Fox Sports - No Love For The Royals

by MileHighKCfan on Feb 15, 2008 3:34 PM EST Comment 35 comments

FOX Sports latest edition of their MLB Power Rankings did not look at our Royals in a positive fashion. In fact, one could say they didn't look at them at all. They have ranked KC as number 30, as in worse than the Giants, Orioles, Pirates, and Marlins....oh, and also as in the worst team in the league! Now I don't claim to be anything special when it comes to evaluating MLB teams pre-Spring Training, but I do think I have done enough evaluation to justify the Royals as better than at least a few teams. But I guess a decade, or two, of losing tends to put you in situations like this.

For a complete rundown of the FOX MLB Power Rankings, click here

0 recs | Comment 35 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

such bullshit

i can't wait to see this thing turn around so we don't have to be subjected to such mindless "analysis" about our Royals anymore. any fool with an ounce of baseball sense could see that the 2008 Royals might be bad, but they're not the worst team in baseball.

by Gordon Roy on Feb 15, 2008 3:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't understand the....

"no optimism headed into spring" line. A new upbeat, confident manager and a lot better roster than last year, where is the lack of optimism?

by MileHighKCfan on Feb 15, 2008 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

East coast bias

Bottom teams as they should be:

22.) Royals
23.) Astros
24.) Nationals
25.) White Sox
26.) A's
27.) Pirates
28.) Marlins
29.) Orioles
30.) Giants

by lordbyronk on Feb 15, 2008 4:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Accidently hit post, when I wasn't finished typing

all the preview magazines are like this. Athlons Baseball preview came in and basically said this orgainization is moving in the right directions, but still picked for dead last. We have a better pitching staff than the White Sox (Buehrle, Vazquez, Jenks and 9 other guys). I can't see them finishing ahead of us even if their lineup is slightly better.

All media is based off either coast and the only thing that will shut them up or get us more than 10 sec on ESPN (which might be a generous guess) is for the Royals to have a winning season. Then they can talk about what a fluke it was, and how we got lucky.

by lordbyronk on Feb 15, 2008 4:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

don't worry

these guys probably weren't big on the Rockies last year, either.

Fox has sort of proven it can't be trusted with any sort of analysis, sports or otherwise.

I will give them credit for the yellow line over the first down marker... that's their crowning achievement.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Feb 15, 2008 5:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That's called not thinking

There is no mode of analysis which would put the Royals at the worst team in MLB. Actually, I don't think any analysis was done at all. It was someone just ranking teams off the top of his head.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 15, 2008 4:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

i can sorta understand...

if they wanted to put the royals as the last-place/ranked team in the AL, wouldn't agree with it, but could see it

but there are at least 5 NL teams the royals are solidly better than

by royalsreview on Feb 15, 2008 4:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

true dat

by Gordon Roy on Feb 15, 2008 4:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Orioles

Can't imagine how anyone could even seriously argue that the Orioles might be better than the Royals this year.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 15, 2008 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

or the A's.

Especially since Blanton is all but gone.

by doublestix on Feb 15, 2008 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seriously

I think Daniel Cabrera is their ace now and he lost 18 games last year and finds the strikezone half the time.

I think the Giants will be worse, but both stand a legitimate shot to lose 100 games.

by lordbyronk on Feb 15, 2008 4:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

o's definitely should be worse

i'm not sure on the A's being worse yet, we'll see

by royalsreview on Feb 15, 2008 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Guthrie's their ace

not Cabrera, but your point is still well-taken...that rotation is question marky at best.

Obama-Buck 2008!

by NHZ on Feb 15, 2008 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And Guthrie

was a rookie last year I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong.

by MileHighKCfan on Feb 15, 2008 5:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Or the Twins.

Very top-heavy rotation which will rely on a full-fledged and immediate return of a talented pitcher. Any of our top 3 beats their #2 (Bonser), and they are going to have to rely on their kids taking an immediate step forward in 2008 for them to avoid last place. I strongly don't see that happening. If anything will keep them afloat, it's the center of their lineup.

Also, whether the Rays are worse than the Royals is debatable. I can see folks arguing they are equal, but certainly not much better (or much worse).

For the record, I predicted the Royals as the 20th overall team in MLB, record-wise in 2008.

Become a member of Royals Nation!

by Royals Nation on Feb 15, 2008 5:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Rays

could be very surprising this year. This year's Rockies? I could see them hitting .500. They just have too much young talent ready to emerge (Longoria, McGee, Davis, Price) that they can't be ignored. They are 3rd in the AL East IMO.

by lordbyronk on Feb 15, 2008 5:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I pegged them at third...

Mostly due to a Blue Jays collapse. I predicted their record at 76-86; those young players like Longoria, et al will probably take 1-2 years to emerge. I still think their lineup is a bit suspect, especially with the subtraction of Young.

After this year, they could become formidable, but that's assuming they actually keep the majority of their players (which, knowing their notoriously cheap ownership, they won't). They'll struggle maintaining .500+ if they don't retain Kazmir and Crawford, and I seriously doubt they keep either.

Become a member of Royals Nation!

by Royals Nation on Feb 15, 2008 6:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Astros at 18th

Are you serious? Their starting rotation for 2008:

Roy Oswalt
Fred
Gary
Dick
Tom

Okay, maybe not...but close! What are they thinking?

by MileHighKCfan on Feb 15, 2008 6:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ranking the Tigers #1

wait, how many pitchers did they have or acquire that were above average last year??

One?

by wildthang on Feb 15, 2008 4:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

That's not a good rotation

But it is probably a mediocre rotation. And maybe with a pretty good bullpen and a great lineup, they'll be one of the best teams in baseball. Maybe. I'm still picking the Indians to win the AL Central, but I think it will be close and competitive.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 15, 2008 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It all comes down to that bullpen

if they can perform like 2006, they will be battling with Boston. I just don't see much depth past Jones, Zumaya, Rodney.

by lordbyronk on Feb 15, 2008 4:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Zumaya

No Zumaya until at least mid-season. Another freak injury I think, but I've read there's a chance he's never the same.

If I had a rocket ship, I'd never want to land.

by dman126 on Feb 16, 2008 1:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tigs

Not sold on them at all. They're pitching stinks. Both rotation and the bullpen since Zum is out for half the year. There's no depth with their staff either.

by doublestix on Feb 15, 2008 4:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It's hard to believe

Analysis like this gets sticked to the front page of one of the largest sports news websites around. I would strongly recommend anyone e-mailing this guy; not necessarily with his lowly Royals prediction, but his completely unresearched analysis altogether.

Become a member of Royals Nation!

by Royals Nation on Feb 15, 2008 5:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

This story is really not worth discussing

It is so obviously based on lack of knowledge that it is insulting to any true baseball fans. What reason could they possibly have for ranking the Royals at #30? What possible argument other than, "We don't know what we are talking about but we do know a lot of people make fun of the Royals."

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Feb 15, 2008 9:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

All true, but

remember it is uninformed dismissal of the Boys in Blue that makes the Vegas "over" on KC wins such an easy score!

by howserfan on Feb 16, 2008 8:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I wonder what the over/under is this year

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 16, 2008 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

hate to say it but

we have finished in last place in the Central Division in the last four years and until we show something on the field we are not going to be looked on as anything else but losers.

A Loyal Royal

by bobchisam on Feb 16, 2008 12:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Great logic

but this isn't boxing. you don't rank the most recent world series champ #1 until somebody knocks them off. especially not in a supposed in-depth analysis of teams for the upcoming year. play devil's advocate all you want, bobchisam (we all know you get off on it), but at least make some sense in doing so.

by Gordon Roy on Feb 16, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Shaking out the Team Rankings . . .

Tier 1

Boston Red Sox
Arizona Diamondbacks
Detroit Tigers
New York Yankees
New York Mets
Cleveland Indians
Philadelphia Phillies
Los Angeles Dodgers
Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim
Chicago Cubs

Tier 2

San Diego Padres
Seattle Mariners
Toronto Blue Jays
Atlanta Braves
Colorado Rockies
Milwaukee Brewers
St. Louis Cardinals
Houston Astros

Tier 3

Kansas City Royals
Chicago White Sox
Minnesota Twins
Cincinnati Reds
Texas Rangers

Tier 4

Oakland Athletics
Tampa Bay Devil Rays
Washington Nationals
Pittsburgh Pirates
San Francisco Giants
Florida Marlins
Baltimore Orioles

by royalstern05 on Feb 16, 2008 2:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

We're Tier 3 Material . . .

until we put together a few more above-.500 months. We could easily be wild-card contenders with just a little more seasoning.

As far as the bottom Tier is concerned - the Orioles and Marlins will be abysmal. At least the Giants have Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum.

I am willing to bet good money that the O's threaten the Mets dubious record of 120 losses in 1962.

by royalstern05 on Feb 16, 2008 2:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Royals Are

Such a different team from the start of preseason last year, and for the better, I can't believe we're only 2 games better than the '07 version. I have to admit, however, that the bullpen with Riske, Greinke and Soria was very good, probably better than this year's.

I'm not getting older....oh, wait, yes I am....and slower.... and weaker. God, this is great!

by philofthenorth on Feb 16, 2008 7:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs