Originally Posted by M2
Rosie, iirc, folks were pretty high on the Reds bullpen heading into last season. There was a widespread love affair with Wagner (me included). Lots of folks believed Riedling was closer material. Reitsma was in the mix until the very end of ST and then Jones stepped in. You also didn't have to search too hard for folks who'd toss a bouquet at Van Poppel or Norton. And Danny Graves was a "proven closer."
I remember folks catching flak for suggesting the Reds bullpen was headed for a sharp downward turn. IMO, this group still doesn't have the makings of a good pen. Maybe it will be better than last year's group (that's a real low bar to clear), but it's not anything near the terminator units that were common in the JimBo regime.
I agree, with all that. Especially the low bar to clear part, and bullpens of the past being much better than what we have today.
But come Opening Day this year, I'll probably even be saying that this current bupllen will be a good one, everyone will have a great year, etc. Because when it comes time to play ball, I want to believe the Reds can win, so I just choose to think it's possible.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I think it's fine for a fan to think, at the beginning of the year, that Riedling is closer material, Wagner will be great, etc. Then you go through the year, and realize "hmm, not so great as I thought." So in the offseason, when the FO gets some new players who (on paper at least) look better than some of the players we had, the whole process starts all over again. I'm at least going to allow for the possibility that the bullpen could be
markedly improved by the new additions.
(Yes, okay, I realize I'm trying to convince myself now.