Injuries

[JohnU]

The next time somebody whines about all the injuries that kept the Reds from winning, here's the list for one rival team as of 7/7.

 

[eburg5000]

And they still win!

 

[Redsfan1507]

I despise the Cardinals...mostly because I'm jealous of them. They don't neccessarily have better players, or even more money, they're just better at winning.

Their Plan B isn't as weak as the Reds, or most any other team as a matter of fact. It helps to already have a big lead in the standings too...

It isn't all money, the Cards aren't spending more than the Reds on payroll. They are getting more for their buck, though.

It seems like, if the Reds unexpectedly ran out of toilet paper, they would think they have to wipe their ass with currency, or "just hold it", until they can afford more TP.

The Cardinals farm produces annual answers to "suprize" needs, and the big club roster is always, pretty solid already. They lost Wainwright, like the Reds lost Bailey this year... but the Cardinals didn't already trade two other SP, making their rotation a long odds, best case miracle, to begin with, before Wainwrights injury. They had enough farm arms (Martinez, Lynn, etc.) to trade a couple (Kelly, Miller) to plug a couple holes, and still weren't forced to sign washed up 84 mph embarrassments and hope 3-4 SP rookies can pitch thru September without needing TJ.

Just luck ? The better decisions you make, the luckier you get. The Cardinals usually make pro-actively wise decisions and stick to the plan, regardless of the players...the Reds are often reactionary, and fall "victim" to annual "bad breaks".

The Cardinals let Pujols walk, and saved a quarter Billion dollars...but had an educated idea they could do OK for a year or so with a farm guy (Craig), and by the time he fell off due to injury, they had another ready (Adams)...and when he went down, they had a previous 30 HR 3b/1b already signed (Reynolds) for about the same money as the Reds paid powerless Hannahan last year. Beltran was let go for the rookie Taveras, but even in that unexpected tragedy, they still had Jay and Burgois, and of course they got Heyward in trade. They don't have a 2b, so they move a 3b (Carpenter) there for a year, and back to 3b when Wong was ready the following year. They pick up a ho-hum contract FA SS (Peralta) to replace their revolving door of hitless ones, and he winds up being the cleanup hitter...why ? Because they recognized the farm didn't have a SS that was as good, and they could afford $60 M for a pretty durable SS with average range, that hits. By the time Peralta is old, they will have a replacement though...or will trade for one that is. Grichuk isn't a bad short term spell for Holliday, and by the time the old guy is too old, Grichuk may be ready for bigger production...like Wong.

The Cards let the manager, the pitching coach, and their best franchise player in half a century all go, and still won the World Series.

The Cardinals don't always have to make a big move to fill a stark need, because they covered it already. It isn't that easy to lose a dozen game lead, even with guys injured if you "slump" and play around .500 for a month until you get healthier...They've been doing this for a long time....Sounds like a pretty solid plan, executed by a consistent factory process, not just good luck, to me.

Can you name the last time the Cardinals had a starting position player that hit less than .240 with more than 500 at bats, two complete seasons in a row ? I can't....I know a couple Reds right off the bat- Stubbs and Bruce. Is that better Cardinal players, or just higher standards, or both ?

The Reds play better "D" than the Cardinals, but make up for it with worse fundamental "O". The Reds steal more bases than the Cardinals, but the Cardinals don't seem to get as many base runners picked off or lost on unforced tag plays. The Reds hit more homers, but win fewer games...and seem try to make up for incomplete roster preparation, by randomly ignoring fundamentals, like understanding advancing runners is easier when you put the ball in play.

The dastardly Cardinals (and Pirates and Royals) are always dreaming up some chip to carry on their shoulder, and the Reds are always making apologies. Might be a clue to philosophy differences, there.

 

[JohnU]

Cincy does not have an option at 3B or 1B if either of those guys pulls a hammy or gets a broken wrist on a foul ball.
They do have a backup plan for calling up guys from the minors -- let them pitch once or twice and send them back for more seasoning.

 

[chico ruiz]

lets assume that castellini is still convinced the reds can contend this year, which based on what i've read is really what he thinks. probably founded more in emotion than intellect i suspect. borderline insanity is what some baseball insiders would say. but, castellini wants to bring cincinnati a winner. that's great and i applaud him for it, but it appears he doesn't know how to go about it. he's not a steinbrenner, and he doesn't have his own network that he can sell off for billions. btw, i would settle for a competitive team. lets also assume that jocketty's hands are tied because of castellini's intransigent ways. that means walt is just drawing a pay check and not fulfilling his job description. it doesn't matter how successful the reds were at the beginning of the decade. the same player contractual obligations were inevitable. 'inevitable' is the key word here.

so, knowing this, they wasted millions on very questionable veteran so-called plug-ins. plug-ins!!??!! what a joke. well, the joke is on the reds fan. time to 'rebuild' some posters write. why would the reds have to 'rebuild?' a hurricane didn't hit the house my fellow posters. no. there was nothing but good weather forecast in the foreseeable future. the landlord & mgmt. company didn't sustain necessary upkeep and maintenance. they were stupid and cheap at once. they tried to put bandaids on gaping open wounds that were revealing bone. no preventative care was being administered. in the meantime, walt continues to get excuses made for him by press, fans, and ownership alike. what this means is, under this protective umbrella, we can expect more of the same. when nobody accepts or takes responsibility for failures, in a organization, it will undoubtedly collapse. it's an illness that spreads dysfunction throughout. and apparently nobody is accountable according to the cincinnati enquirer.

did they make the conscious decision to sacrifice the near future to maybe win for a couple years? is that what happened? did they sit in a boardroom, in 2010, and look at each other and say, 'ah fuck it, we'll deal with that in 2014.' the entire process and situation wreaks of desperation and lacks forethought of any kind. i think walter jumped on the crazy train solely for personal legacy reasons. 'look at me,' says wally. ' i won another world series ring, and i did it against the team that fired me. those dirty rotten bastards. i don't need any fancy statistical information to know what's what. i know a thing or two about a thing or two.' the pinkish hued one screwed my beloved reds and us fans in the process. process? there's been no 'process' that i can distinguish at all. he envisioned himself hoisting a trophy and then retiring. he gives not one shit about the reds future. think about what he inherited and what he will leave his successor. it's the very definition of executive managerial failure in business circles.

the owner needs help. right? a strong determined gm that can talk sense to him would be a start. otherwise, the reds are doomed to the second division for years to come. how could wally have convinced mr. c that the reds opening day roster had a chance of contending? wouldn't a good exec make it clear that this is not a viable path to contention or competitiveness? why weren't these inevitabilities addressed 3 or 4 years ago? other than myself, no one on this board ever really asks that very important, if not vital, question. it's the definition of gross negligence and would not be tolerated in most other organizations. very seldom, if ever, has a reds media person put this man's feet to the fire. why is that?

you simply can't react in the present mlb environment this slowly and expect to be competitive on a sustained basis. the mlb economy demands a proactive approach. especially if you're a middle market organization. you can't pretend to be something you're not for very long. it catches up to you quickly. the press and media surrounding the reds perpetuates this lie with it's collusion, but mostly it's silence, which is deafening. writing this gives me not one nanosecond of pleasure. i feel no vindication or smug 'i told you so' self aggrandizement. i feel cheated by the entire cincinnati reds organization, it's subsidiary 'yes men,' and most of the fan base who had no trouble continuously lambasting the last manager for any perceived, or real, shortcoming, but now shrug their collective shoulders in apathy and acceptance of less than mediocre - on and off field - management. so, why does this happen in reds land? i'm not completely sure. i have my opinions. one thing is for sure red fan; you better get used to it.

dewitt knew in 2007 that wally's way was unsustainable in terms of prospect talent (drafting & development), financially, and the analytics applicable to both. here's a good article to read. it gets deep into the weeds with comparative stats, but it has good quotes and, if you read between lines, reveals why the reds find themselves in this position. geez chico, you can't blame one man for this mess. maybe so. who should be held accountable then? anybody? walt is responsible for most of this disaster. no reasonable argument can be made for him. so, as this farcical cover-up continues, i can say only one thing to the majority of reds fans: you're getting what you deserve.

John Mozeliak vs. Walt Jocketty: How has the St. Louis Cardinals' approach to roster construction changed? - Viva El Birdos

 

[JohnU]

Let's go back to 2010, when the Reds roared out of nowhere with a frisky Phillips, an MVP Votto, an up and coming Bruce, young virile pitchers Cueto, Volquez, etc. Won a division, first time since 1884 or some such year.
Floundered a bit the next year, but nothing to fear ... 2012 -- WOW 97 wins and a walkaway.

What the 2010 and 2012 seasons suggested to the fans was simple -- the 2011 season was a fluke. The Reds proved they could reload at 3B, get a relief pitcher, replace a couple of spare parts, add Ryan Hanigan and win.
2012 ended badly but it didn't really signify a problem.

Where it changed was the next year. Walt simply believed on the trade deadline that the people he had coming off the DL -- Marshall, Ludwick -- were as good as anybody he could get in a deal. He had every reason to believe that. I found the logic sensible. I still do.

What happened after THAT is the problem. The Reds, namely the owner, bailed out. They panicked. They got into a maze of bullshit, fired the manager for no real reason, hired another guy for no real reason, decided to come hell or high water put Hamilton in CF, let him lead off ... traded Hanigan, went with Mesoraco, left Chapman in the bullpen, and decided to wait it out since they had a great excuse -- the team was all on the DL.
Bullshit ensued.

Either way, the Reds at the beginning of the decade were on the right path, perhaps outrunning their supply source.

Now ...

As far as your assertion, Chico, that you are the only one who saw this coming ... a bit less self-satisfaction might be in order. We've watched this team mature since 2008. We know what caused it to fail and we have no idea what will change that. Different players, different results in a league that is constantly changing. In most years, you win 3 out of 5 or lose 3 out of 5 ... the bulk of MLB right now is a 9-game losing streak away from 4th place. You win those games, and you are looking forward to playing the next series.

You could trade Bruce for Beltran. You could trade Frazier for Headley. You could trade Bailey for Masterson. Or you could call up Jess Winker or Yorman Rodriquez ... maybe sign some hotshot reliever off the waiver wire, add a bit of Cuban spice ... it's not who you have. It's how the guys you have perform.

I just don't know for sure how much control the GM has over that facet of the game. Perhaps the metrics do tell a story, but they aren't proving much to me other than, if you get a guy on 2nd base and none out ... the Cardinals get the run home. About 24 other teams in the MLB are not getting the run home.

 

[Redsfan1507]

Every fan has an opinion. We are all entitled to be unhappy with the product we pay for. We vent that here. I doubt seriously many sane people believe the Reds current state is the fault of any one person, or makes a rationalization that Reds "fans are getting what they deserve". Fans don't hire GM's or fire managers. Fans want to win, not cover up incompetence by white executives easily crucified..

Jocketty Cover up ? wow, Chico.... I could argue one real causal factor of Reds troubles is the current market salary structure. Of which inflated during the PED era far more, than the pre-PED days...and THAT conspiracy and cover up of PED's is the reason the Reds will never be able to afford another BRM. Maybe we should ask why Bud Selig has never been charged with obstruction or perjury ?

IMO, Dusty Baker was a stubborn ass, complacent manager that should have been fired years earlier, but he wasn't close to the whole reason for "failure"...but he was Jocketty's fault too, wasn't he...and still is an unfortunate popular "cause" for race baiters and back seat snipers...It's a demeaning bullshit distraction from the truth, that has zero invested in accountabilty. Baker wasn't disliked or fired because he was black- it was because he didn't win to expectations. Period...none of which changes a damned thing.

If BLAME could get back a lost game, the dugout and front office would be covered in blood, and they wouldn't have anyone to run the team or enough players to fill out a lineup. It's ALWAYS about resolution, isn't it ?

I guarantee you, no matter our opinion of their competency, the people running the Reds probably know infinitely more how to run their business than we do. Even now- we're talking Reds...isn't that a big part of their goal ? They're winning at failing.

Chico-Ego ?? How possibly could you rationally feel that you obtained all that knowledge, vision, education and/or experience in the business of professional baseball ? You played Strat O Matic and read Bill James book ? BAHAHA...

If these geeks you respect so much truly had real baseball answers or solutions, they would be running a team to the Series every year, or at least bankrupting Las Vegas... Unfortunately in baseball and in business, most "analysis" is after the fact. Metrics are cute sales pitches, history is only a guide, but neither is a guarantee of future predictability.

Mozeliac wasn't available to hire as a GM when Jocketty was. Is that Walt's fault or Castellini's ? and... what does it resolve ? If every team could be the Cardinals, they would. It must be harder than it looks, huh ?



I don't think ANY GM or coach or manager at any level, looks 10 years down the road without a contract that long- usually, they ALL have to win on a relatively short term plan, or they're toast. I'd like to believe ownership looks that far though....but the truth is, they are investors that aren't predisposed to lose money just to make some fans spending $125 a year happy.


Fan's understand the difference in W-L records, but few understand the real semantics of winning and losing teams. You can't just make trades or sign people at will. The best available, may not be the best. Talent varies. Injuries happen. Gotta turn a profit, and gate receipts DO matter. especially in small media markets.

The Reds may need a Phillies type dismantling. I think Jocketty blew his opportunity, and they need a different resume building the next one.

 

[chico ruiz]

did you read the entire post? i feel know satisfaction (self or otherwise), and thought i made that perfectly clear. hell-oh??? reds fan here. a informed one to boot. however, if it read that way, i apologize. you guys have missed the point almost entirely. but, there must be some grain of truth in my post, otherwise you wouldn't have reacted this way. 1507 - why are you bringing up the so-called 'race' issue? where do you get any of that in my post? get over it 1507. me thinks thou dost protest too much. walt is just pinkish. that's it. nothing more, nothing less. i was simply pointing out that while baker was getting relentlessly grilled the gm was doing next to nothing to improve the ball club for the near future. and, yes 1507, the current market structure is a factor. have you read any of my prior posts? did you really read this last one? it's what the gm does within that structure. also, what is the gm's responsibility in what happens to prospects in the farm system? that question has been asked countless times on this board. walt jocketty was hired as a special adviser to the cincinnati reds on january 11, 2008. jocketty's role was to advise and assist the team in their baseball operations which includes the front office, personnel, scouting, minor and international operations and training and medical services. three months later he was the gm in charge of all the above. he insisted on that. if you insist on, and are given, this responsibility, doesn't that make you responsible for it's success or failure?

ego? you love to throw your cup of coffee in low-a ball experience around on this board as if that makes you an authority in 2015. it doesn't. if you really read my previous posts you would know how i feel about the 'geeks' as you call them. i've been very clear about the effectiveness and application of stats. haven't you gleaned any clues from my posts in the past. could be i've had long conversations with keith hernandez about dusty baker and the state of the reds. full disclosure: keith is a friend of dusty's. but, being the a gentleman he is, would say nothing more than cincinnati is a 'tough town.' i gained some insight, and i'll leave it at that. could be i've done interviews with rays execs about 'uncle charlie,' and the secretiveness surrounding their system. could be i've work over 100 games a year in mlb since 2000. so, you like to insult people's intelligence. it's what you do. it's why that 'baltimore' thread of yours was so short lived, and probably why you felt compelled to bring up the race thing out of thin air on this thread. ego? you have to understand yourself first 1507, before you make judgements of others.

the reds had some winning seasons, but the question is: did wally have them on the right path moving forward? the answer is a resounding 'NO.' they were on the path to self destruction. did you read the humphrey article? i certainly don't consider his article to be gospel, but it was objective. btw, i've done a lot of comparisons on this board. he doesn't take sides in the mozeliak v. jocketty debate. as i've written before, and humphrey charts, it's a organizational philosophy difference spearheaded by the gm. you reference trade deadlines as if those were sound and viable options in the development of a team. that's the same kind of thinking that got the reds where they are now. 'plug - ins.' more 'plug - ins.' this is where it gets real sketchy. wally's signings have been made from a smaller pool of available talent than most other gm's. this is a fact. he has opted -mostly- to sign players that had played for him in the past. as well, wally woke up too late with drafting pitchers in the first round, after he traded three of his first four #1 picks, which is indicative of what the priority hierarchy was. that one decision has had a devastating effect on the reds. take a real close look at december 2014. how did the reds find themselves in a position where they would sign marquis and gregg? they did it. it's over. i get it. but, how in the world did they get there? current market structure? you work smartly within those parameters. i'm talking about an overall approach by the red's gm that has failed. it was set up that way. a so-called 're-build' should not be necessary. of course it's hindsight, but i've also been watching very closely, since 2000, through an actual lens.

 

[eburg5000]

Reading all this is interesting, there is more said in these last 3 or 4 post than I have posted in the 2 years I've been on this board or 4yrs I was on the CBS board. To sum it all up... This team is a mess. and is going swiftly in the wrong direction. And were all wondering who's at fault. The Common

 

[eburg5000]

I always thought you had to hit post, to post. Any way the Common ground here is we all agree that Jocketty is partially the problem.

 

[JohnU]

Of course the GM is partly the problem. The GM is, as I understand it, the guy who procures talent at the top level and generally oversees the drafting and signing of new prospects. It's not all luck, and it's not all skill either. Many a great player didn't get past the first shoulder separation or line drive to the middle of the forehead.

We aren't talking about a freak show. The nature of high-level professional sports is to score when the iron is hot or make hay while it's raining in Seattle. Something of that nature.

We all observe and discuss, and we read what other non-expert experts tell us about who is the best. The St. Louis GM looks like a darling now because Matheny and his staff have turned a contender into a dynamo. They ain't won nothin' yet this year.

Houston roared out of the gate. The season is half over.

We discuss farm systems as if they are the solution. I don't need a farm *system* as much as I need to find a couple of guys every year or so who can play big-league baseball at a high level. One Votto every other season will be just right.

Occasionally, you end up with a Barry Zito or Jason Marquis. Rarely do you get Jose Fernandez, who will likely pitch another 18 games and end up like a billion other guys. Poor mechanics.

All along, we spend time deciding who is the problem and who should be sent in to provide the solution. I am only seeing half of this conversation. Hiring a new GM won't fix Cozart's ACL and it won't help Hamilton learn to bunt. Leake will still throw 88s at the letters and Jumbo Diaz will never grow slim.

The solution is to replace these men with other men who might not be as bad. If they are much better, the teams who have them are likely to be reluctant to release them from their contracts.

If you win 16 games a month, you are going to win a divisional title. The GM can't get that done.

For 2016-7-8-9 ... pffffffffffffffffffffffffft ... I am not all that interested right now.

 

[JohnU]

How-ev-er ... on the deal with Gregg and Marquis, my thinking at the time was that Marquis was only supposed to get a couple of starts until Bailey was ready. That made cheap sense in April when starters only go 5 innings anyhow. So signing an old vet for that reason is probably not a bad thing. Bailey just didn't get past the hump.

Gregg, no clue on him other than somebody maybe thought he was better than LeCure. But he was jettisoned early enough, all in all.

How these guys get into camp is probably no different than any other camp that signs old vets for spring fodder. We just don't pay attention to most of them. As a rule, these guys get DFA sooner than the Reds did, but the spring pitching was a disaster. I blame more of that on Price than on Walt.

 

[chico ruiz]

johnu - i liked your 'announcers' thread. i was going to respond, but got too busy. anyway, that post is exactly what i was referring to when i mentioned 'cover-up' by reds media, with respect to the reds gm's failures. not some sinister pre-meditated watergate kind of thing, but, a go along to get along sing-song of 'jingoisms,' as you put it. perhaps it would have been better to write, mediocrity feeds mediocrity. but, on second thought, that wouldn't have been the truth. whether it's conscious or not, it's still covering up the reality. the willful suspension of disbelief.

however, the post just above this one is really unbelievable. the key words in your post are 'cheap,' 'sense,' 'old,' 'different,' and my personal favorite, 'fodder.' if you think 3 million bucks is cheap, then cheap they were. signing either one of them made no sense. unless, of course you consider the 11th hour trades at the winter meetings the month before. but, that's another success story for another time. neither one is pitching in mlb. that's what the other 29 mlb teams thought about those two hope & a prayer old vets. it was different from how the other teams signed older free agent vets, and i do pay attention to most of them. first, marquis was tabbed as the fourth or fifth starter with, or without, bailey. if bailey stayed healthy, the reds had marquis slotted as the #5 starter. this was obvious from the second week of spring. they had him slotted right behind leake for all the spring training games. management made their minds up early that marquis was going to be in the rotation. that's what was so egregious and downright insulting. he wasn't, as you say, 'spring fodder.' he was one of the reds five starters. i don't know how you can candy coat this at all. no other teams had any real interest in signing marquis or gregg. they kicked the tires and moved down the boulevard to the next used lot. are you just taking an opposing view to be contradictory. this is the kind of stuff on this board that can be maddening. to add insult to injury, the reds had designs on gregg being a vital part of a bridge to chapman. i mean holy leaping shitballs john! go back and look at the box scores. you're post underscores my point about the impervious nature of wally so vividly that no more words are required.

 

[JohnU]

First off, I don't have to attempt to evaluate what the dugout staff intended. I know that Raisel Iglesias was discussed strongly last fall as a rotation pitcher. I assume that was contingent on some things that had to happen in the Arizona winter league.

Do I believe Marquis was being counted on to be in the rotation? No I do not believe he was beyond being available, reasonably healthy and a guy who had no innings governor on his arm.

I not only looked at box scores, I watched the games. What I intend to do is avoid getting into pissing matches over what the GM did or did not intend to do. I wasn't in on the fucking meetings. If you want to lecture people about your self-satisfied insight, have an ice day.

Evidently you take some delight in projecting yourself as some sort of guru who can condescend on everyone who doesn't Xerox your point of view. I never was intimidated by that shit, so feel free to admire your own self-worth, "Chico."

 

[chico ruiz]

i'm sorry you feel that way john. i really am. for the most part, i've enjoyed our repartee, and have always tried to avoid personal attacks unless prompted. even then, i attempt measured responses. it gets ugly on these boards occasionally. i'm sure you will agree with that. perhaps i am a little overly zealous on the gm subject. i've been trying to make a over arching point about walt, and these boards, that goes back 5 years. i could choose my words more carefully, but -in all sincerity- i do not intend to condescend or attempt intimidation. especially with you. i wouldn't feel good about myself doing that. i guess wally's lack of innovation has me more annoyed than usual these last few weeks. actually, it's more slack-jawed bewilderment. i've been rendered discombobulated. hence, the effort through cyber counseling to figure out what the f**k he's been thinking! no need to xerox that.

 

[JohnU]

To begin with, let's step out into the sunlight and look around.
Miami lost its billion-dollar man for the season and has no answer for it.
The Mets are wringing their hands because their short-term ace tore a lat. They are clueless now.
The Nationals "cancelled" a game with the Reds because they are unable to replace a couple of guys who are not hurt enough to be on the 60-day DL. The word was, that rainout was just because their GM had no real idea about how to find a full useful roster.
St. Louis is showing a couple of weak links now that their other ace, Garcia, is going to miss a month.
The teams that so far are not hurting are playing just about .510 or below, except maybe the Pirates who haven't hit their wall yet. If they lose Cole or Liriano, where goest the Parrots?
None of this is particularly useful news but it does demonstrate that most, if not all, GMs are beholden to the market, the players' agents and the whims of the other 29 organizations. It's not like, "I need something for that corner," so I toddle off to Menards and buy a 10-foot rubber tree plant and my problem has been resolved.
To get to the point, Walt's strategy is questionable only to the point that the players he has obtained have failed to produce at desired levels. That is data received. We could possibly have seen at the time (I was a very big critic) that the Latos trade was poorly entertained, but Mesoraco was considered more useful than Grandal (is he?) and Volquez was gonna bolt anyway. Alonso refused to find a new position. Boxberger just got the deal done, as the El Birdos guy asserted in his analysis (which I read despite the bewildering charts).
In summary, replacing the GM will be easy enough. We know what went wrong. What we do not know is if a new GM has the tools or talent to modify that ... or where it will go after that.
I think replacing the manager now is pointless but could have mattered in March.
Cincy's future as a franchise is stable and what success it shows will probably be consistent with club history. There's a 5-in-126 chance of winning the World Series. Being competitive depends more on the players than the front office. This is NOT a bad baseball team. I can identify things that would make it better.
Mistakes are easy to identify. The bullpen problem should have been addressed, but thinking that the relief corps will earn a spot in spring training is sound, fiscally and fundamentally. Sadly, that's on the pitchers. They were the ones who let Kevin Gregg beat them out. Badenhop is a bewildering problem.
Yes, Marquis was a cheap alternative to burning a young arm. I want the back end of the rotation to go out every 5th day and give me a chance to make the other team work a little. Cincy's rotation problem was compounded by not having Bailey, which brought in the rookie Lorenzen and let Marquis move into the 3 slot behind Leake, who really is a 4 pitcher, not a 2 guy. Cueto, Leake and Bailey are good enough, usually.
DeSlafani was a surprise but he has done what he was expected to do.
What murdered this team was its inability to hit. Having Marquis move into the THREE slot in the rotation was the coffin nail.
Could we, should we, have anticipated that? Maybe.
Moving forward, I see three pretty good young arms and maybe a fourth with Stephenson, who has walked 40-some guys in 80-some innings.
Who knows what the Cueto trade brings.
The other problem is that the Reds are facing three ascendant teams -- Birds, Parrots and Cubs. The NL-C is going to be very difficult to win, but it's going to be competitive, which is what we all want. Frankly, how the season is scheduled has ruined it for me -- playing 20-some divisional games in April.
Another topic.
So without evaluating the metrics beyond what I have observed, the GM should get what he deserves -- and almost none of them are winning anything.

 

[chico ruiz]

that's all well and good. staying in the present. i like that, and for my part, i won't interpret 'stepping into the sunshine and looking around' as being condescending. i apologize for tone & style, not content or substance. i won't back-off my assertions that jocketty is a below average mlb executive who has done more harm than good in his stint with cincinnati. you mention -almost exclusively- injuries, and the quagmire that puts gm's in mid-season. that just happens and has nothing to do with my criticisms of jocketty. absolutely nothing. when this board criticized reds medical staff, for the most part, i did not respond other than the dentist / gary nolan post, which was meant to bring humor to a bad situation. the mid-season injuries & dl's are not germane to jocketty's shortcomings. i don't expect wally to pull-off some miraculous trade or pick-up at a time of year when only a handful of clubs have the wherewithal to do so. that has never been part of my criticism. recently i've been critical of the marquis and gregg signings. but, and much more importantly, what iv'e been most critical of is how jocketty could put the reds in the position of having to sign them. it's not as much about the moves he's made, as it is the ones he hasn't. i hope that the rest of this post clarifies, without snobbery (with humility), my viewpoint.

it seems to me you have to know where you've been to get where you want to go. i would have expected wally to refine what krivsky had built, and learned some lessons from his redbird days. nobody likes getting fired, but you have to be adaptable, self-aware, and open enough to see where you failed and correct it. all successful execs say the same thing. they weren't afraid to fail. they learned from them, and did not repeat them. the what 'they learned' part being the most important.

if the objective was to bring a gm in who would take the existing roster and produce a serious contender for 2 or 3 years then i guess wally was your man. if, on the other hand, you wanted someone vested in keeping the prospect, and your minors, vital and stocked, or to tweak the entire system to build and implement continued success with very achievable goals like: strengthening the farm system with an eye on development? something is not right down there. other team's prospects are coming up mlb-ready at a higher rate, and is why they don't have the depth problems the reds do. that is a wally failing. it's hard to ignore that one as a serious fan. other than the pitching prospects, can you name one position player in the reds system that has been developed well enough to make a mlb impact soon? this year? next year? maybe 2017?

looking at jocketty's job with the reds on the whole, i can distill my critique of him down to this. his plan has and does not work. it is not organizationally balanced in it's approach to building a roster. a plan. a long range plan put in place despite and necessarily working within modern mlb financial constraints and limitations. the good gm's do it with less money at their disposal. stick with the plan / approach and set the bar high for sustainable continued success ( a .500+ team). wally walked into a very good situation in 2008, and he only has 3 winning seasons out of eight. i understand that is not completely fair to jocketty. players, managers, ownership, injuries, etc all are accountable. you can't turn back the clock. i get it. but, the very nature of the gm job allows (demands) it be critiqued on what he did or did not do 5 years ago because it directly reflects the here and now. in the end, it is about wins. it's the only stat that really counts, and the gm sets and maintains the bar. i don't think you should ever settle for a club history of averaged wins. that's a trend you should aim to buck. if other teams can do it by adapting, innovation, and resourcefulness, my feeling is, than so can mine. why not?

i think sporting news has him ranked #28 out of 30. writers hold grudges and tend to be more forgiving of gms, managers, and players they like, but it's food for thought. i tend not to put much stock in popularity contests or baseball writers in general. i use them as references. i do my own research and form my own opinions. walt jocketty is simply not a good gm who has adapted much too slowly to modern baseball realities that were in place long before he was hired by the reds. however, and believe this or not, i'm not calling for jocketty's firing. i mean, what the hell, it's too late now anyway. maybe the old dog can learn a few tricks. he might have buried a bone somewhere nobody can find it. reds fans definitely need to get him out of the basement, and put a flea collar on him though. a little mangy. he's not going to like this, but you need to clip his nails too. no leash and no electric fence. he might remember where those bones are.

 

[JohnU]

I am no supporter of the Reds GM, but I am not as inclined to lay all of it as his feet and pass blame as though he were Nostradamus ... if a long-range plan had begun as you apparently assume should have been, the current Reds talent should have been identified 8 years ago -- or when most of them were just entering junior high school.

I think you are still be somewhat "umbrella" in saying "other teams" are bringing up young prospects and succeeding without looking at the Reds, who have brought in Iglesias, Lorenzen and DeSclafani just this year. These are pitchers, prone to mistakes and growing pains -- but all three have shown to have MLB stuff.

All teams are successful at some point in bringing in young talent, even the Phils who have Maikel Franco as a legit player. Atlanta simply unloaded. Houston has done the same. San Diego did not.

Perhaps I overlook somebody, but every team in the NL-C has brought in an up-and-comer. So it's not like the Reds have been completely barren. Arguably, Hamilton, Chapman, Cozart, Frazier and Barnhart, Mesoraco to a point, are the products of the Jocketty regime. A few kids in the minors we have yet to see ....

The mistakes, as I've said, are easier to identify because they come at much higher cost. Ludwick, Hannahan, the current bullpen debacle ... Marshall, Jimbo Diaz, the other tin soldiers ...

On the discussion about Walt's plan, it didn't work because, mainly the Reds just failed to win. I don't see a component between 2010 and 2013 that could have changed that, though the consensus by the "experts" is that Marlon Byrd should have been gotten in '13. Walt said Ludwick was better, already signed and would be back from the DL. Oddly, in the play-in game against the Parrots, it was Ludwick who had the only real offense that night. Lud was a dud, for sure, overall. Tough break. The Choo deal was lauded, as I recall.

I guess I just don't grasp your assertion that the ownership group had any reason to build a working long-range plan in a market that could simply not be identified at the time. I have no idea what the team thought it could spend in 2008 to go from 90 losses to 90 wins. Please, if a backward glance allows you to evaluate that, I can see how it entertains ... but it's hardly useful.

In 2010, the Reds had Cueto, Harang, Arroyo, Volquez, Votto, Bruce ... and Stubbs, who they thought was a talent ... Phillips was young, and there were pieces in the pipeline. Give me that core and I will win a lot of games.

If I find fault, it's that I think the Reds have depended too much on short-term fixes and if that makes Jocketty suspect, I agree. Byrd has acquitted himself in left field. The pitchers have not. Watching yesterday's embarrassment, a wholesale look at the state of the pitching staff is in order.

But we knew that anyway when Latos and Simon were dealt, Cueto and Leake were not signed ... how this team fares in the future is still driven by the market. This is not all on the GM. The scouting system has to work, and I cannot say if it has or not. One presumes that 3 rookie starters is a marker in the ground.

Again, building a team to contend forever and ever is a Yankees philosophy. It's fun to fantasize about that but it's folly if you think a GM is going to guarantee it. Almost no team in recent history has achieved that over a period of more than 3 or 4 years. St. Louis is the exception and perhaps the ONE component to this discussion that fuels the anti-Walt talk. If St. Louis just played ordinary off and on, we'd have no reason to bitch about why the Reds GM used to work for them.

To that end, the Reds have already achieved success over a 3-5 year period ... and most of the failure has come under Bryan Price's leadership.

I structure my opinions about baseball in lots of ways, but the rankings by advertiser-driven sports publications are, at best, amusing to me.

I just need a name or two of somebody who is likely to be better ... and should we start designing a W.S. ring now?

This is not a defense of Walt, but it is a disagreement over whether the GM is the bloodstream of the problem. It's simplistic to blame him for it. The Reds as an organization have not failed. Attendance is up, they spent millions upgrading the ballpark. The downtown area is a destination, not a necessary evil. Cincy gets high marks.

Winning on the field is the part we see. I don't see how the GM could have fixed yesterday's embarrassment but I do think the manager needs to be accountable for that.

 

[eburg5000]

I am not a fan of Jocketty, but isn't the owner partly responsible? Jocketty doesn't make a move without his approval.

 

[JohnU]

I would guess the owner has a grand plan and probably has a budget that needs to work.
Otherwise, if he isn't hiring baseball people to do baseball work, yes ... he is the problem.