Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jojo
Also, what's a FO that just signed Dusty more likely to do (especially if his opinion about the roster are considered), funnel him youngsters or find a way to get him what he historically has preferred the most?
I'd think you'd have to assume the latter. Dusty's going to want vets, especially on the mound.
As for position players, he'll probably want an Ausmus/Matheny type of catcher. He might want a fly chaser in CF. Corey Patterson? Votto would seem to be the guy in the most tenuous position, followed by Encarnacion.
He's likely to love Phillips and Gonzalez. I suspect he'll be good for Dunn, not tampering with him too much, not hitting him too low, getting him to play loose.
Jr. is the real question. Nominally, he's the obvious candidate to go, but will Dusty insist on keeping him?
Possibly the plan could be to deal Votto for an arm and station Dunn or Jr. at 1B.
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lollipopcurve
Yeah, why am I not surprised that this view of the Indians' success is completely software-centric? I'm sure Diamondview is helpful, but more essential tools of the Indians current success were already there before Shapiro et al took over.
Sabathia, signed in 1998.
Peralta in 1999.
Victor Martinez in 1996.
Carmona, probably 2001 or 2002, and I doubt his signing in the Dominican owed anything to Diamondview.
I wasn't arguing it was software-centric. Rather I was arguing that the recent rise of the Indians had less to due with continuity then it is the result of a process set into motion by a complete change in organizational philosophy that was orchestrated by a Shapiro-led FO. How the current Indians regime uses DiamondView is really the embodiment of this radical change. Hart basically had a core of players and adopted a strategy of locking them up long term while augmenting this core yearly by trading prospects or buying the part that was needed via free agency. He rode that pony until it dropped leaving the Indians at a crossroads with his departure. Basically Shapiro took the helm when revenue sharing was forcing fiscal constraints on the Indians FO while player development was a shambles as their high farm system was depleted of bona fide positional prospects and high quality pitchers due to years of Hart flipping prospects and giving up comp picks. By 2004 the system was so improved under the Shapiro-led FO that the Indians were losing guys like Taveras to the rule 5 draft.
While Sabathia was signed and developed under Shapiro's watchful eye, he was on the Indians 25 man roster having made 33 starts for the Indians before Shapiro became their GM in November, 2001.
Martinez was in high A ball when Shapiro took over but he had experienced somewhat of a breakout year with his bat. So Hart handed Shapiro a farm system with basically one serious prospect who was several years away. While Peralta was signed at 17 from the DR, he was basically a struggling kid in low ball who wasn't necessarily projecting as a shortstop. The implementation of Shapiro's player development philosophy is stamped all over Peralta. Carmona (began rookie ball for them in 2002) is a great example of the quick infusion that Shapiro gave the Indians farm system though technically he was under the Indians control in 2000.
Very little that is the current Indians can be counted as a direct result of Hart.
Re: Managerial search update(s) Could it be Dusty?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Team Clark
Ohhh the torture of having to listen those. "This is not a firesale"...
Other infamous Allen quotes:
"We're not thowing in the towel" (after 2003 firesale)
"This new stadium will double our revenues and allow us to field a competitive team".
"Attendence declined from last year, but that's ok since higher ticket prices made up for it".
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jojo
I wasn't arguing it was software-centric. Rather I was arguing that the recent rise of the Indians had less to due with continuity then it is the result of a process set into motion by a complete change in organizational philosophy that was orchestrated by a Shapiro-led FO. How the current Indians regime uses DiamondView is really the embodiment of this radical change. Hart basically had a core of players and adopted a strategy of locking them up long term while augmenting this core yearly by trading prospects or buying the part that was needed via free agency. He rode that pony until it dropped leaving the Indians at a crossroads with his departure. Basically Shapiro took the helm when revenue sharing was forcing fiscal constraints on the Indians FO while player development was a shambles as their high farm system was depleted of bona fide positional prospects and high quality pitchers due to years of Hart flipping prospects and giving up comp picks. By 2004 the system was so improved under the Shapiro-led FO that the Indians were losing guys like Taveras to the rule 5 draft.
While Sabathia was signed and developed under Shapiro's watchful eye, he was on the Indians 25 man roster having made 33 starts for the Indians before Shapiro became their GM in November, 2001.
Martinez was in high A ball when Shapiro took over but he had experienced somewhat of a breakout year with his bat. So Hart handed Shapiro a farm system with basically one serious prospect who was several years away. While Peralta was signed at 17 from the DR, he was basically a struggling kid in low ball who wasn't necessarily projecting as a shortstop. The implementation of Shapiro's player development philosophy is stamped all over Peralta. Carmona (began rookie ball for them in 2002) is a great example of the quick infusion that Shapiro gave the Indians farm system though technically he was under the Indians control in 2000.
Very little that is the current Indians can be counted as a direct result of Hart.
Actually I'm all for giving credit to Shapiro. But it was the work he did as farm director from 1996-2001 that laid a good bit of the groundwork for what they are experiencing now. I just don't think that it's entirely due to any radical change, regardless of their use of Diamondview, which I do understand is regarded to be the best computer system in use by any major league team.
Here's a good article about Diamondview for anyone else who is interested. I'm a professional software developer so I do appreciate how cool this is.
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
M2
I'd think you'd have to assume the latter. Dusty's going to want vets, especially on the mound.
As for position players, he'll probably want an Ausmus/Matheny type of catcher. He might want a fly chaser in CF. Corey Patterson? Votto would seem to be the guy in the most tenuous position, followed by Encarnacion.
He's likely to love Phillips and Gonzalez. I suspect he'll be good for Dunn, not tampering with him too much, not hitting him too low, getting him to play loose.
Jr. is the real question. Nominally, he's the obvious candidate to go, but will Dusty insist on keeping him?
Possibly the plan could be to deal Votto for an arm and station Dunn or Jr. at 1B.
As you suggest, Dusty claims to value pitching (though he doesn't seem to know how to manage a staff) and defense. We know he favors experience and tends to avoid platoons. He doesn't seem to value walks and it's pretty clear he's not a tactician. This off season should be pretty interesting from a roster standpoint. I have no idea what his hiring portends for Dunn and Jr (defense!), Bruce (youth), or Hatteberg (platoon) and Votto (youth/platoon).
Re: Managerial search update(s) Could it be Dusty?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
REDREAD
Other infamous Allen quotes:
"We're not thowing in the towel" (after 2003 firesale)
"This new stadium will double our revenues and allow us to field a competitive team".
"Attendence declined from last year, but that's ok since higher ticket prices made up for it".
OMG..how can we all forget those? I saw John Allen at the Cincinnati Magazine 40th Anniversary party. I didn't bother to say hello because I just didn't think I could keep it together. :laugh:
Kinda wished I had so I would have had something better to post!
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Krusty
On the otherhand, I can't recall Baker burning out pitchers when he was with the Giants. There was a question about Wood's mechanics and Prior wouldn't be the first pitcher with a history of injuries. So how much of the blame do you attribute to Baker for those two flameouts?
It's a philosophy that goes back 60 years. Craig, Lasorda, and Baker are all products of the Walter Alston philosophy. It was fine in the days when the Dodgers were getting the largest percentage of young, quality pitchers every year. But, those days are long past as expansion has doubled the number of franchises and everyone recruits in places where only the Dodgers used to go. The Dodgers for over half a century have burned out their pitchers, and it's a philosophy that goes with those that played for them. Lasorda, Craig, and Baker are all of the same mold. Their style doesn't work anymore. It's antiquated. You have to take very good care of your assets nowadays.
How often do the Dodgers ever have a pitcher come up through their system last very long in the Majors without having Major injuries? Not very often. They rarely get through arbitration before they're ruined. They've had to buy all of their quality pitchers from other organizations for over a decade now.
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
and do you think Dusty Baker will do what Krivsky tells him to when it comes to protecting pitchers? Not a chance. Baker will do whatever he wants because Krivsky didn't hire him. Krivsky would never hire a guy who would do his own thing against Krivsky's orders. Krivsky has proven that he wants to protect the assets and not rush any players or ruin any arms. How many arms got ruined this year in the REDS' organization? None. That's probably the first time in a dozen years where we haven't lost a good prospect for the year because of arm trouble.
Re: Managerial search update(s) Could it be Dusty?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Team Clark
OMG..how can we all forget those? I saw John Allen at the Cincinnati Magazine 40th Anniversary party. I didn't bother to say hello because I just didn't think I could keep it together. :laugh:
Kinda wished I had so I would have had something better to post!
:lol:
I just remembered another one.. A fan here asked Allen a question about why the Reds didn't spend more on something. and Allen's response was "It's not Your money"
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
The darkest hour is just before the dawn.
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
I don't dislike everything about the guy but he really doesn't seem to be a good fit for us, what with the reputation for leaning away from using youth. Because that's what we have/will have during his tenure.
My only rationalization for this is that the powers that be felt the need for a big name was neccessary to establish the fact that they are serious about competing. IMO his hiring doesn't quite send the message they wanted to convey. Sure he is a "known" manager with some degree of success, but again those teams were tailored to fit his style. I just don't see us having the ability to match his style with our available resources.
It's also too bad that Castellini and Krivsky feel that they need to do anything but win to gain this measure of trust with fans, media, the players etc. It's too bad that a guy like Mackanin who seemed to have a real grasp on running this team is replaced with a guy based on managements perception of what they have to do to gain credibility, when the truth is all they had to do is go out and pay some money for quality pitching and Mack would have competed just as well if not better than Dusty "I won't make you publicly accountable" Baker.
Pete Handled the staff pretty well with the exception of a couple of occasions.
Pete motivated everyone, both veteran and rookie and everyone in between. Mainly by holding everyone accountable.
Pete was honest and classy with everyone.
Pete did as well as could be expected with what he had any given time.
Pete wasn't here long enough to be sure he was perfect for the job, but it sure was looking that way.
We don't need any show of commitment other than the commitment to winning and IMHO this (Dusty) isn't it. Of course it's all moot at this point apparently so the best I can do is hope I'm wrong about Baker and hope it brings the Reds what it is they seek..........some slack. And perhaps a FA or 2 that feels this signing is some show of progress.
I will be expecting the Red's to take a step back at least initially and praying for the opposite. Because as bad as it seems to be I can't just walk away for more than few moments at a time anyway.
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
http://www.sportsline.com/columns/we...entry/10383530
It's not perfect, but Reds are Baker's best option now
Most likely, Dusty Baker doesn't know something you don't. He did not agree to a three-year deal believed to be worth between $11 million and $12 million to manage in Cincinnati because he thinks the Reds are ready to win now.
No, Baker has a burning desire to manage again, to not let his career end on that 66-96 downer he and last year's Cubs produced, and the simple fact is that after sitting out a year, there really aren't any ready-made situations whereby a skipper can move in and win immediately.
Cincinnati owner Bob Castellini has been wooing Baker for weeks. The Reds remain far from perfect, what with a dearth of pitching, the Ken Griffey Jr. problem (he's an older, injury-prone player past his prime that they really can't shed) and a middle-of-the-order slugger in Adam Dunn who strikes out way too often and is a defensive liability.
Baker, of course, has plenty of experience in managing superstars in various stages of decline -- Barry Bonds in San Francisco, Sammy Sosa with the Cubs -- and knows the National League extremely well. The players still love him, he still has that energy at 58, and one of the hard truths in the game is that the longer you stay away, the easier it is for clubs to forget about you.
Baker did not want to be forgotten, so he surveyed the landscape and made the best of it.
Seattle would have been a a solid fit, but the Mariners made interim John McLaren their full-time skipper.
There still might be an opening with the Yankees that could come as early as this week, but if Joe Torre is axed, Steinbrenner family favorite Don Mattingly, currently Torre's bench coach, is expected to get that job. Or perhaps former Marlins manager and current Yankees broadcaster Joe Girardi.
The St. Louis situation could be fluid depending on Tony La Russa's decision, but hiring a manager who flamed out with the hated Cubs would be a hard sell in that town
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
Thanks for the post. Who wrote that though? How pointless was the article? Dusty Baker wanted a job running one of the 30 teams in the greatest sport in the world. WOW. Big shock.
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cedric
Thanks for the post. Who wrote that though? How pointless was the article? Dusty Baker wanted a job running one of the 30 teams in the greatest sport in the world. WOW. Big shock.
In other words....
It goes without saying. :thumbup:
Re: Managerial search over. It's Dusty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wolfboy
It can be a lot worse than Boone, Miley or Narron because we're going to pay a lot more money for Baker. You can have twenty guys named Belisle, Jarvis, Parris, or Villone, but it's the guy named Milton that really hurts. If anything, Dusty Baker is our Eric Milton. We can get the same level of ineptitude for much less. I just don't even know what to do with this organization anymore.
What are they paying him? $4 million. Good grief, they paid the wonderful tandem of Cromier, Stanton, and Lohse more than that!
I'm not happy with Baker, but this is not the end of the world. As another Zoner said, the guy, at least has a winning record regardless.
And yes, I had warmed to Pete Macklanin, but let's not hang the guy until he fails.