Before we get to the merits of the David Bell hire, let’s pause a minute to talk process.

Of course, with most billion-dollar businesses, this aspect would be a foregone conclusion. But as we learned with the last manager search, not so much for the Reds. 

Dick Williams’ recent pursuit of a new manager began in April when they fired Bryan Price. Williams said they formulated a list of 20 criteria for the new manager, but the “single most important trait” was whether the manager “could use all available tools at our collective disposal to maximize the performance and value of each player as an individual, while also maximizing the performance of the team as a unit.”

That sentence alone should bring smiles to Reds fans. 

Williams said his staff began with a list of over 90 candidates and spent months conducting a thorough, time-consuming background vetting process. They worked diligently to construct and structure the interview questions. You wouldn’t go through all this if you were going to hire David Bell all along. 

The Reds talked to 12 candidates we know of, but Williams said today they “sat down with more than a dozen” so there might have been a couple we don’t know about. That’s to be expected with certain candidates who might not want their current employers or the public to know they were interested in another job. While the Reds interviewed four people who could be classified as internal, and John Farrell who was sort of internal but not really, more than half of the contenders were external candidates. 

They talked to prospective skippers with a wide range of experiences, from established guys who had won World Series, to several who were younger, coming out of coaching staffs. David Bell was VP of Player Development for the Giants. The names in the Reds search seemed to track those questioned by other organizations. 

The current process stands in stark contrast to the hiring of Bryan Price. Walt Jocketty interviewed just one person and announced that he’d heard enough. A little more than a year ago, I wrote this about the value of conducting a broad interview process and the opportunity missed in the fall of 2013:

“At a minimum, the front office could have used a broad search to hear the strengths and weaknesses of their own organization from the perspective of others, as well as learn new best practices of winning clubs. Listening to a half-dozen smart outsiders offer detailed analyses of the Reds roster could have helped break down their bias toward the familiar and reveal blind spots. For an organization with a recent history of insularity, there would have been gigantic value in hearing how other successful organizations operated. But the Castellini-Jocketty team, looking ever inward, didn’t care. They cut the process short, hired Bryan Price, and seemed proud of the brevity.”

Dick Williams put it this way today:

“We learned a lot about our selves and our team. And I think that’s an important part of the process. You have to go into these interviews willing to ask tough questions and willing to look in the mirror. It was a very enlightening process to go through.”

Bryan Price might have been the right guy for 2014. Point is, the Reds had no real way to know that at the time.

If the Reds hadn’t hired Price as manager, reporting indicated another club would have. There was a case to be made for continuity in the 2014 clubhouse, coming off 93 wins in 2013. Price knew the team and the front office knew it was largely going to go with the same roster the following season.

Bryan Price’s teams fell victim to injuries, roster shedding and mismanagement. But the Reds missed an enormous opportunity to listen to a wide range of other people, to make sure that Price was the best they could do. If nothing else, they could have listened to a bunch of smart people break down the Reds organization. The 2013 process was a lazy, embarrassing, clueless disaster.

Dick Williams said early on that he wanted to name a manager by the end of October. He stuck the landing.

Yesterday and today were chosen for the announcement and press conference because of the two-day lull in postseason games. The Reds were ready to go. Not all the other organizations searching for managers were. The Reds probably had Bell locked up earlier in the weekend, right before reports started circulating about candidates “withdrawing” and being told they weren’t going to get the job. You don’t start doing that until you know you have your guy in place. Today is Oct. 22, comfortably ahead of the self-imposed timeline. 

The 2018 process Dick Williams ran was a welcome breath of maximum professionalism, the product of long hours and much thought, befitting a billion-dollar business. Again, this should go without needing to mention, but not here. 

Whether the Reds landed on the right guy as their manager is another issue. Meanwhile, they should be congratulated for running a first-rate process.

20 Responses

  1. Matt Hendley

    Quality piece of writing here best peice all day. Sets the mind at ease that they tried this time around

  2. Al Lautenslager

    Well done and well written Steve.

  3. Arvil Pilkenton

    Good article…’s a question that either you or Chad could follow up for us……are we going to retain any of our current coaching staff (if so…who?) or are there any names being floated around for possible replacements….I would love to see Billy Hatcher keep on board……Also heard rumors about maybe Mike Matheny joining the coaching staff?

    • Andy

      Honestly, I think it’s time to move on from all those at the major league level. There hasn’t been a lot of success in the past few years so I think it’s best to bring in all new guys.

    • sultanofswaff

      I think the decisions on the coaching staff will be quite revealing about whether they’re serious about having an organization that speaks with one voice top to bottom.

  4. sultanofswaff

    While I admire the front office doing their due diligence by vetting other candidates (probably a lot of uncomfortable truths), you still have to wonder if the process was slanted toward Bell and that it was his job to lose. I mean, of the 20 questions, you have some real clunkers such as (paraphrasing) ‘does he appreciate the Reds history’ and ‘will he be an upstanding member of the community’. To me those speak to a predisposal.

    This guy doesn’t excite me in the least, but I’m sure Counsell and Hinch didn’t excite their fan bases either.

  5. Sliotar


    Bell might be fine, he might not. Am ambivalent towards him.

    The father in the front office, son in dugout is fraught with potential red flags, but #RedsWay.

    Not knocking Steve’s view, but, IMO, it really is faint praise to laud the basics of a managerial search, especially when the winning candidate is praised for “familty ties””, Cincinnati connection” or whatever such nonsense.

    It’s 2018 to most of the other 29 MLB franchises. Good candidates come from everywhere.

    So….Tampa’s Charlie Montoyo wasn’t as qualified? (Just picking another interviewed name). Or, did the above factors play a role over pure merit in who got this job?

    Castellini viewing Bell as “family” dulls a lot of the shine from the search process.

    • hokiebo

      “Castellini viewing Bell as “family” dulls a lot of the shine from the search process.”

      I didn’t know how to express it, but that is perfect. I do not care about family ties. I want to see winning baseball in Cincinnati.

  6. Mike Adams

    Steve, please take a look at my comment near the end of comments for the David Bell press conference post.
    Did I read something into that paragraph?
    I do agree with you that the Reds did a much better job this time on the manager search.
    The Reds desperately need the type of manager that paragraph describes.
    But it seems to me the statement also leaves the door open for not making all the moves necessary to win in 2019.

  7. Hotto4Votto

    Completely agree Steve. DW ran a very good, thorough, and expansive search for the next Reds manager. What a contrast to the last time. Even better, DW actually laid out a plan, set a goal, and followed through. It’s been a while we can say that about anyone from the Reds organization. I’m hoping this is a positive sign that DW and NK are gaining more control of the baseball operations and team management.

  8. Ben

    A week or two ago I complained that I thought Steve was being too hard on the FO lately. Just want to tell Steve I appreciated this article & I agree with him from top to bottom.

  9. Mason Red

    No one ever knows if any managerial hire is right or will work. I’m more than willing to give Bell a chance but he has his work cut out for him. As a fan I have little hope for success next season because sadly the rebuild continues.

  10. Thomas Jefferson

    Well said. The hire may turn out to be a lousy one, but the organization gained from a solid and broader-reaching process. Here’s hoping that similar quality processes drive their trades, their arb decisions, their free agent acquisitions, and more. Every organization makes mistakes – the organizations that use great processes (from evaluation to execution) will makes fewer.

  11. Steve Mancuso

    Yes, David Bell should get the coaches he wants. I have a hard time imagining him choosing Jim Riggleman as his bench coach if he had taken the Rangers job instead.

    Diverse viewpoints are important in an organization, but they have to be working in the same general direction. And they have to be up-to-date. Would you lobby to hire someone who believes the Sun travels around the Earth for a college science department for the sake of balance? No.

    I’d rather have a coaching staff who can help accomplish Bell’s stated primary goal of effectively bringing front office information to the players.

    • lwblogger2

      Sun travels around the flat Earth Steve. That whole Earth is round like a baseball thing is a conspiracy. #Sarcasm

    • earmbrister

      Would you lobby to hire someone who believes the Sun travels around the Earth for a college science department for the sake of balance?

      No, but they would be welcome on the US Congressional House Science and Technology Committee. #Sarcasm

      My apologies for the brief political reference. Nice article Steve. I also am one that defends the FO at times when I feel the rhetoric is too hot. It is indeed heart warming that you feel that the Reds did a thoroughly professional job in their managerial search. Good comments LWB.

      • greenmtred

        Let’s not even discuss the gravity hoax and the effect it’s absence has on home run totals.

  12. lwblogger2

    This article does a lot to help me have confidence that the process was a sound one. Steve has never been shy about pointing out potential problems in the front-office. The fact that he feels strongly enough that the Reds got the process right (not necessarily the hire but the process), carries a lot of positive weight for me on this topic.