Paul Wilson signs a 2 yr contract with the Reds

[M2]

Also, although I know the board wasn't around back then, I wonder what some of the more negative types were thinking before the '99 season.

A lot of us were on the Fastball and Cincy.Com sites back at that time.

I don't know who qualifies as "the more negative types" in your view, but, if memory serves, princeton, WOY, 15 and myself were pretty high on the '99 team heading into spring training that season. Chip and remdog might have been too.

[westofyou]

Let's see.... was GM up on the Reds... I seem to think the answer is no... howbout Redread, he was around as was Rojo.

Alot of the optimism then had to do with the fact that we we're up for the WC, the Stros had just won 102 games and everyone knew the Cubs were a mirage they're were only 3 teams in the NL with over 90 wins that year, last year there were that many in the NL West.

[Scrap Irony]

Wonderfully put, M2. However, how big are your big years? I assume Dunn will rebound from his awful second half and that Kearns will be healthy and not struggle in his second season. That's two pretty big bats right there.

Add in Junior assuming he stays healthy all year. That's the largest ash bat in the game.

IMO, the key resides in the other four guys.

If Boone can hit around .280 and OPS around .775
If Casey rebounds to and average year between 1999 and 2000
If Larkin or Lopez can find the youth/ maturity to OBP .360
If LaRue's second half is a true indicator of his offensive ability

the Reds have a shot at the disision title. If three of the four happen, they can still compete all year. If two of the four happen, they're still in the hunt, though it would take a herculean effort on the parts of Junior, Dunn, and Kearns to do so. If one of them happen, the Reds are a .500 ballclub.

The pitching is not the best in the game, but, with luck, it could be above average. The bullpen looks great and should be among the very best. The starting pitching can be average or a bit above average.

• If Haynes can prove 2002 wasn'ta fluke and that he is indeed improving
• If Paul Wilson can come in and pitch like he did between the All Star Games of 2001 and 2002
• If Ryan Dempster can pitch like he did when he was named an All Star in Florida
• If someone-- anyone-- can step into the fifth starter's role and log 170 IP with a league average ERA

the Reds may even win the NL Pennant.

That's certainly a lot better than it was at this time last year.

[Redsfaithful]

I just thought the '98 to '99 analogy was particularly apt since the '98 club went 77 - 85 (with last year's team winning one more game).

The Reds lost a 2B that offseason as well (Bret Boone), traded a stud prospect in Konerko, and lost Reggie Sanders.

There were probably more positives that offseason (picking up Neagle and Vaughn) but there were questionable moves that offseason as well (Cameron for Konerko being a great example - Cameron was coming off a .210 BA in 141 games).

I guess my point is that it's easier being cynical, quite honestly the cynics are correct more often. Technically if you predicted that no team would win the World Series next year, you'd be right about 29 teams, and only wrong about one. But by being cynical you miss fully enjoying the surprise seasons.

[M2]

BP, I think at least one hitter is going to have to have an MVP quality if the Reds want to compete.

I know it sounds like I'm asking a lot, but take a look at your playoff teams - Barry Bonds, Albert Pujols, Randy Johnson/Curt Schilling, Garrett Anderson, Miguel Tejada and Jason Giambi all had MVP quality seasons. Chipper and Andruw Jones weren't that far off. Minnesota was the only team that made the playoffs without a particulary huge season from anyone.

Now I think Dunn can do that. What I get more and more impressed by is that Adam slumped like crazy for two months and wound up with a .400 OB. Just let that soak in. Despite a horrid slump, the guy had a .400 OB. Usually you need six months of unwavering production to achieve that. The only guy I can ever remember doing something remotely like that was Mike Schmidt when he was young.

Before his slump (April-July) Adam had a .293 BA, .450 OB and .554 SLG. Those were his numbers at 439 plate appearances. Austin Kearns got 426 plate appearances and put up .315, .407, .500 numbers.

Now Austin may not have slumped in the last third of the season like Adam did, but he went on the shelf for the second year in a row, which is a concern in its own right.

So while I expect Adam to avoid that slump this time around and blossom into full superhuman form, my goal for Austin Kearns is for him to stay healthy.

If he goes .275, .350, .425, but plays 150 games, I'll be happy. The guy really is still adjusting to the majors and, while I expect him to be a very good player, I'm not going to change my assessment of him if he suffers a sophomore slump.

Mind you, he was way better than I expected last season, so it's not like I don't recognize that he could have a big season.

Jr.'s injuries make me gunshy. Larkin's got age and his history of infirmity to overcome. LaRue's a catcher and I always try to temper what I expect from them. 20 HR with a .330 OB would be wonderful.

And Boone and Casey can be fine players, but neither has proven himself capable of having a truly big year.

However, I think you're right that a .310, 30 HR, 110 BI (that would be my idea of big for those two) campaign from either Boone or Casey is the sort of enhancer the team really needs. Though I try to temper the fan in me whenever I consider something like that.

So if Dunn goes big and the Kearns/Boone/Casey/LaRue/whoever plays 3B faction puts together solid years, then, provided the pitching holds together, the Reds could find themselves in a position for the money players (Jr. and Larkin) to put the team over the top with money seasons.

To me, that's the most likely scenario and that's a lot of ifs.

[Spring~Fields]

I had hoped that relative stability would allow the team to hunt bigger game this offseason instead of going back to chuck more stones at wharf rats,

[MikeS21]

The Reds do have a legit strikeout artist, his name is Scott Williamson. I do not know recovered the Reds consider Willy, but if it is close to 100%, he needs to be in the rotation, at the top.

The problem with Williamson as a starter is the number of pitches he throws. His control is such that it takes around 15-16 pitches for him to get through an inning. In 2000, he started 10 games, and averaged just over 93 pitches per start. Did he EVER make it into the 7th inning of ANY game? Best I remember, he was about a 5-6 inning pitcher.

By the same token, this tendency to get a little wild concerns me as far as Williamson as a closer.

If Williamson can ever cut down on his pitch counts per inning, he could be awesome. But his tendency is to throw a lot of pitches, and that cuts down his effectiveness as a starter past the 5th and 6th innings.

[princeton]

Originally posted by M2
A lot of us were on the Fastball and Cincy.Com sites back at that time.

I don't know who qualifies as "the more negative types" in your view, but, if memory serves, princeton, WOY, 15 and myself were pretty high on the '99 team heading into spring training that season. Chip and remdog might have been too.

yeah, right after the Greg Vaughn acquisition, I declared the team to be a WS contender if only one more move was made-- the replacement of Jack McKeon with a great manager.

I still think that the '99 team underachieved, not overachieved. They had a lot of talent. Whitey Herzog would have gotten them into the WS

Would a great manager get the '03 team into the playoffs? I'll have to think about that for a while...

[guernsey]

BP, I think at least one hitter is going to have to have an MVP quality if the Reds want to compete.

The nice thing is that the Reds have more than one or two guys capable of putting up MVP-type numbers, so it's not like the Cubs who have to rely on just Sammy.

Junior has an MVP in his trophy case, and is young enough to get another one (or two).

Dunn and Kearns may be a couple of years away from having monster season, but they could happen early.

Casey has put up great half seasons. Maybe he can do it for a full year sometime.

Boone is a stretch, but who knows.

[REDREAD]

Let's see.... was GM up on the Reds... I seem to think the answer is no... howbout Redread, he was around as was Rojo.

Actually I was pretty excited about the 99 reds after they picked up Vaughn and Neagle. I admit that I thought they'd both be gone at the trading deadline though for propsects. But I bought tickets before the season started, because I wanted to see a game before the trading deadline.

But in that offseason, the team gave us a reason to get excited.
They added Cameron, Tucker, Neagle, Vaughn, and had Harnish in the fold. None of the trades that offseason were pure salary dumps. The core of the team was very promising.

If the Reds added 4 solid players this offseason (as they did pre-1999) without hurting the major league depth chart and had no salary dump trades, I'd be turning cartwheels now.

[buckeyenut]

OK so right now just to look at ins and outs, we have Dessens and Walker going out and Wilson and Lopez coming in at the ML level. Not a complete wash because of Lopez being so young and iffy to really contribute this year, but Larson potentially offsets that. And we will pay those guys 800K rather than the almost 7M it would have cost for Dessens/Walker. So a 5-6M savings on moves that really haven't hurt this team at all for 2003.

We had to find a position for Larson and give him a chance after his production last year. We've done that. We still have an OF and MR glut we need to deal with. And we still need an ace and a leadoff hitter. But I cannot find fault with what we have done so far.

Big key is, are we done? I still firmly believe we are not. MON is still holding up the market and we still don't know how much our arb guys will cost. I firmly believe we will make additional moves at some point before spring training. The key is will we stand in place with those moves or get better or get worse to save $$.

Right now, I think this team AS IS will compete for the division. I think we will be in it till the trade deadline if we don't have any major injuries. If no major injuries, we are buyers at the deadline, maybe even getting our ace then for a playoff push. If we have injuries, we are a seller, dealing off potentially valuable pieces like Casey, White, Sullivan, Boone, LaRue, maybe even Haynes or Wilson to contenders.

If we get an ace and/or a leadoff hitter before opening day, I think we can survive one, maybe even two major injuries to key cogs.

[Redsfaithful]

Calling Cameron or Tucker "solid" acquisitions during that offseason is laughable.

Tucker is .... well Tucker.

And as I mentioned earlier, Cameron had never had a decent season, and had hit .210 the year before in 141 games. While he turned into a solid player for the Reds that year, it would have been a stretch to predict just how good he ended up being in '99. Which kind of proves my point Redread, you say those were good acquisitions now, but many people on this board would have called those pick-ups "dumpster diving".

But yeah Vaughn and Neagle were top notch trades, it would be nice to see the Reds pick up two like them this offseason.

[cincinnati chili]

Originally posted by Redsfaithful
Calling Cameron or Tucker "solid" acquisitions during that offseason is laughable...

Which kind of proves my point Redread, you say those were good acquisitions now, but many people on this board would have called those pick-ups "dumpster diving"...

But yeah Vaughn and Neagle were top notch trades, it would be nice to see the Reds pick up two like them this offseason.

See I think the opposite way. I don't really care if a player is high profile or recovered from a DUMPSTER. I care about how he performs, AFTER we get him. Bottom feeding got us Pete Shourek, a cy Young candiate. A high profile trade got us Dante Bichette, a flop.

If anything, the Reds should be praised MORE for low cost-high reward pickups.

[Redsfaithful]

I agree completely chili.

[M2]

Calling Cameron or Tucker "solid" acquisitions during that offseason is laughable.

I find it laughable that anyone didn't consider Cameron and Tucker acquistions during that offseason.

I was doing cartwheels when the Reds got Cameron. As I remember that was a popular trade with a lot of folks on the Fastball site. There was a contingent that didn't like it, but I don't think many of them around anymore. And I loved the Boone and Remlinger for Neagle, Tucker and Bell trade.

You're right, Michael Tucker is Michael Tucker - a great 4th OF. Just have him avoid lefties and he gives you decent OB and pop to go with good corner OF defense (fair CF defense) and excellent speed. I wouldn't build a team around, but, man, what a great complimentary player to put on a good team.

Both of those guys were pro players who had done something in their careers (Cameron had an impressive rookie campaign in 1997 before struggling in 1998). Both of them were heading into their primes.

I wouldn't make the assumption that not liking the team's recent moves indicates a distaste for what it was doing back in 1998 and 1999. If anything, I think it works in the opposite fashion -- having seen it done right back then only underscores the second-class nature of the current operation.