Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor
Very good!
Very good!
I not completely familiar with the issues in Cincinnati, however, in the late 80s, people stopped going to Yankee Stadium, which is located in the South Bronx. Steinbrenner threatened to move the team to Northern New Jersey at one point.
Then the team started winning, and the team started drawing 3-4 million people per year. At the same time Guiliani became Mayor and really cleaned up the area -- but I think the winning had a lot to do with the attendance.
Yep, the Bronx used to be a major war zone in the 80's. Going to Candlestick was never a joy, night games in the Spring in Oakland suck, the area is a mess too. That stuff isn't the only reason teams generate revenue, but it sure helps.
It's fair to say it's going to be difficult, but to make silly hyberbolic remarks like the above is to buy into the self-defeating mindset of this franchise and fanbase.
It's couched as "realistic" in its "tut-tutting" moderateness, but really it's just excuse-making and incuriosity.
Contending for the NL Central crown, at the very least, is completely realistic and achingly attainable.
Last edited by Falls City Beer; 12-21-2006 at 02:22 PM.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
This is all great, well, and good, but frankly, it's akin to saying: "well, the team needs to consider that they have to have three bags, a homeplate, and green grass to play baseball in Cincinnati."
No kidding. Really? The team needs to improve the off-field infrastructure?
Pshaw. There's a revelation.
Look. I get it. But what exactly does the farm, scouting, marketing have to do with the price of tea in China? The lion's share of all Reds' fans don't want to hear about the stuff that is a given for a successful franchise (scouting, marketing, et al), they want their MLB not to play like dogcrap. If they want the reciprocity of the ticket dollar feeding the farm system, they can't let the MLB product rot for 5 years while they fix the other stuff. It just doesn't work that way. It never has.
Last edited by Falls City Beer; 12-21-2006 at 02:31 PM.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
Pshaw. There's a revelation.The lion's share of all Reds' fans don't want to hear about the stuff that is a given for a successful franchise (scouting, marketing, et al), they want their MLB not to play like dogcrap.:
One thing I can applaud ownership for is that they haven't trotted out the "we gotta fix the other stuff first" argument; lucky for them, they've already got lieutenants on the ground to take care of that for them.Pshaw. There's a revelation.
On April 1st, when the team isn't substantively better, I'm sure many of you will be dragging this argument out of the mothballs again.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
Very interesting discussion within this thread.
Bad example. The Orioles made some real nice under-the-radar moves that winter. They got Phil Bradley for Ken Howell, Mike Devereaux for Mike Morgan and Randy Milligan for nothing. Bradley was one of the more underrated players in the game, steady bat with a good glove and some speed.
Brady Anderson had been acquired the previous summer and Fruit Loops Tettleton was poised to get more ABs. Prospects like Steve Finley and Craig Worthington were coming up too. Worthington didn't pan out (though he had a solid rookie season), but Finley was the real deal. The Orioles went from an OF of Joe Orsulak, Fred Lynn and Ken Gerhart in '88 to Orsulak being part of a solid five-man crew in '89.
On the pitching side, Pete Harnisch and Bob Milacki were coming up for their first serious work, joining Jeff Ballard to form a young rotation. Gregg Olson turned out to be one of the quickest draft payoffs in history and Brian Holton was a fairly well-regarded arm pickup, coming off what turned out to be a career season with the Dodgers (and he came with Juan Bell, who was one of those famously overrated Dodgers middle IF prospects).
Anyway, the thing the Orioles had in spades heading in '89 was change. They didn't throw a fresh coat of paint on their ever-collapsing house, they blew it up and built a new one.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
I'm speaking more in theory of their team direction, higher premium on defense after a couple miserable years of really bad defense. However Finley and Anderson both OPS's in the low 600's (that would be a slam fest here) but they could catch the ball, and Deveraux was a late off season pick up, so maybe aside from Jeff Conine the Reds can find something like that later in the off season.Bad example. The Orioles made some real nice under-the-radar moves that winter.
Exactly.
Time is exactly what this franchise doesn't have. It could probably sell the fanbase on a major rebuild once, as that card hasn't been played in previous years. Yet, barring that, the pressure is on, rightly so, to deliver a winner.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Well, as we approach 2007, it's going to have to be later in the offseason for big changes to take place.
As I recall, the Orioles made a decision to get younger more than anything else. They'd suffered through a pile of disappointing seasons with plodding veteran teams and things like defense and speed were a natural outcropping of the youth movement. Though, more importantly, what the Orioles realized was that change requires actually bringing in new faces.
They could aspire to being different than the previous few seasons because they were a completely different team. The Reds haven't nearly made the kind of changes to warrant that kind of outlook.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
In many ways that's very true, but the IF defense this season will prove to be much better then the last five is my guess. Can they shave off more then 1/3rd of a run? Probably not with all the FB starters, but it should help the relief since so many of them rely on GB.They could aspire to being different than the previous few seasons because they were a completely different team. The Reds haven't nearly made the kind of changes to warrant that kind of outlook.
I kind of wish that he would do less after seeing all his moves.
Moeller, Hamilton, Livingston, Crosby, Conine
These the kind of moves that you are referring to?
And Arroyo, Phillps, and Ross.
And all the players you mentioned have yet to play one game for the Reds. Calling them good, bad, or anything else is premature.
The true tale of the Reds offseason will not be told until well after the season begins.
Posting Permissions
|
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. |
