Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Billy Beane's Challenge: HOW to Add A Hitter? Bar-right-arrows

The Royals Are 3-0

Royalsreview_tiny by royalsreview on in News

The Royals are 3-0. Deal with it, America.

And no, this isn't the second time in twenty eight years thats happened -- as was reported on Baseball Tonight, last night, about 2-0 -- it's the second time in five years actually.

Someone call Desi Relaford, Ken Harvey and Michael Tucker.

Quick hits as we celebrate:

  • It's three games. It's three games. If this were an NFL season, by my calculations, we'd be about two minutes into the second quarter of the first game.
  • The team is not winning because of small-ball, attitude, or Tiger complacency, they are winning because of absurd pitching. Period. The offense has been adequate, but not even that good. In 29 innings, the Tigers scored five runs. I could have been the leadoff man and Jenn Sterger could have hit cleanup this series, and the Royals would likely have still won all three games.
  • The bullpen threw nine innings against the Tigers, and allowed one run, the Tomko, surrendered homer in the Opener. Insane.
  • For the curious, 38% of the runs the Royals scored this series were courtesy of the long ball. Another 15% have come from doubles.
  • Some were suggesting, Denny included, that the ball was carrying today in Detroit. I don't know. I was in Iowa. That being said, it was Detroit and it was cold. The three starters -- Meche, Bannister, Greinke -- managed 12 strikeouts combined, which I still believe is a little too low. Twelve K's isn't hideously low, far from it, but, it still suggests the boys may have been a smidge fortunate. Thankfully, just like last season, the bullpen doesn't mess around and rely on guile.
  • As a team, the Royals drew seven walks in three games.
  • Tony Pena Jr is hitting .111/.111/.111. But his only hit was the game-winner on Opening Day. Obviously, he doesn't care about stats. He just cares about winning. I credit Hillman.

1 recs | Comment 123 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Please

Don't call Ken Harvey.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Apr 3, 2008 4:38 PM EDT   0 recs

yep, only 3 games

any stat heads wanna tell me the last time we did three in a row? for the sweep? July 07?

it's hard to not be positive

it's the most wonderful time of the year...

The first thing I know about someone in a KC hat is that they're loyal.

by grantfunk on Apr 3, 2008 4:39 PM EDT   0 recs

the royals won 5 straight last season in June

including a sweep of the Angels, in LA

by royalsreview on Apr 3, 2008 4:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Prediction:

We will not lose another game, so long as Angel Berroa is the last featured "100 Greatest Royals"

Sort of a good luck charm.

Or maybe more like garlic to a vampire.

Let's Go Blues!

by powderbluesfor08 on Apr 3, 2008 4:42 PM EDT   0 recs

Too late

Clint Hurdle # 63 article was already posted here, even though he's not yet listed in the Royals Review side-bar.

Not to mention that Max's (RoyalsRetro) own blog posts about 6 players ahead of what he re-posts here.

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Apr 3, 2008 4:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That's okay

As long as Emil Brown is the last one featured on his blog, I think the principle holds.

by jonfmorse on Apr 3, 2008 4:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Heh

The next one coming up is really crappy too. Maybe the key is exorcising the demons of past Royals teams.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Apr 3, 2008 4:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

How crappy can he be

if he's ranked ahead of Raul Ibanez and Emil Brown, who for all that he represents three rotten seasons, was our RBI leader for 3 years running?

Are we talking about a poor player who racked up win shares through long service time like David Howard and Bill Pecota? U. L. Washington, maybe?

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Apr 3, 2008 5:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Unfortuantely

Yes. He is really awful. I am surprised to see him this high.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Apr 3, 2008 5:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Four years as a lineup regular

will get you pretty far on that list. After Patek, we had no one better at SS until Kurt Stillwell (and that's saying something right there!) Onix Concepcion? Buddy Biancalana? Angel Salazar? Yuk.

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Apr 3, 2008 5:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Just remember:

We still haven't seen Tom Goodwin or Brian McRae show up on the list yet. There are still stinkers in the pipeline.

by jonfmorse on Apr 3, 2008 5:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

McRae wasn't too bad

Terrible 1992, but otherwise solid, and had enough pop in his bat to get over 20 doubles every year, a lineup regular for 4-1/2 seasons.

I don't expect we'll see Goodwin. His service time with the Royals was roughly the same as Raul Ibanez's and his stats were considerably worse.

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Apr 3, 2008 5:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Odd

It felt like Goodwin was there for 38 years.

by jonfmorse on Apr 3, 2008 5:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The hitting

Without crunching the numbers, I think we hit pretty damn well considering that we faced Verlander, Rogers and Bonderman in one of the best pitcher's parks in baseball.

This team is pretty good.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 3, 2008 4:42 PM EDT   0 recs

point taken re: verlander

and maybe bonderman, not sure about Kenny in that group...

by royalsreview on Apr 3, 2008 4:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Kenny's human

But he's kinda given us fits in the past.

by jonfmorse on Apr 3, 2008 4:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

My point was that the Royals faced one great pitcher, one good pitcher and one pretty good pitcher

...in a great pitcher's park. One shouldn't expect a massive offensive explosion from any team in such circumstances.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 3, 2008 4:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Good point on the pitchers (with an assist to the Detroit bullpen)

After moving the fences a few years ago, however, Comerica plays as a neutral park these days.

by Gopherballs on Apr 3, 2008 4:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

last year in July

the royals won the final two games in Boston, then came to Detroit and won the first game there

that was probably the best three game stretch all year, in terms of competition

by royalsreview on Apr 3, 2008 4:45 PM EDT   0 recs

Great Post, Will

I was just re-reading the opening post to the game 3 thread as well.

I just want to thank you for doing this, day in and day out. I went 15 years here in Seattle and in the Navy not finding a Royals friend, and now I have a place to come and read great information with dashes of sarcasm and humor, while bantering with fellow fans.

Really, this could go under anyones post on this board, but you are certainly making it happen.

That being said, I guess I am a bit emotionally caught up in a season opening series sweep of the fatcat Tigers. But I wouldn't be a fan, if I wasn't. I'd just be an analyst.

Finally coming back to the 'K'!!!! I'm going to be there 7/11/08, vs the SEA Mariners, of course!

by RoyalsFanInMarinerTown on Apr 3, 2008 4:46 PM EDT   0 recs

awww

where were you in the navy

by royalsreview on Apr 3, 2008 6:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Good Question ---

Boot camp - Great Lakes (Chicago Area), IL
Training - Great Lakes, IL, Virginia Beach, VA, Pensacola FL
Stationed - USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) Everett, WA
USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) Bremerton, WA
Naval Air Warfare Center, Point Mugu, CA

1 6th month deployment and 1 10 month deployment under my belt, in which I was able to visit Hong Kong, Pearl Harbor, Singapore, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Italy, Spain, the Azores, Perth/Sydney/Hobart Australia, and last (and certainly the least in my mind) Bali.

Finally coming back to the 'K'!!!! I'm going to be there 7/11/08, vs the SEA Mariners, of course!

by RoyalsFanInMarinerTown on Apr 4, 2008 12:33 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

New win total prediciton...

the Royals will obtain 67 wins by June.

HOLY CRAP THIS "WINNING" THING IS AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If the Royals don't look out, I'm going to start expecting them to win. Those are dangerous expectations my friend.

Blown Save

by BlownSave on Apr 3, 2008 4:56 PM EDT   0 recs

Hey Will

I live in Iowa too (I go to Grinnell College) and I was just wondering if you had access to the games on tv? MLB.tv blacks out Royals games in my area.

by RoyalFlush on Apr 3, 2008 4:57 PM EDT   0 recs

no, I had not heard that

that is insanely lame that they do that, if they consider iowa the royals home territory, they might as well also consider NY

i basically don't watch the games on TV, unless some coincidence makes it possible

last season i had the online radio thing, which was definitely worth it

by royalsreview on Apr 3, 2008 7:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

DirecTV

It's fun, it's easy, it's downright unaffordable for a college student but maybe your mom will help! :P

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Apr 4, 2008 12:36 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

MLB sucks

In my zip code in Iowa MLB blacks out the Brewers, both Chicago teams, the Twins, the Cardinals, and the Royals. Of course, only the Cardinals games are on TV here. I guess I'll just stick with radio and gamecast until the summer when I go back to KS and get the games on TV. I would love the DirecTV thing, but I live in the dorms where it is impossible to get.

by RoyalFlush on Apr 4, 2008 4:15 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

slingbox....

Have you looked into setting up a slingbox in your kansas residence? This would get you around the blackouts..

by KCctrell85 on Apr 4, 2008 8:30 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

thats what I plan on doing

but I won't be back in Kansas for awhile, so that's the plan for next season. I think I'm screwed this season

by RoyalFlush on Apr 4, 2008 10:41 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think this series was emblematic of what we'll see from them this year

Not a 1.000 winning percentage, but this is how they'll succeed. I don't think anyone thought this team was going to win its games by being a 1,000-run scoring offense, or even 900, or probably even 800. They are going to succeed with good pitching and sufficient offense to get the wins. That isn't the profile of a playoff team, but it is the profile of a .500ish team.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 3, 2008 5:03 PM EDT   0 recs

Arizona...

... wasn't the profile of a playoff team either and they won the most competitive division in baseball last season. (They won a series too.)

Blown Save

by BlownSave on Apr 3, 2008 5:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It was a competitive division, but not a good division. There were no really good teams in that division.

The AL Central has the Tigers and Indians. It will be hard for the Royals to squeak through.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 3, 2008 5:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Royals are now

the last undefated team in the major leagues. The Nats and Brewers just lost their games today.

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Apr 3, 2008 5:16 PM EDT   0 recs

Whoa

Now that is interesting

Finally coming back to the 'K'!!!! I'm going to be there 7/11/08, vs the SEA Mariners, of course!

by RoyalsFanInMarinerTown on Apr 3, 2008 5:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

if only

the sandwich round didnt exist

:(

Accidentally not thedude925 anymore. I do hate this new name.

by wildthang on Apr 3, 2008 10:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The sandwich picks really screw bad teams trying to rebuild themselves

But this year it helps the Royals get 3 picks in the top 50 overall.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 3, 2008 10:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I have a feeling the RCI would be through the roof right now

A 3-0 start is a hell of a drug.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 3, 2008 5:35 PM EDT   0 recs

although it was a typo

I think that in a game in which he opposing team scores just one run, referring to that run as "The Tomko" is a pretty durned good idea.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Apr 3, 2008 5:41 PM EDT   0 recs

MLB.com article

Imagine, the Royals in first place.

"We're going to get used to it," Gordon said.

Gotta love that confidence baby!

Disclaimer: Comments may not be suitable for young children or women who are pregnant, or women who think they may be pregnant. Side effects could include nausea, dizziness, or yelling at the monitor in disbelief.

by MileHighKCfan on Apr 3, 2008 6:17 PM EDT   0 recs

Historic Series

What's more impressive is that they held the Tigers to just 5 runs over the three game span. In all the three-game series' between the two, the Royals kept the Tigers to five runs only twice (2002 and 1988). Of the Tigers who played that series in 2002, only one batter had ever been on an All Star team (Robert Fick 1). This season's Tigers? A combined 41 All Star appearances (Ivan Rodriguez 14, Gary Sheffield 9, Magglio Ordonez 6, Edgar Renteria 5, Miguel Cabrera 4, Carlos Guillen 2, Placido Polanco 1).

Read more on this series at my blog: TomsBombs.blogspot.com

by habetw4 on Apr 3, 2008 6:21 PM EDT   0 recs

The news keeps getting worse for Detroit

Sheffield apparently tore a tendon in his finger during today's game. His status is uncertain. Bonds might have found a job.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 3, 2008 6:42 PM EDT   0 recs

i want to see bonds keep playing

I might be the only one, but i honestly do

of course, that will also mean coverage of bonds, and more posturing, and more delirious OH MY HE WAS BOOED stories, but nevertheless

by royalsreview on Apr 3, 2008 7:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

PED's or no, he's an ass

Quite frankly, I think the public rebuke he has received is the most fitting punishment for his juicing. I really doubt he's been blackballed. If a team with the money to get him wanted him, they would have signed him by now. And if someone comes to have a real need for him, they'll snatch him up. I don't look forward to him playing again because he's one of MLB's biggest arrogant jerks. Mostly I just hope he doesn't come to the AL Central.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 3, 2008 7:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

if we eliminated all the asses from baseball

the clubhouse would be mighty bare.

by 390 on Apr 3, 2008 7:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

if he can play, and wants to play

he should play. suppositions about his character are irrelevant to me.

by 390 on Apr 4, 2008 12:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah.

Last time I checked, Ty Cobb was in the Hall of Fame.

by jonfmorse on Apr 4, 2008 12:36 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If 1) he can play, and 2) wants to play, AND

3) a MLB team wants to pay him the millions it would take to get him to play.

While the market for him at this time appears to be completely inactive, Bonds pride would not allow him to sign for something like $1M (in my opinion). He sees himself as a great star who deserves star money. Given his age and the limited market for him, he'd certainly give what he sees as a discount. So I think it would take $7+ million to sign him.

Pretty much everyone sees him as a DH only at this point, and rightly so. So how many AL teams
1) Need a DH upgrade
2) Can afford his price tag, and
3) Are close enough to contention that such an outlay makes sense for them

I can't think of one. THAT is the reason he hasn't been signed yet.

The fact that he's one of the biggest A-holes in baseball isn't the reason he hasn't been signed, it is just a reason that I'm happy he hasn't been signed. Back in the day, I would have been happy for Ty Cobb to be out of a job, even though he was extremely talented.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 12:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

do you

1) possibly have a 2) chip on your shoulder about this 3) whole thing?

i see about 15 weird assumptions in the above post. if i'm bonds, yes, i'd want to be paid, because a-hole or no he'll put butts in seats. that's not about some very strange assumption about his sense of pride, imo. i'm not an apologist for bonds, but you're laying on the judgement frosting pretty thick (again, imo).

by 390 on Apr 4, 2008 1:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Is it a chip on my shoulder to think that he wants big money?

Some players would for whatever the market will bear. Some players just want to play, so if the market will only offer them $1-2M, they'll take it. I don't think Bonds is like that. I don't think anyone thinks Bonds is like that. He has a high opinion of his value. He has always had a high opinion of his value. Like it or not, Barry Bonds is an arrogant jerk. I don't base this on his steroid use. I (and pretty much everyone else) recognized this long before the steroid rumors started circling. That's just part of his makeup. There are a lot of A-holes in baseball (A.J. Pierzynski, Jose Guillen, Milton Bradley, etc.) and Bonds is at the top of the list.

I don't see why people feel the need to rush to his defense. What he is is pretty clear:

1) A great and extremely talented baseball player
2) On the downside of his career
3) An arrogant jerk
4) A PED user/abuser

Whether he plays this year or not depends on whether his skills and price tag fit into any AL team's plans. So far, they do not. And that makes me happy.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 1:39 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

"I don't see why people feel the need to rush to his defense."

ignoring assumptions about character is hardly a rush to defense. what's clear is that you really, really dislike the man. i think that calls your objectivity into question.

by 390 on Apr 4, 2008 2:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Huh?

I'm certainly speculating as to what he's thinking, but my feelings on Bonds are based on his words and actions. And my opinion on what he's thinking and what he wants/needs in a contract in order to play is based on what he has done throughout his career.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 3:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

your feelings and opinions

are just that - you tend to present them as undeniable fact. it's called bias.

by 390 on Apr 4, 2008 3:37 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I expressed them as opinions

While these are obviously opinions, to make sure that was clear, I sprinkled in phrases like "in my opinion" and "I think". I am, of course, speculating on his mindset. He and I don't have heart-to-heart talks very often.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 3:45 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

my point is

you made your mind up about bonds a LONG time ago. you don't like him, and that colors your opinions about his present abilities. the reason bonds hasn't been signed has nothing to do with the level of talent he has, today (imo, of course).

by 390 on Apr 4, 2008 3:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Why do you think he hasn't been signed?

I think it is talent (defensive), age, fragility and money.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 3:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

he's a big headache

for whoever signs him. the question is whether he's worth the hassle, not the money.

by 390 on Apr 4, 2008 4:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

For a lot of teams, $7M (theoretically) is a lot of money

...that they apparently don't want to spend on a guy with Bonds limitations and negatives (which include, but are not limited to the hassle).

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 4:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

taking into account

the market rate for a similar line, the hassle is the limiting factor.

by 390 on Apr 4, 2008 4:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

you guys realize . . .

the tigers are about to fall to 0-4!!!!

we could have a four game lead over them by tomorrow morning.

lets enjoy our royals and forget about bonds.

by royalstern05 on Apr 4, 2008 4:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Or we could do both!

Actually, I'm about Bonds'd out. He'll get signed or he won't. Who knows. I hope he gets bunions.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 4:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Interesting...

Apparently after a while when the posts get far enough over to the right, the replies don't get indented anymore.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 4:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

bonds'd out

yep...

just a friendly argument though - i enjoyed it.

by 390 on Apr 4, 2008 4:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Me too

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 4:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If Adam Dunn, Raul Ibanez, and Pat Burrell are good enough to play left field regularly in 2008, then so is Bonds, as we was actually better than any of those guys defensively last year. Bonds isn't spry anymore but he's no butcher out there.

Of course using Bonds as a DH would make sense for a lot of AL teams, as he would indeed represent a substantial "DH upgrade" for the majority of them. But even if he signs with an AL team, he's likely to see some time in the outfield, because the value of another bat in the lineup would be greater than the value of a better glove in left.

Anyway, there's really no reasonable argument that Bonds doesn't suit somebody's needs. I'm with Joe Sheehan on this one -- he'd make just about any team better.

by 2X2L on Apr 4, 2008 1:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Bonds

Even factoring in defense if he had to play the field, Bonds would be an immediate upgrade over what Cleveland, Detroit, Toronto, Tampa Bay, Seattle, Anaheim, Oakland, and Texas have in LF or DH (and that is just AL teams). With his trial pushed back, he would be available for the full season.

I think Oakland hangs around in a weak AL West and ends up signing Bonds.

by Gopherballs on Apr 4, 2008 2:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

My guess is that a contending team with high expectations that underperforms in its first 50 or so games will sign him. Whatever flak they might take for it would be a temporary hazard; fans looking at a chance at a championship but a deficit in either the standings or on the roster will embrace him as means to get to the playoffs.

The Tigers could find themselves in that position, with Sheffield taking pitches like a hitter whose bat speed is largely a matter of reputation. So could the Cubs, who could probably work up a defensive alignment with Soriano somewhere other than left.

by 2X2L on Apr 4, 2008 2:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Tigers also have the history

of ignoring Selig and going well over slot in the draft.

by Gopherballs on Apr 4, 2008 2:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

When Oakland is rebuilding, why would they spend millions of dollars on any one-year free agents?

So they can win 83 games this year instead of 78? Beane clearly isn't looking to contend this year or he wouldn't have traded Haren. Now he's likely shopping Harden and/or Blanton. The A's are going to be sellers, not buyers. Beane knows how to commit to rebuilding and not waste money to buy a few more meaningless wins.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 3:07 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The AL West is lousy this year, especially with the Angels' injuries

85-86 wins may win the division. Most of the talent the A's acquired in the offseason is near major league ready, so the A's are likely to have a better team by mid-year just through internal promotions. Plus, nobody is better than Beane at finding talent off the scrap heap during the year.

by Gopherballs on Apr 4, 2008 3:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I really doubt Beane is going to go all out in a rebuilding effort in the offseason

And then suddenly change course during the season and go with a "win now" strategy. Expect more trades and no multi-million dollar signings.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 3:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You are underestimating the A's chances this year

PECOTA Projected Standings
AL West W L RS RA
Angels 85 77 806 777
Athletics 80 82 731 751 (without Bonds or external upgrades)
Mariners 75 87 687 748
Rangers 73 89 780 867

He did not go "all out" rebuilding, as he held onto Blanton, Harden, Street, etc.

by Gopherballs on Apr 4, 2008 3:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

When you trade away your best starting pitcher and best hitter for guys who won't help the team much at all this year

...then you are 100% into a rebuilding mode. He also signed bargain basement place fillers like Brown and Sweeney. That tells me that part of his rebuilding strategy is saving money for the future, when they genuinely are contending.

Beane isn't the kind of GM who would trade away his best players in Swisher and Haren for prospects and then change course in midseason by spending a lot of money on a one-year guy like Bonds.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Apr 4, 2008 4:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You forget the Hudson and Mulder deals

Beane has money to spend and if the A's are in contention, he will be allowed to use it.

by Gopherballs on Apr 4, 2008 4:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs