Reds front office directory

[Roy Tucker]

While trying to unravel the Reds ownership, I stumbled across this public MLB link to a who’s who in the Reds front office.

https://www.mlb.com/reds/team/front-office

If nothing else, it’s a start as to who to hit up on LinkedIn if you’re looking for a job with the Reds.

[PepperJack]

It’s odd that Krall is listed with executives and not Baseball Operations. Also, Buddy Bell is listed as a senior advisor to a position that doesn’t exist…President of Baseball Operations.

They didn’t replace that role when Williams moved on.

[KronoRed]

You can see other teams just by changing Reds to other teams.

Lots of weird titles, probably just to give someones friends kid a job.

[Boston Red]

They gotta fire Paisley. Terrible job as public safey K-9. I can't believe Wahoff is still traveling secretary. Not that I know anything about how he's doing his job, but just that he's been there for 25 years. Impreseive. I can still remember when he was head of the groundscrew and running around doing extra work to try and get a promotion. Well played Gary. Well played.

[westofyou]

They gotta fire Paisley. Terrible job as public safey K-9. I can't believe Wahoff is still traveling secretary. Not that I know anything about how he's doing his job, but just that he's been there for 25 years. Impreseive. I can still remember when he was head of the groundscrew and running around doing extra work to try and get a promotion. Well played Gary. Well played.

Gabe Paul got his start in MLB as the Reds Traveling Secretary in the 30's, parlayed it into the GM job 15 years later

[Bob Sheed]

Good.

Ole.

Boys.

[westofyou]

Good.

Ole.

Boys.

If the mantra of the ownership is to only distribute shares to groups with Cincinnati ties that's what you get. There never has been a big push from one man to outright own the Reds, until that occurs this boat will be sailed by a bunch of guys who make money in SE Ohio, who also just look at the Reds like a part of their portfolio like their Shake Shack franchises and Shopping centers in Columbus.

No surprise there really

[oregonred]

If the mantra of the ownership is to only distribute shares to groups with Cincinnati ties that's what you get. There never has been a big push from one man to outright own the Reds, until that occurs this boat will be sailed by a bunch of guys who make money in SE Ohio, who also just look at the Reds like a part of their portfolio like their Shake Shack franchises and Shopping centers in Columbus.

No surprise there really

Beyond Dewitt, don't the Cardinals have a mostly local ownership group like the Reds? The only difference is the Redbirds principal owner also lives in Cincinnati but seems to have a magic touch

[westofyou]

Beyond Dewitt, don't the Cardinals have a mostly local ownership group like the Reds? The only difference is the Redbirds principal owner also lives in Cincinnati but seems to have a magic touch

They don't usually discuss that group, but they do let DeWitt control the club, which is a good choice, he has baseball DNA and he owned part of the Colonels and all of the Stingers and the ABA and WHA was a great place to get your feet wet in the business of sport. He's a different beast than Bob C who has a romantic view of ownership first and foremost. One that thinks the brand is bigger than the teams record year in and year out.

[BRM13]

They don't usually discuss that group, but they do let DeWitt control the club, which is a good choice, he has baseball DNA and he owned part of the Colonels and all of the Stingers and the ABA and WHA was a great place to get your feet wet in the business of sport. He's a different beast than Bob C who has a romantic view of ownership first and foremost. One that thinks the brand is bigger than the teams record year in and year out.

The mistake Bob makes is not understanding that over time the the team’s record IS the brand. He isn’t the only Red’s owner to make this mistake.

[RedsManRick]

The mistake Bob makes is not understanding that over time the the team’s record IS the brand. He isn’t the only Red’s owner to make this mistake.

Best succinct summary of Bob's problem that I've seen on this board since he took over.

[757690]

The mistake Bob makes is not understanding that over time the the team’s record IS the brand. He isn’t the only Red’s owner to make this mistake.

I think Castellini understands this perfectly. His problem isn’t that doesn’t value putting a winning team on the field, it’s that he’s not very good at it.

To me it’s clear that his biggest mistake was trying too hard to do that after 2012, signing too many long term contracts, thinking that was the way to keep winning. All the bungling since then has been a result of that initial mistake.

[REDREAD]

To me it’s clear that his biggest mistake was trying too hard to do that after 2012, signing too many long term contracts, thinking that was the way to keep winning. All the bungling since then has been a result of that initial mistake.

Disagree, they won 90 games in 2013 and got the wildcard. That's a resounding success for the Reds. If 2013 was a mistake, then obviously 2020 and 2021 were not good years either.
Why do I say that? Because the argument was that the 2012 Reds should have been torn down faster.. well, look how the franchise has floundered since.. 3-4 more prospects by tearing down earlier would not have made that much of a difference, especially given the Reds' track record on "rebuilding" trades.

Just to be clear, 2020 and 2021 were relative successes IMO.. I was just saying 2013 was a huge success and I'm glad they did not torpedo it to tank sooner.

[GAC]

I finally had a "Summer of George" that I haven't felt in almost a decade with this team. This management team has done some very positive things in the last few years that has at least got us to being a .500+ team. That's a decent jump for a team that was at the bottom of a deep well. But as a fan that doesn't mean I should be satisified or content. But it feeds one's optimism.

OK. So this may be a team on the "cusp". But only IF this FO makes the right decisions/moves this off-season to address numerous glaring weaknesses going into '22. But we'ren't we saying this last off-season?

And that always seems to be a problem with this ownership. But it's a problem that is probably common throughout MLB. But it's felt harder (hurts) the smaller clubs when it comes to competiveness. I'm not saying that Red's ownership group doesn't spend. Nor that they haven't given out LTC (spent big) that have proven beneficial, a positive, as far as money invested. The problem, IMO, is that it's offset by equally bad contracts/money invested that does drag on the organization. No one likes to make a substantial investment in something that is not producing. Unfortunately, guarantee'd contracts limit actions.

They just come across as a management team randomly throwing darts at the board hoping to hit. Or even better - in order to let the water out of the boat they shoot more holes. For every hole they address/plug, they create two (lol). After the '20 season they saw they needed to boost the offense. They did. Great. But at the expense of pitching (primarily relief), as well as the critical SS position. They're lucky Farmer performed for them.

We've seen numerous organizations of similar markets over these many years consistently put forth competitive and WS teams. So it can be done. Yet so far, not in Cincinnati. IMO. That's either due to cheapness or ineptness. And you could probably sprinkle that with a good dose of complacency too.

They are at a "crossroads" IMO. Which direction are they going to go moving forward?

[Revering4Blue]

Disagree, they won 90 games in 2013 and got the wildcard. That's a resounding success for the Reds. If 2013 was a mistake, then obviously 2020 and 2021 were not good years either.
Why do I say that? Because the argument was that the 2012 Reds should have been torn down faster.. well, look how the franchise has floundered since.. 3-4 more prospects by tearing down earlier would not have made that much of a difference, especially given the Reds' track record on "rebuilding" trades.

Just to be clear, 2020 and 2021 were relative successes IMO.. I was just saying 2013 was a huge success and I'm glad they did not torpedo it to tank sooner.

IIRC, there was little redzone sentiment for rebuilding immediately following the 2012 season. If anything, the 2013 team was stronger - at least on paper - than the '12 team. Ditto for '15 compared with '14. But as we know, injuries curtailed what could have been a divisional winner / playoff - advancing team in '13. And the '15 team was D.O.A once Mesaroco, Bailey et all were sidelined.

But more to to 757690's point, the extensions conincided with two additional factors that tied up payroll, efectively preventing the FO from adding to the respective rosters from '13 and '14: 1) A relative non-producing farm system which had been effectively emptied due to the Latos, Marshall and Choo trades. Not that I regret those trades, as all worked out well. 2) A significant amount of payroll tied up in the likes of Broxton, Shumacker, Hanrahann and an injured Marshall.

While the extensions have been debated here for what seems forever, the Bailey extension is the only one, IMO, considered a 'bad' move. That was simply an extension that other markets sitting at our proverbial dinner table - Brewers, A's, Rays and Indians - would never have engineered. The franchise simply underestimated the market for its free agent to be starters at the time and wound up paying market price for Bailey. And tying this together with the present, no one is proposing such an extension for Castillo, Mahle, Gray et all - more along the lines of the Reds locking up Cueto pre arb, in which they gained extra seasons of control before his 2015 departure.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk