Live from Ruston Louisiana...
Just a complete pounding at the hands of the White Sox tonight, as the Royals deproved to 0-10 against the Ozzeros this season. Chicago scored in every inning save the 2nd and 3rd, fueled by an absurd 22 hits, including 4 doubles and 2 home runs. Even though their attack was largely singles-based, 22 hits is unacceptable, and is endemic of a team that features pitchers who can't put hitters away.
Most disturbingly, Zach Greinke returned to his new-found terrible form, facing about a million batters and somehow throwing 95 pitches by the 4th inning. I guess thats what happens when you give up 10 hits. Greinke's season ERA is now 6.05, and its July 25th; so its safe to say that something is deeply wrong here. Of course, after a strong outing the story focuses on some non-objective reason, like, "Greinke just needed some time off to relax", but obviously, after a bad game, the only option for explanation is either a) injury or the ever popular b) "Greinke just didn't have it tonight, that happens sometimes". Since Buddy's been singularly incapable of actually explaning anything negative thus far, I'm not expecting him to have an answer.
And maybe there isn't one. In fact, most of life's problems end up not having answers at all, and when they do, the answer's usually deeply unpleasent. In this case, maybe its something like "he's just not that good", which is roughly the male athlete equivalent of the now-popular book title and female admonition of "he's just not that into you". Does Greinke need an extended, actual, and real rest? I sure think so. What exactly is to be lost in giving it to him?
OK, enough question and answer routine... the hallmark of a lazy writer. The truth is, Greinke's now made 45 career starts and he's 21 years old. Basically, he could end up becoming just about anything from Jimmy Gobble to Roger Clemens (success-wise), or, he could be the next Jamie Moyer and have some strange unevenly-developed career. All we know is that, right now, in 2005, he's not really an asset, although he's usually a dependable innings-eater of the moderate variety.
As for the offense... bleh. The game was over before it got dark in Kansas, so I have a hard time getting too fired up about the developments. T-Long hit his 4th homer, and also got picked off...
Umm, can we f*&ing do something about the *(ing nightly pick-offs?!?!? Look, I get it, Buddy wants to "get something going" and all that. The problem is, the actual team has fairly resoundingly proven that they can't actually meet the demands of the whole "agressive, semi-destructive baserunning" thing. They just can't. We aren't fast, we aren't crafty. How about managing to the players strengths (if they have any) instead of imagining and style of play as sacrosanct and then acting confused when it doesn't work. They don't do that in football, or basketball; two sports featuring some of the dumbest fan-bases and managment personnel in sports. So why does it always happen with baseball? A manager tells the slugger to bunt, he can't, and everyone bitches about the slugger. . .
Egad. 0-10 versus the White Sox.
The beat goes on.