Continuation of Doc says Kriv is fired

[REDREAD]

Since Chip invited us to continue this on another thead, I will.

My point about DanO being fired was to illlustrate that he was signed to a 3 year deal, but only got two years to institute his changes. There was no uproar about how unfair it was for him to be canned, becuase the majority of the board did not like him, for various reasons which were certainly justifiable.

However, since most of the board is unhappy with Wayne firing (per the poll), it's now considered dirty and unfair to can a GM before he can finish off his entire 3 years.

Wayne got just as long as DanO did to convince the Reds of his vision.

That's all I was trying to point out. Ironically, many consider Wayne's big strength to be the youth infusion, and that was also DanO's relative strength.
I think Wayne > Dan, but I think it is an interesting inconsistency.

[Chip R]

One of the differences is that DanO was hired by different ownership while Wayne was hired by the current owner.

[HumnHilghtFreel]

I haven't read through the other thread because I was late to the party and it was massive, so my talking points here will probably be repetitive.

I didn't love all of Wayne's moves, but I recognize that he did some things well. I think it's absolutely ridiculous to give someone so very little time, especially with a team that was really not very good, as much as it hurts to say. That's really my only problem with it. I don't think that he got a fair shake to get anything real rolling.

Hopefully Jocketty's namesake will at the least keep him around more than 2 full seasons if this team doesn't start winning(and let's be honest, it's probably going to take longer for this team to put up consistent W's), because the revolving door in UPPER MANAGEMENT, not to mention at manager, is embarrassing. Give us a little bit of stability, PLEASE.

[REDREAD]

One of the differences is that DanO was hired by different ownership while Wayne was hired by the current owner.

Not so sure that is relevant if people are arguing that 2.1 -2.3 years is not enough time for Wayne to implement his plan. It seems like a lot of the press that is sympathetic to Wayne are using the same argument about "lack of patience, etc".

Cast looked at DanO's 2 year record and gave him the ax. Wayne got the same length of audition. Neither of them were lined up with Cast's vision, apparently.

So I guess the big question is: In general terms, how long should a GM be given before he is fired? What is a fair audition period if 2 years is not enough for a GM (if people feel that way). Some people favor stability, so I'm curious here.

Wasn't it Littlefield that took over the Pirates when they got their new stadium (If the name is wrong, someone correct me). The Pirates gave him many many years to learn on the job and get it right. In hindsight, doesn't that seem like a huge mistake? Wouldn't it have been better to cut bait much quicker?

In my opinion, there should be no minimum trial period for a GM at all. Competence is more important than stability, but I am curious what other people's thought are.

[reds44]

Since Chip invited us to continue this on another thead, I will.

My point about DanO being fired was to illlustrate that he was signed to a 3 year deal, but only got two years to institute his changes. There was no uproar about how unfair it was for him to be canned, becuase the majority of the board did not like him, for various reasons which were certainly justifiable.

However, since most of the board is unhappy with Wayne firing (per the poll), it's now considered dirty and unfair to can a GM before he can finish off his entire 3 years.

Wayne got just as long as DanO did to convince the Reds of his vision.

That's all I was trying to point out. Ironically, many consider Wayne's big strength to be the youth infusion, and that was also DanO's relative strength.
I think Wayne > Dan, but I think it is an interesting inconsistency.

O'Brien brought some GREAT talent into the organization. Cueto, Bruce, and Homer are all his, as well as others.

I want to say Krivsky has a much better handle on acquiring major league talent, but his 72-90 and the Reds worst start in 5 years doesn't really agree with me. The one chance he had to win, 2006, he turned

Felipe Lopez: .268/.355/.394
9 HR/30 RBI
23 SB/6 CS
343 AB

Austin Kearns: .271/.351/.492
16 HR/50 RBI
323 AB

into

Gary Majewski: 15 IP, 8.40 ERA
Bill Bray: 27.7 IP, 4.23 ERA
Royce Clayton: .235/.290/.329 (149 AB)
Brendan Harris: .200/.273/.500 (10 AB)

When you consider the fact the Reds were 2 games out on the final Saturday of the season, that trade could have costs the Reds a playoff spot. Especially when you consider the west coast trip in late August/early September when the team just could not hit. Who knows what would have happend, but when he had his chance to win he traded two productive offensive players for one average RP and garbage.

Maybe if Krivsky turned Kearns and Lopez into something productive, he wouldn't of had to deal Hamilton for Volquez (and yes, I like that trade for the Reds).

Krivsky has plenty of chances to satisfy BCast, and blew it.

[Spring~Fields]

However, since most of the board is unhappy with Wayne firing (per the poll), it's now considered dirty and unfair to can a GM before he can finish off his entire 3 years.

I don’t think that is was about firing the GM, Krivsky, or whether or not that he was allowed to finish his 3 years. I think it more about a question of ethics on Castellini’s handling and the appearance of backdoor techniques that blindside what appears to be decent employees and whether or not we can continue to have faith in Castellini’s running the organization.

I think that the majority of us thought that Castellini was going to make Jocketty the GM and he did, but the way he went about it was almost like your complaints about how Krivsky handled his personnel on and off the field.

Ironically, many consider Wayne's big strength to be the youth infusion, and that was also DanO's relative strength.

I keep perceiving from what you write that you under estimate or devalue the minor league feeder system and how valuable of a resource that is to a small market team. Since they don't have the cash cow of the big city teams, then they need to be able to trade off quality players to get what they want instead of using cash or to grow their own, either/or. I get from you like I did from reading about Marge Schott and how she thought, that the minor league prospects are meaningless? Pitchers if you can develop them are worth millions to a team.

[reds44]

I don’t think that is was about firing the GM, Krivsky, or whether or not that he was allowed to finish his 3 years. I think it more about a question of ethics on Castellini’s handling and the appearance of backdoor techniques that blindside what appears to be decent employees and whether or not we can continue to have faith in Castellini’s running the organization.

I think that the majority of us thought that Castellini was going to make Jocketty the GM and he did, but the way he went about it was almost like your complaints about how Krivsky handled his personnel on and off the field.



I keep perceiving from what you write that you under estimate or devalue the minor league feeder system and how valuable of a resource that is to a small market team. Since they don't have the cash cow of the big city teams, then they need to be able to trade off quality players to get what they want instead of using cash or to grow their own, either/or. I get from you like I did from reading about Marge Schott and how she thought, that the minor league prospects are meaningless? Pitchers if you can develop them are worth millions to a team.

I don't think he was devaluing the minor league system, as much as he was pointing out that Krivsky and O'Brien had the same strength.

[HumnHilghtFreel]

Not so sure that is relevant if people are arguing that 2.1 -2.3 years is not enough time for Wayne to implement his plan. It seems like a lot of the press that is sympathetic to Wayne are using the same argument about "lack of patience, etc".

Cast looked at DanO's 2 year record and gave him the ax. Wayne got the same length of audition. Neither of them were lined up with Cast's vision, apparently.

So I guess the big question is: In general terms, how long should a GM be given before he is fired? What is a fair audition period if 2 years is not enough for Wayne (if people feel that way). Some people favor stability, so I'm curious here.

Wasn't it Littlefield that took over the Pirates when they got their new stadium (If the name is wrong, someone correct me). The Pirates gave him many many years to learn on the job and get it right. In hindsight, doesn't that seem like a huge mistake? Wouldn't it have been better to cut bait much quicker?

In my opinion, there should be no minimum trial period for a GM at all. Competence is more important than stability, but I am curious what other people's thought are.

I think it should be a lot like a college football coach. If you bring in a new guy to turn around a program, do you think that 2 years is enough time to be able to do it?

I certainly don't. That's hardly even enough time to get in some strong recruiting classes... or in this case draft classes.
I think a window of closer to maybe 4 years is just about right to see if the guy has things headed in the right direction. I think it's definitely impatience on BCast's part. I LOVE that he wants to win now, but there aren't a lot of people that could right the ship handed over that quickly given what there was to work with, IMO

[reds44]

Here's something Fay posted on his blog.

But one thing that occurred to me today: What if the big-trade with Nationals had worked out? If Gary Majewski was healthy and pitched like he was capable of, if Royce Clayton was better than marginal, and if Bill Bray was more consistent? (I know that's a lot of ifs) But the Reds would have likely finished above .500 two years, maybe even won the division. Instead, they finished 80-82.

If the trade works out different or if the trades not made at all, and the Reds finish above .500 and win the divison, more than likely Krivsky is still the GM. His biggest blunder turned out to be the reason he was fired.

[Matt700wlw]

Have we had a thread reach it's 1,000 post limit before like the other thread? I don't know if I've ever seen that...

[REDREAD]

I don’t think that is was about firing the GM, Krivsky, or whether or not that he was allowed to finish his 3 years. I think it more about a question of ethics on Castellini’s handling and the appearance of backdoor techniques that blindside what appears to be decent employees and whether or not we can continue to have faith in Castellini’s running the organization.

I'm not sure there was anything backdoor about it. Can you elaborate on this? Cast decided to fire Wayne, so he called him into the office and gave him the news. He apparently was polite enough to give Wayne an hour to fight for his job. Most bosses would not give an employee that luxury.
Now granted, I'm sure Wayne could say nothing to change Cast's mind, but it was certainly gracious to listen to Wayne for that hour. I haven't been extended the same courtesy when I've been laid off.

I think that the majority of us thought that Castellini was going to make Jocketty the GM and he did, but the way he went about it was almost like your complaints about how Krivsky handled his personnel on and off the field.

Please be more specific. What was wrong with how it was handled?

I keep perceiving from what you write that you under estimate or devalue the minor league feeder system and how valuable of a resource that is to a small market team..

I think the question is "how much of the credit goes to Wayne"
This was discussed on the other thread. I agree that DanO's quirky ideas had to go, but any GM would've done that. I'm not sure how much credit Wayne gets for Ceuto, Votto, Bruce, and Homer. I'm also not sure how much blame to give Wayne for EdE's inconsistency (vs Narron vs EdE himself)..

I think in a few years, we'll have a chance to evaluate Wayne's draft class.

I agree that the farm is important. I'm just not sure how what Wayne's actual impact was.

[nate]

I think the question is "how much of the credit goes to Wayne" This was discussed on the other thread. I agree that DanO's quirky ideas had to go, but any GM would've done that.

You keep saying that but I believe the current Reds GM employed some of those "quirky" ideas (tandem starters) in the minors. So, it stands to reason that no, not _any_ GM would've done what Wayne did.

[Screwball]

Have we had a thread reach it's 1,000 post limit before like the other thread?

Yeah. The Bedard thread from the offseason almost got up to 90 pages, IIRC.

[Reds Fanatic]

This is from Fay's blog tonight:

just spoke to Walt Jocketty for the first time since he took over as GM. It sounds like he's in the gathering information mode. But moves will come.

"I think they will come eventually," he said. "It's a little early yet."

Jocketty is taking that approach on what to do about Ken Griffey Jr. and Adam Dunn. Dunn becomes a free agent after this season. The club holds an option on Griffey for 2009. Jocketty says he hasn't made a call on either.

"Not yet," he said. "Again, this all came pretty fast. I was getting to know the organization. That's something I'm going to listen to a lot people in the organization on before moving forward on anything."

Jocketty pointed to driving in runs in key situations as one of the Reds' big problems. That's pretty apparent. But are there things a GM can do during the season to change that?

"Hopefully," Jocketty said. "The other thing I hope to do is talk to players, get their thoughts on different things. Give them an opportunity to speak their minds."

Jocketty saw the club through spring training. He's been at nearly every home game and he was on most of the last road trip. So he's seen some things he doesn't like. But, again, he says he's taking a patient approach.

"I had some ideas. But I want to get the ideas of other people," he said.

That's what he's been doing since taking over.

"I've been very busy just trying to get with people," Jocketty said. "I had some conference calls and set up some meetings. I've got some (Reds front office people) coming into St. Louis. I"m being brought up to speed on a lot of things.”

[bucksfan2]

Redread I have read most of what you have to say on both threads now and I have come to the realization that you didn't not care for Krivsky. That is your stance and I respect that.

The problem with us fans is that we don't know who made the ultimate decisions. I remember reading an article a few years back about the Yankees and it was talking about Cashman and Steinbrenner and who actually made the calls on certain moves. When Krivsky took over he had the bad contracts of Milton and LaRue as well as the big contract of Jr. and Dunn, who many believe was Cast. call. They had 4 similar outfielders who had power but the propensity to stirke out a lot. We can argue as much as we want about the now infamous trade but it looks like no one won that deal. The reds may win if Thompson keeps developing.

Here is the thing three year ago when Krivsky inherited the club the pitching was awful. There is one, count it one, SP who is still pitching in the majors whom Krivsky had his first year on the reds. If you can't tell me the SP has drastically improved since WK took over you are fooling yourself. IMO the main problem over the past 3 years and still today has been the situation of the corner outfielders. Too very similar players who take up a large portion of the payroll. These two players couldn't be moved for any value whats so every. Jr's popularity and star power made it even more difficult to move.

My question is what would you have done? Where was there room to make a trade. Is it about value or making the team better? At this point I would almost stretch to say that having Kearns in the outfield would make a better team than having Dunn. The team needed a complete, Florida style, overhall, but the owner wanted to "bring winning baseball back to Cincinnati".