Fan Graph's baseball has Reds as 24th best organization

[M2]

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

The lazy may not know that the Reds have a pretty talented young core and have announced a shift towards building speed and defense into their roster.

Or they may think that the young core isn't large enough and that it doesn't matter what gets announced when the realization of the plan can be summed up in two words: Willy Taveras.

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

the direction is easily discernible

Yep, the club's been on course for years, across five different GMs in fact. It's the "What are we doing today?" plan.

[lollipopcurve]

Or they may think that the young core isn't large enough and that it doesn't matter what gets announced when the realization of the plan can be summed up in two words: Willy Taveras.

Then they'd have said that. It's your nightmare.

Yep, the club's been on course for years, across five different GMs in fact. It's the "What are we doing today?" plan.

No argument with the problems inherent to constant turnover. I've argued it many times. Would be good if they have a lot less of that going forward.

[M2]

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

It's your nightmare.

Far from it. What the Reds are has never meant less to me.

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

No argument with the problems inherent to constant turnover. I've argued it many times. Would be good if they have a lot less of that going forward.

IMO, the larger problem is the constant turnover hasn't led to any substantive change.

[MWM]

Originally Posted by M2

What the Reds are has never meant less to me.

That sums it up for me as well. And that's a front office nightmare - when life long die hards are even starting to become indifferent.

IMO, the larger problem is the constant turnover hasn't led to any substantive change.

That's pretty much it. I see little difference now to what I've been seeing for a decade. Different names on the door, same results. And some of the folks here have thought every one of them was dong things right and spent hours on here defending them against those of us pointing out the clear flaws in their attempt to build a winning organization. Looks like that hasn't changed either.

[Falls City Beer]

If turnover is the problem isn't that an ownership problem, not necessarily a GM one?

If you ask the vast majority of posters on this side, the Reds let go of the golden goose in Krivsky, only to follow his like with a guy who's won a pennant, nearly won another, and just two seasons ago won a World Championship. Sounds like some solid resumes over the last three seasons, right? Apparently not. Or maybe apparently.

I care less about the Reds than I have in a long time. Ten years of irrelevance essentially enforces that sentiment. But I don't see any reason why this team can't succeed in its current state; I may care less from an emotional standpoint, but logically, I can look at the fact that they do have a very solid bunch of young hitting talent, some current and very exciting pitchers on the MLB roster, and a GM who has been better than nearly all of his peers the last 15 years.

If folks want to dwell on Dusty Baker, Willy Taveras, and the fact that we don't have the Devil Rays front office, they're more than entitled to that. In fact, I can completely understand the frustration that a team seems to continually flout what you believe is the team's tonic.

First I want the Reds to win; second, I want the Reds to have a sustainable way of winning. In that order.

[lollipopcurve]

That's pretty much it. I see little difference now to what I've been seeing for a decade. Different names on the door, same results. And some of the folks here have thought every one of them was dong things right and spent hours on here defending them against those of us pointing out the clear flaws in their attempt to build a inning organization. Looks like that hasn't changed either.

Optimism in itself is a victory, in my opinion. Quell hope, and you die.

Go ahead and lose interest, and comfort yourself that you were "right" all along? Don't see the point.

[osuceltic]

This statement cracked me up:

they've got significant assets tied to Aaron Harang, Bronson Arroyo, and Francisco Cordero, who are just better fits for a contender

By all means ... let's get rid of all those players who would fit in nicely on good teams!!!

A lot of the teeth-gnashing about the Reds comes down to people -- including some here -- simply not agreeing with the WAY the Reds build the team. Whether the major league team wins or not is secondary to them. If the Reds win this season, they'll shrug it off as a fluke and unsustainable.

What you come to realize after years of watching and seeing GMs and "approaches" come and go is this: The only thing that matters is the major league team. Minor league rankings and those things don't matter. Find a way to win at the major league level. Free agents, trades, draft-and-develop ... doesn't matter. We can argue about the best way to do it or the best way to sustain it or whatever, but it's just something to talk about.

I'm gving Jocketty a chance because he has seemed to understand that over the years. He understands they don't give trophies for best minor league system or best "organizational depth."

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by MWM

That's pretty much it. I see little difference now to what I've been seeing for a decade. Different names on the door, same results. And some of the folks here have thought every one of them was dong things right and spent hours on here defending them against those of us pointing out the clear flaws in their attempt to build a winning organization. Looks like that hasn't changed either.

Really? You don't see a much improved farm system? You don't see a farm system that just produced the #1 prospect in all of baseball? You don't see the best rotation the Reds have had in years?

I guess I choose to look at the current state of the Reds differently. They have the former top pitching prospect and a young pitcher who has had success in MLB battling out for the 5th spot. Were not talking about two guys battling to see who is the opening day pitcher, rather two live arms fighting to stay out of the pen or AAA. They have quality arms now and aren't hoping that the likes of Jimmy Haynes, Joey Hamilton, or Paul Wilson can go 30 starts on smoke and mirrors again.

You can focus on the Willy Taveras signing, I will focus on the Reds being one of the top spenders in Latin America this past season. You can focus on signing Weathers and Lincoln but I will look at Roenike, Stewart, Sulbaran, and the other live arms the Reds have in the minors.

For years many people wanted the Reds to build from within. Enough with the Eric Milton contracts. Enough throwing money around in order attract season ticket sales. Well they finally have done that. IMO the organization as a whole is in the best state it has been since the mid 90's. I have head experts saying that the Reds could be this years sleeper pick. But I guess this is just the same old song and dance with the Reds.

[M2]

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

Go ahead and lose interest, and comfort yourself that you were "right" all along? Don't see the point.

I'll let others speak for themselves, but this has nothing to do with right or wrong for me (and I suspect that's common among others as well). In terms of being right, you either are or you aren't. No point in getting worked up about it either way. It's not like it affects the team.

The reason I don't care about the Reds is the club has bored me for too long and my last straw got snapped with the current fudge job. I'm a fan of go-go baseball. "Speed and defense" is not supposed to be code for "not really good at anything else." The way the Reds are using the term what it really means is "try hard and play smart." Exactly 29 other teams attempt to do those same things.

I haven't lost any interest in baseball, still love the game and follow it closely ... just not so interested in the Reds. I don't see the point in that.

[lollipopcurve]

I haven't lost any interest in baseball, still love the game and follow it closely ... just not so interested in the Reds. I don't see the point in that.

No problem with that either. For some of us, the team is in our blood. I'm thankful for that. It's like extended family. For others, you roam for what you need. It's all good, and there's no greater "point" to be found in one circumstance or the other. Just like it's not about being right, right?

[MWM]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

Really? You don't see a much improved farm system?

So what. They've "improved their farm" system before.

You don't see the best rotation the Reds have had in years?

And the worst offense they've had in years.

They have the former top pitching prospect

I'm supposed to be excited about a former prospect? Well, pardon me if I'm not. Every organization has at least one of those.

and a young pitcher who has had success in MLB battling out for the 5th spot.

Again, this is supposed to excite me? I've heard that one before, too.

For years many people wanted the Reds to build from within.

Who are these people? I know I'm not one of them. I think most people just wanted a team that actually won consistently. There is more than one way to get there, and I don't care which one they use. Give me a winner, that's all that matters.

Enough throwing money around in order attract season ticket sales. Well they finally have done that.

This one leaves me scratching their head. I'm supposed to be excited and optimistic about the fact that they didn't go blow a lot of money on bad players? Seroiusly?

I have head experts saying that the Reds could be this years sleeper pick.

Seriously, I don't what it is about the Reds, but go search the archives and you'll find the Reds as an en vogue sleeper pick by these so-called experts pretty much every year over the pat decade. That sure as hell doesn't make me any more optimistic.

Bottom line, all these things you talk about don't matter. What does is wins and losses. And they continue to lose. And they'll lose in a big way this year, too. So until they actually win, I'm not going to get all twitterpated over all these ancillary things that make some people feel better.

So I've seen this song and dance before. I've seen everything you've described above at least once in the past decade. Getting to where they are now isn't that hard. The difference between the good and bad organizations is getting from here to the next level. That's where the Reds don't have it. Will they this time? Maybe. But there's nothing I've seen to lead me to believe they're any more capable of getting there now than at any other time over the past decade.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by osuceltic

A lot of the teeth-gnashing about the Reds comes down to people -- including some here -- simply not agreeing with the WAY the Reds build the team. Whether the major league team wins or not is secondary to them. If the Reds win this season, they'll shrug it off as a fluke and unsustainable.

Couldn't the gnashing of teeth about the way the Reds build a team be the result of having a burning desire to see the Reds win? That's kind of the point of caring about the process isn't it?

Think about it. If seeing the team win is secondary to the process, wouldn't it be more likely that a person would gravitate to whatever team best fit their "model" rather than adopting a team that isn't doing things "their" way and gnashing teeth over it?

If a person doesn't really care about a team, why would they gnash teeth over them?

[lollipopcurve]

Bottom line, all these things you talk about don't matter. What does is wins and losses. And they continue to lose. And they'll lose in a big way this year, too. So until they actually win, I'm not going to get all twitterpated over all these ancillary things that make some people feel better.

Been watching the team for over forty years. There have been some great times and some lousy ones. You learn to roll, I guess. If you can't find something to hitch your hopes to, give up, and the bandwagon will be by before too long and you can hitch a ride.

[Cooper]

I used to post kinda regular on this board. Usually it was out of passion for the team. I stopped when i realized that every decision they make is out of "let's just hold steady and cya mentality". If the Reds do well they will win 81 games -if they do poorly they'll win 70...and almost all the difference is related to no real change -just a blip on the pythag. scale (over or under performing it), but no real difference. When they start to win- i'll start to care. It just feels like they are pretty comfortable holding steady- so i think i'll just hold steady too--it's silly to care more than they do.

[M2]

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

For some of us, the team is in our blood.

What you seem to be missing is quite a few people who have fit into that category for decades no longer do. I'm out after 37 years.

Originally Posted by Cooper

It just feels like they are pretty comfortable holding steady- so i think i'll just hold steady too--it's silly to care more than they do.

What's surprised me about this offseason is the number of dedicated Reds fans who've taken that same attitude. Anecdotally speaking, just from what I read (or don't read) on this board, there's a completely unorganized movement afoot.