Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

This is a 'state-of-the-franchise' question.

With that trade, I have no idea what direction the franchise is going. It was very clear before that. 2010 and 2011 and 2012 were clear in my mind.

To me, the boat's adrift right now.

Can anyone tell me where this ship is going?

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

There's a rudder on this ship??

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

What is this "rudder" of which you speak?

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

Is this the minor league rudder we're talking about? Because I think that one has been stripped and traded to a fishing buddy for an aging, expensive one that our GM can use for a few years on his Major League boat.

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

Maybe we need anudder rudder.

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

Wow -- maybe a little perspective is in order. The team trades two prospects and you'd think the sky was falling around here.

Lots of very good young players still abound who can help the Reds in 2010 and beyond. It's not like the sold off everything not nailed down to bring in a 25-man full of 30-something vets.

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

I'd agree in general, but I think the Rolen deal upsets people because it doesn't seem consistent with a coherent plan to be consistently very good. It seems much more consistent with not having to watch EE throw balls in the dugout and then hear casual fans complain that the Reds are terrible because of EE when the real problem is they can't score any runs and their pitching hasn't been as good as they'd hoped. EE was a problem, but he wasn't a priority problem. By fixing 3rd base at a high price with a name player (albeit a legitimately good, if risky, name player) it appears Walt J or Bob C, or both, are responding to the casual fans at at the expense of the more fundamental issues (SS, CF, LF, and SP).

So, the perspective might be that the Rolen deal was questionable and it appears to signal that the front office doesn't really get it. The combination causes the angst, not simply the loss of two pitching prospects.

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

Bravo BRM well put! :thumbup:

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

I think the rudder can be fixed just like in the movie African Queen it'll be tough, put Phillips at SS and Frazier at second, release Tavares and sign a free agent starter, doesnt have to be anyone that the Yankees or Red Sox will go after but someone solid and then we're back on track with good defense and a more consistent offense and somewhat stable starting pitching staff, I could see the budget coming in around 80-85 million

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

I didn't say the ship was sunk.

Can you tell what direction the ship is heading?

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

Very well said, agree with this 100 percent.

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

Good analysis, BRM13, but I'd dispute, mildly, one point. EE's problems certainly are not the primary reason the team is bad, but it's always a priority problem when a player is allowed to play a position for several years when everybody on the team--probably including EE himself--knows he can't play it adequately. It undermines the team's morale, its respect for itself; in the case of an infielder, it is particularly hard on the pitchers. I'd be more than willing to guess, in fact, that if this team had an absolutely fierce competitor among its pitchers, a Clemens say, EE would have been gone some time ago, at least he'd have been off 3b.

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

Or it signals, in this case, that the FO doesn't agree with the assessment of a good handful of folks on RZ. I don't believe it in any way indicates they don't get it. I would suggest there are various ways to reach the goal we all want, a winning baseball team.

We can disagree for sure, but I think the poster who stated that folks were overreacting, hit the nail on the head. They traded three prospects, two who may end up being successful ML pitchers and suddenly we're rudderless. Frankly that is an overreaction and it overlooks the talent we have on this team.

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

Have you ever seen Stewart pitch?

There has been a whole lot of moaning and groaning about a relief pitcher who very few have actually seen pitch. Even if you think he will become a starter, it will still take him 2 years to build up the arm strength to start.

This is the first legit trade for a major league caliber player using minor leaguers since the Greg Vaughn trade in 1999. This is the first trade for a legit major leaguer since the Ken Griffy trade in 2000. The Reds have tried the FA method, they have tried promoting from within, they have tried trading for scraps and turning them into good big leaguers, none of these methods have worked in the past 10 years. So the Reds go out and trade for a top 20 3b in the history of baseball, who probably has 2-3 productive years left and many are questioning the motives of the front office.

Re: Is the rudder of the ship broken?
 

It really is ironic that we complained that the Reds need to get rid of EE. And that we were accumulating players in the minors who have value that could be used in trades for necessary parts. But when we pull the trigger on a trade that moves EE and acquires a solid bat, albeit one with some risks, we suddenly have no direction.

And for the first time, someone in management has given even a tiny thought that we might address our need at shortstop with Brandon Phillips when we are exploring playing a talented minor leaguer at second, but we're "rudderless".

There are times I think we're a bit schizophrenic around here.

And I fully acknowledge that both pitchers could turn into serviceable ML'ers (or even very good ones) and that the Jays might actually unlock the full talent of Edwin Encarnacion. We addressed an acknowledged need (one of several) while sending out the player only more reviled around here than Willy Taveras. Man, this is a tough crowd.