Turn Off Ads?
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 95

Thread: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

  1. #61
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by GOREDSGO32 View Post
    You don't wanna get into it but you argue semantics over a line in my post? By solid starters, I mean an under the radar type player that could come through with a Jimmy Haynes, Pete Harnisch, Jose Acevado type year. Or strike on another Bronson Arroyo - a cheap guy on the odd end out of a rotation that has had solid career numbers. Remember we only traded Wily Mo Pena for him, and he was an early Cy Young candidate.
    Again I ask, if we traded Lopez and Kearns this offseason for an "under the radar" guy or even two guys who might come out of nowhere to pitch well, would this board melt down? My guess is it would. The complaint about the trade is we didn't get enough in return. Somehow it strikes me that trading them for one or two "maybe, might be, could be" starting pitchers would recieve the same scorn as the actual trade did.

    And don't forget Boston had a surplus of pitching when BA was acquired. That early Cy Young canidate was slated for the bullpen so it wasn't like it was going to take much to pry him away. And the market for pitching reliefe and starting both, has done nothing but go up since.

    I don't have a problem with trying to get an under-the-radar pitcher, in fact I think that's the route they should take (or have taken). My only point was that even had we hung on to them we'd still be having to overpay in cash/trade to get what we need. You either overpay then, or overpay now.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #62
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,347

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    Again I ask, if we traded Lopez and Kearns this offseason for an "under the radar" guy or even two guys who might come out of nowhere to pitch well, would this board melt down? My guess is it would.
    Who cares if this board melts down? I could care less. I would love to have a full-scale head-exploding fit over a trade and get proven wrong by the players acquired being worldbeaters. This particular turd was a disaster on paper at the time of the transaction and that impression has been reinforced by literally everything that's happened since.

  4. #63
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,181

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by dsmith421 View Post
    Who cares if this board melts down? I could care less. I would love to have a full-scale head-exploding fit over a trade and get proven wrong by the players acquired being worldbeaters. This particular turd was a disaster on paper at the time of the transaction and that impression has been reinforced by literally everything that's happened since.
    Only three playing months after the trade - I still say it's way too early to state this "particular turd was a disaster". Of course, I've forgotten, now that Kearns and Lopez are no longer with the Reds, they're not going to regress. And, of course, because Bray and Majewski are with the Reds, they will regress.

    Perhaps two or three years from now we can see if, in fact, it was a disaster. I'll allow it doesn't look good yet, but time has to play out before we see if it's as bad as so many folks here cry. We're really not talking Frank Robinson for Milt Pappas.

  5. #64
    hollywood mid westerner
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    185

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by redsmetz View Post
    Only three playing months after the trade - I still say it's way too early to state this "particular turd was a disaster". Of course, I've forgotten, now that Kearns and Lopez are no longer with the Reds, they're not going to regress. And, of course, because Bray and Majewski are with the Reds, they will regress.

    Perhaps two or three years from now we can see if, in fact, it was a disaster. I'll allow it doesn't look good yet, but time has to play out before we see if it's as bad as so many folks here cry. We're really not talking Frank Robinson for Milt Pappas.
    The trade was made for IMMMEDIATE bullpen help to carry us into the playoffs. thats why we overpaid right? Well our bullpen ended up sucking worse, we didnt get into the playoffs and Lopez/Kearns both had a pretty good 2006 season.

    Therefore, the trade WAS a DISASTER because the whole point was for us to make the playoffs this year not next year.

    If we were planning ahead, we wouldve kept either kearns or lopez or both and STILL could have gotten bullpen help this offseason and go into 2007 shooting for the playoffs.

    Now, our bullpen is worse, older, and everybody and their grandmotehr has been complaining all off season about us finding bats when we had two perfect good ones in lopez and kearns (and SB's with lopez)

  6. #65
    Member tripleaaaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Fort Thomas, KY
    Posts
    583

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by Patpacillosjock View Post

    Now, our bullpen is worse, older, and everybody and their grandmotehr has been complaining all off season about us finding bats when we had two perfect good ones in lopez and kearns (and SB's with lopez)
    I dont agree, our bullpen is much better than it was when Krivsky started, without a doubt. The only thing worse than our bullpen before then, would have been me and you pitching. As for the trade itself, yes we did overpay, but lopez and kearns were not our answer. Lopez was an error prone SS that is due a pay-day at the end of this coming season. Kearns seams to be one of those J.D. Drew types, with great potential, but bad work ethic. I didn't like the trade either, but these players were not the long-term answers, I say with much regret.
    ___________________
    Strikeouts are boring - besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls. More democratic. ~Bull Durham

    MLB Mock Draft
    2009:
    2. Dustin Ackley 27. Tyler Skaggs 33. Kyle Heckathorn 51. Nick Franklin 82. Billy Bullock

  7. #66
    Miami Redhawks Redhook's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    2,257

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by redsmetz View Post
    Only three playing months after the trade - I still say it's way too early to state this "particular turd was a disaster".

    I'll allow it doesn't look good yet, but time has to play out before we see if it's as bad as so many folks here cry.
    I just don't see how you're still reasonably optimistic about the trade. It failed in every which way. It didn't help us last year, it's not helping us now, and it hurt us for the future.

    This team would've been a good #3 pitcher and a few bullpen arms from being a serious contender in 2007. Now, they have virtually no chance in 2007 and it looks rather dim beyond that.
    "....the two players I liked watching the most were Barry Larkin and Eric Davis. I was suitably entertained by their effortless skill that I didn't need them crashing into walls like a squirrel on a coke binge." - dsmith421

    www.kylevoska.com - Golfer? Check out my blog for golf tips.

  8. #67
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,163

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    Again I ask, if we traded Lopez and Kearns this offseason for an "under the radar" guy or even two guys who might come out of nowhere to pitch well, would this board melt down? My guess is it would. The complaint about the trade is we didn't get enough in return. Somehow it strikes me that trading them for one or two "maybe, might be, could be" starting pitchers would recieve the same scorn as the actual trade did.
    It always depends on the starting pitchers, but the board didn't melt down with Jose Guillen was traded for Harang or when Wily Mo Pena was traded for Arroyo. Not everyone liked those deals, but plenty did. Anyway, the larger point is do I think Kearns and Lopez, who are better players than Pena and Guillen, should have fetched more than what they did? You bet your keister I do.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  9. #68
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,181

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by Redhook View Post
    I just don't see how you're still reasonably optimistic about the trade. It failed in every which way. It didn't help us last year, it's not helping us now, and it hurt us for the future.

    This team would've been a good #3 pitcher and a few bullpen arms from being a serious contender in 2007. Now, they have virtually no chance in 2007 and it looks rather dim beyond that.
    I can't say I'm optimistic, I'm just saying it's still too early to say how it actually will play out. If Bray and Majewski don't step up and be the pitchers management believed they would be, then, yes, it might be a disaster. Of course, that assumes that Lopez and Kearns star in DC, which isn't a given either. And I won't disagree that it might have helped to have had both Lopez and Kearns in the offseason as chips, but I agree with those who say neither would have brought a front line pitcher. You are correct they probably would have fetched a #3.

    WK acknowledged at the time of the trade that he might have overpaid. In fact, I would say he did overpay, but then again, looking at the market now, it's possible he didn't overpay much. In fact, the offense didn't take the hit everyone says as we played some pretty decent ball immediately after the trade. The collective funk that was the final six weeks of the season was due to the loss of Kearns and Lopez. We still had some pretty fair bats in our order, they just didn't get the job done.

    I continue to say this trade is too recent to declare it a disaster. And while you didn't make the comment, someone else suggested in response to my response that our bullpen is worse than last year.

    Last year everyone said our ballclub was going to fight it out for last place. They're saying it again. We'll see.

  10. #69
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by dsmith421 View Post
    Who cares if this board melts down?
    The point was people pitched a fit over trading them for 2 reliefe pitchers and 3 complementary parts because of the poor return, but cling to the idea that if only had them now we'd be raking in all the players we need. "We don't have any trading chips" is the mantra.

    The price of pitching has continued to go up, whether by trade or cash. I don't think it follows that we could trade Lopez and Kearns this offseason and get much more than a "might possibly be ok" type #3 guy.

    I'm not arguing whether we got all we should in return for the trade, mearly pointing out that I don't think if we had them now that we'd be able to get much more in return.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  11. #70
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,163

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    I'm not arguing whether we got all we should in return for the trade, mearly pointing out that I don't think if we had them now that we'd be able to get much more in return.
    And yet Guillen landed Harang and Pena landed Arroyo. Kearns and Lopez are better players and they're positive steals compared to what teams have paid for on the free agent market.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  12. #71
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    And yet Guillen landed Harang and Pena landed Arroyo. Kearns and Lopez are better players and they're positive steals compared to what teams have paid for on the free agent market.
    Yes, we got those returns, in the past.

    And Arroyo was a pretty established pitcher when we traded for him. I don't think there are currently any teams who are pitching rich and would let go a proven #3 or better pitcher for only Kearns or Lopez by themselves (maybe Kearns but I doubt it) now.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  13. #72
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,163

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    Yes, we got those returns, in the past.

    And Arroyo was a pretty established pitcher when we traded for him. I don't think there are currently any teams who are pitching rich and would let go a proven #3 or better pitcher for only Kearns or Lopez by themselves (maybe Kearns but I doubt it) now.
    I don't subscribe to the notion that things that were done in the recent past can't be duplicated. Frankly, there's no reason why more compelling returns couldn't have been had for those two players. All we can really say of the situation is that more compelling returns weren't had, which means that the team didn't manage to replicate the two trades which have elevated the pitching staff. I find that unfortunate and I see no reason to make excuses for how unfortunate it is.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  14. #73
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    I don't subscribe to the notion that things that were done in the recent past can't be duplicated. Frankly, there's no reason why more compelling returns couldn't have been had for those two players. All we can really say of the situation is that more compelling returns weren't had, which means that the team didn't manage to replicate the two trades which have elevated the pitching staff. I find that unfortunate and I see no reason to make excuses for how unfortunate it is.
    And again, I'm not commenting on the return from the trade at all, only on what their trade value might be now.

    I don't think it's reasonable to say that the market now is the same as the market at this time in 2006. Especially in light of the wild FA spending. As spring training winds down you might see more reasonable trade activity as teams scrable for last minute shopping before the season starts.

    I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that a WMP/Arroyo trade could be put together again now....assuming there is a trading partner with a surplus of starting pitching and a shortage of a specific player type that we just so happen to have and can live without.

    Not sure what you mean about making excuses. I'm not even taking about the trade itself so I'm not sure how I could be making any excuses about it.
    Last edited by Ltlabner; 01-08-2007 at 02:03 PM.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  15. #74
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,949

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that a WMP/Arroyo trade could be put together again now....assuming there is a trading partner with a surplus of starting pitching and a shortage of a specific player type that we just so happen to have and can live without.

    One thing that should be remembered about that Wily Mo trade is that the BoSox thought they were trading a middle reliever/back end guy for Pena....

  16. #75
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,163

    Re: Wayne Krivsky's "Plan"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    I'm not even taking about the trade itself so I'm not sure how I could be making any excuses about it.
    "I'm not arguing whether we got all we should in return for the trade, mearly pointing out that I don't think if we had them now that we'd be able to get much more in return."

    To me that's an excuse. Juan Pierre's worth a king's ransom and Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez wouldn't be able to fetch more than two middle relievers in trade? I'm not buying that.

    I know what the Reds needed to get. I know they didn't get it. I know that, as a result, they still need to figure out a way to get it.
    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