Are the Reds of 2000=Bengals of the 90's

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

After experiencing success in the 80's the Bengals had one of the worst decades in pro sports history in the 90's, we all know this story to well so I won't get into the details. It seems as if the other pro sports team in Cincy is trying to emulate the Bengals of the 90's by running a franchise with a great winning tradition into the ground. Instability in upper management(They shouldn't have fired Jim Bowden) and questionable personell moves have left the Reds in shambles.

The fans who once expected the playoffs are happy with a .500 team and the false assurances of how they will get it right next year. The owner isn't in it to win, he wants to make money without spending it, that usually never works. The have not had good/great STARTING PITCHING since they were the dominant team of the early to mid 90's, coicindence I think not. They have recently started cutting players who they didn't feel were contributing right now, regardless of how that effects the rest of the team, it's not like those 2 guys were reason they were losing and in the bottom half of the division.

Like football is ultimately all about defense, baseball is ultimately about starting pitching and the Reds have had a dominate starting pitcher in some time, they had a pretty closer but they cut him yesterday. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/30.gif[/img]

[BengalsNYC]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 24 2005, 12:30 PM']After experiencing success in the 80's the Bengals had one of the worst decades in pro sports history in the 90's, we all know this story to well so I won't get into the details.  It seems as if the other pro sports team in Cincy is trying to emulate the Bengals of the 90's by running a franchise with a great winning tradition into the ground.  Instability in upper management(They shouldn't have fired Jim Bowden) and questionable personell moves have left the Reds in shambles. 

The fans who once expected the playoffs are happy with a .500 team and the false assurances of how they will get it right next year.  The owner isn't in it to win, he wants to make money without spending it, that usually never works.  The have not had good/great STARTING PITCHING since they were the dominant team of the early to mid 90's, coicindence I think not.  They have recently started cutting players who they didn't feel were contributing right now, regardless of how that effects the rest of the team, it's not like those 2 guys were reason they were losing and in the bottom half of the division.

Like football is ultimately all about defense, baseball is ultimately about starting pitching and the Reds have had a dominate starting pitcher in some time, they had a pretty closer but they cut him yesterday.  [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/30.gif[/img]
[right][post="95711"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Although I think their are some similarities, i.e. being painfully bad on a consistent basis, I still find the assessment of being the 90s Bengals to be a bit too harsh. Comparisons are abound and it's easy for Cincinnati sports fans to make such a comparison but imagine if the Reds actually DID turn into the 90s Bengals. We might as well move the team to Tampa and call them the Junior Devil Rays.

Granted, the Reds are struggling MIGHTILY this year and unlike years past they are dumping the players they feel have become "dead weight", Jimenez and Graves. Jimenez was and still is a complete joke. I'm not sure why we felt
we had to sign this guy to a 2.87 million dollar deal when we could have had Ryan Freel do the job for less and be more productive. He was awful and I'm glad we are rid of him.

Graves honestly has no one to blame but himself. Is it me or does it look like Gravey Train has been ordering a few too many Big Macs this offseason. He looks soft and out of shape. He says he's in good shape but I'm not
buying it. Then he goes on to say that starting could have ruined his career. Funny, John Smoltz never seemed to lose a step or any velocity on his pitches. That sorry excuse simply is embarassing. If you're hurt, don't try to be a "man" and trot out there in the ninth and wince through it only to give up five runs and lose the game. Their is such a thing as playing hurt and succeeding and playing hurt and hurting your team. If something is wrong with Graves medically hopefully he gets it fixed and has a successful career with somebody. This trend started long before this year and he was just sneaking by with his weak stuff. This year he has been completely punished
and no one had any confidence in him anymore.

Graves didn't lose the games by himself, believe me, he had more than enough help but when you are up four plus runs going into the final frame and your CLOSER comes in on mop up duty and then ends up getting used AS a mop by the
opposition it is cause for concern. I think Wagner will soon inherit the closer role and has better stuff then Graves did and more velocity that will allow him to get away with certain things.

Bottom line is that the Reds made the right move here and will be better off for it.

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

[quote name='BengalsNYC' date='May 24 2005, 12:57 PM']Although I think their are some similarities, i.e. being painfully bad on a consistent basis, I still find the assessment of being the 90s Bengals to be a bit too harsh.  Comparisons are abound and it's easy for Cincinnati sports fans to make such a comparison but imagine if the Reds actually DID turn into the 90s Bengals.  We might as well move the team to Tampa and call them the Junior Devil Rays. 

Granted, the Reds are struggling MIGHTILY this year and unlike years past they are dumping the players they feel have become "dead weight", Jimenez and Graves.  Jimenez was and still is a complete joke.  I'm not sure why we felt
we had to sign this guy to a 2.87 million dollar deal when we could have had Ryan Freel do the job for less and be more productive.  He was awful and I'm glad we are rid of him. 

Graves honestly has no one to blame but himself.  Is it me or does it look like Gravey Train has been ordering a few too many Big Macs this offseason.  He looks soft and out of shape.  He says he's in good shape but I'm not
buying it.  Then he goes on to say that starting could have ruined his career.  Funny, John Smoltz never seemed to lose a step or any velocity on his pitches.  That sorry excuse simply is embarassing.  If you're hurt, don't try to be a "man" and trot out there in the ninth and wince through it only to give up five runs and lose the game. Their is such a thing as playing hurt and succeeding and playing hurt and hurting your team.  If something is wrong with Graves medically hopefully he gets it fixed and has a successful career with somebody.  This trend started long before this year and he was just sneaking by with his weak stuff.  This year he has been completely punished
and no one had any confidence in him anymore. 

Graves didn't lose the games by himself, believe me, he had more than enough help but when you are up four plus runs going into the final frame and your CLOSER comes in on mop up duty and then ends up getting used AS a mop by the
opposition it is cause for concern.  I think Wagner will soon inherit the closer role and has better stuff then Graves did and more velocity that will allow him to get away with certain things. 

Bottom line is that the Reds made the right move here and will be better off for it.
[right][post="95721"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Good points, but what the locker room. Graves was an extremely popular player and letting him go has to cause some resentment. That was one of the major problems the Bengals had for awhile was the rift between players and managers. The Reds aren't going to improve by releasing Graves, imo, only get worse.

[BengalsNYC]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 24 2005, 01:39 PM']Good points, but what the locker room.  Graves was an extremely popular player and letting him go has to cause some resentment.  That was one of the major problems the Bengals had for awhile was the rift between players and managers.  The Reds aren't going to improve by releasing Graves, imo, only get worse.
[right][post="95725"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

I'm glad you brought that up about locker room presence. Remember Mike Brown started the Carl Pickens clause where your entire contract could be in jeopardy if you publicly slammed the team to the media? That was insane. Sure, the guys are upset about losing Graves and how well liked and respected he was. It's always tough to see a guy who has gone to battle with you over the years leave the clubhouse. The problem was Graves has lost it. He is totally ineffective and if you search the quotes of players/managers/front office, not much is said about his
ON the field performance especially of late. I'll admit, a few years back Graves was one of my favorite players. He was fun, likeable, charismatic and most importantly, lights out. When DG came in, barring something unbelievable the game was over and the Reds clubhouse was all smiles.

Then the great experiment where Boone decided to take our best bullpen option and make him a starter. Graves failed in spectacular fashion and is now hinting that this miserable experiment could be the reason for his present day futility. I couldn't believe he even tried that as an excuse. Don't get me wrong, I wish the Reds didn't have to eat contracts the way Star Jones eats two racks of ribs in the morning, both acts make you sick to your stomach and hope you never have to witness it again.

However, these guys like Casey, Griffey, Milton, and Wilson are professionals, well....maybe not Wilson but that's another story. Once their emotions settle and they look at some numbers of what Graves did, or should I say, did NOT do depending on how you look at it they may start to understand. Just because you're a name and a regular clubhouse guy does not grant you lifetime immunity from such things, especially if your stuff would get crushed in your son's knothole league. The Bengals of the 90s let guys get lax and they didn't worry about getting cut because the coaches were all too damn inept to tie their own shoes much less cut the fat off the roster.

[Storm]

I'm not saying Boone was anything but a jackass but making Danny a starter wasn't that bad of an idea. Danny didn't accept the role or work hard to make himself a decent starter which make the decision look bad in hindsight but Boone prolly seen the writing on the wall for him that sinkerball pitchers don't make good closers

I heard Danny in a quote claim that the move ruined his career which is asinine!