Fundamentals

If it's February, the Reds must be working on "fundamentals.'' The Reds work on fundamentals more than grade-school kids. So how come every year, the Reds are fundamentally iffy? Last year, they were next-to-last in the NL in fielding... next-to-last in sacrifices, bunts and flies... if there were a category for advancing runners, they'd likely be next-to-last in that, too. Fact is, their most influential players, Dunn and Griffey, don't "situational hit.'' Or bunt. A mess of other every day players aren't very good at it. They want to cut down on strikeouts, too. Same as they have for each of the last six, seven years. How's that working for 'em?

Question: Shouldnt major league players be "fundamental'' already? I mean, the nature of the word suggests it's a basic requirement, right? Everyone who ever played Knothole learned how to bunt. Everybody who played high school understood the need to shorten his stroke and protect the plate when he was down in the count. Everybody in A-ball understands a grounder to the right side is a good thing with a runner on 2nd or 3rd and less than 2 outs. This isn't earth shaking, and yet here we are, another February, emphasizing something that should have been learned many years ago.

If you've been in your job awhile, arent you, you know, fundamentally sound in what you do? I can spell, I'm reasonably adept at proper grammar. I can two-fingered type. Fundamentally, fundamentals arent an issue. Why, every year, are they on top of the Reds' wish list?