Auto-Interview II
This morning, over oatmeal and blueberry pancakes, Royals Review breakfasted with longtime blogger Royals Review at the Royals Review Midwestern-Eastern Headquarters on South Bass Island in Lake Erie.
The last time we did this the 2007 season was just getting started. What has changed since then?
Interesting question. My sense is you should have saved this one for last, since it really gets to the heart of much of my angst at the moment. Since the start of that season, some nice things have happened, specifically with the pitching staff. We've discovered that Joakim Soria and Brian Bannister can be significant contributors, we've seen Zack Greinke not only return to baseball, but become an above-average pitcher and, although it is early I suppose, we've seen Dayton Moore show some good skill in putting together bullpens. Oh, and the Meche signing turned out OK, although I really don't enjoy actually watching Meche pitch. So there has been some positive development, and beneath the surface the minor league system is slowly getting better. On the other hand, I didn't really like Ross Gload and Joey Gathright fourteen months ago, and through all the ups and downs, I still don't. I didn't think Tony Pena Jr. was very good then, and I don't now. Worse, I'm probably less excited about David DeJesus and Mark Teahen and John Buck than I was then. Alex Gordon is still decidedly not setting the league afire, and Billy Butler didn't either.
So overall...
So overall, it feels like we've hit another lull. If you think of getting to the playoffs as a cross-country drive -- let's say New York to Los Angeles -- then really all that's happened is that we think we have a car that will make it. Currently, we're still somewhere in Pennslyvania. Eastern Pennslyvania.
How far is this car going to make it?
I would say not past the boundaries of the Royals Radio Network. I think we die in the Rockies.
Why don't you trust Dayton Moore?
Why should I? I'm not trying to be difficult. I just...
You already mentioned the Bannister trade, and the snagging of Soria, and the Meche deal. And look at how well Miguel Olivo is doing, and Ramon Ramirez and on and on.
Yes, we now have two #3 starters, a three-innings a week closer, and a good option at catcher.
You do understand how bad the Royals were when he took over?
No, I just blogged about them for three years without noticing that. To go back the main point -- whether or not I trust Dayton Moore -- let's simply ask ourselves "why?" Why should I trust him, or to put it less creepily, why should I trust him to get the Royals into the post-season? Here's the information that I have to work with: a) "baseball people" love him, in this category we can include somewhat useful nuggets like the dalliance with the Red Sox (positive) and the anonymous quotes in Jayon Stark articles (not so much) then we have b) a handful of good moves he's made. That's it. For the Royals to reach the playoffs, he doesn't just have to be a good GM, he has to be a great one. And I just don't see how anyone can truly say that is a certain thing. As a fan, you have to have a certain amount of trust and I think your life is easier if you have in the back of your head that you've got a smart guy running things, but how can we say that now?
Well, would you rather have Allard back?
No, but that isn't the issue. In the last few days, I've started to think about this in a different way... maybe from a more psychological perspective. Think about it this way, lets say you have wanted to be a wedding planner for years. Years. You've worked in the industry, you've served as an assistant and you've been around weddings for a long time. But you've never been the guy. Then, you get hired to handle a major wedding. Major.
Yes...
So those first few decisions you make are probably going to be inspired, even brilliant. Years ago you discovered this cool little florist no one knew about, and you discovered this way of folding invitations that no one else was doing and you met a wonderful flower girl at another wedding, and within a week, you've made all those moves. The wedding industry is impressed and your clients are giddy. The only problem is, you're now out of ideas, and the material you have to work with, in this case, your clients and their preferences, are actually really really lame. Everyone still loves the paper fold you suggested, but now you're starting to get push-back from the familes about what you've setup as the dinner at the reception. Eager and confident, maybe over-confident, you've set the menu as lamb and goose. You keep explaining to people that this is very traditional, but...
I don't quite follow.
My point is, Dayton's first few moves were bound to be brilliant. They were probably the result of years of dreaming and observation. Who knows when he first noticed something about Brian Bannister or when he first made a little mental note about Soria. It's like why so many first albums and first novels are so much better than the next one, because the band spent ten years making the first album and ten months making the second. The bad thing, and what I think gets overlooked, is that Dayton's first flurry of moves also had some major misses: TPJ, Joey Gathright, extending Gload, extending Grudz, etc. There's also been a predictable reluctance to admit that some moves haven't worked, or even, more frighteningly, a blindness to failures. As in the Pena situation.
Where do you put Hillman in this wedding analogy?
Oh, he's the lamb and goose at the reception, or at least part of that.
That bad?
Well, lamb and goose, as long as there are some good sides and an open bar, might actually be kinda fun. It's certainly different, at least superficially. On the other hand, goose isn't much different from chicken, and lamb, isn't much different from beef. I am not a fan of Hillman, no. But honestly, he's just a guy. The baserunning silliness looks like it's slowing down, which is good, but the bullpen management remains uninspiring. As I wrote at the time of the hiring, the important thing is not so much what Hillman does in-game, but rather, what his philosophy reflects about what Dayton thinks is important, or what Dayton wants. Playing Whiteyball with this roster is stupid, but its even stupider if Dayton decides that what he needs to do is reshape the roster to fit Hillman's wishes.
You don't want Whiteyball?
No. Not unless the K goes back to artificial turf, along with half the other ballparks. Here's the thing: everyone gets a little silly about this stuff. Show me a team that supposedly won because of being small-ball-tastic and great on the basepaths and I'll show you a team that had a Top 5 pitching staff. It's really that simple. But for some reason there's this impulse to over-value the offensive side of the equation with those teams, even though that isn't how they are winning. It also works in reverse: since I live in Cleveland now, I just finished watching a four game set between the Tigers and Tribe. I couldn't tell you how many times I heard the Cleveland TV and radio guys go on about how bad the Tiger offense has been and how inconsistent and stationary they are. Here's the thing: the Tigers are losing because their pitching has collapsed. It isn't even really complicated, but extreme power lineups always operate on a short-leash with the baseball media.
I wanted to ask you about another player that you somewhat dismissed before. David DeJesus is hitting .296/.352/.429, why aren't you excited about him anymore?
Because he has already done that. He was a tick better in 2006 (.295/.364/.446). David is a tough guy for me to appreciate at this point, even though two years ago I really loved his game. It's hard coming to the realization that people are who they are and that they won't be getting better. But you're right, he's nicely bounced back. Which is more than can be said for Teahen, who's a similar case.
Do you have a favorite Royal?
No, not really. I don't think you really follow the game that way when you are an adult. I do have guys that I kinda have an extra-non-fandom of, but I still root for them because they are Royals. I like Jimmy Gobble because he's been around for so long and because I can remember writing about him on my first blog, back in 2004. I like Soria because he's awesome.
What about Alex Gordon?
Would it be impolite to say I'm disappointed? In over 800 big league PAs he's a .253/.322/.408 hitter. He is 24 years old, so he's right on the hinge between still being young and being in his prime. Look at his comparables on his baseball-reference page and tell me how I should feel. Whatever it is that we expected he'd be... we may have to give up those dreams. Fortunately, this is an experience that most of us should be familiar with.
What is one move you would make, or that, you wish Dayton would make?
I get asked that a lot, often as a kind of rebuke to my criticisms, but I don't really think it matters what I think. You should ask Jim Hendry that question. The Royals aren't one-move away, they're 20 moves away.
How do you feel about this season so far?
The Royals are 25-40 and have the second worst record in baseball now, which wasn't what I expected. I don't think anyone is happy about whats happened in the last month and a half. The question is: what is the relevant information before us?
What do you mean?
First, is the record relevant? Now most of us predicted -- myself included -- that the Royals would be something like an 78-80 win team. There was actually a frightening consensus about this, at least among Royals people. Well... it doesn't look like that is going to happen. If people viewed this season as an incremental step towards contention, I'd have to say, so far, that looks wrong. There's one line of thought that argues that you have to be a 80 win team before you can be a 90 win team, and if the Royals haven't even reached that level yet, then we're still very far from anything interesting. If the Royals end up winning 70 games instead of 80, we'll have to decide how meaningful that is, which in many ways goes to the second point. Namely, the players. Now you could say, look at the Rays, they seem to have skipped the 78 win step and could easily be a contender deep into the season and for years to come. What worries me, and has worried me since last season, is that the Royals are not overflowing with guys who figure to get much better. I don't think Banny is getting better. I don't think Meche is getting better. I don't think Buck/Teahen/Gload/DeJesus/Gathright/Guillen/Olivo are getting better. So that leaves us waiting on Gordon and Butler and a few pitchers to be named later to carry the Royals to contention in 2009 and 2010. I don't know if that can happen.
So was this your expectation?
It depends on how closely you focus the microscope. Individually, obviously the expectations are all over the place, and those change constantly anyway. Guillen was a disappointment in April, a hero in June, etc. I am more disappointed in the offense more than anything else, which I thought would be mediocre. The pitching is mediocre, despite an early tease that it would be incredible. It isn't and it hasn't been since tax day. We're slowly morphing back into the same old Royals, a team that truly has no strength.
Do you think the Royals can compete in 2009?
They should be competing now! A .500 team would be in... I'm not going to look this up... second-place in this division? But no, I don't know about 2009. Then again, the division has taken such a bizarre turn with Detroit and Cleveland faltering, it's hard to say. One of the things you have to fight against is an expectation that every team follows an inevitable arch to contention. Lots of teams don't. They just stay bad for years and years. They cycle through players, have a few youth movements, get slightly better, then fall back again. I always point to the late-90s Twins, who got all the way back to just short of .500, then collapsed again and had to completely start over. There first attempt at building through the system wasn't good enough, and by the time the won the division again (when it was much much weaker, I should add) basically Brade Radke was the only guy who was still around.
I have a user-submitted question about makes you more upset, Justin Huber or Jenna Fischer's ex-husband?
Both had happy endings. In a way, Huber's sojourn to San Diego has been a blessing, I get to follow Padres games now.
So many of your responses seem to be negative. Did I pick a bad time to interview you?
Maybe, considering last night's disaster. You have to remember though, I am probably a very negative and pessimistic person. That's really just my temperament with most things I 'd say.
How is Royals Review going?
Do you mean you? Or me personally? Or the website?
Umm... the website I guess. Royals Review is a greybeard now.
It's never been better. That being said, this could be a contentious summer if the team keeps playing poorly. It's pretty amazing, and terrifying, to think that RR celebrated its third birthday this May, not that I celebrated or anything. Most blogs die just because people realize no one is reading them, which can be very painful, not because it's an inherently challenging thing to do. The site pretty much runs itself now, thanks to the size and strength of the community. I hated the new site layout and design at first, but have come to love it, which is predictable I guess. And beyond that, you always want to write more and better, or wish that you had. That stays constant.
Do you think the auto-interview went well?
That I cannot say. Thank you for having me.
Thank you.
2 recs |
71 comments
Comments
First
Oh, wait. This isn’t a game thread.
I probably think you are irrational.
by kjfinkes on Jun 11, 2008 2:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dayton Moore has clearly done an incomplete job of rebuilding the Royals
He’s done some very positive things and there are important things left to be done. But how much can we expect any GM to do in just under two years? Should one expect for him to completely rebuild the major league team and minor league organization in two years? Should one expect for him to fill every hole on the major league team in two years? Given the amount of talent he had to trade (which has clearly been limited) and the available free agents, money and KC’s reputation (which makes signing some FA’s hard), is it reasonable to say that he should have done much more than this in two years?
The job is clearly incomplete. But I like what he’s done so far. I didn’t expect a complete turn around in 2 years. Unfortunately, it takes longer.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 2:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure what you're asking
If you’re asking if I think the Royals will be in contention, the answer is no. If I think they’ll be significantly better, the answer is yes.
If you’re asking if three years is long enough to expect a complete franchise turn around with all holes filled, I’d say probably not. But if Moore is a good GM, the vast majority of those holes should be filled by June 2009 (the 3-year mark).
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then again, both you and I agreed prior to the season that the Royals would be significantly better in 2008
In fact, the general consensus on this site was that the Royals would finish 2008 in 3rd or 4th place. Instead, I think it’s safe to say that the team as a whole has regressed thus far, and if there is no signficant improvement the Royals are guaranteed to finish last in the AL Central again.
I agree with you that two years is too short a time to competently pass judgment on Dayton Moore, but I've been highly disappointed in the results this season.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think they have regressed at all
But I do think they have frustratingly stood in place. They’re about as good/bad as they were last year, and they weren’t very good last year.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jun 11, 2008 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, they are underperforming our reasonable expectations
Does that mean Moore has been a failure so far? Can we blame Moore for the underperformance of Gordon and Butler, for instance? There will be bumps in the road, but I think we’re on the right road.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I think you need to look at Moore’s performance more on the minor league level as it is hard to rebuild a ML roster with the restraints he has as far as payroll is concerned. His minor league aquisitions and improved pitching prospects is definitely a big upgrade. And the players he aquired during FA has been an upgrade for the most part. Yes he has missed with a few Tomko, Yabuta, Gload, etc. but Beane and Epstein miss too its not a perfect science. As far as Butler and Gordon are concerned it is Too early to give up on these guys. Butler just turned 22 how many guys perform well at that level in the majors? I would say few, shit how many even deserve to be in the majors that young?
Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.
by kcscoliny on Jun 11, 2008 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not second guessing Moore's competence or Gordon and Butler's future-
I know that Moore is a good GM, and I’m certain that Gordon and Butler will do better in the future. All I am doing is wailing in disappointment at this team’s collective performance. I truly, honesty expected the 2008 Royals to be much much better.
I also accept that one could acceptably argue that the 2008 Royals are arguably no worse/better than the 2007 version, but I don’t think it’s true. The offense is about the same, the starting pitching from 1-5 is a tick better but disappointing overall due to Meche’s underperformance, and the bullpen, which is the breaking point of comparison for me, is MUCH worse.
Who would you rather have?
2007 Royals Bullpen
Bale/Duckworth
Gobble
Peralta (good version)
Riske
Greinke
Soria
Dotel
2008 version:
Nunez
Tomko
Ramirez
Yabuta
Mahay
Gobble
Soria
I think it’s a no brainer.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm, the bullpen
Did we even have Dotel on the 25-man roster for even half of the season? Soria 2008 is performing better than Soria 2007 (and the closer role overall is performing better this year). I’d take Ramirez over Riske both now and in the future. Mahay and Nunez have been very good. Gobble is clearly worse this year. It’s only the bottom of the bullpen which has really underperformed.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dotel was on the 25-man for the first half
And I’d punch myself in the face if i tried to make an argument that Soria is a lesser closer to Dotel. As for Ramirez vs. Riske, it’s not a question of now vs. the future, it’s whether 2007 Riske is better than 2008 Ramirez. That may not be a fair debate since the 2008 season is still young, but don’t forget that Riske was very good last year.
Let me try to explain the overall point I’m trying to make about comparing the bullpens in terms of a theoretical example.
Say your starter gets shelled and doesn’t get out of the third inning, your entire bullpen is fresh, and you have a chance to win the entire game with a save opportunity.
Which of the following scenarios would you be more comfortable with in putting you in a position to win the ballgame?
2007:
Peralta (Long man tosses the 3rd and 4th innings, part of the fifth)
Goobble (LOOGY pitches to one hitter to end the fifth)
Riske (6th inning)
Greinke (7th inning)
Soria (8th inning)
Dotel (9th inning)
2008:
Tomko or Mahay (long man tosses 3rd and 4th inning, part of 5th)
Gobble (LOOGY, pitches to one hitter to end the 5th…hopefully)
Mahay or Tomko or Yabuta (6th)
Ramirez(7th)
Nunez (8th)
Soria (9th)
Although the 2008 closer is much much better, I’d prefer the 2007 pen for all of the innings leading up to the 9th.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Dotel, etc.
Dotel was on the Royals 25-man roster from late May through July. His first appearance was May 23 (on the DL before that) and his last was July 28. So he was basically on the 25-man roster for 2.3 of 6 months.
Ramirez vs. Riske, it’s not a question of now vs. the future, it’s whether 2007 Riske is better than 2008 Ramirez. That may not be a fair debate since the 2008 season is still young, but don’t forget that Riske was very good last year.
That’s why I said I’d take Ramirez over Riske both now and in the future. And by that I mean 2008 Ramirez over 2007 Riske
2008 Ramirez – 3.23 ERA, 1.81 FIP, 10.57 K/9, 3.52 BB/9
2007 Riske – 2.45 ERA, 4.45 FIP, 6.72 K/9, 3.49 BB/9
Riske had a good ERA, but Ramirez really blows him away with the peripherals.
Let me try to explain the overall point I’m trying to make about comparing the bullpens in terms of a theoretical example.
In your theoretical example where nearly all of the bullpen gets used, then yes 2007 is better than 2008. But it is rare for a SP to not make it out of the 3rd inning. In most Royals games, the starter has gone 5 of more innings. I really like this bullpen for the last 3 innings of a game, particularly when Nunez comes off the DL and we have even more depth.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes more depth re: Nunez's return
But that’s not my point – my point is, from top to bottom, from closer to 7th man out of the pen, the 2007 pen was better assembled and more reliable. As I noted, even when Nunez does come back I think the 2007 bullpen (2.3 months with Dotel) had more depth and versatility than the 2008 version.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The great thing is,
though, because we don’t have Dotel tonight, we have a real starter who has upside instead of Tomko making another start.
by I need more Esteban on Jun 11, 2008 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
True
And spinning Riske into supplemental round pick Mike Montgomery could end up being awesome too.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 7:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ladnier says Montgomery is close to signing
Just a little mildly interesting note.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's a difference between the following two statements:
1. The 2007 bullpen had more quality depth than the 2008 bullpen does.
2. The 2007 bullpen is better than the 2008 bullpen.
I think the top 4 of the 2008 bullpen is better than the top 4 from 2007. But I think the 5-7 is worse. This is very quick and dirty analysis, but I think 1-4 is more important than 5-7.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 7:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the qualification
But I would argue that the depth and talent from 1-4 in 2007 AND the 5-7 in 2007 was better than in 2008. Let’s compare a subjective top 4 -
2008:
Soria (CL)
Nunez (SU)
Ramirez (SU)
Mahay/Yabuta
2007:
Dotel (CL)
Soria (SU)
Riske (SU)
Greinke (SU)
OR POST DOTEL TRADE
Soria (CL)
Riske (SU)
Greinke (SU)
Peralta/Bale
Like I said, the comparison between closers is not even close. 2008 Soria is better than 2007 Dotel/Soria no matter how you spin it.
But as for the remaining three in the top 4, I still think 2007 is better. So I guess the breaker in the comparision is – does having a better closer in 2008 outweigh having more effective set-up men in 2007 compared to 2008? I would say no, because Dotel was fine in the closer role in 2007 and Soria, while not as lights out as he has been in 2008, was very good in the second half of 2007.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My point being
No matter how you qualify it (quality depth vs. talent, etc.)...the 2007 version is better.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 7:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
I think you are giving Riske too much credit and Ramirez too little. I think ERA is valuable, but you have to look at more, particularly for a reliever. I think Soria and Ramirez are clear upgrades over Soria/Dotel and Riske.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, look at it this way
Just for a second, I will agree with you and take Ramirez over Riske. I’m assuming that you bump Greinke into the “best set-up man” spot. Would you prefer Ramirez to 2007 Greinke? Would you prefer Nunez to 2007 Riske? I would not in either case.
I’m assuming this is how you would rank them…
2008:
Soria (CL)
Ramirez (SU #1)
Nunez (SU #2)
Mahay/Yabuta
2007:
Soria (CL)
Greinke (SU #1)
Riske (SU #2)
Peralta/Bale
Even with this premise I prefer 2007 in a head-to-head comparison between 1-4.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To add a complication
Greinke wasn’t even in the bullpen all season. 2/3 of a season? Less than that? Given that Dotel/Soria was the 2007 closer and Greinke/Riske was the #1 setup man, and that when Greinke was in the rotation and Dotel was either on DL or not with the team (which was most of the season) the top 4 for 2007 was much different, I’d still go with 2008’s top 4.
Without Dotel (which was most of the season) and with Greinke in the rotation (which was at least 1/3 of the season), the Royals top 4 was:
Soria (2007 version)
Riske
Peralta
Bale/Braun/Duckworth (I added another pitcher here because Bale was only in the bullpen for half the season)
I’ll go with 2008’s top 4.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair
Greinke did make 14 starts last season, in April and late August/September but the majority of his 2007 appearances (38 out of 52) came in relief, and his innings pitched as a starter and innings pitched as a reliever are about equal. All things considered, I would keep him in the set up man category.
I understand your overall point; for the 2007 bullpen it’s not clear cut and dry who should fairly constitute as being a 2007 bullpen top 4 or not because of trades and personnel shuffles. That said, I still disagree with you. I think you undervalue Riske in 2007, there’s no telling when 2008 Nunez will be back and how effective he will be, we are not considering how much better Peralta was in 2007, and the 2008 version of Jimmy Gobble is simply terrible.
The 2008 season is still young so the bullpen could change my opinion depending on second half performance, but we are not there yet.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 12, 2008 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have to give these things their proper weight
Greinke did make 14 starts last season, in April and late August/September but the majority of his 2007 appearances (38 out of 52) came in relief, and his innings pitched as a starter and innings pitched as a reliever are about equal. All things considered, I would keep him in the set up man category.
I’m not saying take Greinke out of the equation entirely, but it is inaccurate to say that the primary setup man for the 2007 pen was Greinke. For part of the season (about 60% of it), Greinke was in the bullpen.
I think you undervalue Riske in 2007,
Do you really think his ERA outweighs his peripherals by that much? Because ERA is the only stat where he was better than Ramirez. And Ramirez’s peripherals are much, much better than Riske’s.
we are not considering how much better Peralta was in 2007, and the 2008 version of Jimmy Gobble is simply terrible.
We’re not considering them because neither is in the Royals top 4 in the bullpen. I granted that 5-7 the Royals are worse this year. But if we’re talking 1-4, then that doesn’t include Gobble and Peralta.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 12, 2008 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, both you and I have Peralta in 2007's top 4
Just pointing that out to correct the following statement :
“But if we’re talking 1-4, then that doesn’t include Gobble and Peralta.”
For everything else, I think we’re in disagreement.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 12, 2008 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, and I'm saying Peralta isn't in the 2008 top 4
So the fact that Peralta is worse in 2008 than in 2007 doesn’t affect the top 4 comparison
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 12, 2008 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
its especially true with somoene
like Joel Peralta. Without looking at any numbers, I think Peralta had a decent season. Same player, new year, and he’s really struggled and now in AAA.
by I need more Esteban on Jun 11, 2008 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Happy endings
I would have hoped that the quote from Emerson’s experience would have had a therapeutic effect, but that’s cool. I don’t need to be privy to your inner psychological workings—that’s a crappy kind of blogging.
Your writing is still great, which is what got me (and I suspect most others) coming back regularly and eventually commenting.
I can’t help but be worried (irrationally) about Gordon, either, despite everything I’ve read about him from, e.g., Prospectus chats and stuff still seems to indicate he will break out and be very good this year or next. That would be a good topic for a roundtable, naturally.
But you are right about happy endings… it was all there from the beginning, it’s always darkest before the dawn, and so on.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jun 11, 2008 2:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
She looks like she's tired of him already
I’ll give them a year (and I’m not even a big Jenna Fisher fan).
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was the “follow-up” to the “kiss” pic I posted last night. This presaged their separation not long after, I believe.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jun 11, 2008 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently I do have second sight then
Well, hindsight at least.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why you statheads will never get it
Stats only tell you what a girl has already done in the past, not what she’s going to do.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jun 11, 2008 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
thats why scouting is so important
by royalsreview on Jun 11, 2008 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and it doesn't hurt to have deep pockets.
I have many leather bound books...
by juano on Jun 11, 2008 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a relevant question
RR, you touched on an interesting point – what if the rebuilding of this franchise doesn’t “take” the first time, like the Twins, and the Royals have to go thru another cycle of young talent before they win?
Will David Glass & family have the patience for that, or will they make additional mistakes, such as abandoning the method of trying to build from within?
It’s a valid question, especially considering the Glass family’s previous track record.
by loyal2sdad on Jun 11, 2008 3:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What would another cycle of rebuilding entail?
The Royals don’t have a lot of vets to trade and rebuild from. Basically Meche and Guillen. (A Grudz trade at this point has no relationship to a second rebuilding). Trading any of the younger, inexpensive players wouldn’t really be rebuilding, it would just be substituting one young, cheap player for another.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
DDJ trade would be an issue
as well as how thorough you wa=ould have the bullpen deconstruction to be
this was the point Silver made last offseason: the Royals should trade meche because the current core isn’t good enough to compete
by royalsreview on Jun 11, 2008 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the decision is made that the current core is not good enough to compete (not that I think the Royals are close to that yet),
unfortunately the only move that would shave years off a rebuilding effort would be trading Greinke for a Haren- or Bedard-like haul of talent.
by Gopherballs on Jun 11, 2008 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good interview
Some tough questions. That interviewer should lighten up and cut you some slack.
I find your lack of faith in DJ disturbing. He’s having a career season thus far. He is not going to get much better, but he’s at an age where he’s not expected to keep improving. He is what he is, a fairly valuable CF with good OBA skills and decent pop.
The rest I can agree with more or less. I think its too early to be down on Dayton. I mean, the Twins example you bring up is a good one. By Terry Ryan’s third year as GM, he had a 94 loss team on his hands and was signing guys like Greg Swindell and trading for Alex Ochoa. But he also drafted Michael Cuddyer that year. And traded a minor leaguer for Joe Mays. And got good value for Chuck Knoblauch when he received Cristian Guzman and Eric Milton (and Brian Buchanan who was dealt for Jason Bartlett).
So I’d give DM plenty more time. The pitching he’s building in the minors is fairly impressive considering where we began from. If he can spin that into some decent hitters, we may be onto mediocrity. And that’s a first step.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jun 11, 2008 3:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Good points. One question
I find your lack of faith in DJ disturbing. He’s having a career season thus far.
Wouldn’t 2005 or 2006 been his career years? Is this year better than those years?
2005 .293 .359 .445 (.804)
2006 .295 .364 .446 (.810)
2008 .296 .352 .429 (.781)
It looks to me like it is more of the same, which is very good for a CFer. I really don’t get Will’s statement that his performance is “hard to appreciate.” Why is it hard to appreciate a guy who is above average for his position? Because he’s not a star? Did anyone expect him to be a star (particularly this year)?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn’t 2005 or 2006 been his career years? Is this year better than those years?
As of a few days ago, his OPS+ was at an all-time high. I guess its probably more accurate to say “he’s back at his highest level of performance.”
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jun 11, 2008 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's hard to appreciate him
because he doesn’t let us down or surprise us with a new talent. He’s fairly unspectactular and he is consistent in his unspectacularity. He’s pretty good, but we expect him to be pretty good.
Don't Stop Believing!
by KC Chris on Jun 11, 2008 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great points
He needs to jump over a car or something.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jun 11, 2008 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I find it difficult to NOT appreciate any player who is above average for his position
How many current Royals position players have stats that are better than average for their position? Right now, I think it is only Grudz and DeJesus, with Gordon, Guillen and Buck close.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with your point
but I think that we have to contextualize the literary context of RR’s auto-interview—he’s writing mostly in terms of his own existential state and feelings about the season and team, and I think this is the case with the DDJ comment.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jun 11, 2008 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"contextualize the literary context"
I know I’m just whipping them off and changing streams mid-sentence, but it would be nice if I wouldn’t humiliate myself by typing such stupid expressions.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jun 11, 2008 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The contextualization of the context
I basically read it as him sharing his feelings/opinions about DeJesus. And I find it odd that anyone would have difficulty appreciating him. I mean, if he were getting $10M per season or if one expected him to turn into a star at age 28, then I could understand disappointment in him being only good. But he’s not getting paid that much and did anyone expect him to be a star this year?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, not me.
And I still love him.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Jun 11, 2008 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought it was pretty clear to everyone what DDJ was going into this season
Actually, IIRC, there were two schools of thought:
1. He’s essentially the player he was in 2005 and 2006. 2007 was a down year that does not signal a real decline and in 2008 he should go back up to or at least near the 2005 and 2006 levels.
or
2. He peaked in 2006. 2007 was the start of a decline which will continue. He might perform a bit better than 2007 but he’ll likely never again reach the 2005/6 level.
I didn’t read anyone say anything suggesting that DeJesus was going to break out this year and finally be a great player. So, he’s basically doing #1, and yet there’s still disappointment, or “lack of appreciation”?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
2005-2006
Might well be his peak, but I think it’s clear he’s still good. I believe I advocated giving him more days off this year…I wish it didn’t get Gathright into the line-up, but at least DDJ’s BA has bounced back.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Jun 11, 2008 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I think his peak is a plateau
...as his 2008 so far is equal to his 2005/6.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Either way,
do we trade him?
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Jun 11, 2008 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm willing to
It all depends on the take. The real problem is that if DDJ is traded, that probably means that Gathright would be the CFer, perhaps even long-term. If they would move Teahen over to CF, then I’d definitely trade DeJesus. But trading DDJ for Gathright is awful.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1 on trading DDJ for Gathright awfulness
I appreciate DDJ, too. I should probably just let RR speak for himself.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jun 11, 2008 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't understand why DDJ is frustrating
When he’s essentially the most knowable and predictable commodity the team has on offense.
2005 .293 .359 .445
2006 .295 .364 .446
2007 .260 .351 .372
2008 .296 .352 .429
There’s only one outlier there folks, and it’s not coming back any time soon. DDJ is what is he is – a solid contact hitter would average pop who plays an above average centerfield and hustles his ass off. I will take that any day unless you’re talking about replacing him with a very good or elite player.
To me, the more frustrating players on the team are guys like Teahen, who obviously has the talent to be a consistently good player but has yet to bring it all together consistently.
True. Blue. Third Place in 2008.
by DC Royal on Jun 11, 2008 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well after all these points
I do think I need to appreciate him more
its just an emotional/mental thing
by royalsreview on Jun 11, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Learn to love DJ
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jun 12, 2008 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's funny about that
is that in this respect, DDJ = Amos Otis.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jun 11, 2008 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
More negative hyperbole which is entirely inaccurate and probably wasn't even meant to be hyperbole
a three-innings a week closer
How many innings a week do closers usually pitch? 75 innings over a 26-week season is 2.88 innings per week. Or was this a shot at his stamina? One blown save and he’s already a weak, overrated part-time closer. I wish we hadn’t locked this guy down with a long-term contract. Now we’ll never be able to trade his worthless ass.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 7:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
he's awesome, but he's never around as much as I'd like
having the closer be your best player is just kinda a drag
by royalsreview on Jun 12, 2008 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's being used as a closer
For better or worse, Hillman is using him as every manager uses his closer. He’s usually just brought into save situations and is used in one-inning stretches, so he can’t do much more than that and it is difficult to use him more than two days in a row. That’s true for all closers, unless a manager uses him in a different way. And no managers do that.
So, we have a dominant closer. Be happy about that. And, look to the future.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 12, 2008 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
1B, SS, and non-DeJesus CF have been the problem
2008 MLB Average by Position
Avg 1B: 266/352/448 116 OPS+
Gload: 246/285/285 54 OPS+
Avg SS: 266/322/379 90 OPS+
Pena 155/175/193 -1 OPS+
Avg CF: 265/333/411 101 OPS+
Gathright 241/284/265 49 OPS+
Plug those three holes, and the team looks a whole lot better. Other Royals are underperforming as well, but nothing like those three (using OPS+):
Avg C 95
Buck 86
Olivo 121
Avg 2B 98
Grudz 94
Avg 3B 109
Gordon 99
Avg LF 108
Guillen 111
Avg CF 101
DeJesus 110
Avg RF 113
Teahen 95
Avg DH 103
Butler 81
by Gopherballs on Jun 11, 2008 7:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm still concerned about DH
On the one hand, Olivo is playing over his head, but on the other hand, I expect Butler to turn it up. RF seems to be a place we’re underperforming too.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jun 12, 2008 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So I know there is a lot of blaming
Hillman for last night’s lost. I was listening to 810 and Nate Bukaty was talking about that, last night, after Mahay pitched, Hillman essentially had 3 relievers to use. Yabuta, Tomko and Ramirez. He was saving Ramirez to be the "closer" so he went with the other guys to try and get one out..
Looking at it like that, with a 5-1 lead, I think I would have had the same mindset and I really think that most others would to. With the way our bullpen has been worked recently, EVERYONE has to be used or injuries will start to pile up. Those crappy relievers didn’t get the job done, and once again Hillman becomes the scapegoat. I think it sucks, but I’m sure others have a different opinion.
by I need more Esteban on Jun 11, 2008 7:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The bullpen was gassed
Options were limited. I don’t completely give Hillman a pass, but he didn’t have the whole bullpen to worth with.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 11, 2008 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
and that is just what I was trying to say.
by I need more Esteban on Jun 11, 2008 7:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't get why
He pulled Mahay. Mahay was cruising. He allowed a hit and an error. His pitch count wasn’t all that high for a reliever. Seemed like a premature hook, particularly if you know your bullpen is gassed.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jun 12, 2008 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Enjoyed the interview.
Of the 5 starters we had opening day only one has an ERA under 5.0.
by djk royal on Jun 12, 2008 6:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You must be overjoyed
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 12, 2008 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 














