Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Race to the BCS: rankings, in-game scores & blogs Bar-right-arrows



Spreadsheet Baseball: The Purple Crayon and the Contention Window

    The Royals are considered by most to be a team in rebuilding mode right now. I'm sure that there are those who disagree with that idea; those who believe the Royals will never win the world series, or those who have already lost faith in Dayton Moore's ability. But the fact remains that most of those who actually care look at the team and see a real rebuilding program, one that was not really seen during the Baird era. Naturally, we're all inclined to see this is as a positive thing. Really and truly, it is nice to see the franchise have some direction. However, looking towards 2008 the near future of the Kansas City Royals, there are some things that are bound to make you slightly nervous. I am not talking about some "anything can go wrong" feeling, I'm thinking more specifically on this one. And do not mistake this for a condemnation of the Royals future chances, because it's anything but that. I am not a negative person, I think, when it comes to what I think the Royals can accomplish in the next three years.

    One of the other teams that I follow throughout the season and the off-season is the Baltimore Orioles. I am, as I'm sure you all know by now, a Red Sox fan tried-and-true, but I was born in Maryland, deep in Oriole country, and I remember the O's from the days when Cal Ripken, Mike Mussina, Chris Hoiles, and other heroes of my single digit years played. I vaguely remember the change over from good old beer-conducive Memorial Stadium to the white wine park of Camden Yards. So if you're wondering what a Red Sox fan cares about the fortunes of the Orioles, that's the reason right there. I think that if you're such a fanatical baseball fan like me, you don't forget the team you saw the first time you went to a ballpark, or the team you saw on TV almost everyday.

    The relevance of the Orioles to this discussion is this: we, the Royals, are not the Orioles. We're surely both rebuilding teams, and we certainly both lost 90+ games last year. We've both got some good young players that provide hope for the future of the franchise. With the exception of the Royals' blip in 2003, these are both franchises that have fallen on hard times. Now, it looks like things are starting to turn around for both franchises, as the rebuilding programs seem real for both teams. But again, the Royals are not the Orioles, and not in the same situation. The Orioles, with the trades of Miguel Tejada and Erik Bedard (as soon as it goes through), have officially blown up the team that wasn't winning and are attempting to start again with the prospects they're getting from those deals, a few good internally developed prospects, and hopefully without the old guard that remains signed on for a couple more seasons. That's a rebuilding program in year one, really, and while the prospects might turn out to bring the O's back to relevance faster than one might think, there's really not much of a timetable on said program. After years of Angelos preventing any real direction for that franchise, the presence of an actual plan should have them giddy.

    The Royals are further along in their own plan, and that's the thing that has to make you nervous if you've been following this team for any length of time. I'm, of course, not the best person to gauge Royals' fans feelings about their team beyond those who post on this blog and by looking at the K's attendance records, but this is a team that's been directionless and wallowing in underachievers for quite a while. Now that Moore has come in and put his stamp on the team--yes, I'm well aware that some players on the team are Baird's--and there's actually progress being made, hope springs again. This upcoming year is one where people have reason to be optimistic, with the power of optimism comes the possibility of disappointment. This is not just a team that is relying on prospects to rebuild from the ground up, this is a franchise that has significant assets committed to veteran players who--as with us all--will not be around forever. Whatever your opinion on the subject, Dayton Moore and the Royals FO have signaled that Kansas City is close to contention. The first big signing, that of Gil Meche to a contract that looked ridiculous at the time, was successful. The signing that made headlines this off-season was the apparently-cranky Jose Guillen being inked to a multi-year deal. These are, of course, not the only deals made by Moore and to suggest otherwise would be to sell him short. However, it's time to realize that if the value gained by pouring millions into Meche and now Guillen is actually to be used, the Royals need to be a real, live, contending team very soon. Where "very soon"  means "by 2010."
   

Star-divide

There are times when a below average team makes a free agent signing with the very simple idea that if somehow everything gels, this player will be an asset. If the more likely occurrence is actualized, and the team in question has a losing season, the player can be flipped at the deadline for prospects. Octavio Dotel was a classic example of this type of move, and that he yielded someone like Kyle Davies at the deadline is not really the point (nor should it have been, in retrospect, all that unexpected). Meche and Guillen represent the type of big free agent contact where if the team does not post a winning record during their tenure, the signings will be wasted. No prospect that Guillen brings in at the deadline in 2010 if the Royals are 38-53 at the time is going to make people consider his signing a success. No one is going to be all that thrilled if Meche pitches his butt of for four more years and the Royals never get a whiff of the post-season before flipping him to the Yankees in year five of the deal. Hell, even signing Ross Gload to a multi-year deal is another thing that suggests the Royals think they're getting close. How many times have I typed the words "Ross Gload would be a good bench player for a contending team"? More than I care to rehash.

    It's not just the signings, of course. By 2010 Alex Gordon will be in his first  arbitration year and 26 years old, and unless he's adopted a very atypical career path we'll know a lot more of who he is by then. Either way, he'll be starting to get expensive. Mark Teahen, who always seems to get lumped in the Royals "young promising players" category will be 28, the prime of his career if he's going to have one, and a free agent at year's end. Gil Meche will be 31. Guillen will be an ancient 34 and probably starting to slip a bit. We'll have made a decision about where Joakim Soria fits in, as he'll be 26 and in his first year of arbitration. John Buck might be a Washington National by then. I'm not typing this things to scare you, I'm typing them to put this in perspective. The Royals are a team this has had a lot of trouble in their recent history with re-signing young stars. Did I mention that Zack Greinke, who seems like he's about 18, will be a free agent at the end of 2010.

    The point is not to say that the Royals will fail in their attempt to become a first division team again. I am one of the most positive people you'll find in all of New England when it comes to the Kansas City Royals. I tell people around here that I write for a Royals blog, and even the non-baseball fans question why that would be. Of course, it means that I just laugh at them, but the point is that I don't wish to be considered in the Neyer camp on this matter. I think Dayton Moore is a good GM, and I like the progress the Royals made last year. I think 2008 will go a long way towards re-establishing KC as a team that no one can just dismiss, and that it will make clear the acquisitions that will need to be made to make the Royals contenders in 2010 (or, Buddha willing, before that). The point, rather is to point out that the Royals are a team on the upswing of their rebuilding program. This is the year that we should see progress to the tune of getting out of the cellar and seeing Alex Gordon start to develop into an All-Star.

     Now I know that there's the possibility I'm coming off as Captain Obvious. "Really NHZ? You really think we need to a winning team by 2010 for things to be going well? No way." Well, it's not that I think that we need to be a winning team in 2010 if the Royals are ever going to be a success team again. I'm saying that after 2010, there's a distinct possibility that the team will have to go into "win now" mode for the current generation of Royals to get to the playoffs, barring some excellent drafting or big FA acquisitions (the latter of which is hard to see coming). Suffice to say that Moore's recent move suggest the goal is to compete in 2009 or 2010, and I think he had better be right. Teams on a "five year plan" simply don't have the Royals current roster construction. Teams far from contention like the Orioles are dumping Meche and Guillen contracts, not acquiring them.

      Anyway, I believe the Royals have done well for themselves thus far. I believe Moore's done a good job remaking this team without the underachievers that seem to symbolize the Allard Baird era. I am merely trying to be realist about this: I think our contention window is coming up fast, and I think the Royals need to show significant progress this year for Moore to keep my confidence in him assured.

     All this being said, I was talking to my dad at length over Super Bowl weekend, which I went home from Maine for to spare my dad from having to watch the Super Bowl without another football fan in the family--I have four younger sisters and, like most of you, a mother--and because watching the Super Bowl at home assures me of watching the game with an actual fan as opposed to some of the bandwagoners I meet up here. I digress. The conversation turned from school and football to my writing for this blog, and subsequently to what the Royals needed to do this year to do well.

     Well, I was completely honest, even if you might read this and think I'm too optimistic. I am expecting--banking on, you might say--significant improvements from Teahen and Gordon to buck up the offense, as well as a continuing Assault on Spheroids by Billy Butler. I'm onboard with the Guillen signing, especially with the upgrade over Emil Brown, and I recognize that DDJ v. 2007 would be an acceptable CF performance, and that I think he's capable of a little more. I mentioned that at this point I just can't forecast Grudzielanek as doing anything other than what's he's done for the last million years. I mentioned that I hate Tony Pena's batting approach almost as much as I hate raisins, but I said that his defense makes him a solid "not the problem" player. John Buck, of course, is the elusive average catcher. I don't see any reason not to expect that to continue.

     On the pitching side, I told dear ol' dad that there's no reason that Meche and Bannister can't do approximate 2007's value, even if I suspect they might start a bit slowly. I was optimistic on the bullpen, and I mentioned that the Royals are probably no worse off then most teams with the back of the rotation. I said that Hillman seemed like a capable manager, for whatever that's worth. All the stuff I've listed above, I think, is totally reasonable and, in some cases, very probable.

     That leaves only a couple things. One I covered extensively last week, which is that the Royals need to figure out what's going on with the 1B/DH situation, first base in particular because DH should be the easiest position to find an average candidate for in baseball (with the exception of middle reliever). The Royals need to figure out if Butler can handle first base, if Shealy is worth anything, and if they can absorb the contributions of Gload in the line-up for any long period of time (or if Gload can). Then, a decision has to be made that will most benefit the team going forward. You just can't punt on production from two power positions and expect it not to bite you in some way. You'll see what I mean this year when if Jose Guillen hits, say, .XXX/.350/.450, as it represents such an upgrade at a position that's supposed to be a good hitter's spot.

     The other question mark that would be huge if it were to turn into a positive is Zack Greinke. If Greinke can finally realize his potential and approximate his level of ability in 2004, then it's going to do wonders for this team, for Greinke, and for all of us Royals supporters. Can you imagine a team coming to town with Meche-Bannister-Greinke on the ticket, if Greinke pitches well? I'll tell you exactly what I'd think having to face that as a Red Sox fan: we're not going to sweep, and 2 out of 3 would be a damn good result. That's the funny thing about having three good starters. You can be a thorn in anyone's side if they catch all three of them for a weekend set. Get a few good contributions from a resurgent Davies and Hochevar shows potential and...well...a fan can dream, can't he?

     We all know the story with Greinke, as he's a popular Royal and his ups and downs have been well-documented, so I'm not going to harp on this for a long time. Still, this point needs to be made, I think. While I'm not an intangibles guy generally, because I feel they're almost always overrated, but that does not mean I can't recognize their value in certain cases. It will be very key for the Royals' staff to work with Greinke if he goes through a rough patch and, this time, it sure would to keep the guy in the rotation if he's  bit hit-unlucky. You can disagree with my opinion and that's fine, but I'll argue for a long time if you want me to that Greinke never should have left the rotation last year when a joker like Odie Perez was sucking up starts and spitting them back out like some kind of defective vacuum cleaner from hell.

     By VORP, Greinke ended up being the third best pitcher on the Royals' staff last year, posting a 30.1 figure in that particular nerdy statistic. His strikeout rate was 7.82/9 IP, which is better than anyone else who made a start for the Royals last year. His walk rate was a solid 2.66, and he did a fair job limiting home runs with less than 1.00 per 9 in a park generally considered a fairly good place to hit. Oddly enough, what with his stint in the bullpen and his strong finish, his BABIP was still up at .321. That's actually a hit higher than you would expect from a pitcher with Greinke's stuff. I don't wish to alarm anyone, but if Zack can come close to these rates next year, than there's a darn good chance he'll be the best starter on the Royals' staff. And if he is, I'm throwing out a lot of the negative possibilities I've conceived when thinking about the Royals' rebuilding program.

Going forward, I do think Greinke has the potential to be a very good starter. I cannot lump him into the category of "near sure thing" because his career has just been a little weird for us to really count on him. If Zack emerges from the craziness of the last three years of his career, it will be a bright and significant development for the franchise. Hope is a dangerous thing, but it sure feels good, doesn't it?

Spreadsheet Baseball returns next week on Thursday, as this appears to be my easiest day on the schedule. For this article, questions/comments are, as always, welcome/encouraged. Happy reading!

Poll
Forecast Zack Greinke's performance in 2008
Ace of the Staff - 125 ERA+
30 votes
Firmly behind Meche, but just as good as Bannister
31 votes
Out of the rotation by mid-season
6 votes
Too injured to contribute much
3 votes
A good innings eater with an average era
8 votes
Traded to the White Sox for Andy Sisco
3 votes

81 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 36 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

A lot of question marks
due to the uncertainty of player development for the Royals v.2008, all of which you address nicely. Gordon-Butler-Teahen will all improve, but how much remains to be seen.  I think DDJ will improve as well and I like Gathright as a 4th OF.  I wholeheartedly agree with you that 1B is the key question mark.  

As far as pitching goes, I'm less worried about Greinke than I am about getting consistently acceptable production from whomever ends up winning the #4 and #5 starter sweepstakes. For different reasons any of the following - Davies, De La Rosa, Hochevar, Tomko, and Hudson - could fill that role adequately...or they could all end up being disappointments.

If the majority of these types of question marks turn in to even mild positives, I strongly believe the Royals can finish a few games above .500 next season.  People think I'm crazy when I tell them that, and while I admit it is not probable it is definitely possible.

"I'm tired of all these stupid a$$ questions every day. Why the f**k would I hit Brett for Miller?" The rest is history.

by DC Royal on Feb 7, 2008 4:19 PM EST   0 recs

People think you are crazy
...if those people haven't looked at the individual players, their roles and their likely performance in 2008.  My personal number crunching, with intentionally conservative predictions has led to a prediction of 765 RS, 755 RA for a record of 82-80.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 7, 2008 4:24 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

the problem is that the majority of fans
Do not follow the Royals at all and do not watch them play, get their baseball knowledge from ESPN's Baseball Tonight, and have internalized the notion that the Royals can never be more than a poorly run, underfunded, and perennial losing small market team.

I've noticed that this attitude is much more pervasive on the East Coast than the West Coast. Then again, the Royals perennial poor performance against the AL East does nothing to validate a different point of view.  In 2007, their overall record against those teams was terrible:

Yankees 1-9
Orioles 0-7
Red Sox 3-3
Blue Jays 3-4
Devil Rays 4-3

Overall: 11-26

"I'm tired of all these stupid a$$ questions every day. Why the f**k would I hit Brett for Miller?" The rest is history.

by DC Royal on Feb 7, 2008 5:30 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

LOL!
How did we go 0-7 against the O's?

Oh yea, when Steve Trashcal is shutting us down!

by doublestix on Feb 7, 2008 9:32 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

I was pretty amazing, given how bad
the Orioles were.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 7, 2008 9:55 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

i didnt think the O's were that bad
they could have won the NL Central

by royalsreview on Feb 8, 2008 1:01 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Every AL team
could've won the NL Central.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 8, 2008 1:30 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

KC's imcompetence against the O's was
shocking to me.  I am constantly amazed at how the Royals find ways to lose.  A .500 record against the O's (who were awful in 2007)puts 4 more wins on the total and provides momentum on those East Coast road trips which are tough enough with the Red Sox and Yankees.  

by daveyork on Feb 8, 2008 8:45 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

That last bit depends on how much
value you place in "momentum" gained against a fellow cellar dweller when you're talking about going up against the two largest market teams in the league.

Still, I'm not in any way disagreeing with how silly it was that the Royals went 0-7 against the O's. It's kind of incredible really, when you think about how bad the Orioles offense/bullpen/starters other than Bedard and Guthrie were. Oh, well. Onward to better times.

Obama-Buck 2008!

by NHZ on Feb 9, 2008 2:26 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

One or two things to add
If we're talking about the talent and financial profile of the 2010 Royals, we have to talk about more than just current players on the 25-man roster.  Moustakas and Cortes could be good major league contributors by then.  We've got some high draft picks in a deep draft class this year.

Talking about the 2010 Royals is speculation of the most...speculative nature.  I'm not saying it shouldn't be discussed, and you made some good points about the team possibly maturing around that year, giving rise to a possible "win now" necessity.  But there is -- or at least can be -- an infusion of young talent every year.  Certainly over the next three years, new young players could help the team from within the organization.

Also, I see the Royals making at least one more big FA splash.  From my perspective the payrolls and revenues of this team, along with the words and actions of Glass and Moore tell me that the Royals are going to sign a top tier FA next offseason.  This would be a long-term contract which would be a key part of the Royals team in 2010.  And, of course, other FA signings are possible in other years.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 7, 2008 4:20 PM EST   0 recs

For sure,
there's not much question that I'm looking into the crystal ball a little bit more than usual for this article, and you're right to point out that the 2010 team should be able to count on some help from within. It will require some good drafting, of course, and that's hard to predict. A lot of this article focused on the current young players and what point they'll be at by 2010 or the next time we contend.

By you see, what the real idea here is to speculate how the 2008 Royals can grow into the next competitive team. 2010 is not an arbitrary deadline, at least not the way I was thinking. It's hard to see the Royals still finishing in last three seasons from now, so the question becomes how much growth this team has in it.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 7, 2008 4:26 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

NHZ
Did you hear that Schilling might have a season ending shoulder injury?
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 7, 2008 4:21 PM EST   0 recs

Yes,
though to be honest, it's hard for me to get too worked up about it. I was a little surprised he chose to return to the Sox in the first place...initially I wasn't counting him in as part of the 2008 squad.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 7, 2008 4:28 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Depth is important
And the Red Sox pitching staff just lost a key piece.  Now young pitchers are going to be relied on more than they otherwise would have been.  Tavarez might have to step up and start.  And then if one of the remaining starters gets injured, they have less depth to replace him.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 7, 2008 4:55 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

We're to the point where
Schilling's help would be appreciated, but he's really not a key piece anymore. He only pitched 150 innings last year, and I'm pretty confident that some combination of Lester and Buchholz could hold the fort for that many innings.

Tavarez starting is pretty much a last resort.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 7, 2008 5:18 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

2008 is the year of Zack Greinke
We gave him last year, ok, mulligan. First year back from the asylum. He had a tremendous ST, I think 27k in 24 IP? Fantastic job. Everybody was hyped up.

Fastforward to May 6 2007: Greinke gets pulled from the rotation. Back to back bad starts, 5.71 ERA, 7 starts into the season, he gone. His ERA peaks at 5.8 the next day, breaks 4 by the end of August. Progress is being made in the bullpen.

Question: When will we know that Greinke is settling in?

My answer: Once he pitches 200 innings in a season, with no breaks, all in the rotation.  Qualifier: We can't let 2005 happen to Greinke again. Obviously, this season was disastrous to his psyche. Can we coddle him anymore? No. But we HAVE to see what this guy can do every 5 days, for 200 innings.

Greinke is truly the question mark, the potential ace. A lot of teams have unknown factors in their rotation - but none as talented as Greinke. He is truly a supreme talent.

If Greinke decides to give us 200 innings of <4 ERA baseball, I think we win 85 games in 08. If he crashes again, and is throwing set up in the bullpen - we're down to a 2 decent 3 random rotation again.

winning records follow good bullpens

by slayor on Feb 7, 2008 5:02 PM EST   0 recs

Yeah,
I think this year is the year for Greinke. I'm leaning towards him being successful, but I expect to see him in a different uniform or out of the 'pen from here on out if he flubs another chance.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 7, 2008 5:19 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

i dont think he will emerge as the staff ace
but he still has a better chance of becoming a cy young candidate than anyone else on the roster

by royalsreview on Feb 7, 2008 5:57 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

I agree
I would say Meche would have a good chance, but I think he's going to struggle to open the year.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 7, 2008 7:35 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Rotation spots #4 and #5
This is why I keep pining for Soria in the rotation. Yes, I want to protect his arm by limiting his innings somewhat, but I still want him in there.

Yes, the Royals have assembled a large number of fringe pitchers who could or could not succeed in the rotation (Tomko, Nomo, JDLR, Bale, Davies, Hochevar, etc. etc.). This is smart, because certainly one or two of those will have a year exceeding expectations, so the more you have the better.

The problem is it is nearly impossible to determine from spring training, which guys it will be. Inievitably, the wrong guy or guys will be selected, and given 5-10 starts before giving up and trying one of the others. This happens every year.

I think the chance of that happening could be virtually cut in half by choosing Soria for one of those two spots. There is no way in the world he would post a line like Lima, fat Elvis, or Odie, so we wouldn't waste 10 games finding out that pitcher X just doesn't have it this year.

by loyal2s dad on Feb 7, 2008 5:54 PM EST   0 recs

Again, I'd liked to see Soria in the rotation
long term, and you certainly make a compelling case for him. He would have to eased into the rotation, though, and I'm not sure the organization is so unimpressed with Hochevar and Davies and 3 million dollar Tomko that Soria will get a chance this year. I really would like to see Soria get a chance in the future, though, and I definitely hear your argument.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 7, 2008 7:42 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

I will bet
That Soria gets a few starts in September and in 2009 they put him in the rotation.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 8, 2008 11:33 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

good stuff
enjoyed it
"So whattya say, should we clean this place up?" - Tom Cruise

by DyeFan187 on Feb 7, 2008 9:32 PM EST   0 recs

I'm glad, thank you. :)
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 7, 2008 9:54 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Bah,
I really need to get better at formatting this posts. I hate microsoft word.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 8, 2008 12:14 AM EST   0 recs

Formatting
I've found cutting-and-pasting from Word to be very troublesome here.  Also, I frequently post one or more small table of stats and without being able to make a real table or even line up columns, it always looks like crap.  Is there any way to better format such things on this site?
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 8, 2008 12:29 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I guess I needed
to put the html tags in the document. I always forget to do that, though. And WordPerfect is so darn expensive. Alas.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Feb 8, 2008 12:38 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

two things
  1. working from Word usually makes things weird, no idea why
  2. I have tried to make tables before, and have had no success. The actual html is insanely hard, and all the short-cut things I've tried have been just as bad.
The site will be upgrading at some point soon, so all this should change. Most formatting should be easier... notsure on tables

by royalsreview on Feb 8, 2008 1:03 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

beautiful night here in the flint hills
I think our defense will be especially critical this year. As will pointed out in his season review, the Royals just don't get strikeouts, especially the starters. We need to chase down all those balls and turn them into outs.

by FlintHillsRoyal on Feb 8, 2008 1:29 AM EST   0 recs

winning in 2011 isnt good enough
I can't wait that long
Hillman, you're on notice.

by FireBell on Feb 8, 2008 11:44 AM EST   0 recs

a truly painful read
That was a poorly written, rambling assessment of the team.  It managed to state the obvious, which is that the Royals have question marks across the board, but in a painfully drawn out way, somehow comparing to the Orioles, who just traded the nastiest lefthander in the league not named Johan, and have generally gutted their team in the past few years (Bedard, Tejada, B.J. Ryan, et. al.).  There is one vague reference to the Royals not being able to retain young talent, ("The Royals are a team this has had a lot of trouble in their recent history with re-signing young stars.") which is really a reference to the Allard Baird/Glass days of low-budget, forced departures of Damon, Dye, and Beltran.  If anyone in this forum believes that the current administration will not find a way to retain the future equivalent of those types of talent, I doubt they'd be readers of this forum at all.  They'd be long gone, like people born in Oriole Country now claiming the Red Sox as their own.  I also wish people would stop trying to predict what Zack Greinke will do.  One would have better luck predicting which way the wind will blow at any given second, yet every tried and true KC fan seems to have some sort of stance on the subject, which I find laughable given his literally and figuratively bipolar performance.  

by royalblues on Feb 9, 2008 12:37 AM EST   0 recs

Entirely unfair
That was not poorly written; it was quite well written.  I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with any arguments, observations and opinions of anyone else on this site.  I freely disagree, debate and challenge the opinions of others.  But there's no reason to criticize someone's writing ability.  It is never a good idea and it is doubly true when you haven't attempted to write a long diary like this yourself.  It is unfair and mean spirited.

And it is silly to say that no one should predict Greinke's future.  It is true that Greinke is hard to predict and that it is hard to be confident about any prediction of his future performance.  That doesn't mean that one can't or shouldn't analyze him or even try to come up with some prediction for him.  And for the record, he does not suffer from bipolar disorder.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Feb 9, 2008 12:56 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Thumper's mom was right, you know,
and that's really all I've got to say about your the somewhat confrontational attitude you seem to have. If you don't like the article, fine, but it's a bit silly to get into the ad hominem stuff. We're all mature adults here, yes?

Anyways, the reason that the O's were compared with the Royals in this article is because the Orioles are also rebuilding...but they've just torn down the old guard, and no one's expecting (relatively) big things from them in the next couple years. Meanwhile, we have the Royals. KC has been rebuilding as well, but they're to the point--what with big contracts and maturing young players--where they need to make progress soon. No one's going to be content with another 90-loss season for the Royals, whereas the O's could lose 90 and it might very well represent progress. The point was to juxtapose teams in different stages of rebuilding, highlighting how the Royals need to take a step forward soon.

Now, you seem to disagree with the idea that the Royals can't hold onto young talent. Arguing against that idea is a classic straw man, where you construct your own idea of what I'm saying--independent of my actual argument--and attack that because it's easier to refute. I never said that the Royals won't re-sign Gordon and Butler and X and Y after their arbitration years expire, but it's a possibility that certainly has to be considered. Glass might be willing to shell out more dough than he has in the past, but the Royals still aren't a big spender compared to a lot of teams.

Furthermore, if you wanted to read an article where no one writes anything about one of the Royals most exciting young players...too bad. I'm not beholden to you when it comes to who I analyze in these articles. If you're tired of the topic, don't read it. There's no need to be unpleasant about it. Greinke's an interesting player, and I'd be remiss as a writer covering the Royals to not speculate about what he's capable of and how likely he is to fulfill his potential.

Finally, I don't really care if people around here dislike me because I'm a Red Sox fan first and a Royals fan second. If that's enough to make you type this sentence -

They'd be long gone, like people born in Oriole Country now claiming the Red Sox as their own.

- then really, whatever. I don't have to justify my fandom. Think whatever you like about me possibily being a fairweather fan or the like, and I really just can't bring myself to address the issue. I'm a baseball fan who loves baseball, and that's what really matters anyhow.

Obama-Buck 2008!

by NHZ on Feb 9, 2008 2:42 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Vina_small
"Who Said It?" Quotation Challenge Answerzzzz
Bbtf_logo_small
ZiPS Projections for Gordon, Teahen
Profile_pic_update_small
OT - Favorite gameday recipes
Vina_small
2008 KC Royals "Who Said It?" Quotation Challenge
Royalsretro_small
The 100 Greatest Royals of All-Time - #37 Bo Jackson

Recent FanPosts

N30314657_30826435_5022_small
Team Local Number 54 (all-grit team)
31049_small
Is Dayton Moore determined to make our middle infield worse?
Royalsreview_small
Bowl Pick 'em Contest Update
Small
Christmas gifts II
Butler_small
Royal Scouting School with Joe Hamrahi of Baseball Digest Daily
Steve_balboni_pose_small
Moore Has to Win Now, and He Knows It
Royalsretro_small
Your Hall of Fame Ballot
Kansascity_small
I Pick Apart Trey Hillman's Proposed 2009 Lineup
_41153080_gallerysanta_small
OT: What did you get for Christmas?

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Site Meter