Very weird timing. Never thought he was a good GM, probably like most people here.

Seriously? Not that I think he really deserved to keep his job but why the hell would you fire him 21 games into the season? If starting 9-12 was all it took to get him canned then why was he kept around all off-season?

Baseball lost one of its worst executives today, but I'm still scratching my head over the timing. Why now? Why wait until he's given a big contract and near-total control to Dusty Baker, which is likely to be damaging in the short and long term to the franchise, and then fire him 20 games into the season? This makes no sense. Lots of good teams start a season 9-12. What's the justification for such an apparent panic move? Color me skeptical that ownership woke up this morning and had an epiphany, suddenly realizing that Krivsky doesn't know what he's doing.

Huh. Did not see that coming. Did not see that coming at all.

I think I predicted June or July in the off-season.

Once they hired Jocketty, the Reds had to win immediately for Krivsky not to get canned. LaRussa will probably be the Reds' manager next year.

What's the justification for such an apparent panic move?

He whipped Kenny Williams in the Worst GM poll?

Once they hired Jocketty, the Reds had to win immediately for Krivsky not to get canned. LaRussa will probably be the Reds' manager next year.

I had completely forgotten about Jocketty. This makes sense now. It's a horsesh*t move by the Reds, though. If they wanted Jocketty to be the gm they should have just handled it in the offseason.

LaRussa will probably be the Reds' manager next year.

Don't I wish. DeWitt loves La Russa and never cared much for Jocketty for whatever reasons.

I'm surprised as everyone is, but I'm also surprised he was GM for three years. I guess time really flies when you make bad trades.

It can happen to Sabean, we can only hope.

There's never really a bad time to fire a bad GM, but the timing of this leads me to believe something went down behind the scenes.

Don't I wish. DeWitt loves La Russa and never cared much for Jocketty for whatever reasons.

We'll see. LaRussa and Jocketty are very tight. And no, I don't "wish." I'd rather they try a new face, although LaRussa has had a great career and I like his animal shelters.

There's never really a bad time to fire a bad GM, but the timing of this leads me to believe something went down behind the scenes.

That's what I think too. The timing is so awkward, it must have been driven by a non-baseball decision.

Seriously? Not that I think he really deserved to keep his job but why the hell would you fire him 21 games into the season? If starting 9-12 was all it took to get him canned then why was he kept around all off-season?

Well, if they didn't do it this way, they wouldn't be one of the worst run organizations in baseball.

So how will Jocketty and Baker mesh?

Baseball lost one of its worst executives today

Setting aside the trade with WA Wayne has accomplished the following:

--Acquired Bronson Arroyo for Wily Mo Pena

--Picked up Dave Ross for nothing and got 38 homers in 558 at bats

--Acquired Brandon Phillips who is among the best defensive second basemen in baseball

--Has supported the playing time of Edwin Encarnacion despite calls from team announcing booth, local media and field managers (Narron) to bench the kid

--Cut bait on Eric Milton

--Picked up Josh Hamilton for chump change

--Picked up Jeff Keppinger for pocket lint

These are all things that pushed the Reds forward as opposed to back.

Just saying..................

There's never really a bad time to fire a bad GM, but the timing of this leads me to believe something went down behind the scenes.

I partially agree, it's not like firing a manager.
For the GM the start of the season is close to meaningless.

Depending on how active a role a particular GM takes in the June Draft, firing him too close to that might be disruptive.

A real bizarre time to fire a GM imho would be September/October/November- but teams do that anyway for some reason.

And no, I don't "wish."

This suggests I should clarify that it's me wishing the Reds get La Russa in 2009.

So Robin is praising Tony's shelters and record and Greenback is pushing him out the door. I guess this is the part where I commend Tony on his easy-going nature.

Depending on how active a role a particular GM takes in the June Draft, firing him too close to that might be disruptive.

Yeah, that would probably be a bad time to fire a GM, depending on how the organization runs it's drafts. At the same time though, if you're going to fire that GM, you might as well do it before he has another bad draft.

Man. They at least let Tony Perez get 44 games into the season before canning him in '93. (Was that really 15 years ago? Damn.)

Much like nearly everyone here, I thought Krivsky did a pretty terrible job, but if they come to their senses and give Jay Bruce the center field job and they catch a few breaks, they've got a shot to be right in the middle of the playoff chase. It sounds insane, but 85 wins has been enough the last two years...a .500 team is a playoff contender in the NL Central. Anyway, it's weird to see a contender can its GM in midseason, and especially weird to see it happen after three weeks.

Of course, having Jocketty around makes it a whole lot easier to fire Krivsky if you're Bob Castellini.

The timing is so awkward, it must have been driven by a non-baseball decision.

He took an intern to a local casual dining establishment and hugged her awkwardly.

What Harvey's said.

Ya'know, I understand folks like Brian Gunn get all gushy about Jocketty but if you put up Walt's record of the last few years versus Wayne's it's kind of hard to point to Walt as the superior talent.

I thought folks here liked to "live in the now". Well, "now" Krivsky is/was doing ok.

He just axed Juan Castro. I wonder if that pushed Marty over the top and he threatened to leave if somebody didn't pay for his special friend being shown the door?

Brennaman's love for Juan Castro is mindboggling. You would have thought Juan had pulled Marty from the Ohio River during a flood or something............

These are all things that pushed the Reds forward as opposed to back.

Just saying..................

You could do the same thing for Bowden's reign as Reds GM, and yet after all these years the Reds are still in a rut.

JP:

There is a world of difference between a decade and a few years.

The talent base for the Reds is MUCH better than it was when Wayne arrived. He deserves the credit for that clearly obvious fact.

I agree with Harvey as well. What am I missing about Krivsky's reign that has brought him so much scorn? Don't say Griffey, either. He gets a pass for sticking with Griffey because no gm in Cincinatti is going to be able to cut bait on Griffey.

So Robin is praising Tony's shelters and record and Greenback is pushing him out the door. I guess this is the part where I commend Tony on his easy-going nature

Hey there SoshU. Since you, unlike me, have the brains/judgment to stay off of political threads, haven't seen you lately.

I am surprised greenback wants TLR out. I have never liked TLR's personality, but the man's teams have won a lot of games and the Cards are out of the gate well this year, contrary to almost all predictions I saw. I would take him over Baker without any question.

These are all things that pushed the Reds forward as opposed to back.

I agree. But he did hire Baker and ditch Hamilton for very little. You put Hamilton's .306/.364/.553 in place of Patterson's .197/.265/.508 and the Reds are probably a game or two better in the early going. The Bowden Reds were always good for interesting transactions if nothing else and GM Wayne kept that tradition going....

shooty:

Let me be clear that I have hammered on Wayne for allowing the media to go after Dunn in such a publicly negative way. It was inexcusable that the team's announcer, HOF or no, to make Adam a target of scorn and ridicule.

It could be Castellini was tired of eating bad contracts. The paid Juan Castro 1 million to go away. Mike Stanton cost about 3.5M. He'd probably like to undue the Alex Gonzalez signing, and Arroyo's extension isn't looking fantastic right now.

What am I missing about Krivsky's reign that has brought him so much scorn?

The Lopez/Kearns trade and the hiring of Dusty Baker seem like the biggest marks against him. However, the WAS trade, while not a "win" for CIN, doesn't seem like the disaster it did a couple years ago. The hiring of Dusty Baker, well, probably not a great idea, but I think Dusty's probably a better manager than he gets credit for around here. I wouldn't want him as the manager of my team, though.

Krivsky was able to gather a strong core of young pitching, and a strong core young hitting.

Cueto/Volquez/Bailey - he might not have signed all these players, but the system developed them.
Arroyo - the trade
Harang - signed LTC
Thompson - turning out to be the best Reds prospect when Bruce/Bailey go up.
Bruce/Votto - developed by the Reds
BP/Kepp - brought in for nothing

He's gathered a very solid foundation for winning.... the only problem were trading for, or signing players that shouldn't have been acquired. Players like Castro/Conine/Cormier/Stanton/Sarlos/the whole Rule V thing/etc.
The biggest FA signings he had were Agone, which was somewhat reasonable at the time. And Cordero, which I still think was a good move.

Walt might be better at getting better surrounding players, but he can't match Krivsky in development and acquisition of star players.

Walt has a history of traded too much talent for mediocre players, and Even though I doubt Bruce will be traded, EE/Bailey are players that might not be Reds in 3 months.

Hamilton was traded because the team discovered that Josh was relapsing into bad behaviors and Josh's main advocate, Narron, had been fired. Now, I would contend that the team should have ditched Freel as it was strongly alleged that Ryan was the pied piper in having Josh walk down the wrong path. But the team chose to trade Josh.

While I understand that Dusty Baker has his flaws we simply do not know yet whether this is a bad fit or not. And Baker does have a winning record as a major league manager in over a decade's worth of service taking two different teams to the playoffs.

Setting aside the trade with WA Wayne has accomplished the following:

The trade with Washington hasn't even turned out poorly. Since the trade, Kearns has a 103 OPS+, Lopez has an 81 OPS+ with crappy defense, and Wgner has an 84 ERA+ in 46 IP. The Reds didn't really get anything useful out of it, but they didn't end up losing much, either.

Let's not give him too much credit for Keppinger...as he was acquiring Keppinger, he gave away Brendan Harris for free. That's a break-even at best.

Despite that, the more I look at Krivsky's tenure, the more I see a guy who made a lot of moves that looked dumb or inconsequential at the time that have generally worked out. He may have gotten a bit of a raw deal, but he just as easily may have stopped being able to find solid contributors for free.

While I understand that Dusty Baker has his flaws we simply do not know yet whether this is a bad fit or not

.

I agree with this intellectually, but I simply don't have confidence in Baker.

There is joy in the chili parlors today. Or is there?

Meanwhile, many of us in D.C. are getting restless about the reign of a former Reds GM. (And say what you will about Krivsky, I sense he has a better feel for pitching at the major-league level than Bowden does.)

Yea, I don't get why Krivsky is so scorned either. He certainly wasn't the worst GM in baseball (I'm looking at you Bill Bavasi and you Brian Sabean). He seemed to be decent at getting freely available talent like Brandon Phillips, David Ross, and Jeff Keppinger. He got Arroyo. I thought the Kearns trade was terrible, but it turned out to be not so bad. I'm in the minority here, but I thought the Cordero signing made sense. I'm also in the minority in thinking it was wise to trade Hamilton while his value was high, as he had a bunch of red flags (injury, only 300 ABs of success, drug past)

I actually had the Reds as a sleeper in the NL this year. I would have given Krivsky the year to see how that played out, but I guess they wanted Jocketty in there.

Hamilton was traded because the team discovered that Josh was relapsing into bad behaviors

This is the first I've heard of this. By all accounts I've seen, he is doing just fine in Texas. Can you provide a source?

The trade with Washington hasn't even turned out poorly. Since the trade, Kearns has a 103 OPS+, Lopez has an 81 OPS+ with crappy defense, and Wgner has an 84 ERA+ in 46 IP. The Reds didn't really get anything useful out of it, but they didn't end up losing much, either.

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Thompson &pos=P&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=444354

People forget this guy was part of "the trade"

Take a look at his numbers, he might be the best player from it.

While I understand that Dusty Baker has his flaws we simply do not know yet whether this is a bad fit or not. And Baker does have a winning record as a major league manager in over a decade's worth of service taking two different teams to the playoffs.

Yes, but how much of that was due to Dusty himself!? Add the greatest player on Earth to this Reds team, and I'm sure they'll end the season with a winning record.

People forget this guy was part of "the trade"

Take a look at his numbers, he might be the best player from it.

But he walked a guy. Screw him!

Dan:

Keppinger is a better player. He is an average SS while Brendan is/was a terrible shortstop. And I think Keppinger will outperform Harris offensively as well.

Just because things LOOKED dumb doesn't mean they are or were dumb. The actions WORKED.

I thought this place was results-oriented as opposed to determining whether they have the appearance of being good. Is that no longer true?

Jonk:

Ask the Reds fans. It was mentioned in another thread and is deemed common knowledge in the Cincy area.

I have relatives in the city who heard the same thing. That Hamilton was seen "partying" with Freel and the team got nervous.

I think the folks at BPro also mentioned this rumor in the transaction analysis.

Hamilton was traded because the team discovered that Josh was relapsing into bad behaviors

Really? Thats sad to hear. Was this reported in the papers or online, or is this "inside info" ?

EDIT: OK, NM.

Unsubstantiated rumor. I do that too sometimes. ;)

Also, Edinson Volquez is pretty good. They got a decent return on a guy from a Rule V draft with Hamilton's history.

Ya'know, I understand folks like Brian Gunn get all gushy about Jocketty but if you put up Walt's record of the last few years versus Wayne's it's kind of hard to point to Walt as the superior talent.

Yeah; I think just about all of Cardinaldom realized this; he'd pull off a "how the hell'd he do that" trade about once a year up until about the Larry Walker trade; after that he was just an average GM.

It's really only surprising if you weren't looking.

A GM has 4 jobs:

1. Roster construction. The roster's a mess - 4 CFs, none of whom are starters for a good team. 2 lefty 1Bs. An injury away from disaster at 3B, SS, or 2B.

2. Too many bad contracts. While Harvey likes to blame everything in Cinci on Marty, Castro's release may indeed have been the final straw after eating the Cormier and Stanton contracts. Plus, Freel's isn't looking so good right now, either.

3. He pissed off his boss. Castellini came in to town promising to "win now". Krivsky pulled off the worst trade since Frank Robinson to try to accomodate that. They still aren't winning.

4. Build for the future. Here, actually, Krivsky can claim some success. While not as deep as some, the Reds system is pretty strong at the top.

Krivsky was given ample chances over the past 2-plus years to prove he's competent, and failed at almost every chance. And like you or I when we suck at our jobs, he got fired.

As far as I'm concerned, the Baker signing is probably Krivsky's worst move.

Let's just say I'm very glad Dusty Baker is not my team's manager -- and my team's manager is Ned Yost. Yep, I'd rather have a guy who pathologically mishandles his bullpen than a guy who has an irrational hatred of young players. A lot of people picked the Reds as sleepers this year, but they were assuming Bruce and Votto would be full-time players, and that Harang's and Cueto's arms won't fall off. I don't think that's a safe assumption to make with Dusty Baker as your manager.

I grew up a Reds fan, but moved to Milwaukee a decade ago and have fallen in love with the Brewers. It's kinda like leaving your parents home and meeting your wife. ;) Anyway, I'll always love the Reds and wish them well (unless they're playing the Brewers), but I don't see many good days in their future with a youth-oriented team and a power-and-patience Big Bat in left with "veteran leadership and aggression at all costs" Baker at the helm.

See, it's not just that Baker's a bad manager -- he can get good results out of veteran teams with healthy pitchers in their prime who can handle repeated 120-pitch outings. While it's possible, it's unlikely that Johnny Cueto can handle that workload. And it's quite possible that Joey Votto could end up like Hee Seop Choi.

This is the first I've heard of this. By all accounts I've seen, he is doing just fine in Texas. Can you provide a source?

Not for nothing, but Harvey pointed out that Narron was a big on him, and now Narron's with the Rangers. Coincidence?

This thread is making me want a three-way from Skyline or Empress. Yum.

Screw Gold Star. ;)

Sounds more like speculation than anything else.

I think they traded Hamilton because they got a good young pitcher for a guy that had at least a decent chance to have a short career.

Whether they are right or not is for history to decide.

Just because things LOOKED dumb doesn't mean they are or were dumb. The actions WORKED.

I thought this place was results-oriented as opposed to determining whether they have the appearance of being good. Is that no longer true?

I totally agree with you, that's exactly what I was saying...many of us (myself included) have derided many of Krivsky's moves as being somewhere between silly and insane. And many of said moves have worked out. I needed to look more closely at his tenure to discover that my perception didn't necessarily match reality.

Either Krivsky was getting lucky (which is entirely possible, and in which case this was a good move for the Reds) or he's really good at seeing things nobody else sees (which is also entirely possible, and in which case this was an awful move for the Reds). I suppose we'll find out if/when he gets another GM job.

The Reds' 2006 draft is shaping up to be a disaster, and the 2007 draft only a little better (depending on what happens with Lotzkar and Soto). Stubbs probably isn't going to hit, and when you consider that the Reds passed on Lincecum and Scherzer to take Stubbs, in a pick widely considered a reach at the time, you have to think that Cincy should have done better. They're certainly not getting much from the lower picks in that draft. Mesoraco was a risky pick at #15 in '07, given the history of HS catchers in the draft. Frazier looks like a solid pick, but he really should be at high-A or even AA given that he's already 22.

-- MWE

This thread is making me want a three-way

Yeah, this is kind of permanent place for me. Not with Krivsky or even Harveys, though, so don't go there!

Joey Votto could end up like Hee Seop Choi.

You mean playing for the Kia Tigers ?

Hope he likes garlic.

Thanks, Mike. That does color my opinion of Krivsky somewhat. And I'm not arguing Krivsky was a top gm, just that he's not the Faulknerian idiot he gets made out to be.

I thought this place was results-oriented as opposed to determining whether they have the appearance of being good. Is that no longer true?

was it ever true?

Seriously, you and Dan Lee do bring out a good issue- Krvisky has made a number of moves that have worked out better (or less bad) than originally anticipated by the likes of us BTFers.

GMs, like people in general, do get lucky, FWIW my impression of Sabean is that his early tenure was marked by extreme good luck- he inherited Barry Bonds- who subsequently juiced and had his performance elevated to unprecedented heights, he traded a god player, Matt Williams, for a good player, Jeff Kent, and saw Kent- out of nowhere- play like a HOFer for several years after turning 30.
Since then- crap, oh he traded for Schmidt and picked up a few useful parts here and there- but all GMs given time will come up with a handful of good moves- even Dave Littlefield- but basically Sabean rode Bonds.
Cain/Lincecum you say? Well Ok, but...
Jason Grilli
Nate Bump
Kurt Ainsworth
Jerome Williams
Boof Bonser
Brad Hennessey
Noah Lowry
Matt Cain
David Aardsma

You draft enough pitchers in the first round some have to work out-
and this is kind of the flip side of the Sabean Giants complete inability to develop position players

all GMs given time will come up with a handful of good moves

Cam Bonifay?

I suppose it depends on what you mean by a "handful." ;)

Just because things LOOKED dumb doesn't mean they are or were dumb. The actions WORKED.

I thought this place was results-oriented as opposed to determining whether they have the appearance of being good. Is that no longer true?



What about "The Trade" worked? It was bad. Revisionist history doesn't change that.

Krivsky traded his good-hitting, GG-defense RF; defensively challenged but good hitting and baserunning SS; and a servicable reliever for an injured RP; a RP with 23 major-league innings; a rookie-league pitcher; a roster-fodder SS (who ended up being given away); and Royce F. Clayton. And made said trade to win now.

There is no way anyone in their right mind makes that trade. Even if you think Darryl Thompson is going to turn into a ML pitcher, you don't make that trade (this is the first he's pitched past A-level). That Kearns hasn't hit as well since doesn't change anything; at the time there was no way to know it. Plus, that meant RF was manned by Freel, DeNorfia, and Hollandsworth. SS became a sucking hole of suckiness. Krivsky wasn't smart enough to ask for medical reports on Majewski. And while Harris was touted in the press as "pivotal" in the trade, and even though he proceeded to be sent to AAA and tear the cover off the ball, he was given a whopping 10 ABs in Cinci before they gave him to Toronto, so obviously Krivsky didn't really believe he was that "pivotal".

Harveys put together a list of Krivsky's good moves that illustrates that he appears to do little things well; his track record of identifying useful players that can be acquired for free is strong. It's everything else that makes him a guy I'd never hand the keys to my franchise to. He's jerked Adam Dunn around endlessly and gone on the record more than once espousing his belief that strikeouts are the worst thing a hitter can do, and even when the Reds picked up Dunn's option last November, Krivsky made statements to the press to the effect that he didn't really want to pick up the option. The Pena/Arroyo trade worked out for the Reds, and you can ascribe that to Krivsky's eye for talent if you want, but at the time plenty of people were optimistic about Pena, and I think it's just as probable Krivsky was lucky. Don't get me wrong; I wrote at the time that trade happened that I thought the Reds were getting the better end of it, but no one thought, at the time, it would be the kind of huge win for the Reds that it's proven to be.

As for the idea that Krivsky's good at putting together a pitching staff... he signed Josh Fogg to pitch half his games in Cincinnati's launching pad. The prosecution rests. The Reds' pitching staff has been OK the last few years because Aaron Harang (acquired by Jim Bowden from the A's) turned into an ace, and Arroyo.

Krivsky makes for a fine guy in a supporting role in your front office, I think, but he should not be holding the car keys. I don't think he understands how runs are produced--Exhibit A is that he hired Dusty Baker--and that's one of the fundamental things I'd want in my GM. Krivsky is near-pathological about detesting hitters striking out and extremely overvalues relief pitchers. The former thing can handicap a talent evaluator; the latter can lead to expensive mistakes. Krivsky was, in my opinion, lucky the Kearns/Lopez trade didn't turn into a category five catastrophe.

Let's be reasonable, though: Krivsky's a garden-variety bad GM, the kind of which there are eight or ten out there as we speak, not a horrendous, destructive force like Brian Sabean or Ned Colletti or Dave Littlefield.

This article was written during Spring Training, but it paints a very different picture of Hamilton with his new teammates. Michael Young, Hank Blalock, and Ian Kinsler sat in on a press conference in which Hamilton talked about his past problems with drugs. If these guys are taking the time to learn about his past problems, then, I would assume, they would not try to get Hamilton to go back to his old ways. The article also says that Kinsler invited Hamilton to grab a salad for lunch one day, and that this was the first time than another professional athlete invited him out for a meal.

It seems like the reception that Hamilton got from both teams is worlds apart. Of course, his acceptance by the Rangers can't positively prevent Hamilton from making a bad decision, but I doubt it will hurt him any.

In the list of "bad contracts", I forgot Affeldt and Fogg. I'll be shocked of at least one of those isn't eaten this year, too.

he signed Josh Fogg to pitch half his games in Cincinnati's launching pad. The prosecution rests.

Josh Fogg costs $1M.

Josh Fogg costs $1M.

And he's on a one year deal.

Hamilton was traded because the team discovered that Josh was relapsing into bad behaviors

That's called libel, since it's false.

Ask the Reds fans. It was mentioned in another thread and is deemed common knowledge in the Cincy area.

I have relatives in the city who heard the same thing. That Hamilton was seen "partying" with Freel and the team got nervous.

Yeah, that fails any reasonable standard for sourcing. Harvey, you're allowed to believe stuff like that, but don't spread it if you can't verify it. "It's deemed common knowledge" is about as weaselly as it gets. I do this stuff for a living, and not only was I not privy to this "common knowledge," my intelligence on the subject is contradictory to your claims.

Yep, I'd rather have a guy who pathologically mishandles his bullpen than a guy who has an irrational hatred of young players.

Lucky me! My guy is BOTH!

And it's quite possible that Joey Votto could end up like Hee Seop Choi.

Votto's hitting right now, but it will be interesting to see:

1: Does he start the day after going ofer 4 with 2 ks and a GDP?
2: If he is rested for a day or two and Hatteberg has a 3 ribbie game- how long does Votto stay on the bench?

Baker has never, ever, gotten to play with a prospect as good as Bruce, but Bruce is in AAA right now, a move that's quite defensible in isolation so I'll leave that aside.
Choi was probably as good a prospect as Votto, Choi was forced to share time with a close to washed up vet (Hollandsworth) just as Votto has to contend with Hatteberg (even worse since 2008 Hatteberg is probably a better player than the Cubs version of Hollandsworth), Choi was hurt, and Baker refused to let him play after he returned- even though the Vet was playing badly at the time.

I don't think Baker will pitch Cueto as much as he did Prior/Zambrano/Wood, even if Cueto is effective, if for no other reason that he's aware of the issue in a way he wasn't before, he may think pitch counts etc are bull, but I'm sure he doesn't like being thought as a career killer either.

BTW, Jeff Keppinger is now at .313/.367/.446 for his MLB career (559 PAs)- OPS+ of 108, and can apparently play an acceptable SS.
He was given up as a throw-in by the Pirates at a time when their dual starting 2Bs were hitting .256/.298/.368 and .266/.353/.339
The Mets- who could really really really use him right now- traded him for a bad defensive 2b who, after finally starting they then inexplicably waived a month ago...
And was traded for the very definition of a fungible A baller by a Royals team which had just played a SS who hit .234/.259/.333 and would go on to play one who would hit .267/.284/.356

Why do I like Jeff Keppinger? Becasuye he's proof there really is such a thing as a "Ken Phelps all star" and the fact that one or two teams might dump a player does not mean, in and of itself, that the guy can't play.

I think the folks at BPro also mentioned this rumor in the transaction analysis.

I'm reading Christina Kahrl's TA article, and I see no mention of this. She talks about his numbers against finesse pitchers and sliders. She does not say anything about Hamilton partying with Freel and relapsing into bad behaviours. She does not mention Freel at all.

Josh Fogg costs $1M.
And he's on a one year deal.

And he's currently sporting a nifty 12.5 ERA.

That Kearns hasn't hit as well since doesn't change anything; at the time there was no way to know it.

Not to defend that particular trade, BUT, if a guy repeatedly trades guys who afterwards do not play as well as we thought they would- YOU HAVE TO ASK - did he know something we didn't?

That said it's still a bad trade even if Wayne knew that Kearns/Lopez/overrated closer prospect would play poorly after the fact- he still gave up what at the time was a package of significant trade value for crap

And he's currently sporting a nifty 12.5 ERA.

That he is, but to cut him loose wouldn't be a burden to the budget.

A lot of people picked the Reds as sleepers this year, but they were assuming Bruce and Votto would be full-time players, and that Harang's and Cueto's arms won't fall off.

Joey Votto is a full-time player, Harang's pitch count is down from last season, and Cueto hasn't thrown 100 pitches in any of his starts.

But Jay Bruce, yeah, I'll give you that one.

Cam Bonifay?

I suppose it depends on what you mean by a "handful." ;)

Todd Ritchie trade...
And then...um...well, if Kevin Polcovich and Ron Wright hadn't had those injuries, everything would have been completely different. Geez, talk about bad luck!

BTW, while searching for good moves by Bonifay, a search I decided not to bother with, I found this hilarious look forward to the 2002 Pirates, written just after they hired Littlefield. You could not imagine how similar it is to all the articles written this year about the 2008 Pirates and Huntington.

Not surprised that it happened, but surprised that it happened right now. It's merited.

Choi was probably as good a prospect as Votto, Choi was forced to share time with a close to washed up vet (Hollandsworth)

It was Eric Karros, not Hollandsworth. Hollandsworth faced off with DuBois.

Votto's hitting right now, but it will be interesting to see:

1: Does he start the day after going ofer 4 with 2 ks and a GDP?
2: If he is rested for a day or two and Hatteberg has a 3 ribbie game- how long does Votto stay on the bench?

Hatte's last start was 4/10, a day he went 3 for 4 with a double. Something tells me Baker's sticking with Votto.

Not to defend that particular trade, BUT, if a guy repeatedly trades guys who afterwards do not play as well as we thought they would- YOU HAVE TO ASK - did he know something we didn't?

Yes, exactly. Generally, we can make the assumption that people in the front office know more than we do about what factors can be used to predict a player's future performance. Statistics are not everything, though we do know all the statistics.

That said it's still a bad trade even if Wayne knew that Kearns/Lopez/overrated closer prospect would play poorly after the fact- he still gave up what at the time was a package of significant trade value for crap

Unless...other GMs shared his view that what appeared to be a package of significant trade value was actually two players whose peak had already passed.

Sometimes there's a consensus among insiders that something which might have seemed significant to outsiders was actually a fluke.

That Kearns hasn't hit as well since doesn't change anything; at the time there was no way to know it.

Not to defend that particular trade, BUT, if a guy repeatedly trades guys who afterwards do not play as well as we thought they would- YOU HAVE TO ASK - did he know something we didn't?

Wasn't RFK shown to be exceptionally bad for RH hitters, Soriano notwithstanding?

Keith:

I LIKE the guy. I opposed the trade. But folks asked so I passed along the gossip from the street. I typically don't traffic in that area but given the trade on its face was odd plus Freel's history AND Hamlton's past it didn't seem far-fetched.

I apologize.

TDF:

I just think it's important to be even-handed. There are a lot of GMs who haven't collected near that amount of talent in that amount of time and are still gainfully employed. It's fine if Cincy has different/higher standards.

And you will note that I wasn't defending "The Trade". Just that it's the thing folks talk about with respect to Krivsky without mentioning the other items.

That said it's still a bad trade even if Wayne knew that Kearns/Lopez/overrated closer prospect would play poorly after the fact- he still gave up what at the time was a package of significant trade value for crap

Unless...other GMs shared his view that what appeared to be a package of significant trade value was actually two players whose peak had already passed.

Sometimes there's a consensus among insiders that something which might have seemed significant to outsiders was actually a fluke.

But the return really was nothing. Kearns played 350 more innings in the OF than anyone else for the Nats last year; so far, he's played every inning this year. Lopez has over 650 PAs since the begging of '07. Are you saying Kearns, still a starter for a ML club, and Filipe Lopez, still a starter for a ML club, had no value?

Not to defend that particular trade, BUT, if a guy repeatedly trades guys who afterwards do not play as well as we thought they would- YOU HAVE TO ASK - did he know something we didn't?

This is spot on. We cannot start with the assumption that all parties, including us, have the same information. It's almost guaranteed that they will not. We should analyze transactions as best we can given our information, but we also need to track the results of those trades in order to account for any information that a GM may have had that we did not. It should be noted, however, that the likelihood a GM ever accumulating enough analyzable transactions to make the results statistically significant is probably very low, given the turnover rate in that profession.

In the list of "bad contracts", I forgot Affeldt and Fogg. I'll be shocked of at least one of those isn't eaten this year, too.

Really? Two one year contracts worth a total of $4 million are bad contracts?

If the worst contracts you've signed are Rheal Cormier and Ryan Freel, you're not doing that bad a job. Most other teams have at least two contracts they're paying for worse than that.

BTW, while searching for good moves by Bonifay, a search I decided not to bother with, I found this hilarious look forward to the 2002 Pirates, written just after they hired Littlefield. You could not imagine how similar it is to all the articles written this year about the 2008 Pirates and Huntington.

I've been saying this since they day Huntingdon was hired (actually, since the day Coonelly was hired.) It's more of the same in Pittsburgh. They're not interested in winning.

Really? Two one year contracts worth a total of $4 million are bad contracts?

If the worst contracts you've signed are Rheal Cormier and Ryan Freel, you're not doing that bad a job. Most other teams have at least two contracts they're paying for worse than that.

The problem isn't that it's a waste of money (though it is). Things like the Fogg contract aren't, in and of themselves, problems, but they're symptoms, indicators that your GM doesn't know what he's doing.

Meh, its judging the guy on his peripheral actions. Neither Freel nor Cormier is a big part of the team, they're both bit players. Those contracts are pretty meaningless.

It is also true that with Wayne in charge Ken Griffey Jr. moved to right field. That move had been attempted multiple times in Cincy with no success.

No idea at to Wayne's level of involvement. But this item helped the team as well and should be acknowledged.

Hamilton was traded because the team discovered that Josh was relapsing into bad behaviors.

That's called libel, since it's false.

Technically, you'd have to show that HW knew it was false because Hamilton is a public figure. Regardless, the trade was made because Narron and his cousin were tight with Josh. Hamilton basically said at one point that him and the Narrons were a package deal. So far Volquez looks like a fair return; hopefully that will prove true in the long-run. Hard to fault Krivsky here.

But Jay Bruce, yeah, I'll give you that one.

As has been said around here before, the Reds OF defense is atrocious at the corners. It's asking too much of Bruce to ask him to man CF if he's flanked by two statues. As Dunn and Jr. are in walk years, Bruce will surely inherit one of the corners next year.

All in all I'm not sorry to see Krivsky go, despite his ability to identify cheap/free talent.

Also, two very strong fan favorites were allowed to leave town amongst a fair amount of hue and cry in Sean Casey and Jason LaRue. While reasonable moves not the actions of a "weak" GM.

Really? Two one year contracts worth a total of $4 million are bad contracts?

If the worst contracts you've signed are Rheal Cormier and Ryan Freel, you're not doing that bad a job.

Sure, as long as you ignore Mike Stanton. And Juan Castro. And not trading Hatteberg when he had value and you already had another LH 1B. And (come to think of it) Javier Valentin. And $3M for Corey Patterson.

It's not 2 contracts for $4M; it's the endless list of $1-2M (in Freel's case, $4M) contracts, many of which get/should be eaten.

He actually did a good job in harvesting young talent. THe big mistake was not playing the young guys this year and hiring Dusty Baker.

Things like the Fogg contract aren't, in and of themselves, problems, but they're symptoms, indicators that your GM doesn't know what he's doing.

Not that Fogg is anything special, but he would have been a fine 5th starter on the Reds the last 4 years. Heck, in 2004 and 2005, he would have been their 3rd best starter. For $1M on a one year deal, you can do a heck of a lot worse. They gave Eric Milton $25M to do not much better.

TDF:

Well, I look at Doug Melvin tossing Derrick Turnbow $8 million for a guy who ends up doing mop up work and Krivsky's "errors" don't seem that bad........................

Harvey pointed out that Narron was a big on him, and now Narron's with the Rangers. Coincidence?

Not at all. ISTR the spin from the club at the time was that Narron was brought back to Texas specifically to oversee keeping Hamilton on the straight and narrow.

Also, two very strong fan favorites were allowed to leave town amongst a fair amount of hue and cry in Sean Casey and Jason LaRue. While reasonable moves not the actions of a "weak" GM.

Sean Casey was traded by Dan O'Brien. Also LaRue was pretty darn unpopular by the time he left.

THe big mistake was not playing the young guys this year and hiring Dusty Baker.

Not to beat a dead horse, but Votto and Cueto are regulars on this team. Do you have someone else in mind aside from Jay Bruce?

I think it's clear that Votto is ready and should be playing every day. Bruce, I don't mind him staying in AAA for developmental reasons, given how young he is. Yes, he's better than Corey Patterson right now, and I think I personally would play Bruce, but if you want to argue it's better long-term to let Bruce develop further in AAA, it's a valid position to take.

It's the aggregate of what we're seeing that justifies Krivsky's termination.

Not to beat a dead horse, but Votto and Cueto are regulars on this team. Do you have someone else in mind aside from Jay Bruce?

I don't think you can quite call Votto a regular, because he only has about 2/3 of the playing time of the real regulars like Dunn and Keppinger, and Hatteberg's played about half as much as Votto has. Plus, with Dusty involved, I still want to see Votto go through an 0-for-13 stretch and continue playing on a regular basis before I declare him a regular.

Not to defend that particular trade, BUT, if a guy repeatedly trades guys who afterwards do not play as well as we thought they would- YOU HAVE TO ASK - did he know something we didn't?

Kearns is year in, year out, the best defensive rightfielder in the majors. Even with disappointing offensive numbers he is a valuable player. Infinitely more valuable than Gary Majewski and Bill Bray who have negative value. Trying to spin this trade as not so bad is idiotic. By results oriented thinking the worst possible scenario has happened for Washington and they still win the trade hands down.

By results oriented thinking that trade cost the Reds the playoffs.

Red:

Was O'Brien still in charge? Cripes.