Will the Reds avoid 100 losses? If so, how?

[harangatang]

Originally Posted by LoganBuck

Bring it on baby, bring it on!

Maybe I am dillusional but I want it. Give me 100 losses and the offseason to chew on it. I want Castellini good and angry. I want the first pick in the draft, and I want changes.

Anything that is not the status quo.

I'm not sure at this point in the season, but I do know that coming into the season that the Reds led the majors in the number of transactions since Krivsky took over. With all of these changes it appears the Reds aren't any better if not a little worse than they were last year. I want changes to the ballclub but I want changes that going to make the ballclub better. If it takes Dunn to get a couple of impact players then so be it IMO. But given all the moves and the lack of success I wonder if Krivsky needs to go before any major changes are made.

[LoganBuck]

Originally Posted by harangatang

I'm not sure at this point in the season, but I do know that coming into the season that the Reds led the majors in the number of transactions since Krivsky took over. With all of these changes it appears the Reds aren't any better if not a little worse than they were last year. I want changes to the ballclub but I want changes that going to make the ballclub better. If it takes Dunn to get a couple of impact players then so be it IMO. But given all the moves and the lack of success I wonder if Krivsky needs to go before any major changes are made.

By changes I mean:
1. Manager
2. Identifying good talent and signing it. This means less Juan Castro/Rick White/Mike Stanton more Scott Hatteburg/Brandon Phillips/Josh Hamilton. Heck Jeff Conine has been very good in the role in which he was cast. No more revolving door bullpen, and no more geriatric guys being depended on for anything more than bats off the bench.
3. Bring in one solid starting pitcher, 1 RH power bat, 2 good bullpen arms. Continue to nourish the farm system
4. Identify a direction, establish a plan, act on said plan. Current plan: steal underpants, , profit.
5. Leadership. Castellini has been doing a Lindner impersonation recently and this club needs start moving. Castellini must step in and demand change, or else nothing has been accomplished since he took control, other then buying new letterhead.
6. Decide what to do with Adam Dunn and JR, either build around them or trade one or both, but do something.

[WVRedsFan]

Originally Posted by harangatang

I'm not sure at this point in the season, but I do know that coming into the season that the Reds led the majors in the number of transactions since Krivsky took over. With all of these changes it appears the Reds aren't any better if not a little worse than they were last year. I want changes to the ballclub but I want changes that going to make the ballclub better. If it takes Dunn to get a couple of impact players then so be it IMO. But given all the moves and the lack of success I wonder if Krivsky needs to go before any major changes are made.

I've been saying the same thing since about a year ago, but I keep getting this stuff about "giving a GM more time" and "changing GM's so often just puts you farther behind" or the like.

We hired a rookie GM from a franchise that valued under-valued players and castoff pitchers. They had a farm system that was some help. He came here and tried to emulate the Minnesota Twins (all he know) and has made the club worse. If he were an experienced GM with some track record of success, i'd agree to give him more time. Since he is not, and has proven nothing but creating a disaster, I say it's time to get someone who can do the job.

Since I'm sure the usual will come out to call me crazy (and I don't doubt that fact), just give them time. They'll be doing the same soon enough.

[cincrazy]

I don't think Dunn or Griffey will be traded, which is a change of heart from what I felt WK would do earlier in the season, but I don't think it matters. This team doesn't believe it can win, and that's the most important thing. I think they'll lose 100, but if they don't, then it'll be very close. I know we're in a bad division, but I don't see things evening out, to be quite honest. We're just an awful baseball team, plain and simple.

[Unassisted]

100 losses sends the message that changes are needed in a way that 90 losses does not. I'd rather see a 100-loss season than a bunch of half-baked tweaks that lead to a 10-game improvement in '07 and 3 more years of sub .500 mediocrity.

[KronoRed]

If they do reach 100 losses then I hope they get to 102, why not set a new record?

[Reds1]

This team has been very competative and in a ton of games. I don't think they'll have the same amount of errors, base running mistakes - and I think the pen will be better. That's my reasoning. I still say this team has too much talent in the rotation and and can score. Also, Ross won't be as bad!

[Redmachine2003]

This team is too laid back and takes each lose in stride. So I say they will lose more than 100. There is no urgency to win shown by the ownership and players and this team was never really constructed very well to begin with. There are no real leaders in the clubhouse and has manager that doesn't know how to rally anything or anybody. I had hoped with BCast this team had an owner who took action but he has shown to be the opposite not only with this team but with the bank project in Cincy, which he is one of the leaders.

[Highlifeman21]

I had em for 90 losses, IIRC, in my preseason prediction.

So far, they're exceeding my expectations.

[harangatang]

Originally Posted by KronoRed

If they do reach 100 losses then I hope they get to 102, why not set a new record?

That's not far enough, how about going to 119 losses. That way the Reds can play Kool and the Gang's "Celebration" like the Tigers did in 2003 when they avoided the modern record of 120 losses set by the '62 Mets.

[oneupper]

Losing 100 isn't that easy, particularly in such a weak division.