Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jim Irsay: We Can Make It Work With Peyton Manning

Impotence Update

Last season the Royals hit only 102 home runs, the lowest total in the Majors by a wide margin (Minnesota was 29th with 118) and 59 below the American League average of 161. (Oddly, the NL out-homered the AL last year, a signal of how many "defense/small ball first" wiseacres now reside in the Junior Circuit.) As I wrote in the 2007 Season Review, that total of 102 round-trippers was the lowest total by an American League team since 1992 (strike years excepted). Despite a few attempts to share this fact with larger audiences, I don't think it really got enough play.

Routinely, in any given season something like a fifth of the teams in the Majors will hit twice as many dingers as that. While scoring runs does depend on more than just home runs (or can) by any relative measure, 102 homers is a pathetically low total, and no matter whatever the other attributes of your lineup if you only hit 102 homers, you're not going to be productive. Basically, having so little power is like having the best band in the world that just happens to have a lead singer who can't sing and can't remember the words to any songs: that killer bassiest doesn't really mean anything.

Heading into this season Dayton Moore acquired Jose Guillen, Miguel Olivo, Alberto Callaspo, brought back Ross Gload and Mark Grudizelanek and handed Billy Butler a full-time slot in the lineup. Despite a considerable amount of chatter about playing like the Angels, the Front Office also acknowledged that the team needed an impact bat in the middle of the lineup, and this appears to have driven the pursuit of Jose Guillen especially.

So are the Royals doing any better this season? This season, through 136 games the Royals have 96 homers and are on pace to hit something like 114 total by season's end. By the standards of WWI land battle success and terrotory acquisition at least, the plan is truly coming along.

 

2007 2008
Royals HRs/game 0.63 0.71
AL Average HRs/game 0.99 1.00

As you can see, despite a slight dip in scoring levels this season, home run levels are essentially the same, if not higher. Apparently, steroids destroyed our national innocence to such an extent that math and reality itself is now compromised. Don't let the facts get in the way of the narrative however.

Returning to the Royals, this slight improvement nevertheless still represents a disapointment, especially when we factor in another season of supposed development from Mark Teahen and Alex Gordon was supposed to bolster the offense as well. While Guillen has been a mild disapointment, his 18 homers to date is essentially in line with what he's done throughout his career. Assuming Guillen has a functional final month and ends up with something like 21-24 homers, he'd really only be slightly below his established norm of 25-30. Again, by the pathetic standards established by the fulility of this franchise, he has been an upgrade over Emil Brown.

Nor is Mark Teahen entirely to blame. To put it about strangely, he's neither a part of the solution or the problem. Thanks to a recent flurry he's climbed up to 12 homers and may very well end up with something like 15 on the season, which is an upgrade from his 7 in 2007. Sure, we'd want more, but he is accounting for some other team's modest improvement. Similarly, in spite of other holes in his game, Miguel Olivo has contributed with 11 HRs in part-time duty.

If we really want someone to blame (and isn't that what we always want?) we should look no further than the limp quartet of Joey Gathright, Ross Gload, Tony Pena Jr. and Billy Butler. (Toss an honorable mention to Grudz.) On a team with no true elite hitters, the Royals have wasted too many plate appearances on guys who are, at best, secondary or tertiary contributors to a real lineup.

HRs PAs
Butler 9 412
Gload 3 400
Gathright 0 296
Pena 1 210

Although these players come from a number of different positions on the defensive spectrum and career arc, they all represent serious enervating influences on the team's pursuit of potency. That the Royals have 12 homers total out of their primary DH and 1B is a stunning non-achievement, and the kind of failure that would be hard to reach even if directly attempted. But hey, you can't put a measure on Gload's glove. When you mix in Grudz's mere three homers and the donut put up by Callaspo and German, we may be looking at a Royals infield of a truly remarkable vintage.

Of course, in both the long and short views, this has been a chronic, even defining aspect of the Royals franchise, with the Curse of Balboni and all that. The Royals have not had a player top 20 homers since Mike Sweeney did so in 2005 with 21 (bonus power!) and have not eclipsed the modest 25-homer barrier since 2003, when Carlos Beltran inspired a nation with 26 homers. Although its now too late to do, had the 2005-7 renovation plans included a dramatic moving back of the K's fences the team may been drastically helped on the field.

Heck, Mark Teahen might even have more homers right now.

Comment 63 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

So what you're trying to say...

is KILA NOW, right?

But seriously folks, nice write-up, Will. By the way, I’d like to see Adam Dunn signed by the Royals.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Sep 1, 2008 8:39 PM EDT reply actions  

"Guillen has been a mild disapointment (sic)"

Pointed out elsewhere, Guillen (-1.8) has a lower VORP than Mike Sweeney, as of BP’s current stats (3.3). That’s about half a win, if I understand VORP.

I suppose Brian Bannister’s last start at Yankee Stadium was a “mild disappointment.”

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 1, 2008 9:17 PM EDT reply actions  

did not think he was below replacement level...

damn

but in terms of pure HR totals, he has only been a mild disappointment (why is my mozilla spell check gone?)

by Freneau on Sep 1, 2008 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

True enough -- he's been OK as far as raw HR numbers go

I’m just relieved that someone besides me makes spelling errors in posts.

What’s really striking about Guillen is that if you look at his 2007 numbers, when his OPS was pretty good, his BABIP shows a fair amount of luck (as far as I understand it), This year he doesn’t. Taking that luck into account, if particularly if you look at 2006, and all the BB/K rate, OBP, AVG, even SLG and iSO, there’s been an overall decline that is gradual, but evident.

It gets even uglier if you look at the splits — last and and this year he’s been smoking lefties, but the trends against righties are even worse.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 1, 2008 10:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

Small correction

“he’s been OK as far as raw power numbers go.”

He’s had good isolated power this season. His problem has been a low batting average and not drawing walks. He’s giving us the raw power we need, he’s just not making enough contact or drawing walks. These should come up (at least somewhat) next year. I’m not saying he’ll be a .850 hitter next year, but he’ll be better than this.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 1, 2008 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Raw power has been decent -- good point

Having said that, maybe my belated discovery of the quick-n-dirty LD% + .12 = xBABIP and fangraphs split charts have made me think about some things.

I agree that Guillen’s ISO/SLG have been good. Indeed, his ISO is up this year, even if BA (and thus SLG) and walk rate are down. It’s hard to believe that’s he’s gotten this bad, this quick, and I think he should be able to produce better next year. According to the quick-n-dirty formula, he’s been slightly unlucky this year.

However, there are two things that stand out to me:

1) As regards raw power, and hitting generally: Guillen’s rate stats as a whole are holding steady over the last few years (things like walk rate, K rate, ratio, ISO, and stuff — ‘06 was bad, but an injured year, and his non BA/BABIP dependant-stats are consistent with more recent years, including his good ’07). Looking at his split stats, though, in particular in ISO, one sees a spike this season and last in some against lefties, while a general decline the past 3-4 seasons against righties. That’s borne out in this years .973 OPS (.303 ISO) against lefties and .619 (1.36 ISO) against lefties. Here’s the fangraphs illustration of Guillen’s ISO trend. (Note that it might change a bit from when I posted it to when you are reading this, if it’s down the road, [the link is dynamic] — although I doubt by much for current conversation)

Now, he is destroying lefties. But the Royals need Guillen to be more than a right-handed platoon guy. Which, from a power perspective at least, is what he seems to be turning into.

2) General trends. According to the simple xBABIP formla, Guillen has been a bit unlucky this year — a 17.6 LD% should result in a .296 BABIP, whereas he’s got a .274. Not, .296 isn’t great when you hardly walk, but it’s not nothing. [Note that I can’t find the split LD, that would be interesting]. In his good 2007, (.813 OPS, 116 OPS+ though, due to the Mariner’s park effect on right-handed sluggers — nice year), his BABIP is .330. However, this is with a 16 LD rate — xBABIP is .280! I don’t know what the year “should” have bee like, but it indicates that he was pretty lucky — most than twice as “lucky” as he has been “unlucky” this year.

I’m not sure exactly how to interpret this, but it does seem that Guillen is on a steeper decline in general than his 2007 stats suggest.

Now, to be fair, maybe he’s an “every other year guy.” He had a bad 2006, good 2007, now a bad 2008. That means he’s in for a godd 2009! But this begs the question:

Dayton Moore — why would you sign Jose Guillen to a deal with an odd number of years!!!!111

Numerology: it’s the new Moneyball.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 2, 2008 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Forget lucky and unlucky

His swing has looked absolutely dreadful at times this year. Stats don’t measure that, do they?

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 2, 2008 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

Just to dig the horse back up, cut it up into 1000 tiny little pieces, burn them, and scatter them in the Bermuda Triangle

Emil Brown’s VORP currently sits at -3.4, worse that Gullen’s.

Guillen is an upgrade over Brown. But he’s closer to Brown than to “Sickening Sweet” Sweeney.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 1, 2008 9:21 PM EDT reply actions  

Kila is the Cialis that KC needs!!!

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 1, 2008 10:39 PM EDT reply actions  

who really is going to get replaced?

2009 starting roster:

C Buck
1B Shealy/Butler/TBD
2B Callaspo
3B Gordon
SS Aviles
OF Guillen
OF DeJesus
OF TBD?
DH Butler/TBD

That makes two, maybe three spots where you could legitimately say we will (not could, that’s another argument) probably upgrade. Callaspo doesn’t hit for much “slug”. With a limited budget and where we are with our current roster, I think it’s going to be very hard to make much of an upgrade. If some of the current players don’t start to produce, it’s going to be at least a couple more years before the offense is just average.

I hereby resign from this post.

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Sep 1, 2008 11:13 PM EDT reply actions  

Upgrades

Replacing either 1B or DH plus a corner OF spot with a genuine hitter would be a big upgrade for this team. And then the further development of Gordon and Butler will help. There is lots of room for improvement and a great deal of real possibility of improvement, but it will take some good acquisitions of new talent. But we really don’t need to replace most of the lineup.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 1, 2008 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

Frustrating part of this whole issue

The Royals might actually end up with 8 guys in double digit HRs, and STILL end up last in the AL. Butler, Buck, and Aviles are close enough to 10 HRs that they might make it, thus giving us 8 guys.

I am going to echo the sentiments of others here, in that the team is CHOCK FULL of complimentary players, but lacking SEVERLY the two true sluggers it needs. Put bonafide #3 and #4 hitter in the lineup, and we would be OK offensively. Unfortunately, if none of the youngsters develops into those guys, then we need to spend roughly 40 million a year to acquire those two guys.

One other point – despite playing in the spacious K, we have been outhomered by around 50! In other words, our pitching staff is not very good either.

by loyal2sdad on Sep 2, 2008 11:12 AM EDT reply actions  

if we get rid of Peralta's homers....

we might be ok. How do we compare to other teams in the HR allowed department?

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 2, 2008 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

Milton Bradley FA !!!

He is gonna win the AL Sabermetric Triple Crown !!!
BA/OPB/SLG

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 12:07 PM EDT reply actions  

OBP

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

SLUG

Splits by position:

Catcher
AL – .258/.322/.393
KC – .234/.295/.387

First Base
AL – .266/.346/.439
KC – .271/.319/.364

Second Base
AL – .283/.339/.412
KC – .305/.351/.407

Shortstop
AL – .266/.316/.373
KC – .246/.277/.347

Third Base
AL – .268/.339/.433
KC – .258.347/.425

Left Field
AL – .268/.338/.436
KC – .273/.329/.401

Center Field
AL – .270/.335/.413
KC – .260/.309/.308

Right Field
AL – .278/.347/.453
KC – .252/.308/.405

Designated Hitter
AL – .256/.341/.435
KC – .271/.310/.452

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 2, 2008 12:53 PM EDT reply actions  

Is this info correct?

CF .308 SLG? Joey brought it down that much? DH SLG is above average?

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

Starts by position

Catcher
Buck 93
Olivo 43

First Base
Gload 93
Butler 30
Teahen 13

Second Base
Grudzielanek 85
German 22
Callaspo 19
Aviles 7
Smith 3

Shortstop
Aviles 68
Pena 56
Callaspo 9
German 3

Third Base
Gordon 121
Teahen 9
German 5
Callaspo 1

Left Field
DeJesus 48
Guillen 43
Teahan 24
German 14
Gload 6
Callaspo 1

Center Field
Gathright 72
DeJesus 50
Maier 14

Right Field
Teahen 77
Guillen 49
DeJesus 9
Gload 1

Designated Hitter
Butler 69
Guillen 34
Olivo 21
DeJesus 1
Gordon 1
Teahen 1

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 2, 2008 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

JOEY

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 2, 2008 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

NOW!

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Sep 3, 2008 2:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

man

TPJ is a pretty good anchor for the SS data. Whew!

The concept of progress acts as a protective mechanism to shield us from the terrors of the future. - Collected sayings of Muad'Dib

by buddyball on Sep 2, 2008 1:54 PM EDT reply actions  

Doesn't this have to fall on Barnetts shoulders a little bit?

I know some in here think the hitting coach is a glorified batboy but look at the SLG on the roster. Most of these guys are having career lows or close to.

Young Core Players
DDJ (HR career high) SLG .430 lower than his other 100+G seasons except for ‘07
Teahen SLG .384 lowest since his rookie year
Buck SLG .363 lowest of his career
Butler – regressed
Gordon- Showed modest improvement
Veterans
Guillen – .429 SLG lowest in a 100+G season since he was 20
Grudz – .399 SLG lowest in 5 years
German .329 SLG lowest as a Royal and lowest of his career
Gload .342 SLG lowest of his full season stats by a wide margin
The Slop
Gathright- .266 SLG 2nd lowest in his career (55g .240 SLG TB)
TPJ – .213 SLG .130 pts below his rookie level
Who Excelled
Aviles – .487 SLG
Olivo – .465 SLG one of his highest in his career (also his highest pct of vs. LH AB’s in his career)
Young and need help
Maier- No Xb hits yet
Kaaihue
If hitting coaches have any influence on their pupils at all is this the guy that should be teaching thes young hitters or helping KC’s veterans make adjustments? Beating a dead horse? Maybe that is what I am doing but Barnett shouldn’t be rewarded by being brought back for another season after these ugly performances.

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 2:46 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

In all seriousness

I don’t know what to make of the hitting coach. Reason and studies and reading tells me that at the major league level they make very little difference. On the other hand, subjectively it just seems like they must… So without repeating arguments other people could make better one way or the other, I just want to ma e a few comments.

This is an interesting list and a cool thing to being up. I would suggest, given that the topic is power, that you might want to go back and re-do this using ISO instead of SLG, since that’s a better measure of raw power, as SLG might be impacted by good or bad luck with BABIP.

Comments on a few specific players:

Gathright — his SLG/ISO is indeed way down, but given his skill set, I don’t think this indicates much except that he still sucks.

You are right about Olivo and the reasons for it. But I think that also reflects on part of Buck’s problem — a reduced proportion of ABs against lefties negatively effects his numbers.

Aviles: not enough time in the majors to evaluate Barnett’s help/harm. I can’t believe Barnett would have him change anything at this point. He’s smoking lefties at a good rate. He probably will continue to be good against them, but not Pujol-good like he is at the moment. He’s hitting righties well for a 2008 AL SS.

I think vets like Grudz and Guillen are beyond the point of being helped by a coach, at least proportional to the decline of their physical abilities. See my comments on Hoagy above. I think he’s been on a slow overall decline for the last few years, masked by a lucky BABIP in 2007 and his demolition of lefties.

DDJ’s numbers in line with his career.

Teahen’s SLG is down due to BA being down this year. His ISO is actually slightly up from last year.

Gordon. Coming around. While his SLG/ISO overall remain the same, his other numbers have all improved. I’ve said this elsewhere, but again, looking at the left/right splits, while he’s a lot better against righties, against both lefties and righties he’s improving significantly across the board, except his AVG against lefties has dropped slightly, and his ISO is way down. GIven his advances overall (and in his batting eye against lefties — BB and K rate are both up), I think that will come around. H aving said that, how much of this is Barnett and how much is it Alex just growing into his abiltiies?

Good points, though. I’m not sure not how Barnett fits into it all. At least one stathead, Rany, clearly seems to think he should go…

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 2, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm not saying he is the only problem

and I totally agree with you about the different isolated stats that can show better than SLG can. I don’t really no how sabermetric people can really justify ISO, why does a player get *3 for a HR and only *2 for a triple compared to a double? I don’t really justify that as a stat but that is just me I’m sure they have their reasons.

The hitting coach should be responsible for strategy at the very least and with KC last in the league in walks and second to last in the AL in SLG, a change would be nice.

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

We have no idea how much Barnett is impacting their hitting

I suspect that he, like just about every other hitting coach, has minimal effect. Hitting coaches dont’ set a player or team’s approach at the plate. But a change likely wouldn’t hurt. Just don’t expect it to help much.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 2, 2008 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

I've been pondering this

and I think… YOU ARE WRONG!™

Seriously, I don’t think a hitting coach can do much to HELP most hitters. A few exceptions (Lau/Brett, Pentland/Sosa/Winstrol), but for the most part all they can do is discuss adjustments.

The probleeeeeem… is that I think it’s actually pretty self-evident that a BAD hitting coach could do some serious damage by screwing a guy up. It’s like an engine. You’re probably not going to find some awesome motor oil that really improves your engine’s performance, but you sure as hell can pour some regurgitated slop in there and end up needing a new car.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Sep 2, 2008 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

Sure

And most of what Barnett has said publicly reveals him to be a standard, run of the mill hitting coach. He says you have to combine patience with aggression. Wait for your pitch, but jump on it when you get it. It’s not like he’s only been talking about aggression, that the Royals have to swing more and not keep the bat on their shoulders. So yeah, if he was the worst of the worst, he could do some damage. But there’s no evidence of that. Pulling out the Royals hitting stats to support the contention that the hitting coach is bad is pure folly.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 2, 2008 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

The way I look at it

The Royals have some young hitters (particularly Gordon and Butler) whose development, let’s face it, is absolutely crucial to the team’s future. Should cornerstone guys like these fail to develop, the team’s rebuilding will be set back by years.

A guy like Gordon was seen as a no-brainer pick, universally regarded as a future top hitter in the bigs. Although he has shown modest improvement this year, I’m starting to be a little concerned about his minimal progress (and, to some degree, Butler’s). I guess I just feel as if the club should be doing everything possible to ensure their development and success, and I can’t fathom how keeping Mike Barnett on makes sense, given the team’s dismal performance under him for several seasons now.

When you think about it, who has shown significant improvement in KC while Barnett has been at the helm? With KC, it needs to be all about developing the young players. I don’t hold out hope that anyone can turn Guillen into a patient hitter or anything, but I would expect young players to progress, something I haven’t seen in the last few years. Time for a change.

by cookierojas73 on Sep 2, 2008 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

Maybe you know better

but who makes the hitting strategy for any given night? Do these guys really just walk up to the plate looking middle-in? That would be pretty idiotic to me as pitchers have different pitches and a catcher/pitcher can develop certain similar sequences that a good hitter can capitalize on.

Why did Tony Gwynn watch so much film?

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yes, they are watching film and yes the hitting coach is talking to them about what the pitcher throws and a strategy for hitting against him

But every hitting coach is doing that. And it’s not a huge game-changing thing. There’s a “book” on every pitcher in the majors. It’s not that unknown or controversial. Hitting coaches around the league aren’t finding out special secrets and distributing magic bullet hints and tips to their players. They are basically distributing the same scouting reports with the same information. And is Barnett better or worse at that than any other hitting coach? Do we have any idea? Can we take the Royals hitting stats and say how much of it should be credited to or blamed on the hitting coach?

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 2, 2008 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

As a whole you are correct

but in the case of Alex and Billy they are not growing at the level that their talent has indicated in the past they would. Someone should pay for that. OFF WITH BARNETTS HEAD !!!

There are no indications he is performing well at his job currently. Aviles is the only player performing and he is a midseason callup that Barnett had little to no influence on.

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

but in the case of Alex and Billy they are not growing at the level that their talent has indicated in the past they would. Someone should pay for that

Correlation does not prove causation. It is quite common for even top prospects to fail, or develop slowly or to not hit the ceiling they were thought to have. When this happens, is it the fault of a hitting coach, manager or general manager? I guess that is possible. But what is more likely is that when this happens it is because the player isn’t as good as most thought he was (or perhaps is developmental curve is different from what we thought it would be).

There are no indications he is performing well at his job currently

So he gets no credit for DeJesus’s hitting, or Grudz’s continual avoidance of the cliff or anything positive that happens with the Royals hitting? He’s only responsible for the bad? Again, we have a real proof of causation problem here. But, as I’ve said all along, go ahead and replace him. I have no problem with that. Just don’t expect a new hitting coach to help anything, much less fix anything.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 2, 2008 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

No one is performing besides Olivo/Aviles

DDJ= Other than HR, DDJ is performing below his previous levels other than ‘07 and Grudz is below norm as well. There are two positive hitting performances this year that he could take credit for I guess. Olivo and Aviles, as we have all kind of spotted out Aviles deserves most of his own credit. As for Olivo he has had a solid season and if you give Barnett the credit for that good, but if they aren’t gonna excercise Olivo’s option then might as well not excercise Barnetts either.

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ok, I'm on board. It's all Barnett fire him and watch the stats soar!

[sorry, but this really requires some good, intense sarcasm]

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 2, 2008 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Why do you get so worked up about someone who in your opinion serves no purpose.

If you are right then who cares the players will increase/decrease their performance by themselves if you are wrong then the hitters get better.

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Am I getting worked up when I say that I'm fine with keeping him or replacing him?

I am pointing out that this is essentially meaningless. I’m pointing out that the quality of the hitting coach has little or nothing to do with the quality of the hitting of the players on that team.

If you are right then who cares the players will increase/decrease their performance by themselves if you are wrong then the hitters get better.

If I’m right, then the hitting coach isn’t of any importance and the name of the person who has that job won’t make the hitters better or worse. So do whatever. Just don’t expect it to lead to a change in results.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 2, 2008 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

I am pretty sure you are wrong

so I guess that is all that matters. If you are right, then I’m gonna apply for the job right now. I’m sure my HS and little league coaching ability should suffice.

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Hey, you know the "right approach" better than Barnett, right?

So I’m sure you’d be great.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 2, 2008 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

Let's Make it Happen

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm in.

I’ll text Dayton for you.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 3, 2008 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions  

It sounds like you're

pulling this out of your ass, NYRoyal. A hitting coach has a minimal effect on players’ hitting? Then why have one? I could see that for established hitters/veterans that a coach would have limited influence, but for guys who are still developing (like most Royals players) a coach would seem like an important piece to the puzzle.

Is there any backup to why you “suspect that he, like just about every other hitting coach, has minimal effect”? A study, or a Baseball Prospectus article maybe? (I don’t mean to sound snippy, but I’m going to anyway.)

Note: To the extent that the coaching staff may be to blame for sustained sub-par hitting, as an outsider I can’t say that it’s necessarily Bartnett’s fault (it may well be the revovling manager door that keeps rocking the boat). Nevertheless, the most obvious constant over the recent years is Barnett.

by benfunke on Sep 3, 2008 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don’t know that there have been any studies on this. I don’t know how one could put such a thing together. But this is a common opinion I’ve read from many analysts, including Rany. Rany’s position on Barnett is that even though hitting coaches aren’t of any particular importance, we might as well replace Barnett because who knows, maybe it will help something.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 3, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

well, as much as Rany can be an odd egg

he does usually have a sensible reason (statistical or otherwise) behind his statements. maybe i’ll dig through some of his old stuff to see if there was any analysis looking at this.

this is a bit of an aside, but: i was talking a couple months ago with an acquaintance/friend of mine who works with the Rays GM and coordinates the majority of their sabermetrics research (which seems to be working, btw). i was trying to convey to him the frustration our fans were having over lack of player development (at all levels), and wondering if he and/or the Rays had looked into statistical analysis of the effects that coaches had on player development. first he gave me sort of a blank stare, then he said that between all the variability in minor league rosters and the lack of thorough minor league stats it would be a tough task to really get anything meaningful out of the analysis. so, to paraphrase his opinion, he didn’t seem to believe that coaches were a vital factor in how players developed over the long term, at least in the minors (although i’m not sure he had really put a lot of thought into it). but, let me end this rambling aside with two notes 1. i bet a study of ML performance under certain hitting coaches is very doable, and 2. the Rays have specific hitting and pitching ‘gurus’ that travel throughout their minor league farm helping coach and train players, so they must put some emphasis on having a good hitting instructor, at least at the minor league level.

(and in case you couldn’t tell, I think having a solid hitting coach is important; if nothing else (as you and others have pointed out), the downside is zero and the upside is very positive.)

by benfunke on Sep 3, 2008 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

i bet a study of ML performance under certain hitting coaches is very doable

It would be very difficult to isolate the variable in question and control for all of the other things would could, should and do affect performance.

so they must put some emphasis on having a good hitting instructor, at least at the minor league level.

I think coaches of all kinds in the minors are more important because those guys are still learning how to hit. Coming out of high school, Latin America or even a year or two of college, these guys are still short on many fundamentals. They need good coaches and instructors.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 3, 2008 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

http://www.ranyontheroyals.com/2008/05/royals-today-552008.html

the only extended mention of hitting coaches i could find from Rany.

the more i look on the web, the more i see that hitting coaches are regarded as next to irrelevant. (but i’m not really convinced.)

by benfunke on Sep 3, 2008 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

Cf.

This

Hillman’s not going anywhere for the time being. Dayton Moore’s approach is so deliberate that he hasn’t even gotten around to firing Mike Barnett yet, so Hillman is sure to get another year to show that he can turn pretty theories into hard reality.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 3, 2008 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

no=know

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 3:30 PM EDT reply actions  

Because I think he is smarter than any of us posting here,

I am willing to let Rany settle the debate.

Barnett goes.

by loyal2sdad on Sep 2, 2008 5:59 PM EDT reply actions  

Cool

As I said, we might as well. And after the 2009 season if/when these players aren’t hitting much better, we’ll fire the new guy too. Might as well make it a hitting coach merry-go-round. At least it will make the fans happy.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 2, 2008 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

You know it is kind of funny someone on here was talking about possibly 8 guys getting double digit homers

like that is a accomplishment.

The Marlins infield needs 2 HR from Cantu to have the entire infield with at least 25 HR’s

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Sep 2, 2008 11:51 PM EDT reply actions  

Cantu Uggla and Ramirez all in the same infield?

They might give up the equivalent difference due to defensive deficiency…

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 2, 2008 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, that infield is giving up a ton of runs

Those are good players, but it is easier to have multiple players in your IF with 25 HR’s when you have first basemen at all four positions.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 3, 2008 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

The Yankees have made with 1-2 1Bs and 1 DH starting in their infield

for 3 years in a row, until this year.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 3, 2008 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

"made the playoffs"

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 3, 2008 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think it is a fine strategy if you've got guys who can really hit

Hitting is much more important than defense. But one shouldn’t ignore how many more runs than the average player a really bad defender gives up. That kind of analytical omission is the kind of thing that could lead you to spend too much money on guys like Dunn or Burrell. They are very good hitters, but their massive defensive deficiencies limit their value.

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

by Scott McKinney on Sep 3, 2008 12:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

yeah, just making a joke about the Yanks defense

and I actually like Ramirez (OK, everyone does) and Uggla as really good players. I’m a bit shocked that Ramirez ever developed this much power, but it’s there and it’s real. “Toolsiest” 1B ever.

Can’t believe Cantu had a productive major league season again.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 3, 2008 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

And

They have Dallas McPherson swatting 40 bombs in AAA.

Cantu and McPherson were passed on by 29 other teams – that should tell us something.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 3, 2008 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

They're crap just like Cust and Pujols

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

by Matt Klaassen on Sep 3, 2008 11:19 AM 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