With the Royals having so much trouble getting runs on the board, one of the things I hear most is "sit Pena in favor of Callaspo." True, TPJ can't hit well, and who wants a black hole in their lineup? But the Royals' recent woes can't be pinned on him. Check out the difference in these Royals hitter before and after the west coast trip that had started on April 14:

April 13 and earlier:

Royals W/L: 7-5

Mark Grudzeilanek: .308/.333/.386

Mark Teahen: .286/.452/.400

Alex Gordon: .333/.604/.360

Billy Butler: .386/.477/.449

Tony Pena: .033/.033/.064

After April 13:

Royals W/L: 7-13

Mark Grudzeilanek: .241/.310/.379

Mark Teahen: .236/.306/.304

Alex Gordon: .246/.287/.337

Billy Butler: .222/.292/.291

Tony Pena: .220/.254/.233

The Royals were not expecting major offense out of Tony Pena. He is what he is, a light-hitting shortstop with great defensive skill. As it is, his hitting during the team's down period is light-years better than it was when the team was doing well, so how could he be held responsible for the problems the Royals have had lately?

The problems here are Gordon, Butler and Teahen, and to a lesser extent (only because he's not big in the future plans), Grudz. And of course, Guillen, but he was bad in both the before and after periods. What could have caused these guys to collapse like this? It's not just regression to a mean from an early small sample size, it's an en masse slump. If the guys we're really counting on as hitters don't hit, what can we possibly do? Callaspo replacing Pena is a band-aid, not a cure.