Originally Posted by The Snow Chief
Come on Brutus. Do you actually think that any manager in baseball past or present could have made the Reds contenders until this ownership group came in and cleaned up the mess that was Cincinnati Reds baseball? We are no longer trotting out Jimmy Haynes or Eric Milton as front of the rotation starters. Dusty is the only manager of the Reds this century who has been given the tools to compete by the front office and GM. You know that.
If you think he is the person to lead this talented group to the promised land over the next couple seasons, fine. However, don't think we're stupid enough to fall for this argument.
Don't think you're stupid enough to fall for the argument that this Reds team did better with Dusty than without and that its' not worth risking the alternatives to find out whether it's true? I never said the Reds made the playoffs solely on account of Dusty Baker. But I sure as heck think if someone is going to make the argument he was given talent, then they should also not be talking out of both sides of their mouths and act like it's his fault they didn't do anything in the playoffs. You can't have it both ways. Either he was not responsible for their success in the regular season or he was equally not responsible for the lack of playoff success.
That grass isn't always greener on the other side. Personally, I think the Reds are better with Dusty than without. And to whatever extent that is debatable, I don't think we should want to find out if it's true. Bobby Valentine says hello.