Why All The Negativity?

[SteelSD]

Ok, so Perez and Miller say no to the reds, which by the way they did, you put the money back in your pocket? Do you think that the reds are better off without Eric Milton on their team? Why do you think that this will keep us from doing something down the road?

I don't see the Reds being significantly better with Eric Milton on the team. So yes, I put the money back in my pocket and save it for a player who'll actually make a difference (note: having 9M to play with a couple seasons ago would have meant landing Scott Rolen in trade).

The contract Milton signed- and particularly the signing bonus- reeks of a desperate attempt to establish credibility. Yet, I'd consider the Reds to be more credible if they'd put the checkbook away and done nothing OR signed a better player regardless of the dollar value of the contract.

And if Perez or Miller or Clement said "no" to the Reds, you find out what would make them say "yes". If you can justify the Milton contract, then you've just identified Matt Clement as a player who's worth geometrically more money to you so you pay it. But if what you need isn't available, buying what you don't need at the same price isn't exactly the smartest thing to do.

In any case, what you just paid Eric Milton just set a standard for what mediocrity is worth to the Reds. Joy.

And just one more question steel, what was the last move the reds made that you liked? Any of you that are against this move, I pose that question to.

Dumping Lidle and moving Todd Jones at the deadline. I also supported the Reitsma trade. So you'll have to excuse me for disrupting that picture you're attempting to paint showing me hating on everything Dan O'Brien does or says just for the heck of it.

<Edit: I also liked the signing of Jimenez this offseason and the Mercker acquisition should be a small help>

He gets props from me when he does something truly significant for the franchise. No sooner.

[westofyou]

Well, then at least you know where Dunn stands, and in the process you haven't just given Eric Milton $25M.

Then O'Brien is negotiating from a disadvantage. As for the 25 million, 4 will go against the 2004 books and he has an out clause himself, that 25 could be seen as 13 over the next 2 seasons in relation to those 2 budgets.

It's hard enough to worry about a business budget I have no control over for one season much alone 3.

For all we know the Reds could be watching the progress of Dunns money handling, or other assets (like his new home being built) and waiting until it's done and then swooping in to make an offer when he has to start filling it up with furniture and paying the mortgage.

IMO the team owns the guy and they're probably scoping out a deal, waiting for the right time to offer years, meanwhile they worry about contracts like Burrell and the history of players with "old ballplayer skills"

[M2]

Where are you going to find a pitcher as good as Wilson for less than $4 million per? I'm not seeing any.

Again, totally the wrong question to ask. The Reds should be looking to make impact additions not, as Steel aptly termed it, hamster-wheel additions.

There were 25 free agent pitchers who were looking for multi-year deals with some reasonable expectation of getting one. Most of those pitchers were worth avoiding.

The Reds had money to spend, there's no longer any disputing that point. If they couldn't land the free agents they wanted, then they should have gone to the trade market and looked to make that work.

Before this offseason ends, some teams will bottomfish better pitchers than Paul Wilson, happens every year. The world's full of better pitchers than Paul Wilson. It's neither a privilege nor a distinction to have him in your rotation.

[RosieRed]

I'm not calling it a sure fire winner, what I am calling it is a step in the right direction, a breath of fresh air to see some effort being put into this team. I just see some people who aren't happy if moves aren't being made and aren't happy if they are. I hope these people have more optimism in their personal lives than they do with the Reds.

Ryan, with all due respect: If you think signing an average pitcher to a $25M deal is a step in the right direction, that's great. It's also your opinion, and someone isn't inherently pessimistic just because they disagree.

[Caveat Emperor]

D'Angelo Jiminez and the 2003 draft. There's been other moves that I haven't minded since then, but those are the last two moves I really liked. Actually I really like the Ben Kozlowski pickup too, though that's more a case of a minor move with high upside.

Here's my question to folks who've reflexively liked every move the Reds have made in recent years, at what point do you recognize that not every move is a sure-fire winner?

I know I haven't been posting on this board much (It was only the recent furry of FA activity that motivated me to actually get an account and stop lurking), but I have to say that I regard D'Angelo Jimenez as living proof that you cannot base a GM philosophy on sabermetrics and statistics alone.

Jimenez is seemingly beloved by every Reds fan who considers himself/herself to be a person that understands the game of baseball. This is a natural thing: he's upper-50th percentile among 2B in just about every measureable stat and, in some cases, lurking in the top-10. D'Angelo Jimenez does all of these things, but despite all the numbers, I cannot find a single thign that the man does well. Sure, he doesn't embarass you in any facet of the game, but he dosen't excell at any partciular aspect of the game.

I've come to the conclusion that most of the so-called "knowledgeable" Reds fans have resigned themselves to a belief that the Reds must, under all circumstances, play it safe. They have to slavishly follow stats like OPS, Runs vs Replacement, and whatever else gets cooked up by dividing number of IBBs by Slugging Percentage during months with more than three vowels. Unfortunately, playing it safe and going by the numbers can only work for so long. D'Angelo Jimenez is the living embodiment of "playing it safe," in that regard. The fact that you think D'Angelo Jimenez is the best thing the Reds have done, IMO, speaks volumes as to where you think this ballclub should be headed.

If you want to be a winning ballclub, there are risks along the way. If you want to be a winning small-market ballclub, those risks are magnified because you cannot underwrite a failure the way NY does. Of course a lot of people want the Reds just to sit back, save their money, and keep developing right along. Somebody call up to PNC Park or Miller Park and ask their FOs how "sitting back and doing nothing" is working for them.

Not every move is a surefire winner, but not every move is a surefire loser. I don't think any of us can armchair quarterback this kinda stuff.

-CE

[Ryan the Reds Fan]

Ok so we shouldn't have resigned Wilson, we shouldn't have traded for Ortiz, shouldn't have signed Milton, and shouldn't have signed Randa, so we go into the season with a payroll at hi 30's low 40's, haven't improved the team, lose our most consistent starter from last year, somehow I have a feeling some folks around here would be yelling a bit. But hey, we kept the money in our pocket.

[Jpup]

Again, totally the wrong question to ask. The Reds should be looking to make impact additions not, as Steel aptly termed it, hamster-wheel additions.

There were 25 free agent pitchers who were looking for multi-year deals with some reasonable expectation of getting one. Most of those pitchers were worth avoiding.

The Reds had money to spend, there's no longer any disputing that point. If they couldn't land the free agents they wanted, then they should have gone to the trade market and looked to make that work.

Before this offseason ends, some teams will bottomfish better pitchers than Paul Wilson, happens every year. The world's full of better pitchers than Paul Wilson. It's neither a privilege nor a distinction to have him in your rotation.

So you don't think that Paul Wilson is a decent pitcher? I think he's faired pretty well in Cincinnati the past couple of years considering the circumstances. I do think he make the Reds a better team even at $4 million per.

[M2]

I'm not calling it a sure fire winner, what I am calling it is a step in the right direction, a breath of fresh air to see some effort being put into this team. I just see some people who aren't happy if moves aren't being made and aren't happy if they are. I hope these people have more optimism in their personal lives than they do with the Reds.

I hear that same sappy line of thinking every offseason. Heard it with Cory Lidle. Heard it with the Todd Walker (people really liked the Brandon Larson direction) and the first Paul Wilson signing. Heard it with Joey Hamilton. Hear it every time the Reds announce a signing or trade. Heck, go and check the lovefest that accompanied the Gabe White trade this past summer.

Technically speaking, every move the organization makes reflects effort being put into the team. Doesn't change the fact that the Reds have collected demonstrably below average starting pitchers and now folks are expecting above average results from them.

Frankly, this discussion is real Groundhog Day for me. Sure I'm just negative/trying to look smart/a bad fan for taking a sober look at these pitchers and noting their fairly obvious deficiencies. Run with that.

[flyer85]

I'm OK with the signing Milton under one condition ... that the money spent on signing Milton doesn't preclude the signing of others.

As long as the Reds will still be willing to spend money to keep their own players and signing Milton didn't remove money from the pool available, then I don't have a problem that they overspent.

[SteelSD]

D'Angelo Jimenez does all of these things, but despite all the numbers, I cannot find a single thign that the man does well.

You mean except being worth more Runs offensively than all but 7 other MLB Second Basemen?

He's not just "safe". He's productive.

I've come to the conclusion that most of the so-called "knowledgeable" Reds fans have resigned themselves to a belief that the Reds must, under all circumstances, play it safe.

Then you've misinterpreted what has been said.

Play it SMART. Not "safe". SMART. Embrace risk, but only when there is a reasonable chance of payoff. Period. Smart. End of story. Nothing more to explain.

There simply isn't a high-level payoff for the 9M risk in reference to Eric Milton. There's no way to possibly get nine million dollars of value from the guy. There's no risk/performance equity in play. None.

Risky? Yes. Smart? No.

[Ryan the Reds Fan]

There's no way to possibly get nine million dollars of value from the guy. There's no risk/performance equity in play. None.

No way Milton has a good year? No way he's worth that money? Say Milton wins 20 games, what do you say then?

[flyer85]

D'Angelo Jimenez does all of these things, but despite all the numbers, I cannot find a single thing that the man does well.
-CE

Translation - all the objective data says he's a solid player but he still sucks.

[TRF]

That he got record run support.

[flyer85]

No way Milton has a good year? No way he's worth that money? Say Milton wins 20 games, what do you say then?

You would have had a better shot if you said a 3.50ERA and 1.15WHIP while pitching 200+ inings.

[M2]

So you don't think that Paul Wilson is a decent pitcher? I think he's faired pretty well in Cincinnati the past couple of years considering the circumstances. I do think he make the Reds a better team even at $4 million per.

I think I spent enough time over the past two years delving into exactly why Paul Wilson's no better than a #4 starter (something you alluded to higher in this thread) and not even that on a playoff-bound team not to have to rehash it for a guy with 113 posts. Nothing personal, but I'm not going to spend the rest of my life having the same discussion with every newbie who comes to the board.

Go here:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/w/wilsopa02.shtml

Look at the ERA+ column.

Caveat, there's a reason why the Reds have been a losing team for the past four season. They make poor decisions. I've been amazed at how easy they've been to spot up front.

As for Jiminez, he's a competent offensive ballplayer who gets by on defense. Good pickup for a AA reliever. He was the equivalent of a free second baseman. Would I build a team around the guy? No and I never suggested anything of the sort. Was he a really good pickup in a league where a lot of teams have a gaping hole at 2B? You bet your bippy he was.