Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24

Thread: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,071

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    A friend of mine likens to the Reds to the 1999 KC Royals, who had several good and relatively young offensive players -- Damon, Beltran, Sweeney, Dye. Had they been able to get those guys signed, they would have had a very solid offensive core for years. Instead, they kept only Sweeney and made poor trades for the others. Cellar-dwelling, 100 loss seasons ensued.
    The Reds talk about upgrading pitching as the key to the future. I think that's only half of the equation, and unless they simultaneously fashion a solid offensive core -- and the materials have been staring them in the face for years already -- they will flounder, flounder and flounder some more.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    13,290

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    Boy, when you fall out of favor around here you can do nothing right. I think we should take it easy on DanO on this one.

    Realistically, what can you expect him to do? New owners are entering in 3 days. No player is going to sign a multi-year deal until they see what the new owners plan for them and the team. Nobody is going to negotiate with a lame duck.

    O'Brien is simply trying to avoid arb hearings this year, leaving open the possibility of long-term deals. These are caretaker moves.

    Frankly, I don't want DanO signing anyone to a long-term deal at this moment, including Dunn. Hopefully, there will be a new head of baseball operations soon who will have a plan for the team. Maybe signing Dunn for $50 million is part of that plan; maybe it isn't. Let the new guy decide.

    DanO's biggest flaw, in my view, was his failure to change Bowden's team and re-design it to be better. Instead, he was "conservative" and made only small changes. We've seen the result. I hope the new guys are bolder and re-shape this team. Let them do it, though, once they get in.

  4. #18
    Harry Chiti Fan registerthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    5,872

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    Honestly, Dunn should have been signed to a LT deal after the 2004 season, as has been mentioned before several times. That was the window of opportunity for the reds. Now, signing him to a LT deal is goign to cost significant cash, regardless of who structures the deal. It's the reality of the situation. Therefore, as kc said, it's unrealistic to expect a LT deal for Dunn to come out at this time. Neither side has any motivation to pursue one until the new ownership is in place and a budget/plan has been decided upon.

    I'm also coming to grips with the idea that there may never BE a LT contract for Dunn, and that this (or next) season will be his last with the club. His production is going to waste on a team with a pitching staff who can't keep the ball in the park, and the reds have not shown the propensity to sign productive FA pitchers, or to draft wisely. Therefore, it might not even make sense to pay Dunn a huge contract to stay here another 3-5 years, if the team continues to flounder. Dunn, too, will have little motivation for staying here even IF the money is there, because he likely wants to play for a competitive team.
    We'll burn that bridge when we get to it.

  5. #19
    The Lineups stink. KronoRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West N. Carolina
    Posts
    55,615

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    I'm always thinking it's the last year of Dunn, 3 years running now

    But sadly I think this will be it.

    I just hope we trade him to the AL.
    Go Gators!

  6. #20
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    12,061

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    I truly fear for the future of this team.

    I understand the new ownership coming in and all that. But the Reds do have some valuable pieces that a good team can be built around. But they are rapidly approaching (if not there or past it) where they need to *prove* to those players they are the Reds' future.

    If they don't lock up that talent and lose it to free agency and given the current dearth of talent in the farm system, the current losing stretch will look like a walk in the park compared to a team with no Dunn, Kearns, Pena, Lopez, etc. *and* an abysmal pitching staff.

    New management's #1 priority should be figuring out, once and for all, if these guys are the future. If they are, then do what it takes to sign them. If not, get a canny GM that will be able to pick the appropriate time in the market and get good young equivalent value for them.

    And if they dither about and do neither and let them go in FA and all we get are draft picks that are years away, we are massively hosed for the foreseeable future.

    Pardon me while I go slash my wrists.

    Pay attention to the open sky

  7. #21
    WAGS
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Allen, Texas
    Posts
    616

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc_Lancaster
    Since the board keeps yelling at me for not posting in a while, let me just direct you over to the blog for some news on this front. News that probably will make a lot of you rather unhappy.

    And then I'll crawl back into hibernation.
    troll hahahhaa


    see you again next spring, marc

  8. #22
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,160

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor
    Or, as a possibility to throw out there: If a player is really concerned with more than money and wants to see a commitment to building a winning team here in Cincinnati before they ink a deal, why on Earth would they deal with Dan O'Brien right now?

    The franchise is in transition, and just about everyone and their brother agrees that O'Brien is just filling a seat until the new owners can get in place and fire him. So, if you're looking for long term information about the direction of the franchise and selling points on signing, O'Brien is a bad source of information right now and likely NOT going to be the guy you're dealing with this time a couple months from now.

    So, why not wait to get the full story from the new owners and whatever new management they put in place as opposed to signing on the dotted line with a lame duck GM, a lame duck ownership group, and a franchise plan that may or may not be set to change drastically in the very short term future?

    If I'm the agent for Adam Dunn, unless DanO comes at me with crazy amounts of coin, I tell him politely: "Thanks, but we'll wait for the adults to show up before we have a conversation."
    I agree that's a factor too, but I figure a better operator would be able to negotiate around that limitation, perhaps even insist he's working as the agent for new ownership. Dan Duquette did some quality work as a lame duck GM, for instance.

    lollipop, your friend has come up with a great analogy.

    Someone in the Reds organization has to convince Dunn, Lopez and Harang that the plan is to build around them. That's always the best pitch. Here's the plan with you at the center of it. Ideally what you do is go to do Dunn and say, '"Here's the young core and you're the key to it. We sign you and the others will follow. You can be the guy who brings this whole thing together."
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  9. #23
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,931

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    I'm really curious who the rudder is on this ship. It seems it has been Barry for a decade, followed by Casey and nobody else really fits the profile. The most talented guys on the team simply don't seem to be interested in being leaders.

    Junior is, but in a very deferential way and he's not somebody you can build around at this point in his career. LaRue, I believe, is the official guy, but he seems more in the Aaron Boone mold and is on a 1 year contract. Dunn just doesn't seem interested in being a leader.

    Now, typically I don't buy in to the whole intangibles argument -- as winning generates chemistry, not the other way around. But in terms of building a nucleus, you need to be able to sell those guys on the idea of leading the team in to the future. I just don't think we've got the type of guys who want to make that kind of commitment. I suppose the ownership change could change everything, but I'm not holding my breath.

    I expect Dunn to test the FA market when he's available and unless Kearns has nailed down a permanent spot in the Reds OF, take the highest money/lowest pressure combination he can find -- perhaps Houston as they'll have the money with Biggio, Bagwell, Clemens, and possibly Pettitte off the books. As for the Reds "core", I think we're looking at Lopez, Encarnacion, Harang, and possibly Claussen. I wouldn't count on any of the outfielders being a permanent part of the Reds future.

  10. #24
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,160

    Re: Reds sign Pena to 1 year $1.25 mil. deal.

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick
    I'm really curious who the rudder is on this ship. It seems it has been Barry for a decade, followed by Casey and nobody else really fits the profile. The most talented guys on the team simply don't seem to be interested in being leaders.

    Junior is, but in a very deferential way and he's not somebody you can build around at this point in his career. LaRue, I believe, is the official guy, but he seems more in the Aaron Boone mold and is on a 1 year contract. Dunn just doesn't seem interested in being a leader.

    Now, typically I don't buy in to the whole intangibles argument -- as winning generates chemistry, not the other way around. But in terms of building a nucleus, you need to be able to sell those guys on the idea of leading the team in to the future. I just don't think we've got the type of guys who want to make that kind of commitment. I suppose the ownership change could change everything, but I'm not holding my breath.

    I expect Dunn to test the FA market when he's available and unless Kearns has nailed down a permanent spot in the Reds OF, take the highest money/lowest pressure combination he can find -- perhaps Houston as they'll have the money with Biggio, Bagwell, Clemens, and possibly Pettitte off the books. As for the Reds "core", I think we're looking at Lopez, Encarnacion, Harang, and possibly Claussen. I wouldn't count on any of the outfielders being a permanent part of the Reds future.
    I think you might be right about what the core will have to be. DanO may have frittered away the chance to keep Dunn.

    As for leadership, I really don't worry about that. Larkin was a special case. Guys like him don't come along too often. I figure it's always a committee of players who set the tone in a clubhouse. FWIW, I never considered Casey a leadership guy. He was everyone's best buddy and a lot of fans considered him the face of the team, but that's a different animal from being the true clubhouse leader. When the team was down and out, as it often was during his years in Cincinnati, Casey's butt-slapping prowess was rendered ineffectual.

    To their credit, the Reds usually play hard. If the pieces of a winning team were in place I'm relatively confident the franchise has the right clubhouse mindset to make the most of it. That's been part of my frustration in recent years. The club has pushed itself to the upper reaches of what it can achieve and the Reds management keeps going back at it like a vampire looking for a hidden vein.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25