Dick Williams resigns as Reds' President of Baseball Operations

[757690]

Bobby Nightengale said Williams told Castellini in August this was probably his last year...

Well, in August, the Reds were well below .500 and looking like a disaster. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that this was more of a prediction from Williams than a deceleration of his intentions.

[kaldaniels]

Well, in August, the Reds were well below .500 and looking like a disaster. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that this was more of a prediction from Williams than a deceleration of his intentions.

So “You can’t fire me I quit!”

Which is interesting because I was told since Williams was an “owner” he would never be fired...

[Strikes Out Looking]

I think there is more to the story about his family - I doubt if we will ever get the entire set of facts. Who he was makes it very unlikely he was actually told he'd be let go.

[757690]

So “You can’t fire me I quit!”

Which is interesting because I was told since Williams was an “owner” he would never be fired...

Well, he wasn’t fired. He “resigned”. I am guessing the same way that Thom “resigned.”

[SirFelixCat]

This is surprising. Very curious to see the next step(s) now.

[Hillsdale87]

It has all the indications that Williams said he wanted to quit then, and Castellini told him to not rush into it.

If I was Bauer, this might give me a little pause about signing back here. Williams/Krall were all about the analytics. Who knows if the next guy might be traditionalist and want to exorcise all the Driveline types.

I have a hard time believing that they would revert back to an old school approach after investing in Boddy and some of the other more modern approaches they have over the past few years. Castellini likes positive press, and signing Boddy was universally praised from baseball people, and I'd imagine he liked that quite a bit. I could be wrong, but I certainly hope I'm not.

[JaxRed]

I have a hard time believing that they would revert back to an old school approach after investing in Boddy and some of the other more modern approaches they have over the past few years. Castellini likes positive press, and signing Boddy was universally praised from baseball people, and I'd imagine he liked that quite a bit. I could be wrong, but I certainly hope I'm not.

I hope your right. I hope Krall is given the reins for a year. I'm just afraid of Castellini falling back on his Jocketty/Buddy Bell types for advice.

[Patrick Bateman]

I actually buy the resignation. Maybe I’m naive. But he’s done more good than bad in his time, primarily setting the infrastructure for modern day baseball analysis and player development within the organization. For as much fault as you could pin on him offensively, you have to credit him equally for the brilliant job on the pitching side.

This current teams story could have gone very differently over 162 games, and he didn’t merit losing his job based on the outcome of the season.

I buy the notion that he could be handed another cushy job within his family organization where he could be paid far more to do far less work. He’s at an age where that could make sense with a relatively young family.

Where I stand there isn’t a “win” to declare here, as the end result is not necessarily tied to results, otherwise 20 other general managers would need to lose their jobs too.

As far as the 600 game benchmark.. we’ve gone over this. Organizationally, from top to bottom, a decision was made to rebuild, punt seasons and shift resources into other areas of the organization that weren’t aimed in creating in season W’s. For 3 years they were not shy about tanking. Pointing to that record and assigning it to him, when it’s just as much ownership decision is not correct analysis.

They tried very hard to win for the last 240 games and came up below .500 with better underlying performance indicators that pegged them at a 80-85 win team. It didn’t meet expectations, but hardly a fireable offense.

I think overall he’s been a net positive in the organization and left a foundation to be built upon by the next guy. I have mentioned before adding an outside influence from a successful modern day franchise (ie. cubs, dodgers, Tampa, Oakland) has been missing from the exec group, and that’s where I would aim to find my next leader, and would be a good fit with the infrastructure that has been built.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[757690]

They tried very hard to win for the last 240 games and came up below .500 with better underlying performance indicators that pegged them at a 80-85 win team. It didn’t meet expectations, but hardly a fireable offense.

When this comes after 4 years of tanking, of losing between 94-98 games a season, this should be a fireable offense.

The plan was undertaken in order to turn the Reds into a dominant team for many years. That is how it was sold. Pain for a few years in order to get better draft picks and a stronger team and organization. None of that has happened.

[Todd Gack]

At least we know ownership doesn’t consider 7th in the league a success.

WHile that is one issue, the bigger issue is that they're incompetent.

[jwdoc77]

I’m more optimistic about the future of the organization if C Trent’s story on the Athletic is the truth and he resigned to spend more time with family. This means the direction he was pushing the organization in should continue, it’s just a matter of finding the right guy to keep moving it that way.
I’m less optimistic if Bob pushed him out. That means he’s meddling in the baseball ops, will likely to continue to do so, and we may be headed down a dark path again.

[Tom Servo]

So “You can’t fire me I quit!”

Which is interesting because I was told since Williams was an “owner” he would never be fired...

All that work by the Williamses to overthrow Big Bob and Jocketty in a coup and their guy just up and resigns, smh.

[RedsManRick]

This is the thing so many of you wanted. Now we're gonna awesome, right?

After Bob C had exhausted his other options, he allowed Williams to bring the organization into the 21st century. Though the on-field results are still lagging behind, I don't think he'll ever get the credit he deserves for the behind-the-scenes organizational change that happened because of his leadership.

Whether or not this resignation was entirely his idea or whether he was booted is sort of beside the point. Though I think we'll get a much clearer picture of which it was based on how / with whom they replace him.

[Patrick Bateman]

When this comes after 4 years of tanking, of losing between 94-98 games a season, this should be a fireable offense.

The plan was undertaken in order to turn the Reds into a dominant team for many years. That is how it was sold. Pain for a few years in order to get better draft picks and a stronger team and organization. None of that has happened.

It just doesn't happen overnight like that. Very few teams have ever gone from sub 70 win seasons to above 85 win seasons year to year. The Reds very well could have gotten there in year two.

Look at the Astros seasonal wins as a benchmark:

74
76
56
55
51
70
86
84
101
103
107

They had more years of tanking, at greater lengths, and had far more elite players drop in their laps via the draft (the Reds didn't have access to one cant miss, elite prospect the entire time), and even then required 3 seasons to get over the hump of 85 wins before reaching prominence (and from there who knows how much cheating elevated them beyond that).


So no, 240 games is not a fireable offense. It would merit a deep analysis into the underlying process, strategy, and execution. It could be based on the answers to that analysis. Many organizations are in far worse places with a comparable level of extended losing, or even gone backwards from having successful franchises.

[UKWhoDey]

I buy the notion that he could be handed another cushy job within his family organization where he could be paid far more to do far less work. He’s at an age where that could make sense with a relatively young family.

I would argue that would make sense for anyone, at any age.