Loading ...I guess it’s some combination of nine consecutive losing seasons and the expectation that 2010 will be the tenth straight…but I’ve never been more apathetic about the Reds. I still love the club, but I just don’t enjoy thinking about them right now.
I dunno, I just needed to get that off my chest. It makes me sad. Sigh….
why would you post something like this? makes me want to never visit the site again. maybe i won’t. sick of the cynicism and negativity.
@broadwaydave:
Well, it’s not cynical or negative to mention the fact of nine straight losing seasons..
and the rest reads more like someone waiting for a wayward, prodigal family member to come to his senses and return home. It just gets discouraging at times.
Am I sounding like Preach?
@RedinFla:
I guess that’s one way to witness….
Of course with this team I personally would have chosen a parable about Hell, but that’s me (now THAT’S cynicism).
Appreciate the shout out, Red.
I’m actually kind of optimistic. I think we have a lot of guys with the potential to be solid to more that. I’m not expecting too much in 2010 but they can sort a lot out next year and if they don’t panic or mess it up I think the Reds could be a team deal with in 2011.
@RedBlooded:
Me too, actually. I am every off season, it’s just been so long since anything has panned out that it’s frustrating.
I agree with you regarding 2011. Unfortunately, I think this could be the case in 2010 with just a couple of moves….and one of those is addition by subtraction.
Bye.
I said almost the EXACT same thing last off-season, with 2009 and 2010 substituted in. Check out our early-season podcasts. Bill and I said it every single podcast.
Every year, contending gets a year further away. I’m losing interest.
Of course, I’m going to Redsfest next week, so I haven’t lost all interest, I suppose.
I am discouraged but have some optimism about the future Too good of an organization to be in the Royals and Pirates company of futility
Chad – I’ve been trying to e-mail you a couple interesting links over the past month. But for some reasons, all the e-mails bounce back to me.
Anyway, Leatherpants is at it again: http://msn.foxsports.com/video?vid=cdc0114b-1f3c-4a3a-9332-450edc9a9e5f
Cheer up Chad! Right now the Reds are tied for the division title!
At least there is no Alex Gonzalez…he signed with the Blue Jays!
I can’t really argue with you Chad, it is very frustrating…
Here is a nice link to an interview with Mike Leake. I really like this kid and I think it was a great pick.
http://projectprospect.com/article/2009/11/26/mike-leake-interview
If you want to see apathy, try being a Jets fan. At least the Reds have won a championship in my lifetime.
The projections last offseason had the Reds potentially shooting for .500 last season. The pitching/defense stepped up – they were about league average. But the offense fell off the table.
The projections that said they could reach .500 had most of the players playing up to their career averages. We know the 3-headed monster of Taveras-Gonzalez-Hernandez did not do this. We know that Encarnacion did not do this because he started the first couple of weeks poorly, then spent most of the rest of the time wth the Reds on the DL. His replacements pre-trade couldn’t match his regular performance. That’s half the offense performing below their individual averages.
How can that improve in 2010
- dump Taveras – I’m guessing more than half of us don’t expect this to happen, but I am holding out hope that he is not on the opening day roster
- no Gonzalez. Not that Janish has mush offense, but he is legitimately good on defense.
- Rolen at 3rd. Health will be the question. The backup options here are also more platable: Francisco or Frazier
- More Hanigan at catcher?
The next in line at AAA will be a very bright future for the organization, too. I know not all these guys will become all-stars, but in addition to those mentioned above, you have Wood, Alonso, Heisey, and Cozart all on the verge of contributing at the major league level.
I get optimistic for next season, but, then I remember that Baker is the manager and Taveras is still on the roster.
Right now the stove is cold but you’ll be ok after the new year and spring training rolls around.
This team doesn’t have the stars necessary to win. Who are the “stars” on the Reds? Votto, Phillips, and who else?
For the most part, you haven’t grown ‘em and Big Bob can’t afford ‘em. So you get by with young players such as Bruce who you project to accomplish great things.
You have a group of average to below average players with a few above average players tossed in.
This is not going to win anything in this league.
Match up the Reds with the Phillies by position and see what you got. The Reds come out very, very wanting.
@WORLD:
speaking of cynicism and negativity — this steams me more than Chad admitting he’s discouraged.
At least Chad’s a Reds fan, working hard to bring the Nation to the faithful.
Who are the stars on the Reds? Yes, Votto and Phillips. I think Votto is one of the very best in baseball on many levels. And I think there is good reason to believe Cueto and Bailey will be stars. Bruce projects as a potential star. I think Stubbs will be solid. Masset should come into his own. If we get Volquez fully back he could be a star.
Cozart hit .340 in the AFL and should be an serious upgrade at short. Frasier looks solid. Leake looks like the real deal. He had the best ERA of any starter in the AFL in his first pro action. Some people think Alonzo will be a star. You can look at a number of others who have potential. Some may fulfill that potential some won’t. But there are enough that the law of averages seems in our favor.
As far as “Big Bob” and spending goes, I don’t think it would have been smart to trade or splurge much for stars this past year or next. The splurge they did make (Rolen) I think was ill advised. I don’t think the late (way too late) surge was due to Rolen. I think it had more to do with Bailey and Arroyo putting it all together and Stubbs replacing Willy. You only make those spending moves when you are on the cusp or you get a great deal you can’t pass up. We were not on the cusp in 2009. I don’t think we will be in 2010 although we should be stronger. I think we will be in 2011. That’s when it makes sense to spend to get over the top, not before.
I enjoy watching their homegrown talent mature. I am also excited by the decent pitching around here for the first time in 20 years.
I’m sorry that the truth hurts. Those who have seen my posts here know that I am a big Reds fan even though I live in New York now and Delaware and D.C. earlier.
That notwithstanding, the facts are the facts. You need some studs to win in the hardball leagues. And the Reds don’t have many. Maybe things will change and there seems to be some youth on the way to help. I hope so for it would be fun seeing the Reds in the playoffs again with you guys getting a break after so many years of unrewarded loyalty.
Look, the Phillies stunk it up for a long time. For goodness sakes, they hold the all-time lead in professional losses. If they can win back-to-back pennants, anyone can. But you got to be smart and you got to put a little moohlah for the cake to rise. So far, it seems to me that the Reds have not put enough of either in the mixing bowl.
Why Can’t we be friends? why can’t we be friends?
oh
and
Lean on me! when your not strooooong!
And I’ll Be youuuur frieeeend!
I’ll help you carryyyyy onnnnnnn!
Lets just agree that we suck and we’re addicted
Yes, my name is RedBlooded and I am a Redsaholic. And we have sucked for sometime. I still think the sucking is about to end. I may be delusional but I think there are good reasons to think that things are looking up. There are better signs for this team than I have seen in a long time. I think we will be more competitive next year and very competitive in 2011. Even if you are pessimistic I assume you are hoping I’m right. And if I am we will all be happy and still be friends. If I’m wrong we all be sad and still friends. At least we won’t be the Cubs.
I remember before the Big Red Machine Era they had been pretty lame for about 8 years. Then it was a great ride. I don’t think we will be that lucky this time. But I think there should be some excitement, fun and success coming.
I like your post as I think you have the right idea. Paul Janish is a major league player but you can’t think of winning the pennant with him taking 3 or 4 at bats every day. If the Big Boy does make it at first and Votto goes to left and Baker is not rehired and Taveras quietly slips away and Volquez comes back and ………..
Too much thinking for a Saturday night. Time for a cocktail.
And no offense intended to anyone else. I really root for the Reds as I have a ton of friends with the organization, past and present. I like to see these people happy.
I’m just as frustrated as anyone, but I can’t help but be optomistic about next year. The minor league system is the best its been in years and that has to pay off with wins at some point….
or I may just be a sapp…
I feel the same way. Problem is, I’ve been feeling this way – that we’ll be competitive (winning record) the next year and a bona fide contender in two years, since about 2002. One difference this time is our pitching. Even if you argue that it’s only average, that’s so much better than the past. The other difference is that our farm system has been rebuilt, and I believe in most of our young players – Votto has already proven he’s the real deal. I’d put my money on Jay Bruce, Homer Bailey, and Cueto. Hopefully Volquez comes back strong. A majority of Stubbs, Heisey, Alonso, Frazier, Wood, and the usual suspects will succeed. When earlier in the decade, did we have a crop like this ?
“I remember before the Big Red Machine Era they had been pretty lame for about 8 years.”
Not trying to give you a hard time, RedBlooded, but the 1960’s Reds, whom I lived and died with as a youngster and young teenager, are underrated.
After 1960, the ’60’s Reds had only one losing season (1966), which was the first season after they traded Frank Robinson.
Of course they won the NL pennant in 1961, which back then you had to do by having the best regular season record in the league (93 wins in 154 games). The Reds did not see postseason play again until 1970, but until 1969, only 2 teams in all of baseball saw postseason play in a season (in 1969 4 did).
The Reds won 98 games in 1962, finishing 3 games behind the Giants-Dodgers. Won 86 games in ‘63, and 92 in ‘64, when they lost out on the last day and coulda/shoulda won the pennant.
In ‘65 they won 89 games with a GREAT lineup (you can look it up) and bad pitching. Then they traded Frank Robinson, resulting in a losing season
in 1966. Then they won 87, 83, and finally 89 games in 1969. Rose’s rookie year was ‘62, Perez’ was ‘65, Nolan’s was ‘67 , Bench’s was ‘68.
The 1960’s Reds were consistent winners, setting the stage for the 1970’s Reds.
Leatherpant’s comments are comically self-serving. His message: the Reds have stunk since they fired me, and that’s why they’ve stunk.
@pinson343: Haha, my thoughts exactly.
For the heck of it, I looked up all his #1 draft picks as the Reds GM, and the only one of any note at all is Kearns. So why exactly do networks hire him to play fantasy GM?
I can’t believe Leatherpants would say something like that, he was always such a team player who never sought to bring glory on to himself….Yuck…Yuck…Yuck
I concur. 100%. MLB is a joke. And its only going to get worse. Unfortunate.
To me it’s about the game. Right now it’s cold and bleak outside as December and winter approaches. Nothing beats sitting outside in the summer watching baseball. Even bad baseball is better then sitting in doors and either watching football or the unwatchable NBA.
HOw were Bowden’s comments that far off? Depending on what those two players would cost you, would maybe a 2 year deal not be worth a chance?
I really think this team is close to being pretty darn good, but it’s awfully discouraging that they probably can’t afford to push themselves over the hump by signing a mid-rotation starter and an aging stopgap LF to hit second or fourth. Those are not all that expensive, relatively speaking, but too rich for the Reds’ blood. Meanwhile, the Yankees and Red Sox are competing for John Lackey, Aroldis Chapman and Roy Halladay.
It was a little harder to be cynical when the Yankees missed the playoffs and the Rays made it, but I’m starting to change my mind about a salary cap or some other dramatic action (let’s move the Royals to Brooklyn!).
Drew, Bowden’s recommendations weren’t necessarily bad – getting a couple of free agent veterans (he named Tejada and Cameron), that could be traded if we’re not in contention in July. Those recommendations would seem to be irrelevant, given the Reds budget, but I have no objection to his making them.
If Bowden limited his comments to that, then fine. But then he named the Reds’ “glory years” in the 90’s – although the real glory year, 1990, was before he arrived. He also talks about the Reds unwillingness to make moves of the kind he suggests since he’s left – he doesn’t mention that the most important job and the necessary focus for years after he left has been rebuilding the farm system, which he and certain owners left in a state of ruin.
“It was a little harder to be cynical when the Yankees missed the playoffs and the Rays made it, but I’m starting to change my mind about a salary cap or some other dramatic action (let’s move the Royals to Brooklyn!).”
Travis, I’m with you on this. I’m feeling depressed about the state of ML baseball, not so much about the Reds. Halladay has reportedly said that the teams he’ll consider pitching for are the Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, and Angels. I bet that the Yankees pick up either Lackey or Halladay this off-season.
Here’s a thought: if the 1975-76 Reds players were around today – I mean in particluar Rose, Morgan, Bench, and Perez – who would they be playing for ?
Sure as h_ll not the Reds.
Once a top player becomes a free agent, 6-8 teams are in the running to get him. The other teams can keep one top player – like the Cards with Pujols – but then they can’t afford to keep other players.
The reports on the financial state of the majority of teams are contradictory. I read that many of them are going broke, and then I read that they’re all bringing in big bucks.
Before the next basic agreement, the owners need to decide where they stand. If they’re making money, stop whining and start investing in winning. If they’re really losing money, “grow a pair” (as someone on the blog suggested) and stand up to the union. They can force a dramatic change if they’re determined enough. One can argue that there’s no way the owners will be united, given the different situations of the “high revenue” vs. the “low revenue” teams. I disagree with this. Only the Yankees would oppose dramatic change, if it’s needed.
“Let’s move the Royals to Brooklyn.” Love it, was thinking just the other day of how a team in Brooklyn would make so much sense. As a New Yorker, I’d even adopt them as my second favorite team.
I also had the depressing thought that maybe 21st century baseball does not permit a consistently good team in Cincinnati. I would think the Reds would fold before they would move, a Reds team outside of Cincinnati would not be the Reds, I would not follow them or MLB if that happened.
Before anyone jumps on me, I’ll add that I think you can have a successful team in Cincy in this era. The key is winning new (or winning back) fans outside of Cincinnati, in Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, etc. The key of course is a few winning seasons and a postseason appearance, from there things could turn around for a long time, with good management.
Ah, now you are getting into an area I have strong feelings about. And it is connected to the whole theme. I think the Reds have a chance to be pretty darn good in 2011 but the window is small. They better make the best of it because they won’t be able to stay good long. As soon as their best players are eligible for free agency several of the best will be on the road to New York, Boston or wherever the big money is. And it won’t be because the management won’t want to keep them. There is just no way they can compete financially with those big market teams. And that is when I will be really depressed. As it stand now the game is fixed. And its perfectly legal. The Reds and other small market teams voluntarily agree to get screwed. And its still fixed. A team like the Reds just might have the good fortune of a bunch of good young players all coming to maturity at once, but its not going to happen very often. I think it will happen in 2011 but if it does, don’t blink or you’ll miss it.
If the Reds are really good in 2011 it will be a test of your theory, Pinson343. If the Reds are good the fans will flock to them. But the Reds organization won’t make Yankee money or Red Sox money. And free agency will decimate the team. I hope they are great in 2011/2012. And I hope I’m wrong about the subsequent decimation. But I can’t see how I can be given the present system.
Okay, I’ll throw this out there…
If Bailey is as good as he looks like he is and…
If the primary players stay (mostly) healthy and…
If Dusty doesn’t start Taveras more than once a week…
I think the Reds might field a winning team. I really do. That’s three ifs, I’ll grant you, but I don’t think the team itself is that bad. it isn’t deep, but what’s there is pretty good, I think.
@JasonL: I am hopeful of the same thing, Jason. I really think a shortstop, catcher, or left fielder would improve those chances.
I agree with every word. If the Reds are very good in 2011/2012, it will be because players like Votto, Bruce, Bailey and more are really good. And if that’s the case, we won’t be able to keep most of them, even making optimistic assumptions about revenue growth. The “subsequent decimation” would decimate my love for MLB.
The current MLB basic agreement ends after the 2011 season. I would think at least a few of the owners are ready to fight for a big change. Milwaukee’s owner has been vocal about it. But where will the Reds stand ? If the Reds win 90+ games in 2011, and revenue is rising, they could say: Hey things are going OK and we don’t want to risk a strike now. Or they could think long term and join a fight for a major change.
This scenario for the Reds is hypothetical, maybe they’ll just keep losing. But the overall scenario for MLB is not hypothetical, it does not depend on what happens with the Reds. If the next basic agreement just applies a band aid to the current system, which is what Selig is already calling for,
then the dark days will continue.
If it doesn’t happen in 2011/12 it is not going to happen for another decade at least. If it does happen in 2011/12 it is not going to happen again for another for another decade at least. So here’s hoping it happens in 2011/12.
I don’t think the small market teams are ready yet to buck the system and the Yankees et al are still too strong. I’m afraid it will be business as usual with the new agreement. I hope I’m wrong.
There never is going to be a cap on salaries in MLB. Never is going to happen. And everyone’s making too much money for the boat to be scuttled. So expect the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, Phillies, Angels to dominate play.
Especially the Yankees. I mean they literally print money up here in New York because of the grotesque ticket prices and their ownership of the YES Network where the Yanks show their games.
How can the Pirates, Reds, Padres, Brewers, et. al compete? They can’t. They have to be smart and be lucky. And even then their best players are down the road and beating the door to play in the Bronx when they have the first chance.
Votto playing leftfield for the Yankees? Bruce in right?
Bet on it.
I am more apathetic than Chad, even. At least he put up this post. I could barely be bothered to comment on it.
I can’t imagine a good Reds season. And even more, I’m having a hard time getting it up for baseball season. The games are too damn long, and frankly, too boring. All the announcers still spout cliches that were disproven a decade ago, and the only teams you ever see are NYY and BOS.
I assume the Reds are a large cause of my overall malaise, but it’s remarkable how little I follow baseball at this point. I was pretty disengaged during the first couple years of college (91-92), but this is probably worse. I can’t remember the last non-Reds game I watched all the way through.
I’m the same way. I love the idea of watching games, but they take so long and the announcing is so distractingly bad that I usually give up and pick up a book or the laptop. I watched less than nine innings of the entire postseason because of those problems.
There’s certainly no chance, under those conditions, that my wife will learn to appreciate watching games on television. She’s OK with going to a few games per season, but TV does an awful job of selling the game.
There’s a built-in tension right now regarding fans’ appreciation for baseball, with some fans turning to statistical analysis to better understand what they’re watching and others holding on to their cherished beliefs in baseball superstitions, like the productive out. You’d think that some team or network would pair two guys in the booth who sat on opposite sides of that debate and let them fill the considerable downtime during games with their views on that topic. It’d sure as heck beat talking about what The Cowboy ordered from room service after last night’s game.
I thought it was just me and the busy-ness of life. I only watched close to half the games I usually do this past season, and hardly any of the post season.
I’m just not so into it. And like virtually everyone else who posts here I’m a big baseball fan. Makes you wonder what the casual fan in a non-coast market must be thinking.
I got sick of hearing about the Cowboy’s ice cream habit, in gruesome detail.
I don’t really watch a game on tv anymore. I’ll watch a few innings while playing on my laptop.
I love baseball at the park but only go once or twice a year. In NY it’s too expensive.
During the season I’ll take in the Reds’ hilites after every game on my laptop, which doesn’t qualify as watching a game.
Travis G (going back a ways), as always your analysis is right in line with my own. Close, darn close. And that is what seems like is driving everyone’s apathy and frustration. Every year, close, darn close. But this I think we can all agree on… There are three parts to baseball: Pitching, Fielding, and Hitting, and last year was the first time we were pretty decent at two of them during “The Lost Years”. Offense is all that’s lacking, and during the decent run at the end the boys were hitting.
By the way, one note about Stubbs. I’m always surprised when people say he doesn’t have power, or are shocked at the slugging numbers he put up last year. I saw him while he was with the Dragons. He once hit a homer to left that broke a window in the top floor of a 5 story building across a 4 lane street. That was well over 500 feet. The kid can and will hit for power and average. He is the future star of this team.
@JustTheFacts:
Absolutely — having decent (actually better than decent) pitching and fielding this year was enormous. When the offense finally kicked in the last few weeks of the season I got this strange feeling that the Reds had the potential to be a good team.
And about Drew Stubbs: we saw one of those looong homers on one of the back fields at Ed Smith Stadium in Sarasota a couple years ago, so the power doesn’t surprise me either.