Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Kevin Duckworth, Dead, at 44 Bar-right-arrows

Jeff Francoeur

Tiny by eboston on

According to MLBTradeRumors:

The Braves will listen to offers for Jeff Francoeur and Will Ohman, and maybe Mark Teixeira if the Braves struggle in the next week.  The Royals are said to be interested in Francoeur.

I think Francoeur would be a good pick up. What do you guys think that the Braves would want in return?

A DDJ, Guillen, Francoeur OF sounds nice so I wouldn't want to give up DDJ.

I would give them either Teahen straight across or maybe a Mahay + a prospect. If they didn't move Teahen what do you think his fate would be? Headed to the bench?

0 recs | Comment 86 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Of possible Of options

for next year he would have to be the cheapest option. While I wouldn’t love it, it would be nice start if they could keep Marky Mark and platoon he and Frenchy. Would much rather aquire Holliday via trade or Dunn/Pat the Bat via Free Agency.

This is the type of trade I would almost expect the Glass/Baird regime to make. Make it look like the team is trying to win/upgrade without really dolling out any cash. The new Glass/Moore regime is supposed to spend more money.

Who cares about RBI's, how many HDB's you got?

by kcscoliny on Jul 24, 2008 2:26 PM EDT   0 recs

The thing about it

is the Braves already had Mahay and traded him, I think, so I doubt they would want him again….who knows, though.

by I need more Esteban on Jul 24, 2008 2:28 PM EDT   0 recs

No the braves didnt trade him

he came over to them in a trade last year (the texiera trade) and he was a free agent after words and they didnt resign him

Yasuhiko Yabuta is to Major League Baseball as Drew Carey is to The Price is Right

by focs on Jul 24, 2008 3:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

No

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 24, 2008 2:33 PM EDT   0 recs

He's only 24 and has loads of potential.

If he came for the right price why the heck not.

by djk royal on Jul 24, 2008 2:45 PM EDT   0 recs

According to a poster at Royals Scout

Career Eqa:

Francoeur .254, Teahen .258

Career OPS+

Francoeur 95, Teahen 97

They’re about equal in value. Its just a matter of what you want more – walks or home runs.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 24, 2008 2:47 PM EDT   0 recs

walks or home runs

i think this is a wonderful way to look at it. in terms of overall value (whatever that means) they would seem fairly equal, and thus a potential trade option, so its simply what stat you feel the team needs more. Given the lack of power on the royals, Francoeur seems like an interesting option.

honestly, i could go either way on it, not wanting it, but would be fine if it happened.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jul 24, 2008 3:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Kinda my feeling

It would depend heavily on what the asking price was. Having Guillen, DJ, Teahen and Franceour is surely an upgrade over Guillen, DJ, Teahen and Gathright. But what’s the asking price? If its one low A ball pitching prospect, I’d probably make the deal. If its Dan Cortes and Derrick Robinson, I say “no thanks.”

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 24, 2008 3:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1

Who cares about RBI's, how many HDB's you got?

by kcscoliny on Jul 24, 2008 3:09 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

?

Derrick Robinson is not a prospect..he sucks. He’s a throw in with that trade scenerio.

by Stook on Jul 24, 2008 5:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Wrong.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Jul 24, 2008 5:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

.625 OPS in High A ball

dude’s not a prospect. He’s Joey Gathright in A ball. Joey at least could OPS in the mid .700s in the minors. Dude better repeat High A ball and have an OBP in the .350-.370 range and an OPS >= .750 before I bother considering him a prospect.

by Stook on Jul 24, 2008 6:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You're wrong

That’s all I’ll say.

Baseball America ranked him #10 after a bad season last year. For a reason. Because he has huge upside. Stats do not tell the whole story.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Jul 24, 2008 11:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah. I'm a big performance guy, but even the most performance-reliant sabermetricians will tell you that you can't evaluate minor leaguers just by stats

You have to look at skills, tools, body and projectability as well. This is true for high minors guys, but doubly or triply true of young guys in the low minors.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 24, 2008 11:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You're getting me started.

:-P

In response, this is ESPECIALLY true in Robinson’s case, where the guy only payed attention to baseball for three months of the year since he was a big time football guy.

The guy may not ever break out, but if he does, he could really be a hell of a player that can play an outstanding CF and hit at the top of the lineup.

And that’s why he’s a prospect, and ranked highly.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Jul 25, 2008 12:05 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes

Young, athletic players with a lot of talent shouldn’t be written off merely because they have poor A-ball stats. That would be a poor and very incomplete analysis of a prospect.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 25, 2008 12:46 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That fine

but he’s gotta prove he can play baseball. There are a lot of guys that are athletic and projectable and just can not play the game of baseball. This guy has had 2 and a half seasons to show anything and he hasn’t. He might cut his Ks down from 100 to 90 this year. Wow..freaking impressive. I realize he’s young and didn’t focus on baseball, but maybe he just wasn’t all that good to begin with. And I love BA as much as the next guy, but they are just taking a guess as much as you and me. I put little stock in them ranking this guy 10th. I disagreed with them at the time. You want an OF to get excited about pay attention to Joe Dickerson. DR should have repeated low A ball and he better repeat high A ball next year. We aren’t doing the kid any favors by moving him up even though he can’t play. He’s fast..so what. Should have played football.

by Stook on Jul 25, 2008 11:01 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Hasn't showed anything?

D.Robinson is only 20 years old there is a learning curve to anyone who hasn’t played at the top levels of any sport. He is stealing bases at a 80%+ clip and from what I’ve heard of the radio announcers he plays great defense. I know announcers aren’ the greatest source but that’s probably as much info as anyone else has other than reading Prospectus/Ba or anything else. My concern for any of the Blue Rocks including Dickerson is lack of power. I don’t what Frawley stadiums power alleys measure at but 325 the corners and 400 to center isn’t huge. Their lack of power is concerning.

Who cares about RBI's, how many HDB's you got?

by kcscoliny on Jul 25, 2008 12:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He's fast..so what.

See Gathright, Joey

by Stook on Jul 25, 2008 3:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It's a nice tool to have

most minor leaguers don’t even have that going for them. We aren’t just talking fast either we are talking the FASTEST ATHLETE in football/baseball of ‘06 (Perfect Game said perhaps fastest EVER). For a prospect to have one great tool on their side that is a big deal and adds value. It is up to the Royals coaching staff to help him with his other tools.

Who cares about RBI's, how many HDB's you got?

by kcscoliny on Jul 25, 2008 4:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Robinson

Yea, he ran the fastest 60 in the history of the event, I think it was 6.19. He’s not just fast, this is world class speed.

Here’s Robinson’s main problem, and the #1 reason his stats look bad. Since he didn’t focus much on baseball in high school, he never really got the chance to work on his switch hitting. He’s a natural right handed hitter, and (shocker for everyone) his stats against LHP are pretty good (.308/.354/.385). He had a similar line against LHP last year as well. He’s still working on hitting from the left side, and until two years ago, never really got the chance to do that full time.

As good of an athlete as Robinson is, the Royals fully believe that he will figure this out at some point. Kind of similar to Carlos Beltran’s progression. No, he’s not Beltran because he doesn’t have that power, but they think that eventually everything will “click” for him. It’s why they paid the guy nearly a million bucks as a fourth round pick. It’s why some of the scouts in “the room” were pissed that the Royals didn’t take him in the THIRD round.

This is not to say everything WILL click for him at some point, but the upside he possesses certainly makes him a legit prospect IF that time does come. And plenty of people inside the organization and other scouts think it WILL come at some point.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Jul 25, 2008 4:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Really?

You are relying on the Royals coaching staff to teach him how to play baseball? Have you seen how well we develop players? I’d rather the guy actually be able to play the game BEFORE the Royals coaching staff has a chance to screw them up.

by Stook on Jul 25, 2008 7:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He does still have a lot to prove
There are a lot of guys that are athletic and projectable and just can not play the game of baseball.

Well, he can field and run the bases well. So far he just can’t hit. Maybe he never will. Most prospects fail and maybe he will too. We don’t really know yet.
And I love BA as much as the next guy, but they are just taking a guess as much as you and me.

I’m not saying that BA is never wrong, but they know a hell of a lot more about these guys than either you or me. Among other things, they talk to multiple scouts who have looked at and evaluated these guys. They like his tools. Will those tools translate into becoming a good baseball player? We’ll see. Even most polished prospects don’t pan out in the majors.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 25, 2008 1:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Walk = 1 base, HR = 4 bases, run guarantee

Walks are a gift the pitcher gives you, you’re completely dependent on their lack of control and the umpire’s judgment (you have to be smart enough to take it, but no one can foul off every strike pitch!), HRs are something a batter gets for himself (admittedly, this year, that proves to be a bit umpire-dependent as well).

there’s really a question of what you want more?

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

by cmkeller on Jul 24, 2008 5:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Wow.
Walks are a gift the pitcher gives you, you’re completely dependent on their lack of control and the umpire’s judgment

After everything that’s been done to study this game in the last 30 years, you still think that?

Wow. Really, just, wow.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 24, 2008 5:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Is it not true?

Aside from fouling off every strike thrown to you, how do you manufacture a walk against a pitcher with good control?

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

by cmkeller on Jul 24, 2008 5:40 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Even Greg Maddux throws balls 33% of the time

Most pitchers do not have good control.

by Gopherballs on Jul 24, 2008 6:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh, yeah?

Promise a major league pitcher you will not swing at anything. You think he won’t be able to throw you three straight strikes?

Sure you get occasional mental breakdowns, but for the most part, pitchers throw at the strike zone, and fail only because they are trying to avoid a bat at the same time. Being able to lay off bad pitches is important, but not nearly as important as being able to put good, solid wood on good pitches. The majority of outs in any given game are made in the field, which means that the pitches are at least somewhat hittable. No doubt some of those are out of the strike zone, but the large majority probably aren’t.

I’m not advocating a total lack of plate discipline, but moderate plate discipline + home run power is more valuable than extreme plate discipline + little power. A walk is only valuable because it might turn into a run. A homer is a guaranteed run. A walk doesn’t advance any baserunner that’s not forced. A homer advances every baserunner to the maximum distance. If you have to ask “what do you want more, walks or home runs” I’ve got to wonder what sport you’re discussing.

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

by cmkeller on Jul 24, 2008 7:09 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah

Walk rates are one of the three most repeatable rates (along with swining strike rates and groundball rates) from year to year, so they are not the result of mere happenstance. Other batters face the same pitchers as the Royals, yet are able to generate more walks because they have better plate discipline skills.

Obviously, a single walk is not as valuable as a single HR (a walk is worth about .33 run, while a home run is worth 1.40 runs), but over the course of the season, a guy who walks a lot can be more valuable than a guy who hits a lot of HRs. Everything else being equal, a guy who walks100 times (and hits no HRs) is more valuable than a guy who hits 20 HRs (with no walks) by 5 runs.

by Gopherballs on Jul 24, 2008 8:02 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But all it takes is 15 walks

for your second guy to be just as valuable. How much plate discipline does it take to get 15 walks? Dave Kingman never had fewer than that. Neither did Steve Balboni. Nor did Rob Deer.

Obviously, your examples are of extremes. I can respect that, I can conduct a debate in theory. But when we’re talking about real major league players, and you conclude that which one you’d rather have is a matter of what you want more, walks or home runs, I say the home runs is a no-brainer. It’s more likely that the home-run hitter will have enough walks to justify his presence than that the walker will show enough power to do so.

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

by cmkeller on Jul 24, 2008 8:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Drawing walks does require the pitcher to miss the plate.

However, every bit of statistical analysis has proven beyond the shadow of any doubt whatsoever that drawing walks is a skill possessed by hitters. As gopherballs notes, even the best pitchers are going to throw balls. The skill, from the hitter’s perspective, is two-fold: not swinging at them, and being effective enough as a hitter to induce the pitcher out of the strike zone.

And, yes, fouling off every strike thrown to you is ALSO a skill possessed by hitters.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 24, 2008 7:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree that plate discipline is a skill

but it’s a REACTIVE one. Isn’t a PRO-active skill, one that doesn’t depend on other peoples’ mistakes, better to own?

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

by cmkeller on Jul 24, 2008 7:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Now you think hitting home runs doesn't depend on other people's "mistakes"?

Mister Keller, may I introduce you to Barry Bonds?

Seriously, this argument is like me trying to convince you that the world is round. Yes, a hitter who can bang 40 homers with no plate discipline is worth more than a hitter who can draw 100 walks with zero power; the problem is that the latter creature does not exist in Major League Baseball, because a hitter with zero power won’t draw 100 walks. He has to at least be an extra-base threat in order to accumulate that sort of walk total. And a guy with, say, 10-homer power and 100-walk plate discipline? Your power hitter with no plate discipline has to be a 60-homer guy to compensate.

This is all irrelevant, however; your statement was that walks are essentially random happenstance and the hitter has nothing to do with it, and that’s just flat-earth balderdash from the 1960s. A walk is a 50-50 event; the pitcher and hitter have equal influence on the result.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 24, 2008 8:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

As I said above

your zero-walk power hitter is just as imaginary as the theoretical zero-homer walk man. The most undisciplined power hitters you can possibly name all drew a decent number of walks.

As for your second statement: of course a walk is not random happenstance. Pitchers do make mistakes, and it takes a skilled eye for a batter to capitalize on them. Nonetheless, as much as the batter might foul off pitches and work his counts, he still depends on the pitcher messing up, eventually. And the best result the walk-man gets is a single base, which isn’t guaranteed to advance whoever’s on base.

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

by cmkeller on Jul 25, 2008 1:39 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Every pitcher throws pitches outside of the strike zone

Players with a good eye and plate discipline turn those pitches into walks. It’s a skill every bit as much as power hitting is a skill.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 25, 2008 1:53 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah, okay, Pope Urban VIII.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 25, 2008 3:07 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Zing?

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 25, 2008 3:11 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Somehow, this got from

“Walks are a gift the pitcher gives you, you’re completely dependent on their lack of control and the umpire’s judgment” to “of course a walk is not random happenstance,” and then detoured into some la-la land where advancing runners is more important than the MOST important skill in all of baseball for a hitter: NOT MAKING AN OUT.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 25, 2008 3:19 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Flat earth and geocentrism are alive and well

No good idea ever dies.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 25, 2008 3:31 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't see where

I detoured into any sort of la-la land. I offered several reasons why when someone asks “do you want walks or home runs” the better choice is the home runs. Several reasons, all (in my opinion) are valid.

“Not making an out” is not a single skill. You need to have an eye for the strike zone. But the pitchers are major leaguers as well. They will more often throw in the strike zone than out of it. And in an overall sense, the guy who’ll take maximum advantage of the pitches in the strike zone will put bigger numbers on your scoreboard than the guy who takes small advantage of those yet has an expert eye to not mistake the bad pitches for good ones.

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

by cmkeller on Jul 25, 2008 3:40 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

OK, I'm sorry

that I didn’t realize how specific your issue with my earlier statement was. Allow me to better address your point:

Yes, a batter who walks a lot has done something better than one who walks little. Certainly there’s a skill involved in protecting the plate and in making sure you lay off the bad pitches. I’m not disputing that. Any pitcher, even Mariano Rivera, will miss the strike zone every now and then, and the more pitches a batter can make him throw, the better the chances are that this will happen. All true.

But it’s also true that a ball is (except in the case of the intentional walk, or the pitch-out meant to catch a stealing runner) a mistake made by the pitcher. Everyone makes mistakes. Batters make them too, and so do fielders. When a runner takes an extra base because he sees a fielder bobble a ball, or throw to the wrong cutoff man, that’s a skill as well. But it’s a skill you can’t exercise at a time of YOUR choosing. You can only exercise it when circumstance allows you too. A pitch out of the strike zone will certainly be a more common circumstance than a fielding faux pas, but you still can’t make it happen. You can only wait for it to happen.

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

by cmkeller on Jul 25, 2008 10:07 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Your definition of "mistake" is retarded.

Chaim, listen to me. Maybe it will sink in.

EVEN THE BEST PITCHERS MISS THE STRIKE ZONE A THIRD OF THE TIME.

To classify something which has a 1 in 3 chance of occurring (partly because they do it on purpose) as a “mistake” is intellectual dishonesty in the service of trying to save face at best, and sheer mendacity at worst.

Pitchers deliberately throw the ball outside the strike zone as part of their pitch sequence in order to get batters to chase the bad, unhittable pitch. You know this, right? That’s not a “mistake.” Throwing Tony Pena Jr a hanging meatball in the strike zone which he manages to loft over the fence in left-center is a “mistake.” Throwing a pitch low and outside after two strikes on the inside corner is NOT.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 25, 2008 3:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

So you're telling me that

in those situations, the pitcher is actually aiming to miss the strike zone, and not just trying to hit the other corner and missing? Could be, I suppose. I’m no expert on pitching strategy. I’ve just assumed that pitchers aim for the strike zone, but in trying to do so without giving up a hit, they’ll frequently miss said zone. It certainly can’t be an easy thing to do.

So yes, if a pitcher routinely intentionally throws balls, then it’s not a mistake. A misnomer on my part which I will readily retract.

It’s still a circumstance outside the batter’s control. The batter might have every reason to expect it, but he still can’t make it come.

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

by cmkeller on Jul 25, 2008 4:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Are you kidding?

Greg Maddux could hit the wings off a fly (Wanted Reference) if he wanted. Just a little over your head on this one.

Who cares about RBI's, how many HDB's you got?

by kcscoliny on Jul 25, 2008 4:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

There are many instances where a pitcher is intentionally throwing the ball outside of the strike zone

The most obvious instances are when the pitcher is ahead in the count. 0-2 and 1-2, a smart pitcher is going to make a pitch outside the strike zone, trying to get the batter to chase. Now he doesn’t want to throw the pitch a foot outside of the zone, but he is definitely trying to throw a ball outside of the strike zone. Also, when a pitcher goes up against a first ball hitter, it often makes sense to not throw a strike on the first pitch.

Not only do all pitchers throw a lot of balls, but all pitchers intentionally throw balls outside of the strike zone. It happens in probably the majority of plate appearances.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 25, 2008 4:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I Hate A

Really bad 0-2 “waste” pitch. Just throwing an unhittable ball because it’s 0-2 is moronic. The pitch should be intentionally out of the zone, but at least close enough to get a defensive hitter to swing. Really wasting an 0-2 pitch is wasting the biggest advantage a pitcher can get.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Jul 27, 2008 8:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes, a pitcher shouldn't waste his waste pitch

0-2 and 1-2 pitches should be out of the strike zone, but if it is a foot out of the zone, you’ve completely wasted the situation. However, on 0-2, I’d rather the pitcher miss well out of the zone, than miss by accidentally throwing one in the zone.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 10:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But, every now and then, you need to throw

an 0-2 or 1-2 in the zone to keep them honest, otherwise it does no good to stay outside the zone. It seems like a flaw in Royals pitching this year – they almost never throw 2-strike pitches in the zone, therefore hitters almost never feel the need to swing.

My mother's basement is better than YOUR mother's basement!!

by Royal Kingdom on Jul 28, 2008 11:09 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

How often to major league pitchers (including the best MLB pitchers)

...throw 0-2 or 1-2 pitches in the strike zone? Very, very rarely. And this is because it just doesn’t make sense to do the batter a favor. Down in the count like that, a batter is protecting the zone and swinging at just about anything near the strike zone. So a pitcher shouldn’t give the batter anything actually in the zone on those counts.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 28, 2008 1:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree, I am just saying that the best pitchers

don’t get into a routine of, say throwing curve ball low and outside on every 0-2 pitch. Maybe you do that the vast majority of the time, but once in a while you slip in a fastball on the outside corner that, on delivery, looks like the standard low and outside curve ball. Mayb a guy fights it off, but since he’s expecting the curve, he won’t do much with it. Or, expecting it to drop out of the zone, lets it go for a backwards K.

My mother's basement is better than YOUR mother's basement!!

by Royal Kingdom on Jul 28, 2008 3:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Francoeur hasn't put it together

Bear in mind that we’re talking about a guy who hit 29 HR with an OBP under .300 in 2006, 19 HR with a decent OBP for a middle infielder (.338) when he nearly doubled his walk rate (and hit for a better average) in 2007, and is currently on pace for the worst of both through 2/3 of 2008. The idea of trading Teahen for JF is not necessarily a low-power/high-OBP guy for a high-power/low-OBP guy.

Yes, JF’s young. He could develop plate discipline, strike out less, and connect for HR more often, but none of those things are guaranteed. They may not be more likely than the possibility that he ends up being no better than Teahen, or even worse (less than 20 HR without the walks or average).

by Stat Ninja on Jul 26, 2008 10:57 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

A key difference between Francoeur and Teahen

Franky is only 24. Teahen is 26. Being (roughly) just as good as a player, but two years younger on a relatively steep part of the development curve is meaningful.

Saying that Francoeur = Teahen is both facile and inaccurate.

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

by NYRoyal on Jul 24, 2008 9:40 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I guess I have to look at it like this.

Obviously, the current management places no value on “plate discipline” in the sense of “taking pitches”, so they’re going to be interested in Francoeur. In that respect, maybe taking a shot at him wouldn’t be a bad idea if he can be had cheaply.

Of course, I’d much rather the organization be more concerned with plate discipline…

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 24, 2008 3:23 PM EDT   0 recs

“Obviously, the current management places no value on "plate discipline" in the sense of "taking pitches"

I think that statement is way off base. You aren’t the only one who thinks that this is true, however. But I’ve heard interviews with Trey Hillman talking about his frustration with his players not taking pitches and not working counts because of how vaulable OBP is. He said that they’ve beat the issue into the ground so much that he feels like he doesn’t know if still talking about it is working or if it is just annoying hte players, but it still isn’t being done.

By management, maybe you meant Dayton Moore…..which I have no idea what his philosophies are, but unless you have heard quotes from him then I think it is tough to speculate that he doesn’t like players with plate discipline.

by I need more Esteban on Jul 28, 2008 12:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

There is a difference

between “doesn’t like players with plate discipline” and “doesn’t recognize players with plate discipline.” I’ll just let that sit there.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 28, 2008 1:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

noted

and backed up with djk royal’s numbers. GMDM definitely has much to prove in that area. So I assume you weren’t referring to Hillman then. I’ve seen quite a few people who have suggested that Hillman doesn’t recognize the importance of OBP, which was my reasoning for defending that.

by I need more Esteban on Jul 28, 2008 2:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

GMDM position player acquisitions since becoming GM:

Callaspo: OBP 349
Gload: OBP 321
Gathright: OBP 302
Guillen: OBP 286
Olivo: OBP 276
TPJ: OBP 174

by djk royal on Jul 28, 2008 1:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

From Jayson Stark

“The Braves asked the Royals about Jose Guillen, but Dayton Moore is asking for a ton.”

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 24, 2008 3:56 PM EDT   0 recs

Sorry

That quote was from MLBTraderumors. Here’s Jayson’s quote:

“• Jose can you see: Jose Guillen’s combustibility wouldn’t exactly make him a perfect fit in a lot of towns to begin with. But teams that have spoken with the Royals report that the Braves asked about Guillen in their hunt for outfield offense. Don’t bet on that deal’s going down, though. The Royals have been telling teams they want a cornerstone player back (a la Gorkys Hernandez) and at least one other piece. And it’s doubtful the Braves are that interested.”

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 24, 2008 3:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The usual caveats

with that site apply, but shouldn’t we be asking for, ya know, a very good position player prospect if we’re going to price ourselves out of range?

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 24, 2008 4:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oooh

I have another question.

Why does anyone seriously think Jose Guillen is going to help that much in a playoff run right now?

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 24, 2008 4:02 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He's a veteran

and a clubhouse leader

and a team guy

and oh god I can’t keep this up

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 24, 2008 4:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Are you not convinced

By his clutch .412 July OPS?

Well let me tell you this…he was one of five players nominated to be an All-Star along with Evan Longoria. Obviously this means he is as good as Evan Longoria. IN YOUR FACE!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 24, 2008 4:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah, take that, Evan!

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 24, 2008 4:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh, don't play with me like this!

I find this a real head-scratcher of a rumor. Why would anyone find Gullen an attractive addition given his contract and production? A RF with a .757 OPS and a ton of baggage, still owed $24M during the next two years….

If there really is some interest out there I hope GMDM does not let pride prevent him from swinging a deal.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Jul 24, 2008 4:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

There are two untouchable on this roster

Greinke and Soria. The rest should be for sale for the right offer.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 24, 2008 4:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs