Originally Posted by Falls City Beer
Maybe it's just a phrase, but I think you know what I mean. You've seen organizations that fail time and time again--for a lot of reasons, of course, and no it's not a curse--there's an inertia in some organizations (not just ballclubs either) that is almost impossible to overcome. Lack of urgency, acceptance of lower standards of performance, cheapness.
But I like this bunch of players. Can they buck disaster? (Which is a different question than, "can they be good or great?")
I agree with you that for the past "lost decade" (your check is in the mail, Cyclone), the Reds were a Double-Helix of Failure. Don't have to do much research to back up that claim.
But I think the Double-Helix was at first an ownership that valued profit over winning, and a GM that held a "win now at all cost, the future be damned" philosophy.
Then it became an owner with a "win now at all cost, the future be damned" philosophy, and a GM with good scouting skills but no discernible organizational plan whatsoever.
This is not either of those two organizations. I only see one small Helix of failure, and that is a manager that likes to manage like it's 1979. But the owner wants to win and is willing to spend what is necessary, and the GM has a long term plan of building a strong organization deep on pitching and defense.
I just don't see a long downward spiral this year. The Reds may not make the playoffs, but they will contend the rest of the year, and be fun to watch. More importantly, I think they will be a solid playoff team for years to come.