What are you talking about? When you criticized the Reds for letting Dunn go and watching their slash numbers decrease because of it, I was just pointing out that it was a little of a narrow view since you were only focusing on the effect on the offense.Originally Posted by Spring~Fields
But I was also saying that, maybe, the decision was already made to spend his savings on Arroyo and Harang and others. Maybe.
For now he should be, unless he does something that is going to materially impact the future of this franchise in a negative way.
But if/when Walt is given $100MM or so to spend and he ends up botching it, then I think the teflon comes off.
Don't be too hard on him.
Well that is really something to ponder. Just how does that work?
Maybe the competition scored less runs overall in 2009 too? Maybe that helped to inflate the positive look for the Reds defense?Maybe the team's defensive/pitching performance increased more than the offense decreased due to Adam's departure. If that is the case, then he should have been let go.
And the alternatives were, and at what cost or price to the teams finances and team performances without them? The part you always selectively omit.And the signing of good pitchers at a decent cost line is laughable. Cordero got the richest contract in history for a reliever. Is that really a decent cost? Arroyo was extended 2 years before his way below market value current contract was over. Which killed his value on the openmarket and made them take on unnecessary risk. They gave Arroyo $12MM per year years in advance. Were they scared that Bronson was going to turn into a $20MM pitcher in those two years? The downside of that contract was way more than the upside, especially since there was no upside. And I had less of an issue with Harang at the time, but obviously that hasn't worked out too well to this point.
And what GM before Jocketty did not walk into a "crappy situation" with financial constraints? Not to mention bad pitching, bad defense, weak minor league, little inconsequential "crappy situations" like those on top of the financial contstraints?But Jocketty walked into a crappy situation at a very difficult economic time. He has been given zero payroll flexibility and has a few definite payroll cloggers on the books that have nothing to do with him.
Did you miss those extreme payroll comparisons that Bowden, O'Brien, Krivsky and even Jocketty has had to work under against the competitions spending? and spending season after season, not just one season? So who is it that did not have a crappy situation to work with? Last year in arguments you pretty much gleamed over those excessive payroll comparison postings, and ignored them seemingly in your responses, was that because you could not reconcile the disparities for Reds GM's and at the same time argue in defense of your positions?
Jocketty has the highest payroll in the history of the Reds and their GM's so how much worse was it for them, if it is bad for him in your perception?
It has been almost ten or more years that all gm's of the Reds have operated under an inadequate money supply to compete with teams that did have the funds available. That is not just an isolated case in arguments for Jocketty.Teams with payrolls like Cincy's cannot just add contracts willy nilly. There needs to be a plan in place and we didn't see much of one in the past. It appears that the plan now is to get some of this money off the books (through trades or expiration) and look to (hopefully) add when money loosens up. But that's to be seen, I guess.
No plan ? so you think those men before Jocketty including ownership are idiots? I think not. Where did many of these players come from today that you indicate that the "the team improved", to improve with, if the predecessors were just out "willy nilly" obtaining, trading for and drafting then with no thought or reason to the future during their tenure?
Neither of us will make a willy nilly optimistic prediction for this team, because neither of us believes that it has improved to a point of being relevent in comparison to the competition regardless of who the GM is. Don't you agree?
Last edited by Spring~Fields; 12-30-2009 at 12:14 PM.
When someone's hands are tied by the financial environment and current payroll, it's kind of a tough task to do something to help the team in the immediate future.Don't be too hard on him.
Just my opinion.
Walt Jocketty can do no wrong.
The Dunn trade was awful. Awful. The Reds traded a .900 OPS bat for a 5th starter, an injury prone AA pitcher, and a career minor leaguer. I would've rather had the two draft picks, or if he accepts arbitration then good, we get another year of Dunn.
I'm sick and tired of the excuses for Jocketty. He's been a HUGE failure with the Reds. Those happy with his performance must be pleased with how the Reds organization has fared in the last decade.
If you like other stats, the Reds traded a guy who had less value last year than Luis Castillo and Skip Schumaker in 2009 while costing $10MM per year for those three same guys.Walt Jocketty can do no wrong.
The Dunn trade was awful. Awful. The Reds traded a .900 OPS bat for a 5th starter, an injury prone AA pitcher, and a career minor leaguer. I would've rather had the two draft picks, or if he accepts arbitration then good, we get another year of Dunn.
I'm sick and tired of the excuses for Jocketty. He's been a HUGE failure with the Reds. Those happy with his performance must be pleased with how the Reds organization has fared in the last decade.
Pretty good haul, if you ask me.
Not if he can evaluate talent, he could do what the man before him did with financial constraints and make some shrewd moves on the cheap both in trades and of the FA variety. That he has 2 starting pitchers making under market rates shouldn't be handicapping him, ya gotta pay some people sooner or later and no amount of hindsight can change that. Oh I forgot that one guy makes too much money, that is what has done poor Walt in.
"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."
--Woody Hayes
Yeah, what an excellent haul. The Reds landed nothing in return for one of the most feared hitters in the game. What a haul!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Such a long leash from a guy who had a chocker collar around Krivsky 24/7, I find the whole patience act a tad ironic myself.
Walt's on the electric fence program with me.
I think some people believe the Reds could not have won in 2008 or 2009, even if they had executed in the offseasons perfectly with what was available to a small market team with the payroll of the Cincinnati Reds. i.e. they believe a theoretically perfect general manager could not have won given the circumstances the Reds face.
I do not believe that. The Reds have some building blocks, more than some teams, the key is adding something to what they already have without taking on a lot of payroll and also using the resources they have in the best way possible. I don't think Walt Jocketty has done a good job on either front.
He's not as big a disaster as Dan O'Brien or Jim Bowden in his lesser years, but he's not good either. A good GM would have this team contending in a seriously weak division.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
It sure seems that way.Walt Jocketty can do no wrong.
The funny part is some of Jocketty's most vocal defenders were DO's and WK's harshest critics.
Come on. You know as well as I do that I put the Griffey, Dunn comments in there in response to anticipating your chronic overkill on the three pitcher contracts and the burden that all expensive long term contracts put on any organization, and not just the Reds. But to cause you to respond or ignore the money that Jocketty should have had and been able to use. So what did he do with the money from Dunn and Griffey to improve the team?
Even though I never seem to see you suggest that O'Brien and Krivsky had some contracts and a very poor talent pool handed to them too in the same poorly funded environment to work within in. If I had not tossed out the Griffey, Dunn names speaking to the money, someone else would have, maybe they already did, but I think you ignore those weights that were around the previous GM's strapped by ownership.
My only real issue with your points of view is that I see an incongruent and double standard in them for Jocketty, anti-Krivsky and O'Brien. You don't seem to measure the same basic factors for each of them with the same scales, justly. None of the GM's produced a team over .500 under the ownership groups, what a coincidence. What’s the cliché? “you get what you pay for”, and in this case none of the GM’s had the money to pay for it, like lucky Walt when he was in St. Louis and building his money bought reputation.
Last edited by Spring~Fields; 12-30-2009 at 12:31 PM.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices it.
Last edited by OnBaseMachine; 12-30-2009 at 12:31 PM.
Yep.
|
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. |
Reply With Quote
