Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 57

Thread: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

  1. #1
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,068

    Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    I was hoping to see most of Stanton, Lohse, Conine, and Hat dealt by now, so Wayne could focus on potentially bigger deals in the last few days (such as Weathers/Dunn).

    My prediction is that we will see only 1 or 2 trades. Wayne will drag them out, and then we'll get nothing for some guys that should've been moved for the best offer.
    Sure, there's always the non-waiver deadline, but I'd rather just move them now. I think he'll get even less after the non-waiver deadline.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,022

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Given this market, the biggest non-trade would be that of Kyle Lohse. While I actually wouldn't mind keeping him around at $4M or so, as a Boras client, the asking price will be that of a legit #3 starter (3 years, $30M). As Cyclone has shown, he will not get us compensation picks, so letting him walking gives us nothing.

    I get the feeling that Castellini, in his gut, is afraid that auctioning guys off makes it look like we're "giving up" to the casual fan and that's not what he wants to portray. Like we see over and over in the failing organizations, they underestimate the fan's ability to understand how progress is actually made and so they try to save face, undercutting their ability to actually build a winner.

    I don't care if we get 10 cents on the dollar for Kyle Lohse. 10 cents is more than 0 cents, which is what I fear we're going to end up with. I'm trying to ignore the possibility that we try to "build" on our "success" and resign Lohse, Hatteberg, etc. for more money...
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  4. #3
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,163

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    REDREAD, I suspect you're right. These are dull days to be sure.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  5. #4
    Greatness In The Making RedLegSuperStar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    4,078

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    I was hoping to see most of Stanton, Lohse, Conine, and Hat dealt by now, so Wayne could focus on potentially bigger deals in the last few days (such as Weathers/Dunn).

    My prediction is that we will see only 1 or 2 trades. Wayne will drag them out, and then we'll get nothing for some guys that should've been moved for the best offer.
    Sure, there's always the non-waiver deadline, but I'd rather just move them now. I think he'll get even less after the non-waiver deadline.
    I totally agree. I don't even know if will see 2 trades the way things are going.

    Now one would think with Bray, Guardado, Hamilton, Gonzalez, and possibly Bailey coming back by early to mid August that some house cleaning would be made to make room for them.

    Also you have Votto (.307 w/ 14 Homeruns and 61 RBI's) waiting in the wings to emerge from Louisville. Also how far off is Jay Bruce? .280 w/ 4 HR's and 9 RBI's in just 14 games. This season for Bruce: .320 w/ 19 HR's and 73 RBI's between SAR, CHA, & LOU.
    "I could watch video of Griffey swinging all day. It's like baseball porn." - C. Trent Rosecrans


    2008 Reds Record When I Attend: 9W - 5L

    2009 Reds Record When I Attend: 1W - 2L

    2010 Reds Record When I Attend: 1W - 0L

    2011 Reds Record When I Attend: 0W - 1L

  6. #5
    Member Stormy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    6,987

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Treading water has been the modus operandi of every Reds' 'administration' for most of the past decade (excepting Bowden's flourishes of major attempted improvement prior to the 1999 and 2000 seasons). Avoid making the painful decisions, don't part with the fan favorites regardless of production issues, trust that the temporary boost after an interim management change is the real deal, try to simultaneously compete while rebuilding.

    Nevermind that the Reds' definition of 'competing' or 'contending' during the span of the past 3 regimes vastly differs from those of franchises which actually 'contend' in the real baseball world. The result of this process is the equivalent of changing the window dressing on a condemned shanty and calling it repaired, otherwise known as 7 consecutive losing seasons (nearly halfway to the Pirates).

    Wayne Krivsky has apparently once again convinced himself that the Reds 13-8 record in Pete's 21 games is indicative that he has a real contender on his hands for 2008 if he can just make a few tweaks. Of course, this is utter nonsense, and this team's inherent flaws left unaddressed will soon re-emerge to completely eclipse the improvements we've seen over the past 20+ games. The pieces don't fit will together, whether you're looking at the style of the offense, the construction of the bench, the design of much of the bullpen, or the production of the back 3/5 of the rotation.

    How far does this team fall the moment Lohse returns to form, the next time Griffey goes down to injury, as soon as father time reasserts dominion over Weathers resurrgence? This team doesn't need a complete demolition, but it does need a serious renovation which removes the wheat from the chaffe, and which serves to stockpile some talented, inexpensive youth in place of overpriced, aging, long-term risks. We can't just trade a spare part or two, maintain the status quo, and think that Wayne can transform us into contenders with his 2008 version of signings Stanton, Gonzo, Conine etc...

    That is a recipe for finding ourselves in the same place in July 2008, as we did in early July 2007, only this time it will be Wayne's dismissal that we'll be witnessing. Then again, maybe that's not such a bad thing. Identify your future nucleus, as well as the pieces which must be translated into future commodities via trade (Lohse, Weathers, Hattenine etc...) and rebuild accordingly.
    Last edited by Stormy; 07-27-2007 at 12:05 PM.

  7. #6
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    I have no idea what WK may or may not do and trying to guess is really a waste of effort. I guess we will have to wait and see.
    What are you, people? On dope? - Mr Hand

  8. #7
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,179

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stormy View Post
    Treading water has been the modus operandi of every Reds' 'administration' for most of the past decade (excepting Bowden's flourishes of major attempted improvement prior to the 1999 and 2000 seasons). Avoid making the painful decisions, don't part with the fan favorites regardless of production issues, trust that the temporary boost after an interim management change is the real deal, try to simultaneously compete while rebuilding.

    Nevermind that the Reds' definition of 'competing' or 'contending' during the span of the past 3 regimes vastly differs from those of franchises which actually 'contend' in the real baseball world. The result of this process is the equivalent of changing the window dressing on a condemned shanty and calling it repaired, otherwise known as 7 consecutive losing seasons (nearly halfway to the Pirates).

    Wayne Krivsky has apparently once again convinced himself that the Reds 13-8 record in Pete's 21 games is indicative that he has a real contender on his hands for 2008 if he can just make a few tweaks. Of course, this is utter nonsense, and this team's inherent flaws left unaddressed will soon re-emerge to completely eclipse the improvements we've seen over the past 20+ games. The pieces don't fit will together, whether you're looking at the style of the offense, the construction of the bench, the design of much of the bullpen, or the production of the back 3/5 of the rotation.

    How far does this team fall the moment Lohse returns to form, the next time Griffey goes down to injury, as soon as father time reasserts dominion over Weathers resurrgence? This team doesn't need a complete demolition, but it does need a serious renovation which removes the wheat from the chaffe, and which serves to stockpile some talented, inexpensive youth in place of overpriced, aging, long-term risks. We can't just trade a spare part or two, maintain the status quo, and think that Wayne can transform us into contenders with his 2008 version of signings Stanton, Gonzo, Conine etc...

    That is a recipe for finding ourselves in the same place in July 2008, as we did in early July 2007, only this time it will be Wayne's dismissal that we'll be witnessing. Then again, maybe that's not such a bad thing. Identify your future nucleus, as well as the pieces which must be translated into future commodities via trade (Lohse, Weathers, Hattenine etc...) and rebuild accordingly.
    And then the wheel keeps turning; another GM, another manager and on and on and on.

    How is it that we're so able to deduce the mind of Wayne Krivsky on Redszone? You wrote

    Wayne Krivsky has apparently once again convinced himself that the Reds 13-8 record in Pete's 21 games is indicative that he has a real contender on his hands for 2008 if he can just make a few tweaks.
    While you've qualified your statement with "apparently", but what are you basing this on? That no trades have happened as of yet? Folks here screamed bloody murder last year when WK jumped the gun with "The Trade" and now folks are chomping at the bit to get something done early.

    I would prefer a methodical approach that gives the Reds top value for their pieces. It's hard not to recognize the flaws in this team (bullpen, the bottom of the rotation, etc.), but the overall nucleus of this team isn't too bad. Now can it be improved? Absolutely! But I don't want to make trades just to be making trades - I want to solidify the team. And I certainly don't read inaction thus far to indicate nothing is happening. Remember, it takes two to tango.

  9. #8
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,163

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by redsmetz View Post
    Remember, it takes two to tango.
    But only one to lead.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  10. #9
    Haunted by walks
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    6,679

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    We're looking at the team as a zero-sum process. To get a decent middle reliever, we have to give up a 40-home run hitter. There are teams that take the best of what they have and add to that.

  11. #10
    Member Stormy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    6,987

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by redsmetz View Post
    How is it that we're so able to deduce the mind of Wayne Krivsky on Redszone? While you've qualified your statement with "apparently", but what are you basing this on? That no trades have happened as of yet? Folks here screamed bloody murder last year when WK jumped the gun with "The Trade" and now folks are chomping at the bit to get something done early.
    I had hoped that the use of 'apparently' indicated the necessity of speculation. When you have a Front Office which refuses to reveal it's intent or designs, one is left to judge their intentions based upon their actions. To that end, I think your allusion to 'the trade' actually helps emphasize the premise that Wayne has difficulty reading the tea leaves accurately.

    Is it safe to say that Wayne's decision to 'buy' last deadline, indicated that he thought we were a Maj and Bray away from contending? That he thought our fast start April-May was the reality, and that our @20 game under .500 June-September was the mirage? Nevermind who he targetted, and how abysmally they failed.

    Is it safe to say that an offseason in which none of our primary trading chips were moved, in which he acquired and/or extended extensive veteran pitching help, and added Gonzo/Conine indicative of the fact that he again thought we were ready to contend 'as is' for the NL Central again in 2008? The trend towards utilizing any youth at all, came only as the veteran dregs imploded throughout the BP, bench, rotation, and as we slowly slouched towards last place and a managerial change.

    And now we approach yet another crossroads, as a last place team (with a paucity of youthful impact players on the immediate horizon, and a dearth of young pitching talent) approaching the trading deadline. It's a year in which we are getting unprecedented production out of veterans like Griffey and Weathers, coveted production clips from guys who aren't part of our future like Hatte, Conine and Lohse, and perhaps our last chance to maximize Adam Dunn's trade value (if we're not going to extend him).

    What direction are we headed? If there is little-to-no movement, then it appears that Wayne might think our recent flourish is indicative that he should keep this group intact to try to make a quick fix run at the volatile NL Central again next year. I've seen that movie twice during Wayne's tenure, and it has a real disappointing ending.

    Since we are an organization which refuses to divulge anything of substance about our designs for the future, I would love for a cohesive, coherent well formulated design to make itself present through our actions (as opposed to the mixed messages, stop gaps and half measures which our transactions often depict). Are we going to rebuild in the Indians model, are we going to renovate by keeping the core intact and trying to *seriously* upgrade areas of need via trade and F.A., or are we going to 'keep on keeping on' and hope that a few tweaks to Wayne's pet BP and defense pojects is all that's needed to turn this cellar dwelling team into contenders in 2008 and beyond?

    Quote Originally Posted by redsmetz View Post
    I would prefer a methodical approach that gives the Reds top value for their pieces. It's hard not to recognize the flaws in this team (bullpen, the bottom of the rotation, etc.), but the overall nucleus of this team isn't too bad. Now can it be improved? Absolutely! But I don't want to make trades just to be making trades - I want to solidify the team. And I certainly don't read inaction thus far to indicate nothing is happening. Remember, it takes two to tango.
    I can agree with everything except the last 2 sentences of that, but I have to believe there is a good market for guys like Weathers, Lohse, Hatteberg given their performances (or recent performances in Lohse's case), and a secondary but strong market for a star slugger like Dunn (or Griffey)... but is there any will and vision from the Reds' leadership to radically transform the status quo?
    Last edited by Stormy; 07-27-2007 at 12:55 PM.

  12. #11
    Member cumberlandreds's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Sterling VA
    Posts
    9,299

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Most trading isn't done until the day of the trading deadline or at most the day before. I would be patient and see what happens. I don't think anything major will happen but I think a deal or two involving Lohse,Hatteburg and/or Weathers will happen.
    Reds Fan Since 1971

  13. #12
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    42,799

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Even Baseball Weekly in all its diluted meanderings has pointed out that the market is the slowest it has been in years at this time.

    No one wants to part with cheap talent.. or potential cheap talent.

  14. #13
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,163

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou View Post
    Even Baseball Weekly in all its diluted meanderings has pointed out that the market is the slowest it has been in years at this time.

    No one wants to part with cheap talent.. or potential cheap talent.
    If I were the fan of a contending team that needed to fill some holes, I'd be livid.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  15. #14
    Please come again pedro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    portland, oregon
    Posts
    14,745

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    If I were the fan of a contending team that needed to fill some holes, I'd be livid.
    If it wasn't you saying that M2 I'd probably respond by saying "how could you tell the difference? (except by the Reds W/L record)
    Get your nunchucks and the keys to your dad's car. I know where we can get a gun

  16. #15
    High five! nate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    6,976

    Re: Not looking like a big makeover is coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    If I were the fan of a contending team that needed to fill some holes, I'd be livid.
    Like the Reds, 2006?
    "Bring on Rod Stupid!"


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