Reds move up on BA's organization report cards

[mbgrayson]

Last year, the Reds rated a letter grade "D" on Baseball America's organization report cards. THis placed them 27th out of 30, with only the Pirates, Devil Rays, and Royals lower.

This year, Baseball America's latest issue rates them a "C+", which moves them up to 15th.

Under the overall grade, there are a number of sub-categories. Below these are listed, with a comparison of last year and this year's rankings.


1. Major Leagues 2005: D 2006: C
2. Minor Leagues 2005: D 2006: B
3. Talent Level 2005: D 2006: B
4. Player Procurement 2005: B 2006: C
5. Organization Direction 2005: D 2006: B

I don't think I should quote all of the one sentence narratives for each sub-category, since BA is fussy about having their content copied. Under team direction is the overall summary; "With improved ownership, things are suddenly looking up in Cincinnati, but team still needs more good players to make a serious playoff push."

[TOBTTReds]

I think we had a pretty good draft and with another solid one in 07 we should continue moving up.

[MrCinatit]

Originally Posted by mbgrayson

5. Organization Direction 2005: D 2006: B
[/I]."

That there - that tiniest of threads - is enough to give me hope to grab onto.

[texasdave]

Johnny Almarez must have done something right in 2006. I would think since he was in charge of Player Development that #2 (Minor League) was his main concern. And that area jumped up from a D to a B in one season.

[LoganBuck]

texas, that is all likely attributed by the four individual performances of Bailey, Bruce, Votto, and Cueto, as a collective improvement.

[Eric_Davis]

Originally Posted by mbgrayson

Last year, the Reds rated a letter grade "D" on Baseball America's organization report cards. THis placed them 27th out of 30, with only the Pirates, Devil Rays, and Royals lower.

This year, Baseball America's latest issue rates them a "C+", which moves them up to 15th.

Under the overall grade, there are a number of sub-categories. Below these are listed, with a comparison of last year and this year's rankings.


1. Major Leagues 2005: D 2006: C
2. Minor Leagues 2005: D 2006: B
3. Talent Level 2005: D 2006: B
4. Player Procurement 2005: B 2006: C
5. Organization Direction 2005: D 2006: B

I don't think I should quote all of the one sentence narratives for each sub-category, since BA is fussy about having their content copied. Under team direction is the overall summary; "With improved ownership, things are suddenly looking up in Cincinnati, but team still needs more good players to make a serious playoff push."

This is the kind of report I'm looking for while observing the job our new G.M. is doing for the organization...not some what-have-you-done-for-me-lately kind of results that get some fans wondering why we didn't do anything during the winter meetings.

I guarantee you. A lot of things were done during the winter meetings. Conversations were held and groundwork was laid for all future negotiations.

Great Job!

This organization is in the best hands it's been in for the last 20 years. We can say goodbye to two decades of funk.

[Spike]

Originally Posted by Eric_Davis

This is the kind of report I'm looking for while observing the job our new G.M. is doing for the organization...not some what-have-you-done-for-me-lately kind of results that get some fans wondering why we didn't do anything during the winter meetings.

I guarantee you. A lot of things were done during the winter meetings. Conversations were held and groundwork was laid for all future negotiations.

Great Job!

This organization is in the best hands it's been in for the last 20 years. We can say goodbye to two decades of funk.

I may be in a minority, but I am a Wayne Krivsy fan. I like his moves and although the Kearns/Lopez trade was tough, I think we will see Bray and Majewski shine in time.

[TRF]

Originally Posted by Eric_Davis

This is the kind of report I'm looking for while observing the job our new G.M. is doing for the organization...not some what-have-you-done-for-me-lately kind of results that get some fans wondering why we didn't do anything during the winter meetings.

I guarantee you. A lot of things were done during the winter meetings. Conversations were held and groundwork was laid for all future negotiations.

Great Job!

This organization is in the best hands it's been in for the last 20 years. We can say goodbye to two decades of funk.

If that's true, You must have at least liked Dan O'Brien.

Because he drafted a helluva lot better than Krivsky did. at least so far. He infused the minors with more talent than Krivsky has as well. Now a lot of what he brought in is gone, but he recognized the GLARING weakness that was the Reds farm system. Krivsky went all JimBo on the draft and picked Stubbs first.

All I am saying, is if you want to praise Krivsky for what he has accomplished, use the same criteria for previous regimes. I don't think DnO was a good GM. I do think he is a good baseball man though. And I think he has a very defined role that he can excel in. I'm thinking Krivsky might be the same animal. Good in a very defined role. Maybe he'll grow into more. DanO didn't, but it's possible Krivsky will. He showed remarkable restrain at the winter meetings. I commend him for that.

[Eric_Davis]

Originally Posted by TRF

If that's true, You must have at least liked Dan O'Brien.

Because he drafted a helluva lot better than Krivsky did. at least so far. He infused the minors with more talent than Krivsky has as well. Now a lot of what he brought in is gone, but he recognized the GLARING weakness that was the Reds farm system. Krivsky went all JimBo on the draft and picked Stubbs first.

All I am saying, is if you want to praise Krivsky for what he has accomplished, use the same criteria for previous regimes. I don't think DnO was a good GM. I do think he is a good baseball man though. And I think he has a very defined role that he can excel in. I'm thinking Krivsky might be the same animal. Good in a very defined role. Maybe he'll grow into more. DanO didn't, but it's possible Krivsky will. He showed remarkable restrain at the winter meetings. I commend him for that.

All of my previous posts always supported DanO, mainly because I'm not going to judge a G.M. on just two years of service, especially when the minor leagues is where the organization needed it's biggest improvement. Just like I do now, I try to temper those who want to hang the G.M. before six months have passed, one year has passed, or two years have passed. This is baseball, where it takes 5-7 years to judge the effect a General Manager has on an organization.

I'm probably making too early of a thumbs up call myself, but I like the type of moves that he makes and from my viewpoint, the reason that he makes them.

No one has a clue what type of draft results Wayne has had yet, as it has only been six months since his first draft!!!!!!!! (TRF, not referencing this to your comment on "going JimBo"....I know you meant that he went for power early in the draft....at least he didn't intentionally draft someone whom he couldn't sign.)

What I like most about Wayne is that he's always looking to make improvements at all levels of the organization. I love the trade with Washington. In 2008 and 2009 it will really show itself to be a good trade.

[Heath]

Well, I would hope that the Reds move up. They obviously couldn't get much worse.

[TRF]

When I posted "going JimBo" I meant drafting a "toolsy" player. Stubbs may end up being the better pick, but I personally wanted the Reds to take Tim Lincecum. Having your minors stocked with pitching can allow you to trade for hitting. The other way around, not so much.

I liked a lot of what DanO did. I just disliked a lot too. Same with Krivsky. I don't think either man works the 25 or 40 man rosters very well. But DanO did see the value in keeping WMP on the roster. Value that Krivsky cashed in on. I'm thinking that Krivsky is hoping to stay with the reds long enough to see both Stubbs (his pick) and Bruce (DanO pick) in the OF for the Reds. Their combined version of Kearns/Dunn.

[Falls City Beer]

Originally Posted by TRF

I don't think either man works the 25 or 40 man rosters very well.

Now you're being too generous.

[TRF]

ok, stupid take the first pitch aside, I liked the tandem starter idea. Problem is DanO let his underlings bully him into dropping it. Truth is after it was instituted, Surgeries were on the decline. In that regard, it worked. That doesn't mean that just regular pitch limits won't, but at least it was outside the box thinking. I can't fault that too much.

Taking the first pitch though... Why would you broadcast that? And why for every AB? Maybe first time facing a pitcher it might have some merit, but AB's 2,3 and 4? just silly.

But DanO did draftat least 2 potential stars in Bailey and Bruce. Also his regime produced Wood, Cueto, and LeCure. And no major league contracts to minor league players. another plus.

So far, Krivsky has had a pheh draft and a good March and April on the trade/FA front. I'm patient, but there seems to be no real discernable method to his moves. He seems to be adding defense, but all the defense is just going to make horrible pitchers a little less horrible. There is no Number 3 starter, or number 1 if you prefer. Bailey won't get more than a cup of coffee in September. And there is nobody at AA or AAA ready to be a starter for the Reds.

The lower minors is looking better, But that is because of DanO, not Krivsky.

How odd it is to type that.

[M2]

I don't know that the lower minors looks all that great. It's certainly not deep. Essentially, in two years of DanO the Reds have three arms (Bailey, Wood and Cueto) and a bat (Bruce) to dream on.

When isn't that the case?

Go back in time four years ago and folks thought the organization was swimming in pitching (Gruler, Basham, Moseley and Howington being the top-rated guys) with Pena and Encarancion around to boot.

IMO, what happened in 2006 was that, unlike many past seasons, a number of the team's top prospects had good seasons. Instead of doing a hot prospect reshuffle, 2006 reinforced the prospect status of many of the Reds' top kids. There wasn't a lot in the way of depth, though. If the top prospects ultimately miss, there isn't much beyond that that profiles as any sort of help. Even if the bulk of the top prospects ultimately make it, the Reds still have to do some serious fishing outside the organization in order to round out a good future team.

A number of Krivsky's draft picks performed well in Billings so we'll see if anything approaching depth comes of it in 2007.

Anyway, while I agree the Reds' system looks better than it did a year ago, I think it's mostly because the farm system managed not to implode for the first time in a number of years, at least in terms of the top prospects. That might be because the Reds now have better top prospects, but that doesn't equate to a turnaround. It's just a good first step with many more needed before anyone proclaims it to be a new direction. At least that's my take.

[PuffyPig]

I'd suggest that having many of the top propsects having good seasons is an absolute turnaround. As opposed to having many of the top prospects flop. It validates the top prospects ratings.