Poll: Do you like Wayne Krivsky as GM

[MartyFan]

Okay, he still hasn't been on the job for a year yet and there are those who thnk he is a goof...some who think he is a god...so where do you fall in on this one?

[Degenerate39]

So far I like what's hes done for the most part but I'll still have to wait and see.

[Johnny Footstool]

Thusfar, he's been all over the place. He's had a high-risk move pay huge dividends (Arroyo for Pena) and one turn into an unmitigated disaster (the Kearns/Lopez fiasco). His low-risk moves have been anywhere from brilliant (Phillips and David Ross) to confusing (Cody Ross, Esteban Yan) to downright miserable (Juan Castro).

He leans heavily towards old-school baseball theory (strikeouts are always bad, defense can't be measured objectively) instead of objective analysis, which is a strike against him.

I don't loathe him as much as DanO, but if he doesn't show me something this season, I'll place him in the same circle of Hell as old O'Binder himself.

[shredda2000]

We as Reds fans have been snake bit so many times...However, I think we need to give Kriv a little more time.

[M2]

I generally like him. He's been active and he's willing to talk about what he's doing and where he's trying to take the team (something Dan O'Brien never did).

However, I have no idea whether he's the guy who's going to deliver the Reds from their current six-year slide. He might and he might be a spectacular failure (which I can respect in certain ways).

[Ltlabner]

I voted for "I'll get back to you after 1 year".

He's walked a difficult tightrope of playing for now and later at the same time. Especially considering the state of the orginization he took over.

That said, some of his moves have been serrious head-scratchers while others seem brillant beyond compare. Behind the sceens we have zero information regarding his skills of managing people, rebuilding the support structures, etc.

This year will be a make or break year for him. We'll know soon enough which ones of us will be eating crow and who will be crowing about Krivsky eating it.

[BoCcc2832]

He is definitely better than Jim Bowden and DanO. He does have a good streak so far at finding good players for cheap (Ross, Phillips). However, sometimes I feel that he does a move just for the sake of doing a move. Ask the same question right before spring training starts (I'm counting down already) and my answer of waiting could, and probably will, change

[George Anderson]

So far I like what he has done!! "The Trade" is still yet to be determined, but even if we had not made the trade I dont see how anyone in their right mind really think Kearns and Lopez would have helped us get to the W.S.

So far he has done way more good for this franchise than bad but I think it is way to early to pass anything but a "lets wait and see" attitude.

[15fan]

He seems like Dave Kingman.

Towering HRs (Arroyo, David Ross) and a whole lot of whiffs. Not much in between.

I'm willing to cut him some slack because he got stuck with an $18 million albatross in Eric Milton.

But I'm not cutting him too much slack because of the Drew Stubbs selection. I think that's a dog that's going to come back to bite big time.

[Redsland]

Incomplete.

[Johnny Footstool]

I generally like him. He's been active and he's willing to talk about what he's doing and where he's trying to take the team (something Dan O'Brien never did).

However, I have no idea whether he's the guy who's going to deliver the Reds from their current six-year slide. He might and he might be a spectacular failure (which I can respect in certain ways).

I'd respect him if he had the guts to really blow things up, trade Arroyo, Dunn, Harang, and Freel for quality ML-ready prospects, and play for 2010.

Of course, I don't know if I trust his eye for talent enough to assume he'd get a Marlins-style, high-quality return instead of a Royals-style pile of crap.

[M2]

I'd respect him if he had the guts to really blow things up, trade Arroyo, Dunn, Harang, and Freel for quality ML-ready prospects, and play for 2010.

Of course, I don't know if I trust his eye for talent enough to assume he'd get a Marlins-style, high-quality return instead of a Royals-style pile of crap.

He's definitely in an either/or scenario. Either he takes a legitimate shot at 2007/8, which will require an all-in commitment from Castellini too, or he should do a serious rebuild, which will also require an all-in commitment from Castellini (e.g. "We need to rebuild this team from the ground up and we think our fans will enjoy watching a young team come together."). To my thinking, there is no viable middle road. The upside of the go-for-it-now option is that you've still got plenty of "future" options when you've got a good team in hand.

[RedFanAlways1966]

IMO being the GM or manager of a team that has the 4th/5th highest payroll in your own division is a tough job. Tough to make friends in the fanbase when the cards (no pun!) are stacked against you.

At the start of last season your team is outspent 55.0% (CHI), 51.9% (HOU) & 45.9% (St. L) by three teams in your own division. So far in the offseason those outspending numbers have increased for at least two of the teams.

At least there is a GM who tries to do something. Maybe not always making the perfect or good moves, but not: sitting on his hands, signing HR pitchers to high-salaried 3 year deals, upsetting players by lying to them or behaving in an underhanded way to them, etc.

[oneupper]

I like Krivsky a lot more than Narron.

[Falls City Beer]

Lots of bet-hedging in this thread. ;)

It's like walking out of a deep foreign film or some critically acclaimed flick and being the one who doesn't want to say, "That sucked!"

[westofyou]

Lots of bet-hedging in this thread. ;)

It's like walking out of a deep foreign film or some critically acclaimed flick and being the one who doesn't want to say, "That sucked!"

But there two sides to that eh?

Film is art and films are more then the story, there's the camera work, the editing, the sound, the mis en scene, likewise being a baseball GM is more about the whole organizations growth and prosperity then instant gratification on the 25 man roster level.

[RFS62]

But there two sides to that eh?

Film is art and films are more then the story, there's the camera work, the editing, the sound, the mis en scene, likewise being a baseball GM is more about the whole organizations growth and prosperity then instant gratification on the 25 man roster level.



No kidding. I'm constantly amazed at the lack of recognition for the big picture when people blast Krivsky.

[Ltlabner]

Lots of bet-hedging in this thread. ;)

Actually, there's a lot of reasonable people here who are willing to give someone a realistic amount of time before deciding they are or are not fit for their position. There are others who feal it's reasonable to make an iron clad decision about his performance overhauling an entire orginization that has been abused for decades after a whopping 5 months on the job. And then remind us of that decision with each subsequent post for the next 7 months.

To each their own.


It's like walking out of a deep foreign film or some critically acclaimed flick and being the one who doesn't want to say, "That sucked!"

:rolleyes:

[Falls City Beer]

But there two sides to that eh?

Film is art and films are more then the story, there's the camera work, the editing, the sound, the mis en scene, likewise being a baseball GM is more about the whole organizations growth and prosperity then instant gratification on the 25 man roster level.


Yeah, but art should have a visceral response. Or it's not art, it's a math problem. Those guys who walk out of the movie and say, "I'm going to have to think about whether I liked it or not." Psh. Artistic judgments (and by extension baseball discussions) shouldn't be some sweaty deliberation over buying a house or car. You either like what he's done or you don't--the thinking afterwards should only serve to reinforce the judgment one way or the other.

I'm just saying, I think people are more worried about looking smart or silly. The majority of people, unless uninformed, should have a clue where the team's headed and whether it's to their liking or not.

[Falls City Beer]

No kidding. I'm constantly amazed at the lack of recognition for the big picture when people blast Krivsky.

I still haven't gotten an explanation of the big picture that he's working on. I'm not saying it's not there. Just haven't had it explained or scried.

[Falls City Beer]

Incidentally, I'm not saying you should dislike Krivsky. I'm saying you shouldn't be agnostic at this point.

[Ltlabner]

Incidentally, I'm not saying you should dislike Krivsky. I'm saying you shouldn't be agnostic at this point.

People have clearly stated their opinions on where this team is currently and how they feal about where it's going. Because they think it's reasonable to give someone a lenght of time in office before running him out of town doesn't mean they have no opinion. If you take the time to read this thread you ought to be able to piece together what people think.

BTW, you were saying we shouldn't be agnostic back in May. I'll give you credit, you are consistant.

[Spring~Fields]

I have to wait and see if Krivsky locks up Harang and Arroyo in a pitching desperate world first, (Gil Meche 11 mil per) and then wait to see if he trades Dunn for a Majewski or Casey for a Williams type deal.

The previous management and ownership has placed him between a rock and a hard spot, in the present ownership he is boxed in with no money to spend, no minor league prospects ready, and nothing really to trade. I have to see what he does with his box and rocks first.

[Falls City Beer]

People have clearly stated their opinions on where this team is currently and how they feal about where it's going. Because they think it's reasonable to give someone a lenght of time in office before running him out of town doesn't mean they have no opinion. If you take the time to read this thread you ought to be able to piece together what people think.

BTW, you were saying we shouldn't be agnostic back in May. I'll give you credit, you are consistant.


I'm aiming at the individuals (the vast majority) who are "waiting" to make their judgment.

Why can't you just say you like what he's done? You obviously do. So why not say so? Take a chance. It emboldens the soul. :beerme:

[texasdave]

Yeah, but art should have a visceral response. Or it's not art, it's a math problem. Those guys who walk out of the movie and say, "I'm going to have to think about whether I liked it or not." Psh. Artistic judgments (and by extension baseball discussions) shouldn't be some sweaty deliberation over buying a house or car. You either like what he's done or you don't--the thinking afterwards should only serve to reinforce the judgment one way or the other.

I'm just saying, I think people are more worried about looking smart or silly. The majority of people, unless uninformed, should have a clue where the team's headed and whether it's to their liking or not.

For the most part I agree with this assessment. However, I have had albums that at first I was blah about but have grown on me with repeated listenings.

[westofyou]

Artistic judgments (and by extension baseball discussions) shouldn't be some sweaty deliberation over buying a house or car.

That's where we differ, you want to call it art and love the game for the smash mouth aspects that come with winning, whilst I see it as an organic business that redefines itself in new ways every year and then goes ahead and breaks that mold again and again.

Almost a half a billion bucks was spent last week at the meetings on new contracts, if that doesn't deserve some sweating I don't know what does.

[RollyInRaleigh]

I don't really think we have enough evidence to make a "yes" or "no" decision. The guy has had the job for less than a year.

[Falls City Beer]

For the most part I agree with this assessment. However, I have had albums that at first I was blah about but have grown on me with repeated listenings.

Still it's your affect that changed, not the inventory of elements (lighting, mise en scene, cinematography). The art hasn't changed, but you have.

[dabvu2498]

I'm aiming at the individuals (the vast majority) who are "waiting" to make their judgment.

Why can't you just say you like what he's done? You obviously do. So why not say so? Take a chance. It emboldens the soul. :beerme:

Personally, I don't care for the majority of moves that have been made thus far.

I voted, however, for the "wait and see" option. Rome wasn't built in a day.

[Falls City Beer]

That's where we differ, you want to call it art and love the game for the smash mouth aspects that come with winning, whilst I see it as an organic business that redefines itself in new ways every year and then goes ahead and breaks that mold again and again.

Almost a half a billion bucks was spent last week at the meetings on new contracts, if that doesn't deserve some sweating I don't know what does.

Well, sure, the GMs should sweat. That's why they make 4 times what you and I do.

[Ltlabner]

I'm aiming at the individuals (the vast majority) who are "waiting" to make their judgment.

Why can't you just say you like what he's done? You obviously do. So why not say so? Take a chance. It emboldens the soul. :beerme:

I have stated many times that I like what he has done to this point overall. I dissagree with several moves he's made and I think the remainder of the offseason and next year will make or break him. He's got some big choices to make or avoid. He has a chance to lay some solid ground work, or throw us in a pit of dispare. Something tells me there is no middle ground with him.

BTW, how in the world do you rectify the disparity of saying you don't like Krivsky because he hasn't created this visceral responce (ie. your fealings) you apparently need but player moves should be evaluated with emprical data (ie. don't use your fealings)?

[Doc. Scott]

He's definitely in an either/or scenario. Either he takes a legitimate shot at 2007/8, which will require an all-in commitment from Castellini too, or he should do a serious rebuild, which will also require an all-in commitment from Castellini (e.g. "We need to rebuild this team from the ground up and we think our fans will enjoy watching a young team come together."). To my thinking, there is no viable middle road. The upside of the go-for-it-now option is that you've still got plenty of "future" options when you've got a good team in hand.

Given how the last rebuilding plan went, I don't see how there is any other viable option before "go-for-it-now". Fans aren't going to come to the ballpark to see a young team that loses... not after six straight sub-.500 seasons.

It may sound like splitting the middle- and I understand that whole "commit" argument- but I think we have to do our best to win now while restocking the farm as best we can simultaneously. If O'Brien-style "rebuild" rhetoric is the main outward organizational stance, then both Wayne Krivsky and Bob Castellini will end up doomed (at a minimum from a public-relations standpoint, which counts for a lot).

Even with the failure of some of last year's trades (as I've said, I think there's only the Washington deal as a real turkey), I think Wayne did his best within his available means to take a shot at winning without mortgaging the farm. Of course, the Reds finished a lot closer than they should have, because in a normal year the NL Central champion is going to win a lot more than 84 games. I consider it to have been a blessing that there was enough divisional parity to maintain fan interest into September. That made Kriv and Cast look a little better.

I wouldn't be disappointed if Krivsky tries the above methodology in 2007. But from there it's about targeting the right players at the right times, and that's always problematic.

[RFS62]

I pretty much agree with Doc's take.

[M2]

I'm aiming at the individuals (the vast majority) who are "waiting" to make their judgment.

Why can't you just say you like what he's done? You obviously do. So why not say so? Take a chance. It emboldens the soul. :beerme:

I absolutely agree with allowing yourself to make judgments. It's how you arrive at a conclusion before it's already a moot point.

In regards to the Reds, I've never understood why folks who've paid some attention can't formulate an opinion on whether the team has just made a smart move. Obviously you keep an open mind on these things and don't get dogmatic about it. For instance, I thought DanO did an all right job when he traded Chris Reitsma for Bubba Nelson and Jung Bong. He didn't. It was a miserable failure. I also set an Internet record for the number of o's in the word no when the Reds moved Alex Ochoa for Todd Walker. Walker really shined while he was in town and that was a great trade (undone later by giving him the Red Sox for nothing).

When it comes to Krivsky, he's had some big scores (Arroyo, Phillips, Hatteberg, Ross) and one miserable failure (because he's never getting Kearns and Lopez back to trade them for some real quality). A picture is starting emerge with the guy. I don't think it's fully formed yet and that the next three months will go a long way toward providing Reds fans with some clarity on where Krivsky's leading the club (most particularly if no significant changes are made). He's done some great things and some awful things. He's interesting. I like that. I'm reasonably sure he's going to take some risks ... and that should make for some good fur flying around here.

I'll just add that, as an argumentative stance, you don't read a lot of folks insisting that you've got to wait to like a move or the (nebulous) direction of the club or the current regime. Normally the insistence is you've got to wait before you dislike it. Seems to me that if you can love a deal then someone else has just as much license to hate it. I don't think you should ever be required to turn off your critical eye and reserve your opinion based on someone else's arbitrary timetable for how long it should take you to formulate an opinion that the team has made a mistake.

[Johnny Footstool]

He's definitely in an either/or scenario. Either he takes a legitimate shot at 2007/8, which will require an all-in commitment from Castellini too, or he should do a serious rebuild, which will also require an all-in commitment from Castellini (e.g. "We need to rebuild this team from the ground up and we think our fans will enjoy watching a young team come together."). To my thinking, there is no viable middle road. The upside of the go-for-it-now option is that you've still got plenty of "future" options when you've got a good team in hand.

Yes, it takes guts to make either choice and follow through.

Personally, I think the team has shown this offseason that it's not willing to do what it takes to compete in 2007. Maybe the overspending Cubs scared Kriv and Cast into tightening the purse strings, I don't know. But they're limping along, trying to scrape together a .500 ballclub and luck into a few extra wins. So the "blow it up" option seems more realistic at this point.

[M2]

Given how the last rebuilding plan went, I don't see how there is any other viable option before "go-for-it-now". Fans aren't going to come to the ballpark to see a young team that loses... not after six straight sub-.500seasons.

It may sound like splitting the middle- and I understand that whole "commit" argument- but I think we have to do our best to win now while restocking the farm as best we can simultaneously. If O'Brien-style "rebuild" rhetoric is the main outward organizational stance, then both Wayne Krivsky and Bob Castellini will end up doomed (at a minimum from a public-relations standpoint, which counts for a lot).

Even with the failure of some of last year's trades (as I've said, I think there's only the Washington deal as a real turkey), I think Wayne did his best within his available means to take a shot at winning without mortgaging the farm. Of course, the Reds finished a lot closer than they should have, because in a normal year the NL Central champion is going to win a lot more than 84 games. I consider it to have been a blessing that there was enough divisional parity to maintain fan interest into September. That made Kriv and Cast look a little better.

I wouldn't be disappointed if Krivsky tries the above methodology in 2007. But from there it's about targeting the right players at the right times, and that's always problematic.

I agree for the most part. I think the key, no matter what direction the Reds take, is not to be afraid to shoot a sacred cow along the way. If you're going for it, don't patently refuse to move a top prospect. If you're rebuilding, don't neglect to move your most valuable players because those are the folks who'll bring you the best returns.

The Reds don't have enough cake to have it and eat it too. They're going to have to make some choices. If they're going for it, then they've got to move decisively in that direction and tend to the farm, as you said, as best they can. Picking up younger major leaguers (e.g. emerging guys in their 20s as opposed to older guys in their 30s) could help insulate against future exposure caused by trading away some prospects.

[camisadelgolf]

My favorite thing about Special K is that he hasn't been overly-active in the winter meetings. You could say the A-Gonz move was a high risk, but I think it's a low risk compared to all the so-called crazy contracts being given to pitchers. Non-spent money is better than wasted money because you can always use the non-spent money later.

[Hey Meat]

I think he can only do deals with one or two teams in the League, mainly the Twins.

[Doc. Scott]

Incidentally, I'm not saying you should dislike Krivsky. I'm saying you shouldn't be agnostic at this point.

Okay, that's fair enough (although it's not like we have any legitimate idea whether or not Kriv knows how to draft, build a farm system, or evaluate talent in the long-term).

I like him. I feel like we can win with him as GM. Even though some of his Twins-leftover philosophy (too much emphasis on defense, three catchers on the 25-man, over-the-top hatred of strikeouts) bugs me, I have no doubt the team will be able to win under Wayne. Whether they do is the standard poker-game equation of skill and luck.

[wheels]

I can say without a doubt that from a PR perspective, Wayne's light years ahead of Dan O'Brien.

I may not agree with all of his moves, at least I do get the feeling that he's capable of recognizing team weaknesses.

That's way more than I could ever say about DanO.

I just don't understand the whole Juan Castro/three catchers/Royce Clayton thing.

The the current construct of that roster has been an unmitigated disaster since last July, and it's really daggone annoying to me.

Everything's so disjointed.

Much like this post.

What I'm trying to say is.....Yes, I like Wayne, but he really needs to get on the ball and slap some sense into that roster.

[mth123]

This is a guy who is about to pay Kyle Lohse $6 Million on the hope that he pitches at a level where he never has. For the cost of a couple mediocre and old relievers he could upgrade to some true quality.

He is doing this on the heels of the worst Reds trade since Frank Robinson. I was wait and see after the season, but his approach to 2007 thus far (through the height of the Free Agent season and the winter meetings) is enough for me.

I voted no on Krivsky. Signing Weathers and anouncing his intentions for Lohse in the rotation pushed me out of the wait and see mode.

A good deal or two could still change my mind, but when I add up the payroll on the roster, I think he's probably done with the exception of a cheap RH bat being signed. Cheap being the key word. Eduardo Perez is the best hope at this point and as much as like him and his family, its not good enough now.

[Redhook]

This is a guy who is about to pay Kyle Lohse $6 Million on the hope that he pitches at a level where he never has. For the cost of a couple mediocre and old relievers he could upgrade to some true quality.

He is doing this on the heels of the worst Reds trade since Frank Robinson. I was wait and see after the season, but his approach to 2007 thus far (through the height of the Free Agent season and the winter meetings) is enough for me.

I voted no on Krivsky. Signing Weathers and anouncing his intentions for Lohse in the rotation pushed me out of the wait and see mode.

A good deal or two could still change my mind, but when I add up the payroll on the roster, I think he's probably done with the exception of a cheap RH bat being signed. Cheap being the key word. Eduardo Perez is the best hope at this point and as much as like him and his family, its not good enough now.

What he said.

[MartyFan]

I'm aiming at the individuals (the vast majority) who are "waiting" to make their judgment.

Why can't you just say you like what he's done? You obviously do. So why not say so? Take a chance. It emboldens the soul. :beerme:

I'm sure most have their thoughts on what has or hasn't happened to this point but may not be willing to throw Special K under the bus or proclaim him as a savior.

[Ron Madden]

I voted for "Wait and see" outta the kindness of my heart. ;)

Most Fans say give WK more time, (He hasn't even had 1 year on the job).

In his short time as Reds GM he's made about 45 roster moves. Most of us like to remember 4 good moves ( Arroyo, Phiilips, Ross and Hatteburgh) and forget all the bad ones.

If it's fair to count his good moves it should be fair to count the bad ones too.

I'm sorry, but it seems to me like whenever someone questions any of Waynes moves they are labled as "Negative Pessimistic Reds Fans".

It's all well and good to keep pointing out the 4 good moves but we should never mention and must forget about the bad ones. :confused:

I'm a Reds Fan, I wish Wayne well but he worries me.

[Jpup]

who is to say how someone should feel about the job he has done. some like him, some hate him, some aren't sure yet. I fail to see anything wrong with that.

I think he has done a pretty decent job thus far. I don't like the Kearns deal, but that has a lot to do with him being my favorite player. I don't know that I can really look at that objectively. Either way, I think Krivsky is a smart guy and it's too soon to say whether his tenure will be a success or failure. Was he my first choice, no, he wasn't even my 3rd choice, but I don't make the decision. We don't know the whole story as to why Kearns and Lopez were traded. We don't know how Krivsky's hands are tied or if they are not. We don't know what is going to happen between now and April. We are all very smart, but it's not an easy job given the circumstances handed to him.

Now go get some pitching, a bat with some thunder, and a new manager. ;)

[dsmith421]

Non-spent money is better than wasted money because you can always use the non-spent money later.

Well, I don't know if that's necessarily true since if you sit on the money too long you may run out of valuable commodities to spend it on. Granted, anything's better than wasting money, but that doesn't necessarily mean that conservatism in the market is always an admirable quality or an optimal strategy.

[camisadelgolf]

That's a very good point. And if there isn't anything valuable to spend the money on, it's probably better to sit on it until something valuable does come up (which in theory, is inevitable).

[MartyFan]

I have to say with the resignation of Johnny Almarez I am a bit concerned...though, he still hasn't been able to put his full team in place...perhaps he wanted Johnny GONE?

[Falls City Beer]

Still just 64 committed folks and 86 agnostics. Tsk.