Rany jumps off the Dayton Moore bandwagon

Two weeks ago I wrote this: "Dayton Moore does many things well, and he still has my support as the man who could lead the Royals to the playoffs once again. But after three off-seasons to prove himself on the free-agent market, with one notable exception (Gil Meche), all he has proven is that he is prone to wildly overspending for highly replaceable talent." Now that he’s signed Bloomquist, I stand by these words completely. Well, accept for the part that he still has my support.

Well, there you go. This kind of offseason leads to breakups like this. Personally, I put a lot of stock in this offseason as far as my evaluation of Dayton Moore. He had done some things well (mostly involving pitchers) and some things poorly (mostly involving position players). So I was looking for him to start spending the currency of baseball and seriously address the offensive/defensive issues.

And then this offseason came. Wow. He spent the currency of baseball poorly. He spent David Glass's currency even worse. Dayton Moore isn't a good GM. Is he an average GM? Maybe. But as he can't be expected to make good FA signings, the only way the Royals compete is with cheap homegrown talent. So how long are we going to have to wait until there is enough of that to compete? Until Moustakas, Hosmer, Cortes, Duffy, etc. are in the majors and have all panned out?

If I may paraphrase Phil Connors, this winter has been cold, it's been gray and it may last us the rest of our lives.

5 months ago NYRoyal Comment 35 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

OK....

speculation leads to groin strains.

Let’s watch the season first.

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

by 306008 on Jan 10, 2009 11:03 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

This Line

Moore is looking less and less like the GM that will take us to the promised land and more and more like a really good scouting director who’s in over his head every time his owner hands him his checkbook.

Kinda hits the nail on the head for me.

by kcbottom9th on Jan 10, 2009 11:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Rany

has been teetering on the edge all offseason. I’m not going to jump ship just yet, but I am scouting for a good landing. I have to hold out hope that GMDM has a plan.

I don’t see a plan, but there has to be one.

by Warden11 on Jan 10, 2009 11:38 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'm with Rany

I’m sorry, but I am. I just hope DMGM’s farm system is still good when the next GM comes in.

I know people like goingn to winners, and I’m not saying that I would have done it, but I have little doubt that even Pat Freaking Burrell would have come to KC for 2/20 — that’s $4M more. Just sit still, let Burrell/Butler play 1B/Dh, hopefully move Guillen, and with a breakout or two, you’re in contention.

I do agree that the salary/revenue/financial structure of MLB needs to be fixed. But Moore’s offseason gives him to right to complain about it — he’s flushed enough money down the toilet the last two years to either save it for worthy signings or to have signed good FAs that would put the Royals in the mid-80s, winwise.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 10, 2009 11:42 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Arbuckle NOW!!!

Kyle Farns***** is my hero. Not many men can turn zero talent into 9.5 mil during a recession.

by Steve Hovley on Jan 10, 2009 12:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yes, just what the Royals need

another excellent player development guy who think you evaluate the future of 31 year-old major leaguers the same way you evaluate 17 year-old high schoolers

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 10, 2009 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hey, Moore and Arbuckle know good makeup, character and a winning attitude when they see it

And when they see it, they throw money at it.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 10, 2009 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

good news is that in 2 years when moore is gone...

we SHOULD have a great farm system b/c both moore and arbuckle seemingly have that down pat. there must be a reason why the Phillies gave the GM job to that idiot Amaro rather than Arbuckle, they probably saw that he was in over his head.

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jan 10, 2009 9:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

except moore won't be gone...

Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.

by doublestix on Jan 10, 2009 11:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I really think Moore will be around for several more years

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 11, 2009 2:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

All aboard

After signing Meche to that huge deal I thought the new GMDM was ballsy. Then after he signed Guillen to a huge deal I thought he was crazy. Then after Farnsy, HoRam, and Jacobs I was convinced he has no idea what he is doing. Now he has added Bloomquist and I’m 100% convinced DM is incapable of taking a small market team to the playoffs. It’s clear that the Peter Principle has slapped Dayton Moore in the face.

The drafts have been great, but you can’t evaluate drafts until long after they are complete. The good news is that when Moore is eventually canned, there should be some influx of talent from the farm system for the new GM to hit the ground running. The bad news? I expect this team to slightly improve next year, maybe hang around .500 for a good chunk of the season. This will only buy DM more time to wallow the franchise in mediocrity.

by gilmeche55 on Jan 10, 2009 2:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

(sigh)

Stathead, Zack Greinke fan, and Rock Band 2 singer extraordinaire.

by NHZ on Jan 10, 2009 2:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

moore is staying for a while

sorry folks.

his contract runs through 2010. we’ll probably be .500 or so the next two years. glass will like that (and that is ALL that matters when it pertains to his job). so he’ll re-up him. then the prospects will start to filter in. then who knows what will happen.

Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.

by doublestix on Jan 10, 2009 3:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, with Glass being willing to spend, Moore will be able to keep this team around .500

And the only way this team gets over the top is of a lot of prospects pan out at around the same time.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 10, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Isn't that the plan anyway?

What moves could GMDM had made that are short term moves that would’ve helped the team really.

They sign Pat Burrell 2/22 (probably gotta give him what he originally asked for) – How does that work out for Billy ? Sign a permanent DH only stunts his growth.

Jason Giambi 1/5.5 + option (prob gotta give him more to skip Oakland) – A fulltime 1b/DH who doesn’t need platooned for again only stunts Billy’s growth. This time around it also stunts any reality of calling Kila up.

Rafael Furcal 4/44 – I don’t know about you but I don’t want any part of that contract. Bad back if it goes bad it locks KC in longterm to him and stunts the 2010-2011 available payroll.

I’m not a fan of alot or most of these moves but I don’t think they are hurting KC longterm because the longterm plan is about youth and prospects. These moves are shortterm improvers.

Farnsworth by far is the worst move of the offseason not for signing him but the huge amount they signed him for. 9M is at least 5M too much for him with this bad market. KC could’ve gotten any number of relievers instead. The others aren’t good but they aren’t back breakers so to get all worked up about them is kind of a waste of time.

Waechter- Decent signing best move of ‘09 probably
Crisp- I didn’t care for this move much but if it is just a one year move his defense should improve the team.
Jacobs- It’s been since ‘05 since KC had a expected .800+ OPS guy at the 1b/DH spots. Billy should be able to reach those marks but can’t be trusted 100% to and neither can Shealy. Kila needed to start in Omaha regardless. 1b defense couldn’t possibly be as bad as thought.
Bloomquist- As long as Callaspo is giving a fair shot to beat him out (which he will in fair competition) then this move is just running in place. I would’ve preferred Hairston with the same type of deal over Free Willy.

Offseason Grade= D

In the end all these moves are moving the needle slightly increasing the win total little by little and not selling the farm to do it. I would’ve preferred GMDM sat on his hands and let the market develop before he did anything this year but who knows if he is finished. A trade after the arbitration period could yield something worth while so I am not gonna jump off the GMDM boat yet.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Jan 10, 2009 6:09 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

A few things

First, have you seen d_f’s “if I ran the zoo”? Basically that involves mostly standing pat. I think all he added was Langerhans off waivers and Waechter as a FA. That team, which of course still includes RamRam and Nunez, is better on paper than the one the Royals currently have and doesn’t spend a lot of money foolishly.

As Burrell signed for 2/16 with TB, I think 2/20 would have easily gotten him to KC. And I’d allow him to be the starting LFer. His offense more than makes up for his defense at that price. Actually, he’d probably spend some time at DH, as Butler would spend some time at 1B.

As Burrell signed for 3/30, I would have offered him 3/36 plus some PT incentives if he stays healthy. I think that contract might have gotten him to KC. And that’s a pretty good contract for KC.

I’m not a fan of alot or most of these moves but I don’t think they are hurting KC longterm because the longterm plan is about youth and prospects. These moves are shortterm improvers.

These moves aren’t entirely negative. The first problem with them is the opportunity cost. There are many other moves which could have been made which would have been a better use of $16M, or of $10M or of $5M. For a GM to spend that much money and get that kind of minimal improvement is a definite failure. Also, the fact that two of these guys are owed a total of $6M for 2010 and Crisp and Jacobs could be $13M more is a problem beyond 2009. Most importantly, the fact that Moore thought these signings and trades were a good way to spend talent and many millions of dollars shows that he isn’t a very good GM. That’s the real downside to these moves: what they say about Dayton Moore.

Jacobs- It’s been since ‘05 since KC had a expected .800+ OPS guy at the 1b/DH spots.

I hope you aren’t implying that Jacobs is expected to have a .800+ OPS this year. And if he manages .800, a .270/.310/.490 stat line is one of the least valuable versions of an .800 OPS.

All tolled, there’s no way to give this season any grade other than an F.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 10, 2009 6:33 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

"there's no way to give this season any grade other than an F"

Unless GMDM signs Greinke to an extension.

by DarthYoshi on Jan 11, 2009 8:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I guess there is time for Moore to do one thing big

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 11, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with you guys

about how different players could’ve been aquired but I also see how the Nats have wanted to land some FA’s but haven’t had much luck either. Maybe we are underestimating the difficulty of getting someone to play in KC.

d_f zoo prediction is a decent thought but I have a feeling there would be an even bigger backlash by people for standing pat with little to no moves.

Also Teahen as an everyday outfielder over Guillen I believe is an overestimation of projections and the value of defense but we’ve been round and round about that so I won’t get back into it. I don’t think we would be very satisfied with a offseason of Langerhans and Waechter.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Jan 11, 2009 3:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

d_f zoo prediction is a decent thought but I have a feeling there would be an even bigger backlash by people for standing pat with little to no moves.

What actually affects fans the most is not the number and quality of offseason moves; it’s the actual performance of the team. If fan were pissed that Moore did little this offseason and then they went out and won 82-83 games, they would in the end be happier than this unimpressive but active offseason if it leads to 79-81 wins. In the hearts and minds of fans, wins overrule everything. So you need to do the smartest moves which will lead to the best results on the field, not just the most moves so that some fans are placated during the offseason.

I don’t think we would be very satisfied with a offseason of Langerhans and Waechter.

I wouldn’t have been satisfied with the payroll staying that low. And I don’t think d_f is suggesting that merely adding Langerhans and Waechter was exactly what the Royals should have done. He’s merely showing what standing pat plus these two small moves would have done. What I would have liked is for Moore to do something like that (add Langerhans and Waechter) and then make a push for a smart contract to Furcal, Bradley, Hudson, Dunn or Burrell. I think the Royals could have gotten one of them. Glass was willing to spend the money and none of them have gone for a big contract. Add $2M per year (which is a significant increase) to any of their contracts and the Royals are getting a good deal. I also think it is very likely that one or more would have been willing to sign with the Royals for that kind of money. If the Royals actually try to spend a big chunk of money wisely and every player turns them down, I would have been happy with them sitting tight, instead of overpaying for a bunch of crap.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 11, 2009 4:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What actually affects fans the most is not the number and quality of offseason moves; it’s the actual performance of the team.

This is true for the fans that aren’t on here. This whole thread is based on offseason moves and has nothing to do with “Actual performance”.

As far as Ryan Langerhans is concerned he is a nice player in the same way Mark Teahen is a nice player and to suggest that he would be a capable centerfielder after 87 career games is going a bit far. Especially considering his only season in which he played 1/4 of his games there he performed at a
-12.5 UZR/150. Guys like Teahen and Langerhans are nice clubhouse guys and decent defensive corner outfielders but their ineptitude with the bat will get you fired over time. To build your team around defense when the overall statistics of the subject are innacurate would be fools play. GMDM has the benefit of video, scouting and I’m sure some sort of advanced stats that we don’t know about.

I’m not gonna toss out GMDM as a possible good GM based on what could be inaccurate projections. So far the people thought he was crazy about signing Gil Meche and Jose Guillen to high contracts. He’s 1 for 2 and while I hate the Farnsworth signing I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the Bloomquist deal because I think he was looking for a double switch type player he could utilize in the middle infield and outfield. Last year using Gload and Callaspo in those instances was probably death to the pitchers far more than we actually know. I think his original and better target Hairston (probably didn’t want to move his family or something) wouldn’t sign here for some reason.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Jan 11, 2009 9:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

To build your team around defense when the overall statistics of the subject are innacurate would be fools play.

So defensive stats are inaccurate? You’re just dismissing the entire field of advanced defensive metrics. They’re all just inaccurate. No meaningful information there, just inaccuracy. To say that this is an overstatement is a spectacular understatement.

I’m not gonna toss out GMDM as a possible good GM based on what could be inaccurate projections.

So if his acquisitions from this offseason perform at approximately the relatively low level of their projections, will you then change your opinion of Moore? How much benefit of the doubt does he deserve, and for how long?

I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the Bloomquist deal because I think he was looking for a double switch type player he could utilize in the middle infield and outfield.

Double switch? Did the Royals move to the NL and nobody told me?

Last year using Gload and Callaspo in those instances was probably death to the pitchers far more than we actually know.

German is at least as good as Bloomquist overall. They both stink defensively in the OF. But of course defensive stats mean absolutely nothing. What matters is….the handful of games we’ve watched Bloomy play? Or should we assume that if Moore likes his defense that it must actually be good? No, Moore’s track record hasn’t earned getting that much deference.

I think his original and better target Hairston (probably didn’t want to move his family or something) wouldn’t sign here for some reason.

That’s no excuse for then overpaying for a replacement level player, when the Royals have someone for that role already.

I still don’t think you understand why a team shouldn’t pay millions of dollars over multiple guaranteed years for marginally useful replacement level players.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 12, 2009 5:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

German is at least as good as Bloomquist overall. They both stink defensively in the OF. But of course defensive stats mean absolutely nothing. What matters is….the handful of games we’ve watched Bloomy play? Or should we assume that if Moore likes his defense that it must actually be good? No, Moore’s track record hasn’t earned getting that much deference.

Using your inaccurate defensive statistics Bloomquist was a -3.2 UZR last year with the majority of games in CF/SS/RF. As opposed to Germans -2.4 at 2b/LF. Bloomquist if used not as a double switch but late inning replacement the way German was last year will be better at 2b and LF defensively.

My statement of bad defensive statistics is a comparison as to what we are currently using. They are inaccurate and misleading when you can’t use everything as a whole. These GM’s have a much larger array of statistics/video/scouting than we do so they can better judge a players full ability. You know what these GM"s are getting shopped at the winter meetings. Thousands of math geniuses are shopping their work/statistics to these guys and almost every team has a few of them on the payroll (I’m sure KC does too) to think that KC doesn’t have some better advanced defensive statistics in use this winter could be false thinking. The game is moving towards these stats and I’m sure GMDM is looking at ones that are a step ahead of UZR, etc.

I like German’s bat but the guy leaves something to be desired with the glove. If used in the proper way Bloomquist can be an upgrade as a LF/2b/SS late inning replacement the way Gload/German was used last year. If he Ab’s more than 150-200 times this year then that is more of indictment on Hillman or Callaspo’s skill.

So if his acquisitions from this offseason perform at approximately the relatively low level of their projections, will you then change your opinion of Moore? How much benefit of the doubt does he deserve, and for how long?

I will change my opinion of him if a couple things happen. If this team doesn’t improve this year then he has done a bad job. If he picks up the Jacobs/Crisp options for ‘10 without them performing above average. Those things will definitely effect my opinion on him. Thus far all I see that he has really done wrong is vastly overpay Farnsworth. He isn’t that good at recognizing good FA talent and then signing them to reasonable valued contracts but until KC starts winning with young talent they really don’t have much leverage in those situations anyway.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Jan 12, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ok, I'm done

It amazes me that anyone is actually willing to defend Bloomquist at even 1/1.5, but whatever. Players like him grow on trees and can be found easily and by the dozen. But if you don’t agree that he’s a replacement level player, that’s fine. I think the stats show that pretty clearly. Feel free to disagree with them.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 12, 2009 11:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I have 4 words for you...

G R I T

We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan

by Royal Kingdom on Jan 12, 2009 11:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Just a couple comments from others on Willie and replacement level

Tom Tango: “Willie Bloomquist is my main man as the perfect explanation of a replacement level player.”

Dave Cameron: “If you’re having a tough time visualizing what a replacement level player looks like, there’s probably not a better example in baseball than Willie Bloomquist.”

Those are two of the best baseball analysts on the planet. And Tango has done the best work of accurately assessing what true replacement level is. They aren’t Royals fans or detractors and both of these quotes came before the Royals acquired Bloomquist. No bias here. Just facts.

So if he’s just a replacement level player, why pay him $1.5M? Because he’s versatile? That kind of versatility (pretty good in the IF, pretty bad in the OF) is easy to find. Hell most pretty good defensive utility IFers can be pretty bad defensively in the OF. Because he’s fast? Again, that kind of speed isn’t hard to find, nor is it particularly valuable.

(looks like I wasn’t quite done)

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 12, 2009 11:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You're Funny

I will remember all of this craziness this summer when you are doggin people in Game Threads. It’s funny how you guys can get all worked up about projections. It’s like yelling at the calculator when you expected different results.

GMDM has proved to be a bad negotiator thus far but I hope that has more to do with the Royals overall situation. I also hope he is learning from these mistakes so when KC is in better positions to negotiate (2010-2012) he can seize better opportunities. I refuse to complain about who he is aquiring when I see similar teams (low payroll bad track record) Cincinnatti, Washington, Pittsburgh going through the same things. I think we are underplaying the difficulty to get players to go there.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Jan 12, 2009 11:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You're embarrassing

I will remember all of this craziness this summer when you are doggin people in Game Threads.

Yeah, I don’t like knee-jerk, baseless, emotional overreactions.

It’s funny how you guys can get all worked up about projections.

It’s funny how you turn your back on important information. Ignorance really isn’t bliss.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 12, 2009 2:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’ll wait til the season to base GMDM moves. The Gil Meche deal would’ve launched a thousand firework opinions but it has worked out well for KC thus far.

I get why you are upset I’m just gonna judge his whole body of work over time. I think it is too difficult for KC to attain the players that we would like at this time.

Hey my dream roster last year included Dunn, Branyan and Jacobs. I wanted balls flying out of the K like a meteor shower but that ain’t gonna happen so I’ll sit back and hope the one thing GMDM has done extremely well (build a young core) works.

KC move in the Dominican and their investment in the draft is what really matters with this team in the long term. 1 year 2 year posturing moves are nothing more than just that posturing and trying to get and extra 2 or 3 wins without hurting the longterm plan.

Guys like Giambi/Burrell would’ve cost probably extra money and at least a year or two to play here. Jacobs could be a one year rental, Crisp could be a one year rental. Plus those guys fall in that old body category that you guys are always talking about they could easily be inline for a big dropoff. Save the room for the young guys. As much as I hate Farny he might be able to moved at the break if the cold weather and the spacious K can get him off to a good start. I’m probably just dreaming there but hey gotta give me something to hope for. Along with a Guillen midseason trade.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Jan 12, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

One good thing

Although I don’t know for sure from any reliable source, there are hints that Moore has figured out that he needs to move Guillen for whomever is silly enough to take most of the contract.

Maybe I’m just grasping for straws…

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 12, 2009 3:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I really like the persistent reports (reportedly from the "inside") that Moore really was working hard to try to trade Guillen. I hope that had more to do with his numbers than with his intangibles/attitude/problems with Hillman.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 12, 2009 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ned? Ned Ryerson?

I’m not exactly sure what the biggest hole was coming into December, but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t 1B/CF/RP/Utility Infielder. And, you nailed it, opportunity cost was really the reason why this offseason was such a failure – $16 million could have gone a long way to solve the more pressing problems (Catcher, Corner Oufielder, Starting Pitcher.)

It’s even more depressing to see this money squandered when it looks like we actually could have afforded guys like Bradley, Burrell, or Dunn. According to Passan’s free agent tracker, there’s a handful of former all stars that we could have had for less than what we paid for just Farnsworth and Bloomquist combined.

Anyway, I was about to go on a giant rant about how the team might actually be worse as a result of the signings we made, but this really is sucking the life out of me.

by marbotty on Jan 11, 2009 12:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

maybe later today I'll post another tab to the CHONE/predictor with just the roster as of the last day of the '08 season

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 11, 2009 2:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

that's a good idea

by marbotty on Jan 12, 2009 6:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Either way--D or F, it's no way to manage money and talent.

I’ve definitely begun to question Moore’s ability, philosophy, and direction. I used to believe the ‘golden boy’ was the right man for the job. After this series of moves, I’m not too sure. He’s going to have to really turn it around and do something great before I’m in his camp again.

Kyle Farns***** is my hero. Not many men can turn zero talent into 9.5 mil during a recession.

by Steve Hovley on Jan 11, 2009 8:13 AM EST reply actions 0 recs