Turn Off Ads?
Page 48 of 48 FirstFirst ... 384445464748
Results 706 to 720 of 720

Thread: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

  1. #706
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    8,546

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by HammerTime View Post
    David Bell on Amir Garrett: “Amir is going to continue to pitch in important spots… Amir is going to be fine."
    Nothing changes. Analytical manager BS. He’s no different than Baker. I would rather have Baker then.

  2. Likes:

    REDREAD (04-22-2021)


  3. Turn Off Ads?
  4. #707
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    126

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by HammerTime View Post
    David Bell on Amir Garrett: “Amir is going to continue to pitch in important spots… Amir is going to be fine."
    The one thing I was concerned about with the Reds getting off to a good start was an early extension for Bell. I really hope that doesn't happen. The highest compliment I can give him is that he's a better manager than Bryan Price. Barely.

  5. #708
    Member Mutaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    5,783

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Cloninger View Post
    Nothing changes. Analytical manager BS. He’s no different than Baker. I would rather have Baker then.
    I've heard Dusty called a lot of things but this is the first time I ever heard him called "analytical".
    Last edited by Mutaman; 04-22-2021 at 12:24 AM.

  6. #709
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    26,777

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds View Post
    That’s a big swing and a miss for Boddy having pumped him up so much over the offseason.

    Still believe in what the guy is doing and all, but of all of his reclamation projects and pet guys, Antone is the only guy who seems to have stepped forward so far.
    I"m sure Brody is a great coach, but man, the Reds really have not given him much to work with.
    5 marginal bullpen arms and Hoffman in the rotation.. that's a lot of miracles to ask.
    I realize Lorenzen was an unexpected injury, but other than that, they are at full strength.
    This reeks of the "Gullet can fix him" plan that the Reds did for about a decade.
    A good coach can only do so much, especially when he's given garbage.
    He's been given a collection of castoffs that other teams did not want to carry on their 40 man roster..
    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  7. #710
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    29,878

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by Griffey012 View Post
    I wanted nothing to do with Garrett closing that game. Just get the W, get him work later.

    You’ve been beating this dead horse about spending on the pen again and again but you continue to refuse to drop names. I understand that spending on bullpen arms is a crapshoot but you’d rather continue to complain as if it would have solved a problem.
    The issue was Reds’ exclusion this off-season of a whole class of available upper echelon relievers and starters.

    Name dropping? Who cares, Reds weren’t spending. I’m confident Reds would have made reasonable individual decisions, they usually do when signing guys.

    The “dead horse” here is the constant refrain that relievers are a total guessing game to be selected only from the bargain basement. So far, the result isn’t too great, hopefully it will change.
    Last edited by Kc61; 04-22-2021 at 01:15 AM.

  8. Likes:

    REDREAD (04-22-2021)

  9. #711
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    26,777

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Cloninger View Post
    Nothing changes. Analytical manager BS. He’s no different than Baker. I would rather have Baker then.
    yea, good obseravation. Kind of funny, the Baker/Jocketty combo was the best success we've seen since 95/99.. yet they were panned because they were "Traditionalist , not stats guys, etc".. Since then , we've seen a parade of supposedly enlightened stat guys and the team just keeps getting worse and worse. I mean, I get it.. when a GM or manager changes, people want to be optimistic, pick up a few quotes that give them hope, etc

    But the Reds have been feeding us this nonsense nonstop since the Bowden era.
    "We are modernizing analytics"
    "We are going to be more aggressive in Latin America"
    "We are going to start being aggressive in Asia"
    "We are going to rebuild the farm"
    etc

    Just a bunch of empty talk, then a few years later, the new guys come in and pretty much say the same thing, but nothing improves.
    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  10. #712
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    152

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by JFLegal View Post
    blandino sucks. has never been good.
    Tough play...... “Do or Die”Name:  0BADC63F-FE0B-4F1D-BC98-01E64453E7D8.jpg
Views: 110
Size:  295.3 KB


    Go Stanford Cardinal Baseball

  11. #713
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,304

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    The “dead horse” here is the constant refrain that relievers are a total guessing game to be selected only from the bargain basement. So far, the result isn’t too great, hopefully it will change.
    The dead horse is you keep going back to your one pitch arsenal of "all you idiots said they don't need to spend on a bullpen"

    Not every argument fits into a meme. You and I know it's much more nuanced than that

  12. #714
    Member NebraskaRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    4,449

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by MoneyInTheBank View Post
    I know we are all in our feelings right now but this is a pretty serious accusation. Whether we like to think so or not, the organization didn't draw straws for the closer role. Bell has a lot of trust in Garrett. He put him in there to win the game
    And he prioritized one over the other. I'm not saying he didn't want to win the game or that he thought they would lose if he put Garrett in.

    I'm saying his decision prioritized getting Garrett going first, winning the game second. I have a very hard time believing that Bell thought putting Garrett in the 9th gave the Reds the best chance of winning this game.

    Do you:

    (a) put in the person who will give you the best chance to to win the game

    or

    (b) put in Garrett in hopes to get him going and show him that you have confidence in him AND then also win the game

  13. #715
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    8,546

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by Mutaman View Post
    I've heard Dusty called a lot of things but this is the first time I ever heard him called "analytical".
    Well I don’t think people realize how analytical he was in regards to people. All kidding aside Dusty had a HOF type closer and even he would have these games where he would get hit and blow games. He still at least handled a bullpen better than Price and Bell. LeClure and Ondrusek were not exactly the beat of arms either.

    I call BS in these I’m an analytical manager who doesn’t follow the book. On this team there should be no set closer. Do you want to win games or make people feel good. I would rather they win games. No wonder they have such a happy clubhouse. Great that the manager covers your behind. Has confidence in you. How about caring about winning games too.

  14. #716
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,304

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by NebraskaRed View Post
    And he prioritized one over the other. I'm not saying he didn't want to win the game or that he thought they would lose if he put Garrett in.

    I'm saying his decision prioritized getting Garrett going first, winning the game second. I have a very hard time believing that Bell thought putting Garrett in the 9th gave the Reds the best chance of winning this game.

    Do you:

    (a) put in the person who will give you the best chance to to win the game

    or

    (b) put in Garrett in hopes to get him going and show him that you have confidence in him AND then also win the game
    But he didn't though. He thought Garrett gave the team the best chance to win. Amir Garrett is his closer. He named him that for a reason. He didn't toss Sal Romano out there to "get him going". He put his closer in with a 3 run lead, bases empty in the 9th. We can debate all day whether that is the right decision but he doesn't have the fan mentality of changing his opinion on a player after 5 appearances. If you want to argue he's stubbornly sticking with Garrett in the closer role? I can buy that argument. I'm just pushing back on questioning Bell's integrity because he put his closer in for a save situation.

  15. #717
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    8,546

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by MoneyInTheBank View Post
    But he didn't though. He thought Garrett gave the team the best chance to win. Amir Garrett is his closer. He named him that for a reason. He didn't toss Sal Romano out there to "get him going". He put his closer in with a 3 run lead, bases empty in the 9th. We can debate all day whether that is the right decision but he doesn't have the fan mentality of changing his opinion on a player after 5 appearances. If you want to argue he's stubbornly sticking with Garrett in the closer role? I can buy that argument. I'm just pushing back on questioning Bell's integrity because he put his closer in for a save situation.

    The question would be is why is Garrett the closer to begin with. I wouldn’t even say Sims is either. But during the first 2 weeks it did not look like Garrett at all. So coming into this game unless Sims or even Doolittle who’s been pitching very well would have been the better options.

  16. #718
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,304

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Cloninger View Post
    The question would be is why is Garrett the closer to begin with. I wouldn’t even say Sims is either. But during the first 2 weeks it did not look like Garrett at all. So coming into this game unless Sims or even Doolittle who’s been pitching very well would have been the better options.
    Like I said, why Amir Garrett was the closer to begin with is a legit question (although it didn't take us long to forget him throwing 4 perfect innings in Spring Training with 10 strikeouts). Like Kc61 has pointed out, Sims and Doolittle had to close out game 1 just a couple hours earlier. In fact, Sims would have had to pitch twice the same day after pitching the night before. I would have loved for the Reds to spend a few bucks on a good closer just like I would have liked to see them spend a few bucks on a SS. They didn't. Bell likes Garrett as his closer and put him in for a save situation. I don't know why it's that controversial.

  17. #719
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Marietta, OH
    Posts
    175

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    On the plus side, tomorrow is a 12:30 start time, so the misery will be over quickly and we move on with the rest of our days.
    Yes it could be the last out might come for three losses in less than 22 hours!

  18. #720
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    8,546

    Re: 4-21-21 Reds vs D-backs 6:50pm

    Quote Originally Posted by MoneyInTheBank View Post
    Like I said, why Amir Garrett was the closer to begin with is a legit question (although it didn't take us long to forget him throwing 4 perfect innings in Spring Training with 10 strikeouts). Like Kc61 has pointed out, Sims and Doolittle had to close out game 1 just a couple hours earlier. In fact, Sims would have had to pitch twice the same day after pitching the night before. I would have loved for the Reds to spend a few bucks on a good closer just like I would have liked to see them spend a few bucks on a SS. They didn't. Bell likes Garrett as his closer and put him in for a save situation. I don't know why it's that controversial.

    I wasn’t really disagreeing with you as well.

    It is amusing how everyone says no one should be given a spot based on ST numbers. And sure enough Garrett and Bedrosian had some of the best ST numbers. 1 gets to be closer the other made the team.

    They may be going through dead arm periods too. They used to happen during the middle to end of ST. Now since pitchers are coddled even more during ST. The dead arm hits in April

  19. Likes:

    MoneyInTheBank (04-22-2021),REDREAD (04-23-2021)


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | cumberlandreds | Gallen5862 | Kinsm | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | The Operator