- Thread starter
- #1
JohnU
Aristocratic Hoosier
I squirreled together some thoughts on how we got to this point in Reds history and where we are likely to be in a year, two years ... or in the next phase of the Ice Age.
Without producing a work of excessive prose, I would like to get some other thoughts on it. A lot of this is re-hash, I suppose.
Four general areas on the field:
Starting pitching
Relief pitching
Defense
Hitting
A fifth on-field area, managing-coaching, could be part of that.
I suppose the not-on-the-field stuff, like contracts, scouting, player development are on the table too but that's harder to quantify until it's actually on the field. Baseball finances, of course, are a separate topic.
All in all, it appears the team came out of spring training with a paper-thin strategy that was based on realities that were almost certain to fail.
What worries me, if being worried about a baseball team is the biggest deal of my day, is quite frankly: The same strategy appears to be in place for 2016. About all that the Reds F.O. can say is that they are letting young pitchers get their experience at the top level. That will probably sell season tickets.
As "chico ruiz" is wont to point out, there's not much of a discernible plan in place beyond that. Not clear on what that plan ought to be and whether we'd notice it anyhow, but the problems this team faces appear to be less about talent (or lack thereof) than the way it's been managed.
The bullpen, specifically, is made up of a half-dozen guys who aren't better, worse, different or unique. They are all just ordinary pitchers who could pitch for anybody and achieve the same results. I personally don't buy into "roles" for relievers but the relievers evidently do. What I see is, let's just warm somebody up and bring him in to see if he can get the side out.
Why did the Reds come into the season knowing they'd lose 2 of their 3 starters by July, and essentially believe that Homer Bailey, hurt when camp started, would suddenly become a staff ace?
When did the front office realize that the best fifth starter they had wasn't an immature Iglesias, but was instead -- Jason fucking Marquis?
Why does the best pitcher in recent team history get to throw 3 innings a week?
Why did the Reds think that 550 strikeouts in the outfield was going to generate 100 long hits, 100 stolen bases and profound excitement?
Or that the bench would include still another 15 left fielders who combine for .228 and 7 HR?
I keep looking at the on-field presence and realize that if this team wins 75 games next year, it will mostly be by luck.
Without producing a work of excessive prose, I would like to get some other thoughts on it. A lot of this is re-hash, I suppose.
Four general areas on the field:
Starting pitching
Relief pitching
Defense
Hitting
A fifth on-field area, managing-coaching, could be part of that.
I suppose the not-on-the-field stuff, like contracts, scouting, player development are on the table too but that's harder to quantify until it's actually on the field. Baseball finances, of course, are a separate topic.
All in all, it appears the team came out of spring training with a paper-thin strategy that was based on realities that were almost certain to fail.
What worries me, if being worried about a baseball team is the biggest deal of my day, is quite frankly: The same strategy appears to be in place for 2016. About all that the Reds F.O. can say is that they are letting young pitchers get their experience at the top level. That will probably sell season tickets.
As "chico ruiz" is wont to point out, there's not much of a discernible plan in place beyond that. Not clear on what that plan ought to be and whether we'd notice it anyhow, but the problems this team faces appear to be less about talent (or lack thereof) than the way it's been managed.
The bullpen, specifically, is made up of a half-dozen guys who aren't better, worse, different or unique. They are all just ordinary pitchers who could pitch for anybody and achieve the same results. I personally don't buy into "roles" for relievers but the relievers evidently do. What I see is, let's just warm somebody up and bring him in to see if he can get the side out.
Why did the Reds come into the season knowing they'd lose 2 of their 3 starters by July, and essentially believe that Homer Bailey, hurt when camp started, would suddenly become a staff ace?
When did the front office realize that the best fifth starter they had wasn't an immature Iglesias, but was instead -- Jason fucking Marquis?
Why does the best pitcher in recent team history get to throw 3 innings a week?
Why did the Reds think that 550 strikeouts in the outfield was going to generate 100 long hits, 100 stolen bases and profound excitement?
Or that the bench would include still another 15 left fielders who combine for .228 and 7 HR?
I keep looking at the on-field presence and realize that if this team wins 75 games next year, it will mostly be by luck.