"Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.
I didn't understand then, and knowing a lot more than I did as a 10 year-old, I don't understand now. I guess some just prefer to be critical, even when it involves cognitive dissonance to do so.
Last edited by traderumor; 12-01-2012 at 02:16 PM.
Can't win with 'em
Can't win without 'em
Dusty managing the Reds seems to be the source of cognitive dissonance for many folks.
Dusty is an ignoramus when it comes to lineup construction and in-game strategy. Some of the most basic tenets of modern baseball are over his head. Fortunately for the Reds Dusty's people skills are outstanding.
Bryan Price is the unsung hero who has really put the Reds over the top in my opinion.
Last edited by AtomicDumpling; 12-03-2012 at 07:28 AM.
Many moves are made possible by previous moves and non-moves. Everything cannot be viewed purely at that moment.
To say that he was asleep at the switch is embarrassing. It is obvious that he would've made moves if they were there at the time.
It's OK to think that a leader isn't doing his job the way you would do it, but to call anyone an ignoramous who clearly can manage a team (three different ones) to the playoffs, no mean feat, and to say a GM is asleep at the switch based on "no significant moves until," yet that GM has constructed a winning program, that's just plain disingenuous and reveals a level of ignorance from the one holding that opinion.
Can't win with 'em
Can't win without 'em
It wasn't me who started the Jocketty is asleep at the switch bandwagon. I was just pointing out that it was not an unreasonable topic after someone said it was.
As I have said before, I think Jocketty has done a good job in the last 12 months. I also think he inherited a very strong farm system and a stellar core of young major league players. This team was bound for excellence before Jocketty took over. He did not build this team into a contender all by himself. I think most reasonable people understand that.
If you believe Jocketty did such a great job prior to 2012 then maybe you can explain the moves he made that built this team into a winner. The key components were all here when he took over with the exception of Chapman. Prior to 2012 the acquisition of Chapman was the only unquestionably good player move he had made in several years. I can certainly see why some people saw fit to question Jocketty's job performance (or lack of performance). One good move in several years is clearly quite dubious, especially when there were some glaring holes in the lineup and plenty of trading chips available and plenty of other teams finding ways to fill their holes while Jocketty couldn't.
Jocketty did a great job in 2012. I think most everyone agrees on that.
Last edited by AtomicDumpling; 12-03-2012 at 08:45 AM.
Yep. And another thing to consider.. After the Reds won the division in 2010, there was a lot of young talent to sort out. The Reds used 2011 to sort some of that out. Now true, they possibly missed the opportunity to "sell high" on some guys, but at the same time, they didn't foolishly count on Travis Wood to be an ace going forward or make other assumptions. They kept Janish around and bought in Valdez in case Cozart fell flat on his face.
Honestly, the slower deliberate style really paid off, as opposed to grabbing every available pitcher off possible and throwing them against the wall, hoping they'd stick.
Thank you Walt and Bob for bringing winning baseball back to Cincy
Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!
Jocketty gets the credit because he was in charge when a long rebuilding project that was well underway when he took over finally came to fruition during his tenure.
To me it is overly simple to claim that Jocketty is a great GM because the Reds won 97 games in 2012. You have to look a lot deeper to determine the true reasons why the team has developed so well. Jocketty is only one cog in that machine, and some other cogs were more instrumental than he.