Originally Posted by Will M
the team keeps making mistake after mistake despite changes in ownership, GMs & managers.
then the team keeps running out the same 'potential' guys year after year with the same subpar results. it seems 2010 was simply to put 'lipstick on the pig' of the 2009 team & try to sell it to the fans as a team that could compete. same players as 2009 is gonna get you the same results as 2009.
I think that I agree with you. I wish that the Reds would either get on the Tampa, Florida, Oakland, and Minnesota plan or get on the St. Louis and other big spenders plan. The Reds keep getting basically the same $50.00 bag of groceries filled with cheap cosmetics when they go shopping.
They did pay the big bucks for the general manager, the manager and the broadcast booth, to get similiar results, that many try to dismiss and white wash away.
The same players as 2008, 2009 or the same, like or similar performance and production numbers, even if the players names change, will get you the same results as 2008, 2009.…..2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 etc.
Walt Jocketty/Dusty Baker's Cincinnati Reds
2008 OBP .321 ranked 25th RS 704 ranked 24th 4.34 RPG
2009 OBP .318 ranked 28th RS 673 ranked 24th 4.15 RPG
2010 OBP .314 ranked 25th RS 121 ranked 20th RS projects 700 4.32 RPG
Run support for the pitching?
Or the same lipstick?
Repackaged and sold to the fans.
I think that I recognize the snout and curly little tail.
To put "lipstick on a pig" is a rhetorical expression, used to convey the message that making superficial or cosmetic changes is a futile attempt to disguise the true nature of a product.