Moore is needlessly vilified
by iancahill on Dec 17, 2009 4:17 PM EST
Email
Print
The Major League Roster on any team in the MLB is endlessly scrutinized and examined in an effort to put out the best product for the lowest price (Yankees and Red Sox excluded). Lately there has been a trend among a group of Royals fans to paint Dayton Moore in the role of the villain, whose sole purpose is to field a losing product. This image of him is unfounded.
Every GM is bound to make a mistake or two along the way (Read: Barry Zito, Vernon Wells, Yuni Betencourt) and it is unfortunate that a simple mistake, such as signing an aging Catcher or adding a second year to a player's contract who probably doesn't deserve it, can cause the fan base to lose sight of the fact that the Royals were improving marginally prior to the 2009 season.
The Dayton Moore years leading up to the 2009 season were years of improvement, at least in as far as wins are concerned. Using 2006 as a base, the Royals had 62 Wins on their way to a third 100 loss season in a row. Enter Dayton Moore:
2007: 69 Wins (+7 wins)
2008: 75 wins (+6 wins)
In each of his first two FULL years as GM, Dayton Moore increased the team wins by 4%. Not a lot but progress none the less. Now one can argue that the decisions made in the off season from 2008 – 2009 were disastrous, it doesn’t change the fact that Dayton Moore was committed to change and came through. Then the team was met with the reality that 2009 was full of emerging players going down with injuries (Gordon, Aviles, Davies, Bannister) and aging veterans catching the injury bug as well (Meche, Guillen, Crisp).
There is no reason that the Royals can’t meet or exceed their 2008 win total, even with the addition of Jason Kendall and the loss of Mark Teahan. The key to this happening is to show a willingness to call the right players up from AAA, like Hayes and Rosa or maybe even Kia’hue to DH. Test them out while we have the time to do so. Now I am not saying it is going to be easy, but our players are capable of much, much more than stats and 2009 has shown us (Yuni excluded). Dayton Moore is not the one you should be mad at, it has more to do with poor performance on the field and key roster spots living in on the DL.
162 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Because Dayton Moore can't be bl;amed for the shitty players on the field
You really should get professional help. Your obsession with ND football is not healthy. ---Dr. lookingdeadred
(Waves hands in front of face)
“Now you see me, now you don’t!”
FKA "MileHighKCfan"
Your not John Cena are you...
Who ever that is.
You really should get professional help. Your obsession with ND football is not healthy. ---Dr. lookingdeadred
by averagegatsby on Dec 17, 2009 5:54 PM EST up reply actions
If by John Cena you actually mean John C. Reilly
then yes
FKA "MileHighKCfan"
"Simple mistakes"
Lots, and lots, and LOTS of “simple mistakes.” Which were all basically the same type of mistake, repeated over and over again.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2009 4:49 PM EST up reply actions
Thank God we have Bloomquist and Betancourt to make up for those mistakes.
You really should get professional help. Your obsession with ND football is not healthy. ---Dr. lookingdeadred
by averagegatsby on Dec 17, 2009 5:54 PM EST up reply actions
By the way,
This:
2007: 69 Wins (7 wins)
2008: 75 wins (6 wins)
could be random noise, or it could be the team was in such bad shape when he got here it was hard not to make improvements (payroll has increased every year since 2006 IIRC).
But he can be needlessly Villified...and should be.
Sure he improved the team, but I guarentee you that a color blind monkee given 30 million to spend could have improved the team simply by defacating on players photos at random.
The fact is that when you make horrible player decision after horrible player decision and get occasionally bailed out by players that you wish you could bury it doesn’t make you a good GM. It doesn’t make you a passible GM. It makes you a bad one. One all the worse for the situation that this team is in.
The Royals cannot afford to have a one dimensional GM. We can’t have a guy who just scouts, or who just looks at numbers or who gets enamored of just one position or just one stat. We NEED a GM who is capable of hitting gold in the draft and in the FA market, one who can tell you the upside of a prospect and what UZR stands for.
Dayton Moore is not that person. And though it may seem unfair, his inability to realize this and make the adjustments necessary (bringing in more stat guys, actually listening to the ones he has) is what is going to doom this franchise
I refuse to set up a signature....DAMMIT
by RoyalPug on Dec 17, 2009 4:48 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
Best. Quote. Evar.
Sure he improved the team, but I guarentee you that a color blind monkee given 30 million to spend could have improved the team simply by defacating on players photos at random.
So which one was the colorblind Monkee? Michael Nesmith, Peter Tork, Davy Jones, or Mickey Dolenz?
Welcome to RR, and good post...but a couple problems
1. We don’t live in a world where improvement in the past counts for much, so we really have to scrap 2007 and 2008 at this point. So we improved by 13 games two years ago…who cares? I don’t give a flip if it means nothing for this 2010 team. What we have are a lot of quesiton marks and the core of a 2009 team that was a huge step backwards for this franchise. Even worse, it was a huge step backwards on a bloated budget.
2. We are human and we make mistakes. So I agree that every GM should be allowed to make a few mistakes along the way, but from the end of 2008 to 2009 Dayton Moore made A LOT of mistakes: Read: Farnsworth, Horacio Ramirez, Mike Jacobs, Sidney Ponson, Betancourt. Juan Cruz and Coco Crisp I’m willing to extend mulligans on, but the bottom line is they were still the same mistake over and over again (READ: throwing obscene amounts of money at the wrong people for all of the wrong reasons).
3. Injuries and ineffectiveness are not excuses. Mark Shapiro didn’t make excuses for the Indians when they were hit by the injury bug. He wisely rebuilt and cut ties with sunk costs instead. One of the most troubling points of GMDM’s tenure is his inability to cut ties with sunk costs that he acquires. No excuses. Royals fans are perfectly in the right to be sick and tired of hearing the excuses from the Royals front office. Speak on the field with results and we will be happy.
4. I agree with you that a key for next season is giving the right young players a chance and calling them up from AAA, but when has GMDM shown an ability to do that effectively? Why promote Dusty Hughes and not Kila Ka’aihue at the end of 2009?
5. KC is a small market team, and as such the crux of judging Dayton Moore’s career is studying how well he drafts and what he can do to acquire talent on the cheap. If we agree that we was not involved in the 2006 draft (probably half-true), then 2010 is the year that we should begin to obtain some true color on this issue. How did the 2007 draft go and can Dayton rebuild this once-proud franchise in the way it needs to be rebuilt? This is the year that those draftees start to enter the high minors and MLB level. Unfortunately, we still don’t know the answer. There are some promising talents from that draft – Moustakas, Duffy, Hilton Richardson, Greg Holland, David Lough, Clint Robinson, Keaton Hayenga – but no sure things. Barring a huge breakthrough from one of them, only Holland and Lough seem to have a chance to sniff the Majors next year.
Waiting for April.
6)
In regards to the improvement that KC showed over its first 2 seasons under GMDM, the core pieces of that improvement were put in place by Allard Baird. It isn’t like GMDM came in, gutted the roster, & brought in a completely new talent pool. The players that were here got better.
BOOM! ROASTED!
Hey, get that nonsense out of here.
I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.
He may not have gutted the roster
But bringing in Meche, Bannister, Soria and Dotel was certainly worth a handful of wins right there. Add RamRam, Callaspo, Guillen and Olivo (who despite their deficiencies were better than the players they replaced) in 2008, and the proper management of Grienke’s return to major league pitching (which I’ll admit Baird might have handled properly as well), and you certainly can credit Dayton Moore with those seasons’ improvement.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
2006 draft
Conveniently, when Hochevar is considered to be sucking Dayton says he had nothing to do with that draft; but when Hochevar is considered to be playing well Dayton says he drafted him.
Air Cassel - approved for takeoff
One more thing...
Like it or not, the Royals fanbase (small and ingrown as it is) is also probably one of the savviest. We’ve been spoiled from years of guys like Poz, Rany, and yes even Neyer, who didn’t mind using some introductory sabermetric stats in their articles. Check other major baseball blogs, many if not most have a contributer that started by following the Royals, even a few from this site. Heck even the big wig of sabermetricians, Bill James, is from Kansas City.
Its alot like Poz said in one of his articles, not only is it hard to root for a losing team, its just as hard to stay optimistic about a team that is clearly run differently than how you would like it to be. and in this case Dayton’s “Process” is about as far from how most people here would run it as you can be.\
And thats why theres seemingly endless vitriol for Dayton Moore. Because most people here can see the bad mistakes blatantly, can see the correct moves to make, and have to live through Dayton both missing the good ones, making the bad ones, and then trying to justify it.
Its just a little grating.
I refuse to set up a signature....DAMMIT
Most saber-savvy fan bases
1. Mariners
2. Royals
3. Red Sox
4. Twins
5. Giants
Worst saber-savvy fan bases
1. Mets
2. Mets
3. Mets
4. Mets
5. Mets
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Royals No. 2?
I guess the fanbase has come along way, but not sure I would rank it that high (especially since A’s fans had such a head start).
Go back and read the archives from eighteen months ago, and you will see things that shock and disturb you.
I'm guessing RR meant
Most Saber savvy SBNation pages? I’d find it hard to rank the entire fanbase that high, given the media coverage that Joe Fan is exposed too, where, even the savvy Radio guy like Soren Petro REALLY wanted to trade for Juan Pierre…
BOOM! ROASTED!
The Rays SB Nation site gives the M's site a run for its money
The volume and depth of analysis is impressive, although they did not create their own stat (or at least one that works as well as tRA).
The A's should be in the top 5, I omitted them
I’m seriously impressed with the level of intelligence of the average Royals fan. My buddy took me to a game 2 years ago and brought a work friend. The work friend was a huge Royals fan and by the fourth inning he had brought up VORP in a discussion on Angel Berroa.
You won’t see that in St. Louis, best fans in baseball be damned.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Amazin' Avenue is trying
Metsblog is holding the fanbase back.
by James Kannengieser on Dec 26, 2009 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
Not sure about the rankings one way or the other
but there’s a bitter irony in there for not just us, but also Twins and Giants fans
where would you put As fans?
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 27, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks
Guys good or bad, I am just glad people are reading and considering my thoughts.
Honestly, I don’t see the injuries as an ‘excuse’. It is a pretty honest reason why some of the players that everyone (Probably some of you guys) said were keys to the success of 2009 weren’t around to get Grienke to 20 wins, weren’t around to score a few extra runs to bail out our terrible bullpen.
I am right there with you if you are going to talk about poor line up choices by Hillman or Moore’s inability to call up players who are successful in AAA. But I will not mindlessly forget the fact that Moore is making moves and spending money that was unheard of 5 yrs ago for this team. And by all indications some of those signings had indications that they could do well in KC. Of course it didn’t happen, so hope they can bounce back next year.
Again with the 75 wins
Allard Baird’s Royals won 83 in 2003. If that team can win 83, then any team can win 75.
Let’s not suck Dayton’s popsicle yet.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 17, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
That's one of the funniest
comments I’ve read in while.
by wt on Dec 17, 2009 5:38 PM EST up reply actions
and Allard Baird's
draft picks helped us win more games in 07 and 08. I think Moore might get too much credit for the “turnaround” that was taking place. It seems that we won more games in 07 and 08 IN SPITE of Dayton Moore. And now that the roster is more littered with DM’s guys, we’re starting to get worse; maybe worse than before.
And spending money unheard of 5 years ago is a ludicrous argument. I would spend 10 time more of Glass’ money if he’d let me.
I hate to bag on DM, I blindly root for the Royals. And it behooves me to want Moore to do well. I’m jsut not seeing it anymore.
Don't Stop Believing!
Royals injuries
should never be allowed to be an excuse because they are self inflicted.
Air Cassel - approved for takeoff
With Dayton Moore, the good moves have been the exception
He’s done some things right, but he’s done more things wrong. He’s incompetent. I wish that wasn’t true. I wasn’t convinced of it until this year. But the conclusion is inescapable. The following is a horrible resume:
Jason Kendall $6 million over two years
Kyle Farnsworth $9 million over two years
Willie Bloomquist $3.1 million over two years
Ross Gload $3.2 million over two years
Ron Mahay $8 million over two years
Brett Tomko $3 million over on year
Jose Guillen $36 million over three years
John Bale $5.2 million over three years
Yasuhiko Yabuta $6 million over two years
Horacio Ramirez $1.8 million over one year
Traded decent prospects for Yuni Betancourt (Royals owing him $5M over two years)
Compare that list to the list of Moore’s good moves and you have, overall, a really bad GM.
I don’t think Dayton Moore is a villain. I’m sure he’s a nice guy. But he’s a baseball man stuck in the 1980’s. He’s all about tools and scouting and is has only a passing familiarity with stats and modern performance-based analysis. That doesn’t work anymore.
The immoderate moderator
Don't forget Leo Nunez ($415K) for Mike Jacobs ($3.275M)
Just to play devil’s/Dayton’s advocate, I’ll try to list his good moves:
Teahen (overpriced average player) for Getz/Fields (cost-controlled, possible upside to both)
Octavio Dotel for Kyle Davies (probably did about as well as he could for a deadline deal)
Ambiorix Burgos for Brian Bannister (enough said)
Gil Meche $55M over 5 years (this is at least a wash; looked stupid at first, then brilliant, now…eh, we’ll see)
Hmmm, anything else? Some other random, potentially positive, but minor, trades…maybe. And the jury will just have to be out on the drafts and international signings for a few years. But he clearly has FAR more bad moves than good at the veteran free agent/MLB level.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
Yes on Parraz
But I refuse to give him much credit on the Greinke extension—a 5 year old whose dad bought him a #23 jersey would have seen the wisdom in that move. Maybe he shrewdly negotiated the terms, and we didn’t get to see it. More than likely, Zack’s comfort level here, and perhaps willingness to take a little less for that comfort level and security, played a larger role.
On Arguelles, and any international prospect signing (e.g. Cuthbert), I definitely agree that investing some significant dollars on those sorts of moves is absolutely the right thing to do for the Royals. But, as far as identifying the RIGHT prospects, like I said, we’ll have to wait a few years and see.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2009 5:45 PM EST up reply actions
And I'll agree on Pena and Callaspo, as well
But again, those moves show Dayton’s minor-league scouting abilities, and not necessarily any ability to recognize the valuation and market forces involved in MLB-level transactions.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2009 5:49 PM EST up reply actions
Which is exactly why Dayton did it.
But I refuse to give him much credit on the Greinke extension—a 5 year old whose dad bought him a #23 jersey would have seen the wisdom in that move.
You don't have to give him credit for seeing that it was a smart thing to do
But credit HAS, repeat HAS to be given for….
A) The Timing of it. Imagine the cost if his plan had been to wait until THIS offseason!
B) The $$ of it. This is directly related to A, but I still think we got him cheaper than a lot of GM’s would have paid him last year.
C) The length of it. He got, what, 2 years of FA (I think that is accurate) bought out? That is a great deal for a small market team.
BOOM! ROASTED!
The Grinke contract did not include some 20 million a year club options.
That makes it only meh in my opinion,
Go Royals!
His press conference after signing it
He basically gave Baird a blow job. I’m certain Baird (or any other reasonable GM) could have locked him up.
That raises a big flag for me
B) The $$ of it. This is directly related to A, but I still think we got him cheaper than a lot of GM’s would have paid him last year.
Which begs the question, why does he play hardball with his own players and give in to the likes of Kendall?
by AxDxMx on Dec 17, 2009 8:09 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Half of those
guys didn’t really do so bad. Mahay earned his $$ the first year and so did Guillen in as far as he actually posted reasonable numbers given the line up around him.
I still like Bloomy and Gload just signed the same deal with the Phillies who have been to the WS 2 years running. The thing is we misused some of those players, but if you want to build a good pitching core, you have to sign sign sign and wait for a few to stick.
I do thing the H Ram resign was stupid though.
um, no
Mahay was pretty bad the first year, and predictably so
Guillen was worthless the first year, unless you believe that RBIs prove anything. He was worse than worthless this season. It’s the signature contract for “Dayton Moore is the only one who can’t see what every fan knew was coming.”
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 17, 2009 5:58 PM EST up reply actions
um, no
Mahay was 5-0, with 50 SO and 21 Holds in 2008. He wasn’t All-Star material, but he helped much more than a lot guys could have hoped for.
UNDEFEATED SEASON
I stand corrected — that barrage of stats really put me in my place
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 17, 2009 6:12 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Poor iancahill
obviously has no idea who he’s dealing with.
iancahill, just a bit of friendly advice, stats like wins, saves, holds, and ERA will hold very little weight with this crowd. Same goes for RBI’s, HR’s, errors, etc. for position players.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2009 6:15 PM EST up reply actions
Actaully Mahay had a very good fist half of the first season then
got injured and he pretty much never recovered.
Go Royals!
Mahay's good first half of 2008 was largely due to an unsustainably low home run rate on fly balls
Through the end of July, his HR/FB rate was 2.7%. Pitchers have little control over that rate, which should regress toward 10-11%. After July, all the fly balls he had been giving up started clearing the fence.
.5 WAR $4M
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 17, 2009 6:18 PM EST up reply actions
didn’t quite earn his salary but wasn’t a total flop. if i had to guess, i would say he probably wasn’t given the most favorable L/R matchups, either
Blank
MAHAY ISN'T A LEFTY SPECIALIST
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 17, 2009 6:21 PM EST up reply actions
i wonder if Ian is confused as hell right about now. it’s like we’re keep saying seemingly nonsensical things yet continue to reply back with seemingly unrelated nonsensical things.
and why does this d_f guy keep yelling about Ron Mahay? — Ian
(making fun of us, not you, Ian)
Blank
Don't Worry
I have been following Devil Fingers on Twitter for a while, I understand his temperament, though don’t always respect the ALL CAPS agression of it all.
Also
I am new to the advanced metric stats, so I don’t want to spout them out when I am still learning them. I have some tact.
the good news is that if anyone here is hard on you about using trapdoor stats like RBI and ERA, you will be the better for it in the long run.
Blank
that is sorta the plan.
I would rather get blasted a few times, that way it will stick to my brain faster!
Per statcorner (which uses slightly different data than fangraphs)
Mahay 2008 tRA: 4.88
Average AL reliever 2008 tRA: 4.48
not a leveraged one
but they do give you one. To get a leveraged one, take the pitcher’s inLI from FGs, average it with 1 (so (inLI +1)/2), then mulitply the statcorner WAR times that
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 17, 2009 6:34 PM EST up reply actions
Before everyone jumps on you
Here is a good article explaining why pitcher wins and holds are a terrible way to evaluate pitchers.
I just sort of take the approach that
we can’t educate them and their instant gratification mentality.
No offense intended iancahill, that’s a shot at Dayton Moore and Trey Hillman, who actually uttered a comment similar to this.
Sorry
just being silly at the end of a long day
I’d read Gopherballs’ recommended article
Still, we should track down all the “undefeated seasons” in history and see how “awesome” they were
Sounds like a FanGraphs project
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 17, 2009 6:18 PM EST up reply actions
Worst undefeated seasons in history, by ERA+, min. 5 wins
1. Bob Veale 1971 – 6-0 6.99 ERA
2. Jason Bere 1999 – 5-0 6.08 ERA
3. Ruddy Lugo 2007 – 6-0 5.40 ERA
4. Bill Connelly 1952 – 5-0 4.55 ERA
5. Wes Stock 1963 – 7-0 3.94 ERA
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Mahay was nails until the trade deadline and got hurt
after that he was crap.
But for a little over half the year, he was very reliable in the toughest of situations.
by Fernando Vina School of Linguistics on Dec 17, 2009 6:39 PM EST up reply actions
haha
love the replies to yourself.
I don’t care enough about Royals baseball right now to look up stats. Maybe when college football is over. But even then I doubt it.
so you may call no stats" if you desire
by Fernando Vina School of Linguistics on Dec 18, 2009 2:19 AM EST up reply actions
College Football is Over
Now it’s the bullshit bowl season…The system has me so jaded as a fan, that once KSU is done playing, I don’t give a shit about any of it anymore. Them pairing up Boise & TCU in the FIesta Bowl was the last straw for me…They were TERRIFIED of a TCU-Florida or a Boise-Iowa matchup, where the smaller school would kick the BCS schools ass & really start the title wave for a playoff push.
BOOM! ROASTED!
Meh
You play a midmajor schedule, at the end of the season you get to play for the midmajor championship
by PopeSoria on Dec 18, 2009 9:44 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
TCU played a schedule every bit as tough as the one Texas played.
I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.
I feel more strongly about Boise
As if one good nonconference team balances out the turd-laden conference schedule
Also remember how few schools are willing to actually schedule Boise a home and home.
Either way, it’s horseshit and “CYA” big-time from BCS to have those two play each other.
I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.
I remember how Boise likes to say that no one will play them,
but I’m not sure I totally believe it. And even if it is the case, the onus is still on BSU to do whatever is necessary to put together a decent schedule. Even if that means scheduling away games with no return home game. Because if you play in the WAC you have a lot of work to do to catch up.
I don’t think anyone would be impressed by beating Iowa anyway.
What's their benefit?
TCU played a tougher schedule and they still got stuck with Boise.
I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.
Coulda been better...
SMU, Texas State, Clemson, Virginia? That is borderline acceptable non-conference schedule for BCS team, let alone one that has to make up for playing the dregs of the Mountain West.
Which At-Large BCS Non Con is toughest?
School A:
Louisiana-Monroe
@ Wyoming
UTEP
U Central Florida
School B:
Northern Iowa
@ Iowa State
Arizona
Arkansas State
School C:
Oregon
Miami (OH)
@ Fresno State
UC Davis
@ Tulsa
School D:
SE Mo State
@ Oregon State
Fresno State
@ Miami OH
School E:
Charleston Southern
Troy
FIU
Florida State
School F:
@ Virginia
Texas State
@ Clemson
SMU
BOOM! ROASTED!
Your "Borderline Acceptable Non-Con"
for a BCS school, that TCU played is one of only two BCS non-con’s to include two BCS schools. BOTH BCS schools they played were on the road (and they only got to play one team that was coached by Ron Prince).
IMO, the order of toughest to weakest schedule above goes
F, C, D, B, A, E
The two teams playing for the title? A & E
BOOM! ROASTED!
Is beating Virginia and Clemson really that impressive?
Clemson finished 2nd in a very weak ACC conference. They are only slightly better than FSU while Troy is probably better than Virginia. You can’t give Boise credit for Fresno State because that is a conference game. So their non-conf consist of Oregon, Miami(OH), Tulsa and UC Davis. The Oregon win was very nice but the rest of that schedule is hardly a jugernaut. If anyone should be barking it is Cincinnati who beat a good Oregon State team on the road and played in a better conference in reality than the Big 12. They are victims of Illinois underachieving and pollsters falling in love with TCU. The big boys don’t duck them as much as you think though. These teams want home and homes and money to boot. In todays business world that is just too much. Why should Florida give away one of their non-conference games when they are already required to play Florida State and a tougher conference schedule. Alot of teams have tough tie in games already so that leaves very few High Power teams left. Texas is really the only perrenial power I can think of who doesn’t have one semi tough non-conference game scheduled every year but they are coming off a home and home versus Ohio State last season.
The Boises of the world need to give up the home game but they don’t wanna do that in case they take a beatdown like they did at Georgia a few seasons back. Otherwise what is really so bad for them. They get to upset some unmotivated team in a BCS game collect their 7 million dollar check and continue to run thru their weak conferences. If they really want it so bad go beg and plea the Pac 10 to join.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Except the BCS isn't even giving them the opportunity
to upset anyone by pairing them up with another non-BCS school.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
I disagree
The Boises and TCU’s would quickly get dismantled in a playoff and eventually would probably lose their seedings in a playoff system. Unless it was 16 team playoff system which is very very unlikely of every happening these teams would get booted from playing in a playoff system too. It only takes one season of these teams getting beat badly in a bowl or playoff to get eliminated all together from ever getting to compete in legitimate games.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Why does one bad loss
have to ruin it for them? BCS conference teams have bad losses in BCS bowls often. Is that held against them every year?
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Boise should get their shot next season
They should start the season in the Top 5 and will probably have ample opportunity to compete for the title if they can beat Oregon State and Virginia Tech.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
No way they will have a chance
over an undefeated BCS conference team.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
If they beat Oregon State, VaTech
and start the season in the Top 5 which they should they would definitely get a shot as long as a couple teams in front of them lose. Just because they are undefeated doesn’t mean they should automatically be given a shot. Their schedule head to head is weaker than Texas and Bamas. Their nonconference has one tougher team than Texas and Bamas but that doesn’t make their schedule tougher overall and therefore they don’t deserve the opportunity to play in the game. Anything short of a 16 team playoff would still leave those teams at a disadvantage because anything short of an undefeated season would leave them on the outside looking in and that is still not fair.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Undefeated doesn't mean an automatic shot
You’re right. But the non-BCS schools are never given the chance. The system favors teams from the BCS schools because of SOS being a factor. Obviously their conferences aren’t as tough. So what can they do about it? Not much.
I’m not saying the non-BCS schools deserve a title, I’m saying they at least deserve a shot at it. An 8 team playoff between the top 8 schools in the BCS rankings isn’t too much to ask for, why do you need 16? The way the smaller schools would qualify would be a provision that any undefeated team in the Top 20 of the BCS rankings would have an automatic berth. Another stipulation would be that you have to be your conference’s champion to make the 8 team tourney. If no one qualifies through the other provisions, then a conference could get 2 teams in possibly. That’s an extra 7 games, they could play the first round in bowl games before Christmas, the 2nd round New Year’s Day, and the Championship around Jan 8th. Couple that with all the other bowls going on, and I think you have a ratings bonanza.
I doubt the
majors would allow a playoff with just the conference winner allowed. They push the dial and are worth the most amount of money Ohio St, Texas, etc doesn’t want to be disqualified from a playoff by some fluke conference loss. SEC, Big 12, Pac 10, Big East, Notre Dame that’s alot of teams for just 8 spots. Just USC, Notre Dame, Texas, Ohio State and their alum represent alot of money and power. Too much for the Boises of the world unfortunately. I agree it would be nice if it was more fair but that is a pipedream. Might as well have free and awesome healthcare for everyone too while we are at it ;)
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
The problem with your analogy to health care, is that's expensive.
An awesome playoff would be a cash cow.
A fluke regular season loss keeping teams out of it? I thought the BCS claims they don’t need a playoff because the season is one?
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Well here's the main thing:
A “fluke” conference loss automatically disqualifies a team almost every year from BCS title contention. At least with this system, those teams still have a chance at the title. I can’t imagine anyone would dislike this system. And the academics thing is BS at this point. These games could all be played outside of finals week.
Why would an 8 team playoff leave those teams out?
Take your 6 BCS conference champions and two at-large teams. That covers it.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
I believe that is what they claim to do
They have said they’ll play anyone, even if there is no return home game, but BCS teams are scared to play them. I don’t know why, there is no stigma losing to BSU anymore. If you lose to them, you lost to a helluva good team. If you beat them, that’s quite a feather in your cap.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
There isn't a stigma
but if you don’t go 4-0 in the non-conference you are risking a bowl for an average team in a tough conference. And why would a top team risk playing someone that good, when a loss will put you out of national title contention? There’s just no incentive there to play them.
I hope the subtext of the sarcasm font got through
although subtext + internet post = does not compute
Injuries seem like one of the big bugs in using stats as the ‘hard and fast truth’ to what happened and what will happen, and your comment seems like a good chance to poke fun at the stats-only mindset that tends to creep into the modern baseball blogosphere.
Blank
yea...
I admit I was one of the first to “go negative” on Moore, but it isn’t like everyone just jumped on him all at once
its been a… process
and sees no reason
to try to learn about stats and modern performance-based analysis. Even worse, is belligerently bellicose in his dismissal of them.
Air Cassel - approved for takeoff
Every GM is bound to make a mistake or two along the way (Read: Barry Zito, Vernon Wells, Yuni Betencourt)
Two of the three responsible GMs are no longer GMs (and likely will never be considered for a GM job again), while the third has been hanging by a thread since then.
Ummm...
hanging by a thread since then.
Hanging by the thread of his extended GM contract?
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2009 5:41 PM EST up reply actions
His contract was up and he was almost fired
The new managing partner waited until his current contract expired, and then only gave him a two-year contract, which for a GM is one step up from “interim.”
that's the best news I've heard in months
I wasn’t aware that his extension wasn’t really a vote of confidence
Blank
I don't think GB's referring to Dayton Moore
or is he (hopefully)?
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 17, 2009 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
For the record
I was referring to MOORE’s extension through 2014. Which I don’t think could be interpreted as anything other than Glass giving him a big slap on the back for a job “well done.”
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2009 6:28 PM EST up reply actions
Sabean (for Zito) is the guy who was hanging by the thread
Sabean received a two-year extension in October when his contract was up but only after the new managing partner of the Giants let him drift in the wind for awhile.
yes, that is all my bad for inferring the wrong thing, and also ignoring when my brain tried to tell me, ‘wait, DM’s contract wasn’t recently up’.
Blank
You meant what he meant but not what I meant
although what he said could have meant what I meant.
Got it?
Sort of like this...
I took two halves from each of your statements, and like mismatched puzzle pieces, I mashed them together in a twisted, unholy amalgamation of cardboard and colored laser ink, with unfortunate consequences.
I’m glad we can finally put this traumatic, life altering sub-thread to rest and wake up tomorrow to a new day. A new day of Dayton-bashing.
Blank
My head hurts
I hereby resign from this string of comments.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2009 6:58 PM EST up reply actions
I think GMDM gets dumped on alot too
but I think he deserves it a lot. Maybe not QUITE as much as he gets, but he deserves some good tonnage of shit. I thought he had a REALLY good off-season going this year, right up until the speedbump known as Jason Kendall got in the way (and I still dont think that deal derailed this offseason, it is still MILES & MILES ahead of last year).
From where I sit, one of his weakest aspects is trust in his own Minor League system. We had one of, if not the worst bullpens in the league last year, and it was like he was absolutely terrified to reach down & grab somebody other than Colon. It made him look worse, when the September callups got here & by god, they did OK or better.
The shortsightedness also played a major role in the trade for Jacobs. It is well documented that the belief if that Kila would have put up better numbers than Jacobs, at considerably cheaper price, yet we gave up a serviceable RP to get him.
BOOM! ROASTED!
by GoBabies!! on Dec 17, 2009 5:40 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I totally agree there.
From where I sit, one of his weakest aspects is trust in his own Minor League system.
What happens to the superstar Jack Z IF
Lee tears his labrum in Spring training, Felix breaks his tibia, Jack Wilson breaks 4 fingers and then pulls his hamstring upon his return, Aardsma has TJ, Ichiro and Saunders go down for the year, and Griffey gets older?
Then he’s no longer popular and he’s vilified!
Just trying to open your eyes to reason. :)
Coffee. The NEW Performance Enhancing drug for Sport's Writers. Just ask Ken Rosenthal.
was thinking about Jack Z. and Griffey last night
Having Griffey as 25th man and DH only isn’t a huge deal, but since SEA is clearly going for it now, it’s a weird choice, especially since, e.g. Jack Cust will probably sign for a couple million. That’s a one or even two win swing. No team can carry two DH-only players, of course. And if SEA misses the playoffs by one or two games, this should be remembered.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 18, 2009 9:10 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
The average sailorboy fan
will not blame Griffey for the failure, unless he visibly sucks in a way that the average fan recognizes (you know, .218/7/47), and gets a ton of PT. Yeah, the Lookout Landing crowd will call it, and Rob Neyer will call it, and the sabermetric community will call it. But the fans and the local media? No way. It’ll all be about how they “came up short trying to finally win it for Junior.”
This space for rent.
Griffey will barely play and spend time on the year on DL anytime a roster move is needed
Griffey was a part-time player last year, and Jack Z said Griffey re-signed with the understanding that he would be coming back in a “reduced” role. I bet his main role is as a pinch hitter for Jack Wilson or whoever ends up at catcher in high leverage situations (and maybe the Sunday DH during homestands). In that role, he is fine — he bats lefthanded, he still has strong K/BB rates and good power (.196 ISO), and he was pretty unlucky with BABIP last year (.222 v. 16% LD rate). He is the new late career Don Baylor.
Seattle is interesting in that they have so many players who can play multiple positions, so if a team can get by with two DHs, it’s the Mariners. They have three CFs starting in the OF, Chone Figgins who can play anywhere, Jose Lopez who can also play 3B and 1B if needed, the first guy off the bench is Bill Hall who can play anywhere, and the second guy off the bench is Jack Hannahan who can play all over the infield.
by Gopherballs on Dec 18, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
I hope the Mariners go undefeated and win the Series next year
Then maybe Dayton will sit up and take notice of the way they go about running their franchise. Also, speaking as a guy that was born in 1986 and thus grew up thinking Griffey was the next Hank Aaron, I would love for him to win one.
by Soria's Unibrow on Dec 18, 2009 1:46 PM EST up reply actions
I dunno
The Rays won with homegrown players, no big money FAs and great defense, and DM didn’t exactly take note of that.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Dayton Moore isn't going to change
He’s been in baseball a long time. He learned under Schuerholz and is following the Braves playbook which was successful in the 1990’s. The problem is that this isn’t the 1990’s anymore, and DM’s FO team isn’t as talented as Schuerholz’s was. DM is convinced that the Braves Way is still the way to go and he isn’t interested in this new fangled statistical analysis mumbo jumbo. So DM is going to maintain the same course, even though the ship has run aground already.
The thing for Royals fans to really hope for is that when DM is eventually fired, the Glass’s will hire a good GM who uses all of the arrows in a modern GM’s quiver.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 19, 2009 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
Is it fair to say that DM grounds the worship he walks on????
(Shamelessly borrowed from a pithy Herb Caen observation after a Navy captain grounded a ship in San Francisco)
by Steve Nelson on Dec 22, 2009 3:51 PM EST up reply actions
Don't forget about the Royals!
if a team can get by with two DHs, it’s the Mariners
how about 3 DH’s in 2009?
anything is possible with Gritmaster Willie and sidekick Teabag.
Guillen
Jacobs
Pena
maybe “get by” has a different meaning in Seattle than K.C.
Blank
I don't get the Bill Hall thing
even as a platoon guy, he sucks
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 18, 2009 2:42 PM EST up reply actions
Hall is pretty mediocre but not a bad guy to have at the end of a bench
He is a good defender (especially at 3B) who can play anywhere — probably only a fill-in at SS or CF, but in his last years at those position, he posted +3.5 UZR at SS in 2006 and +5 UZR in CF in 2007. He was downright horrible offensively last year, but has a good track record as a lefty masher:
2006 v LHP: 300/422/650 1.072 OPS
2007 v LHP: 270/335/459 795 OPS
2008 v LHP: 306/371/522 893 OPS
2009 v LHP: 223/252/354 606 OPS
He is their Willie Bloomquist, except legitimately good on defense and possessing the ability to hit the ball out of the infield.
meh
820 career PAs vs LHP, not too big a split
CHONE has himj at -19/150… Bloomquist at -17/150. Th at’s context-neutral. That’s shocking even to me.
Hall can play a little D on the corners. NOt a good enough hitter to be worth much as a pinch-hitter.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 18, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
This is like debating the relative value of Jose Guillen and Gary Matthews, Jr.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 18, 2009 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
He's making quite a bit of money for a bench player
I never really got that trade.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
MIL pays most of the $
SEA is paying $1m or so — less than Bloomie
by Gopherballs on Dec 19, 2009 1:34 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
IIRC - Milwaukee DFA'd Hall ...
… so the Mariners scooped him up for a pittance. Almost any team in baseball could have had him for a song. The Royals of course didn’t need him because that spot on the roster is capably manned by Bloomquist.
by Steve Nelson on Dec 22, 2009 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with DC Royal
We have a good, possibly great player development guy, who just happens to be the GM. So far, as GM, his decisions indicate that he may be poor, or optimistically “just” below average.
The readers of this site do not hesitate to praise Moore when he does something good (hell, the Soria Rule 5 pick makes up for several of his errors, easily, by itself). In turn, I don’t think criticism of his perceived bad moods is “villifying” him in any way. As long as comments are not personal, and are not arbitrary but rather based on something measureable, then they are fair comments, in my opinion – and represent exactly what should be discussed on a blog like this.
I’m not a Moore fan any more (liked the hiring a lot at the time) – but I can guarantee you I villify Glass FAR MORE than I do Moore. The reason? Glass put the franchise into such a sad state of disrepair, that ANY GM coming into this situation would come in with an 0-2 count and Pedro Martinez in his- prime pitching. Absolutely no margin for error, and that will remain true until the farm system is completely restocked. (think about 2012 or 2013). Only then will we know if Moore’s abilities in player development are enough to overcome his apparent deficiencies in evaluating and valuing Major League talent.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
by loyal2sdad on Dec 18, 2009 11:12 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
The simple way to compare Moore to Baird at the major league level
Baird teams: generally average to above average offense, worst pitching in the league
Moore teams: generally average to above average pitching, worst offense in the league
The offense doesn’t look to be getting better in 2010 either.
Unless I'm wrong...
My Twitter feed
Don't worry
Scotty Pods will shore up the defense
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 18, 2009 2:43 PM EST up reply actions
Thoughts in agreement and disagreement
Yes, it’s “needless.” So is watching baseball. But “needlessly” in that sense does not imply “unfairly” or “wrongly” or “inappropriately.”
“Vilified?” I don’t know about that. “Rightly criticized as having done a terrible job that should have led to a pink slip rather than an extension.” That seems about right.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
well, okay
I mean, if “Dayton Moore sucks ass” is villification, th en I agree. It’s also true.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 18, 2009 6:36 PM EST up reply actions
let me correct that
I hate that metaphor, yet I’ve used it lately more than once
If pointing out that Dayton Moore is terrible at his job (and, by the way, this doesn’t mean he hasn’t done some good thing, just not enough to be considered anything other than a bad GM) is to vilify him, then, fine. It’s also an accurate description of how he’s done so far.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 18, 2009 6:46 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Sunshines and Rainbows
damn it!
I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.
Villification implies unjust
Which many would argue isn’t the case at all. He deserves all the stick he gets.
i'll be "that guy"; via webster
1 : to lower in estimation or importance
2 : to utter slanderous and abusive statements against
Blank
I guess finishing well under .500 year after year is an unfair reason to think your GM sucks
I mean why do we have to judge based on wins and losses? Winning games is way overrated.
I really don't understand "win and loss metrics", I really don't
Anyone that watches games long enough can tell which team is better without stat-hounds keeping stats like “the score” or “wins” and "losses.’
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 19, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I guess you can keep track of wins and losses
you know, if you’re into instant gratification
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 19, 2009 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise’
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
