Looking at the whole picture

[edabbs44]

As you may or may not know, I am a rather large fan of the Walt regime and, at times, have been called a "front office shill", among other things. I am a buyer of Jocketty and, for the most part, generally believe in his moves whether I love them off the bat or not. This is somewhat different from others, since some posters seem to be on a love/hate pattern on a move by move basis.

- Great job locking up Bruce
- Ridiculous that they gave Cairo 2 years
- Great move signing Chapman
- Can't believe they went 3 years on Arroyo
- Great move getting rid of Taveras
- Awful move signing Taveras

And we could go on. But at what point do some of you just become a believer in what this regime is doing? Moves cannot be looked at in a vacuum. The fact that they traded Dunn for basically nothing 2 years ago made some people crazy but, when you think about it, may have made a lot of these better moves possible. When we see guys like Gomes and Cabrera getting every day playing time, don't we think that maybe there is a legitimate reason for it?

I kind of compare it to today's video game/fantasy sports mentality. Most of us do not have intimate FO knowledge and the closest we have been to running a sports franchise is either on PS3 or a fantasy football team. We move players in and out of the lineup and the performance of both the team and those players really have little to do with anything except their talent. I'm sure that we sometimes assume that they can just remove Cabrera from the lineup, put in Janish and there will be no ramifications except the team will win more. Yet we have no idea what actually will happen, since we aren't there.

So back to my original topic...Walt's moves have been greeted with reactions that are all over the charts. This move is great, this move sucks, Walt is the man, Walt is asleep at the wheel, etc etc etc. But shouldn't we give the FO the benefit of the doubt until we actually see the finished product? Isn't it a waste of energy to be complaining about them not doing anything at the Winter Meetings until we see what actually happens later in the offseason and even during the season?

Some on here were wanting Walt to make a move on JJ Hardy, the guy who will make in the neighborhood of $7MM in arb this year. Again, we have no idea what the ramifications would be on that move. Maybe Walt gets him and makes some posters giddy. But unknown to us, that kills Bruce's extension and other flexibility down the line. Every move has a butterfly effect, which is unknown to us at the time.

I'm all for discussion from move to move...that's why we are all here, right? But when you have a GM who has proven that he knows what he is doing, I think more leeway should be given to him and less criticism should be levied until we see the overall product and performance. If there is a move that can be made that isn't, do we really think that it was Walt asleep at the switch? or shouldn't we believe that it doesn't fit in the overall picture of what they are trying to do?

[Mario-Rijo]

Here is the whole problem with giving him the benefit of the doubt. 1st you have to believe he has proven himself. I really don't buy it. Now that doesn't mean I think he is a bad GM. I think he excels at certain aspects of the job which is probably a far cry from some we have had the past 20 years. How he handles the media and fans is quite masterful. The fact that he takes intangibles & chemistry into consideration and gives them a fairly high order of importance isn't a bad thing (though I think he may give them a bit too much importance).

In short I think he did do one brilliant thing for his career and that was to sign LaRussa. Give Walt a manager or top notch F.O. executive who is an excellent talent evaluator and I think he would be just fine. But I haven't seen enough yet to convince me that he is one himself, or has one working with him. IMO a good GM makes the most of every asset and I don't feel like he has. So I have to ask myself why and the only thing that encompasses every scenario he has been presented with is a lack of evaluating ability.

So either I have to be proven wrong on my assessments (and I haven't much). Or Walt has to do a series of things in a row that I can see make sense. And he has done a few but then he seems to miss a lot of opportunities in between. I can see the big picture (have looked at it all along) and again he has missed prime opportunities to improve the Reds for the short and long haul.

Jay Bruce was a big one though that he got right and he got it really right. I think alot of it had to do with Jay kind of making it easy for him but at least he took advantage of the opportunity.

[gonelong]

I'm all for discussion from move to move...that's why we are all here, right? But when you have a GM who has proven that he knows what he is doing, I think more leeway should be given to him and less criticism should be levied until we see the overall product and performance.

Thats generally what I do from my couch. I watch. I enjoy. Besides, I have no choice but to wait and see what happens.

When I am discussing the team with neighbors, family, and Redszone there is no need to take a wait-and-see approach. I want your opinions and the logic behind those opinions right now. Go out on a limb and tell me what you think and why. Over time, I will come to value some opinions more than others and will take them into higher consideration when forming my own opinion.

GL

[TRF]

And yet you did not look at the bigger picture when it came to Krivsky. Most of your posts regarding Jocketty point to his past success as proof of future results. Deals you praised Jocketty for that were THE EXACT SAME DEAL Krivsky did, you panned. (Arroyo) The simple truth is this: Jocketty in his two years did not bring in as much quality talent that Krivsky did. What he did do was complement that talent and allow it to gel. There is a ton of value in that. Jocketty does understand the psychology of the game.

But it also blinds him at times. It makes him think that Gomes as a starter is a good idea. That Cabrera was the defender he was 10 years ago. That Rolen is somehow 26 instead of 36 and that he's the same offensive force he was as a Cardinal. Not every move is bad, not every move is good, but the overall philosophy of the type of talent to acquire hasn't changed from when WK was GM. The difference is Krivsky has to take pride in what he did here while working somewhere else.

[Ghosts of 1990]

I agree with you. There is no way that we see the fold as often or as deep as Walt Jocketty and his cohorts, experienced front office executives for years inside this game. However, getting everyone to just sit back and say that they're cool with every move made--that's asking a lot--and probably impossible. And we shouldn't feel that way unless we're winning World Series titles or at least contending for them year in and year out. Of late, they've made more good calls than bad calls. Do I agree with them all? No way. Do I know as well as Jocketty? No way. Has be been right 100% of the time. Not a chance. Even the best in the business who do it for a living are not right always--they're human too. It's a tough business.

But basically you're asking are we reaching the point where we sit back and just let the organization act without criticism. I don't think you get there until you've built a dynasty. I think most of the time, Patriots fans are faithful of the man behind the curtain in New England. For good reason. When Belichick and company pick up an unknown, good chance that he's gonna be a football player. His track record the last decade says so.

[westofyou]

Everyone sit back.... unless of course you don't like a move, then make your case.

Just like many did when the prior GM's ran the team.

I'd suggest if you want a blanket agreement on the state of the team you visit your nearest mirror.

[Ghosts of 1990]

At the same time I'd like to add that there are people in this very forum who are knowledgeable enough that they could definitely be in a baseball front office.

I know a guy who is 24, very smart and analytical; but no more baseball knowledge then some of the posters in the ORG. He is the assistant head baseball operations for the Arizona Diamondbacks. The different between him and a lot here is that he knew some people who had some pull, he impressed them a great deal and he works his tail off.

The conception that fans don't know isn't always right. I know there are plenty of fans who are prodigious about baseball and would do some positive things if given the opportunity.

[reds44]

Am I the only one looking at the Arroyo, Bruce, and (potentially) Cueto extensions as a sign Votto won't be extended?

[Captain Hook]

Am I the only one looking at the Arroyo, Bruce, and (potentially) Cueto extensions as a sign Votto won't be extended?

I was kind of thinking the opposite.It's good to show your star player that your serious about keeping a winning team together when that player is considering weather or not to make a long term commitment.I suppose it could mean something different though but I'm not reading into it much that way.I think at worst it's just Walt taking care of business.

[edabbs44]

And yet you did not look at the bigger picture when it came to Krivsky. Most of your posts regarding Jocketty point to his past success as proof of future results. Deals you praised Jocketty for that were THE EXACT SAME DEAL Krivsky did, you panned. (Arroyo) The simple truth is this: Jocketty in his two years did not bring in as much quality talent that Krivsky did. What he did do was complement that talent and allow it to gel. There is a ton of value in that. Jocketty does understand the psychology of the game.

But it also blinds him at times. It makes him think that Gomes as a starter is a good idea. That Cabrera was the defender he was 10 years ago. That Rolen is somehow 26 instead of 36 and that he's the same offensive force he was as a Cardinal. Not every move is bad, not every move is good, but the overall philosophy of the type of talent to acquire hasn't changed from when WK was GM. The difference is Krivsky has to take pride in what he did here while working somewhere else.

Yeah, disagree. The reason is as follows: They were two different teams at two different times.

If Cincy had a need for a closer right now and they went out and got Cordero, that would make sense to me. Not when they were a 90 loss team. And I think it is painfully apparent that this is true. Now when this team is good we have a $12MM struggling closer who is clogging up the books. He was lights out when the team sucked. Awesome.

You bring up Arroyo, I wasn't a fan of his extension at the time since it was unnecessary and the team wasn't very good. I'm not in love with that third year, but that's where my faith in this guy comes in. I'm not going to moan and wail about that 3rd year, because this guy is a proven winner and he knows a hell of a lot more than any of us do. He's proven it. He knows their finances, he knows what their next 5 moves are going to be and he knows what Arroyo is like in the clubhouse, in the bullpen and on the field. None of us know that except for what we pull off of Fangraphs. If Arroyo's extension gives this team more comfort to go and trade one of the other pitchers for a leadoff LF/SS, does it make you feel better about it?

So, to answer your question, my critiques of the moves you mention have to be viewed in the context in which they were made. If you are 21 years old, broke and jobless, have $10k in debt and go out and buy a $5k watch, I'll think you are an idiot. If you are 30 years old, pull down $200k per year and have no debt and buy that same watch, good for you. Especially if you have a very solid historical performance which shows me that you know how to manage your finances.

[edabbs44]

At the same time I'd like to add that there are people in this very forum who are knowledgeable enough that they could definitely be in a baseball front office.

I know a guy who is 24, very smart and analytical; but no more baseball knowledge then some of the posters in the ORG. He is the assistant head baseball operations for the Arizona Diamondbacks. The different between him and a lot here is that he knew some people who had some pull, he impressed them a great deal and he works his tail off.

The conception that fans don't know isn't always right. I know there are plenty of fans who are prodigious about baseball and would do some positive things if given the opportunity.

Maybe. But not in this context. The Reds FO gets blasted from time to time on this board without any knowledge about pretty much anything besides what can be found online. No knowledge about what happens in the dugout, no knowledge about finances, just a bunch of stats.

I'm not sure what Jocketty needs to do to get some faith around here.

[edabbs44]

Everyone sit back.... unless of course you don't like a move, then make your case.

Just like many did when the prior GM's ran the team.

I'd suggest if you want a blanket agreement on the state of the team you visit your nearest mirror.

If this is directed at me, I haven't agreed with every move made by Jocketty. I wasn't in love with Arroyo's 3rd year. I wasn't in love with Taveras. I wasn't throwing a party for Baker's extension.

But I'll take Jocketty's overall product any day of the week. And I think that's what some fail to realize.

[OnBaseMachine]

And yet you did not look at the bigger picture when it came to Krivsky. Most of your posts regarding Jocketty point to his past success as proof of future results. Deals you praised Jocketty for that were THE EXACT SAME DEAL Krivsky did, you panned. (Arroyo) The simple truth is this: Jocketty in his two years did not bring in as much quality talent that Krivsky did. What he did do was complement that talent and allow it to gel. There is a ton of value in that. Jocketty does understand the psychology of the game.

But it also blinds him at times. It makes him think that Gomes as a starter is a good idea. That Cabrera was the defender he was 10 years ago. That Rolen is somehow 26 instead of 36 and that he's the same offensive force he was as a Cardinal. Not every move is bad, not every move is good, but the overall philosophy of the type of talent to acquire hasn't changed from when WK was GM. The difference is Krivsky has to take pride in what he did here while working somewhere else.

Nice post.

[westofyou]

If this is directed at me, I haven't agreed with every move made by Jocketty. I wasn't in love with Arroyo's 3rd year. I wasn't in love with Taveras. I wasn't throwing a party for Baker's extension.

But I'll take Jocketty's overall product any day of the week. And I think that's what some fail to realize.

No it's directed at the whole, even Branch Rickey and George Weiss had guys who disagreed with their moves, I've never seen one GM who was Teflon, i don't believe one exists.

[edabbs44]

No it's directed at the whole, even Branch Rickey and George Weiss had guys who disagreed with their moves, I've never seen one GM who was Teflon, i don't believe one exists.

Neither do I, it's one thing to disagree specific moves to a point and it is another to still question the motives and direction they are headed. We had people freaking out when no moves were made at the deadline, when Rolen was traded for, when no major moves were made until the new year last year, even when Walt says that he didn't call anyone on a specific day. It's obvious that these guys know what they are doing and that they have the ship headed in the right direction. Is it necessary to seriously question them at this point?