Discussion:
Comments from Last night's hot stove league
(too old to reply)
David Short
2003-11-06 16:20:30 UTC
Permalink
All from Marty.

"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds front
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I don't
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."

"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't play
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."

"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way a major
league
baseball team should operate. That's keeping quiet. Conducting your business
and when the time comes to make an announcement, make it."

dfs
Swamp Fox
2003-11-06 21:33:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds front
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I don't
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't play
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way a major
league
baseball team should operate. That's keeping quiet. Conducting your business
and when the time comes to make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow and
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice to
have someone with long term vision.
David Short
2003-11-06 21:44:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow and
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice to
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.

dfs
Mike Oxbig
2003-11-06 21:59:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow and
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice to
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
dfs
I have not heard or seen anywhere near enough to form an opinion of him or
his ideas. But my initial gut reaction............nitwit.
Swamp Fox
2003-11-06 22:51:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Oxbig
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
and
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice to
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
dfs
I have not heard or seen anywhere near enough to form an opinion of him or
his ideas. But my initial gut reaction............nitwit.
Let it be known that we have 2 votes for "nitwit".

I'd prefer a nitwit over a horses ass, which is what he replaced.
Swamp Fox
2003-11-06 22:50:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow and
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice to
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
Kevin and Tammy Patrick
2003-11-06 23:45:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
and
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice to
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
He'll be fine.... but yes... paralysis is something he may have inherited
from the previous GM and his long term contracts and last minute signings to
the front office. My guess is that we see Miley running the show of the
Griffey showcase season... If he plays well... they will deal him as soon as
they can swing something that is tolerable. When that salary is freed and
some pitchers have come of age a bit... we'll see. As far as this season
goes...I'd expect to see us go with what we have and hope the injuries don't
pile up again. In that sense, things won't be different from previous
years. I mean... what other choice do they really have? My biggest hope
for this year as that they let Miley pick his own coaches. See ya Ray!

I wonder if we would have had less injuries with a more conservative 3rd
base coach. Both Griffey and Kearns were injured on the 3rd base path I
think... throw in Freel in one of those injuries as well.
Stebain
2003-11-07 00:20:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin and Tammy Patrick
I wonder if we would have had less injuries with a more conservative 3rd
base coach. Both Griffey and Kearns were injured on the 3rd base path I
think... throw in Freel in one of those injuries as well.
Add in that there seemed to be an inordinate amount of throw-out-at-home
plays. Remember we
had a big discussion about if Dunn understood how to run the bases (IIRC)?
Kevin McClave
2003-11-07 00:42:37 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:45:07 GMT, "Kevin and Tammy Patrick"
Post by Kevin and Tammy Patrick
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
and
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice
to
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
He'll be fine.... but yes... paralysis is something he may have inherited
from the previous GM and his long term contracts and last minute signings to
the front office. My guess is that we see Miley running the show of the
Griffey showcase season... If he plays well... they will deal him as soon as
they can swing something that is tolerable. When that salary is freed and
some pitchers have come of age a bit... we'll see. As far as this season
goes...I'd expect to see us go with what we have and hope the injuries don't
pile up again. In that sense, things won't be different from previous
years. I mean... what other choice do they really have? My biggest hope
for this year as that they let Miley pick his own coaches. See ya Ray!
I think you allude to something that for me is at the heart of what's good
about Miley in the manager's office: I trust his baseball judgement.

I did not trust Jimbo's baseball judgement. I did not trust Bob Boone's
baseball judgement. Miley didn't get all those wins without knowing
something about the game, and he learned about it precisely because, as
evidenced by his soliciting feedback from his coaches, he apparently
realizes he doesn't know it all. I think Jimbo and Boone thought they did.

Anyway, I trust his judgement, and as such, I would expect him to pick
coaches that were going to do well at their assigned tasks. This is
especially crucial at the hitting coach position (because Gullett is under
contract, so we needn't worry about pitching coach yet).

If you think a manager can only swing the wins and losses a handful a
season one way or the other, then I say that things like selecting a
hitting coach who can help Adam Dunn, especially, get back on track can
make a bigger difference than that.

I trust Miley to make the right choices.
Post by Kevin and Tammy Patrick
I wonder if we would have had less injuries with a more conservative 3rd
base coach. Both Griffey and Kearns were injured on the 3rd base path I
think... throw in Freel in one of those injuries as well.
Foli sucked, but I figure the injuries are just bad luck.


******************************************************************
Kevin McClave

Reward excellence and loyalty: Miley NOW!
http://www.mileynow.com/
******************************************************************
Swamp Fox
2003-11-07 02:57:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin McClave
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:45:07 GMT, "Kevin and Tammy Patrick"
Post by Kevin and Tammy Patrick
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
and
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice
to
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
He'll be fine.... but yes... paralysis is something he may have inherited
from the previous GM and his long term contracts and last minute signings to
the front office. My guess is that we see Miley running the show of the
Griffey showcase season... If he plays well... they will deal him as soon as
they can swing something that is tolerable. When that salary is freed and
some pitchers have come of age a bit... we'll see. As far as this season
goes...I'd expect to see us go with what we have and hope the injuries don't
pile up again. In that sense, things won't be different from previous
years. I mean... what other choice do they really have? My biggest hope
for this year as that they let Miley pick his own coaches. See ya Ray!
I think you allude to something that for me is at the heart of what's good
about Miley in the manager's office: I trust his baseball judgement.
I did not trust Jimbo's baseball judgement. I did not trust Bob Boone's
baseball judgement. Miley didn't get all those wins without knowing
something about the game, and he learned about it precisely because, as
evidenced by his soliciting feedback from his coaches, he apparently
realizes he doesn't know it all. I think Jimbo and Boone thought they did.
Anyway, I trust his judgement, and as such, I would expect him to pick
coaches that were going to do well at their assigned tasks. This is
especially crucial at the hitting coach position (because Gullett is under
contract, so we needn't worry about pitching coach yet).
If you think a manager can only swing the wins and losses a handful a
season one way or the other, then I say that things like selecting a
hitting coach who can help Adam Dunn, especially, get back on track can
make a bigger difference than that.
I trust Miley to make the right choices.
Post by Kevin and Tammy Patrick
I wonder if we would have had less injuries with a more conservative 3rd
base coach. Both Griffey and Kearns were injured on the 3rd base path I
think... throw in Freel in one of those injuries as well.
Foli sucked, but I figure the injuries are just bad luck.
I'd agree.
Henry Porter
2003-11-07 21:51:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin McClave
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:45:07 GMT, "Kevin and Tammy Patrick"
Anyway, I trust his judgement, and as such, I would expect him to pick
coaches that were going to do well at their assigned tasks. This is
especially crucial at the hitting coach position (because Gullett is under
contract, so we needn't worry about pitching coach yet).
If you think a manager can only swing the wins and losses a handful a
season one way or the other, then I say that things like selecting a
hitting coach who can help Adam Dunn, especially, get back on track can
make a bigger difference than that.
You may be right. Terry Pendleton did a great job in Atlanta last
season. Bobby Cox will eventually be voted into the HOF, but frankly a
lot of his success is due to Mazzone. I've never heard of a coach
being voted into the Hall, but I honestly believe that Mazzone has had
as much impact on Atlanta as Cox.

Are the Reds about to hire their 4th hitting coach in 4 seasons?
That's pretty bad.
Post by Kevin McClave
I trust Miley to make the right choices.
Post by Kevin and Tammy Patrick
I wonder if we would have had less injuries with a more conservative 3rd
base coach. Both Griffey and Kearns were injured on the 3rd base path I
think... throw in Freel in one of those injuries as well.
Foli sucked, but I figure the injuries are just bad luck.
Stebain
2003-11-07 23:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
You may be right. Terry Pendleton did a great job in Atlanta last
season. Bobby Cox will eventually be voted into the HOF, but frankly a
lot of his success is due to Mazzone. I've never heard of a coach
being voted into the Hall, but I honestly believe that Mazzone has had
as much impact on Atlanta as Cox.
Are the Reds about to hire their 4th hitting coach in 4 seasons?
That's pretty bad.
Yes it is. Are you saying Pendleton may be coming over? (I may be
misreading the intent of this post).

I'd like to have a guy like Pendleton. Not a classic, natural hitter.
Turned himself into a good hitter. Not (apparently) so
anal that he couldn't work within the framework of a hitters natural swing.

[I'd be afraid of Rose, Gwynn, Yaz types as batting coaches for exactly what
I said Pendleton doesn't represent]

No way do I want Jack Clark. He almost turned a decent hitting team into a
joke.
Kevin McClave
2003-11-08 00:29:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
Post by Kevin McClave
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:45:07 GMT, "Kevin and Tammy Patrick"
Anyway, I trust his judgement, and as such, I would expect him to pick
coaches that were going to do well at their assigned tasks. This is
especially crucial at the hitting coach position (because Gullett is under
contract, so we needn't worry about pitching coach yet).
If you think a manager can only swing the wins and losses a handful a
season one way or the other, then I say that things like selecting a
hitting coach who can help Adam Dunn, especially, get back on track can
make a bigger difference than that.
You may be right. Terry Pendleton did a great job in Atlanta last
season. Bobby Cox will eventually be voted into the HOF, but frankly a
lot of his success is due to Mazzone. I've never heard of a coach
being voted into the Hall, but I honestly believe that Mazzone has had
as much impact on Atlanta as Cox.
Are the Reds about to hire their 4th hitting coach in 4 seasons?
That's pretty bad.
In this instance, that's much better than the alternative!


******************************************************************
Kevin McClave

Reward excellence and loyalty: Miley NOW!
http://www.mileynow.com/
******************************************************************
David Short
2003-11-07 13:23:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
I feel that I have cut him some slack.
The fact that he has NOT appointed Miley manager already is a decision.
It disappoints me. I certainly have not seen enough to form an opinion
one way or the other, but no matter what Marty may say, just because
the guy is new doesn't mean he is an improvement over Bowden.

dfs
Swamp Fox
2003-11-07 15:54:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
I feel that I have cut him some slack.
The fact that he has NOT appointed Miley manager already is a decision.
It disappoints me. I certainly have not seen enough to form an opinion
one way or the other, but no matter what Marty may say, just because
the guy is new doesn't mean he is an improvement over Bowden.
I don't know about that. I'd rather have J. Fred Muggs (who is still alive)
as GM over Jim Bowden.
Chris Collins
2003-11-07 17:55:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
I feel that I have cut him some slack.
The fact that he has NOT appointed Miley manager already is a decision.
It disappoints me. I certainly have not seen enough to form an opinion
one way or the other, but no matter what Marty may say, just because
the guy is new doesn't mean he is an improvement over Bowden.
I don't really know whether MLB's rules are similar to the NFL's, but
are the Reds forced to jump through the hoop of finding the obligatory
minority managerial candidate to interview even though they may
possibly already have their mind set on Miley? I thought I had heard
something about the Marlins getting in trouble for naming McKeon the
interim manager without considering minority candidates. If that's
the case, then it may be too soon to blast O'Brien if he's trying to
save the Reds from a senseless fine from MLB.

Chris
Mike Oxbig
2003-11-07 22:28:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Collins
Post by David Short
I feel that I have cut him some slack.
The fact that he has NOT appointed Miley manager already is a decision.
It disappoints me. I certainly have not seen enough to form an opinion
one way or the other, but no matter what Marty may say, just because
the guy is new doesn't mean he is an improvement over Bowden.
I don't really know whether MLB's rules are similar to the NFL's, but
are the Reds forced to jump through the hoop of finding the obligatory
minority managerial candidate to interview even though they may
possibly already have their mind set on Miley? I thought I had heard
something about the Marlins getting in trouble for naming McKeon the
interim manager without considering minority candidates. If that's
the case, then it may be too soon to blast O'Brien if he's trying to
save the Reds from a senseless fine from MLB.
Chris
I think I read that the league guidelines say, you can make an immediate
appointment under the interim label, but any permanent hiring would require
interviewing at least one minority.

Who's blasting O'Brien?
Stebain
2003-11-07 23:18:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Collins
Post by David Short
I feel that I have cut him some slack.
The fact that he has NOT appointed Miley manager already is a decision.
It disappoints me. I certainly have not seen enough to form an opinion
one way or the other, but no matter what Marty may say, just because
the guy is new doesn't mean he is an improvement over Bowden.
I don't really know whether MLB's rules are similar to the NFL's, but
are the Reds forced to jump through the hoop of finding the obligatory
minority managerial candidate to interview even though they may
possibly already have their mind set on Miley? I thought I had heard
something about the Marlins getting in trouble for naming McKeon the
interim manager without considering minority candidates. If that's
the case, then it may be too soon to blast O'Brien if he's trying to
save the Reds from a senseless fine from MLB.
Chris
Blasting? I haven't seen anything I'd construe as blasting. Not even sure
I'd read it as criticism, necessarily. Questioning? yes. Trying to infer
what is going on? yes. Blasting? no way.
Henry Porter
2003-11-08 14:12:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
I feel that I have cut him some slack.
The fact that he has NOT appointed Miley manager already is a decision.
It disappoints me. I certainly have not seen enough to form an opinion
one way or the other, but no matter what Marty may say, just because
the guy is new doesn't mean he is an improvement over Bowden.
dfs
If he had hired Miley already, I would have been disappointed. Not
because I believe that Miley isn't deserving, but because Dan simply
hasn't been here long enough. I didn't listen to the HSL on Nov 5, but
as of Oct 29, Dan said that he had not spoken to Miley. That was a
week and a half ago. To the best of my knowledge he had not
interviewed any other managerial canidates at that time. There is no
way that he can have adequetly undergone the process in the short
amount of time that he has been here.
Had he arrived with this organization, and almost immediately
appointed Miley manager, I would have been disappointed because of the
hastiness of the act. What basis would he have for the appointment?
Marty's recommendation? Gossip within the organization? Kevins
McClaves websites?
Dan has plenty of time to find a manager. He should gather what
facts and opinions he can, analyze them, and then make a decision.
This takes more than a week and a half when you consider that he has
other responsibilities. I want him to do things the right way.
Kevin McClave
2003-11-08 14:41:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
I feel that I have cut him some slack.
The fact that he has NOT appointed Miley manager already is a decision.
It disappoints me. I certainly have not seen enough to form an opinion
one way or the other, but no matter what Marty may say, just because
the guy is new doesn't mean he is an improvement over Bowden.
dfs
If he had hired Miley already, I would have been disappointed. Not
because I believe that Miley isn't deserving, but because Dan simply
hasn't been here long enough. I didn't listen to the HSL on Nov 5, but
as of Oct 29, Dan said that he had not spoken to Miley. That was a
week and a half ago. To the best of my knowledge he had not
interviewed any other managerial canidates at that time. There is no
way that he can have adequetly undergone the process in the short
amount of time that he has been here.
Had he arrived with this organization, and almost immediately
appointed Miley manager, I would have been disappointed because of the
hastiness of the act. What basis would he have for the appointment?
Marty's recommendation? Gossip within the organization? Kevins
McClaves websites?
Dan has plenty of time to find a manager. He should gather what
facts and opinions he can, analyze them, and then make a decision.
This takes more than a week and a half when you consider that he has
other responsibilities. I want him to do things the right way.
I do, too. While I don't intensely disagree with you here, and agree in
principal with what you said, I think that in the case of Miley it is a
slam dunk. It *should* be a rather obvious choice. It seems the word on
him from everywhere is nothing but positive. He has a long history of
winning and he knows the players in the Reds organization already.

Under those circumstances, I don't think a lengthy decision is
required...unless someone is doing it for show, to show they "won't be
rushed."

At a certain point, they're taking too long. I'm not sure exactly where
that point is, but I do think it makes more sense to have a field manager
on board before making any trades.

Bottom line for me is more that I'm nervous they won't make the right
choice more than I am that they haven't made it yet.


******************************************************************
Kevin McClave

Reward excellence and loyalty: Miley NOW!
http://www.mileynow.com/
******************************************************************
Henry Porter
2003-11-11 18:30:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Henry Porter
If he had hired Miley already, I would have been disappointed. Not
because I believe that Miley isn't deserving, but because Dan simply
hasn't been here long enough. I didn't listen to the HSL on Nov 5, but
as of Oct 29, Dan said that he had not spoken to Miley. That was a
week and a half ago. To the best of my knowledge he had not
interviewed any other managerial canidates at that time. There is no
way that he can have adequetly undergone the process in the short
amount of time that he has been here.
Had he arrived with this organization, and almost immediately
appointed Miley manager, I would have been disappointed because of the
hastiness of the act. What basis would he have for the appointment?
Marty's recommendation? Gossip within the organization? Kevins
McClaves websites?
Dan has plenty of time to find a manager. He should gather what
facts and opinions he can, analyze them, and then make a decision.
This takes more than a week and a half when you consider that he has
other responsibilities. I want him to do things the right way.
I do, too. While I don't intensely disagree with you here, and agree in
principal with what you said, I think that in the case of Miley it is a
slam dunk. It *should* be a rather obvious choice. It seems the word on
I don't see it as slam dunk. And I don't see the reasons why O'brien
should at this junture view Miley as the obvious choice. O'brien
barely knows anybody in the organization; certainly not well enough to
retain Miley upon their recommendations without going through the
process of looking at other canidates
Post by Kevin McClave
him from everywhere is nothing but positive. He has a long history of
winning and he knows the players in the Reds organization already.
When Pinella was hired he had been unable to finish first with good
Yankee clubs, and he was unfamiliar with almost everybody in the
organization. As things turned out, he was the right man for the job.
I'm not arguing against Miley here.

.
Post by Kevin McClave
Under those circumstances, I don't think a lengthy decision is
required...unless someone is doing it for show, to show they "won't be
rushed."
At a certain point, they're taking too long. I'm not sure exactly where
that point is, but I do think it makes more sense to have a field manager
on board before making any trades.
I think that they need to hire the manager before the start of the
winter meetings, whenever that is, or at least before Dan starts
making a lot of important player moves. The G.M. needs input from the
manager.
Post by Kevin McClave
Bottom line for me is more that I'm nervous they won't make the right
choice more than I am that they haven't made it yet.
David Short
2003-11-12 14:02:30 UTC
Permalink
"Henry Porter" <***@meiwausa.com> wrote in message news:***@posting.google.com...
You post some interesting things. Have to comment.
Post by Henry Porter
When Pinella was hired he had been unable to finish first with good
Yankee clubs, and he was unfamiliar with almost everybody in the
organization. As things turned out, he was the right man for the job.
I'm not arguing against Miley here.
Was Lou the right guy for the job?

I know. I know he won the world series and all. And Marge ran
him out of town and Marge was the root of all that is wrong in the
world. So the question should be easy. Right?

Was Lou the right guy for the job?

Lou ran Paul O'Neil out of town. Yes it was Bowden who
made the trade, but he would not have made it if they were
not looking to dump the guy Lou derided as "big."

Lou ran Willie Greene off the first time. Setting the pattern
for Greene's career.

Given a choice between Todd Benzinger and Hal Morris, Lou
stayed with Morris instead of replacing both of them.

Billy Hatcher was in this teams outfield throughtout Lou's
tenure. Think about that. Left field and firstbase were manned
by Billy Hatcher and Hal Morris.

Unable to handle the wealth of his bullpen, Lou let Charlton
and Meyers go and stayed with Dibble. This is an easy choice
to criticize. Dibble was always a problem child, but he was
an amazing closer.

None of the pitchers got better under Pinella. Rijo's injury
string started here.

Given an outstanding relief core, very good starting pitching,
an all-time shortstop and an all-time centerfielder in an
organization pumping out a new major league regular
every year, Lou won a world series finished fifth and
then second. Should he have done more?
Post by Henry Porter
I think that they need to hire the manager before the start of the
winter meetings, whenever that is, or at least before Dan starts
making a lot of important player moves. The G.M. needs input from the
manager.
I was under the impression that the "winter meetings" were the first
or second week of December. ergo they need a manager
pretty quickly.

dfs
Stebain
2003-11-12 16:42:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
I was under the impression that the "winter meetings" were the first
or second week of December. ergo they need a manager
pretty quickly.
Listening to "Mike and Mike" (or whatever it's called), they twice referred
to Boston as "the only managerial opening".
I was hoping to come home and read that Miley had been officially named.
Henry Porter
2003-11-12 19:07:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
You post some interesting things. Have to comment.
Post by Henry Porter
When Pinella was hired he had been unable to finish first with good
Yankee clubs, and he was unfamiliar with almost everybody in the
organization. As things turned out, he was the right man for the job.
I'm not arguing against Miley here.
Was Lou the right guy for the job?
I know. I know he won the world series and all. And Marge ran
him out of town and Marge was the root of all that is wrong in the
world. So the question should be easy. Right?
As things turned out:
1990 91-71
1991 74-88
1992 90-72

I'm not arguing that Lou was a good/bad manager. You should know by
now that I'm not convinced about the effectiveness of managers. My
point was that Lou came to the organization unfamiliar with the bulk
of the personell, yet the team was, for the most part, successfull
under his leadership.
Post by David Short
Was Lou the right guy for the job?
Lou ran Paul O'Neil out of town. Yes it was Bowden who
made the trade, but he would not have made it if they were
not looking to dump the guy Lou derided as "big."
I don't know the particulars of the Lou/Paul relationship. I do know
that there was some friction between them because Lou was trying to
change Pauls swing. I also know that Lou selected Paul as a reserve on
the 91 all-star team. I think Paul left after 92 season, same as Lou.
I don't see a connection.
Post by David Short
Lou ran Willie Greene off the first time. Setting the pattern
for Greene's career.
So your saying that Willie was a bust because of Lou?
Post by David Short
Given a choice between Todd Benzinger and Hal Morris, Lou
stayed with Morris instead of replacing both of them.
With who? Terry Lee?
Post by David Short
Billy Hatcher was in this teams outfield throughtout Lou's
tenure. Think about that. Left field and firstbase were manned
by Billy Hatcher and Hal Morris.
Who should have started over Hatcher?
Winningham?
Sanders?
Rolando Roomes?
Glenn Braggs?
Post by David Short
Unable to handle the wealth of his bullpen, Lou let Charlton
He couldn't handle it?
Post by David Short
and Meyers go and stayed with Dibble. This is an easy choice
to criticize. Dibble was always a problem child, but he was
an amazing closer.
What do you mean "Lou let Charlton and Myers go"? Was he the G.M.?

Should Lou have used a 3 closer rotation? No. If you have a surplus of
one item and a shortage of another, doesn't it make sense to do some
swapping?


Charlton traded for Kevin Mitchell after the 92 season.
Myers dealt for Bip Roberts after an unsuccesfull attempt at
converting him to a starter.
Those turned about to be pretty good pickups for this club.
Post by David Short
None of the pitchers got better under Pinella. Rijo's injury
string started here.
Where did the Reds finish in the league in team ERA before during and
after Lou's stay. I don't know offhand but it would be a good
indicator of whether or not the pitching improved.
Post by David Short
Given an outstanding relief core, very good starting pitching,
an all-time shortstop and an all-time centerfielder in an
organization pumping out a new major league regular
every year, Lou won a world series finished fifth and
then second. Should he have done more?
Should he have done more? You act as though Lou inherited a great team
and ran it in to the ground. He inherited a club that had finished 5th
in 1989, and 2nd the previous 4 seasons.

Was Eric Davis the Reds all-time centerfielder? Was he an all-time
centerfielder. That's an interesting statement. I was recently looking
through Rob Neyers book of baseball lineups. I expected to see Eric
mentioned as one of the best centerfielders in team history. IIRC,
Neyer list Edd Roush and Vada Pinson ahead of Eric Davis on all-around
talent, and he listed Eddie Milner ahead of Davis in CF on the Reds
all-defensive team. I don't know what he based his ratings on.
Although he is one of my all-time favorites, I don't consider Eric
Davis as an "all-time centerfielder" in the way that Barry is an
all-time shortstop.
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
I think that they need to hire the manager before the start of the
winter meetings, whenever that is, or at least before Dan starts
making a lot of important player moves. The G.M. needs input from the
manager.
I was under the impression that the "winter meetings" were the first
or second week of December. ergo they need a manager
pretty quickly.
I believe that the meetings are Dec 12-15 in New Orleans. Better
hurry, only a month.
David, there were people posting within the first week of O'briens
hiring with the opinion that he had already had plenty of time to hire
a manager (Miley). If a week is a reasonable amount of time to these
persons (not necessarily you), then 1 month is an eternity.
Post by David Short
dfs
Honestly David, this doesn't seem like you. You made a bunch of
half-thought-out arguments regarding Lou's success. I think that maybe
you have some deep-rooted bias against Lou. Why?
David Short
2003-11-12 19:45:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
I'm not arguing that Lou was a good/bad manager. You should know by
now that I'm not convinced about the effectiveness of managers. My
point was that Lou came to the organization unfamiliar with the bulk
of the personell, yet the team was, for the most part, successfull
under his leadership.
And that's an entirely reasonable way to look at it.
Another way to look at it is that the reds under Pete underachieved
and that when Lou came around all he had to do was clear the air
and poof with a bit of luck they won the series. Now how much
credit do you give to Lou and how much do you give to that
"poof with a bit of luck." I think you give a bunch of credit to that
bit of luck, but I get the sense that redsvolk believe that
the almighty Lou was the be-all and end-all of managers and
that he somehow, put that team over the top with his super
Yankee player experience ray-gun.

Most of the arguments that followed had a purposeful
slant against Lou. How much of those problems are due
to the GM's and Marge and how much are due to Lou,
I honestly have no idea. I read the same writers that you
guys do. I think the Manager/GM line is very blurry when
it comes to player aquisition. I think the reds bench was
configured the way it was last season, not because Jim
Bowden couldn't get better players, but because that
was the bench that Bob Boone wanted.
snip
Post by Henry Porter
Was Eric Davis the Reds all-time centerfielder? Was he an all-time
centerfielder. That's an interesting statement. I was recently looking
through Rob Neyers book of baseball lineups. I expected to see Eric
mentioned as one of the best centerfielders in team history. IIRC,
Neyer list Edd Roush and Vada Pinson ahead of Eric Davis on all-around
talent, and he listed Eddie Milner ahead of Davis in CF on the Reds
all-defensive team. I don't know what he based his ratings on.
Although he is one of my all-time favorites, I don't consider Eric
Davis as an "all-time centerfielder" in the way that Barry is an
all-time shortstop.
No disrespect to Neyer, but I think it's a slam dunk that Eric Davis was the
reds
all-time centerfielder. I think it's a real stretch to say he was a
historically great
all-time centerfielder in the mold of Mantle or all-century Junior. Well.,
no
that's too polite. He was not an all time great, but I would put him ahead
of Roush and well ahead of Pinson. From my memory, Milner was
a fine offensive player, but his defense wasn't anything special.
Part of that may be that I rate peak value more than career and part
of it may be that Eric's peak coincided with my return to reds country
after being away for years.

dfs
Henry Porter
2003-11-13 14:30:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
I'm not arguing that Lou was a good/bad manager. You should know by
now that I'm not convinced about the effectiveness of managers. My
point was that Lou came to the organization unfamiliar with the bulk
of the personell, yet the team was, for the most part, successfull
under his leadership.
And that's an entirely reasonable way to look at it.
Another way to look at it is that the reds under Pete underachieved
and that when Lou came around all he had to do was clear the air
and poof with a bit of luck they won the series. Now how much
credit do you give to Lou and how much do you give to that
"poof with a bit of luck." I think you give a bunch of credit to that
bit of luck, but I get the sense that redsvolk believe that
the almighty Lou was the be-all and end-all of managers and
that he somehow, put that team over the top with his super
Yankee player experience ray-gun.
Most of the arguments that followed had a purposeful
slant against Lou. How much of those problems are due
to the GM's and Marge and how much are due to Lou,
I honestly have no idea. I read the same writers that you
guys do. I think the Manager/GM line is very blurry when
it comes to player aquisition. I think the reds bench was
configured the way it was last season, not because Jim
Bowden couldn't get better players, but because that
was the bench that Bob Boone wanted.
I totally disagree with you about the blurring of lines between the
G.M. and F.M. jobs. All the manager can do is advise the G.M. on who
he would like to get. He doesn't know the payrolls situations. He
isn't on the phones with the G.M.s from other clubs laying the
groundwork for trades. He isn't watching the waiver wire. He's the
field manager. His job is on the field and in the clubhouse.

I have a distict recollection of some events in 1991. They went as
follows:

The Reds were having difficulty maintaining a healthy rotation, to the
extent that they tried Randy Myers as a starter. As a result the were
falling hopelessly out of the race. Rumors were swirling that the
Reds, in a last ditch effort to stay in the race, were enquiring about
Expos pitcher Dennis Martinez, who, at that time, was one of the best
starters in baseball. Lou expressed to Marty on their pre-game show
several times that he was eager for the Reds G.M. to acquire Martinez.
Finally, the day came; the Reds acquired Martinez. Unfortunately, it
turned out to be 1b/of Carmelo Martinez. I can remember, like it was
yesterday, Lou's comments to Marty: "I told him (Reds G.M.) that we
needed Martinez, but he got me the wrong one".
Post by David Short
snip
Post by Henry Porter
Was Eric Davis the Reds all-time centerfielder? Was he an all-time
centerfielder. That's an interesting statement. I was recently looking
through Rob Neyers book of baseball lineups. I expected to see Eric
mentioned as one of the best centerfielders in team history. IIRC,
Neyer list Edd Roush and Vada Pinson ahead of Eric Davis on all-around
talent, and he listed Eddie Milner ahead of Davis in CF on the Reds
all-defensive team. I don't know what he based his ratings on.
Although he is one of my all-time favorites, I don't consider Eric
Davis as an "all-time centerfielder" in the way that Barry is an
all-time shortstop.
No disrespect to Neyer, but I think it's a slam dunk that Eric Davis was the
reds
all-time centerfielder. I think it's a real stretch to say he was a
historically great
all-time centerfielder in the mold of Mantle or all-century Junior. Well.,
no
that's too polite. He was not an all time great, but I would put him ahead
of Roush and well ahead of Pinson. From my memory, Milner was
a fine offensive player, but his defense wasn't anything special.
Part of that may be that I rate peak value more than career and part
of it may be that Eric's peak coincided with my return to reds country
after being away for years.
I think that Eric wasn't even close to being the Reds all-time
centerfielder. Just based on years of service and consistency Pinson
and Roush were far better.
Eric was only a "full time centerfielder on this club for 4 seasons
1987-1989 and 1996. He split time between left and center in 1986 and
1990. He was not much of a contributor in his other seasons.

games in center (as a Red):
Eric Davis 781
Vada Pinson 1496
Edd Roush 1317

Compare the stats and consider the respective eras.

concerning Milner:
I think you have it backwards. Eddie was better known for his glove
than his bat. You may have confused him with Gary Redus. I was never
under the impression that Milner was better defensively than Davis.
I'm not sure why Neyer selected him as the Reds all-time defensive
centerfielder (ahead of Cesar too).
Post by David Short
dfs
Kevin McClave
2003-11-13 15:34:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Most of the arguments that followed had a purposeful
slant against Lou. How much of those problems are due
to the GM's and Marge and how much are due to Lou,
I honestly have no idea. I read the same writers that you
guys do. I think the Manager/GM line is very blurry when
it comes to player aquisition. I think the reds bench was
configured the way it was last season, not because Jim
Bowden couldn't get better players, but because that
was the bench that Bob Boone wanted.
I totally disagree with you about the blurring of lines between the
G.M. and F.M. jobs. All the manager can do is advise the G.M. on who
he would like to get. He doesn't know the payrolls situations. He
isn't on the phones with the G.M.s from other clubs laying the
groundwork for trades. He isn't watching the waiver wire. He's the
field manager. His job is on the field and in the clubhouse.
I think that is incorrect. I'm certain that there are any number of
managers who give input on waiver wire transactions. In fact, the most
successful GM/FM relationships I'm sure have that sort of give and take.
Post by Henry Porter
I have a distict recollection of some events in 1991. They went as
The Reds were having difficulty maintaining a healthy rotation, to the
extent that they tried Randy Myers as a starter.
My reccollection is that Myers own performance as the closer in 1991
played a role in his being moved tothe rotation, too.
Post by Henry Porter
As a result the were
falling hopelessly out of the race. Rumors were swirling that the
Reds, in a last ditch effort to stay in the race, were enquiring about
Expos pitcher Dennis Martinez, who, at that time, was one of the best
starters in baseball. Lou expressed to Marty on their pre-game show
several times that he was eager for the Reds G.M. to acquire Martinez.
Finally, the day came; the Reds acquired Martinez. Unfortunately, it
turned out to be 1b/of Carmelo Martinez. I can remember, like it was
yesterday, Lou's comments to Marty: "I told him (Reds G.M.) that we
needed Martinez, but he got me the wrong one".
I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate with that anecdote, but
David's comment about Boone making the decisions about his bench players
had everything to do with who he chose that was already within the
organization. He didn't need to ask Jimbo to go out and trade or acquire
via waivers anyone in particulr in order to have started the season with
Ryan Freel and Jose Guillen on his bench instead of Reggie Taylor and
Ruben Mateo(?). He didn't need a trade to have Chris Reistma on the major
league staff instead of Jimmy Anderson *and* Joasias Manzanillo.

One instance where Boone's hands were tied is the Wily Mo Pena situation,
though.
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
Was Eric Davis the Reds all-time centerfielder? Was he an all-time
centerfielder. That's an interesting statement. I was recently looking
through Rob Neyers book of baseball lineups. I expected to see Eric
mentioned as one of the best centerfielders in team history. IIRC,
Neyer list Edd Roush and Vada Pinson ahead of Eric Davis on all-around
talent, and he listed Eddie Milner ahead of Davis in CF on the Reds
all-defensive team. I don't know what he based his ratings on.
Although he is one of my all-time favorites, I don't consider Eric
Davis as an "all-time centerfielder" in the way that Barry is an
all-time shortstop.
No disrespect to Neyer, but I think it's a slam dunk that Eric Davis was the
reds
all-time centerfielder. I think it's a real stretch to say he was a
historically great
all-time centerfielder in the mold of Mantle or all-century Junior. Well.,
no
that's too polite. He was not an all time great, but I would put him ahead
of Roush and well ahead of Pinson. From my memory, Milner was
a fine offensive player, but his defense wasn't anything special.
Part of that may be that I rate peak value more than career and part
of it may be that Eric's peak coincided with my return to reds country
after being away for years.
I think that Eric wasn't even close to being the Reds all-time
centerfielder. Just based on years of service and consistency Pinson
and Roush were far better.
Eric was only a "full time centerfielder on this club for 4 seasons
1987-1989 and 1996. He split time between left and center in 1986 and
1990. He was not much of a contributor in his other seasons.
Eric Davis 781
Vada Pinson 1496
Edd Roush 1317
Compare the stats and consider the respective eras.
I think you have it backwards. Eddie was better known for his glove
than his bat. You may have confused him with Gary Redus. I was never
under the impression that Milner was better defensively than Davis.
I'm not sure why Neyer selected him as the Reds all-time defensive
centerfielder (ahead of Cesar too).
He definitely had a pretty good glove, but I agree that I wouldn't
consider him the best ever. Sometimes I think guys do things like this to
show how deep their baseball knowledge is: "hey, I remember this somewhat
obscure guy and not only do I remember him, but he was the *best*
____________! Yes, even better than the de facto best player-everyone
usually-considers-the-best-at-____________"


************************************************************
Kevin McClave

Reward excellence and loyalty: Miley NOW!
www.mileynow.com
************************************************************
Henry Porter
2003-11-13 18:35:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Most of the arguments that followed had a purposeful
slant against Lou. How much of those problems are due
to the GM's and Marge and how much are due to Lou,
I honestly have no idea. I read the same writers that you
guys do. I think the Manager/GM line is very blurry when
it comes to player aquisition. I think the reds bench was
configured the way it was last season, not because Jim
Bowden couldn't get better players, but because that
was the bench that Bob Boone wanted.
I totally disagree with you about the blurring of lines between the
G.M. and F.M. jobs. All the manager can do is advise the G.M. on who
he would like to get. He doesn't know the payrolls situations. He
isn't on the phones with the G.M.s from other clubs laying the
groundwork for trades. He isn't watching the waiver wire. He's the
field manager. His job is on the field and in the clubhouse.
I think that is incorrect. I'm certain that there are any number of
managers who give input on waiver wire transactions. In fact, the most
Yes, they give their input. But do they spend their time watching for
players to be put on waivers or is that the general managers job?
Post by Kevin McClave
successful GM/FM relationships I'm sure have that sort of give and take.
Post by Henry Porter
I have a distict recollection of some events in 1991. They went as
The Reds were having difficulty maintaining a healthy rotation, to the
extent that they tried Randy Myers as a starter.
My reccollection is that Myers own performance as the closer in 1991
played a role in his being moved tothe rotation, too.
Post by Henry Porter
As a result the were
falling hopelessly out of the race. Rumors were swirling that the
Reds, in a last ditch effort to stay in the race, were enquiring about
Expos pitcher Dennis Martinez, who, at that time, was one of the best
starters in baseball. Lou expressed to Marty on their pre-game show
several times that he was eager for the Reds G.M. to acquire Martinez.
Finally, the day came; the Reds acquired Martinez. Unfortunately, it
turned out to be 1b/of Carmelo Martinez. I can remember, like it was
yesterday, Lou's comments to Marty: "I told him (Reds G.M.) that we
needed Martinez, but he got me the wrong one".
I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate with that anecdote, but
The point is that Lou was vocal about wanting to acquire Dennis. The
G.M. knew Lou wanted Dennis. But the G.M. acquired Carmelo instead,
much to Lou's surprise and chagrin.
Post by Kevin McClave
David's comment about Boone making the decisions about his bench players
had everything to do with who he chose that was already within the
organization. He didn't need to ask Jimbo to go out and trade or acquire
via waivers anyone in particulr in order to have started the season with
Ryan Freel and Jose Guillen on his bench instead of Reggie Taylor and
Ruben Mateo(?). He didn't need a trade to have Chris Reistma on the major
league staff instead of Jimmy Anderson *and* Joasias Manzanillo.
Kevin, surely you realize that we live in the age of contracts. Who
comes north is often determined by salary and options. It's the
reality of not being the Yankees. Boone told Bowden who he wanted to
take north. Ultimately though, the decision was jims.
Also, Manzanillo earned a spot on the team. He had a great spring
training. Too bad he let us down when the bell rang.
Post by Kevin McClave
One instance where Boone's hands were tied is the Wily Mo Pena situation,
though.
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
Was Eric Davis the Reds all-time centerfielder? Was he an all-time
centerfielder. That's an interesting statement. I was recently
looking
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
through Rob Neyers book of baseball lineups. I expected to see Eric
mentioned as one of the best centerfielders in team history. IIRC,
Neyer list Edd Roush and Vada Pinson ahead of Eric Davis on
all-around
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
talent, and he listed Eddie Milner ahead of Davis in CF on the Reds
all-defensive team. I don't know what he based his ratings on.
Although he is one of my all-time favorites, I don't consider Eric
Davis as an "all-time centerfielder" in the way that Barry is an
all-time shortstop.
No disrespect to Neyer, but I think it's a slam dunk that Eric Davis
was the
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
reds
all-time centerfielder. I think it's a real stretch to say he was a
historically great
all-time centerfielder in the mold of Mantle or all-century Junior.
Well.,
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
no
that's too polite. He was not an all time great, but I would put him
ahead
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
of Roush and well ahead of Pinson. From my memory, Milner was
a fine offensive player, but his defense wasn't anything special.
Part of that may be that I rate peak value more than career and part
of it may be that Eric's peak coincided with my return to reds country
after being away for years.
I think that Eric wasn't even close to being the Reds all-time
centerfielder. Just based on years of service and consistency Pinson
and Roush were far better.
Eric was only a "full time centerfielder on this club for 4 seasons
1987-1989 and 1996. He split time between left and center in 1986 and
1990. He was not much of a contributor in his other seasons.
Eric Davis 781
Vada Pinson 1496
Edd Roush 1317
Compare the stats and consider the respective eras.
I think you have it backwards. Eddie was better known for his glove
than his bat. You may have confused him with Gary Redus. I was never
under the impression that Milner was better defensively than Davis.
I'm not sure why Neyer selected him as the Reds all-time defensive
centerfielder (ahead of Cesar too).
He definitely had a pretty good glove, but I agree that I wouldn't
consider him the best ever. Sometimes I think guys do things like this to
show how deep their baseball knowledge is: "hey, I remember this somewhat
obscure guy and not only do I remember him, but he was the *best*
____________! Yes, even better than the de facto best player-everyone
usually-considers-the-best-at-____________"
The only time Neyer mentions Davis in his book is when he list the
all-time has-been teams for the Dodgers and Giants.
Mike Oxbig
2003-11-13 17:56:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
I'm not arguing that Lou was a good/bad manager. You should know by
now that I'm not convinced about the effectiveness of managers. My
point was that Lou came to the organization unfamiliar with the bulk
of the personell, yet the team was, for the most part, successfull
under his leadership.
And that's an entirely reasonable way to look at it.
Another way to look at it is that the reds under Pete underachieved
and that when Lou came around all he had to do was clear the air
and poof with a bit of luck they won the series. Now how much
credit do you give to Lou and how much do you give to that
"poof with a bit of luck." I think you give a bunch of credit to that
bit of luck, but I get the sense that redsvolk believe that
the almighty Lou was the be-all and end-all of managers and
that he somehow, put that team over the top with his super
Yankee player experience ray-gun.
Most of the arguments that followed had a purposeful
slant against Lou. How much of those problems are due
to the GM's and Marge and how much are due to Lou,
I honestly have no idea. I read the same writers that you
guys do. I think the Manager/GM line is very blurry when
it comes to player aquisition. I think the reds bench was
configured the way it was last season, not because Jim
Bowden couldn't get better players, but because that
was the bench that Bob Boone wanted.
I totally disagree with you about the blurring of lines between the
G.M. and F.M. jobs. All the manager can do is advise the G.M. on who
he would like to get. He doesn't know the payrolls situations. He
isn't on the phones with the G.M.s from other clubs laying the
groundwork for trades. He isn't watching the waiver wire. He's the
field manager. His job is on the field and in the clubhouse.
I have a distict recollection of some events in 1991. They went as
The Reds were having difficulty maintaining a healthy rotation, to the
extent that they tried Randy Myers as a starter. As a result the were
falling hopelessly out of the race. Rumors were swirling that the
Reds, in a last ditch effort to stay in the race, were enquiring about
Expos pitcher Dennis Martinez, who, at that time, was one of the best
starters in baseball. Lou expressed to Marty on their pre-game show
several times that he was eager for the Reds G.M. to acquire Martinez.
Finally, the day came; the Reds acquired Martinez. Unfortunately, it
turned out to be 1b/of Carmelo Martinez. I can remember, like it was
yesterday, Lou's comments to Marty: "I told him (Reds G.M.) that we
needed Martinez, but he got me the wrong one".
Post by David Short
snip
Post by Henry Porter
Was Eric Davis the Reds all-time centerfielder? Was he an all-time
centerfielder. That's an interesting statement. I was recently looking
through Rob Neyers book of baseball lineups. I expected to see Eric
mentioned as one of the best centerfielders in team history. IIRC,
Neyer list Edd Roush and Vada Pinson ahead of Eric Davis on all-around
talent, and he listed Eddie Milner ahead of Davis in CF on the Reds
all-defensive team. I don't know what he based his ratings on.
Although he is one of my all-time favorites, I don't consider Eric
Davis as an "all-time centerfielder" in the way that Barry is an
all-time shortstop.
No disrespect to Neyer, but I think it's a slam dunk that Eric Davis was the
reds
all-time centerfielder. I think it's a real stretch to say he was a
historically great
all-time centerfielder in the mold of Mantle or all-century Junior. Well.,
no
that's too polite. He was not an all time great, but I would put him ahead
of Roush and well ahead of Pinson. From my memory, Milner was
a fine offensive player, but his defense wasn't anything special.
Part of that may be that I rate peak value more than career and part
of it may be that Eric's peak coincided with my return to reds country
after being away for years.
I think that Eric wasn't even close to being the Reds all-time
centerfielder. Just based on years of service and consistency Pinson
and Roush were far better.
Eric was only a "full time centerfielder on this club for 4 seasons
1987-1989 and 1996. He split time between left and center in 1986 and
1990. He was not much of a contributor in his other seasons.
Eric Davis 781
Vada Pinson 1496
Edd Roush 1317
Compare the stats and consider the respective eras.
I'm an Eric Davis fan. I did see Vada play. I would have to give the nod
to Vada. I'm trying also to be fair and factor in that I was a kid, and
that was my first real exposure to MLB.
David Short
2003-11-13 18:06:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
I totally disagree with you about the blurring of lines between the
G.M. and F.M. jobs. All the manager can do is advise the G.M. on who
he would like to get.
And who not to get and evaluate where there are needs and where
the strengths are.... I think there is a significant blur there. You're free
to disagree with me. I don't mind.
Post by Henry Porter
I think that Eric wasn't even close to being the Reds all-time
centerfielder. Just based on years of service and consistency Pinson
and Roush were far better.
Eric was only a "full time centerfielder on this club for 4 seasons
1987-1989 and 1996. He split time between left and center in 1986 and
1990. He was not much of a contributor in his other seasons.
Eric Davis 781
Vada Pinson 1496
Edd Roush 1317
Compare the stats and consider the respective eras.
I'll gladly concede that Roush is a defensable pick over
Eric. I'll still take Eric because I saw him and I think
the level of competition was better, but that's me.
Even with the injuries, and I concede they significantly hurt
his PT, I take Eric over either of the other two guys.

Look at park and era adjusted OPS+ between Pinson and Eric.
Eric comes out on top in peak and average. Part of that has to
do with the fact that Vada stayed around long after he was
anything special where Eric just retired as soon as he wasn't
very good. On the other hand Vada was in the majors at 19,
while Pete squandered Eric's age 22 and 23 seasons proving
that Pete was in charge.

As to longivity, I can't hold Eric responsible that the reds
didn't recognize he was good enough to hold on to.
Post by Henry Porter
I think you have it backwards. Eddie was better known for his glove
than his bat. You may have confused him with Gary Redus.
You are absolutely correct.

dfs
Henry Porter
2003-11-14 13:14:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
I totally disagree with you about the blurring of lines between the
G.M. and F.M. jobs. All the manager can do is advise the G.M. on who
he would like to get.
And who not to get and evaluate where there are needs and where
the strengths are.... I think there is a significant blur there. You're free
to disagree with me. I don't mind.
I'm not even sure that we are disagreeing. I say something and then
you say "I disagree" and then you rebutt me by repeating essentially
what I had just written.

Once and for all:

The makeup of the 25-man roster is ultimately determined by the G.M.
He has the final say.
Agree or disagree?

G.M.'s sign/release players. G.M.'s make trades.
Agree or disagree?

Managers tell G.M.s what they would like but don't officially have the
power to do any of the above.
Agree or disagree?
David Short
2003-11-14 13:26:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
I'm not even sure that we are disagreeing. I say something and then
you say "I disagree" and then you rebutt me by repeating essentially
what I had just written.
We seem to have a different understanding of how people work together.
I'm curious what industry you work in that has roles so strictly
compartmentalized?
Post by Henry Porter
The makeup of the 25-man roster is ultimately determined by the G.M.
He has the final say.
Agree or disagree?
I'll rephrase the question.
"The 25 man roster is determined by the GM?"

No. I don't think so. The 40 man roster is determined by the GM, Probably
20 of the 25 man roster is determined by the GM. The last remaining slots
are determined by the manager.
Post by Henry Porter
G.M.'s sign/release players. G.M.'s make trades.
Agree or disagree?
with the understanding that GM's are stuck in the middle. Just as
they "must/should" take the financial advice of the people above them,
they also "must/should" take the baseball advice of the people running
the team. That advice and consent power is serious stuff.

dfs

Swamp Fox
2003-11-12 19:55:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
You post some interesting things. Have to comment.
Post by Henry Porter
When Pinella was hired he had been unable to finish first with good
Yankee clubs, and he was unfamiliar with almost everybody in the
organization. As things turned out, he was the right man for the job.
I'm not arguing against Miley here.
Was Lou the right guy for the job?
I know. I know he won the world series and all. And Marge ran
him out of town and Marge was the root of all that is wrong in the
world. So the question should be easy. Right?
1990 91-71
1991 74-88
1992 90-72
I'm not arguing that Lou was a good/bad manager. You should know by
now that I'm not convinced about the effectiveness of managers. My
point was that Lou came to the organization unfamiliar with the bulk
of the personell, yet the team was, for the most part, successfull
under his leadership.
Post by David Short
Was Lou the right guy for the job?
Lou ran Paul O'Neil out of town. Yes it was Bowden who
made the trade, but he would not have made it if they were
not looking to dump the guy Lou derided as "big."
I don't know the particulars of the Lou/Paul relationship. I do know
that there was some friction between them because Lou was trying to
change Pauls swing. I also know that Lou selected Paul as a reserve on
the 91 all-star team. I think Paul left after 92 season, same as Lou.
I don't see a connection.
Big flourished with the Yankees but he wasn't terribly impressive offensivly
with the Reds.
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Lou ran Willie Greene off the first time. Setting the pattern
for Greene's career.
So your saying that Willie was a bust because of Lou?
I hope not.
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Given a choice between Todd Benzinger and Hal Morris, Lou
stayed with Morris instead of replacing both of them.
With who? Terry Lee?
Nick Esasky.
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Billy Hatcher was in this teams outfield throughtout Lou's
tenure. Think about that. Left field and firstbase were manned
by Billy Hatcher and Hal Morris.
I liked Hatcher until his terrible performance in the 1990 World Series. He
should have hit much better than .750.
Post by Henry Porter
Who should have started over Hatcher?
Winningham?
Sanders?
Rolando Roomes?
Glenn Braggs?
Ed Armbrister.
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Unable to handle the wealth of his bullpen, Lou let Charlton
He couldn't handle it?
Post by David Short
and Meyers go and stayed with Dibble. This is an easy choice
to criticize. Dibble was always a problem child, but he was
an amazing closer.
What do you mean "Lou let Charlton and Myers go"? Was he the G.M.?
Should Lou have used a 3 closer rotation? No. If you have a surplus of
one item and a shortage of another, doesn't it make sense to do some
swapping?
Charlton traded for Kevin Mitchell after the 92 season.
I keep watching Ebay. I want to bid on Kevin's gold tooth, should he decide
to sell it.
Post by Henry Porter
Myers dealt for Bip Roberts after an unsuccesfull attempt at
converting him to a starter.
Those turned about to be pretty good pickups for this club.
Post by David Short
None of the pitchers got better under Pinella. Rijo's injury
string started here.
Where did the Reds finish in the league in team ERA before during and
after Lou's stay. I don't know offhand but it would be a good
indicator of whether or not the pitching improved.
3.39, 3.86 and 3.46 respectivly. It certainly didn't get any worse.
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Given an outstanding relief core, very good starting pitching,
an all-time shortstop and an all-time centerfielder in an
organization pumping out a new major league regular
every year, Lou won a world series finished fifth and
then second. Should he have done more?
Should he have done more? You act as though Lou inherited a great team
and ran it in to the ground. He inherited a club that had finished 5th
in 1989, and 2nd the previous 4 seasons.
Was Eric Davis the Reds all-time centerfielder? Was he an all-time
centerfielder. That's an interesting statement. I was recently looking
through Rob Neyers book of baseball lineups. I expected to see Eric
mentioned as one of the best centerfielders in team history. IIRC,
Neyer list Edd Roush and Vada Pinson ahead of Eric Davis on all-around
talent, and he listed Eddie Milner ahead of Davis in CF on the Reds
all-defensive team. I don't know what he based his ratings on.
Although he is one of my all-time favorites, I don't consider Eric
Davis as an "all-time centerfielder" in the way that Barry is an
all-time shortstop.
Post by David Short
Post by Henry Porter
I think that they need to hire the manager before the start of the
winter meetings, whenever that is, or at least before Dan starts
making a lot of important player moves. The G.M. needs input from the
manager.
I was under the impression that the "winter meetings" were the first
or second week of December. ergo they need a manager
pretty quickly.
I believe that the meetings are Dec 12-15 in New Orleans. Better
hurry, only a month.
David, there were people posting within the first week of O'briens
hiring with the opinion that he had already had plenty of time to hire
a manager (Miley). If a week is a reasonable amount of time to these
persons (not necessarily you), then 1 month is an eternity.
Post by David Short
dfs
Honestly David, this doesn't seem like you. You made a bunch of
half-thought-out arguments regarding Lou's success. I think that maybe
you have some deep-rooted bias against Lou. Why?
Kevin McClave
2003-11-12 23:37:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Given a choice between Todd Benzinger and Hal Morris, Lou
stayed with Morris instead of replacing both of them.
With who? Terry Lee?
Nick Esasky.
Nick was already gone by the time Morris got there. Esasky was traded to
the Red Sox after the 1988 season (for Benzinger and Jeff Sellers, I think
it was) and had his best year with Boston in 1989. He then left there to
play or his hometown Braves and had that weird vertigo problem that ended
his career after only a handful of games for Atlanta in 1990.

Anyone know what Nick wound up doing post-career? He was one of my
favorites and I always felt he could have done some good things had they
played him more.


******************************************************************
Kevin McClave

Reward excellence and loyalty: Miley NOW!
http://www.mileynow.com/
******************************************************************
Swamp Fox
2003-11-12 23:54:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Given a choice between Todd Benzinger and Hal Morris, Lou
stayed with Morris instead of replacing both of them.
With who? Terry Lee?
Nick Esasky.
Nick was already gone by the time Morris got there. Esasky was traded to
the Red Sox after the 1988 season (for Benzinger and Jeff Sellers, I think
it was) and had his best year with Boston in 1989. He then left there to
play or his hometown Braves and had that weird vertigo problem that ended
his career after only a handful of games for Atlanta in 1990.
Oh, I knew all that. I was attempting to be humerous.
Post by Kevin McClave
Anyone know what Nick wound up doing post-career? He was one of my
favorites and I always felt he could have done some good things had they
played him more.
Henry Porter
2003-11-13 13:35:16 UTC
Permalink
After answering to this post the first time, I went home and did a
little research. Consider this the completion to my first response.
Post by David Short
Lou ran Willie Greene off the first time. Setting the pattern
for Greene's career.
Willie was 20 years old in 1992. Sounds like he should have spent most
the season in the minors, which he did.
Post by David Short
Given a choice between Todd Benzinger and Hal Morris, Lou
stayed with Morris instead of replacing both of them.
Billy Hatcher was in this teams outfield throughtout Lou's
tenure. Think about that. Left field and firstbase were manned
by Billy Hatcher and Hal Morris.
Hatcher was traded midway through the 92 season for (drumroll) Tom
Bolton, in a pathetic half-assed attempt to catch the Braves.
Post by David Short
Unable to handle the wealth of his bullpen, Lou let Charlton
and Meyers go and stayed with Dibble. This is an easy choice
to criticize. Dibble was always a problem child, but he was
an amazing closer.
None of the pitchers got better under Pinella. Rijo's injury
string started here.
I researched both of these statements last night. You are wrong on
both accounts.
I looked up "park-adjusted ERA normalized to the league average",
also known as ERA+, in my 1999 copy of Total Baseball. If you are
unfamiliar with this stat, it is used and explained on
baseball-reference.com. The Reds ERA+ for the years 1985-1996 are as
follows:

year ERA+ NL rank
1985 102 5th
1986 99 7th
1987 100 7th
1988 107 4th
1989 96 9th
1990 116 1st
1991 99 7th tied
1992 104 4th
1993 89 12th
1994 109 4th
1995 102 7th tied
1996 96 10th

notes:
100 is average. Higher than 100 is better than average.
N.L. had 12 teams before 1993; 14 teams after 1992.
In 1990 the Reds finished 2nd to the Expos in ERA, 3.37 to 3.39.

The Reds average finish in ERA+ before Lou arrived (1985-1989) was 6th
(out of 12).
The Reds average finish in ERA+ during Lou's tenure (1990-1992) was
4th (of 12).
The Reds average finish in ERA+ after Lou's departure (1993-1996) was
8th (out of 16).

I think that it is reasonable to conclude that the Reds had average
pitching staffs in the years before Lou, above average staffs during
Lou's stay, and average staffs after Lou left.

The ERA+ was better under Lou, therefore, pitchers did get better
under Lou.


As for Rijo's injury history:

Rijo on the D.L.
1988 Aug 18 - Sep 8
1989 July 17 - Sep 1
1990 June 29 - July 21
1991 June 21 - July 25
1992 Apr 18 - May 3
1995 July 19 - ....

Rijo's injury string began before Lou arrived.
Mike Oxbig
2003-11-08 17:58:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henry Porter
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
Cut him some slack until he actually makes a decision, will ya? Geeze.
I feel that I have cut him some slack.
The fact that he has NOT appointed Miley manager already is a decision.
It disappoints me. I certainly have not seen enough to form an opinion
one way or the other, but no matter what Marty may say, just because
the guy is new doesn't mean he is an improvement over Bowden.
dfs
If he had hired Miley already, I would have been disappointed. Not
because I believe that Miley isn't deserving, but because Dan simply
hasn't been here long enough. I didn't listen to the HSL on Nov 5, but
as of Oct 29, Dan said that he had not spoken to Miley. That was a
week and a half ago. To the best of my knowledge he had not
interviewed any other managerial canidates at that time. There is no
way that he can have adequetly undergone the process in the short
amount of time that he has been here.
Had he arrived with this organization, and almost immediately
appointed Miley manager, I would have been disappointed because of the
hastiness of the act. What basis would he have for the appointment?
Marty's recommendation? Gossip within the organization? Kevins
McClaves websites?
Dan has plenty of time to find a manager. He should gather what
facts and opinions he can, analyze them, and then make a decision.
This takes more than a week and a half when you consider that he has
other responsibilities. I want him to do things the right way.
Plenty of time??????? He has plenty of time if they are looking for the
"center ring" of a circus act. He has plenty of time if they are looking
for a puppet. If they are looking for a legitimate field manager who has
input into the make up of the club, along with total control on the field,
it's not getting late. It's getting damned late! I insist that they are
going to have to go through a hiring process or catch hell from MLB.

It was said that goofball Allen wanted to offer the new GM the opportunity
of choosing his own man. Great! Now extend the field manager a form of the
same courtesy. Let him at least have a voice in the needs of the team.
John H
2003-11-07 05:10:03 UTC
Permalink
Lets see....David Short's analysis, or Marty's analysis....I'm really tossed
as to who I should listen to regarding the O'Brian....

john
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow and
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice to
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
dfs
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Mike Oxbig
2003-11-07 03:30:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by John H
Lets see....David Short's analysis, or Marty's analysis....I'm really tossed
as to who I should listen to regarding the O'Brian....
john
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
and
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be nice to
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
dfs
I don't see where David Short pretended to make an analysis. Marty, David
Short, you, me....there isn't anybody that could have made an analysis as of
yet. But you only get one first impression. And keep in mind, absolutely
ANYONE is going to look good after Bowden, especially to Marty. Marty has
made it clear on several occasions that he hated Bowden's guts! And I'm
sure, rightfully so.

I've become a skeptic concerning the Reds. I'm downright suspicious of
anybody that John Allen would hire. Aside from and beyond that, I have a
bad first impression of O'Brien. He may turn out to be Bob Howsam, and I
hope he does.
Swamp Fox
2003-11-07 15:52:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by John H
Post by John H
Lets see....David Short's analysis, or Marty's analysis....I'm really
tossed
Post by John H
as to who I should listen to regarding the O'Brian....
john
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
Another reason to annoit O'Brien as the Anti-Jim. He seems to be slow
and
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
methodical. He asks questions and collects information. It'll be
nice
Post by John H
to
Post by John H
Post by David Short
Post by Swamp Fox
have someone with long term vision.
Just to be an ass about it, it's also possible that instead of being
slow and methodical that O'Brien is just a nitwit. Honeymoons
are nice and everything, but I'll adopt a put up or shut up attitude
with this franchise. What looks like "long term vision" could also
be paralysis.
dfs
I don't see where David Short pretended to make an analysis. Marty, David
Short, you, me....there isn't anybody that could have made an analysis as of
yet. But you only get one first impression. And keep in mind, absolutely
ANYONE is going to look good after Bowden, especially to Marty. Marty has
made it clear on several occasions that he hated Bowden's guts! And I'm
sure, rightfully so.
Marty took a couple of clearly veiled shots at Bowdon on this weeks HSL. I
wish I could remember specifically.
Post by John H
I've become a skeptic concerning the Reds. I'm downright suspicious of
anybody that John Allen would hire. Aside from and beyond that, I have a
bad first impression of O'Brien. He may turn out to be Bob Howsam, and I
hope he does.
David Short
2003-11-07 16:19:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
"This club now from a baseball perspective is operating the way
a major league baseball team should operate. That's keeping
quiet. Conducting your business and when the time comes to
make an announcement, make it."
snip
Post by Swamp Fox
Marty took a couple of clearly veiled shots at Bowdon on this weeks HSL. I
wish I could remember specifically.
I quoted the big one that I heard.

He piled on a bit afterwards about how relieved he was, but the comment
above was his main point.

dfs
Stebain
2003-11-07 11:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by John H
Lets see....David Short's analysis, or Marty's analysis....I'm really tossed
as to who I should listen to regarding the O'Brian....
john
David was playing devil's advocate.
Kevin McClave
2003-11-06 23:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds front
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I don't
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't play
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Or, more likely, there won't be one.


******************************************************************
Kevin McClave

Reward excellence and loyalty: Miley NOW!
http://www.mileynow.com/
******************************************************************
Swamp Fox
2003-11-07 02:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds front
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I don't
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't play
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Or, more likely, there won't be one.
Even if it's Castro at SS every day, we don't suffer on the defensive end. I
think that discussion should be postponed until a field manager is hired.
Mike Oxbig
2003-11-07 03:20:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds front
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I don't
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't
play
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Or, more likely, there won't be one.
Even if it's Castro at SS every day, we don't suffer on the defensive end. I
think that discussion should be postponed until a field manager is hired.
But please take note, our GM has decided to review the roster and possibly
make player moves BEFORE hiring a field manager.
Swamp Fox
2003-11-07 15:55:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Oxbig
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds
front
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I
don't
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't
play
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Or, more likely, there won't be one.
Even if it's Castro at SS every day, we don't suffer on the defensive
end.
Post by Mike Oxbig
I
Post by Swamp Fox
think that discussion should be postponed until a field manager is hired.
But please take note, our GM has decided to review the roster and possibly
make player moves BEFORE hiring a field manager.
Good point. But he hasn't done that. Yet.
Kevin McClave
2003-11-07 04:23:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds front
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I don't
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't
play
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Or, more likely, there won't be one.
Even if it's Castro at SS every day, we don't suffer on the defensive end. I
think that discussion should be postponed until a field manager is hired.
Castro will b in the mix, I'd imagine, but most years in the Larkin regime
he either is the everyday SS, or when he's hurt a cast of several get the
ABs.

Unless Barry completely fools everyone and pulls a rabbit out of his hat
next year, there will probably be three or four guys with significant time
at SS. There will be at least two.


******************************************************************
Kevin McClave

Reward excellence and loyalty: Miley NOW!
http://www.mileynow.com/
******************************************************************
Swamp Fox
2003-11-07 15:57:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds front
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I don't
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't
play
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Or, more likely, there won't be one.
Even if it's Castro at SS every day, we don't suffer on the defensive end. I
think that discussion should be postponed until a field manager is hired.
Castro will b in the mix, I'd imagine, but most years in the Larkin regime
he either is the everyday SS, or when he's hurt a cast of several get the
ABs.
Unless Barry completely fools everyone and pulls a rabbit out of his hat
next year, there will probably be three or four guys with significant time
at SS. There will be at least two.
IF Miley's given the job, I'd disagree with that. Now, under Boone, we'd
have to get Pat Sajak in here to play "Wheel of Shortstops".
Kevin McClave
2003-11-08 00:33:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds
front
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I
don't
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't
play
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Or, more likely, there won't be one.
Even if it's Castro at SS every day, we don't suffer on the defensive
end. I
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
think that discussion should be postponed until a field manager is hired.
Castro will b in the mix, I'd imagine, but most years in the Larkin regime
he either is the everyday SS, or when he's hurt a cast of several get the
ABs.
Unless Barry completely fools everyone and pulls a rabbit out of his hat
next year, there will probably be three or four guys with significant time
at SS. There will be at least two.
IF Miley's given the job, I'd disagree with that. Now, under Boone, we'd
have to get Pat Sajak in here to play "Wheel of Shortstops".
I don't know, it hasn't seemed to matter who the manager is.


******************************************************************
Kevin McClave

Reward excellence and loyalty: Miley NOW!
http://www.mileynow.com/
******************************************************************
Swamp Fox
2003-11-08 00:37:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:33:53 GMT, "Swamp Fox"
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
All from Marty.
"I don't think, since Jim Bowden was fired, anybody from the reds
front
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
office
has said that this team will be competitive ballclub in 2004....I
don't
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
think
anybody in the reds front office expects this team to challenge for
a division title."
Kevin McClave need not apply.
Post by David Short
"As we speak, Barry Larkin is still the best shortstop in the
organization....
but...
Post by David Short
I think over the last couple of years Barry has proven that he can't
play
Post by Swamp Fox
Post by David Short
every
day and then the question arise, how many days can he play."
Therefore, someone else will be the everyday SS.
Or, more likely, there won't be one.
Even if it's Castro at SS every day, we don't suffer on the defensive
end. I
Post by Kevin McClave
Post by Swamp Fox
think that discussion should be postponed until a field manager is hired.
Castro will b in the mix, I'd imagine, but most years in the Larkin regime
he either is the everyday SS, or when he's hurt a cast of several get the
ABs.
Unless Barry completely fools everyone and pulls a rabbit out of his hat
next year, there will probably be three or four guys with significant time
at SS. There will be at least two.
IF Miley's given the job, I'd disagree with that. Now, under Boone, we'd
have to get Pat Sajak in here to play "Wheel of Shortstops".
I don't know, it hasn't seemed to matter who the manager is.
What I'm saying is that Miley has the rep for favoring 'set' lineups.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...