manager search

A lot of the same people we've known about.
Another Bell in the mix, which might prove interesting.
I'd assume a pitching-first agenda would be on the table but does the new guy have any input on who the Reds go after?
Williams asserts he is going to spend some money on the rotation.
I presume the other teams plan to do the same thing.

The biggest name and least likely of the candidates is Joe Girardi.

David Bell was once thought of as the future manager of the Reds by a lot of fans. Left the organization after Dusty was extended for the 2013 season. I don't know the dynamics of why he left.

My gut instinct tells me it's either Farrell or Bell. Anyone that follows this team knows the Castellini Group isn't in the habit of stepping outside the box. Since buying the team they haven't changed course much in their mode of operation. They hire at the bottom positions and promote upwards. It's a sign they believe they have a system that works. Results say otherwise.

I think whoever comes in will have to take a long hard look at reinventing the wheel in the pitching strategy. Perhaps a season-long "bullpen starters" approach makes sense -- if they can find 10 guys who can get 6 outs.

Either way, I don't see the pitcher they want coming to throw home run balls in that stadium.

To that end, I'd guess the manager will be the guy who agrees to the most favorable terms since there probably isn't a real difference in who they plan to select.

I think more and more the manager is becoming merely the messenger. As the game has increasingly turned to analytics the strategy is predetermined by graphs and charts. The manager remains responsible for the eventual outcome, but a lot of the decision making is determined by some unknown guy in a corner cubicle.

Hit-n-Run said:

I think more and more the manager is becoming merely the messenger. As the game has increasingly turned to analytics the strategy is predetermined by graphs and charts. The manager remains responsible for the eventual outcome, but a lot of the decision making is determined by some unknown guy in a corner cubicle.

Click to expand...

I read a Daugherty column this a.m. that was mildly interesting, though it didn't reveal much other than a colorized Castellini point of view. BC apparently still believes that the position players are adequate and that all Cincy needs do is boost the payroll (budget) across the board, hire a couple of pitchers -- and we will feast at the table of victory.
That being the case, the manager who can promise all that will have to be convinced that Krall and Williams can deliver those sterling arms.

Looking around, I see the Reds trying to land a top lefty in the FA market.
The manager probably won't get to weigh in on that, as per past experience. Crap, they might as well hire Price.

Watching these post-season teams, I can't say for sure what it takes but keeping the bases empty when the big bats come to the plate appears to be working. You can nibble at the power hitters if you aren't as afraid of putting them on.

The bottom of the batting order is somewhat neutralized if nobody is on base.

That's what the manager can't do.

Reds had a hideous record in one-run games, and the credit goes to the offense for scoring enough runs to make it close. I have no idea how I can rationalize that comment.

The offense was average and may not improve significantly next season.

The pitching remained among the weakest in the NL. They have half a bullpen and plenty of half ass starters. In theory if they get the rotation to be NL average they may play .500 ball.

Castellini would like us to believe all the team needs is a tune-up. The reality is this rebuild is still up on blocks in the garage. The manager seems somewhat irrelevant at this point.

No matter who the Reds hire as manager, or who they trade or sign, I have a hard time getting excited about next season, but I will work on this so maybe by the time next season gets here I will have a little excitement.

I know that was sort of a crap post , but I haven't posted for a while and I just wanted to say something .

I think you're like a lot of Reds fans Eburg. Losing will do that to a fan base.

The Reds aren't unique in floundering during this rebuild. There are teams that are perceived as perennial losers and the Reds are probably one of them outside of their diehard regional fan base.

This FO talks as if they've walked the path of success many times. The truth is they've had 3 seasons since 2005 where they've played .500 or better. The only teams that haven't done better are the San Diego Padres and Miami Marlins.

Well, this season was a little different in that they played some really good baseball for around 6 weeks . They got my hopes up and then played some of the worst baseball I have seen them play in the last ten years.

I won't give up on them, they're the only game in town anymore. All the others has changed the rules so much , half the time I don't know what's going on.

We who are old enough to remember the great era of the 70s tend to forget that we were also perceived as arrogant about that. I recall being snobby to Cubs fans even in 2010-12. We get what we deserve, maybe.

But the part about the losing heritage is gnawing at Castellini and was, IMO, the reason Price was hired -- to speed along the rebuild Jocketty told BC was coming. If you are going to rebuild, it starts with pitching, not hitting. Dusty was a hitter, so dump him and hire the pitching coach. After all, the 2012 miracle pitching staff wasn't Dusty's doing.

Price got the job on mirrors, not facts. Once it was clear the rebuild wasn't working, BC panicked again and fired Price with FIVE months to go. Nobody should be interim for five months.

I see where Rigs is pretty much OK with playing out his life on the team's tit .. and for a hoo-hah minute, look at Reds.com and check out the "front office" ... there are more administrators and assistant administrators than there are things to administrate.

HERE IS THAT PAGE

All of this brings me back to organizational ineptitude and the continued culture of "Mediocrity would suit us just fine."

As of now, IF anyone thinks this outfit is primed to contend next year, you have my full undivided attention. It's not that they will be worse; far from it.

Milwaukee has a 3-year window for winning. St. Louis is going to be a very good team if they make the deals I think they will make and all the Cubs need to do is sign Corbin or Kershaw (they might) ... I will watch the Pirates do it on the cheap.

The Reds' record inside the division was atrocious this year. How that figures to change is beyond me.

They have 6 pretty good pitchers and need 8 pretty good pitchers -- and 2 real good ones. They might have 1 real good one.

Not a lot of news noteworthy of discussion, but there is a round two of interviews. It's mostly speculation as to who is still in the running. Bell, Girardi, and Ausmus are the names being floated, but I don't think anyone outside of the FO knows for sure who they're still considering.

I'd assume if a candidate shows up for a second interview there is interest on both parts. But a candidate's interest may wane when it gets down to the details of roster decisions and salary.

I think if a manager wants too much control, the Reds FO may say no to that.
Which means exactly what it means.
But Price was supposed to bring some new thinking to the operation and we saw how that worked. Honestly, not sure what a manager is expected to do now. Get better players, I reckon.

Sounds like Girardi is the first leaf to fall off the tree.

David Bell might be the odds on favorite to get the job. The Reds like hiring from their orchard of family trees. Bob and Phil, Williams brothers and Dick, Walt and Joe, and could be Buddy and David.

If for ever what ever reason the names on the short list don't work out they may re-hire Riggleman as the interim manager. I'm joking, but with this group you never know. A lot of this rebuild seems like a bad joke at times.

I think the rebuild is finished, at least from the perspective of knowing what they need. Getting what they need is another matter but the weaknesses have been identified. There is no shortage of them.

I'd put a buck on Bell to get the job unless he wants a contract they aren't prepared to accept, which tends to take the short list in another direction.

I don't think a top name guy is necessary but beyond that, I have no idea what will work with a team that gives up 220 home runs every year.

It's official. They've hired the son of another FO employee.
They now have a matching set of Bells.

New manager, same problems.

I don't like the term rebuild. It's an over used excuse for losing. Every team adds and drops players from their systems. It's an ongoing process for every team.

When your farm system is void of talent and you can't afford the players you already have it's a FO office problem. Changing managers isn't going to fix that.

Pundits (professed experts) were all hoping for a manager who wouldn't call for bunts or misuse his pitching. Geezusfuckinchrist ... every manager calls for the bunt and the only way a bullpen game is wrong is when it fails with bad pitchers. Bell is going to bunt and he isn't going to manage differently from anybody he ever learned from, including everybody in his family.

My brother and I were musing that a 46-year old guy being named manager is one thing but the fact that he and I saw his GRAND-father play in his prime is a bit telling about our age.

Bell is not the problem and he isn't the solution. But the armchair GMs will be all right with him for the first 70 games.

I listened to the media interview during the hiring news conference. Other than the normal cliches you'd expect there wasn't much that made me feel like things were going to be much different.

Hey, I think Bell has plenty of credentials to manage, besides he’s a baseball guy looking for a better opportunity....same as about 99% of players on the Reds roster. I’m sure Homer doesn’t want to stink, and every other disappointing player, coach, trainer or low level front office worker would concur, they all want to keep a job....it’s about standards the teams really have, vs. what fans expect.

Unfortunately, baseball is a business fans only see one side of.

The Reds still need better players, and after a couple of miserable seasons, I came to the realization that what the Reds were doing, wasn’t a rebuild in the sense that it was going to develop a winner on the field, anytime soon anyway.

I entirely understand the economics that prevent the Reds from trading up, and signing elite free agents. I do not understand how they can continue to make annual miscalculations and / or under preparation of young talent.

I’m of the opinion that other than minor tweaking of an occasional grip on a pitch or minute adjustment of a timing mechanism at the plate, Reds arent “developing” in the minors, other than getting players a few years of minor league experience.

Therefore, I think they may need to spend more on scouting than development, or even overpaying popular future DL millionaires on the MLB roster. If they can’t grow skills, maybe they need to find better to begin with. Fans at GABP wouldn’t see that with a ticket for years.

Unfortunately, unless the Reds get better talent in the minors, they won’t ever see it in GABP.