Pyramid Hill lights up
Women of Excellence Awards
16th Annual Music Festival
Hall of Fame baseball writer Hal McCoy is in his 36th year of covering the Cincinnati Reds, the longest tenure for any active writer covering one team. Counting spring training and postseason games, McCoy has covered more than 7,000 major-league baseball games, written close to 18,000 baseball stories and eaten enough hot dogs to give Babe Ruth indigestion.Home > Blogs > The Real McCoy | Cincinnati Reds baseball news > Archives > 2008 > September > 04 > Entry
Fogg or Ramirez - Need you ask?
A decision that faced the Cincinnati Reds was decided by a strained right groin.
The decision? Josh Fogg or Ramon Ramirez?
Fogg is 2-7 with a 7.58 earned run average. It isn’t likely he’ll be with the Reds next season.
Ramirez is 0-0 with a 2.70 ERA in two outstanding appearances in the last week, his first two major-league appearances. There is a chance Ramirez will be with the Reds next season.
Shouldn’t he be pitching instead of Fogg? The Reds didn’t see it that way Thursday and Fogg started — giving up five runs and four hits in three innings.
Then he trundled home from third base in the bottom of the third on a sacrifice fly and strained his right groin.
The soon-to-be 26 Ramirez, a righthander, replaced Fogg and pitched three perfect innings — nine up, nine gone — as the Reds worked their way methodically back into the game and beat the Pittsburgh Pirates, 8-6, scoring three runs in the eighth.
It isn’t likely Fogg will make his next start, so Ramirez steps in, continuing his audition for next season and beyond.
“That’s why we put Ramirez into the game in that situation,” said manager Dusty Baker. “This was a potential start day for him. Fogg’s groin situation is a dangerous situation for a pitcher.
“The way the young man (Ramirez) has pitched he certainly earned the right to start,” Baker added. “The way the kid is throwing, how do you not consider giving him strong consideration.”
In his major-league debut, an emergency start last Saturday, he held the San Francisco Giants to three runs and five hits over seven innings and turned a 6-3 lead over to the bullpen, which promptly blew it up and Ramirez received no decision.
“My confidence was very high today and every time I pitch I try to be positive,” said Ramirez. “I’ll be ready any time they need me, in the bullpen or starting. I’m working hard and I’m ready for anything.
Said Baker of Ramirez’s day, “He threw great, just excellent. When you’re down 5-0, that’s what you want — a guy to come in a throw zeros. Stop the scoring, give us a chance to come back. Impressive. He doesn’t appear nervous, rattled or scared. And he throws strikes, including off-speed pitches for strikes, which is great for a young pitcher.”
After falling behind, 5-0, with Fogg on the mound, the Reds chipped away, or as Baker put it, “We slow-walked ‘em with a bunch of ones until we could get that crooked number (three in the eighth).”
The Reds scored one run in each inning from the second through the sixth to tie it, 5-5. And it was 6-6 in the eighth when the Reds filled the bases and Joey Votto poked a tie-breaking, game-winning single.
“He is a clutch RBI man and he is getting better, that’s what I like,” said Baker. “He is more confident and more comfortable.”
Said Votto, who also homered in the fifth and batted .382 in August and drove in 18 runs, “Just one of those stretches and I don’t know why. We’re trying to win as many games as we can to transfer into next year and I’m trying to do as well as I can and hope that transfers into next year as well.”
Votto had two hits, drove in two and scored one. Jay Bruce also homered, his 15th. Votto’s was his 17th and the Reds will be baseball’s only team with two rookies with 15 or more home runs.
Amazingly, the No. 9 spot in the batting order had four straight hits. Fogg singled in the third, Ramirez singled in the fourth, his first major-league hit, pinch-hitter Andy Phillips singled and scored a run in the sixth and pinch-hitter Corey Patterson beat out a bunt single in the eighth.
The victory enabled the Reds to avoid being swept and Baker said, “It was important because they were gaining on us, trying to get out of the cellar. Sure didn’t start out too good, down 5-0.
“What I like is that we executed — a number of bunts and some double plays,” said Baker. “We played a good game.”
Permalink | Comments (58) | Post your comment |
Comments
By Bob
September 7, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this
This is vintage Baker; playing the wrong players. Fogg, Patterson and Bako should NEVER play unless there are three left on the bench. Hanigan should catch ever inning, yet he puts Bako in there against righties and he can hit neither and Baker finds very inventive ways to get his boy, CP in everyday. I realize most GMs don’t like to meddle in these things, but when stupidity is involved, it reflects on the GM to let this crap continue.By MAC
September 6, 2008 1:00 AM | Link to this
Matt, I don’t know how much credit DB can get for the improved pitching? It seems to me most of that credit should go to Krivskey? due to him bringing more talent on board? In tonight’s game, Welsh talked about how the Cubs BB/Walks were reduced each and every year w/ DB at the helm. Of course, their avg and on base % went down as well. That goes exactly to the pt. I was trying to make earlier; DB doesn’t appear to instill any discipline in his players? Welsh went on to say how the Cubs are now 1st in BB and how Lou has instilled an approach or philosophy of working counts/pitchers to get into a better hitting situation…SEE THE DIFFERENCE? Under DB, the Reds are 29th in avg., are 11th overall in BBs, yet have the 12th most Ks and rank 23 in OBP. I’m sure he’ll be back next season, but I think he has to provide more leadership and discipline w/ these young players if the team is going to improve much?By Mr. Redlegs (Original)
September 6, 2008 12:03 AM | Link to this
I’m not Mr. Baseball, nor do I play him on radio, but I don’t disagree with much of what he and Matt have said. Funny how short memories are, but the lousy bullpen cost them a pennant run in 2006 and it was the absolute focal point of a terrible staff in 2007. So when the front office actually ponies up to fix the biggest need, you complain about spending TOO much. Good grief. You’d think after 2-3 years of wading through the closer by committee failures you’d be happy. Nah. The $46 mil they spent on Cordero isn’t your money, so why complain? He’s allowed the bullpen to get slotted into roles and that’s worked out quite well. Besides, those of you who say Burton could have done the job … not when he’s on the DL for almost two months. No GM in his right mind is going into a new season handing the closer job to a Rule 5 pick one-half a season into the majors. The Cordero signing hasn’t hurt this team and his presence for youngsters Cueto and Voltron cannot be underestimated.By HuberTucky
September 5, 2008 11:59 PM | Link to this
Wiz, HILARIOUS comment: “All Majewski needs is a horn on his belt!” Yes, Clarabell, indeed!!! And how about being hopelessly out of playoff contention WITH a very high paid moderately effective closer? Now there’s a deal!By Wizard
September 5, 2008 7:51 PM | Link to this
All Majewski needs is a horn on his belt! I like your thoughts Mark—but,think Cordero would improve greatly, if someone convinces him to take control of the inside of HIS plate!Needs to knock some people down…By Matt
September 5, 2008 7:39 PM | Link to this
Another Losing Season, you say you want facts only. Out of 30 teams, the Reds’ ERA ranks #7 this season. That’s ahead of several playoff teams, and just behind the LA Angels. How does that number look? Pretty good from where I’m standing. The Reds ranked at or near the bottom of all of baseball last year. Now yes, the bullpen has not been perfect. Not by a long shot. But the biggest improvement, hands down, from last year’s club is the bullpen. There is no question about that, at least according to the statistics and numbers. To think that Cordero has had nothing to do with that I think is just not reflective of the facts. He and David Weathers have been just the veteran presence that bullpen has needed this year. While Cordero has not been dominant every single time out, the Reds have themselves a bonafide closer, which is what they’ve been missing these past few years. Yes, they probably did overpay for it, but if you want to improve your team, especially on the free agent market, it’s going to cost you. That’s just how the game is these days. If you are a team that is serious about winning, having a battle for the closer’s role during the season is not a key piece for that goal. Maybe in this part of the year if you don’t have a closer and you are hopelessly out of playoff contention that may be good to do, but it is best for guys to have clear and determined roles, not guessing every night. But then again, that’s just one man’s opinion.By BrarHopper
September 5, 2008 6:45 PM | Link to this
Biggest overall mistakes for 2008 Reds: Cordero, Bako, Patterson, Baker. Most costly mistakes: Cordero & Patterson.By Mark in Sun Valley
September 5, 2008 6:02 PM | Link to this
The Cordero signing was not the best of ideas. Very anti-moneyball. It was a knee jerk reaction to the horrors of the 8th inning we had last year. I always felt the money was better spent elsewhere and give Burton the shot to close. Weathers, Affeldt and Lincoln are all free agents, I doubt we will sign all 3, let alone 2 or the 3. And Majewski still scares me every time he pitches.By donb51
September 5, 2008 5:40 PM | Link to this
Hal, I hope you are happy! After perusing this whole thread, it actually appears that people are presenting their arguments without rancor or discord-there are some very good comments through and through on both sides. Congratulations for making us better Reds fans! Now if we can just figure out how to make the Reds better??? Can you get on that?By Another Losing Season
September 5, 2008 4:58 PM | Link to this
Matt, I disagree with your assessments and with MisterRedLegs, aka Mr. Baseball. This year’s bullpen is not considerably better than last year’s. In 2007, the Reds finished with a Save percentage of 55%. This year, it is only slightly better at 59%. Also, you couldn’t be more wrong about Cordero. Krivsky’s mistake was in overvaluing current talent and believing he was only a competent closer away from contending. WRONG! So he overpays for what he believes is the last piece of the puzzle and the Reds are on the hook for another $36 million over the next three years, making it increasingly difficult to add the talent they really need. No way this deal is made by a competent GM. The notion that relief pitchers now are somehow better slotted or know their roles is preposterous. Weathers would have been just as good as Cordero in the closers role. While Cordero might not be a miserable failure, he certainly has not been worth what he is getting paid. Anyway you look at it, the statistics paint a different picture than what you claim. This year’s bullpen has not been remarkably better. Please, facts only!By sun deck lover
September 5, 2008 4:12 PM | Link to this
Sorry. Meant to type poor mechanics. Bad fundamentals are contagious now.By sun deck lover
September 5, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this
I see that Cueto is listed as starter for Sat. WHY!? What possible reason would outweigh him developing for mechanics due to a sore arm, or taking an injury into the off-season? Hal, I know you’re with me on this one. In the end, Baker fills out the card, but Walt needs to step in and put the young arms on the shelf for the last 4 weeks.By Matt
September 5, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this
I believe that Mr. Baseball makes excellent points about Dusty Baker. As far as Cordero, I would make that move 50 more times if I were the Reds ownership. While he hasn’t been perfect, just him being the closer has greatly improved the bullpen. It improves the bullpen in the sense that roles are more defined. You don’t have guys auditioning for the closer’s spot, or closer by committee. I think that was a huge problem with the 2007 bullpen, is that guys didn’t know their roles and what they were doing from night to night. With the way the bullpen is set up now, it is clear who does what. You’ve got Cordero closing, Weathers/Burton as the set-up men, Bray/Affeldt as the left-handed specialists, and Lincoln/Masset as the long relievers. Throw in Majewski for an appearance now and then and that’s a pretty good bullpen. And Cordero has not been a miserable failure by any means this season. He is 4-4 with a 3.52 ERA, and 27 saves. He should finish with between 30 and 40 saves. That’s not bad at all, and he has 6 blown saves. With how many saves and games the Reds ‘pen blew last year, 6 blown saves is a drop in the bucket as far as I’m concerned. I bet this team lost about a third of their games last year because of their horrible bullpen. The results have been remarkably different this year. I am in 100% agreement that the Reds MUST find a veteran leader from somewhere. In 1999, one of the key reasons why the Reds won 96 games and came within one game of the playoffs is Greg Vaughn. He was a rock for that team to lean on and he carried them the entire year, in more ways than one. Getting another player of that caliber should be top priority for the Reds this offseason.By bobs
September 5, 2008 2:58 PM | Link to this
Think several mistakes happened prior to the start of the year that will also impact next year. One, Dusty should not have been signed. Cordiero should not have been signed. Patterson should not have been signed…and yes easy to say now, but I did back then. Dusty is a waste of money that could have been spent elsewhere. I personally (which means absolutely nothing), dont belive you need a high priced closer. I think if you look at Weathers’ numbers last year, they are probably just as good. Patterson took AB’s from Bruce. Which leads us to next year…where Mike-Cinci is on the money in regards to our needs. But, two problems, one, who wants to play for a last place team…er “up and coming team?” Two, if they come, they will need to be paid a bunch of money, but because of some contracts, they will not have that money. Third, why pay big money when we have youngsters coming up who will be cheap, Stubbs, Valaika, Francisco…etc. Can someone give me plausible scenario how we can be good next year? And, please be realistic with how and/or why they would come.By Mark in Sun Valley
September 5, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this
Mr. B has the most important thing about rebuilding the Reds. Jocketty needs to clean out the minors and rebuild from there. I get angry becasue Baker does not do more to get these guys to play fundamentally sound, but they should be taught these things from their first day at Billings, and have it reinforced through the system.By Mark in Sun Valley
September 5, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this
Mr. B has the most important thing about rebuilding the Reds. Jocketty needs to clean out the minors and rebuild from there. I get angry becasue Baker does not do more to get these guys to play fundamentally sound, but they should be taught these things from their first day at Billings, and have it reinforced through the system.By Steve
September 5, 2008 2:38 PM | Link to this
Dusty is not the worst manager around. He is just ok. If just ok is what the Reds want, stick it out with Dusty. I just wonder what Chicago and San Fran saw in his abilities that lead to letting him go. And as far as experience- overrated. Who is managing Florida? Tampa Bay? Arizona? Colorado? Bob brought Dusty in for his name and to hold off the restless natives (along with a 46 mil. closer that we had no business signing). We need a hard a** skipper that will stress the right way to play. Why, oh, why couldn’t the White Sox have fired Ozzie? He is a butt buster that this young team could use. He supports his players if they play right and he knows how to light a fire to get them going. I see no such fire in Dusty. That doesn’t make him awful. Just OK.By sun deck lover
September 5, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this
Read Mike-Cinci’s post. I agree with it almost word for word.They need to find a right handed hitting (high OBP) VETERAN outfielder. Also could have more options for middle infield if consider Phillips at SS or 2B. This club has been rebuilding for a decade, but only the right way for a couple years. Yes it is painful (even more when I pay for my tickets every winter) but they are really close to at least being the Brewers. I think it will be an active off-season.By sun deck lover
September 5, 2008 2:07 PM | Link to this
Mark in Sun Valley has some good points on Dusty. Yes, for the most part managers are all overrated. They will not decide more than half a dozen games either way in a season- the players on the field do. However, he has has always been refered to as a “player’s manager”. He goes to bat for his guys. This is obviously refering to how he manages veteran players. As someone brought up recently, he defends Pattersons terrible play/plays to the death, but “throws the rookie under the bus” for missing a sign after being with the club for all of 3 days. This is the reason that Jr. always batted third, the reason Patterson is still playing, the reason he says how great of a catcher Bako is, or why a team full of talented (yet inexperienced) young baseball players can’t put it together. He is not the Lou type manager that they need right now. I was not a fan of Dusty from the get-go. Sure, easy to say now, but it is too much money for a guy who manages egos instead of games. He would still be criticized for alot of his decisions this year if they were winning, but I understand that he is not playing with a full deck of cards. That being said, Hubber, I noticed the same thing- Pete Mackanin did better with less team.By MAC
September 5, 2008 2:00 PM | Link to this
Good pts Bob. I think Dusty was hoping 1 or more of our veterans would help teach the younger guys, but from everything I’ve read, that didn’t/hasn’t happened? Dusty has mentioned several times how Hank Aaron and other vets taught him to play the game. Likewise, I’ve read a number of quotes by DB where he has suggested players should do this or that to be more successful. That may work on a veteran team, but IMHO, it won’t work w/ very young pros that the Reds have & R likely to have again next season. IMO, that’s the over-riding pt in the DB debate. He doesn’t seem to have the energy or take a direct approach w/ the young guys; he only suggests this or that? IMO, a team this young has to have an approach or protocol to follow that the Mgr re-enforces over and over again on a daily basis. More importantly, when the approach isn’t followed, there have to be some consequences…lack of playing time, a fine, a trip back to the minors or maybe a suspension? Very much like raising a teenager if U ask me? DB just doesn’t seem to be willing to do that; he seems too laid back to me for this young of a club?By bobs
September 5, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this
I am not advocating the firing of Dusty, and I think I, and some others are trying to point out that Baker should not have been hired in the first place. It should have been a younger coach who has the patience to coach and more importantly the ability to teach. Not sure Dusty has that in him. I guess the thinking was with Griffey, Dunn, and Harang we had a chance to be good, but the organization also knew that Griffey was gone this year no matter what he did, and they never really liked Dunn. Dusty will be here next year, but will be gone halfway through. This team is not close, and either Dusty gets fired or Dusty says something to get fired and get out of this mess. Maybe Billy Hatcher would be/would have been the better choice.By Mr. Baseball
September 5, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this
Some of the comments about Dusty are just over the top. The fact of the matter is he just hasn’t had the players to work with. His usual reliance on veterans did not work with this team as veterans like Griffey, Dunn, and Harang are not good leaders and have had sub-par seasons. It’s true he went far too long with Cory Patterson early in the season, but CP is playing now because of a shortage of outfielders. Bako has had a bad season at the plate, but many critics are missing his contribution in the handling of young pitchers Volquez and Cueto and now in mentoring young Ryan Hanigan. Contrary to the claims of many, Dusty has played a lot of young players and the experience they have received will make the Reds a better team next year. Frankly, Mr. Baseball thinks that Dusty is embarassed by many of the things he has seen this year and some of the deficiencies that have come to light about the Reds organizaiton. His calling out of Wilken Castillo for missing a hit and run sign was a rare occasion where he vented his frustration publicly. (Not coincidentally, Castillo was only recently acquired from Arizona, so Dusty could make his point without offending those in the Reds organization.) Many of the Reds problems stem from the lack of fundamentals in the minor league system. The Cardinals have always been known as a fundamentally sound organization and Mr. Baseball thinks Jocketty’s influence will create a greater emphasis on fundamentals in the minor leagues. Don’t be surprised to see Jocketty clean house in the Reds minor league system as well as the major league coaching staff as the Reds bring in personnel who place a greater emphasis on fundamentals. The one legitimate concern that has been expressed is whether Dusty can change his stripes and become a teacher of young players. He will be given one more year to see if he can. Mike-Cinci is correct that Dusty will be given at least one more year because the Reds will not eat two years of his contract.By michael
September 5, 2008 12:34 PM | Link to this
I agree that it’s too soon to write off DB, but CP has to go. Your CF, or any “pro” player for that matter, can not get by hitting -200 for the season. That will kill your chances at the post season. Whats amazing is that Patterson was not that bad offensively in the past. I don’t blame DB for giving him a chance, buts now it is just ridiculous to play him everyday.By Matt
September 5, 2008 11:46 AM | Link to this
Very good point, Mike-Cinci. Hope is definitely not a plan. I don’t believe that Dusty Baker is a perfect manager, but I do believe he is what is best for this club. There is not another more qualified and experienced manager available for the Reds to hire. A lot of folks talk about how the Reds do nothing right on the field, and about how none of Baker’s moves during the game work. I beg to differ. His strategies have worked more often than not this season. As bad as Patterson and Bako have been, they have not been total failures, especially on defense. A manager needs some time before we can determine whether he is a success or not. There were people on this blog, no doubt, that were calling for Baker to be fired before the season even started. This guy deserves a fair shake, and it seems to me a lot of the fans on this forum refuse to give it to him. It’s almost like it’s personal with some folks on this blog, and I don’t understand it. Again, the guy has won everywhere he’s gone. I have faith that he can win here as well, with the right personnel. Rome wasn’t built in a day. I know that may sound trite, but this team didn’t get to where they are overnight, and they won’t get out of it overnight either. The turnaround for this team will take time. Young players, which is what the Reds are predominantly composed of, don’t learn how to be big leaguers overnight. This young team requires patience, and the hope that during this offseason the Reds make the personnel moves to put this team over the top. Removing Dusty Baker though will not help this team in any way, in my opinion. The man doesn’t even have a full season under his belt here for pete’s sake. This was a team in transition this year, and it still is. Let’s see what happens this offseason. We finally have an owner and a GM who know how to win, and what this team must do to win. Let’s let them implement the changes and improvements necessary for this team to win again. Then when Dusty Baker has a team capable of not only competing but winning, then let’s make the determination as to how good (or bad) that he is.By Mike-Cinci
September 5, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this
The Dusty Baker comments are interesting. Some of the criticism has merit especially whether he is suited to manage a young team. If he is not a good teacher I would expect his coaches to fill that void. Hopefully that is happening on the Reds. To be fair the Reds problem is a lack of talent. These guys are not quite as good as the top flight teams. Dusty will get fired if the team does not improve next year. Firing and hiring managers is easy and it makes it look like management is doing something. The only chance Baker has to stay around is if Walt Jocketty finds a solid everyday catcher, a good right hand hitting outfielder, a shortstop, a fifth starter, and he at least maintains the quality of the current bullpen in the face of free agent losses. He may need to trade a starter or a good young everyday player to get what he needs. Reds trash won’t get gems from other teams. Will it be an interesting winter or will the Reds stand still hoping the current roster produces more in 2009? Hope is not a plan.By Mark in Sun Valley
September 5, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this
Great points Bobs. One more thing about Torre. Here in LA, the team has been decimated by injuries and underperforming stars, but the team STILL HUSTLES and still plays FUNDAMENTALLY SOUND BASEBALL. He might not be winning as many as he did in NY, but most people in LA are still happy with Torre because he is trying rookies, moving vets to new positions and in general getting all the effort he can from this weaker team. Can anyone say the same of Baker?By Hank
September 5, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
This is just my opinion, but when you look at whether Dusty Baker should stay as manager of the Reds, I think you need to look at the type of team the Reds might have next year before you make that decision. Most of Dusty’s managerial career was spent at San Francisco. Barry Bonds arrived there the same year DB did. Over the course of 10 years, the Giants had a pretty good run, but they had very veteran teams the entire time; if my memory serves me correctly, they rarely had more than one or two players younger than 25 contributing to the team. If the Reds go out and hire a lot of free agent talent, then maybe Dusty would be the right manager for the team; however, given the financial situation of the Reds, that isn’t likely to happen. In my opinion, Dusty isn’t the right manager for a youthful team which, in all likelihood, is what the Reds will be next year.By James Bradley
September 5, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this
You base your position on Baker’s past, Matt. Give me another year of Pete. He couldn’t have been worse than what Baker has done as Reds manager. I feel that it was rotten of the Reds to cut a man who gave them exactly what they asked of him — namely, an over 41-39 record of .515 with an awful awful team.By Cait
September 5, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this
Thanks, Mark in SV. That makes sense. It’s unfortunate that a guy can come in and give up the go-ahead run in a tie game, but still get the win. But life isn’t fair, is it!By bobs
September 5, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this
Matt, you are missing a very big point about Dusty and actually about managers in general, they are only as good as the talent around them. Has Dusty ever won with a team that was thought of as average, young, or a team that over achieved? I would always laugh when someone said Joe Torre was a great manager…its not hard to win when you have an all-star at every position. Look at him now, less talent, less wins. You have to look at someone like Tony LaRussa. He is a great manager because he gets the most out of his players, and usually not as talented as other teams. Dusty is a very average manager as is evident by the numbers. He is not the right coach for this team. Perhaps in a few years when we have actual major league talent. His faults this year include, his loyalty to “his” players, failing and continuing to fail to play younger (and better) players, and to teach basics (yes, his job). That is my complaints with Dusty, he is a veteran manager, he is not the right manager for a young team.By Hank
September 5, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this
Matt, I don’t wish to appear to be “piling on” but you made a comment that I found a little funny. You said: “Because, in my humble opinion, you need someone who has been there and done that to lead a team to a championship”. By that criteria, the Reds never would have hired the managers that led them to their last 3 World Series Titles: Lou Piniella (1990 WS) whose 3 previous years managing the Yankess had a 2nd place finish as his best result. Sparky Anderson (1975, 1976 WS, 1970 and 1972 NL titles, etc.) had no previous major league experience. So much for 1200+ wins of experience, eh?By Mark in Sun Valley
September 5, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this
Cait, you are right about the scorer having some discression on awarding the win in a game where a starter goes less than 5 innings. However, the pitcher has to be in the game when the team either takes the lead, or already has a lead they never relinquish. Ramirez pitched great, but the Reds never had a lead while he was pitching, only after.By Steven Ross
September 5, 2008 10:02 AM | Link to this
James Bradley wrote: Since we continually hear about professional manager Dusty Baker’s 1200 plus wins, isn’t it fair to at least mention his 1100 plus loses? It’s very fair and proves a point. Baker’s had proven vets to lean on. That isn’t the case here. He’s also not the answer as the Reds move forward.By Cait
September 5, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this
Hal, can you answer a question for me. Arizona Pat and I seem to be onto the same thing. I learned baseball in the 1970s and I could swear there was a rule that let the official scorer award a win to the most effective pitcher if the starter didn’t go 5 innings or leave with a lead. Was that ever the case? Ramirez deserved the win yesterday.By Lurker
September 5, 2008 9:07 AM | Link to this
Thanks for the thoughtful and insightful back and forth discussion today. It stuck to baseball and didn’t dissolve to the usual bickering. This was a HUGE breath of fresh air for this blog.By Pete
September 5, 2008 8:43 AM | Link to this
Upper tier manager? R U kidding me? Why would we want to get rid of Baker? Because he’s a friggin’ idiot! He’s barley above .500 as a career manager. He’s helped the Reds lose more games this year than Mr. C’s made produce sales. C’mon Matt, take off your blinders, get a clue & take a real good look @ the debacle of players & manager that this team has & who really can or can’t play. Patterson, Bako, Fogg — CAN’T PLAY!By Mike
September 5, 2008 8:14 AM | Link to this
Glad that Ramiriz got in the game. But a question..assuming all professional athletes get prepared for a game, mentally and most important physically, how is it that Fogg on a tag up, running only 90 feet, has a groin pull? A routine situation done time after time in most every game by pitchers and postion players alike. It’s been seen by players runnning to first base or even onto 2nd base. It is simple acceleration that should be routinely performed by any athelete especially this late in the season. Exceptions could be a lingering injury, not physically prepared for the game, or even an injury prone player. Players,pitchers included, especially professionals should be able to tag up, run 90 feet without an injury.Not that the Reds will miss Fogg. Just a thought, you rarely if ever see it in Basketball or even Football..By MAC
September 5, 2008 8:01 AM | Link to this
Matt I know U like him and Dusty does have the experience to be a good Mgr. However, the problem is, it hasn’t translated into wins for the club, or MORE IMPORTANTLY, a ball club that plays hard, plays smart and or at the very least is continuing to play better along the way. Perhaps most significant R the # of poor ABs this team has? If DB was good at anything, it’s was being a good hitter, yet this team continues to have NO or a poor approach at the plate, poor ABs, an inability to bunt and or run the bases well all season long. U may be right, but I don’t think he’s the answer. With all our young players, this team needs a Mgr that can relate to them and LEAD them along the way. On a good note, Bats scored 19 runs last night in their playoff win against Durham. Cowboy Homer Bailey pitched great going 6 innings, giving up 2 hits w/ 8 Ks.By SteveS
September 5, 2008 7:58 AM | Link to this
In talking about mistakes, etc. made by a manager, when was the last time anyone saw a major league team bat out of order? Last time I saw it,it was not in MLB, it was at a T-Ball game of 5 and 6 year olds. What I see from the decisions of the manager this year are ones that are made from someone just cashing a paycheck. If the manager is just going through the motions can you expect “His” team to anything else? Oops, sorry, this is not Mr. Baker’s team but someone else’s. I just hope the Reds can get someone in the manager’s position that seems to care about what is put on the field. Maybe this can be Mr. Baker, but from his actions so far this year it does not seem likely.By Matt
September 5, 2008 6:18 AM | Link to this
James, it’s true that Baker has over 1,100 losses as manager. But let’s take a look at a couple other big-time managers who have had success as well. How about Joe Torre? He has 2,134 wins as manager. He also has 1,838 losses as manager. Tony Larussa? He has 2,450 career wins as manager. He also has 2,135 losses. All three of those managers have over .500 records. All three of those managers have been there and done that, as far as winning, being in the playoffs, and things of that nature. Let’s balance that out with Pete Mackanin. His career record as manager is 53-53. He has accomplished zilch as a manager, as far as guiding a team to the playoffs and a championship. I’ll take Dusty’s record and experience over Mackanin’s any day of the week.By jsc
September 5, 2008 2:52 AM | Link to this
Mark, yes, Votto got screwed! Ya suppose the Reds are like Rodney Dangerfield getting no respect?By James Bradley
September 5, 2008 2:14 AM | Link to this
Since we continually hear about professional manager Dusty Baker’s 1200 plus wins, isn’t it fair to at least mention his 1100 plus loses?By HuberTucky
September 5, 2008 12:09 AM | Link to this
I repeat, Pete Mackanin had a better record last year (above 500) than Baker has this year. So much for those 1200 past wins we hear about over and over again… they’ve been absolutely meaningless to the 2008 Reds.By Mark in Sun Valley
September 5, 2008 12:00 AM | Link to this
Anybody else ticked off that Joey Votto’s .382 average in August was not good enough to even get NOMINATED for rookie of the month?By Austin Red
September 4, 2008 10:43 PM | Link to this
Amen to this comment: “The question for a manager is, does he get his guys to play hard, does he get them to play the right way? The lack of hustle and lack of fundamentals of this teams says no. Playing underqualified veterans over rookies with better statistics undermines their confidence.” I really think Dusty is a dolt.By Mark in Sun Valley
September 4, 2008 9:55 PM | Link to this
Don, you are right. Managers are hired to be fired. Ultimately their decisions, even the horrible ones that Baker has made, will make the difference in only 5-10 games a year. The question for a manager is, does he get his guys to play hard, does he get them to play the right way? The lack of hustle and lack of fundamentals of this teams says no. Playing underqualified veterans over rookies with better statistics undermines their confidence. Fearless and depressing prediction: Baker will be fired, but not until August/September 2009, at which point, the Reds will be 20 games below .500 again, and most likely will have traded either Harang, Arroyo or Phillips at the deadline. He won’t be fired before that for money reasons. They might eat one year of a contract, but not 2. Hold on Reds fans, it will be a long long road to a winning future.By Arizona Pat
September 4, 2008 9:54 PM | Link to this
isn’t it a bit archaic that baseball awards a pitcher a win just because he was in the game when his team took the lead? Shouldn’t it be the pitcher that contributed the most toward the win, if awarding a win to a pitcher is worthy at all?By Matt
September 4, 2008 9:15 PM | Link to this
Don, I think that’s a great and fair question, and I’m happy to give you the best answer I can. I think the question deserves that. Why have a 1,200 plus win manager? Because, in my humble opinion, you need someone who has been there and done that to lead a team to a championship. A team needs someone to guide the ship who has the ability to make the tough decisions, and to lead that team in every facet to victory and to glory. This team had talented teams that beat this year and last year combined over the past several years, in my opinion. Who managed those teams? Dave Miley. Jerry Narron. Bob Boone. Did anyone ever see their managerial skills, or the lack thereof? For all the complaints that folks who don’t like Dusty Baker have on here on a daily basis, any errors that Dusty has made this season PALES in comparison to the horrendous managing by those two, and they had at least one year a piece where they had a pretty good team to manage. What did they do with that? They couldn’t even motivate their players to show up every day ready to play winning baseball. I submit that with a better owner, GM, manager and coaching staff, that those teams in 2002, 2005 and maybe even 2004 could have done better than what they did. I hope that answers your question, and if not please tell me so I can try to answer your question better.By donb51
September 4, 2008 9:01 PM | Link to this
Matt wrote, “The answer is to give this upper tier manager that the Reds are lucky to have the players needed in order to win a championship.” Why fire any manager? Just let the owners give the lucky manager all the players they need to win! Leo Durocher said, “In order to become a big-league manager you have to be in the right place at the right time. That’s rule number one.” Dusty’s 1200 wins arguably put him in the right places at the right times - but it doesn’t seem so now, does it? Leo also said, “If you don’t win, you’re going to be fired. If you do win, you’ve only put off the day you’re going to be fired.” Dusty arguably was given a better team than last year and has not turned the record at all. Sparky Anderson said, and this supports Matt’s point that, “The players make the manager, it’s never the other way.” So, ipso facto, why is it so important to have that 1200 game winning manager? Just give someone, anyone, the talent to win.By Matt
September 4, 2008 8:43 PM | Link to this
Since we agree Shockmonkey that Jocketty and Castellini are professionals who know how to run a major league ballclub, why in your mind would they want to get rid of Dusty Baker? What has he done that would make the Reds want to get rid of him? What about his record, accomplishments and accolades would make the Reds want to get rid of Dusty Baker? Who is a better candidate to manage this team? I think those are fair questions, and I look forward to seeing what your answers are on those questions. I’m not sure exactly why Fogg started over Ramirez today, although it could have been that Ramirez hasn’t up to this point been formally put into the starting rotation. He was called up for an emergency start. It doesn’t seem to me that the Reds know exactly how they intend on using Ramirez. Rather than ridiculing a manager like Dusty Baker for virtually every time that he blinks his eyes the wrong way, I think he is deserving of the benefit of the doubt once in a while. As far as Patterson and Bako, they are part of the 25-man roster and are going to play and should play. What should the Reds do? Have an entire roster full of 25 year old rookies who have zero major league experience, just for the sake of doing so? Regardless of whether or not they legitimately have a future with this team, just knee-jerk reaction play rookies at every position just for the sake of doing so? That doesn’t sound like a very good plan in my opinion.By Y-City Jim
September 4, 2008 8:42 PM | Link to this
Speaking of groin injuries: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxaQ9cKYQXoBy ShockMonkey
September 4, 2008 8:08 PM | Link to this
Naturally Matt wrote: It seems to me that Walt Jocketty and Bob Castellini are professionals who know how to run a major league baseball team…which is exactly why they’ll let Dusty go. Sorry Matt, I think you just come on here to get posters riled-up. I find your posts humorous. You a comedy writer? No Patterson or Bako today and WHOA—we win! What a concept. Only Dusty would start Fogg over Ramirez which is another reason he’ll be let go. Don’t let that fat goodbye check hit you in the toothpick.By Fred
September 4, 2008 7:53 PM | Link to this
Hal, this was a no-brainer before Fogg stepped onto the field today. As you said he isn’t going to be a Red next year, has a 7.50 ERA, why use him at all. Rameriz pitched great in his first game. Get him his starts and see how he does. Let him get experience. Use Fogg and know that your team is going to be at a major disadvantage knowing they are going to have to score a lot of runs. We’ve seen what Fogg can do. He has the highest ERA of any pitcher with over 75 innings pitched. He has nothing left to prove. Rameriz does.By Matt
September 4, 2008 7:39 PM | Link to this
It truly is something else to me as to why someone comes on to a Reds blog and continually trashes and ridicules the team, while hiding behind multiple SNs. The answer, in my opinion, is not to fire a 1,200 plus win manager. The answer is to give this upper tier manager that the Reds are lucky to have the players needed in order to win a championship. When the Reds do that, Dusty will lead the Reds to glory, and to the top of the standings, which is where the Reds belong. It seems to me that Walt Jocketty and Bob Castellini are professionals who know how to run a major league baseball team, and I have full faith in them. Dusty Baker is a winner, a winning manager who knows how to manage a team on the field. With those three gentlemen running the show, this team is in good hands. Now they must make the right decisions and provide the right players in order to bring a World Series back to Cincinnati. Go Reds!!By Dennis (BrarHopper's son)
September 4, 2008 6:29 PM | Link to this
Dear Bob and Walt; When exactly does this fluff PR letter you recently issued to us fans go into effect? Would that be next year? Or are you just waiting for your manager to grow a brain?By Tom
September 4, 2008 5:54 PM | Link to this
Dear Mr. Castellini: You are a successful businessman so cut your losses now and fire Dusty. How will this save money. You might not be out of the race by July 1, 2009 and fans will have a reason to attend later in the year. Fogg over Rameriz, Patterson and Bako continue to get more at bats that Hanigan, Colbert, etc. Please spare us.By HuberTucky
September 4, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this
Well, Hal,the only mistake you made (in posing your question Fogg or Ramirez?) was to assume that you were dealing with someone with a brain. Of course, if you ask your bloggers, we all would unanimously agree with you that logic dictates Ramirez. But let’s remember who the decider-in-chief is here: Dusty Baker, the man who logic regularly escapes. BTW, R Ramirez already has a higher BA than Patterson. Hahaha!By Florida Buckeye
September 4, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this
The way the kid is throwing, how do you not consider giving him strong consideration…now that makes perfect sense?!? How do you not think about thinking about him?!? What is this a Yogi Berra, Aflac Commercial??! I dont get the roster moves; the line ups; the batting order; the pitching decisions…I just dont get what’s goin on this year, and what the Reds are trying to accomplish? And based on the recent letter: I don’t think they, or Dusty, do either…