Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Check out our NFL Scoreboard: scores, schedule and blogs Bar-right-arrows

38-46

Royalsreview_tiny by royalsreview on in News

Frustrating loss tonight, and back to eight games under .500. Those dastardly Orioles! Essentially this is the result I expected last night, only this time Sherrill was able to finish the job.

  • According to the fangraphs.com's version of WPA, Mike Aviles was the worst Royal of all tonight, at least among position players. An 0-5 with two GIDPs will do that. When he wasn't GIDPing, he was leaving the bases loaded. Has Aviles let success go to his head? Is he an unclutch destroyer of our national innocence like Alex Rodriguez?
  • A lame and disappointing start for Hochevar, who couldn't avoid a big inning in the third, and couldn't quite keep the ball down enough.
  • Your Jimmy Gobble ERA update is: 7.40. Um... not good. Not good at all. Gobble may be one of the 100 Greatest Royals of All-Time by the end of the season (Retro?) but he isn't doing anyone much good at this point.
  • Gathright was decent tonight, getting to first base three times. Does anyone know Kenny Williams's cell number?
  • Hey! Billy Butler hit another single. He's the new Grimace!
  • Congrats to Alex Gordon and Mark Teahen for both homering tonight! With twenty combined homers out of third base and rightfield, the Royals have the AL Central shaking.
  • Did anyone expect Alex to deliver in the 9th inning? I wasn't around on the game thread at the time, but I suspect there wasn't much juice.
  • 19,756 people watched the game in the stands. It looks like it won't be hard for me to catch an Orioles game this September when I'm living in D.C.

0 recs | Comment 104 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

oh I forgot

I’ll have to watch that instead of planning a verbal attack on Camden Chat.

by I need more Esteban on Jul 1, 2008 10:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Unfortunately, I didn't expect Alex to pull through,

he had a great game, though.

the OFers were playing practically at the warning track, if he could have just turned himself into Goey for a swing or two and slapped one over the IF…

Nobody will celebrate harder when the Royals make the playoffs!!

by juano on Jul 1, 2008 10:34 PM EDT   0 recs

NO!

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 11:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That guy has been...

...running on fumes for years. I don’t know how he does it. But I guess this shows that not just any monkey can close games. – TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 11:32 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It shows that lots of mediocre pitchers can get a bunch of saves if you give them a bunch of save situations

He should show you how easy it is to find an acceptable closer.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 2, 2008 11:37 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

No, it only...

...shows how easy it is to get saves. You and I know that there’s a big difference between being an excellent reliever and merely piling up save statistics. – TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 11:39 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1

and it shows you how stupid saves are.
except as a fantasy stat.
and even then.

by Sean O Se on Jul 2, 2008 11:39 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I wonder

How different the game would be if the hold were the stat people cared about, and not the save. Managers would probably treat relievers totally differently, using closers earlier in games.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 2, 2008 11:41 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Someday, I'm going to do

a pet peeve article about how much I hate the way bullpens are used. It won’t be for the faint of heart.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:44 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1 again

The Hold is vastly underestimated. Every save that counts should also be a hold. That would de-inflate the save statistic. – TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 11:44 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Both holds and saves

are pretty pointless. You can get a hold without retiring a batter, IIRC.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:45 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Change it so you have to retire a batter

Ideally, I think a simple counting stat to replace the save would be:

Any reliever who:

(a) retires at least one hitter
(b) with the tying run on deck
(c) without any of his runs tying the game

Regardless if the team wins or loses. It wouldn’t be perfect, but it would be far more useful than the save.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 2, 2008 11:49 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1

An abused hold stat still tells us more than the save. – TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 11:51 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

How can you argue this

and still seriously think that some special mentality is needed to close? If holds are better stats than saves-which I disagree with, I think they both equally suck-then shouldn’t someone who earns a lot of holds be able to close?

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:53 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

see my comment...

...two below. – TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 12:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But RoyalsRetro is...

...right for calling more attention to the hold. While it too can be abused as a meaningful indicator of performance, it seems less abused than the save. – TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 11:50 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It's certainly less ballyhooed

and no more useful.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:51 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

And my comment is not...

...intended to underestimate the importance of the 9th innning in certain situations—-the last plays in the game are on the line. So every reliever needs to be good, but the closer needs to the best of that group. – TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 11:45 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

How?

The fact that Joe Friggin’ Borowski can close games more often than not seems to suggest that well below average relievers can get the job done more often than not when it comes to the ever-so-precious “saves.”

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:37 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Read...

...this. I second Flanagan’s non-empirical arguments for having a top-notch closer. It doesn’t have to be Soria, but someone has to anchor the bullpen. – TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 11:40 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I read the first two paragraphs

and was immediately struck by the ridiculous straw men. NO ONE is saying that the Royals shouldn’t have someone good closing. And it’s stupid to call “Soria for starter” a “tired argument,” as the writer does. It’s an argument that will be continually made because there’s a lot of sense in it.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:42 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

(gulp)

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:45 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1

I look at him as more of a sports gossip hack, and no more.

Nobody will celebrate harder when the Royals make the playoffs!!

by juano on Jul 2, 2008 11:46 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Count on him

To provide arbitron ratings, but if you’re asking for Royals analysis, you should probably bang your head against the wall before you read his column.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 2, 2008 11:50 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

So I'll get more info

about the Royals if I bang my head against the wall? Or I’ll be numb to his stupid arguments if I bang my head against the wall? Or both??

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 12:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Not as fast as that article did.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 12:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But it feels so good when you stop.

Much like reading the article.

Nobody will celebrate harder when the Royals make the playoffs!!

by juano on Jul 2, 2008 12:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes, Flanagan is not one of the better analytical or strategic baseball minds

He’s basically one of the many sports journalists who just regurgitate traditional, conventional wisdom.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 2, 2008 11:53 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Apparently he's also good

insulting his reader’s ideas. Us and our “tired argument.”

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:55 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

ahem, good at

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:58 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Apparently the Soria-as-closer-forever people really don't want to hear about Soria as a starter

Flanagan complains about it as a “tired argument” and more than one poster has complained about the “incessant” argument about Soria starting. Apparently even talking about it is dangerous.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 2, 2008 12:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

an "Incessant"

Isn’t that a term for someone with a reasonable argument that you do not subscribe to?

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 12:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That sounds about right

So far, a majority of fans on this site and the sabermetric community are quite incessant on this point.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 2, 2008 12:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I have an editting question

When you go to the dashboard, do you have the option to edit fanposts or delete fanposts that aren’t yours?

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 12:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I can edit or delete stories and fanshots, but not fanposts

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 2, 2008 12:18 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh, okay,

can you delete individual comments?

I’m just wondering about this in general, since we are getting some spam recently…

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 12:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I should clarify

I have the option to edit or delete recent fanshots and stories. For some reason, if I try to expand the list to include older posts, I only have the option to delete my own fanshots or stories. That seems weird.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 12:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

yes, that happens to me as well

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 2, 2008 12:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

All right.

Just making sure I wasn’t screwing up somehow.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 1:37 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

In general no

I don’t think I can delete individual comments (or if I can, I don’t know how). But I think if I ban someone, there are check boxes where I can delete their content as well. But that is, of course, a nuclear option.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 2, 2008 12:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Just to clarify: I'm not...

...one of the “Soria-as-closer-forever people.” Despite my incessant advocation for him to remain so this season, I’ll defer to higher powers (i.e. DM, TH) for the winter and beyond.

Incessantly yours,

- TL

by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 1:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You understand that Flanagan has a long and storied history

of babbling idiocy, right? Not the person you want supporting your argument.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 2, 2008 4:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Clearly Aviles's worst game of the season

Poor hitting, lots of runners left on and two glaring defensive mistakes.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 11:00 PM EDT   0 recs

what was the other botch?

I saw it on the GT at the time, but don’t know what actually happened.
Typically, there was no error called.

by royalsreview on Jul 1, 2008 11:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The other botch

Was his throw to second behind a the runner at second base on a routine groundball to short. He had no chance to get the runner at second and should have thrown to first instead. Instead, everyone was safe.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 11:18 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

just saw the highlight

it looks like Gordon holds up his hands to say “don’t throw”

by royalsreview on Jul 1, 2008 11:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

should be obvious to him, but in the case that its not....

there should be a call coming from olivo-gordon-aviles…where the breakdown was, we wont know

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jul 1, 2008 11:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You're joking, of course.

Because it’s not obvious that any throw is to home when your back is to both third base and the plate to take the cutoff. I know we sometimes forget this because WE can see the runner rounding third, but the last time I checked they aren’t hiring mutants with eyes in the back of their head to play major league baseball.

It’s the third baseman’s job on that play to be yelling at the SS to either throw home, or throw to a base. Occam’s Razor indicates to me that Aviles didn’t just ignore Gordon yelling to throw home, which leads to one answer.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 11:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I wouldn't divest Aviles of all responsibility here

Did he think the runner was just stopping at third? That’s quite a poor assumption on his part. He should have at least turned and looked home as soon as he got the ball. Instead, his first move, bizarrely was to second base. That’s not a smart play; that’s a rookie play.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 11:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Obviously, you and I are on the low end of the biorhythmic cycle right now

I can think of no other explanation for you saying something as colossally ridiculous as “I wouldn’t divest Aviles of all responsibility here” (emphasis mine) in ultimate response to me saying “I think, in retrospect, one of those mistakes is really more on Gordon” (emphasis again mine).

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 11:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree

It is a very tough read for the SS in that situation, unless he is like my 3rd grade teacher, Mrs. Boothby. She had eyes in the back of her head.

Gordon was out of position. He needs to be ON 3rd, if not between 3rd & home.

For that matter, the throw really shouldn’t have gone to Aviles at all, it should have been directly to the bag @ 3rd…

by GoBabies!! on Jul 1, 2008 11:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

"colossally ridiculous"

You get points for overstatement there.

Actually my post there was not in response to you saying that the mistake was “more on Gordon.” My post was in response to your more recent comment. In that post, you appeared to backtrack from the idea that there was a shared mistake and put it all on Gordon. Perhaps I misinterpreted, but in that post all of the criticism was on Gordon and Aviles was just a victim of circumstance.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 11:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

"in that post all the criticism was on Gordon"

A post in which I was responding to you basically trying to disclaim Gordon of any responsibility at all. I wasn’t putting all the blame on Gordon; I was trying to illustrate to you how Gordon screwed up, after you asserted that Aviles should know (via psychic powers or just his amazing godly awesomeness or something) where the play will be.

Aviles screwed up, mostly, simply by being indecisive. If he glances at second, but throws home without the visually embarrassing double-clutch, maybe he gets the out anyway. I didn’t actually see whether there was a play at second at all; if there was, then if he goes to second instead of hitching then at least there’s an out even if it’s the wrong out. So, no, he’s not without some contributory negligence here. But he’s not in that situation if Gordon speaks up.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 2, 2008 2:34 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

psychic powers

Did Aviles not know that there was a baserunner at all? Did he not know that Guillen had bobbled the ball? If he had no idea that the runner would be going home, then he is devoid of baseball instincts.

But we are agreed that both Aviles and Gordon erred.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 2, 2008 2:48 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Aviles and Hillman had this to say about it:

For the kcr website…

“Usually on a ball like that, there’s no chance that a guy on first is going to go all the way home,” Aviles said. “It just so happened he ended up going and he scored.”

Royals manager Trey Hillman said there was no reason for Aviles to be checking second base—where Fahey already was arriving with a double. Besides, Gordon was shouting for a throw home.

“Once it’s bobbled all the way down the line like that, we’re not going to have a shot at second base,” Hillman said. “Jose made the right throw, we just didn’t get the right relay. We had the delay, and that cost us a run.”

So, Aviles is to blame. Gordon was calling for home. And the second botch Aviles made later in the game, well, maybe he makes that play and it’s “a real head’s up play!” But he didn’t, so he looks bad. The obvious (to us and most fundamental) play was to first. Oh well. Bad game for a rookie; I doubt it’s a trend.

Don't Stop Believing!

by KC Chris on Jul 2, 2008 1:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

There you go

apparently it’s Aviles’s goof.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 1:37 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If we take that at face value

then Aviles is solely to blame.

The problem is, on multiple replays, Gordon seemed to just be standing there mute. MASN was focusing on this, even saying it appeared that Gordon had failed to direct the throw.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 2, 2008 4:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Gordon is a psychic

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 3, 2008 10:16 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But just imagine if we COULD find some mutants like that...

Royals, NBA, Golden Hurricane, Hawkeyes, Chiefs, and KU basketball, in that order.

by Rowyal on Jul 2, 2008 9:22 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Isn't that usually on the catcher?

Usually on relays, the relay man doesn’t know where the throw is going and its up to the catcher to direct traffic.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 2, 2008 9:16 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He has his back to the play.

Fuckin little league teams know to yell where to go with the ball.

Billy at worst will be Sean Casey jr.

by kcscoliny on Jul 2, 2008 10:16 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Um...

it wasn’t only Gordon’s job. If, indeed, no one told Aviles to throw home, that’s partially Alex’s fault. But the thing is, the whole infield should’ve been telling Aviles to throw home. Aviles also should have been ready to throw home, which he wasn’t.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.