in the next few years. Hamilton, Cingrani, and Corcino can hopefully take some of the load off, but beyond that, our cupboard's pretty bare until you hit Billings.

Caveat Emperor
10-16-2012, 12:55 AM
Bobby Cox, Sparky Anderson, Charlie Manuel, and Leo Durocher had that rep too... Until they didn't.

I'm not eager to spend the next two years seeing if that rep is justified. They've outright wasted three years of their current window. It isn't going to stay open forever.

Patrick Bateman
10-16-2012, 12:56 AM
Bochy didn't leave his struggling starting pitchers in to put the games out of reach like Dusty did.

You know, Buster Posey hits homeruns some times. If Lecure (or whomever) was brought in and gave up a homer, Baker is torn to shreds for that. Latos had generally pitched pretty well and just didn't control that situation that well. If he gets out of it, and was close numerous times, he could have been strong for numerous innings.

Not to mention that it could easily be argued that Bochy shouldn't have even had struggling pitchers in the game in the first place. I mean, the Reds torch lefties, why was Zito even starting the first place? Lincecum looked pretty electric against us. Zito was close one batter away from being torched numerous times. Bochy was fortunate that did not get out of hand before he was taken out.

Why does it always have to be someone's fault? It's 5 games, and in the end, the results get evaluated to death. There were numerous combinations of events that could have transpired after the respective decisions by the managers. If Hanigan grounds sharp to SS, and Stubbs follows up with a homer, is Dusty a genius for applying the hit and run? That was certainly an event that could have happened, and due to the extreme randomness of baseball, it's just not fair to go purely off of results without considering the complexity of some of the decisions required.

In the end, the Reds best pitcher got injured in game 1 immediately which changed the whole complexion of the staff that Baker was preparing for the series. The best hitter in baseball was relegated to the calibre of an aging Todd Helton role, rather than his normal MVP self. The Reds had a run differential in the 5 games that if extrapolated over 162 games would line up with a team with a record comparable to the Reds regular season success. However, at the level of baseball, you're still likely to lose 45% of the games. That's unfortunately how baseball works. The Reds were so close to winning that series in a number of different ways, and due to some bad luck, randomness, and strong play by the Giants at crucial points, the Giants were able to win despite largely, IMO, being outplayed by the Reds.

If you think that replacing Dusty Baker with a flavour of the month managerial candidate, I think you are dead wrong, not familiar with the inadequacies of the average manager out there, and really over analyzing a few select results that turned ugly at the wrong time.

Superdude
10-16-2012, 01:10 AM
You know, Buster Posey hits homeruns some times. If Lecure (or whomever) was brought in and gave up a homer, Baker is torn to shreds for that. Latos had generally pitched pretty well and just didn't control that situation that well. If he gets out of it, and was close numerous times, he could have been strong for numerous innings.

I see his point about Chapman. Sure it burns up your best arm in the 5th inning, but that was a game changing moment.

But on the whole, I completely agree with you. If Dusty wasn't going to burn up Chapman, I really don't see how sticking with your ace starter, who'd been cruising for the first four innings, is the gigantic tactical transgression people make it out to be. Bringing in a new pitcher isn't the answer to every problem in the playoffs.

Patrick Bateman
10-16-2012, 01:50 AM
I see his point about Chapman. Sure it burns up your best arm in the 5th inning, but that was a game changing moment.

But on the whole, I completely agree with you. If Dusty wasn't going to burn up Chapman, I really don't see how sticking with your ace starter, who'd been cruising for the first four innings, is the gigantic tactical transgression people make it out to be. Bringing in a new pitcher isn't the answer to every problem in the playoffs.

I personally wouldn't use Chapman, because you have to get him warmed up first, numerous batters in advance, and if the situation ends up not dictating a logical spot for Chapman, you might have just got him warmed up for no reason. He doesn't strike me as a guy that you want to get up and down and still expect him to be sharp later.

I personally would have been getting Marshall warmed up. I consider him to be the next best guy (and can get out righties or lefties), has great control, and could likely handle that situation well, and maybe not a huge deal if you get him warmed up and then end up saving him for later. I said at the time I would have had him in for Posey, but in the end, who knows if that would have played out well later, and generally Latos was as good a candidate as any to get Posey struck out.

Tom Servo
10-16-2012, 01:58 AM
I agree that the Reds outplayed the Giants. The Reds dominated the first two games, the Giants dominated the last two (though the Reds had their chances in the last one). It was the middle one that drives me absolutely batty, Game 3 where the Reds had no business losing. And I still think pulling your best pitcher, Chapman, after one inning and putting in Broxton was bad decision making. I don't think we are doomed with Dusty, but I also don't think we are likely to get any closer to the World Series under his management than we already have. And sometimes you need to say that the status quo isn't good enough.

757690
10-16-2012, 02:59 AM
I'm not eager to spend the next two years seeing if that rep is justified. They've outright wasted three years of their current window. It isn't going to stay open forever.

First there was the Casey/Larkin window, then the Dunn/Kearns/Griffey window, then the Harang/Arroyo window, now the Votto/Cueto/Bruce window.

This is a smart organization with a strong farm system. There will always be windows, some better than others, but they never close, they just change players.

RBA
10-16-2012, 04:30 AM
People on Facebook are freaking out commenting on the MLBTR announcement. :lol:

When are people on Facebook not freaking out? It's where all those AOL users have migrated to.

mth123
10-16-2012, 05:20 AM
After living through a handful of managers over the last 10-12 years, I can emphatically state that ANY replacement manager would have you scratching your head six weeks into a new season. Bellyaching about line-ups. Complaining about sacrifice bunts. You name it, the same complaints would rise up.

The garbage Dusty gets called on is the same garbage every manager has been called on. Go back over the last 15 seasons: Mackanin, Narron, Miley, Boone - all got ragged on for in-game decisions, playing certain players, etc. Jack McKeon was the last manager who got positive reviews - mainly because he had AAAA players and still managed to cobble together a winning record.

To me, Dusty's return never has been a question of the FO not wanting him back, but a matter of Dusty's health.

This is not a bad thing.

:thumbup::thumbup:

GAC
10-16-2012, 05:35 AM
8th most wins in a season in team history good enough?

Franchises don't dump guys for that

Yep. But some would say a better tactical, critical thinking manager would have gotten 100+ wins out of this team. LOL

He lost his closer before the season ever started, as well as other key injuries to his bullpen staff early, causing him to make changes/redefine roles in his rotation... his starting 3Bman was in/out of the lineup all year due injury/age, yet he had the confidence to hand the job to a rookie.... his GG 2Bman struggled with some injury off/on....and most importantly, he lost the team MVP for most of the 2nd half.

Yet somehow this team still won 97 games ins spite of Baker. ;)

And I still say that if this team hadn't lost Cueto we'd be in that championship game. But alas -that's baseball.

GAC
10-16-2012, 05:43 AM
If you think Dusty Baker is the reason the Reds won 97 games you aren't paying attention.

If you think the only criteria for judging a manager is the win total, why didn't they fire him after last year's collapse from a playoff team to a losing record? Same manager managing the same way. Proof positive that Dusty Baker isn't a great manager.

Key injuries in 2011? Plus, in the course of this last off-season this FO did address some of the holes/weaknesses. Not all of them, but some.

GAC
10-16-2012, 06:05 AM
2010 - Division champs, out in first round
2012 - Division champs, out in first round

Sure some elements may have changed, but the result was the same: no improvement :bash:

But what were the reasons we went out in the first round in each of those years?....

In 2010, the Reds, even though we won the division, was a team with greater holes, and were HUGE underdogs going into the 1st round vs what many state was the best pitching rotation in all of baseball that year. Most saw the Reds as being over-matched and not having a chance. How is that Baker's fault?

I understand many fans frustration in the 1st round this year. Especially being up 2-0. And while some may question some of Baker's calls/decisions in any of those last 3 games, IMO, none were influential enough to be pinpointed as the reason(s) we lost. #1 - you can't lose your Ace and CY candidate right off the bat. Think things would have been different if he was able to pitch game #4? And #2 - Votto was not Votto.

It still came down to pointing the finger at those players on the field... uncharacteristic, yet critical, errors really hurt.... and not taking advantage of MULTIPLE golden opportunities when they presented themselves.

Jocketty has a job to do this off-season to address some of the weaknesses that still plague this team, and which also reared it[s ugly head in the post-season. This team struggled badly offensively in September - I saw that as a warning sign - and it carried over for the most part.

KittyDuran
10-16-2012, 06:53 AM
When are people on Facebook not freaking out? It's where all those AOL users have migrated to.Hey! Not me (not even my Dad)... :p

RedFanAlways1966
10-16-2012, 08:24 AM
I am still convinced that if not for BP's running mistake in inning one of game 3... then we are not talking about this right now b/c the REDS wait until after the NLCS/WS to extend his contract. Please do not forget this. If not for this, then there is no discussion of this-and-that in games 3-4-5. Of course some will fault Dusty Baker for BP's bad decision to try to take 3rd base. I am convinced from reading this thread (and numerous others).

But this all reminds me of one thing. People want a manager that has led this team to 2 division titles in 3 years relieved of his duties. Ignorance, hatred... I am not sure. I am still waiting to hear of this Connie Mack/John McGraw test tube by-product that will replace a WINNER. "That guy" in Toronto. Show me his trophy case.

One five game series vs 8 months. Makes sense. Tell that to BP or the other 7 guys who could manage but 1 hit over nine innings. Oh yes, Dusty should have brought up the powerful bench or possibly himself to drive in that winning run (you know, the run that BP cost his team with a mental error).

Some of you are probably too young to remember that 1990 WS champion. Of the four teams who made that post-season, they were probably 3rd or 4th best. They were not even considered the best in the NL! Damn, they won the thing. Think about that all of you "WS champs or nothing thinkers".

edabbs44
10-16-2012, 08:27 AM
Key injuries in 2011? Plus, in the course of this last off-season this FO did address some of the holes/weaknesses. Not all of them, but some.

Especially since the OP believes that Dusty plays a large role in the construction of the roster, as was stated earlier in the thread. Looking at the roster management that we have seen over the past few years, if counted for Dusty then he should get even higher grades than he is being given by some.

Always Red
10-16-2012, 09:45 AM
Could be that I'm just becoming a bitter old guy, but I find myself actually agreeing with Paul Daugherty more and more every day.


If you’re looking at this from outside, maybe you’re thinking what a bunch of morons Reds fans are. Especially if Outside is a burg like Pitts or KC or Seattle or Houston or. . .

Wait, your team won 97 games last year, has won a division title two of the last three years, and you want to what? Fire the manager?

Hahaha.

Maybe the problem isnt with Dusty.

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/daugherty/2012/10/16/the-morning-line-1016/

mth123
10-16-2012, 09:58 AM
Posted this in one of the other Dusty threads. May as well put it here too.

The pre-season prediction thread had 2 people who predicted that the Reds would win 97 games or more. The average was in the 88 to 89 range. The "knowledge" of the posters here who say the Reds should have gotten more out of the season are the same "knowledgeable" posters who said the Reds didn't have the talent to win as many as they did.

IMO, you can't have it both ways. I predicted 92 wins. The team won 97 and surpassed my expectations. Were there things I disagreed with? Sure there were. Fact is they did better than they should have with the obvious roster flaws that included no real lead-off guys, too may RH bats who struggled against RHP, their top 15 prospect falling flat on his face and the best player on the team out for a huge chunk of the season. I don't see any grounds for taking the manager's job away. In fact, even though there were some obvious warts, he worked a minor miracle IMO. If you weren't one of those people who predicted 97 wins or more (Sir Charles, Roy Tucker) what grounds do you have to complain about bringing back the Manager?

One fairly vocal poster in this thread, whose stance is that Dusty cost the team wins, only predicted 85 wins. I don't get it.
__________________

GAC
10-16-2012, 10:35 AM
Posted this in one of the other Dusty threads. May as well put it here too.

The pre-season prediction thread had 2 people who predicted that the Reds would win 97 games or more. The average was in the 88 to 89 range. The "knowledge" of the posters here who say the Reds should have gotten more out of the season are the same "knowledgeable" posters who said the Reds didn't have the talent to win as many as they did.

IMO, you can't have it both ways. I predicted 92 wins. The team won 97 and surpassed my expectations. Were there things I disagreed with? Sure there were. Fact is they did better than they should have with the obvious roster flaws that included no real lead-off guys, too may RH bats who struggled against RHP, their top 15 prospect falling flat on his face and the best player on the team out for a huge chunk of the season. I don't see any grounds for taking the manager's job away. In fact, even though there were some obvious warts, he worked a minor miracle IMO. If you weren't one of those people who predicted 97 wins or more (Sir Charles, Roy Tucker) what grounds do you have to complain about bringing back the Manager?

One fairly vocal poster in this thread, whose stance is that Dusty cost the team wins, only predicted 85 wins. I don't get it.
__________________


:thumbup:

mdccclxix
10-16-2012, 10:37 AM
I had Stubbs, Heisey and Bailey getting a combined $5M in arbitration. I don't see them being moved because of raises. They will be getting very moderate raises. I simply used cots for the payroll, but I don't think the deferments are going to make much difference at all. The Reds may have a few million to spend. Enough to maybe get a poor starting caliber player or a quality bench player or two.

Arroyo's only getting 6.5 next year, did you count it as 12 million? I think that's the main deferral.

Here's my thinking on arb for those guys:

Bailey = 4 million
Heisey = 1 million
Stubbs = 2 million
Leake = 2 million

Those are just guesses, but sort of guaged off the fact that Bailey, whose career bWAR was 0 before this season, got 2.4 million in his first arb year.

I think now is the time to shed some of these valuable cost controlled players before they become too expensive. Unless the payroll is going up in the mid to high 90's.

OldXOhio
10-16-2012, 11:01 AM
If you’re looking at this from outside, maybe you’re thinking what a bunch of morons Reds fans are. Especially if Outside is a burg like Pitts or KC or Seattle or Houston or. . .


Wait, your team won 97 games last year, has won a division title two of the last three years, and you want to what? Fire the manager?

Hahaha.

Maybe the problem isnt with Dusty.

Is the Reds current situation really a problem? Some might call it an opportunity.

Caveat Emperor
10-16-2012, 12:24 PM
Could be that I'm just becoming a bitter old guy, but I find myself actually agreeing with Paul Daugherty more and more every day.

It all depends on your point of view.

The Seattle Mariners, between 2000 and 2003 won 91, 116, 93, and 93 games. They never won a World Series. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 3 years?

The Oakland As, between 2000 and 2004 won 91, 102, 103, 96, and 91 games. Four times during that stretch, they were dumped in the divisional round 3-2. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 4 years?

There's no right answer to that question. You might be perfectly fine having summer after summer of 90 or 100+ win teams to root for. I'm not. I want Championships. I want the World Series being played at GABP. I want parades at the end of seasons, not just at the beginning. I want a new Reds tradition for MY generation -- statues of players I rooted for out in front of the stadium.

I don't want halfways, almosts, and good shots.

_Sir_Charles_
10-16-2012, 12:27 PM
It all depends on your point of view.

The Seattle Mariners, between 2000 and 2003 won 91, 116, 93, and 93 games. They never won a World Series. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 3 years?

The Oakland As, between 2000 and 2004 won 91, 102, 103, 96, and 91 games. Four times during that stretch, they were dumped in the divisional round 3-2. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 4 years?

There's no right answer to that question. You might be perfectly fine having summer after summer of 90 or 100+ win teams to root for. I'm not. I want Championships. I want the World Series being played at GABP. I want parades at the end of seasons, not just at the beginning. I want a new Reds tradition for MY generation -- statues of players I rooted for out in front of the stadium.

I don't want halfways, almosts, and good shots.

For myself, yes...I'd be perfectly fine with that being the Reds for the next several years. Win divisions, make the playoffs, let the chips fall where they may. That's what I'm looking for. If we get championships, icing on the cake for me.

westofyou
10-16-2012, 12:30 PM
It all depends on your point of view.

The Seattle Mariners, between 2000 and 2003 won 91, 116, 93, and 93 games. They never won a World Series. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 3 years?

The Oakland As, between 2000 and 2004 won 91, 102, 103, 96, and 91 games. Four times during that stretch, they were dumped in the divisional round 3-2. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 4 years?

There's no right answer to that question. You might be perfectly fine having summer after summer of 90 or 100+ win teams to root for. I'm not. I want Championships. I want the World Series being played at GABP. I want parades at the end of seasons, not just at the beginning. I want a new Reds tradition for MY generation -- statues of players I rooted for out in front of the stadium.

I don't want halfways, almosts, and good shots.

Oh Lord.. I'm quoting Daughtery :bang:



Our capacity to enjoy anything is kinda limited around here. I know we’ve been bludgeoned with bad breaks. Does that mean we can’t expect the best?

I know we’re a conservative, buttoned-down hamlet. We’re not good at self-love. But this is a very likeable team, with players you can relate to. Todd Frazier is as likeable as it gets. What’s not to appreciate about R. Hanigan? Chapman is a carnival. And so on.

I’m not getting paid by The Club. And I’m guilty, too, of the occasional Dusty-bash. But I don’t let it consume me, to the point where I can’t enjoy what I’m witnessing on the field.

Lighten up, loosen up, don’t let the good times roll right on by. They don’t come ’round all that often.

Caveat Emperor
10-16-2012, 12:31 PM
Oh Lord.. I'm quoting Daughtery :bang:

I'm amazed you even made it far enough to copy and paste. ;)

Patrick Bateman
10-16-2012, 12:37 PM
It all depends on your point of view.

The Seattle Mariners, between 2000 and 2003 won 91, 116, 93, and 93 games. They never won a World Series. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 3 years?

The Oakland As, between 2000 and 2004 won 91, 102, 103, 96, and 91 games. Four times during that stretch, they were dumped in the divisional round 3-2. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 4 years?

There's no right answer to that question. You might be perfectly fine having summer after summer of 90 or 100+ win teams to root for. I'm not. I want Championships. I want the World Series being played at GABP. I want parades at the end of seasons, not just at the beginning. I want a new Reds tradition for MY generation -- statues of players I rooted for out in front of the stadium.

I don't want halfways, almosts, and good shots.

Simply put, once you get to the playoffs, it's pretty much out of the team's control. The odds of any team winning the WS in a given year is never greater than about 15%. There is no way around that, it's just simply how it works in baseball.

I would take that stretch of regular season success any day. What happens after that is unpredictable. If the Reds do follow that trend, I will happy with what we get, and hope that we get lucky and catch fire in the playoffs. If they don't, oh well, not much to blame other than the baseball gods.

Always Red
10-16-2012, 12:41 PM
It all depends on your point of view.

The Seattle Mariners, between 2000 and 2003 won 91, 116, 93, and 93 games. They never won a World Series. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 3 years?

The Oakland As, between 2000 and 2004 won 91, 102, 103, 96, and 91 games. Four times during that stretch, they were dumped in the divisional round 3-2. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 4 years?

There's no right answer to that question. You might be perfectly fine having summer after summer of 90 or 100+ win teams to root for. I'm not. I want Championships. I want the World Series being played at GABP. I want parades at the end of seasons, not just at the beginning. I want a new Reds tradition for MY generation -- statues of players I rooted for out in front of the stadium.

I don't want halfways, almosts, and good shots.

You want an guarantee, and that doesn't exist, especially into today's crapshoot playoffs.

Sparky and Torre couldn't win the big ones...until they did. Torre managed 15 years, with only one division championship, and got swept in the playoffs that year, before suddenly becoming a genius in New York.

If you could guarantee me that not rehiring Dusty Baker, and hiring someone else instead would absolutely, positively result in a World's Championship, then I think everyone here would be on board with you. No one could hand pick one manager, employed or not right now, that could deliver on that.

But you want to take a really good thing, better than we've had in 20 years, and gamble that you absolutely will make it better. In spite of this team doing much better than you (or I) thought it would do this past year.

The only guarantee is that Dusty Baker is the same guy today and will be next year as he was yesterday. I'm happy with that, and tend to "believe" that there is not something inherent in his genetic makeup that keeps him from "winning the big one."

Most here aren't happy with Baker, and now that he's back, it'll be back to the daily Dusty bashing. I get that. It's painful to read it everyday, but it is what it is.

I'd rather improve the roster and give him better players to put in the lineup.

Always Red
10-16-2012, 12:43 PM
It all depends on your point of view.



No, I'm pretty sure I'm becoming a bitter old guy. ;)

NJReds
10-16-2012, 01:01 PM
It all depends on your point of view.
The Seattle Mariners, between 2000 and 2003 won 91, 116, 93, and 93 games. They never won a World Series. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 3 years?


Didn't they do that with Sweet Lou at the helm? Lou "outcoached" Leyland and LaRussa in 1990 ... was he just lucky?

CySeymour
10-16-2012, 01:02 PM
The probably fact is there really isn't anyone available who could do a better job then Dusty at this point. And if there is a better tactical manager, would the players respond? Would Price have returned for a new manager? Probably just as well to stick with Dusty and accept his flaws. With that, Jocketty needs to come up with fewer players for him to misuse.

marcshoe
10-16-2012, 01:22 PM
I hope Dusty's health allows him to serve out the contract, but I also hope that he doesn't push on to the point that it hurts his health.

Tom Servo
10-16-2012, 01:57 PM
The weird thing is when it comes to football, I have always said give me a guy like Marty Schottenheimer who will at least get you to the playoffs even if he has a reputation of not being able to get you over the hump. I thought the Chargers made a huge mistake when they fired him and hired Norv Turner, who couldn't even guarantee you a playoff appearance.

But with baseball, I dunno, it's just soul crushing to watch the team play 162 games, win at a near .600 clip, and then fail to advance in the playoffs. And if Walt were comfortable hiring somebody else, and I really do think he would be, I would trust him not to hire a Norv Turner.

VR
10-16-2012, 02:32 PM
Based on this mindset, looks like Bob Brenly is the guy to bring in....as he's a genius that's actually won a World Series.

lollipopcurve
10-16-2012, 03:24 PM
But with baseball, I dunno, it's just soul crushing to watch the team play 162 games, win at a near .600 clip, and then fail to advance in the playoffs.

The regular season's the meal -- where you get your baseball nutrients. Playoffs are dessert.

redsmetz
10-16-2012, 04:06 PM
Oh Lord.. I'm quoting Daughtery :bang:

Our capacity to enjoy anything is kinda limited around here. I know we’ve been bludgeoned with bad breaks. Does that mean we can’t expect the best?

I know we’re a conservative, buttoned-down hamlet. We’re not good at self-love. But this is a very likeable team, with players you can relate to. Todd Frazier is as likeable as it gets. What’s not to appreciate about R. Hanigan? Chapman is a carnival. And so on.

I’m not getting paid by The Club. And I’m guilty, too, of the occasional Dusty-bash. But I don’t let it consume me, to the point where I can’t enjoy what I’m witnessing on the field.

Lighten up, loosen up, don’t let the good times roll right on by. They don’t come ’round all that often.

That final line has been said by you multiple times. That's why it resonates with you. In fact, you should ask Daugherty why he lifted it from you.

REDREAD
10-16-2012, 04:07 PM
The players failed, but Dusty still got out-manged by Bruce Bochy, who isn't exactly a MENSA member.

I disagree. There was a game (Game 3?) when Dusty brought in Marshall in the 6th or 7th inning and Bochy decided to empty his entire bench other than the backup catcher and got no hits.. I think the game was tied at the time (?) Anyhow, that was an idiotic move. The Giants ended up winning due to a past ball and error, but Bochy was not exactly "out managing Dusty".

I didn't follow Game 4 and 5 too closely.. I guess Bochy had the advantage of having a guy like Linecum out of the pen.. It's fair to blame Walt/Dusty for not putting Leake on the postseason roster (chosing Simon instead), but I guess I disagree that Dusty was "outmanaged". But maybe I missed a glaring error in Game 4 or 5 that Dusty did (Just saying that I missed parts of those games)

REDREAD
10-16-2012, 04:12 PM
I'm gonna ask you guys to put them on the table.

Playoffs. Crapshoot or not?

I think they are a crapshoot.

But of course a manager can have an effect on the outcome. Yet in 2010 and 2012 I can't say Dusty was way out of bounds with any moves...so I can't hold him responsible for the 2 series losses.

But that's me.

I think a team can do stuff to improve their playoff chances.
It's obvious (but hard to implement).. Correlation studies say you have the best chance with a strong defense and bullpen.. Obviously ace starters and the ability to manufacture runs probably helps too.

But yea, Latos had a bad day on game 5.. for whatever reason, it just happened. Hard to call anyone stupid for deciding to schedule Latos for game 5 though.. Just like it's hard to predict that Hanny and Rolen would have miscues in Game 3.. stuff happens.

So yea, it is somewhat of a crapshoot.. Just like the Astros can sometimes beat the Reds on a given day.. doesn't really mean that the Astros are a better team.

westofyou
10-16-2012, 04:14 PM
The regular season's the meal -- where you get your baseball nutrients. Playoffs are dessert.

No doubt, isn't the greatest thing about baseball the fact that it's on every freaking day for half the year?

You don't have to mortgage your weekends to catch a game, when you do decide to watch a game you don't have to slot yourself into one time slot if it's not the weekend, there are games on in the day, on the east coast, on the west coast.

Six freaking months and I wouldn't change it for anything

I cry at the end of the playoffs because it means no more baseball, not because I can't stick my chest out a bit further an declare that I'm a FAN of the best team.

redsmetz
10-16-2012, 04:36 PM
No doubt, isn't the greatest thing about baseball the fact that it's on every freaking day for half the year?

You don't have to mortgage your weekends to catch a game, when you do decide to watch a game you don't have to slot yourself into one time slot if it's not the weekend, there are games on in the day, on the east coast, on the west coast.

Six freaking months and I wouldn't change it for anything

I cry at the end of the playoffs because it means no more baseball, not because I can't stick my chest out a bit further an declare that I'm a FAN of the best team.

I've already caught myself going to switch my car radio to see if the game's started and then realize the season's over (for the Reds). I watched a tiny bit of one of the Cardinals/Giants game two days ago, but couldn't watch the Cards batting. My wife said I shouldn't be bitter, but San Francisco can't dispatch those guys fast enough this season. We listened to a lot of Reds games on the radio in the evenings this year, more so than usual, because the season was so exciting. Alas.

traderumor
10-16-2012, 08:13 PM
Welcome back, Dusty.

GAC
10-17-2012, 08:48 AM
It all depends on your point of view.

The Seattle Mariners, between 2000 and 2003 won 91, 116, 93, and 93 games. They never won a World Series. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 3 years?

The Oakland As, between 2000 and 2004 won 91, 102, 103, 96, and 91 games. Four times during that stretch, they were dumped in the divisional round 3-2. Are you OK with that being the Cincinnati Reds for the next 4 years?

Why stop there? How about the Twins who, from 2002-2010, pretty much dominated the AL Central, yet got their butts kicked 6 times in the post-season, and in that span never made it to a WS? Does that make Gardenhire a bad manager? Then there are those lovable Cubs who in the last decade lost in all 3 post-season appearances (two under Sweet Lou).

Look at the Cleveland Indians of the 90's,. They dominated the AL, yet were losers every time in the post-season. And the same thing can be said of the Atlanta Braves of the 90s. One helluva ball team, and some of those team won 100+ games. Yet from 1991 to 2005, and in 14 post-season appearances, they won one WS (1995 vs Indians).

Even more examples can be sighted, but I'll stop there.


There's no right answer to that question.

Sure there is. If I was a fan of any of the teams above, I may be tempted to hang my head, or show disappointment... but on the other side of the coin I could be a fan of organizations like Kansas City, Pittsburgh, and a few others, who haven't sniffed a winning record and/or the post-season in eons. That doesn't mean one is content, doesn't want better results, but only that, as a fan, you could be in a far worse situation (even futility).


You might be perfectly fine having summer after summer of 90 or 100+ win teams to root for. I'm not. I want Championships. I want the World Series being played at GABP. I want parades at the end of seasons, not just at the beginning. I want a new Reds tradition for MY generation -- statues of players I rooted for out in front of the stadium.

I don't want halfways, almosts, and good shots.

And there isn't a member on this forum that doesn't want the above. It's not like we're content with what occurred this year (post-season). We simply are forced to accept it because it is now history, and it can't be changed. So why, as fans, beat ourselves, and this organization (especially Dusty), over the head, lamenting over what could have been?

We've all been members of this forum for quite some time. Prior to 2006, and for a decade, people on here were wondering ... as we went through managers, GMs, owners, and a hodgepodge of player personnel ..... if this organization would ever get it's act together, quit being an embarrassment, and start putting a quality product on that field and become competitive again.

They have at least accomplished that.

Should they (we) be content. Not at all. But let's be honest here....

As successful as this team was this season, it had it's very glaring "holes" (weaknesses). Some contend this year's team was "built" to win the WS. Well, IMO, if that was true then we'd currently be in the NLCS, and be going on to the WS. We're not. But I'll be honest.... as I watched this team struggle offensively in the last month (September) - and they were bad - I actually told myself "I don't see this team escaping out of the 1st round." When they won the first two in S.F. I thought "Alright! We're gonna do this!" Then that monster reared it's ugly head in those last three games. Sure, we can say losing Cueto, having to juggle the rotation, and Votto not being Votto, hurt us. If someone wants to add the defensive lapses, or even a decision or two that Baker may have made that's fine.

But the bottom line is this team, in those last three games, went 3 fer 24 with RISP, and stranded 28 men on base. We were given golden opportunities and could not capitalize. That is not the mark of a WS winning team. but one that, at some point in the post-season, is doomed for disappointment IMO.

But we'll be back next year, and we will be in the hunt once again. Before we were never in the hunt. And IMO, the regular season, and especially the post-season, should show this FO those areas they need to address to get us to that "next level". That is the only item I'm going to "worry" about this off-season - are they going to do what is necessary to address them? And so far, Castellii and Jocketty have done a pretty good job in restoring this organization.

Every year, at the end, there are going to be 29 disappointed teams (fans). Why?

http://www.onandoffthestreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/highlander.jpg

lollipopcurve
10-17-2012, 09:56 AM
And so far, Castellii and Jocketty have done a pretty good job in restoring this organization.

Better than pretty good, IMO.