Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 47

Thread: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

  1. #1
    Worth The Wait
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Posts
    4,308

    The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Just Sayin'

    Doing whatever I can to remain positive right now.

    1999 is forever etched in my memory, sometimes, I feel as if I can remember every pitch

    Anyway, if memory serves, we started 9-13 (actually fell to 9-14). Again, if my memory is correct, we got swept near the end of the month by the Braves and I can remember thinking how lousy of a season it was going to be.

    Again, just sayin'

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    5,870

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    The 1972 and 1995 Reds also had very bad starts ....no hitting ....up/down pitching.

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    7,636

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Shhhhh.....

    Haven't you guys gotten the memo?

    The season's over.
    "Strickland Propane... Taste the meat, not the heat." - Hank Hill

  5. #4
    The wino and I know bucksfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    NW OHIO
    Posts
    3,039

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    I'm disappointed but far from worried right now. I think the poor portions of the roster construction will start to be worked out, the hitting will come along to more than supplant some potential fall-off from our new "big 3" starters.

    That said, I want us to be at least few games over .500 when I come down May 17!
    "I'm virtually free to do whatever I want, but I try to remember so is everybody else..." - Todd Snider

  6. #5
    Beer is good!! George Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,728

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    I'm always amazed at people who write off seasons when its only April. I wonder if these are the same people who will leave a game in the second inning because the home team is down several runs?
    "Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard

  7. #6
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,880

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    If there's the GM who can vault a bunch of excuses and make this squad instantly competitive, it's Jocketty. But he's going to face a pretty tough trade market, one that would have been more pliable in December of 07.

    But this current roster, however it's deployed, is in no shape to contend against the likes of the Cubs. They look like a juggernaut, very much to my surprise.
    Last edited by Falls City Beer; 04-24-2008 at 11:43 AM.

  8. #7
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,159

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Sure Ed, be reasonable and take the long view.

    I think you've forgotten that this is baseball and that all bad 12-game stretches demand overreaction.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  9. #8
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    12,035

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    They kicked some tail after that though...

    http://www.baseball-almanac.com/team...p?y=1999&t=CN5

    Code:
    Monthly Splits
     
    Month (Games)	Won	Lost	WP
    April (21)	9	12	0.429
    May (26)	16	10	0.615
    June (27)	18	9	0.667
    July (28)	16	12	0.571
    August (29)	17	12	0.586
    September (28)	19	9	0.679
    October (4)	1	3	0.250

    Pay attention to the open sky

  10. #9
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    42,290

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    The Coach

    “Everything is magnified at the beginning of the season,” says Yankees hitting coach Kevin Long. “It’s kind of ridiculous to think David Ortiz is going to hit .100 all year or Jason Giambi is going to hit .100 all year. Nobody pays as much attention if a guy has a similar stretch in the middle of the season.”

    The General Manager

    “I don’t know that we have the luxury of waiting two to three months for somebody to kick in because we can’t let this league or this division get away from us,” Toronto general manager J.P. Ricciardi told reporters after he cut Frank Thomas.

    The Owner

    “We’ve come to the point where we just aren’t going to lose anymore.”

    Bob Castellini

  11. #10
    Member OnBaseMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    34,844

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Great post, Ed.

    Someone told me in the Krivsky thread the this was a lost season. Now you're telling me the season isn't over and there's 140 games left. Who to believe?

  12. #11
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,880

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Tucker View Post
    They kicked some tail after that though...

    http://www.baseball-almanac.com/team...p?y=1999&t=CN5

    Code:
    Monthly Splits
     
    Month (Games)	Won	Lost	WP
    April (21)	9	12	0.429
    May (26)	16	10	0.615
    June (27)	18	9	0.667
    July (28)	16	12	0.571
    August (29)	17	12	0.586
    September (28)	19	9	0.679
    October (4)	1	3	0.250

    And had a historically great set of offensive players, several ready to break out, a bullpen that was second only to the NBs in Reds' history. And surprisingly, for all the hoopla surrounding these kids in the rotation, the 99 rotation was considerably deeper than the current one.

    This is a bad squad who, if they get a huge break in the Pythag. dept., will be lucky to finish at .500.

  13. #12
    Worth The Wait
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Posts
    4,308

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    And had a historically great set of offensive players, several ready to break out, a bullpen that was second only to the NBs in Reds' history. And surprisingly, for all the hoopla surrounding these kids in the rotation, the 99 rotation was considerably deeper than the current one.

    This is a bad squad who, if they get a huge break in the Pythag. dept., will be lucky to finish at .500.
    Really?

    We had Ron Villone and Steve Parris in that rotation. They both did well for us, but they clearly captured lightning in a bottle that season. Guys like Eddie Taubensee and Mark Lews were also pretty key contributors.

  14. #13
    Worth The Wait
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Posts
    4,308

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Quote Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine View Post
    Great post, Ed.

    Someone told me in the Krivsky thread the this was a lost season. Now you're telling me the season isn't over and there's 140 games left. Who to believe?
    Normally, I'd say believe the other guys

    I REALLY believe that this team has a higher ceiling than we'd had the past 5-7 years, and therefore, I am more reluctant to just throw my hands in the air and give up. Maybe that's my problem. Maybe I've just severely overrated our potential.

    But I'm not willing to call it quits quite yet. Although, we honestly can't afford to fall much farther behind. When is it no longer "still very early?"

  15. #14
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,880

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Quote Originally Posted by Edskin View Post
    Really?

    We had Ron Villone and Steve Parris in that rotation. They both did well for us, but they clearly captured lightning in a bottle that season. Guys like Eddie Taubensee and Mark Lews were also pretty key contributors.
    I'm assuming you've seen Arroyo, Fogg, and Belisle, no? Belisle may still turn it around, but the other two appear shot. And rookies shouldn't be counted on for full seasons, IMO.

  16. #15
    Member OnBaseMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    34,844

    Re: The 1999 Reds Were Also 9-13

    Sorry, but I prefer this year's rotation to the 1999 rotation.

    1999 rotation:

    Pete Harnisch
    Denny Neagle
    Ron Villone
    Brett Tomko
    Steve Parris/Jason Bere/Steve Avery

    Juan Guzman was acquired in July and replaced Avery/Bere. Neagle missed time due to injury.

    Harang is better than any of those guys. Cueto and Volquez, while young, are better pitchers than anyone on that list IMO. Arroyo, while in a rough stretch right now, is a solid option at #4. The number five spot is a problem right now but many teams have holes at #5. Homer Bailey could solidify that spot later on in the summer if he continues to pitch well in Louisville.

    The 1999 bullpen was better than this current squad, though.


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