PDA

View Full Version : 1989 and 1991 Reds



redsfan80
10-17-2012, 12:37 AM
Okay. Question. I remember the 1990 Reds team being really good...obviously. (They won the WS.) So help me remember this: what was so different about the 1989 team and the 1991 team, why they weren't as successful?

Looking back, and not remembering well, admittedly, it just seemed out of the blue the 1990 team was awesome. Best team in baseball. So wouldn't they have been really good during the years around 1990? Was there a major trade in 1990 that made them that much better...and then lost that player the next year? Just a question.

redsfan80
10-17-2012, 12:39 AM
Just one more fact to throw in there. The Reds were under .500 both in 1989 and 1991. What was so different about the 1990 team?

BluegrassRedleg
10-17-2012, 12:44 AM
Starting pitching went south in 1991. Didn't have anyone reliable after Rijo and Browning. Armstrong stunk and Danny Jackson was no longer around. Meanwhile, ATL was beginning its great run of the 90s.

In 1989, I think they had all the Pete Rose stuff hanging over their heads.

Captain13
10-19-2012, 12:08 PM
Starting pitching went south in 1991. Didn't have anyone reliable after Rijo and Browning. Armstrong stunk and Danny Jackson was no longer around. Meanwhile, ATL was beginning its great run of the 90s.

In 1989, I think they had all the Pete Rose stuff hanging over their heads.

Exactly what he said, plus I think the injury bug hit the team particularly hard in '91.