You've got to be kidding me....Reds continue to negotiate with Aurilia

[RFS62]

This makes my head hurt.

[NC Reds]

Reasons to sign Rich:

1) Veteran
2) Hit well at home last year
3) Takes AB's away from Tony Womack

Reasons not to sign Rich:

1) Little range in field
2) Not fast on basepaths
3) Money spent on Rich could be put to better use elsewhere
4) Exhibited petulence last season over how he was used, despite playing a lot
5) Aging, best years are behind him
6) Takes AB's away from younger, speedier players
7) Can get compensatory pick if someone else signs him

Put me down for not signing him.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by NC Reds

Reasons to sign Rich:

1) Veteran
2) Hit well at home last year
3) Takes AB's away from Tony Womack

Reasons not to sign Rich:

1) Little range in field
2) Not fast on basepaths
3) Money spent on Rich could be put to better use elsewhere
4) Exhibited petulence last season over how he was used, despite playing a lot
5) Aging, best years are behind him
6) Takes AB's away from younger, speedier players
7) Can get compensatory pick if someone else signs him

Put me down for not signing him.

In the first section, you forgot #4

4.) Reinforces to new management that Dan O'Brien is a moron who should be relieved of his duties.

[KronoRed]

Originally Posted by BRM

Stop saying that! You're scaring the children!

hehehe

[RedsBaron]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

In the first section, you forgot #4

4.) Reinforces to new management that Dan O'Brien is a moron who should be relieved of his duties.

That was already self-evident. I am truly amazed by the inepitude of the Reds front office.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by RedsBaron

That was already self-evident. I am truly amazed by the inepitude of the Reds front office.

I'd say that currently its only rival in absolute loserdome in the history of the franchise has to be the waning years of the Bancroft making player decisons. At least in the depression the owner was broke, at least after the war they still drew fairly well and had Gabe Paul and Frank Lane in the wings.

1913  7th     64   89  .418   37.5 
1914  8th     60   94  .390   34.5 
1915  7th     71   83  .461   20   
1916  T7th    60   93  .392   33.5

3 different managers in those years and the last left under a cloud of suspician.

All the while Bancroft (who was born in 1846) made the player decisions, while the Reds owner was in the hip pocket of the AL President and the NL President.

[Heath]

Originally Posted by westofyou

I'd say that currently its only rival in absolute loserdome in the history of the franchise has to be the waning years of the Bancroft making player decisons. At least in the depression the owner was broke, at least after the war they still drew fairly well and had Gabe Paul and Frank Lane in the wings.

3 different managers in those years and the last left under a cloud of suspician.

All the while Bancroft (who was born in 1846) made the player decisions, while the Reds owner was in the hip pocket of the AL President and the NL President.

woy - as usual good points and all - but not to drag this down into a discussion of past & present Reds suckitude - wouldn't the early '50's be a better on field similarity? You look at the young sluggers (Klu, Adcock) with the "veteran leadership - read vets on downhill side of career-" like Dixie Howell & Andy Seminick - and pitchers off the scrapheap like Herm Wehmeier & Bubba Church.

I still can't picture Rogers Hornsby trying to manage.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by Heath

woy - as usual good points and all - but not to drag this down into a discussion of past & present Reds suckitude - wouldn't the early '50's be a better on field similarity? You look at the young sluggers (Klu, Adcock) with the "veteran leadership - read vets on downhill side of career-" like Dixie Howell & Andy Seminick - and pitchers off the scrapheap like Herm Wehmeier & Bubba Church.

I still can't picture Rogers Hornsby trying to manage.

Yes, that's a lot like it, but Paul wasn't afraid to make moves (though he made a mess of bad and good ones) The pitching was a bit better.

But as far as absolute rudderless direction the Federal League era was primed with player managers, playing were they shouldn't, choosing the roster with a guy who had managed 30 years before when the game was so very different.

Just reeks of a "Keystone Cop" movie... The Current Reds are more "Ernest in the Show"

[Falls City Beer]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Yes, that's a lot like it, but Paul wasn't afraid to make moves (though he made a mess of bad and good ones) The pitching was a bit better.

But as far as absolute rudderless direction the Federal League era was primed with player managers, playing were they shouldn't, choosing the roster with a guy who had managed 30 years before when the game was so very different.

Just reeks of a "Keystone Cop" movie... The Current Reds are more "Ernest in the Show"

Dude, I can't give you freakin' rep for "Ernest in the Show." So I'm just going to have to praise your genius here.

[Heath]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Yes, that's a lot like it, but Paul wasn't afraid to make moves (though he made a mess of bad and good ones) The pitching was a bit better.

But as far as absolute rudderless direction the Federal League era was primed with player managers, playing were they shouldn't, choosing the roster with a guy who had managed 30 years before when the game was so very different.

Just reeks of a "Keystone Cop" movie... The Current Reds are more "Ernest in the Show"

When Warren Giles saw the handwriting on the wall and took off before '51 to hit the NL presidency under Frick - he new what he was really getting out of. I would admit the pitching was better in the '50's with Nuxie coming back & Ken Raffensberger was probably an underappreciated hard-luck pitcher. Ewell Blackwell was well on the way to a sore arm. But Giles still sifted through some junk pitchers like Church, Tom Acker, Wehmeier (local kid done good), etc. He did get strike bronze on an Art Fowler. But not to go Hersh Freeman on you and all, Gabe Paul was probably more like a Jim Bowden-clone.

Funny thing that Federal League. It gave us Wrigley Field & Edd Roush. Touche'.

With a labor deal looming, one would wonder if the "Federal League" would make a comeback....and survive.

I'm going to read my BE and look up 1914-1915.

[membengal]

Originally Posted by M2

IMO he's meaningless. Ideally Encarnacion, Lopez and Freel play every day and Aurilia would get himself about 150 ABs tops. In fact, a glove man for the middle IF in the late innings might be of greater use. You can get yourself better PHs from the OF/1B ranks.

Most of all, I'd rather the team had the draft choice. Allowing Rich Aurilia to hook on elsewhere (and he will hook on elsewhere over the next month) means the club's turned a backup IF into a high draft pick. That's smart roster management.

That first part is as it should be. But I guess there is no way after last spring that we can trust it will be that way.

Plus, what would baseball season be without Aurilia polluting the clubhouse?

[westofyou]

When Warren Giles saw the handwriting on the wall and took off before '51 to hit the NL presidency under Frick - he new what he was really getting out of.

Yeah he did, he helped cause it. in his last 3 years as GM he didn't trade more than 1 starter. But the Reds screwed the pooch when they didn't sign guys during WW2, they decided to "save" their money (A lot of Crosley's factories were working for Uncle Sam) and not sign guys going into the service, other teams like Rickey's Dodgers signed a bunch of them for peanuts, making them Dodgers property on V-J Day.

Conservative actions don't work well baseball the Reds of the Giles era were like those Bowery Boys movies, the Reds were Leo Gorcy.

[Doc. Scott]

You know, it's very possible that DanO made a deal with Aurilius' agent to tell the public they're trying to negotiate a deal with Richus to try and drive demand for him. (Fay is just a maroon and buys it all at face value, which is why the smarter sorts in the Reds media don't publish articles about how Richus is returning.)

I'm sure most of you wouldn't find DanO capable of that, but he's capable enough at not telling people anything in interviews, too.

Anyone else want to add to my one-pretzel bet that Aurilius is NOT coming back to the Reds for 2006?

[lollipopcurve]

Anyone else want to add to my one-pretzel bet that Aurilius is NOT coming back to the Reds for 2006?

The endgame in Operation Aurilia nears. Who can doubt that the outcome, and the intrepid machinations leading to it, will baffle and amaze even the most seasoned observer?

I'll take that pretzel bet, Doc.

[M2]

Originally Posted by Doc. Scott

You know, it's very possible that DanO made a deal with Aurilius' agent to tell the public they're trying to negotiate a deal with Richus to try and drive demand for him. (Fay is just a maroon and buys it all at face value, which is why the smarter sorts in the Reds media don't publish articles about how Richus is returning.)

I'm sure most of you wouldn't find DanO capable of that, but he's capable enough at not telling people anything in interviews, too.

Anyone else want to add to my one-pretzel bet that Aurilius is NOT coming back to the Reds for 2006?

I'll buy that DanO might be throwing Rich a bone here by acting like he's got the door open to come back. That's not so outlandish.

Hopefully that's the case. It would be nice if the thing DanO's consistent about is valuing draft picks and not collecting retreads.