THE BROO VIEW with Ken Broo

If ever there was a case for the Reds to add a legitimate 'bat', you saw it Tuesday night. Johnny Cueto pitched another strong ballgame. He went six, allowed only one hit and whiffed eight. He wound up getting the win, a dicey 1-0 decision over the Arizona Diamondbacks. But how many games do you win with only one run? How many times have we seen the Reds score only one run this season.

If they Reds had done what they needed to do this off season, add a productive hitting outfielder who could fill the 4th or 5th spot in the batting order, it's my guess that this team would be in first place in the NL Central, by a comfortable margin. Go back and look at the number of times the Reds lost ballgames simply because they couldn't get a base hit when needed (situational hitting). Look at how they did when Joey Votto was away getting his head straight (8-14). Now, what would have happened if the Reds had made that deal with the White Sox for Jermaine Dye, or if they had made a run at Bobby Abreu? We'll never know.

Instead, they dropped $6.8 million on Willy Tavares, a player they might've been able to sign for close to the major league minimum had they waited a few weeks. Instead, they elected to sign the far too injured Edwin Encarnacion to a two year deal (two years???). Instead, they bottom fed for players like Laynce Nix and Jonny Gomes. Instead, they spent $10 million on a scoreboard in left field, rather than spending $10 million on a left fielder. Abreu signed with the Angles for $6 mil. He might not have come here for that, but would he have signed for $8 million? Again, we'll never know.

Reds owner, Bob Castellini, who probably took a large bath last summer when the tomato scare hit the USA, watched the economy go into the dumper in September, looked at his season ticket sales and put his checkbook back in his pocket. Dye would have cost $11 mil, Abreu less than that, but not much. So instead of the bluster we got from the Produce King in 2006, the stuff about winning championships now, we got a lot of 'building for the future'.

I like Castellini, a lot. But excuse me, we've been hearing about the future ever since Davey Johnson was run out of town by Marge Schott in 1995.

Here's the thing about professional sports: there is no future. You, me, Castellini, no one can predict what 2010 or 2011 will bring. Did anyone see Edinson Volquez being a shadow this year, of what he was in 2008? Anybody predict that Votto would go through what he did this season? It's why when you're close, you give yourself the best shot to win in the here-now. The Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox and Cubs do it every year. But smaller market teams play that game too. What did Milwaukee do last year when it got close? It went out and got pitcher CC Sabathia. The Brewers didn't win the World Series. But they made the playoffs. And though they had to trade one of their best prospects to the Indians to get CC, it certainly hasn't hurt that team's ability to contend this year, has it?

In professional sports, there is only one thing that counts: winning. If the Reds really want to win, if Castellini really wants to be taken seriously by the fans of his team, he'll 'green light' his general manager to make a move, a big move that will separate the Reds from the pretenders.

We're waiting. But then again, we have been since '95, haven't we?