Should Wayne Krivsky's contract be extended?

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

While some of this is true (I could take issue with some points, especially #2 and #4), he needs to produce on the field. Last year's team was an abomination. This year's team better show a significant amount of improvement or I think he is gone.

What do you consider significant improvement? I think this is a very would be better in the books however the third place finish would probably bsubjective viewpoint. Lets assume that the reds trade Bailey, Votto, etc. for Bedard but finish second. Another assumption is that the reds stand pat, go with a rotation of Harang, Arroyo, Bailey, Volquez, and Belisle. The reds struggle early but both Bailey and Votto come on late in the season and show a significant amount of promise in the second half of the season. The second place finish would be better for the orginazation as a whole.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

What do you consider significant improvement? I think this is a very would be better in the books however the third place finish would probably bsubjective viewpoint. Lets assume that the reds trade Bailey, Votto, etc. for Bedard but finish second. Another assumption is that the reds stand pat, go with a rotation of Harang, Arroyo, Bailey, Volquez, and Belisle. The reds struggle early but both Bailey and Votto come on late in the season and show a significant amount of promise in the second half of the season. The second place finish would be better for the orginazation as a whole.

Well, the team last year was one of the worst we have ever seen in Cincy. They were fighting for the #1 overall pick in the 2nd half of the season.

Significant improvement means they need to be in the playoff hunt. Plain and simple. I'm not saying they have to win it all...but they better be minimally knocking on the door of the postseason.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

Well, the team last year was one of the worst we have ever seen in Cincy. They were fighting for the #1 overall pick in the 2nd half of the season.

26th worst winning percentage in team history, not as bad as 2001, 2003 and slightly better then 2005.

[princeton]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

Krivsky's drafts are enough for me to lean towards "No".

drafts should make you say "yes"

What's unusual about them has been that none of the players have completely washed out already. In the past, we've had multiple guys drafted in rounds 4-10 out of baseball in just over a year, and multiple pitchers with immediate shoulder problems.

but if you have a look at the 2006 draft, you see that almost everyone's done something positive and that this has created a lot of trade value within the organization. That's a solid effort. Importantly: THERE HAVE BEEN NO SHOULDER SURGERIES! I repeat-- there have been no shoulder surgeries. Most of those pitchers have reached A and are really looking solid; some are all the way up to Chattanooga. That's terrific.

He gave a lot of money to Ravin and to Arneson, and they have control issues. It happens; maybe they'll figure it out. He reached a bit on Stubbs, but a defensive, powerful RHHing CFer that can lead off was a clear need in the organization and remains one. Have a thought if Stubbs DOES become a more powerful Mike Cameron-- that's a huge help, correct? You could actually keep Adam Dunn in LF if Stubbs becomes a player. right idea. Player needs to come through. He's clearly developing better than Szymanski, so there's hope.

in 2007, Mesoraco and Cozart might turn out to be defensive reaches, but you understand them-- defense is really bad up in Cincy. No. 4 Stouffer did not sign. No. 5 Bowman got beat up pretty badly in his first go-round. But my initial reaction is that this draft will turn out to look quite a bit like 2006's

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by westofyou

26th worst winning percentage in team history, not as bad as 2001, 2003 and slightly better then 2005.

That's pretty awful.

Don't forget...they got the obligatory "new manager bounce" when Narron was canned.

[AtomicDumpling]

I voted "No".

When evaluating a General Manager the proof is in the pudding. The pudding says the Reds have had miserable records the past two seasons.

We can compare and contrast every transaction, draft pick, trade and signing but our opinions mean less than the team's record on the field. The team has performed poorly -- so it will be hard to convince me the GM has done a good job so far.

We can name lots of seemingly very good moves Krivsky has made, but since the team has a losing record under his tenure those good moves must have been cancelled out by the poor moves.

Most of the team's hopes and strengths lie with players acquired before Krivsky arrived. Harang, Dunn, Griffey, Encarnacion, Bailey, Votto, Cueto, and Bruce represent the bulk of this team's foundation for 2008 and beyond and all of those players were here pre-Krivsky. Wayne has brought in Arroyo, Phillips, Cordero and a bunch of spare parts. These additions were not nearly enough to turn a bad team into a good one -- and that is why the team has continued to play badly.

I don't think Krivsky has proven to be a bad GM either. I just don't see any reason to extend his contract at this time. That is why I voted No.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling

I voted "No".

When evaluating a General Manager the proof is in the pudding. The pudding says the Reds have had miserable records the past two seasons.

We can compare and contrast every transaction, draft pick, trade and signing but our opinions mean less than the team's record on the field. The team has performed poorly -- so it will be hard to convince me the GM has done a good job so far.

We can name lots of seemingly very good moves Krivsky has made, but since the team has a losing record under his tenure those good moves must have been cancelled out by the poor moves.

Most of the team's hopes and strengths lie with players acquired before Krivsky arrived. Harang, Dunn, Griffey, Encarnacion, Bailey, Votto, Cueto, and Bruce represent the bulk of this team's foundation for 2008 and beyond and all of those players were here pre-Krivsky. Wayne has brought in Arroyo, Phillips, Cordero and a bunch of spare parts. These additions were not nearly enough to turn a bad team into a good one -- and that is why the team has continued to play badly.

I don't think Krivsky has proven to be a bad GM either. I just don't see any reason to extend his contract at this time. That is why I voted No.

That's a point I've been making for a while...when evaluating Krivsky, a lot of people love to applaud his acquisitions of Hamilton, Phillips and Arroyo. Bottom line is the team performed worse this past year than the year before he took over. We can pick out a few winners for Wayne, but bottom line is he needs to win.

This is the third year. If they do not show a nice chunk of improvement then he should be given the boot. He has chosen not to rebuild, so minimally we should be seeing improvement on the major league level by now.

[westofyou]

If they do not show a nice chunk of improvement then he should be given the boot.

Because stability is always found in changing regimes every 3 years right?

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Because stability is always found in changing regimes every 3 years right?

I'd rather have volatile success than stable failure.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

I'd rather have volatile success than stable failure.

Yeah, let me know when that exists.

What organization jettisons GM's consistently and succeeds?

[princeton]

keep an eye on the farm, keep an eye on the pitching. Important predictors.

both MacPhail and Beane had two bad seasons to start their tenures. each had more success in year 3.

Brooklyn stuck with Branch Rickey in spite of three straight years of decliine, getting terrible in year three. finally won a pennant in year five (first year of Jackie Robinson)

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by princeton

keep an eye on the farm, keep an eye on the pitching. Important predictors.

both MacPhail and Beane had two bad seasons to start their tenures. each had more success in year 3.

Brooklyn stuck with Branch Rickey in spite of three straight years of decliine, getting terrible in year three. finally won a pennant in year five (first year of Jackie Robinson)

Pittsburgh stuck with Rickey too, finally ran him off though, he created that monster that the Reds went against all through the 70's.

Giles did horrible his first three years if all one does is measure with a ruler marked MLB W/L Record.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Yeah, let me know when that exists.

What organization jettisons GM's consistently and succeeds?

Sometimes you have to make a gut call and say "This guy isn't right for the job." Giving the wrong person more time for the sake of stability isn't exactly genius.

After this season, Wayne will have had 3 years and what seems like trillions of dollars in Cincinnati currency at his disposal to improve this team. Seriously, in the past few years he has spent good chunks of change on Harang, Arroyo, Cordero, Gonzalez, Dunn and other smaller sized amounts on guys like Stanton. Has any Cincy GM in recent times been able to spend like this? And where is it getting them?

At what point do you say "You know Wayne, maybe you work best as an Asst GM?"

[princeton]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

Sometimes you have to make a gut call and say "This guy isn't right for the job."

I think that your quantitative won/loss argument is a stronger one. Lots of guts around here. Tough to build a gut consensus.

I knew that DanO was wrong within a month. Krivsky's a huge improvement over previous 8 years. Should see if he develops a pitcher, which would make him the first in 20 years.

if Stubbs hits, it would also break a 15-year-old Pat Watkins jinx. These are important milestones.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by princeton

I think that your quantitative won/loss argument is a stronger one. Lots of guts around here. Tough to build a gut consensus.

I knew that DanO was wrong within a month. Krivsky's a huge improvement over previous 8 years. Should see if he develops a pitcher, which would make him the first in 20 years.

if Stubbs hits, it would also break a 15-year-old Pat Watkins jinx. These are important milestones.

Lots of guts is correct, but I was kind of talking about Castellini's gut here. I'm all for stability, don't get me wrong. But if we don't start to see improvement pretty soon, how much longer should Bob have to wait?

I don't know...5 years could go by and we could be having the same conversation. Improvement. Progress. Let's just see some of that. If the ML team isn't showing it and the farm isn't producing top guys, then what does Wayne have to show as proof of his work? "Depth" in the farm, which could partially be due to the fact that he had a serious amount of high picks last season? Improvement on paper, like saying "At least they have a closer now, that's due to WK"?

I don't know how much more time he needs. If people start refuting that progress needs to be made in '08, then I'm not sure what anyone expects.