Originally Posted by WVRedsFan
No shut door here, but to say I'm mystified at how they went about "improving" the team is the understatement of the year. And I want someone, anyone, to blow a hole in my argument or stand on this. I've said this before and not to beat a dead horse, it started out well and then (all of a sudden) we were getting every retread that ever pitched a ball game in a Reds uniform. That reminded me of the Bowden years. Franklin, Kim, Mays, the list goes on, were brought in to do what pitchers we already had could do and that was give up great numbers of hits and runs. The bullpen was statistically better, but the guys we already had improved also, so determining the effect of that should be left to Cyclone or someone who has time to figure it. Anyway the result if obvious.
And I agree this team needed some tinkering and yes, only one starting pitcher was different, but the result will apparently be the same, no matter how much tinkering was done (hopefully not, btw). I guess the best thing to do is give it a couple of years and then judge. I just wish Robert and Wayne had done that with field management (at least a year), but adoration of Krivsky and Castillini (I can't spell his name, I know) is a little much right now.
"Started out well" is the key point. The team had a great April, the rest of the season was more of the same because it was the same. The results were predictable, although we all hoped upon hope the team would be the one to overcome the odds. In the end, they have not and the minor moves that were made had mixed results.
Now, this offseason will tell us much, as I hope a major overhaul will take place.