Krivsky rumors

by jamesp50014 on Aug 30, 2007 10:21 AM EDT Comment 42 comments

I read on ESPN or Fox today that Krivsky's status for next year is in doubt, which (according to what I read) partially explains why they are waiting to decide on Mackanin. Krivsky has had a few ups and downs, but I can't seriously think his job is in jeopardy, not yet. He's only been on the job 18 months. Love him or hate him, that's hardly enough time to decide to fire him. I say he gets one more year--at least.

But let's say he does get fired. Who are the candidates to replace him? As in, seriously, who is out there who would fit well with the Reds?

Poll

Who replaces Krivsky?

Kim Ng

6 votes

Paul DePodesta

13 votes

Tim Purpura

1 votes

first-time GM only

4 votes

experienced GM only

7 votes

Jim Beattie

3 votes

Dan O'Brien

2 votes

36 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 42 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

can we get a link?

"I can't seriously think his job is in jeopardy" are f-ing you kidding me?

www.eastwind.org

by ewquinn on Aug 30, 2007 10:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

If it isn't John Schuerholz

or Dayton Moore, then I don't know how much it matters, because we'll be taking a chance on whoever does get hired.

Personally, I like the sound of Kim Ng. That would be a nice tip of the hat to old Marge, and I hear she's a tough, skillful negotiator.

"I'd walk through hell in a gasoline suit to play baseball" - Pete Rose

by Officer Dibble on Aug 30, 2007 10:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Kim Ng will play well in Cincy

I voted for her, even though I know next to nothing about her.

Paul DePodesta interests me (big surprise). The best things the Dodgers have going for them happened under his brief regime (the controversial Penny trade). On the other hand he supposedly had serious issues dealing with people. It's hard to tell how much of that is computer-geek spin from the media who greeted him with hatchets, but it looks to be his biggest fault.

Where have you gone Webb Alert chick?

by Red Menace on Aug 30, 2007 10:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

RE: Miss thaNg..

Marty'd looove that.

I think she'd be unhappily greeted at her new office by the zombified corpse Cincinnati's original baseball babe.

"Honey, like Singer said: 'Where are you from?'"

by Fat Vegas Alan on Aug 30, 2007 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

And she'd probably marvel at how well Kim Ng spoke English too.

My usual answer to that is, "And you speak English so well too!"

If Krivsky doesn't exercise Adam Dunn's 2008 option, I'm a Mets fan until they fire him.

by Paul Householder on Aug 30, 2007 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ng

It ain't easy being female in a front office, let alone an Asian female. She's a U Chicago grad but I'm not sure how saber-friendly she is. She was interviewed by BPro a while back. She seems business-sharp, but I have no idea how she is as a talent evaluator.

by ken on Aug 30, 2007 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ESPN First Take Reporter

Juan Rodriguez says he talked with Sweaterpants over the weekend about Pete. Sweaterpants says he is impressed with how Pete has used the bullpen and the way the team has played, and that no one would be surprised if he came back next year.

So based on that, if sweaterpants is around Pete is the manager for '08.

If the Reds are tied with the Cubs/Brewers/Cardnials when there is 5 games left in the season. Zach will join the band wagon

by Zach K on Aug 30, 2007 10:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I just...

vomited in my mouth.

by artvandelay on Aug 30, 2007 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wayne's a plugger.

by Fat Vegas Alan on Aug 30, 2007 10:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Just ask Jim Day

I vote for boobs :)

Has the game started yet?

by Madville on Aug 30, 2007 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

fuck the heck?

wayner's job better be in jeopardy. i get the feeling it is. an easy decision such as "should we pick up dunn's extension year?" should have been made a loooooong time ago. dunn has had a career of career years, and this is the most of career year of his career. the only reason for the way it has played out is that Bob has reservations about the man making the decision (and rightfully so, in my humble yet esteemed opinion).

at least this isnt pittsburgh

by Charlie Scrabbles on Aug 30, 2007 11:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I would love DePo.

Just sayin'.

by Geki on Aug 30, 2007 11:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Why?

Why all the DePodesta man-love?

He wasn't very successful in LA at all. I know he fits the Moneyball profile, but on paper, I don't think he's much to write home about.

by bobestes on Aug 30, 2007 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

DePodesta love

Depo gets martyr cred for the way he was taken down by the media and ownership. A couple years removed his moves look very good. He got crucified for Loduca-Penny and for not resigning Adrian Beltre, both of which look brilliant now. His signings of Lowe, Kent and Drew also look good (some argue that Drew's opt-out was a smart inclusion from the team's POV). Here's a recent article that calls him the best GM currently available.

Where have you gone Webb Alert chick?

by Red Menace on Aug 30, 2007 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

DePo

Pretty much every move he got fired for has worked out great. Meanwhile, the Dodgers are paying big money for Juan Pierre and Nomar Garciaparra. They could use DePodesta.

by Geki on Aug 31, 2007 1:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Others...

I think Beattie would be top of Castellini's list. He's in the organization now and they are buddies.

But doesn't Jockettey's name still need to be floating out there? I wouldn't want him, but he does have a WS ring.

If you get one of the Beane/Alderson disciples like DePo, he may build you an intriguing team, but the feast or famine of that style might prove too hard for many Reds fans. It's clear LA wasn't ready for it, you all think Cincinnati would be?

by jambolyajones on Aug 30, 2007 12:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think Cincinnati has already..

..grown pretty comfortable with "or famine."

by Fat Vegas Alan on Aug 30, 2007 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

DePodesta

I put DeP on the list in part because his tenure was a short one...roughly the length of Krivsky's current tenure in Cincinnati. Also, he made a number of moves that have worked out well for the Dodgers, long after his firing (Mota and LoDuca for Penny is looking pretty sweet about now). DeP seemed to depart due to some sort of disagreement with management, yes?

As for Krivsky, he's made some dumb moves and I question some of the tinkering he's done with the Reds' roster, especially in the area of the 24th/25th man. I think he's also not a great interview. But he's also brought in some good (a couple of them verging on great) players, let's not forget it. And the Reds' resurgance under Mackanin might indicate that the Reds were mismanaged under Narron. Listen, I agree with those of you who think that that Krivsky should be under intense scrutiny. And that the record this year sucks and so the scrutiny is going to be more negative than positive, deservedly so. But I do think he deserves another year. What good does it do to fire another GM after two years, especially when the team actually overachieved in one of those years? That's the other thing. I want to know what you all think: fire Krivsky (which I could see happening, potentially), then what? His detractors cheer and then we all start over again. One more year to see what he can do.

Anyway, I think he should pick up Dunn's option, too. He's having the best year of his career thus far, and it's pretty damned good.

by jamesp50014 on Aug 30, 2007 1:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

And the winner is.....

Krivsky is at a critical juncture, to say the least. This year has been a big disapointment, to say the least.
But if you look at the whole picture of the Reds' system, there is definently more talent in the minors and the Bigs than there was 5 years ago.
But Wayner has had a real problem making objective and correct decisions about pitching talent. And this is what he gets payed the big bucks for. This is also, largely, the downfall of Bowden and O'Brien.

Exhibit A: Joe Mays (ha! fooled you! thought I was gonna say Stanton).
Exhibit B: Esteban Yan
Exhibit C: The Trade!!!!!!
Exhibit D: Cormier
Exhibit E: Eddy Guardado

And of course

Exhibit F (for really effing up): Stanton

All this crappy talent has passed through Cincy since the start of the Bad Sweater (BS) regime. So don't whip out the universal trump card of "Arroyo", because he ain't that great a shake this year, either.

Wayner either makes the right talent choices for next year's pitching staff, or he should be gone.

And frankly, I wouldn't be upset if they brought back Brad Kuhlman. His talent choices were not all bad (Jose Guillen for Aaron Harang, Joe Valentine, etc.)

Witless as usual

by Lonesome George on Aug 30, 2007 1:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't know, guys.

Folks get upset with the acquisition of the Yans and Mays of the world when the GM simply is trying to catch lightning in a bottle, throwing something against the wall and seeing if it sticks, or any other cliches we like to use.

Every team does this. Look at the Cardinals last year. From Nov. 2005 through the end of the 2006 season, they brought in the following:

Timo Perez, Will Cunane, Jorge Sosa, Ron Belliard, Jeff Weaver, Jose Vizcaino, Gary Bennett, Deivi Cruz, Preston Wilson, Michel Hernandez, Larry Bigbie, Juan Encarnacion, Sidney Ponson, Braden Looper, Ricardo Rincon and Aaron Miles.

I know it's somewhat apples and oranges, but is that group any better than what Krivsky brought to Cincinnati? Is is even as good?

Unless you're the Yankees or Red Sox, you're probably going to have some fringy guys on the 40-man roster who at some point wind up on the 25-man roster for a while. Esteban Yan didn't help the Reds win the pennant, but he didn't cost them the title, either.

Sure, I've thought some of Krivsky's moves were curious, but I think he's well on the plus side of the ledger for now. I think he deserves another year.

We Are ... Marshall!

by Thundering Turtle on Aug 30, 2007 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Back at ya!

T-Turtle,

You are, of course, being reasonable, logical and correct.
However, Jocketty has also produced some very fine Cardinal teams in the last few years, when he has had time to think about personnel and make measured moves. When was the last year the Red's finished above 0.500? 2000.
Krivsky has made some very shrewd and clever moves, ASIDE from his judgments about pitching:
Pena for Arroyo (pitching move!)
Brandon Phillips
Josh Hamilton
Scott Hatteberg
Jorge Cantu (this could be a really good one)
Jared Burton (pitching move)
Marcus McBeth (for Denorfia, on the DL all year!)

And several other good moves (his trade of Lohse was probably, on the net, a good move, both coming and going), and some minor league aquisitions, bolstering the system from within.
He's not stupid or incompetent. But he has got to stop choosing short term band aids in getting "veteran presence" instead of genuine talent and ability, however raw and inexperienced.
He was, indeed trying to throw crap against the wall to see if anything would stick (as a lot of GM's do in desparate situations), but couldn't make the right talent judgement in return for talent given (and you know about that transaction which shall not be named that is perpetually discussed).
He should have the off-season to sort out the Red's talent, and fix prior mistakes. But if the pitching is in the same boat next year as this, he should be canned. IMHO, that is.

Witless as usual

by Lonesome George on Aug 30, 2007 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Link

Here is the Fox Sports story I was referring to. Krivsky first gets mentioned in a section about a potential shakeup of NL Central GMs. Then, in the next section, there is a line about how the uncertainty at GM is affecting the managerial decision. However, this is sourceless material, so take it as such:

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7163794

by jamesp50014 on Aug 30, 2007 2:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Krivsky

I have lurked and followed the discussions on here for a long time and finally joined. And what moved me to join was frustration. Not in Krivsky. But in seeing everyone's unrealistic expectations of a GM. Krivsky has had one offseason to work with. He's had 1-2 drafts. The first draft has to be a difficult one to grade because setting up the scouting system in his way is not a turnkey operation. So it might be the case that this year was the first Krivsky draft.

He cannot spend big on free agents. He cannot acquire large contracts--not to say he has the assets to get those guys anyway.

Anyone who thinks that building a playoff caliber team can be done in such a short time frame is absolutely nuts. The fact that he is excoriated for "throwing dung at a wall and see if it sticks" moves is ridiculous.

He got burnt on the Majewski trade because of shady dealing by Bowden. But the value of the players he has given up is seriously overrated here. I thought Kearns would be a star but he's not. He's an average major league player right now at best. And the chances of him becoming better are not high. This is not his 2nd or 3rd year. He's been around a good while now.

Lopez? Poor fielder. Not an incredible hitter. He's got pop for a SS but he is not a difference maker at the plate and he is not a plus player in the field. And Krivsky's philosophy revolves around pitching and fielding. It takes a long time to build the pitching. But he's turning over the fielding part more quickly. Our defense has been much better much of the year.

To my mind, no other move has been even arguably a negative. Some moves were non-factors like the Lohse deal and the aforementioned "see what sticks" moves. Others have been home runs. From Hobbs to Burton to Phillips to Arroyo (even with a poor first half), he's had some real sharp moves. Cormier? Stanton? Non factors. They DFA's Cormier. At least he tried and Cormier had great numbers last year. Stanton? I disagreed with the move but who did we have that he could count on last offseason?

Bottom line: in this website, on C. Trent's blog and elsewhere, I have seen a stunning lack of perspective from Reds fans. Impatience with Krivsky is the biggest issue that has irked me. I think he's getting a raw deal in Cincy.

by Jay on Aug 30, 2007 4:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

heh

"Stanton? Non factors."

That is really funny. Really, really funny.

We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. --Oscar Wilde

by JD Arney on Aug 30, 2007 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

JD

I do enjoy the site by the way. But by non-factor I mean that the alternative was no better and in this case might have been worse. I thought Stanton was pretty much on the down slope but he had a good year last year and relievers are so variable from year to year that you never really know for sure. But think about last winter and who we had in the bullpen and Krivsky was faced with giving kids he didn't believe much in a shot or signing a vet to eat innings and hopefully be somewhat successful. He took a shot and had to give him multiple years. Again, a move I disagree with but within the context of other moves, the market and his team and farm system, I think it's far from the offense it's made out to be.

by Jay on Aug 30, 2007 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Stanton

It's the contract that bothers me, just so we are clear. I'm guessing it's why the Reds didn't cut bait this year, even though it's obvious to absolutely everyone (and has been at least since the second or third month of the season) that Stanton is a major liability.

Krivsky didn't have to give Stanton two years unless you believe there were other teams competing for his services, which is possible I guess, but if so then Krivsky should have known better because of Stanton's age. He didn't, and it's cost the Reds pretty badly this year. Not the difference between playoffs and no playoffs, but the entire thing is a decision that a competent GM would have made differently.

We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. --Oscar Wilde

by JD Arney on Aug 30, 2007 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and further

Krivsky started with someone elses manager. And after last years success for the better part of the year, Narron was coming back. Krivsky had no choice. The add on years might have been unwise but who is to say whose fault that was? Krivsky or Castellini? And given that they did ax him this year, it didn't stop them from making a move to someone else. Now, assuming that Krivsky will be able to pick the next manager and won't be saddled with someone else, he'll have his team in place in scouting and on the field.

by Jay on Aug 30, 2007 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree that at some points we

lack good perspective on thing with regards to the GM but in such examples as Stanton he threw him aganist the wall didn't stick and is still pitching for us. i think the list that was given with fringe players that the cards had is pretty comparable to what we had in some aspsects the difference is how many of those players are still on the cards roster and being used in roles similiar that Stanton has been allowed to be used. I don't mind Wayne throwing shit at the wall but when it dosen't stick get rid of it and thats the difference and where I have a problem with how Wayne has operated in keeping some of these players too long. The same thing happened with Mays he started 6 games with us and after probably the 3rd it had to be obvious he wasn't going to help us.

by OURob on Aug 30, 2007 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And why can't get get rid of Stanton?

Because he signed an older reliever to a silly two-year contract that's not exactly chump change. That's part of Kriv's problem, too, not being able to price talent correctly.

Caveat: He gets credit for the great Harang contract. I do think, however, the media's Harang blackout helped.

"Two Dunn's enter, but only one Dunn will leave...unless neither do because they decide to play cards, drink beer, golf, and fish."--SlydeFrog

by Man Mountain on Aug 30, 2007 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Do not forget...

Keeping three catchers on the roster, none of which was Johnny Bench, Ivan Rodriguez or Mike Piazza.
Keeping the "non-factor" Stanton in the bullpen for 47.2 innings and 59 appearances of 1.72 baserunners per inning and losing games for the Reds when guys like Burton or anyone else with a future with the Reds should have been getting more of a shot. Also, why send down Coutlangus and keep Stanton? Krivsky said it was because Coutlangus was walking too many people, when his WHIP was actually lower than Stanton's. It gives me the impression that he just doesn't know his personnel.
The Cormier trade was done for Justin Germano, who is now pitching pretty darned average for the Padres (which is actually quite valuable, if you figure you could plug him in for the Lizard or name your 5th starter crap guy).
He let Brendan Harris go for basically nothing (and don't give the argument that he was let go in order to get Hamilton--the two things were not connected).
He signed Juan Castro to a two-year contract with a club option for 2009 when he could have used Keppinger or Harris in the same spot.
He let Cody Ross go for basically nothing. Think we could have used a righthanded power-hitting outfielder instead of Ellison?
The Trade, which would have been a bad trade, even if McJeffsky and Bray were healthy.
Thus far, he has not drafted well. Jay Bruce and Homer Bailey were Dan O'Brien's responsibility.

Now I would not say that he is the worst GM I have ever seen, but he does have a lot of bad outweighing the good that he has done.

Overall, if he can manage to assemble a somewhat better bullpen this offseason (beginning with Bray, Burton, Weathers and McJeffsky as his building blocks), add a #3 starting pitcher and exercise the option on Dunn's contract, I would not call for him to be fired. He does deserve the chance to try again this offseason. How is that for perspective?

If Krivsky doesn't exercise Adam Dunn's 2008 option, I'm a Mets fan until they fire him.

by Paul Householder on Aug 30, 2007 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm sorry, but you're wrong

Krivsky has, on a number of occasions made moves that ranked anywhere from bad to "he should be tarred and feathered" bad. Let's just look at this year's roster:

Ross: Hey, Krivsky picked him up off the scrap heap, and Ross responded with a career year. So what did Krivsky do? Reward him like he'd continue to hit like that - 2 yrs, $4.5M. Ross is hitting worse than ever.

Hatteberg: Good pickup. However, he absolutely should have been traded in July. The Reds' best hitting prospect is the exact same player (only 14 years younger). So now, it's (1) dump Votto, (2) delay Votto for no good reason, or (3) lose Hatte and get nothing in return. That's just stupid.

Phillips: Remember, he was brought in to be part of the "throw it at the wall" experiment with Womak and Aurilia at 2B. Given BP's history, Krivsky's lying if he says he thought BP would turn out like this.

EdE: The way Krivsky and Narron have treated him is criminal. Take out The Trade, take out the overaged, overpriced relievers, take out the fodder that masquerades as "4th outfielders" on this team, and Krivsky should still be fired simply for his treatment of Eddie. It pisses me off just writing about it.

Dunn: Why has Krivsky not made what should have been the easiest decision he has to make? Why is there any question if Dunn's option is picked up?

Conine: He lucked out. Again, there is no reason for him to be on our roster Aug. 1. What would have happened if someone had claimed him off waivers - we would have been stuck with a 41 year-old who'd already said this is his last year, thus again getting nothing for him.

Moeller: DFA'd twice, and brought back. The guy's never, ever hit, he's no longer a good defensive catcher, yet Krivsky thought it vital to carry 3 catchers most of the year (and leave the bench barren of PH).

Castro: The guy's one of the worst hitters in MLB history, so Krivsky gave him a 2 year deal.

Ellison: It's not Krivsky's fault that Mackanin is starting Ellison instead of Dunn, but it is his fault that Ellison is on the roster, giving Pete the option. Oh, and Ellison's career OPS vs. LHP is .734, while Dunn's (who has to sit so Ellison can play) is .835.

Stanton: ERA+ the last 4 seasons: 93, 135, 89, 111. And he's 40 years old. Why in the world would you give this guy a 2 yr/$5.5M contract???

Cormier: I know he's not on the roster, but he's being paid $2.75M to sit at home. Another nice signing of a 40 year old reliever to a multi-year contract.

Majewski: Krivsky says, "The Nats didn't tell me about his shoulder". Bowden says, "We gave him everything he asked for". Remember, those two statements are not mutually exclusive.

Coutlangus: The one decent (and decently dependable) arm in the bullpen was optioned to bring up Majewski. Explain that one.

Meanwhile, a couple of guys not on the team:

Brenden Harris: Keep him, don't sign AGon (whose defense was vastly overrated, as we've seen), and save $15M. Especially since he was such a pivotal part of The Trade (per Krivsky).

Justin Germano: 20 starts, 4.25 ERA (97 ERA+). Traded for Rheal F. Cormier. Oh, and he's only 24 (same as Livingson, younger than Doumatrait).

Josh Hancock (RIP): Too fat for Wayne, but good enough to help the Cards win it all last year.

If it was one or two moves (or just the one really, really bad move), I might agree with you that we tend to be too harsh on Krivsky. But time and time and time again, he makes moves that most grade school kids would tell you are dumb.

just....wow.

by sidnancy on Aug 30, 2007 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some good points.

However:

Ross is valuable even with the poor bat. Catchers are hard to come by and he's valuable behind the plate.

Hatteberg I'm fine with. Likely wouldn't have brought much more than Conine did in a trade. Afterall, the only teams that picked up a 1B in a trade were Atlanta (Teixeira) and LA (Mark Sweeney). Tex isn't a comparable trade and Sweeney brought a low-level 2B prospect in return. Is Votto ready? Call him up in September and find out.

Phillips. Great pickup, the kind a GM of a team such as the Reds should make. Talented and young but hadn't put it together until he got to Cincinnati. If you can get a player like that for nothing, you do it. Krivsky did.

Encarnacion. I've personally never been sold on him, but I admit I'd sure like to have seen enough of him to prove me wrong.

Dunn. I agree. Pick up the option. No brainer.

Conine. Acquired for very little. Did a fine job. Traded for two so-so prospects. What's not to like?

Moeller. Your guess is as good as mine.

Castro. Seemed like a good idea at the time? Difficult to defend this one, I guess.

Ellison. If they don't play him too much he won't hurt anything. Has some nice defensive ability and versatility. Shame he doesn't hit.

Stanton. I didn't like the signing but could have stomeached it for one year. Two years was a bad move. If he wouldn't have signed a one-year deal, I'd have passed.

Cormier. He had pitched well until he came to Cincinnati then fell apart. It was a gamble worth taking.

Majewski. Still might pan out. I'd love to know the real workings of what went on. I like Bray and Thompson. I don't miss Kearns, Lopez nor Wagner.

Coutlangus. Great pickup. Again, a gamble a team such as the Reds needs to take. Now, keep him in the big leagues.

Harris. I don't think anyone knew he was going to have this kind of season. And he could easily "David Ross" it next season. Likely was just a throw in in the Washington deal.

Germano. Yes Krivsky traded him, but remember it wasn't to San Diego, where he has pitched so well. It was to Philadelphia, which thought so much of him that they lost him on waivers.

Hancock. It might well have been more than just being too heavy as it turns out.

I still say Krivsky gets another year.

We Are ... Marshall!

by Thundering Turtle on Aug 30, 2007 7:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm confused...

Phillips. Great pickup, the kind a GM of a team such as the Reds should make. Talented and young but hadn't put it together until he got to Cincinnati. If you can get a player like that for nothing, you do it. Krivsky did.

Harris. I don't think anyone knew he was going to have this kind of season. And he could easily "David Ross" it next season. Likely was just a throw in in the Washington deal.

One guy is 26, has a batting line of .288/.344/.418 (OPS+ of 99) and plays decent SS; the other is 26, is hitting .287/.329/.490 (OPS+ 104) and plays good 2B. How can dumping one and acquiring the other both be good moves?

Other nits:

Ross: There are 18 NL catchers with at least 200 PA. He's 14th in OPS (in a hitter's park, remember - two of the guys behind him play in FLA and WAS), and even the Reds don't start him as much any more. He isn't worth that kind of contract.

Hatteberg: The point is that he's blocking Votto, and either he's going to continue to block Votto or the Reds will be forced to dump him for nothing. He should have been traded.

Ellison: It's a shame I can't date Nicole Kidman, too. There is no defendable reason he's on the team.

Cormier: Sure, it may have been a gamble worth taking (if giving up on 23 year old Germano makes sense), but the contract extension which Cormier demanded to OK the trade is, again, indefensible.

just....wow.

by sidnancy on Aug 31, 2007 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, but Phillips

was more highly regarded than was Harris at the times of their trades. I'd rather have kept Harris than have given him away, but I'm certainly pleased with Keppinger in that role. Phillips, at the risk of sounding like ole Leather Britches, had more to offer tool-wise than did Harris, who was a worthy gamble by Tampa Bay. I'm sold on Phillips, though, and not as much on Harris.

You made an excellent point with the comparison, though, and caused me to think a bit more than I did in my original post. I like that. That's part of why I like this site so much.

Ross' contract. I won't argue much there on the dollar value of the contract. You have to have a catcher, though. I'm with you in that I didn't expect him to repeat his 2006 numbers.

Hatteberg wouldn't have brought anything in return, I'm afraid, and it wouldn't have made sense to give him away if the Reds felt they were in a pennant race. In fact, if the Reds believed they were in the race, they had to go with the veteran Hatteberg over the rookie Votto, didn't they? If they felt they were out of it, though, them I'm with you -- bring up Votto and see what he can do.

Ellison. I'm not a fan, but nearly every team has someone like this on the roster at some point in the season. Would we rather have had Wily Mo, Bobby Kielty or Craig Monroe? Probably.

The extra year added to Cormier's contract is my only rub in that deal. He had pitched very well all season for the Phillies. As for Germano, I hate to see young pitching dealt, too, but this wasn't just Krivsky throwing him away. Remember, the Phillies let him go for nothing on waivers to the same San Diego team that originally traded him with Travis Chick for a declining Joe Randa.

If Krivsky hadn't made a move for bullpen help, we'd have been screaming. Now, if we want to discuss that the Cormier deal never would have been necessary had the trade with Leather Drawers not taken place, well, then we have something.

I think a lot of moves would have been different if we, or Krivsky, had a handle on whether this team is (or was last year) a contender or rebuilding.

We Are ... Marshall!

by Thundering Turtle on Aug 31, 2007 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

contender or rebuilding?

i think that is the most important question to deal with. in this division even pittsburgh was considered a "contender" at the beginning of the year. every team was. that is the trap of playing in the NL Central. so our we division contenders? undoubtably yes. the bigger and more important question though is our we PENNANT contenders? undoubtably no. so what is more important? staying pat and playing for a weak division crown every year or making a concerted effort to build a World Series championship caliber team? of course, many would argue that just getting to the playoffs is the real feat. winning in the playoffs is more a function of luck and timeliness than proper team composition (see St. Louis last year). im inclined to disagree with that strategy though. i dont really want my reds to be a team that consistantly nibbles on the scraps from the adult table, taking advantage only when the right opportunity arises. i want a team that beats the shit out of everyone.

i dont know though. are we even in a position to want such a thing? after all this losing i would be happy with a playoff birth and a loss in the first round (see Bengals of '05). but do we even need a full-blown rebuilding effort? as mentioned before, this team is pretty young. alot of good players are right in that window between 25 and 30 where lightning can be caught in a bottle. so i guess im saying perhaps wayner should get another off-season to see what he can do (and i cant believe im saying that). if he fucks it up and the team starts poorly again then he should go. but i guess the way this division is and the number of young uncertainties on the team, even with all his mistakes (and there are plenty) perhaps wayner should get one more chance.

at least this isnt pittsburgh

by Charlie Scrabbles on Aug 31, 2007 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well said.

The goal should be a world championship, understanding that it's not always attainable. I know it's a different era, but what I felt in 1975, 1976 and 1990 was a whole lot better than what I felt in 1970, 1972, 1973 and 1979.

And the gulf between the World Championship years and the playoff years was just as wide for me as was the chasm that existed between the 1976 and 1982 teams. Does that make any sense?

We Are ... Marshall!

by Thundering Turtle on Aug 31, 2007 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here's my little defense of Krivsky

I think don't give him proper credit for Phillips and Arroyo sometimes (a reaction to the common "what-about-X-Y-Z" refrain whenever he makes a misstep). Unlike Womack and Aurilia, Phillips was young, highly regarded and cheaply controlled for years. Sure the result is way more than people could have hoped for, but this is exactly the type of player he should be "throwing against the wall," not the old retreads. Credit should be given for that.

As for Arroyo some discount it as an obvious match, because the teams' needs met up so well. But GMs don't always make the obvious needed move. O'Brien sat on the glut of outfielders his entire tenure. You have to give some props, although I'm still worried about the Arroyo extension.

Where have you gone Webb Alert chick?

by Red Menace on Aug 31, 2007 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

welcome

Frustration is a common method of joining. There was once this guy named Michael who spurred a lot of us to sign up.

I want to make one caveat about the Trade (I know, I know...) Kearns and Lopez's stocks have certainly plummeted (although some of that is park factors). But when evaluating the Trade you have to look at what they were at the time. Lopez had just come off a year in which he hit .291/.352/.486 and was hitting .268/.355/.394 with 23 SB at the time. He was a bad defender and was probably destined to slide down the defensive spectrum. But he had value, and we didn't get enough for him.

It certainly looks like we sold at the right time, but that's only have the battle.

Where have you gone Webb Alert chick?

by Red Menace on Aug 31, 2007 1:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

eat your cake and half it two

"Two Dunn's enter, but only one Dunn will leave...unless neither do because they decide to play cards, drink beer, golf, and fish."--SlydeFrog

by Man Mountain on Aug 31, 2007 1:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Reading through all the above Posts

reinforces my C level grade for Waynr's slightly less than average results. He has a tough job but he just hasn't been able to take care of the most important part of building this Reds team: Pitching.Yep it is almost impossible to find good pitching these days. At least that's what P.Docks says. BUT that said, finding or developing decent pitchers is an area where Krivsky has been out GM'd by his contemporaries.

Don't even get me started on Chad and Ellison.

Has the game started yet?

by Madville on Aug 31, 2007 6:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Ugh

Sweaterpants is going to get another year, I just know it...oh well I guess when Kobe leaves the lakers and they draft OJ Mayo with the NO.1 , I can watch his rookie year and see true selfishness

If the Reds are tied with the Cubs/Brewers/Cardnials when there is 5 games left in the season. Zach will join the band wagon

by Zach K on Aug 31, 2007 11:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

My choices

DePodesta
Ng
Chris Antonetti (Assistant GM in Cleveland)

Antonetti is also one of the "hot" names around certain circles in baseball but he obviously has done well in Cleveland.

From Baseball America:
Chris Antonetti, Indians. What makes Cleveland's Mark Shapiro so sharp with numbers? Many believe it's Antonetti, his right-hand assistant GM. Antonetti has impressed with his quantitative work while remaining versatile enough to handle serious contract negotiations and other duties. Said Dodgers assistant GM Kim Ng, "Everything you hear about the Cleveland organization, they have such high standards for the research they do, the whole decision-making process. From talking to him, you know that Chris has a great handle on the analytic part of things, as much as what he sees on the field."

by xjjeep90 on Sep 2, 2007 1:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs