Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

ESPN: Keri: History says potential Red Sox dynasty no sure thing

Dynoastic work by Keri here...or as he calls it, “9,500 words of Dynasty talk and gratuitous Expos references‏.”

“There’s too much movement now,” former Reds reliever Rob Dibble says. “Chemistry is a big deal. You need to come up with the same guys, stay with them, get to know their tendencies and their inside jokes. Otherwise, it doesn’t work.”

Dibble knows something about the challenge of building a dynasty. In 1990, he was a member of the Cincinnati Reds team that won the World Series. Joined by Randy Myers and Norm Charlton, Dibble helped form the Nasty Boys bullpen, a collection of hard-throwing young relievers who—along with Barry Larkin, Jose Rijo, Eric Davis and other young stars—figured to form the nucleus of a Reds team that could reel off multiple championships. It didn’t happen. Injuries and bad luck conspired against the team, and management soon took it apart.

“Once you break a link in the chain, it’s never as strong as it once was,” Dibble says. “Free agency has ruined the game.” Forgive Dibble if he sounds like the lords of the realm who still keep Marvin Miller out of the Hall of Fame. It’s not that he begrudges players the opportunity to choose their employer and make a healthy living. It’s that ,as a fan of the game, he misses those Mount Rushmore-level teams of the past, the ones you either respected or hated, but could never ignore. Although teams such as the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets pull in and spend more money than their lower-revenue counterparts, bigger dollars haven’t translated into the kind of juggernauts that once littered baseball’s landscape, teams such as Casey Stengel’s Yankees, Branch Rickey’s Cardinals and John McGraw’s Giants. Actually, Dibble was born in 1964, too young to remember any of those teams, barely in middle school when the Big Red Machine was winding down. He might pine for the powerhouse teams of the past, but more because of what he has read and heard than what he has seen with his own eyes.

Repoz Posted: March 26, 2008 at 09:18 AM | 22 comment(s)
  Related News: GeneralHistory

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages
   1. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 08:37 AM (#2720660)
Dibble knows something about the challenge of building a dynasty. In 1990, he was a member of the Cincinnati Reds team that won the World Series. Joined by Randy Myers and Norm Charlton, Dibble helped form the Nasty Boys bullpen, a collection of hard-throwing young relievers who—along with Barry Larkin, Jose Rijo, Eric Davis and other young stars—figured to form the nucleus of a Reds team that could reel off multiple championships. It didn’t happen. Injuries and bad luck conspired against the team, and management soon took it apart.

Name a single person on the planet who believed that 90-win team was a burgeoning dynasty.
   2. Edmundo is Super Average Man  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 08:56 AM (#2720671)
Name a single person on the planet who believed that 90-win team was a burgeoning dynasty.

Not that my insight was grounded in any kind of analysis, but at the time I thought of the '90 Reds as a fluky world champion in much the same way as the mid-70s Golden State Warriors team that won a championship.
   3. SJ and the pants of freedom.  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 08:59 AM (#2720676)
The Braves and Yankees both had division winning streaks ~10 years. How is this not dynastic?
   4. schuey  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 09:07 AM (#2720683)
I can remember seeing the Reds in 1987 with young healthy Eric Davis and Kal Daniels and thinking "these guys are dangerous. Cincinnati will contend for several years with them". The 1990 Reds squad had Tom Browning as the oldest regular at age 30. Maybe Dibble has that in mind in thinking they should have a good run remaining. But they fell off in 1991 and had one last decent year in 1992.
   5. Ginger Nut  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 09:15 AM (#2720688)
Hmm, I thought baseball's big problem was that too many teams went into the season knowing they had no chance to win. Now it seems that the problem has changed to not having enough dynastic teams. Poor MLB, they can never quite get it right.

I think Dibbs must be mad that his career was essentially over before he had a chance to cash in on free agency. Still, according to B-Ref he made over $7M in his career and that obviously wouldn't have happened in the pre-free agency era.

I remember everyone being very surprised that the Reds beat the A's that year.
   6. Steve Parris, Je t'aime (M. Valentin)  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 09:27 AM (#2720701)
I wonder if Dibble thinks he helped the team's "chemistry" when he wrestled Pinella in '92.
   7. Hector Moreda & The Generalissimo  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 10:13 AM (#2720747)
That was no wrestling match, that was a comedy sketch, to keep things light!
   8. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66)  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 10:35 AM (#2720765)
at the time I thought of the '90 Reds as a fluky world champion in much the same way as the mid-70s Golden State Warriors team that won a championship.


you and about 95% of all BB fans thought that way

although the analogy I would use would be the 85 Royals (or the 60 Pirates, for those old enough to remember)
   9. John DiFool2  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 10:47 AM (#2720779)
There's parity, but there's also expansion. Put the 1920-1964 Yankees into a 30 team league and see if they can duplicate their original success.
   10. Toolsy McClutch  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 10:50 AM (#2720787)
You'd think the Jays might be considered as well. Back to back WSs, a division title just before that. 2nd in 90, 1st again in 89. No cheap WC either.
   11. The elusive Robert Denby  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 10:54 AM (#2720791)
He might pine for the powerhouse teams of the past, but more because of what he has read and heard than what he has seen with his own eyes.

Making the huge leap of faith that Rob Dibble can, in fact, read.
   12. Jonah Keri  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM (#2720795)
This is what I wrote about the Jays in the commens section of the article:

The Jays of the early 90s are another interesting case. Back-to-back World Series is a really tough task in the modern era. At the same time, while the core players on those teams were very good, you could argue that they won largely thanks to contributions from guys like Jack Morris, Dave Winfield and Paul Molitor--go-for-it acquisitions who were added hoping to get 1-2 more good years out of them before they faded away. So the Jays weren't likely to keep winning after that second World Series, but they weren't a failure either. They did what they set out to do, basically, which was pretty great in its own right.

As for the Reds, definitely a fair point. They were an interesting and young team at the time, it just turned out that Sabo and Duncan weren't that good, Davis never become the superduperstar people expected, and the SP didn't materialize behidn Rijo (who was really excellent for several years, I'd forgotten how good he was when I first started working on the article).
   13. SJ and the pants of freedom.  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 10:59 AM (#2720800)
although the analogy I would use would be the 85 Royals

I always thought of the 85 Royals as the last ride of a great team, even if that isn't entirely accurate. The Royals were monsters in the late 70s/early 80s
   14. scareduck  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 11:11 AM (#2720811)
Judging by this offseason, the Angels certainly aren't standing in Boston's way...
   15. RB in NYC (Now with Resolutions!)  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 11:27 AM (#2720833)
Judging by this offseason, the Angels certainly aren't standing in Boston's way...
Thus continuing their tradition from the 2004 and 2007 ALDS.
   16. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66)  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 01:17 PM (#2720934)
Dibble says. “Free agency has ruined the game.” ........ Although teams such as the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets pull in and spend more money than their lower-revenue counterparts, bigger dollars haven’t translated into the kind of juggernauts that once littered baseball’s landscape


pardon me, but isn't that EXACTLY the opposite of what Selig & Co were screeching as recently as 4 years ago??

remember "lack of competitive balance"--translated as "the Yankees win too much"

so Dibble has gone over to the Seligian dark side with it's wonderful logic:

if event A happens, that proves that free agency is bad

if event (-A) happens, that proves that free agency is bad


(oh, yeah--and we need a salary cap)
   17. Eddieot  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 01:52 PM (#2720972)
Next up on ESPN: John Kruk on the importance of conditioning, Rickey Henderson on modesty and Charlie Manuel's seminar on in-game strategy.
   18. Edmundo is Super Average Man  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 02:18 PM (#2721010)
Charlie Manuel's seminar on in-game strategy
Poor Charlie, his reputation is set forever. We need an IGSORM (InGameStrategyOverReplacementManager) metric to prove or disprove this reputation.
People zero in on his replacing Kendrick (a surprisingly effective rookie last year) with Lohse, as average as average gets, after Kendrick loaded the bases in the playoffs. I would not have made that move as Kendrick had pitched with tremendous poise all season long. But Charlie's reason -- Matsui a low-ball hitter, Kendrick a sinker-baller so bring in Lohse was at least defensible. Obviously a GS later, it didn't work out. Charlie had had a tremendous run down the stretch with heavy handed managing of the pitching staff. Of course, having Romero, Gordon and Myers reincarnate the Nasty Boys for a month helped the outcome.
He does understand the double switch (alright, that did take a while) and he really got the hang of shuffling his lousy 3Bs last year to maximize their effectiveness. He hustled Pat Burrell out of the game at the right times, mostly. Gene Mauch he ain't but I think he's gotten to the point where he's not too bad in that department. Or maybe he just listens to Jimy Williams, but if that's the case, it's a man knowing his limitations, which I'll take too.
   19. Dan Evensen  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 02:28 PM (#2721025)
I always thought of the 85 Royals as the last ride of a great team, even if that isn't entirely accurate. The Royals were monsters in the late 70s/early 80s

Yeah, they certainly weren't pushovers. They had some great teams between 1975 and 1985, but you've got to ignore 1981 and 1983. Though they won the division, they really weren't all that good in 1984, either.

For what it's worth, my favorite APBA team of all time is the original 1975 Royals (from the set my dad bought back then). I haven't tried a '75 APBA board replay yet, but I've got a feeling they'd finish in first place.
   20. Toolsy McClutch  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 02:50 PM (#2721060)
The Jays of the early 90s are another interesting case. Back-to-back World Series is a really tough task in the modern era. At the same time, while the core players on those teams were very good, you could argue that they won largely thanks to contributions from guys like Jack Morris, Dave Winfield and Paul Molitor--go-for-it acquisitions who were added hoping to get 1-2 more good years out of them before they faded away. So the Jays weren't likely to keep winning after that second World Series, but they weren't a failure either. They did what they set out to do, basically, which was pretty great in its own right.


I think that's a fair point, but the Molitor/Winfield additions were simply a matter of updating a position (DH) and Jack effect on the team wasn't that large. It was really the Alomar, Carter, Olerud core with a sprinkly of Gruber and White and such.
   21. Bob Dernier Cri  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 03:04 PM (#2721072)
The decision I was impressed with, in two senses, for the 90s Jays was Ed Sprague at 3B. Cito Gaston put him there in '93 when they didn't have anybody else, and was patient with him (though Molitor played third a couple of times in non-DH World Series games) I admired Gaston for that: he didn't run sixteen different third basemen out there looking for a weekly advantage, as many managers might have done.

I was less impressed when Cito stayed just as patient with Sprague for the next four years. I think that's the fate of some would-be dynasties; they stay with their World Champion starters even when it is clear they're not very good any more (or really never were). I was very impressed when the Mets, for instance, let Ray Knight go not long after the 1986 Series; he had all the makings of a Met Forever at that point. Now, it didn't do them any good in terms of winning another Series, but OTOH Knight didn't do anybody else any good after that either.
   22. schuey  Posted: March 26, 2008 at 08:04 PM (#2721327)
Another team you could add to this list is the 1983 Chicago White Sox.
They went 46-15 after August 1st to win the AL West by 20 games. Although they lost the ALCS to Baltimore, mainly due to poor base running, their future looked good, especially since there were no real powerhouses in the West, unlike the AL East. The future got even brighter when they picked up Tom Seaver as compensation when Dennis Lamp left. It is one of the ironies is the first few years of free agency, owners and media complained about not getting anything if they lost a player. So they demanded and got a system after a two month strike in 1981. But eventually teams like the Mets hollered "wait a minute, Chicago loses Dennis Lamp and I have to lose a player, especially the most famous Met in history". Draft picks soon replaced that.
The White Sox had four starters under 28. But Lamarr Hoyt went from 24-10 115 adjusted era to 13-18, 93. Richard Dotson went from 22-7, 130 to 14-15, 116. Floyd Bannister went from 16-10, 117 to 14-11, 86. Britt Burns had injuries and went from 10-11, 117 to 4-12, 83. The hitters saw 1983 ROY Ron Kittle and aging slugger Greg Luzinski decline. A string of mid division finishes ensued and Tony LaRussa left for Oakland.
Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Adam M
for his generous support.

My Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Vivid Seats is a sports ticket broker, concert ticket broker and theater ticket broker offering the best baseball tickets like Yankees tickets, Cubs tickets, and Red Sox tickets, as well as Police reunion tour tickets and Jersey Boys tickets.

We have baseball tickets, the NFL schedule, college football tickets and Cowboys tickets. We have NBA tickets like Celtics tickets and Lakers tickets. Plus, buy concert tickets, Patriots tickets and Colts tickets. Also check out our MLB baseball schedule

Baseball Bats

JustGreatTickets.com provides the best value for Chicago Cubs Tickets, MLB tickets including Red Sox Tickets, Yankees Tickets, SF Giants Tickets, LA Dodgers Tickets, Cleveland Indians Tickets. Get the best concert tickets like Jonas Brothers tickets and more Chicago Tickets.

Concerts Theatre NFL Angels Dodgers MLB Celtics Theater NBA Tickets Venues NHL Lakers Tickets NFL Yankees NHL Phillies NBA Wicked Marlins MLB Concerts Cubs Mets Red Sox Wicked WWE Red Sox Mets Yankees Dodgers

Major League Baseball: All Star Game, New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, LA Angels, Washington Nationals, Chicago White Sox, and the Chicago Cubs.

Find terrific deals on Yankees tickets for the new home, Cubs tickets for classic Wrigley, or Red Sox tickets for Fenway with OnlineSeats. We have seats for every baseball game, including Dodgers tickets.

Page rendered in 0.7398 seconds
82 querie(s) executed