Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Please, Someone Make Bob Sapp Stop Already

Ignoring Omaha

I am new to Royals Review and having reread this post I've realized that it is overly negative, and that is not the direction my future posts will take, but this is what happens sometimes when your mind gets going. I'm currently studying in the hell hole that is Newcastle, Australia where it's 3:18 A.M. so I apologize in advance for the rant which is about to transpire..

The Kansas City Royals don't need their AAA ballclub in from our little brother, Omaha. Seriously. The Royals in recent years have completely and I mean completely ignored all contributions their AAA players have been making to their club.

The Royals have become a "direct high draft pick AA to the bigs" pipeline. Alex Gordon made the big jump most recently and famously. AAA has become the "if one or our catchers has a baby and we need a back up" team. (Belated Congrats to Mr. Buck) What I am saying is hell if we aren't going to even pay attention to the team, and if KC only needs a player to occasionally sit on the bench we might as well bring up a AA player or hell some kid from Blue Valley West.

What does a player in Omaha have to do to get called up and play for the big club? I'm sure Craig Brazell is still wondering in Japan. (How funny is it that the Royals have been prolifically poor power hitting franchise while Omaha has had some of the best power hitters in the Minors) It would have been nice to have some of his 32 homers come be for the big club. Mike Aviles finally got the call up but will he ever see the field for a consistent playing time? I doubt it. It's not like guys from AAA would be replacing the irreplaceable. Tony Pena is not making major dollars and is not hitting particularly well. Mike Aviles is hitting quite well in AAA and will probably never get the shot to see if that translates in the Majors. What if Aviles is the middle infielder who can actually hit the Royals have been desiring since...I don't even know who the last was, Greg Gagne maybe?

The Royals seem to be so invested in their current players that they are afraid to make changes. Why? The Royals have a core group who has played in the big leaugues for multiple seasons, non of which have been at a high level. Honestly the young player with the best year in the bigs is in AAA playing SS. Teahan has underperformed. Gathright...well I like him sitting on the bench as the 4th outfielder so he can stay. Buck is consistently a poor hitter.  Gordon and Butler have less service time and more potential, although I hate the word potential, and I will not go after them for the time being. If a player consistently underperforms in the majors while a player consistently overperforms in AAA shouldn't the club at least look at the switch. Why is Tony Pena so near and dear to the Royals hearts, simply because he put on the big clubs uniform before Mike Aviles. And that is stupid.


AAA has become a zone where no player wants to go. AAAA was once the label for a player who was not good enough for the majors but too good for AAA. That is no longer the case. If a player even plays AAA he is looked at as a decent player, but doesn't have that superstar potential. What the hell is up with that! Hello!!! The Royals have ZERO superstars! No player on our roster will become one! Our offense is filled with below average hitters! If AAA has players who right now could hit for a higher average but were deemed by some scout in 1999 to have less of an upside than Ross Gload was in 1989 I don't care! My goodness when will this team realize that just because years ago one player was not sought after, but this player was a number one pick eventually means nothing. If you give no rewards to successful players in the form of promotion, then why even have the club. I find current minor league stats much more compelling than scouting reports from high school. If a A ball player is dominating, AA should be the next step and so on. Just because a player was a high draft pick doesn't mean he should get an easy pass to the big leagues. Who cares about money invested!! The best players should play.


Mitch Maier is having an excellent year as is Shane Costa. Billy Butler just flat out should not be in AAA but that is a different story.

Everyday I wake up and say a prayer that the Royals have traded David DeJesus, Mark Teahan, Ross Gload, TPJ, John Buck and Grudz for a player. Others will get bent out of shape about this comment, but the truth is non of their stats are spectacular and most are below average. But because we hold our players to such a low offensive standard that batting .275 with 11 homers is a Royals Player of the Year season. 

If we traded ALL those players for just ONE player with power, how could our team be anything but better. Who cares if we lose Teahan, Maier is now in the OF probably doing better than Teahan was before him. German or Callapso is now at second. Butler is back at first and Costa can DH or OF. Olivo is now the starting catcher. Berroa can be the new backup infielder.

Because the Royals have plenty capable guys to fill their spots in AAA,  why not try and create an opportunity to get a truly above average player with our expendable talent.


Hell even Angel is hitting for average and power again. Do you ever think Pena will be as good as his counterpart in AAA? I don't. The front office got so mad at Angel for not being more disciplined at the plate that they forgot to realize that he is still better than TPJ!!! Do you think Mark Teahan will hit more home runs than any of the outfielders in Omaha? I don't. I'm completely rambling now, but it is frustrating to see good performances wasted because of over commitment to certain players for whatever reason.

Comment 157 comments  |  4 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

So we should start dumping players so we can give those crappy PCL stiffs more playing time?
Everyday I wake up and say a prayer that the Royals have traded David DeJesus, Mark Teahan, Ross Gload, TPJ, John Buck and Grudz for a player.

Wow. So we can give a lot of playing time to Aviles, Maier and Costa? Good lord. Do you know much about the PCL? Do you know how often mediocre players and journeymen put up great stats in the PCL?

The Royals send many prospects through AAA and have them prove themselves there before getting to the majors (Butler and Buckner last year. Rosa, among others this year). But the front office knows who is a genuine prospect and who isn’t. They know how much stock should be put in PCL hitting stats.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 1:28 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Ever think of changing your handle to Sisyphus?

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by Matt Klaassen on Jun 2, 2008 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

Excellent idea

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

sisyphus

def:
a king punished in Tartarus by being cursed to roll a huge boulder up a hill, only to watch it roll down again, and to repeat this throughout eternity.

Today, Sisyphean can be used as an adjective meaning that an activity is unending and/or repetitive. It could also be used to refer to tasks that are pointless and unrewarding.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

a king punished in Tartarus by being cursed to roll a huge boulder up a hill, only to watch it roll down again, and to repeat this throughout eternity.

Today, Sisyphean can be used as an adjective meaning that an activity is unending and/or repetitive. It could also be used to refer to tasks that are pointless and unrewarding.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Damn

Zep liked it so much he posted it twice!

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ah,

don’t be worried. It’s hard to look dumb in a Zeppelin. They’re pretty cool looking.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ironic!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jun 2, 2008 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

AAA players and numbers

The Royals should give Costa, Aviles, Maier and Lubanski some PT this year. The MLB guys aren’t getting it done, and now the season is otherwise a lost cause, so let some of the younger guys play. They shouldn’t need to dump anyone for that purpose, but if any of Teahen, DDJ, and especially Gload can be flipped for prospects, then it should be done.

Speaking of prospects, the Royals also missed an opportunity to trade several players for something when they decided not to give him ANY MLB playing time, even as TPJ is struggling to aspire to the Mendoza line. It makes me sick to think that the Royals may have kept a winning record for a few more weeks and avoided a twelve game losing streak with Berroa instead of Toothpick Jr. Of course no team will be interested in a player like Berroa, Brazell, or Pickering if one of the big time big league loser clubs doesn’t bother to give any of them a little time before September.

Oddly enough, Ken Harvey passes your test for a “good player”. The Twins (a winning team, no less) picked him up, not because they thought he would develop power or fielding skills or baserunning skills, I’m sure, but because the Royals had given him MLB playing time and some of it was flukily good. So flukey for two years that his MLB career AVG/OBP isn’t so different from his PCL stats in 2002.

As for Costa, he probably deserves another chance. His first callup in 2005 was after he’d seen all of 16 AAA plate appearances and only 301 AA plate appearances in his pro career. His 2006 stint was acceptable, and he’s probably learned something since then.

At the AA level, I’d like to see Kila Kaaihue promoted to Omaha and possibly to KC by season’s end, too. I know he’s not a particularly sexy prospect, but look at that plate discipline…and he even seems to be developing power, too.

I imagine that Costa, Maier, Lubanski, and Kaaihue could each replace Ross Gload (and Gathright indirectly, unfortunately) at different times and see enough PA’s during the season if the Royals start now. I’d also like to see Stodolka later this year if he can turn his season around. Bottom line: I want to see the FO making moves to improve the team for next year. Even if all of those callups produce only one cheap reserve player on next year’s 25-man roster, it will be worth it. If none of them seem worthy of that, then the FO has examined their options before jumping to conclusions, and you can crow that you told everyone that there was no use in trying to improve a horrible losing team with their horrible in-house minor leaguers.

by Stat Ninja on Jun 2, 2008 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

There are quite a few scrubs

on the AAA team. Shane Costa has gotten more than a few chances to prove himself. I would be shocked if Mitch Maier was better than Mark TeahEn right now. As NYRoyal and others have pointed out, players in the PCL continually put up big hitting numbers. Don’t you wonder why no other team gave Craig Brazell a chance? Are they all stupid? I doubt it.

Remember Calvin Pickering? He tore it up in AAA. Then they called him up, and he hit a few homers. It was a lot of fun…. until we realized that players like Pickering on the big club meant the team was terrible. Pickering got a chance the next season and wasn’t good enough to make it.

They just called Aviles up and hopefully he gets a chance for some more ABs. There is a reason there are different levels in baseball. AAA and the majors are actually a BIG DIFFERENCE. If we bring up more than three or four AAA players to get significant playing time, we will lprobably ose 24 straight.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 1:43 PM EDT reply actions  

FWIW

Calvin Pickering was demoted after all of 30something PAs in 2005. Hardly a good way to do business for a team that had the amazing Ken Harvey holding down first base. That still makes me wince…Pickering could’ve had a nice little three year run.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Could be right

he was hitting a cool .148/.226/.259, though.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

I know

but he had slugged .500 in his trial late in 2004, and he was up against Ken Fucking Harvey. That’s a time where I think you give the guy more than 35 PAs/

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Interesting that no MLB team showed any interest in him at all

Did everyone get it wrong? Even the forward thinking, sabermetrically inclined ones? Was every team and every GM wrong?

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Every GM wrong or...

if the royals passed on the guy, right or wrong, and the royals are that bad who is going to sift through their garbage? This is a massive over exaggeration but I am sure that winning teams players who can’t quite crack the starting lineup are looked over more times than the ones who can’t crack the royals.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 2, 2008 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm not sure I buy the argument

That simply because every team did something, they were all correct. Didn’t the A’s become a better organization once they started doing things differently? I don’t think the Royals will ever be successful doing things everyone else does. They’re going to have to think outside the box, take chance other teams won’t take.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jun 2, 2008 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

It doesn't prove that it was correct, but it was certainly good evidence

Every team passed on both Pickering and Brazell. The old school ones, the traditionalists, the new analysis and sabermetric ones. All of them. Every team. Yes, they might all have been right. But not even one FO thought Pickering was worthy of even a minor league contract. That’s why he’s playing for the T-Bones. Just because a certain kind of thinking is “outside the box” and “not what everyone else does” doesn’t make it right. The fact that no MLB organization wanted either of these guys is great evidence that they weren’t any good.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Its evidence

But its not conclusive. And you seem to treat it as conclusive more often than not.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jun 2, 2008 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

Anything is possible

But when a player has limited skills and every MLB team passes on him, I think there’s little chance that every team was wrong.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Brazell

NYRoyal is right on with Brazell. Brazell was a one-trick pony who could hit for great power, but absolutely nothing else. His OBP last year was only .338—in a hitter’s park in a hitter’s league (which translates to something like .300 in the majors). In the minors, he never hit for average or walked (4.8% last year), so he simply lacked any sort of on-base skills necessary to succeed in the majors.

by Gopherballs on Jun 2, 2008 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

+1

Brazell never was all that good.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Doesn't mean every GM was right

Jack Cust was less than a month away from goin to Japan. His agent was negotiating with japanese teams according to a SI article before the A’s came a calling.

Every other GM was wrong but Beene then.

Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.

by kcscoliny on Jun 2, 2008 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

Cust was long thought to be a good prospect

Every time anyone brings up some mediocre minor leaguers, they bring up Cust. He’s an exceptional case. For every Jack Cust, I can list dozens of mediocre minor leaguers who got a chance and failed.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

He wasn't thought to be a good prospect at

that time. Just because you are a good prospect at one time doesn’t mean anything. He was thought of as a guy who missed at the time and Oakland knowing they had an opportunity to decide if he could make it or not gave him a chance. Billy Beene knew his team wasn’t a contender last year (as evident in his Oakland A’s blog) and thought to give Cust an opportunity. A team like KC should’ve given Brazell an opportunity his story isn’t all that different than Cust’. He was a 5th rounder who made the big league team at 24 years old so I’m sure sometime along the way he was considered a prospect.

Thats the diff between Beene and our team he took a flyer when he knew his team wasn’t gonna compete. Our team runs everything too by the book to have a chance. DDJ, Teah, Gload, etc. are better prospects than these guys but they aren’t giving our team an opportunity at winning long term. I’m not saying that these other guys would pan out but for every 10 that fail if you can find 1 that succeeds would you be that much worst off? Shit we’ve lost 100 games how many times in the last 10 years? I’m also not saying you get rid of DDJ or Teahen unless you have a good opportunity to make your team better but Gload, German, Pena? Do we need depth on an already bad roster?

Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.

by kcscoliny on Jun 2, 2008 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Cust was about 100 times better than Brazell

or at least 100 points better in OBP. Cust had two major league skills—power and strike zone judgment. Brazell only had one.

Cust

2005 AAA 402 OBP 19.2% BB% 605 PA
2006 AAA 467 OBP 24.2% BB% 591 PA
2007 AAA 430 OBP 19.0% BB% 100 PA
2007 MLB 408 OBP 21.0% BB% 509 PA

Brazell

2005 AAA 301 OBP 7.0% BB% 190 PA
2006 AA 283 OBP 4.3% BB% 447 PA
2007 AA 408 OBP 9.9% BB% 121 PA
2007 AAA 336 OBP 4.8% BB% 457 PA

Cust and Brazell are not remotely the same case. Really, Brazell was lucky a Japanese team was interested in him.

by Gopherballs on Jun 2, 2008 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

No, it is not true that for every 10 that fail, 1 succeeds

It’s more like 100 to 1.

I’m also not saying you get rid of DDJ or Teahen unless you have a good opportunity to make your team better but Gload, German, Pena? Do we need depth on an already bad roster?

Ok, that’s more reasonable. Unfortunately, we don’t have any 1B’s to call up who appear to be any better than Gload. I wish Shealy was hitting. He isn’t. Pena sucks at the plate, but we have no SS’s to call up to replace him. Aviles isn’t a SS, period. And German is a good utility IFer and has been for a while now.

There are guys we can and should trade. We should trade them when we can get maximum value for them. We definitely should not rush trades to get rid of players so that we can call up crap like Costa as soon as possible. That would be the tail wagging the dog. It just isn’t smart.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

No don't call up anyone this year

I’m not saying that I just thought Brazell could’ve been given a shot last year. Or should we call up Costa. To me a guy like Costa has been given his opportunity and he failed he doesn’t warrant another call up (not to mention his current injury) but if the season would tailspin with another 10-15 game streak and be 20+ behind .500 later in the year. Give a guy like Maier a opportunity or should’ve gave Brazell a chance last year. What does it hurt takes a team that will lose 90+ and lose a 100. I would like to see Maier and Lubansky a chance later this year if DDJ and Teah are on the roster still. Also improves our draft status and limits those holdovers from attaining any performance incentives that adds extra $ to the payroll

Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.

by kcscoliny on Jun 2, 2008 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Would you actually bench DeJesus or Teahen

...to give significant playing time to marginal prospects like Maier or Lubanski? Their minor league performances have been only ok, and scouts don’t particularly like their skills. If we were talking about real prospects, then ok. But for these guys, I’ll call them up if trades or injuries open up a spot for them. But if there’s no room for them, then so much the better. They aren’t good and there isn’t much reason to believe they’ll ever be good.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

To the extent that Pickering probably could have

approximated his 838 OPS in 2004, plenty of people were “wrong.” I don’t think it exactly helped Cal Pickering’s cause that the Royals gave up on him so quickly.

Career minor league rates: .298/.403/.543. Guy could’ve ben a Ken Phelps All-Star, NYRoyal.

Suppose for a second that all Pickering had in him were his career major league rates of .329/.438…that still could’ve been useful of a ML bench and it would’ve been better than Ken Harvey.

Long term big deal? No. And if you seriously think I’m decrying the Royals in 2008 for not bringing Pickering back, you’ve got another one coming.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

indeed

While Brazell was almost certainly a Berger-esque flash in the pan, Pickering had a very good, if not excellent, minor league track record.

That the Royals couldn’t find a spot for him when they had Harvey “manning” first and were last in the majors in SLG is more of an indictment of the Royals than of Pickering.

Sure, he was not picked up by another team, but that was likely due to the fact that more competent organizations actually had a 1B/DH combo that produced at a reasonable level.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 3:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

No one even gave him a minor league contract

That’s why he’s playing for the T-Bones instead of a real minor league team.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 3:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

good point

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 3:59 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yes,

when you released by the worst team in the league, it can’t help your career prospects when you already have a rep as someone who ate his way out of baseball.

Much ado about nothing. I wasn’t saying the Royals should still have him.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't buy that argument

Even when bad teams release players, other teams independently evaluate those players. I don’t think they trust the judgment of other organizations or let those judgments affect them much. For instance, I remember a few years ago that the Royals waived/released Guiel and Kris Wilson. The Royals were one of the worst teams in baseball that year. And in that year, one of the best teams in baseball, the New York Yankees picked up both of them and gave them MLB playing time. I think teams always trust their own scouts more and think that their organization knows better. If they see skills, performance or upside that they like, they pick up a player, regardless of who let him go. This is doubly true for no-risk, minor league contracts.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

You do realize,

that my argument is not based on thinking Pickering could have been awesome for the Royals for three years (04-06, I guess), it was that with his significant power and plate discipline, he could have had two or three good years as someone’s first basemen or, more likely, DH. Pickering was not just some minor league schlub who spent his whole career being buried by players better than him, he was a legitimate prospect in the Oriole system who failed in no small part because he could not keep himself in shape.

When he got himself back into reasonable baseball shape, he showed he still had some of the ability that made him a prospect in the first place. This and the stats are what my argument is based on, not whether or not he got a minor league contract after the Royals let him go. FWIW, the Royals were Pickering’s fourth organization to give him a shot, and you might be undervaluing my idea that that had some affect on no one else showing interest. He also wasn’t dynamite in AAA in 2004 the way he had been in 2003. I think it’s pretty much a fact of baseball that if you’ve got a negative reputation and you can hit in the majors, people give you a shot. If you’re a guy in AAA trying to get back to the majors at age 28…and you have reputation for bad work ethic…AND then you get dumped by the Royals in favor of Ken Harvey…I think that all counts against you.

But anyway, have you looked at his , NYRoyal? Because I am serious here…Pickering had the ability to hit in the majors, and it’s supported by the way he hit up the Baltimore chain…those are not the numbers of a journeyman. They are the numbers of a very good hitting prospect. Pickering was never thought of as an organizational filler coming up, because he was a prospect. When he failed, I’ll argue it had more to do with failing to stay in shape and swinging for the fences-mostly the former-than any particular decline in skills.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

I understand

I know you’re not saying that he would have been great or that he would have performed well for a long time.

with his significant power and plate discipline, he could have had two or three good years as someone’s first basemen or, more likely, DH.

And, at the time, I would have agreed with that opinion. But the fact that no MLB organization wanted him anywhere in their organization is a big red flag for me. We’re talking about many different front offices who look at players in a lot of different ways. Old school ways, traditional ways, sabermetric ways, new analytical ways. And they all passed on him. My guess is that every team passed on him for some combination of the following reasons:
1. Can’t field any position well, therefore mostly just a DH
2. Doesn’t have sufficient desire to play MLB that he’ll work hard and keep himself in shape (perhaps there were other work ethic issues)
3. He fits the “old player skills” type. He’s a guy like Kevin Maas who has a limited skill set and therefore tends to peak early and decline rapidly. If this is true, at 28 he was already past his peak and in for a fast, ugly slide.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yes, I'd have to agree that

the thinking in not picking him up went something like that, plus that he washed out originally when he was a bigtime prospect and that he had gone through four organizations. It’s certainly possible he wasn’t a model citizen.

I guess we’ll never know now what Pickering could’ve done with a couple years in the majors, and I think that’s a shame.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

See below

I kind of replied to the wrong comment.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Most of them had a DH already

...and Pick had no value at first base.

by Stat Ninja on Jun 2, 2008 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Thanks

I was going to add that too

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

Are you saying the Baird regime was smart?

So you’re saying that not calling up Pickering when he was on a tear one year (because they believed in Harvey) and giving up on him after 30 PA’s the following year were smart moves? What exactly did the Royals gain by calling him up too late and giving up on him too early?

by Stat Ninja on Jun 2, 2008 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Nothing

Which was kind of my point.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

i think this is way off the mark

trade away average or below average players so we can promote crappy players who have thus far been unable to take roster spots from them??

thats not how you build a good baseball team, at least in my opinion. moreover, i think you have a really inflated idea of what MiL stats suggest.

but otherwise, glad to see more people reading and posting on the blog, don’t be scared off when ppl disagree with you, just turn it around and tell them why your right :)

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 1:44 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

+1

about the last paragraph. I always enjoy new takes on topics.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

I am probably overvaluing the stats, but I feel the royals are...

I just disagree on the statement the front office knows who the genuine prospects are. No the Royals picked who they thought was the best prospect when they conduct the draft each year. But who is the best prospect now should be constantly reevaluated by the current stats, with stats from higher leagues having a higher value.

I know some journey men put up great numbers in the PCL, just like some top prospects put up crappy big league numbers with no consequences of the journeymen overtaking them. If they journeyman is better than the top prospect consistently, then he should play. But the stereotype of the AAA is very negative and it is hard for a AAA player to take the spot of a big league player especially when the AAA player is not an extremely young player.

Why are we devaluing the second best league? I care more about how someone hits in the PCL than in the Eastern Kansas League or the Western Iowa Conference. Matt Diaz tore it up in AAA in in 2005 behind a Royals team that lost over 100 games. Now he is backing up that success in Atlanta.

I can’t find Brazell’s current Japan stats but last I heard he was doing well.

In 2006 Jeff Kippinger had a good season for Omaha, and we did not reward his good play. Now he is playing for the Reds and doing quite well.

I’m not saying that AAA success guarantees major success in the least. I am saying that a top prospect who struggled in the minors but gets called up over a slightly older never highly sought after player with better minor league stats is stupid. Because if the PCL is so bad we should at least be using the players who tear up the PCL. Do you think that Marky Mark would outhit Maier in Omaha? I really doubt TPJ would outhit Berroa either.

Prospects and potential are dangerous words when they are outweighing performance in decision making processes.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 2, 2008 2:05 PM EDT reply actions  

there is also

something to be said about player development. do you want performance good now or great stuff later on. playing high upside guys can pay dividends in the future

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

you make a good point

about evaluating players now instead of what kind of prospect they once were. And the players you name are all doing well for their new teams. But do you believe that players such as Matt Diaz and Jeff Keppinger are the missing link on the Royals? What do they add to our team except the same Ross Gload like production that we have too much of.

And also, I would take a bet that Mark Teahen would outhit the hell out of Maier in Omaha, and every other player on Omaha’s roster. Teahen has faced many of the best pitchers in the world in his time with the Royals, I think he could handle some AAA pitching.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yep

Guys like Mark Teahen, Ross Gload adn Joey Gathright all dominated AAA as well.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jun 2, 2008 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

Guys like Diaz and Keppinger aren't the missing link

But they might have improved the overall talent of the Royals. We’ll never know since they didn’t get a shot. How is it that Diaz can start for the Braves who are always in contention but couldn’t crack the lineup with the cellar dweller Royals? Keppinger is in the top 10 in batting until injured – can’t crack the lineup in KC who currently has a SS starting every night who is the worst hitter in baseball.

Here is the point – KC doesn’t have the track record of giving AAA player a chance to play in ML. How sweet would it be to have a RH OF to platoon with our LH outfield. Huber could have been that guy – maybe or maybe not – but they don’t get the chance. He was a AA batting champion but can’t get a sniff in KC with their awful offense. Whtat would he have to do to get a shot? Lead the league in HRs – wait, Brazell did that and he couldn’t get off the bench in September. Jason Smith – he had a descent look and was found lacking. Leave him at Omaha along with the Devil as a spare part insurance player only.

Realistically, Aviles isn’t the most gifted guy with tools, etc. Why not give him a chance to sink or swim for several weeks. Or find times and matchups where he could contribute what he has to offer. Instead, they run the same predictable lineup out there every night and stratch out a couple of runs. None of the Omaha types are Jay Bruce, Justin Upton material. But could they help the team be better than the worst offense in the AL and perhaps the majors. Considering SD doesn’t use a DH – KC’s is probably worse.

by daveyork on Jun 2, 2008 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

thanks

much more eloquently said than any of the crap i have written

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 2, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't completely disagree with both of you

I just think it shows the craziness of this game we love. I remember watching Matt Diaz play in KC for 34 G (89 ABs) in 2005 and being thouroughly unimpressed. And I don’t even care about numbers (not eye-popping), I watched a lot of those games and didn’t see much. Then out of nowhere, he has two pretty damn good years in platoon years for the Braves (btw, I don’t think there is anyway he could have those kind of years as a starter). So I guess I see your point, we should maybe give some of these guys a better shot.

My point, though, is that 67 wins instead of 62 is not that big a difference to me. That is why I’m not as concerned about a couple of guys like that. If we had given up guys who were in our AAA that ended up being starters for years, then I might turn to your side more.

All in all, though, it’s an interesting topic.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

Diaz had eye surgery in Atlanta

And that has drastically improved his defense, as well as his hitting.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jun 2, 2008 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

offensively, he's been Jose Guillen the last few years

surely we could use that… and then shift Teahen to first or trade him away.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 3:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

Let's not overstate things

He’s been Jose Guillen like as a part-time (no more than 360 AB in any season) semi-platoon player (a disproportionate number of his at bats against lefties). Let’s not pretend that he’d be that good playing against every SP and getting 550+ PA’s.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 3:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

not sure about that

He crushed righties in 2006 (.877 vs .800 against lefties) and then crushed lefties in 2007 (.964 vs .756 against righties), in essentially the exact same number of plate appearances against both types.

He’s been Tony Pena against righties this year, though. That’s in only 60 at bats, so maybe he can still turn it around.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 4:04 AM EDT up reply actions  

If you look at Diaz's splits by year, you'll see two things

1. Except for one aberrational year, he’s had a conventional and pretty extreme platoon split.
2. He’s gotten a disproportionate number of at bats against lefty pitchers, due to semi-platoon use and pinch hitting.

Year vs LHP vs RHP
2008 .787 .356
2007 .964 .756
2006 .800 .877
2005 .642 .844
Career .874 .706

Long story short, make this guy and everyday starter where he’ll get the vast majority of his PA’s against RHP and his numbers will plummet.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 4:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

guillen's career splits

vs RHP . 759
vs LHP .804

It’s more important how you hit right handed hitters, since you face more of them, so Guillen has a little edge there.

But Diaz has hit much, much better against LHP. And the 60 at bats from 2008 have realy dragged down Diaz’s career #s vs RHP. I tried to find minor league splits for Diaz, to get a bigger sample size for judging. All I found were his 2005 splits in Omaha—he posted OPS against both RHP and LHP at over 1.000.

I think the comparison is still pretty close.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 4:30 AM EDT up reply actions  

Still close? Not really

In Guillen’s career, 25% of his AB’s have been against LHP and 75% have been against RHP. If Diaz played as a regular and thus faced the same kind of split, then going by his career splits, his OPS would be .748. And that’s in the National League.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 4:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

why are you comparing to guillen

guillen is better than teahan undoubtedly. Diaz would only have to prove better than mark to be in the lineup, not guillen. Besides Diaz is a righty where as we have plenty of left handed hitters.

You are taking what I am saying too far. Our worst outfielder, or our worst hitting infielders should potentialy be giving at bats to AAA players hitting better than them. Our best players shouldn’t be losing at bats.

That being said if we could trade some of our best players (who really aren’t special) for a one better player, we have plenty of AAA talent to plug holes. If we had got Hunter or Jones for example in center and traded away teahan and ddj and put costa in right we would have a better team.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 3, 2008 7:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

Replies
why are you comparing to Guillen

I was responding to marbotty’s inaccurate hyperbole that Matt Diaz “has been Jose Guillen” over the last few years offensively.
You are taking what I am saying too far

In my opinion, you took what you said too far.
Our worst outfielder, or our worst hitting infielders should potentialy be giving at bats to AAA players hitting better than them

So Pena should give way to Aviles? That’s already happened. Aviles isn’t playing in every game, but I’m sure you’re not calling for that, are you? And Gathright should give way to Costa? Sure, maybe later in the season that might happen. But how many failed PA’s does Costa have to have before we say we know he stinks. He’s over 400 already.
That being said if we could trade some of our best players (who really aren’t special) for a one better player, we have plenty of AAA talent to plug holes.

Maybe some of those players will get traded. Shouldn’t Moore wait for a genuinely good offer? You wouldn’t want him rushing a deal just to get DDJ or Teahen off the roster so someone like Costa can get called up, right? So basically, you’re saying Moore should be shopping these guys, right? Well for all we know he may be.
If we had got Hunter or Jones for example in center and traded away teahan and ddj and put costa in right we would have a better team.

You state that as if it is fact. First, have you seen how Andruw Jones has hit this year? If the Royals had signed him, we’d have a worse team right now. And also, your “we’d have a better team” comment is only true if Costa performs up to a certain level. Your whole premise is that we’ve got some good AAA players who could perform at least as decent major leaguers. We don’t know if these guys would make even decent major leaguers. Costa usually hasn’t performed that well in the majors. There’s no reason to believe that Maier or Lubanski is ready for the majors yet. Shealy hasn’t hit well in Omaha. Who knows what we have in Aviles. You certainly can’t say that some good PCL hitting proves that they’d hit ok in the majors.

Long story short, we have some tradeable players. I have a feeling that Moore is willing to trade many players and is looking for and listening to offers. But he should make trades when he can get the best value for players, not ASAP so we can get more at bats for marginal players who are doing well in the PCL at the moment.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Andruw Jones is baaaaaaaaaaad

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

that was not hyperbole

you choose to view it that way

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

I just think the numbers don't bear it out

It’s easier to put up good numbers as a part-time platoon player, and he’s been making a living off of his platoon differential.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

You really think that

Diaz and Guillen are the same player at this point, or were you just pointing some stats of theirs that happened to be close?

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

Imagine what Guillen's stats would look like...

...if most of his PA were against pitchers with the opposite handedness (which is what Diaz has done).

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

Jose's platoon split

isn’t that great anyway. I’m well aware that Guillen has been the superior player.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

I know...I'm just saying

And this isn’t me disagreeing with you. I just think comparing an everyday player’s OPS and OPS+ to a player who has been usually platooned and used as a pinch hitter is comparing apples to oranges. Make Diaz an everyday player and suddenly you have a well below average player. He’s useful in the role he fills.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

just that they're close

just trying to prove Diaz has value… I don’t necessarily believe he’d be as good a hitter as Guillen. but I wouldn’t discount it outright, either

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

You can't give every mediocre journeyman a shot

...nor should you. You evaluate players as best you can and give the ones a shot who appear to deserve it because of their performance and tools. That doesn’t mean you give everyone a shot who manages a .500 SLG in the PCL for a couple of months.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

Conversely

You shouldn’t foreclose anyone from getting a shot. These are both strawmen. Let’s try some guys out when the opportunity arises.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jun 2, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not a strawman at all

Yes, you give some guys a shot when it makes sense. The original poster is basically saying dump a bunch of decent MLB players so we can give every journeyman stiff and mediocre prospect in Omaha who is hitting well a shot. That is beyond silly. Sometimes 27 year olds who haven’t hit well in the majors before this year deserve a shot. Often they don’t.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

Keppinger and Diaz

...are way better than Gload, and Keppinger (.313/.368/.441 in 616 career MLB PA’s) could be all or part of the solution at SS.

by Stat Ninja on Jun 2, 2008 11:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yes, and I believe Kepp was actually brought in for his defense

I wonder how much playing in Cincy is helping, though.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 3:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

yeah -- i believe Kepp was actually brought in for his defense

I wonder how much playing in Cincinnatti is helping him, though.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 3:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

Who brought Keppinger in for his defense?

He’s a low-range hack at SS.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 3:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

i am misremembering

he may have just been said to have good defense in relation to gotay… or league average defense at 2B. neither of those qualify one to be a good defender at short

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Jun 3, 2008 4:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think he was a capable defensive 2B

which means he was a better defensive 2B than Gotay.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 4:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

Not a hack

His RF is below average at SS, but then again, so is TPJ’s at this point. Keppinger’s FPCT is better than average, so he’s not booting a bunch of balls he should catch or anything. I would gladly have his above-average bat in the lineup and his slightly below average glove in the field.

by Stat Ninja on Jun 3, 2008 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions  

Of course they are constantly evaluating and re-evaluating players

I’m just saying that you don’t look at something like Aviles’s in a vacuum. He’s never hit well in the minors. It’s his third year in AAA. He’s hitting in the most hitter-friendly league in the minors. One good 1/3 of a season doesn’t make him suddenly a good prospect. The same goes for Brazell last year. There’s a reason no MLB team gave him a contract and he had to go to Japan. You have to take everything into consideration and not overreact to some good PCL numbers. And you certainly don’t trade away decent players to give more PT to crappy prospects.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

"Prospects" and "potential"

are given to players that have physical and statisical progress coming through the organization so that they are highly regarded. There’s nothing particularly dangerous about either word.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think Berroa would be a better option than Pena

does anyone think BERRORa at his worst was worse than Pena right now?

by mikewormdog on Jun 2, 2008 2:31 PM EDT reply actions  

I've been wondering that.

From what I’ve seen, Berroa has been playing a lot of 2b in Omaha which isn’t a good sign to translate to the big club. Berroa was 1-11 in his last chance in KC last season. Not a big sample size but I don’t think he would be that much of an upgrade to make the move.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Berroa is much worse than Pena

They are both awful hitters. But Berroa is also an awful defensive SS. Pena is at least a good defensive SS.

So, Pena is much better than Berroa.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 2:31 PM EDT reply actions  

Bah, they both stink so badly its

hardly worth a debate, but Pena’s glove could keep in the majors for years. Berroa will be lucky to get antoher September call-up.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'll take a good defensive SS who can't hit over a bad defensive SS who can't hit any day

Pena is much better than Berroa. At SS, defense really counts. Neither is a long-term solution, but at least Pena has some good, important SS skills.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

Depends a lot

On how bad the hitter, how good the defense, how bad the defense, how good the offense, etc. I’ll take Derek Jeter over Adam Everett, for example.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jun 2, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

I didn't say I'll take good defense over good hitting

I said I’d take good defense with bad hitting over bad defense with bad hitting. I’d be happy to have a great hitting SS with poor defense. But when we’re comparing two awful hitting SS, the one with good defense is a hell of a lot better than the one with poor defense.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

you can't put berroa and pena's "bads" in the same category

Pena’s “bad” is much, much worse than Berroa’s “bad.” Pena is better at defense, but Berroa, despite being “bad” at the plate, looks like A-Rod compared to Pena. Pena’s OPS+ is 1 this year. 1! At Berroa’s worst, he could still hit the occasional home run.

We bemoaned Berroa’s plate discipline, but Pena is worse. Pena is worse at everything offensively, and I think having a borderline average fielder and a below average hitter is better than having an above average fielder and a well, well below average hitter in the lineup every day. I think we dwell too much on 2006 Berroa. 2004-05 Berroa was bad, but more in line with what he would do if given the starting role.

by mikewormdog on Jun 2, 2008 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Is Berroa a better hitter than Pena?

His OPS+ went from 81 to 52. Last year Pena managed a 66. Can we really say with confidence that Berroa’s a better hitter? I don’t think so. They are both unrelentingly awful.

I think having a borderline average fielder and a below average hitter is better than having an above average fielder and a well, well below average hitter in the lineup every day

Berroa was and is not a “borderline average fielder”. He was and is not a “below average hitter.” He was a very bad fielder and an awful fielder. Pena is a good fielder and an awful hitter. Advantage Pena, by more than a little.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

You're dwelling on Berroa in 2006

while implying that I shouldn’t dwell on Pena in 2008. Berroa had three seasons of decent/fairly bad hitting from 2003-05. Pena has had one fairly bad season that wasn’t as good as any of Berroa’s fairly bad ones, and only marginally better than Berroa’s historically bad 2006 season. That was Pena at peak production. Pena’s career SLG and OBP are worse than Berroa had in his worst season.

I’d rather have Berroa. Berroa at his averagest at the plate combined with his mediocre fielding would be better than Pena, even with his good fielding, especially with the year Pena’s having so far.

by mikewormdog on Jun 2, 2008 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

His skills have deteriorated every year

Every year after his ROY season, he’s gotten worse. Bat speed, plate discipline, range, everything. He’s gotten worse and worse. He’s likely even worse now than 2006. Berroa is an embarrassment at SS. Awful hitting and even worse fielding. Pena is an embarrassment at the plate, but provides good defense. Pena is clearly the better SS.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's probably because of his love

for the Ganja. I know a guy who used to sell to a guy who got it for Berroa and another current Royal (I will not mention his name, but obviously on the team when Berroa was)

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

Gotta be Sweeney

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by Matt Klaassen on Jun 2, 2008 10:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Berroa vs. ToothPick Jr.

Are you suggesting that TPJ would have a .305 OBP after 2,443 MLB PA’s, like Berroa?

...and develop the power to hit 45 HR in that span also?

Let’s compare apples to apples. Berroa’s career-worst OBP was .259. (Granted, that’s really bad). So far, TPJ’s worst is .175.

You like OPS+, so let’s compare that, too:
Berroa: 78 career, 101 best, 52 worst.
TPenaJr: 51 career, 66 best, 1 worst.

By RFg, Berroa was always better than the league average, and by RF9, Berroa was always at or above the league average. He tied for 3rd AL/8th MLB in double plays turned among shortstops in 2006. He led the AL shortstops (and was 4th among MLB SS’s) in double plays turned in 2005. He was 6th AL/10th MLB in DP’s by SS’s in 2004, and 2nd AL/3rd MLB in DP’s by SS’s in 2003.

Seriously, there is no justifying TPJ over Berroa. Especially since our small market team is wasting $4 million in unused payroll that nobody will want in a trade, he should be playing in the majors. Nobody should have batted Berroa anywhere but ninth, but he was fine for that.

Unless there is something just awful we don’t know about Berroa (killed somebody or was violent, sacrificed living animals in his locker, dealt drugs to retarded kids on the side, etc.), he and the fans have gotten the shaft. I think Berroa was a scapegoat to represent the regime change (and I wondered at the time if Kevin Kietzman’s not always so informed rants were a favor to GMDM). At the very least, dumping Berroa for TPJ and refusing to go back is the most short-sighted and stubborn move I can recall the Royals making under any general manager.

by Stat Ninja on Jun 2, 2008 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

You're not taking into account Berroa's diminishing skills

According to scouts, his skills - both offensive and defensive - have been getting worse every year. By now, his ROY season is irrelevant. TPJ isn’t as good as Berroa was then. TPJ is better than Berroa is now. Berroa is a flameout. He burned bright early and now he’s burnt out. Don’t ask me why; it just is.

(and, by the way, the reason I bring up advanced fielding metrics is because metrics like Range Factor are pretty horrible at accurately measuring defensive skills or performance)

Your “Berroa was a scapegoat” paragraph is sheer nonsense. Berroa was a SS who couldn’t hit or field and was getting worse every year. He was an embarrassment and getting more embarrassing by each passing day. TPJ at least handles himself well when he’s in the field. He’s better than Berroa by more than a little.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 4:16 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Are we at a point

where the Royals’ scouting department’s assessment of players should be taken as gospel? I think their track record of “success” speaks for itself.

Berroa was a Baird player, and that’s why he’s not playing. If Berroa had been picked up off the scrap heap by Moore, and Pena was a light-hitting Baird acquisition, I doubt Berroa would be in Omaha. All of the statistical arguments go toward Berroa, and only the vague, personality-driven and non-empirical ones say Pena is better than he is. Saying something to the effect of “Berroa just doesn’t have it anymore, while Pena’s great defensively” is a cop-out. It’s an argument put forth with confidence, but that still doesn’t make it correct.

If Berroa has diminishing skills, then what about Pena’s regression from last year to this year? His hitting skills certainly seem to have diminished. Even if he gets back on track, say (240/270/315) for the rest of the year (assume 300 ABs), and I’m being extremely generous here, since I don’t think he will hit that well, he could bring his stat line up to: 211/238/274 . Doesn’t look good to me, or to the scouts.

That is much, much worse than Berroa ever hit, and worse than he would hit this year, and I’m assuming a marked improvement that gets Pena above the Mendoza line. Wouldn’t an average-fielding shortstop (which I think Berroa is) who would hit something like 255/290/370 (I’m being conservative here) with a few homeruns be a better option?

by mikewormdog on Jun 3, 2008 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm not talking about Royals scouts
Are we at a point where the Royals’ scouting department’s assessment of players should be taken as gospel? I think their track record of "success" speaks for itself.

I’m talking about the opinions of multiple, anonymous scouts as reported over the last few years by BP, BA and Scouts.com. Those guys never just talk to the player’s team’s scouts. And those scouting reports consistently talk about Berroa’s inexplicably ever diminishing skills.

Berroa was a Baird player, and that’s why he’s not playing

I think it has more to do with the fact that he’s a zero-tool player who does absolutely nothing well. At this point, he’s not even mediocre at anything anymore. Pena at least has good range and a good arm. Defense counts at SS.
All of the statistical arguments go toward Berroa

Only if you’re still clinging to his ROY season and ignore the devolution of his skills. You have to take into account how much worse his skills have gotten every year. You have to take into account his age and his particular deterioration curve. Some guys peak early and burn out. Berroa is one of those guys.
only the vague, personality-driven and non-empirical ones say Pena is better than he is.

And all of the scouts.
Saying something to the effect of "Berroa just doesn’t have it anymore, while Pena’s great defensively" is a cop-out. It’s an argument put forth with confidence, but that still doesn’t make it correct.

First, all of the advanced defensive metrics say that Pena is better defensively now than Berroa ever was. Second, the consistent and unanimous opinion of scouts that Berroa’s skills have gotten worse every year says something.
If Berroa has diminishing skills, then what about Pena’s regression from last year to this year? His hitting skills certainly seem to have diminished.

Could be. The stats certainly have regressed. None of the scouting reports have said that his bat speed or any other skill has worsened.
That is much, much worse than Berroa ever hit, and worse than he would hit this year,

That’s worse than Berroa would hit this year? What makes you so confident of that? His awful 2006? His awful cup of coffee in 2007? His below average PCL hitting? His diminishing skills? Berroa might hit a little better than Pena. Maybe. But his much, much worse defense would more than make up for it. Overall, Pena is better.
Wouldn’t an average-fielding shortstop (which I think Berroa is) who would hit something like 255/290/370 (I’m being conservative here) with a few homeruns be a better option?

Wow, this has really gone off the deep end. Berroa and average fielding SS? That’s just…wow. He wasn’t, and he’s only gotten worse (unless all of the scouts are in some kind of conspiracy to destroy Berroa). And offensively, you think he’s basically going to be right back to the 2005 Berroa. He’s not that guy anymore. He just isn’t. I don’t know why all of the scouting reports on him would lie.
Mike, players aren’t static. They change. Decent players with long careers have development curves which have them usually peak in their late 20’s and decline after that. But the development curve is often different for bad players. Some players peak early and decline fast. That happened both for Berroa’s stats and his skills. He’s no good anymore. He’s awful. Pena’s an awful hitter. Berroa is an awful player.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Berroa hasn't had a chance under the Moore watch.

Berroa had 11 at-bats in 2007. Yeah, his poor performance in all those chances backs up the “anonymous scouts’” assumptions.

What are these scouts saying about Pena? Which player would they rather take, if salary were irrelevant? Scouts take salary into consideration, and nobody wants to take on Berroa’s salary or trade something of value for him. The Royals already have him, so there’s nothing to lose. The only thing that could take a hit would be Dayton Moore’s reputation/ego.

Pena never hit as well in AAA as Berroa is hitting now in AAA. Pena never hit as well at any minor league level as the ever-diminishing Berroa at AAA right now. Pena has no power and less plate discipline than Berroa, who at least could get hit by a pitch once in a while.

Pena apparently looks better or plays the game the right way or something while standing between second and third base. Defensive metrics don’t really reflect this, or at least don’t point to a net plus over Berroa when hitting is taken into consideration. His attitude is supposedly better, his father played in the majors, baseball men like him better. Pena never fooled scouts by lying about his age, like Berroa. Pena isn’t into drugs like Berroa was rumored to be. Maybe they think Berroa looks disinterested in AAA, whatever. These arguments don’t counter any of the stats. Pena is worse than Berroa.

Moore’s just not going to admit that he’s even worse off with Pena than with Berroa. It’s an ego thing. He has to find another longterm option (which I think we both agree would be better than either Pena or Berroa), but I think he would be better in the short term with Berroa.

by mikewormdog on Jun 3, 2008 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh, no.

No, no. No. No, no, no. No. No. No.

Angel Berroa is an awful baseball player in every single way possible.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Scouts
What are these scouts saying about Pena?

Plus range, plus arm, can’t hit is weight.
The Royals already have him, so there’s nothing to lose.

Except for baseball games.
Pena apparently looks better or plays the game the right way or something while standing between second and third base

It’s called playing good defense. And defense counts, particularly at SS.
Defensive metrics don’t really reflect this, or at least don’t point to a net plus over Berroa when hitting is taken into consideration.

It may not be a net plus if you think that Berroa can still hit like he hit in 2005. There’s no reason to believe he’s even that player anymore (and that player wasn’t very good at all). In fact, the scouts are unanimous in saying that he’s much worse.
Moore’s just not going to admit that he’s even worse off with Pena than with Berroa. It’s an ego thing.

Or maybe, just maybe, Moore, his FO staff and the Royals scouts agree with the rest of the scouts that Berroa is now a zero-tool player who can’t hit, run or field very well. Maybe it isn’t an ego thing and his opinion of Berroa genuinely disagrees with yours. Basically you’re hanging your hat on hitting stats from several years ago and pretending that his skills haven’t diminished. I don’t know why all of the scouts would lie. Do you think they are all wrong? Do you think that when they talk about his tools, they are actually talking about his attitude or pot smoking? Do you think that all of these scouts just don’t like him personally? You’re really out on an odd and inexplicable limb here.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Scouts don't necessarily lie

but they aren’t always accurate. They, like front office personnel are human and have human interests. There are human concerns that may affect Berroa negatively, despite what he does on the field. Does being in AAA when a player feels he should be in the majors affect his “tools?” Probably, especially when he’s been there a while and any gain seems futile. Are “tool” ratings more subjective than player stats? Definitely. Does a player’s known history likely affect the way humans view him? Yes.

Does anyone think Berroa would bat 150/170/190 now? Worse than Pena? No, I think the consensus is that he’d be better at the plate and worse in the field. How much in either direction is up in the air. Moore values defense at shortstop. He also values his own players over Baird’s players. Both of these facts work against Berroa. I think Moore doesn’t think the possible slight gains by going with Berroa would be enough to compensate for the damage to his credibility. Maybe he does think Berroa is worse than MLB’s worst hitter, or maybe he’s convinced himself into thinking that.

You dismiss stats and basically take a “Listen, son, the elders have spoken” approach. I don’t think that counts as a logical argument. But if you say it often enough and forcefully enough maybe it does. I yield to you, sir.

by mikewormdog on Jun 3, 2008 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

The unanimous opinions of scouts

...is supported by Berroa’s big statistical drop off in 2006.

You dismiss stats and basically take a "Listen, son, the elders have spoken" approach. I don’t think that counts as a logical argument.

I am stating my opinion. I am putting the stats that you have quoted in a meaningful perspective. His ROY season is ancient history now and, unfortunately, doesn’t have much to do with how bad he is now. Also, adding a scouting perspective is worthwhile, particularly since we have very little MLB statistical data for Berroa in 2007 and 2008.

In my opinion, your evaluation of Berroa as an average fielder who would hit a lot better than Pena for the remainder of this season is clearly wrong. And I think your guess that Moore is making his SS decision based on “protecting his credibility” not on his honest evaluation of players is silly at best. By the way, if Moore loves “his guys” and hates “Baird’s guys” then why did he call Aviles up?

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 3, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

The thing is...
You dismiss stats and basically take a "Listen, son, the elders have spoken" approach. I don’t think that counts as a logical argument. But if you say it often enough and forcefully enough maybe it does. I yield to you, sir.

...anti-Berroans are taking the stats into account. We’re taking into account his .259 OBP in his last year as a regular, his terrible defense confirmed by most metrics and observation, and the steady decline from a rookie year where his success was batting average-driven anyway. No one’s ignoring the stats, here, I’m looking at what we can reasonably expect Berroa to do based on what skills he has left and what the projection system peg him for…and it isn’t pretty. He’s not a major league regular, and has little value as a reserve because he can’t field well AT ALL.

At least Tony Pena Jr. is fine when it comes to throwing a spheroid towards first base.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

are you joking

“I think it has more to do with the fact that he’s a zero-tool player who does absolutely nothing well. At this point, he’s not even mediocre at anything anymore. Pena at least has good range and a good arm. Defense counts at SS.” NY Genius

Berroa is batting 290 in the second highest level in American baseball and quite possibly the world. He can’t do anything right?? Come on!!!!!! Stop with the extremist propaganda. So batting .290 with nine home runs is now below average??????!??!!?

Berroa is not great. He committed more than average errors etc. But he can hit better than TPJ can. You only talk about Berroa’s bad year, but refuse to look at TPJ’s bad career at the plate. If TPJ had options left he would be down in Omaha and he would be being outhit by mr. berroa. I guarantee it.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 4, 2008 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

correction

.291
second on team with 10 home runs.

(insert hitters league comment here)
But lets say if there is a positive coefficient associated with stats in AAA. Say arbitrarily 1.1 or so. That still means that everyone batting in that league is on the same playing field. The coefficient really only even comes into play when comparing players from other leagues. Therefore if a player is outperforming others in his own league than subjective arguments are not valid.

That unanimously terrible baseball player….
Mr. Berroa is STILL 2nd on the team in home runs.
AND first in home runs among the leagues SS….while splitting time.

So to say he is terrible at all things baseball really just backs up what others brought up…That Berroa for whatever reason is deemed a terrible player no matter how good or bad his stats are.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 4, 2008 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Small correction
That Berroa for whatever reason is deemed a terrible player no matter how good or bad his PCL stats are.

Fixed.

You might want to peruse the list of the top 20 hitters, and particularly power hitters in the PCL last year. In addition to some real prospects, you’ll find a lot of 27-35 year old nobodies on that list. Do you think they all just finally figured out how to hit? Or is it maybe - like all serious prospect analysts understand - that it isn’t particularly impressive when a 30 year old repeating a level multiple times hits well in a hitter’s park in a hitter’s league.

You are fully entitled to your opinion, but my analysis of the PCL and older minor leaguers isn’t in any way novel or unique. This is the common, essentially unanimously agreed to perspective of prospect analysts at BP, BA and basically everywhere else that does serious prospect analysis.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 4, 2008 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'll say it one last time: Diminishing skills

He’s 30 years old, which is past a player’s prime. And scouts have said that his skills have diminished every year since his ROY season. 2006 wasn’t an aberration. It was the continuation of a trend which has continued every year for him. He’s likely worse now than he was in 2006. In the majors, he’d be an awful hitter, yet again and an even worse fielder.

Do you know how meaningful it is to hit .290 in the PCL as a 30 year old repeating the level for the third time. I know you value PCL stats very highly. I know you don’t want to believe this, but you have to put minor league stats in context. That context must include at least the following:
- Age of the player
- Number of seasons the player has played at that level
- Whether the stats come from a hitter’s park or a pitcher’s park (and to what degree)
- Whether the stats come from a hitter’s league or a pitcher’s league (and to what degree)

All of these factors go against guys like Berroa and Aviles. They are players considerably older than the genuine prospects, they have both repeated the level multiple times and they are putting up these stats in a hitter’s park in a hitter’s league.

Ok, I’m done with the Berroa nonsense.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 4, 2008 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Pena defense

There is none the guy is hitting .150 and his plus plus defense isn’t showing. The FO and Hillmans excuses no longer hold water the guy has to go. Greinke was credited with four unearned runs last night because of that plus d. It just isn’t true, scouts can tout all they want but his defense is not exceptional this year and it is time to give him the boot.

Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.

by kcscoliny on Jun 4, 2008 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

The issue in question is not...

...is Pena bad? or Should Pena continue to get a bunch of starts at SS. No one is saying he isn’t bad. No one is saying he should get a lot of starts at SS. But should he be replaced by Berroa? After laughing so much I almost swallowed my tongue, the answer is no. There are many other SS candidates better than both Pena and Berroa.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 5, 2008 2:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

Pena not starting

I’m not saying Pena shouldn’t start I’m saying he shouldn’t be on the 25 or 40 man roster. He isn’t a big leaguer no matter what scouts say about his average to below defense. He should be sent to Omaha and if someone wants to claim him before he gets there good for them.

Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.

by kcscoliny on Jun 5, 2008 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

performance now or great stuff later on....

how many times have we heard that? Too many. I don’t think the royals have any budding superstars. This miraculous super upside potential is largely made up in my mind. Players do not magically become allstars without performing in the past. But some players will continue to do extremely well as they move up.

Gload etc. dominated AAA….but now they are in the bigs and not fairing well. Maybe one of the players below them who is dominating at AAA would be able to sustain it in the bigs. It is impossible to tell unless they got PT. The guys we have now in my mind had their shot. They have all had adequate playing time and I don’t see upside for these guys, I see prolonged averageness at best.

Kepinger and Diaz may not be the missing links, but they would/should both be starters on this team and we would not be last in runs scored, homers, etc. Do you think Brazell wouldn’t have outperformed anyone we had at first base last year? Or even this year? And Berroa is better than Pena, just because Berroa isn’t liked doesn’t mean he is horrible. Hitting over .250 with 10 to 15 times more homers is not TPJ awful.

Here is my best example. The royals deemed Ryan Sheeley as their top first baseman prospect. Ryan Shealy has never hit well in AAA or the Bigs but he kept getting AB’s. Brazell was tearing up the PCL…the same PCL that Shealy couldn’t hit….but Shealy was the prospect so he kept playing over the journeyman.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 2, 2008 2:36 PM EDT reply actions  

you don't believe in upside?
This miraculous super upside potential is largely made up in my mind.

i just can’t agree with that on any level. players get better. some faster than other. tools exist that dont show up in stats at first.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

Potential

exists, plain and simple. It’s not a mirage.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

And if potential doesn't exist, then why give a shot to guys like Aviles, Costa, Maier, etc.?

This is getting increasingly bizarre.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

Maybe I'm not making sense...probably not

I am saying potential to exceed your existing numbers at a higher level or have a significant stats increase at the same level is unlikely. But Aviles, Costa, Maier have not had a shot to see if they can continue their good statistics at the next level. Maybe all three could be .300 plus hitters in the bigs like they are in AAA.

I think players who are successful at one level should be given the shot to be successful at the next higher level.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 2, 2008 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think players who are successful at one level should be given the shot to be successful at the next higher level.

i understand that feeling, and plenty of organizations (royals included to some extent) agree, if for no other reason than to show rewards for hard work and performance.

the thing is, the combined knowledge base of modern baseball execs/scouts/statisticians tends to be quite good at knowing who will perform and who won’t. there are exceptions, absolutely (albert pujols being the best example in history) but how much pt do you take away from what you think are either your long-term guys, or the guys who will produce wins now, just to “give others a shot?”

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

You don't unseat guys like DDJ and Teahen for mediocre prospects like Costa and Maier
I think players who are successful at one level should be given the shot to be successful at the next higher level.

When there is room on the roster for them, ok. But DDJ is an above average CFer. Teahen at least plays good defense with a good OBP. There’s no reason to bench or trade either of these guys in favor of Costa (who has stunk in 400+ career MLB at bats) and Maier (who is a mediocre prospect at best).

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

no no no no no

I didn’t say that straight up. I said if we could trade DDJ or Teahen for an Outfielder with power i wouldn’t mind putting costa or maier in RF. I said that would be a plus differential if we could get a player out of all our mediocre ones.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 2, 2008 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

also
Ryan Shealy has never hit well in AAA or the Bigs but he kept getting AB’s.

he has a career 900 ops in AAA

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Shealy's numbers

G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS OBP SLG AVG
2002 R-Casper 69 231 55 85 21 1 19 70 50 52 0 0 .497 .714 .368
2003 A-Visalia 93 341 70 102 31 1 14 73 42 72 0 0 .391 .519 .299
2004 AA-Tulsa132 469 88 149 32 3 29 99 61 123 1 1 .411 .584 .318
‘05 AAA-C Sprngs 108 411 85 135 30 2 26 88 41 81 4 0 .393 .601 .328
‘06 AAA-C Sprngs 58 222 37 63 16 1 15 55 20 34 0 0 .351 .568 .284

I know that isn’t easy to read, but as a 25 year old, Shealy hit 26 HR AA, and then the next season hit 30 with AAA. The Royals made a trade for him to see if there was something there for a guy who hadn’t got much of a chance with the big club because he was blocked at 1B (by Todd Helton)

Meanwhile, in 2005, Craig Brazell was in his second season at AAA- Norfolk, and after that season, the organization felt so great about him that he went down to AA- Jacksonville.

I’m not trying to say that your evaluation of the Royals handling of their system is wrong, I just think you have picked the wrong players to try and prove it.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

I was wondering that too

I’d love to be in Australia, as opposed to f’n Kansas.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

from wikipedia

Newcastle was nicknamed “Hell” by the most brutal convicts as it was a place where the most dangerous convicts were sent to dig in the coal mines as harsh punishment for their crimes.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

K, I picked wrong guys

I was mainly looking at Shealy 2007 and well 2008 numbers in AAA and comparing them to Brazells over the same period.

Newcastle looks nice on paper, but then you come down here and the people have a really bad reputation. I landed in Sydney and I told some people at the airport I was going to Newcastle and they made funny faces.

Newcastle is blue collar angry white kids who are racist to the extreme. Lots of fights, shady people, and rough night life. A week or two ago a couple of my american friends got jumped and beaten pretty badly. One kid had to get a plate in his jaw. Well anyways that was because a couple of local kids heard their american english, knew the semester was ending and knew that the americans would be going home before they could press charges against them.

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 2, 2008 2:58 PM EDT reply actions  

damn that really sucks

My girlfriend was in London last summer and heard some similar anti-American sentiments. There weren’t ever any fights (probably because she is a girl). But some of her friends were threatened a couple of times. Well keep posting whenever you can.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

the trick in england

is be a pro-american as you can. threaten people with guns, call everyone else a terrorist, etc. europeans will think you are serious and leave you along.

also, Newcastle sounds exatly like newcastle, england as well, weird karma for that name i guess

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 2, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

people actually make that joke all the time.

funny that you said that. Newcastle is newcastle. Well its way too late. Going to bed. I’m not going to pretend to know answers, and many of you know alot more than me, but enjoying the site and the opinions. Go royals!

At least Wally Joyner's not on the team....

by tcon125 on Jun 2, 2008 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh and as far as Shealy 2007 & 08 numbers go

I think the reason Shealy was given more of a shot was that the Royals FO and even fans were truly hopeful that he could snap back into the promising player that he once was. After being traded to the Royals in ‘06, he had a decent amount of HR’s in not that many AB’s, I think many people were hoping that would return. Hindsight is 20/20.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Omaha numbers translated

Per BP’s minor league stats translation page for 2008:

Aviles .273/.304/.500 .270 Eqa
Lubanski .250/.313/.446 .259 Eqa
Costa .258/.299/.424 .253 Eqa
Maier .279/.309/.409 .251 Eqa

Only Aviles looks like anybody who should be in a discussion about a callup, but then you remember the warning about small sample sizes and check his unadjusted lines from his two previous years in AAA:

Aviles 2007 AAA 296/333/463 (538 AB)
Aviles 2006 AAA 264/306/373 (469 AB)

So even with his big numbers this year, his overall unadjusted AAA line in 1221 AB is .291/.329/.458.

The bottom line is that 26 and 27 years olds putting up good numbers in a hitter’s park in an extreme hitter’s league is nothing to get excited about (especially when the good numbers are posted over only two months).

by Gopherballs on Jun 2, 2008 4:57 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

I take that back

Gathright had damn good AAA numbers, he should be starting in CF.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

Muahaha!

Recommended!

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 2, 2008 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Matt Wright has to be in the rotation

He earned it last year in Omaha. A team full of gritty AAA journeymen grinders. I love it.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Don't forget Huber and Costa

They have to be on that team. They’ve earned it too. Just release Teahen and DDJ. They are just average players anyway. We’ve got to take some chances and dare to be great!

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

Crap,

I can’t believe I forgot Huber and Costa. I’m sure they can all play every OF position, though, so just a 4 man outfield rotation should work fine.

by I need more Esteban on Jun 2, 2008 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Let me ask you

how much better would our current team now be than that bullshit fictional team? 10 games? and does that make it laughable or our FO laughable? Our current roster is 23-34.

Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.

by kcscoliny on Jun 2, 2008 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Our current team is a hell of a lot better than that team.

Yes, I know the Royals current record. And it is skewed by a losing streak. Do you think the Royals will end the season with the same winning percentage they have now? Thankfully the FO isn’t emotionally overreacting to a losing streak. But many fans sure are.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Really?

If you exchange Guillen for Pickering I think you’ve got a better team than our current team.
Brazell could hit as a #8 power hitter and if he hits 15-20 HR (which he is capable of) that would be more production than Gload. The only downgrade in that roster really is Aviles over Grudz. But this is fantasy land.

Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.

by kcscoliny on Jun 2, 2008 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

No, I don't think Brazell would do hit better than Gload

Gload is underperforming right now. His OPS will come up. Brazell was never any good until last year in the PCL. He’s not young; he’s not getting better. There’s absolutely no reason to believe that Brazell is or ever will be better than Gload. Pickering, Aviles and Brazell don’t belong on any team’s starting lineup. Of those three, I think only Aviles is possibly good enough to be a major leaguer, and then only a as a bench player. He projects to be maybe a decent hitting utility IFer who can’t field.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Jun 2, 2008 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh,

crap. I never should brought up Pickering, clearly. All I meant was that at his peak he was good enough to have a couple decent years at first. Not “bring him back, he’s awesome!” Brazell would’ve struggled to OBP .300 and might have slugged around .430, which would not have been a plus from first or DH or LF. Yes, our current team is a lot better than throwing the roster to AAA veterans with no upside at all.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Geez, how does Mr. Spoiled Golden Boy Baby Alex Gordon make that team?

I say put Berroa at 2B, and move “Off the Table” Aviles to 3B.

Also, how does Matt Diaz make that team? Not that I think “we should trade DDJ, Teahen, and Buck” for him or anything like that, but it’s a bit uncomfortable to have him on a “Royals AAA Grinders All-Stars” when he had a better OPS+ Jose Guillen in both 2006 and 2007…

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by Matt Klaassen on Jun 2, 2008 11:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well, OK

I guess DDJ. Teahen, and Buck don’t really belong that much, either….

In any case, I didn’t suggest a make-up guy for taking Diaz off the team. It would have to be Lubanski, I guess. Gathright in center (speed up the middle!). Good thing the Royals picked up Brayan Pena, he’s the new starting catcher… RF, I don’lt know. Mair?

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by Matt Klaassen on Jun 2, 2008 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

Omaha is the Newcastle of the Midwest, Lincoln = Middlesbrough

Scientists from the University of Nebraska-Omaha recently announced that the stink emanating from the Saddle Creek Record label, and its cloyingly sweet brand of nasal indie pop, actually has negatively distored the true potential and power of several Royals prospects over the last several years. Bob Hamelin, who had a few decent years prior to the creation of Conor Obrist’s first band, Commander Venus, saw the writing on the wall years ago. “This town stinks. The music sucks too.” He growled to Omaha World Herald beat writer Thad Livingston in the summer of 1994. Although the sucess of Saddle Creek has spawned an independent film theatre, evidence suggests that the twee pop in NoDo has also negatively impacted the selection of films, which focus on the marginally eclectic, but largely avoid the powerhouse and thickly layered works of the true masters like Ozu, Passolini, Herzog, and lil Ronnie Howard.

by Nighthawk at the Diner on Jun 2, 2008 11:02 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Costa

I buzzed through the preceding 100+ comments, but IMO Costa has been given a bum wrap by KC fans. Someone pointed out that he only had a handful of AAA AB’s & a couple/few hundred AA AB’s before making his way to KC.

Calling him a bum, or a never has been would be similar to doing the same with AG at this point IMO.

I remember watching the (04?) draft when Costa was taken on my computer @ work. They had a video highlight reel of him, and the INSTANT I saw his swing I liked him as a MLB’er. He had/has a short compact swing. He has the body type to potentially turn into a power hitter. He is fast and can play defense at an avg+ level.

I know we are more than crowded in the OF w/ average players now, but I’m still banking on him being a serviceable MLB player if and when he gets the chance. Be it in KC or with another organization.

I may be all wet on this, and I’ll definitely submit that as a possibility, but he hasn’t in my recollection been given consistent AB’s in KC since his first callup when I think he was inserted pretty regularly…

by GoBabies!! on Jun 2, 2008 11:47 PM EDT reply actions  

costa may well be an average player

but we have plenty of average players in the OF already. only, we already know what we have in our current guys, but costa is a risk to be worse with almost no chance of being better.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jun 3, 2008 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

Costa has had 400+ PAs

at the ML level. How many more chances does he get? Yes, he’s probably better than what he’s shown thus far, but not so good that the Royals should sink more PT into him.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jun 3, 2008 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.

Managers

Cimg0036_small Freneau

Editors

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

Authors

Royalsretro_small RoyalsRetro

Headshot_small Old Man Duggan