Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: World Soccer Digest for Soccer Fans!

How the Kansas City Royals Can Win the AL Central in Four Steps

Photo

More photos » by Tony Gutierrez - AP

The Royals can win the AL Central this season. They aren't the favorites, and they shouldn't be, but they can do it. There's enough talent, legitimate talent, on both sides of the rubber to rather easily imagine the Royals winning the division in six months. It's been six years, six long years, since this has been the case, but it is true. No one has been less sanguine on the 2008 off-season than I have, but all the moves, from the good (Juan Cruz) to the bad (Willie Bloomquist) to the indifferent (Doug Waechter) have been a mostly minor level of frosting atop what is a rising cake. A cake, to be fair, that has had a number of key ingredients provided by the previous administration.

As was the case in 2003 (the last season the Royals were even close to winning the division) the Royals are not truly a division-winning club yet, but if a number of things break right, they can be.

As I see it, the Royals are four steps away from winning the AL Central. No, none of these steps is a single move ("Zack Greinke needs to make 30 good starts," for example, only a few teams are at that level) but at the same time, there are multiple ways the Royals can achieve most of them.

So how can they do it?

Star-divide

  • The Division has to break right. This is the vaguest step of the four, but in some ways the one that will or will not make everything else meaningful. For the purposes of this discussion, the Royals do no good by emulating the 2008 Yankees or Blue Jays, quality teams that were left buried deep in the standings by better rivals around them. Thankfully, the AL Central is hardly the AL East, especially with the White Sox and Tigers seemingly trending downward. The Twins? I don't think they're allowed to be anything other than mediocre at this point. No, the primary concern here is Cleveland, who has the highest ceiling of any team in the Central. The Indians may not win the Division, but they're the one team that could win 95 games. I can't see a scenario whereupon the Royals get to that level. Not yet. So simply put, the Indians can't have a great year. The Central needs to stay manageable, like it was last year, when two third-place teams (American League scale) battled it out for the division "crown". Considering the Royals will play 54 games against the Tigers, White Sox, and Twins, it would help if this trio could be as weak as possible, but mainly, it's all about having everyone under 90 wins. Odds of this happening: 60%.
  • The Royals need to score 760 runs. The offense has to get better, and by a large margin. After two seasons of running in place, the Royals of the Dayton Moore era finally need to break out of the doldrums and be functional. After scoring 691 runs in 2008, the Royals need to get to 760 or so. Those 69 runs won't be surrendered easily, but it's manageable. Certainly, Alex Gordon and Billy Butler need to have good seasons, but shouldn't that be expected at this point? A Billy Butler explosion would set up everything else. Around the lineup, a handful of obvious upgrades seem apparent: Jacobs replaces Gload, Crisp replaces Gathright etc, a full season of Aviles replaces half a season of Aviles. Mike Jacobs, John Buck, Miguel Olivo and Jose Guillen need to flash enough power to off-set their OBP issues, and it would help if someone had a lucky batting average year. Not terribly likely, but not impossible either. Every other year or so this model works out for the White Sox. Finally, either David DeJesus or Mark Teahen needs to give us a mini-career year. Yes, this "step" is actually like eight steps, but the funny thing is, none of it is really outlandish. In fact, I expect about half of these things to happen. The other thing working in the Royals' favor is that they have no where to go but up and we're still only talking about 760 runs, not 820 or 850. This is a reasonable, goal. Odds of this happening: 50%
  • The Royals need to allow 710 runs. The boys in blue allowed 781 runs last season, so as with the offensive step, this is about a seventy run improvement. In one respect it's probably easier to imagine, because the Royals already have the makings of a good staff, yet in another respect, for the same reason, getting to 710 could be tougher. Gil Meche, Zack Greinke & Joakim Soria have dragged the rest of the staff this far, now it's up to other players to push the Royals across the line, because only Greinke can really get any better now. The easiest way to do would be to replace Hochevar's 22 "meh" starts with 28 good ones, replace Davies 21 "solid" starts with 30 "solid to good" ones and have the Ho-Ram, Ponson, Bannister tilt-a-whirl do better than what Brian Bannister managed in 2008. On the whole, all of this sounds reasonable, although everyone's life would be easier if Hochevar would a) pitch better and b) the Royals gave him the starts to do so. The model breaks down a bit if Hochevar only makes 22 starts, because that's the largest area of growth potential... As for the bullpen, the Royals need to off-set the losses of Ramon Ramirez (quality) and Leo Nunez (depth, when healthy) with more innings from Soria and good work from Juan Cruz. With those two, the Royals should have enough of a foundation to at least match last season's performance, although with bullpens its always a roll of the dice. I don't mean to minimize the talents or the heart of the rest of the pen, but considering the nature of these jobs (short appearances here and there) and the fact that the best remaining guy (Mahay) has a cloudy health status, well... the best we can do is hope that bodies=depth=success. Lastly, we come to the team's defense. The outfield looks much better, thanks to the Crisp addition, but it's imperative for the infield defense to find a way to be good or else it won't matter. If Teahen gets the second base job and rates negatively, I'm not sure how, with Jacobs already in place and Gordon medicore, this can truly happen, but we'll see. It's also clear how disastrous the Guillen signing continues to be, as he figures to off-set a lot of the goodness from the DDJ/Crisp combination. So in sum, there's a foundation (Meche, Greinke, Soria, Cruz) the Royals just need some improved performances from somewhat likely sources. Odds of this happening: 50%.
  • The Royals need to leverage their assets (and some luck). The runs scored and runs allowed numbers above aren't random. If the Royals can reach those marks, they'll be at a baseline level of 86 wins. Thanks to a great closer, and what should be a team winning thanks to its pitching staff, the Royals might very well expect to jump a game or two above their pythag. So now we're at 88 wins. If 89 wins the division, where does that last win come from? Probably from Hillman, who will need to pull the plug on an ill-fated gamble (Teahen to second, Ponson or Ho-Ram in the rotation) or simple roster dead weight (Gload, TPJ) or in finding another start for Greinke somewhere in the schedule. The 89th win might come, in retrospect, in mid-June, when Hillman thanks Horacio Ramirez for his five good innings and sneaks out of the Metrodome with a win. Moreover, the Royals might very well need to do extremely well against their primary rival in head to head competition or make a key mid-season pickup. The bottom line is, if the Royals get to the 86-win level, which is possible, they can't waste their chance when they're there. Soria's a two-game pythag bump on his own, so... Odds of this happening: 70%. 

So if you throw all these odds together, which very plainly are incredibly imprecise feelers, not actual percentages based on objective numbers, you wind up with a team that has a 10-11% chance of winning the division. Although that number looks small, that's a team with a chance, make no doubt about it.

In conclusion, what matters the most here, are the middle two steps: run scoring and run prevention. The Royals need to flip a 90-run negative in 2008 into a 50-run positive, and that's just to get to 86 wins. So again, the Royals have work to do. This point needs to be emphasized, so this paragraph shall end now.

However, a 140-run net improvement would not be unheard of and it wouldn't even be in the mythical this year's Rays category, who made a 266-net-run turnaround. The Royals don't need to be this year's Rays, they need to the this year's Brewers team from two years ago, so to speak. By having a few young players emerge and making a few obvious upgrades, the 2007 Brewers improved their run differential by 154 runs, and almost won the NL Central. Unfortunately, they hit their pythag right on the nose, which means they had very little luck and went 6-9 against the Cubs, so they lost the division by two games.

We know that if the Royals get that far this year, they won't let that happen. They'll make their own luck, win the key games down the stretch, and make all the right moves over 162 games, even the one's in May that no one notices.

OK, so actually we don't know that that will happen. But it could.

7 recs  |  Comment 157 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

70 each way?

yeesh thats asking for a lot.

by e-gus on Mar 31, 2009 1:00 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

It would take a lot

That’s why Will is right that is unlikely to happen.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 1:02 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

just repeat

2007 Brewers
2007 Brewers
2007 Brewers

by royalsreview on Mar 31, 2009 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good work

Great analysis, well reasonsed. Rec’d.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 1:03 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Four Steps

1. Create a clone of Barry Bonds in his prime
2. Create a clone of Steve Carlton in his prime
3. Create a clone of Barry Larkins in his prime
4. Put them into the field.

Mourning Guy Carbonneau...
Royals obscure player to watch in ST: Lenny DiNardo

by playingwithfire on Mar 31, 2009 1:04 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

5. trade for Huber

WE DON"T NEED TO CLONE HIM!!!

by royalsreview on Mar 31, 2009 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

although it wouldn't hurt

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 2:18 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

why stop at 2?

(other than you might run out of H’s to be sewn on the jerseys)

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Huber? pshaw, wtf??
Give me 25 Ross Gloads and I’ll win this division.

The General Theory of Royaltivity

by kabrink on Mar 31, 2009 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

forgot to mention this in the column

but does anyone else feel like, for a year maybe, Farnsworth and Jacobs will both be good, just to spite the logic of the world and, in the case of jacobs, probably hurt the franchise long-term with a bad extension

the early dusty baker cubs had a number of moves like this, dumb as hell from a sabermetric standpoint that ended up working out in the short term…

by royalsreview on Mar 31, 2009 1:12 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

It could happen

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 1:21 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

the Royals would never offer an ill advised contract extension, would they?

give me 8 examples, Mr. Negativity

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Mar 31, 2009 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The 2005 White Sox come to mind

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 31, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good stuff

If the Royals are on top at the break, isn’t it reasonable to think that they’d be shopping?

So basically, if the royals are sitting with say 43 wins at the break with the current roster, and they pick up just one player (2B?) who can bring the potential of a couple more net wins to the squad, or more, that could very much improve those odds and percentages. If this 25 man roster can win 43 in the first half, this 25 man roster minus TPJ/Gload etc. plus could certainly entertain 45-47 wins.

I submit that as a fifth step – be in control in July and in a position to be a buyer.

No outs to go!

by 45degreesnorth on Mar 31, 2009 1:17 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

If they are buying at the break

…I hope they don’t spend too much. I’d hate for the Royals to mortgage their future by trading a genuinely good prospect (anyone in the top 10) in the hopes that they can maybe squeeze their way into the playoffs this year.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 1:22 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I see Jarrod Washburn in our future

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 31, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

+1

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe...

but then what do you do with the bench?

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

by Sweep_the_Leg on Mar 31, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

dump Gload and TPJ and Callaspo

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Mar 31, 2009 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

One down

FKA "MileHighKCfan"

by JSouth on Apr 1, 2009 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Great write-up Will.

Tell all those damn negators to take a hike. You’re the positive guy!

by hunter s. royal on Mar 31, 2009 1:23 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

So you're tellin me theres a chance,yeah!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA This is how I feel, after an entire life of being a royals fan knowing we have no chance!!!

by ZachMartin2 on Mar 31, 2009 1:34 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

And then when the Royals get to the playoffs, they can use a 3-man rotation of Greinke, Meche and Davies

…and the Royals would have a shot to make it to the ALCS!

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 1:39 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Optimism is breaking out everywhere!

The government must be dumping Prozac in the drinking water.

by hunter s. royal on Mar 31, 2009 1:42 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hey the Royals are currently tied with the

Indians
Twins
Yankees
Red Sox
Rays
Angels

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 1:44 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wow!. DMGM has really made some great moves!

The future’s so bright we better all get some nice, dark, shades.

by hunter s. royal on Mar 31, 2009 1:55 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, he won't need to when Greinke and Meche start

He can pitch 1-2 innings in those games and then 3 when Davies starts. Now I wonder what kind of shot they have to win the World Series…

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 1:44 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

how do we matchup with the Cubs?

we need a loogy to get Fukudome out

by royalsreview on Mar 31, 2009 1:46 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

In July, we can trade Hosmer for Gobble

(I’m sure he’ll be in some team’s system by then)

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 2:08 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd rather have D-train

I just saw a news flash that Willis was placed on the DL for “anxiety disorder”. Yeah, look what that did for Zack! We should sign him, send him to whatever shrink we had Zack with and put him in the #4 slot! World Series here we come…

by FretFriendly on Mar 31, 2009 2:12 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

We'd need to bring Buddy Bell back to help Dontrelle work through his issues

I’m sure we could trade something to White Sox to get him.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 2:13 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Damn

I forgot Buddy Bell had his hand in that recovery…. we could pay Buddy minimum wage.

by FretFriendly on Mar 31, 2009 2:14 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Re-acquire David Riske

He helped Zack apparently.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 31, 2009 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

So, since I'm trying to be positive

Someone talk me through Teahen at second base (which I’m assuming will at least happen with some regularity). I’m having a hard time seeing him as much bettter than being merely “bad”, which really leads to a bad defensive infield. ((and if Aviles regresses to the defensive norms scouts thought he was at… look out, but forget I even wrote or thought this))

by royalsreview on Mar 31, 2009 1:45 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

This is purely speculation

but I think the idea of having Teahen at second as opposed to Bloomquist is purely offensive theory. If he plays at an average level or just below defensively, he will more than make up for it at the plate (versus what Bloomy or even Callaspo would contribute offensively). Bloomquist is just not the threat Teahen is even with his down year in 2008. I tend to agree with the decision of putting him at second. Offense is where the Royals’ turn-around has to start. Teahen is definitely going to make errors at second, but if he settles in and rebounds towards his potential, I think it’s the right move.

It’s the Manny concept. Why any NL team would want him in the outfield is beyond me, but he more than makes up for his defensive inaptitude when he swings the bat. I’m sure there are stats out there for this, but I think just like the Dodgers with Manny, the Royals are willing to give up a few E’s for the quality at-bats they anticipate getting from Teahen.

by FretFriendly on Mar 31, 2009 2:09 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Teahen at second base

Evaluating any player requires looking at the player’s offense and defense relative to his position(s). Offensively, he projects to being better than average for second base. Defensively, he’s somewhere below average (somewhere between merely below average and awful). If he’s merely bad defensively (as opposed to awful), then he’d arguably be a slightly below average overall second baseman (and likely better overall than Callaspo, much less Bloomy).

So would there be defensive downside for the Royals to have Teahen at 2B? Certainly. But there would also be offensive upside. At this point, we really don’t know how bad his defense is or will be at second base. But I’m glad they are taking the experiment seriously.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 2:12 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed

It’s risky, but this could be one of the x-factors that makes this an exciting year to watch the Royals.

by FretFriendly on Mar 31, 2009 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

It still falls in the "worth a try" category for me

It’s not like it’s a choice between Teahen and a genuinely good second baseman. The other choices are a possibly ok hitting second baseman with below average fielding and a probably ok fielding second baseman who can’t hit at all. Let’s roll the dice and see what happens. The worst that can happen is Teahen fails and the job is handed over to Callaspo and/or Bloomy.

Anyway, I don’t think he’s going to be the full-time second baseman. At most, I think he’d start the season getting 50-75% of the starts. Perhaps if he performs well enough, those percentages would increase over the course of the season.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I couldn't agree more

I like seeing this kind of creativity from the Royals. It’s such a breath of fresh air.

by FretFriendly on Mar 31, 2009 2:45 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

And small market teams need to take on a certain degree of risk that has potentially high upside

In order to get over the top, small market teams need to put themselves in some dare-to-be-great situations. Teahen’s may not pan out, but the upside potential is that over the next year or two he develops into a roughly average defensive second baseman. Add that to above average hitting and the Royals have an above average overall second baseman. And the Royals don’t have many position players who are above average for their position (right now it’s basically Gordon, Aviles and Dejesus).

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 2:53 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

With his combination of hitting and defense, yes

There’s an old fashioned idea that corner OFers have to be sluggers. It is antiquated and just plain wrong (I’m not ascribing this to you necessarily; I’m just discussing the concept). The value of any player is determined by the runs he helps create on offense and the runs he helps prevent on defense (I’m not trying to be overly pedantic, but I wanted to explain why I think he’s likely to be an above average corner OFer). DeJesus has a couple things which should make him a slightly above average corner OFer:

1. Excellent defense for a corner OFer. For his career his defense is 22.5 runs above average in LF per 150 games. Now this is a pretty small sample size of 148 games (118 GS), but it is about what you’d expect from a guy who has been an above average defensive CFer over the course of his career. Usually a player whose defense is above average in CF is great in a corner OF spot.

2. Very good OBP. An average of DDJ’s PECOTA, CHONE and ZiPS projections have him at a .352 OBP. That’s damned good. Now his average SLG projection is only .412, but OBP is much more important to run creation than SLG. This would give him a pretty good wOBA of about .342.

Add decent, OBP-heavy offense to excellent defense and you have an above average corner OFer. Devil_fingers crunched the offensive and defensive numbers based on the projections and came up with a 2.8 WAR for him, which is above average (2.0 WAR is usually described as a roughly average player, 2.5 is above average, 3 is good, 4 is excellent). FWIW, here are some guys whose WAR was less than 2.8 last year:

Hunter Pence 2.6
Prince Fielder 2.6
Vlad Guerrero 2.4
Torii Hunter 2.3
Raul Ibanez 2.3
Jim Thome 2.2
Chris Young (Ari) 2.1
Jermaine Dye 1.8
Bobby Abreu 1.5
Adam Dunn 1.3

Excuse the rant, but I just felt like expounding on how moving DeJesus to a corner OF spot doesn’t really hurt his value (by comparison, his last two years his WAR have been 2.6 and 3.0).

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 7:24 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also, this does not include that he would be a superior speed guy in the corner.

Defensive metrics don’t include this and it is worth almost half a WAR, so more like a 3.2 WAR player.

Go Royals!

by BabyBlues on Mar 31, 2009 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

what do you mean?

his speed influences his range, do the metrics surey do include that, right? Did I misunderstand your point?

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

And speed is included, to some extent in his SB and CS numbers, which are a part of his wOBA

It doesn’t include other base running elements though.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

In my upcoming

Jenn Sterger LineUp Optimization post, I’ve included them.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Using EqBR?

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

yeah

EqBRR-EQSBR. Weighted average, regression to the mean based on CHONE’s Speed Score (important since BP only has two years of data… Don’t know why they didn’t get all the years from Fox, since I know he has them. I’d use Rally’s numbers, but in his historical database he doesn’t separate SB lwts from baserunning in general).

I also include GDP, but that’ smore of a below/above average thing, since I couldn’t find a the info I needed to normalize for GDP Opps.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

er should have expanded that to say..

The speed helps them cut doubles into singles, triples into doubles, keep people from scoring etc, which is not included in defensive metrics. Yes, this make Guillen somewhat worse defender then his numbers, and Crisp maybe a little better (cf’s tend to be pretty fast).

Go Royals!

by BabyBlues on Mar 31, 2009 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's part of the "Arm" rating

which is sort of mislabeled, since people get mad because “OF x has a much better arm than that.” It’s really about holding baserunners and stuff — which includes not just arm (which isn’t just strength itself,b ut also accuracy and release), but the ability to catch the ball in a position that allows one to throw guys out or hold them.

BIll James and others have written that oufielders’ contribution in this regard is one of the easier things to measure. The fact that “arm ratings” in different systems seem (to me) to agree more than the purely “range” stuff supports that.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:59 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

makes sense to include it all togther I guess.

Guillen does have a great arm and turned a double play yesterday by doubling off Sweeny.

Go Royals!

by BabyBlues on Mar 31, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

yeah, physically it's great

and he is above average most years (although his arm plays much better in right, at least historically), but his positioning and stuff (and his range issues) must effect things, because he isn’t one of the tops in the league or anything.

But like I wrote earlier (maybe in a different thread), the spread in talent in “arms” is much narrower than that in range.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Won't be a problem...

at least not at the beginning of the season. Hoch has officially been optioned.

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

by Sweep_the_Leg on Mar 31, 2009 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No

someone needs to talk me through Guillen in RF, first, and probably the roster, too.

If the team actually want to win, and this has nothingto do with salary, the best combination is almost certainly Callaspo at 2B and Teahen in RF. That’s the best combo. Callaspo won’t be worse than Teahen defensively, and probably a bit better. Teahen is not only a better OF defender than Guillen (even if he’s only average out there), but he’s probably a better hitter, too. Then there’s baserunning, DPs…

By the way, is “mediocre” the new “average?” Because Gordon projects as an average defender statistically. His career UZR/150 at 3B is better than that of A-Rod, the most persecuted human in history, but one of the greatest.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 2:23 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

probably a lot better, I mean

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 2:23 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

In that case

I would say trade Guillen. I simply cannot see us getting rid of Billy Butler and he would almost certainly have to be traded or sent to the minors if we moved Teahen to the OF and Guillen to DH. Butler has too much upside to get rid of him and he needs AB’s this season if the Royals want him to improve.

by FretFriendly on Mar 31, 2009 2:31 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think just about everyone is in favor of trading Guillen

If the persistent offseason rumors are true, then this includes Dayton Moore. But, given his age, salary, performance and attitude/character issues, he’s essentially untradeable. However, if he has a good first 2-3 months of the season, that could change.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 2:36 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If the team actually want to win, and this has nothingto do with salary, the best combination is almost certainly Callaspo at 2B and Teahen in RF. That’s the best combo. Callaspo won’t be worse than Teahen defensively, and probably a bit better. Teahen is not only a better OF defender than Guillen (even if he’s only average out there), but he’s probably a better hitter, too. Then there’s baserunning, DPs…

I think this falls into the same category as the Soria-to-the-rotation discussion. Yes it would definitely be better for the team and lead to more wins, but it’s off the table so… what can you do?

By the way, is "mediocre" the new "average?" Because Gordon projects as an average defender statistically. His career UZR/150 at 3B is better than that of A-Rod, the most persecuted human in history, but one of the greatest.

I like Gordon defensively, but I want to say something about defensive projections. Gopherballs recently pointed out that in terms of sample size, one season of defensive stats is the equivalent of two months of hitting stats. Therefore, Gordon’s projection comes from a sample which is the equivalent of four months of hitting stats (And, by the way, this means that we only have a MLB defensive data on Aviles which is the equivalent of 5 1/2 weeks of hitting stats). This is a long way to say that defensive projections for guys like Gordon and Aviles have a low reliability score.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I know, I crunched those numbers, too, and added reliability

but in any case, that makes the assertion of Gordon’s mediocrity less credible, and we assume that he’s closer to average.

My own numbers also includes the FSR (weighted inversely to playing time) and a weighted average ((career UZR is just average), so his bad 208 is weighted more heavily, but Gordon still comes out around average.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

and Sorry about the A-Rod snark, it was late and I was grumpy

nothing like an overreaction to an overreaction to an overreaction

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

are we sure that teahen's a better hitter than guillen?

the problem with whether guillen should be in RF or not is that guillen and teahen have so many variables that we cannot reasonably predict. we’ve seen guillen hit extremely well when he’s healthy (and it’s not cold out), and when that happened the Royals were winning. but is he going to be healthy, and when i say ‘healthy’, i mean not playing-at-75%-but-won’t-come-out even though he can’t hit or field worth a spit.

then there’s teahen. i don’t need to remind anyone how unpredictable he is. but even with teahen at his average, i maintain that a healthy guillen is a better hitter, OBP be damned. like i said, though, it’s really impossible to tell how good (or bad) guillen is when healthy.

although, maybe i under-appreciate the effect of guillen’s poor defense. and baserunning.

i realize you said ‘probably’ the whole way through, so i’m not trying to pin you saying that teahen’s a better hitter than guillen, i just wanted to make a case that through a different perspective (hopefully not a particularly flawed one) it might seem that there’s a case for guillen as the probable better hitter.

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

how about a matrix

comparing the overall WAR difference between the two taking into consideration variable outcomes for each (injuries/convalescence for guillen; hitting projections for teahen)? assigning probabilities to the variable outcomes might generate an expected value number, which could condense the entire question down to one number comparing their expected WARs.

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

this is an example of what i was thinking of, with fake numbers

guillen games at full strength
120 80 40
WAR 5 1 -3

teahen OPS
800 750 700
WAR 6 2 -2

Teahen’s WAR – Guillen’s WAR
120 80 40
800 1 5 9
750 -3 1 5
700 -7 -3 1

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I..............what?

The General Theory of Royaltivity

by kabrink on Mar 31, 2009 9:47 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

How about just looking at

PECOTA or CHONE percentiles?

CHONE’s are

created by estimating the variance in the player’s rate stats (walk percentage, strikeouts per non-walk, homeruns per contact, batting average on balls in play, etc.) and fitting them to a normal distribution. I don’t know how useful these are. The main practical use I see is using it to create a weighted average for player valuation. For a star player, you won’t see much difference between his weighted average and his 50% projection. For Carlos Pena, they are identical at 44 runs above replacement.

You can look on the individual player pages for both Teahen and Guillen for them… but I think you’ll find that the end results is that Teahen is projected (as in “likely to be”) the better offensive player in 2009.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

while Chone for Teahen was essentially what i was thinking, for Guillen it seems much more complicated. my explanation is too convoluted and lengthy for a pretty unimportant subject, and it has more to do with a general question than a comparison on Teahen.
  
maybe I don’t trust Chone as much as I should for Guillen, and that would be because I think of Guillen’s distribution as atypical (even bimodal — healthy or not); from what I understand, when Chone factors Guillen’s recent performance, it also is inherently including his injury history. is his probability of being healthy (which to me means he performs in the upper quartile of his projections) predicted with much certainty (i.e. by Chone) based on recent history?

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not that much of a statistician

I’m a bit lost already, but I guess that the injury history is sort of implicitly in there since the data is taken from past years. Aging adjustments are also included.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, and injury history should project the injury future

In short, with his age, condition and not infrequent injury history, we should expect more injuries in 2009.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

ahhh...so we're looking at 30-40 games of mitch maier in Left....

b/c Davey is surely to be oft booboo’d again….since he has a nonfrequent booboo history

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 31, 2009 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think Teahen in LF is much more likely

With Callaspo/Bloomy sharing second base duty. And, FWIW, DeJesus has missed an average of 16 per year over the last two years. The good news is that maybe the Royals will be more competitive this year and DeJesus will therefore fake fewer injuries.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Who gets hives?

I mean really. Do they even exist? I think it’s like getting “the vapors” or having your humors out of balance. Faker, I say!

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I was

thinking about getting bled – you know, just for the health effect of it.

The General Theory of Royaltivity

by kabrink on Mar 31, 2009 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe I'll send a case of live leaches to the Royals clubhouse

Maybe they can suck the swing-at-everything humors out of Jose Guillen.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

He's obviously

capable of removing them himself.

So, I don’t think you’d get the effect you are hoping for.

The General Theory of Royaltivity

by kabrink on Mar 31, 2009 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

and injury history should project the injury future

but does it? small sample size? non-uniform distribution? i have no concrete knowledge relating to the statistically predictive nature of injuries, but I don’t see that it’s quite the same as a traditional stat. and if it’s not quite the same as a traditional stat, then maybe the predictive use of Chone when related to injuries is not as clear cut, either.

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Those are all very valid points
i have no concrete knowledge relating to the statistically predictive nature of injuries, but I don’t see that it’s quite the same as a traditional stat.

I haven’t read a great deal on the predictive nature of injuries, but I have read some. There is some predictive value there. I’d have to read the articles again to tell you how predictive they are. There are a few well established principles. Injuries over multiple years from young players (20-25), particularly pitchers, tend to lead to more injuries later and throughout the player’s career. And, injury frequency risk, severity and duration increase by year through a player’s 30’s and 40’s. Also, Will Carroll at BP has developed injury projection algorithm (kind of a PECOTA for injuries) which uses empirical data on types of injuries, ages of players, position, etc. to project injury risk.

So I think injury history is predictive, with lots of caveats and grains of salts taken (as with defensive metrics and their projection).

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

of course!!

BP has projections. i should have known they would.

now if we could only get those projections to apply precisely to specific circumstances.

although i suppose i could find those projections and update my matrix (don’t anyone hold their breath, though).

by benfunke on Apr 1, 2009 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm going to go so far as to say Teahen can be a ABOVE AVERAGE second baseman

yes, you read that right.

first off, his main position has always been an infielder. we know he can field, and we know he can throw, which is most of the battle. so, what’s so different about 2b vs 3b? 1.) range – that remains to be seen, but is his range really going to be worse than callaspo’s? seems like extra height might actually work as an advantage when leaping for a line drive or diving for a grounder in the hole. 2.) turning double-plays – i think it’s safe to assume that sooner or later the 4-6-3 DP will become as natural as the 5-4-3 was for him at 3b; but the DPs started at 3b or SS could be the source of some problems. i’m going to rely on his generally athletic ability to at least avoid embarrassing himself when turning DPs.

playing 2b may minimize the value of his +arm, but it is still there and can be a valuable tool, such as on balls hit up the middle and relay throws home (and to some extent turning a DP).

this is of course a bunch of speculation on my part, based on what little i’ve seen and my own experiences in the infield, but i think it seems reasonable to be slightly optimistic, especially if you’re looking to be talked into it.

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

hmm... I guess I can see it

but I wouldn’t expect it

I think theres also a fairly large injury risk here, with teahen’s footwork being off covering a play at the bag

by royalsreview on Mar 31, 2009 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

definitely being the pivot man at 2nd is my biggest worry

whether it’s injury or just not being able to get the hang of it. i’d be interested to know how many times per game/season the 2b-man acts as the pivot in a DP (probably more than i hope it is).

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

i realize you're giving a "scouting opinion"

and that’s cool, but for the record, the stats say that Teahen was pretty bad at 3B

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

thus, you'd assume he'd be about the same at 2b

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

i didn’t have time to look up his defensive numbers at third, but i hoped my memory served me correctly that he was above-average there. apparently my memory is as optimistic as my analysis.

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

and being bad at third would also explain why i keep reading that he doesn’t look so hot at second.

by benfunke on Mar 31, 2009 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Now, that is pretty fascinating
Gopherballs recently pointed out that in terms of sample size, one season of defensive stats is the equivalent of two months of hitting stats.

So, one could really make an argument that even though we have a bevy of newish defensive statistical metrics available, you almost have to have five (?) years (the equivalent of 3 years of hitting numbers) worth of defensive numbers to get a real gauge on a player’s defensive abilities – at least statistically speaking?.

I guess that’s one reason to keep scouts employed, isn’t it?

by racf on Mar 31, 2009 10:07 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

This is what I've been wondering

for the past year, I’ve been hearing more and more about defensive stats and now that it seems to be going into consideration for player moves (see Adam Dunn). Basically what I wonder is this:

Say there is a hypothetical players (I’m completely making these up, so sorry if it’s not plausible, it’s just a point):
 +11 Wins with bat, -7 Wins with glove: costs $15 million
+4 Wins with bat, +1 Win with glove: costs $1 million

You would choose the second guy, right?

BUT! My question concerns the postseason. If offensive numbers come into play more often, would you want the the first guy for the playoffs?

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Mar 31, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

they don't come into play more often unless he's a DH

in which case you adjust for position

The “sample size” issue is simply on of saying that it takes a lot more data for defensive play to get the same reliability as offensive stats, not that it “comes into play” less often.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I have done way too much on defensive stats

and they aren’t that reliable yet.

That being said, 5 years worth of data is at least need and that is at one position. Basically, lifetime stats (or close to it) and adjust for age (steady to ~30 years old and then declines at about 1 run).

Chone has just done predictions, from what I have seen, are pretty decent (link you have to click on each player to get the numbers).

by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Mar 31, 2009 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, those have been around for a while

unless you’re talking about different ones. But I think you linked the wrong page, as the defensive projections aren’t team-by-team

Here are the infielders; here are the outfielders; here are the catchers.

The catchers are a different story. I think CHONE’s projections are pretty good — he combines STATS and BIS data with his own TotalZone, regresses inversely to playting time to the FSR, adjusts for age, uses 4 seasons of data weighted, etc. I do think that it’s not perfect (as he will readily concede), although that isn’t his fault. My impression on a bit of looking around is that the raw STATS andf BIS data (as opposed to how they are inpreted by UZR, Dewan’s, etc.) can be a lot “harder” on some players than in the more sophisticated systems. I dont know if this is because they don’t adjust for certain batted ball types or not. They’re harder than TotalZone, too, because Rally has Gordon projected at -9, while TotalZone has him as actually above average in 2008.

I think the projections are a good basic guide, but it will be interesting to see whta numbers he gets if/when he switches the BIS portion to bUZR.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

oops, sorry

just realized he put TotalZone projections on the team pages

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Your wrong.

You and NYRoyal in the same month, Armageddon is coming.

by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Mar 31, 2009 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

heh

although I’m wrong an awful lot, and try to be good about owning up to it

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

BUT,

We know that player 1 will get 4-5 at bats per game in the post-season, and we have no way of knowing how many defensive opportunities he will get (could be a lot, could be hardly any, unless he is DH). Roughly speaking, if one season of defensive stats is worth two months of hitting stats, that suggests a ratio of 1/3 in terms of ‘opportunities’ on average. Small sample sizes mean anything can happen (Tigers pitchers lost the ability to field in 2006 WS, did Burrell’s awful defense hurt the Phillies last year?), but if you’re playing the percentages I would say player 1 is more likely to help you in the playoffs because of the known hitting versus unknown defensive opportunities. Also, its important to remember here that even the worst defender still makes most of the defensive plays.

The more I learn about it, the more convinced I am that defense (or at least defense as currently measured by the metrics we have) is a lot less important than offense. Maybe not 5% like the A’s used to say, but no way is it %50 like Dewan claims.

I once tried to string together the combination, "Hot Shot Hit Foul". It didn't quite come out that way. -- Denny Matthews

by gordonfan on Mar 31, 2009 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also, its important to remember here that even the worst defender still makes most of the defensive plays.

…and even the best hitters fail to get on base 60% of the time…

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

yes,

which is why a 90% success rate (if we use something like fielding percentage, which is admittedly bad) on defense (anyone can do it) is less important than a 40% (OBP). You’re making my point for me.

 

I once tried to string together the combination, "Hot Shot Hit Foul". It didn't quite come out that way. -- Denny Matthews

by gordonfan on Mar 31, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

see my post below

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

you are getting at something

I haven’t read Dewan’s article yet, so I can’t speak for his position. I do think that one can pretty well get the average linear weight of a defensive play nailed down — around 0.8 runs.

I think what you are getting at is that the average spread between the best and worst defenders is not as greeat in general between the best and worst hitters. I don’t know for sure, but just looking at this year’s bUZR stats vs. wRAA (linear weights above/below average)… let me find guys with close to equal numbers of PAs… Among the qualified first basemen, Albert Pujols was about +70 offensively this season, and Daric Barton was -10 offensively. According to bUZR, Mark Teixeira was +10.7 in the field, and Mike Jacobs was -11.1.

It’s crude, but let’s spread it across positions. Pujols is the best hitter at +70 (all data from FanGraphs). Jeff Francoeur was the worst qualfied hitter with 22.7 That’s about 90 runs. The worst fielding was Brad Hawpe at -38.2 runs. The best was Alexis Rios at +23.1. Now, we cold adjust for position, too, since a +3 at 1B is much different than a +3 at SS, for example, but let’s just leave Rios/Hawpe as our standard - about 60 runs.

So the “spread” is, I would guess, as supported by my examples, between the best and worst hitters and best and worst fielders is probably not the same, although the fielders are greater than we’d think. There’s more of a talent spread. It’s the same reason that range is more important to gauge than the throwingout out/hlding baserunners (although the throwing out/holding is easier) — there’s more of a talent spread in one, although a run saved is a run earned.

I’m just thinking out loud (or in print) here… Does that make sense? I’m not sure about Dewan — but I do think it’s clear that a run saved is a run earned, and that teams have underavlued defense, primiarily because only recently have they been able to get a grip on how to evaluate it. But what you’re pointing out might be supported in the sense talent spread probably doesn’t have quite as much impact as that in hitting.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

stupid cross out

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

yeah, thanks

that is what I’ve been thinking about. You’re absolutely right, range is undervalued (outfield assists forever!). Kinda hard to believe because of the emphasis on speed, but that isn’t everything, I suppose (reading the ball off the bat)

I once tried to string together the combination, "Hot Shot Hit Foul". It didn't quite come out that way. -- Denny Matthews

by gordonfan on Mar 31, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

another way to think about the talent spread

How many Hall of Famers are in for primarily defense?

How many great glove men are there compared to great hitters. Depends upon position, of course. But seems like you can always find a slick fielding shortstop who can’t hit a lick. Maybe that’s distorted by our inability to really measure defense though?

I once tried to string together the combination, "Hot Shot Hit Foul". It didn't quite come out that way. -- Denny Matthews

by gordonfan on Mar 31, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not sure I'm ready to look at HoF voting as an objective gauge of relative player quality

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

How many Hall of Famers are in for primarily defense?

I think that shows you how poor of a job HOF voters do in evaluating performance historically. Players get into the HOF based on what can easily be counted, like HR’s, RBI, Wins, Strikeouts, MVP awards, CY awards, and WS rings. Great fielding can’t easily be counted, so its value is minimized by HOF voters.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Great write up

I’m already camped out at the Plaza, awaiting our October parade!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 31, 2009 10:57 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Kudos, Will

This is a thoughtful, well written piece, as usual. You may have been pulling those odds out of your arse, so to speak, but considering that Vegas has the Royals at 7-1 odds to win the division, I think you did a pretty damn good job of estimating yourself. (7-1 odds equates to about a 14% chance).

That being said, since there are only 5 teams in our division, most likely at least 2 of the other teams should have easier scenarios which would result in them winning the division. Not trying to be negative – just realistic.

Personally, taking a linear approach to which individual players might be the key to a division winner, I would list potential improvements, from most important to least, as follows:

1) Davies (Only one of the non-Meche/Greike quintent whom I could see actually making a leap forward and shaving his ERA a full run or more)

2) Teahen (only because he could suddenly hit like it’s 2006 again, and that would be a HUGE improvement)

T3) Gordon & Butler

Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!

by loyal2sdad on Mar 31, 2009 12:22 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

So tired of all of the negative articles

by Top Ramen on Mar 31, 2009 1:20 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I think one of the larger keys to getting to 760 runs is the performance of Guillen

Sure Butler and Gordon breaking out needs to happen to get there, but if Guillen craps the bed with another .200/.200/.300 performance in the cleanup spot for the first 2 months of the season, it’ll be nearly impossible to get to 760.

by Top Ramen on Mar 31, 2009 1:22 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Related to this, a question

If Guillen comes out hot during the first two months of the season, and the Royals are still in the race — would Moore take the opportunity to dump Guillen on another team?

by Top Ramen on Mar 31, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sure he would...

especially if he could unload ALL of his contract, too. And if Teahen was swinging the bat well, and also struggling at 2B, then there would be even more motivation to get Jose out of RF and plug Teahen in there.

The problem, as always, is getting Jose to actually perform like that, and then…having to find a willing taker.

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

by Sweep_the_Leg on Mar 31, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think we should realistically expect ANYONE to pay 12M/yr. for Guillen.

They certainly would not in this market. That’s wishful thinking. Even if he rakes the first 2 months of the season, I think we’d have to eat some salary. DM hasn’t shown the humility to admit mistakes by eating bad contracts.

by Steve Hovley on Mar 31, 2009 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, the Tigers are paying Gary Sheffield...

$14M this year to NOT play for them, so you never know.

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

by Sweep_the_Leg on Mar 31, 2009 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

How do people feel about the first step?

anyone worried that Cleveland is gonna render all this moot with a 93 win season?

by royalsreview on Mar 31, 2009 5:07 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Truthfully, so could CWS

They could run away with it if they remain healthy and don’t age.

I do think it is Cleveland’s. They don’t have as much downside (CWS) and alot more upside that most teams.

by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Mar 31, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

They could run away with it if they remain healthy and don’t age.

Their problem is that this would require either a time machine or a magical elixir. I have them pegged for a sub-.500 season.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

yeah, I see the Royals and White Sox in a race for disappointing 4th place finishes

although, as I’ve said before, Kenny’s teams do the best when I expect them to be the worst.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think some team will break out and have a genuinely good season

“Genuinely good” meaning 90+ wins. I don’t think any team is going to be able to squeak through and win the division by default.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Cleveland, yeah

I think the talent in the division by WAR is fairly tight, but due to the unbalanced schedule and win probabilties, the slighlty better teams will get more wins. Cleveland’s rotaiton has tons of questions, but when one guy goes down to suckitude/injury, another #4 (better than Ponson/HoRam) steps in.

Actually, although they’re aging, I can see Detroit making a run for it. Bonderman is still young and could improve, and Polanco and Everett upt he middle is good defensively. They have the bats.

Minnesota would be my vote over Detroit as possibility #2, but with the uncertainty re: Mauer, I have serious doubts. I think they have the best pitching, when those guys are healty. If Baker, Liriano, and Slowey all get ~190 innings, they will be tough to score on.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

that they're better than they seem, or worse?

as a Royals fan or a neutral observer?

Or is this Mrs. RR?

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

well, they seem pretty thin already

I think projecting Lee as a 3.5 in pitcher is reasonable, but as for the rest of the guys…

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

As your breakdown of the numbers show, they have a thick, deep back end

(no double entendre intended). Their top 5 is nothing to write home about, but their top 8 is tied for best in the Central. I really think depth in mediocre/average SP’s counts for a lot.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I frickin' hate Baker

it is so frustrating that our little team can’t do anything against him. (OK, based only on memories of observations last year)

The General Theory of Royaltivity

by kabrink on Mar 31, 2009 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

He's pretty damn good

He’s going to continue to dominate a lot of teams this year and for years to come. At least Liriano can be counted on to go on the DL for long stretches of time.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wish the Royals had been able to trade Teahen for Baker after 2006

Baker is the Minny prototype — not dominating, but good. Throws a lot of strikes. Got jerked around when he was younger while they wasted money and starts on crappy veterans like Levina Hernandez and Sideny Ponson.

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 10:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

the game is playedon the field, not with stats!!!

no, really, I did not know baker’s k rate was that sorta ok

by royalsreview on Apr 1, 2009 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I actually thought it would be higher

I don’t know if that’s MLB-wide, or just starters.

My main point was to point out that he’s not Carlos Silva.

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

by devil_fingers on Apr 1, 2009 9:16 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

i just really dont see cleveland doing it...

pavano being counted on as a #3 on a division favorite?…havent bothered to lookat their 4 and 5s b/c that tells me enough. Also, Hafner sucks. I’m still banking on Lee’s 2008 being somewhat flukish…i think he might be about as good as his career averages…a 4.15 ERA or so pitcher. Carmona has been up and down and is largely IF defense dependant…and from what i’ve read, their IF defense is a giant clusterfuck, due to all 3 of them playing out of position, when there could be an easy fix.

Sizemore is awesome, outside of that, I dont see much

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 31, 2009 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

pavano being counted on as a #3 on a division favorite?

I don’t think he’s really being counted on. The Indians rotation is light on elite talent, but it is very deep in roughly average, decent pitchers. So if/when Pavano fails or gets injured, there’s half a dozen decent pitchers behind him ready to take the ball.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

JeremY Sowers, Aaron Laffey, etc. etc.

Basically, a bunch of guys who are more talented versions of Banny (in general — not that they are exactly like him, just guys who aren’t quite average).

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

by devil_fingers on Mar 31, 2009 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, it is a long list

Huff, Lewis, the return of Westbrook at midseason. So they really don’t need Pavano to stay healthy and pitch well. If he doesn’t work out, he’s quickly and easily replaceable.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 31, 2009 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

153 comments

On a non-game thread/non-transaction thread. Nice job Will!

FKA "MileHighKCfan"

by JSouth on Mar 31, 2009 11:18 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Sorry

Meant to give mad props to all that have contributed as well, obviously the involvement by everyone on RR is what makes it so enjoyable to be a part of.

FKA "MileHighKCfan"

by JSouth on Mar 31, 2009 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.
Start posting about the Royals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Stadium-sellout-450w_small
Early projection on 2010 Royals roster
Small
Fixing the kansas city royals
_41153080_gallerysanta_small
Are you good enough?
Trust_small
Denny Matthews at Plaza Library
Royalsretro_small
Royals sign P Jorge Campillo
Stash1_small
Kansas City Fails To Pick Up Option On Royals
Royalsretro_small
Royals sign P Brad Thompson
Tu_small
What would be an appropriate haul for Greinke?
Small
Shane Costa and Ryan Shealy Eras Officially End
Royalsreview_small
Predictions: Will Greinke Win the Cy Young?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Royalsreview_small royalsreview