Mellinger's nonsensical case for not trying Soria as a starter
I lived through the awful years of Burgos and Mac the Ninth as well, but I just don't this paralyzing fear of trying Soria in the rotation that has become so prominent. I'd be fine with Cruz closing for us, he was almost as sure a thing for the D-backs as a setup man as Soria was for us as a closer.
And if this were about the risk of injuring Soria by having him pitch 2.5 as many innings in a season, I would understand that. But this fear that we would instantly fall back into the 2005 season with the bullpen is beyond all reason. Juan Cruz is not Ambiorix Burgos.
almost 3 years ago
DarthYoshi
85 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
One of Mellinger's worst pieces
Basically it all boils down to “didn’t you hate it when Royals relievers blew saves all the time? And doesn’t it feel a lot better that they aren’t doing it now?” He doesn’t even attempt to determine the relative value of having another good starter in the rotation. He doesn’t even want to consider it.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 12:21 PM EDT reply actions
it is like he is trying to follow up on Joe Po's similar column
I knew Joe Posnanski. Joe Posnanski was a friend of mine. You, Sam Mellinger, are not Joe Posnanski.
(Actually, I don’t know JoePo…but it is like a much poorer articulation of JoePo’s already weak case for not starting Soria.)
Yeah, Sam, that's a great example...
Think about that. The Indians’ No. 3 starter is Carl Pavano. If the Royals traded Soria for Pavano, you’d be livid, right?
Good lord. There’s picking a straw man, and then there’s grabbing a leftover pile of months old, rotten hay and tossing it in the air.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
by Sweep_the_Leg on Apr 14, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, that was a particularly pathetic passage
It was downright nonsensical.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I've got a better one
The Nationals No. 3 starter is Daniel Cabrera. Would you trade Soria for Cabrera? Aha!
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
And of course you could flip it
The Yankees #5 starter is Joba Chamberlain. If the Yankees traded Joba Chamberlain for proven closer Kevin Gregg, their fans would be livid, right?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Mellinger said these things, too
At the end of Mellinger’s post, he linked to a story he wrote a few weeks ago. Did any of you read that story?
Look at it statistically: Rivera saved 39 of 40 chances last year, maybe the best season in a Hall of Fame career and good for 17 win shares, an advanced metric measuring a player’s worth. That was the most of any relief pitcher — and the same as Zack Greinke, Edinson Volquez and three others who tied for 14th among starting pitchers.
-Sam Mellinger
Soria had the second-best save rate last year — good for 15 win shares. The third-best starter on each big-league team last year averaged eight win shares. By that measure, Soria was nearly twice as valuable as a closer as he would’ve been as a No. 3 starter.
-Sam Mellinger
I don’t know about win shares (as far as “are they a good measuring stick or not”) but it seems he tried to address what you say he doesn’t address:
He doesn’t even attempt to determine the relative value of having another good starter in the rotation. He doesn’t even want to consider it.
NYRoyal
The Alex Gordon era - www.number4thesmirk.com
by CollininCalifornia on Apr 14, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I guess it is good that he ever attempted to address it
But no, I don’t think Win Shares are the best measuring stick here. And, quite frankly, I wouldn’t necessarily trust my attempts at measuring the value of closer vs. starter. Thankfully there have been many studies done by sabermetricians much better than yours truly which have found, in short, that a good starter is more valuable to his team than a great closer.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Plus, the comparisons
to a No. 3 starter are almost meaningless unless someone has projected Soria’s stats as a starter to be equal to an average No. 3 starter. If it’s because Meche and Grienke are likely Nos. 1 & 2, that does not logically require that Soria pitch like a No. 3. It is feasible that Nos. 1, 2, & 3 end the year with numbers equivalent to a No. 1 or No. 2 starter. You can’t equate performance with which game a pitcher starts.
by stuckinstl12 on Apr 14, 2009 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
another point to consider
Soria is currently on pace for 93 innings. What’s more valuable—93 innings of 2.00 ERA with closer’s leverage or 180 innings of 4.50 ERA with starter’s leverage?
I doubt any of those numbers will/would be accurate
I don’t think he’ll pitch 93 innings. 75 is more likely. I don’t think he’ll have a 2.00 ERA. 3.00 is more likely. I don’t think he’d have a 4.50 ERA. 4.00 is more likely.
But, without crunching the numbers, assuming peripherals fall in line, in your hypothetical, I think the closer is more valuable than the starter.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree that 75 is more likely than 93
but that’s a management problem that’s not inherent to a bullpen role. As for 2 vs 3, I know it’s reasonable to expect Soria to regress toward the mean after a great year, but I’m a fan, so I don’t. To get up to 3, he’d have to give up homers like a normal pitcher. I don’t think he’ll do that. As for 4 vs 4.5, it’s tough to say. 4.0 is a damn good starter. I think Soria’s velocity would drop to Banny level as a starter, and while I think Soria has better secondary pitches, I’m not sure they’d carry him into “damn good” territory with a 87-88 mph fastball.
but that’s a management problem that’s not inherent to a bullpen role.
It is inherent in the reality of a closer role (on any team with any manager). Sure if Soria were used differently (say, like Quiz was used…or any good closer in the early 80’s), he’d pitch more innings and actually get more high leverage situations. But that just isn’t within the reality of 21st century baseball. The reality is that any closer is only going to pitch 65-80 innings (usually around 70) with the vast majority of his appearances in the 9th inning with a 1-3 run lead.
I think Soria’s velocity would drop to Banny level as a starter, and while I think Soria has better secondary pitches, I’m not sure they’d carry him into "damn good" territory with a 87-88 mph fastball.
His average FB is 91 mph. Going from a relief roll to a bullpen role, a pitcher usually loses 1-2 mph. So his FB velocity as a starter would likely be 89-90. That’s roughly average velocity (he’s barely above average now) with way, way above average control of that baseball. So, overall, that’s still a plus fastball, go to along with a plus change, a plus curveball and a pretty good slider. That’s three plus pitches (plus another decent one). There are good #2 starters who don’t have that many good pitches.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
links?
I believe you—I just find this stuff interesting. Any links for average Soria FB = 91, and pitcher loses 1-2 mph? Re: Soria’s fastball, people (including Buck) say Soria’s fastball is a cutter which means he’s sacrificing some velocity for rotation. That might explain some of why his fastball is so effective despite the middling velocity.
that partially explains the effectiveness of Soria's fastball
but the other big factor that I know of is Soria’s delivery itself—he does such a good job of masking his pitches that he can make a 90 mph heater feel like 95 mph. So even if he loses 1-2 mph on his fastball, it could still be the equivalent of him throwing 92-93 mph, so for the purposes of the batter’s perspective, he’d still be throwing gas.
You can find Soria’s velocity here. Scroll down to “pitch type.” The numbers come from Pitch f/x data. As far as losing 1-2 mph as a starter, I’ve just read that in a few places. No link. And if it is a cutter (Pitch f/x doesn’t think so) then the movement helps make it a better pitch as well, despite the not blazing velocity.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions
1-2 or 2-3
I remember hearing 2-3 usually. I think that’s the number Rany uses, but it doesn’t really matter. Soria would likely be in the 88-90 range. If the Royals wanted to try him out and see if he could be effective as a starter, I’d be okay with that, but I’m not convinced that he would be effective enough to make the switch worthwhile. And it’s by no means a guarantee that he could return to ace-closer status if the experiment failed. I’d much rather see management push him for more innings.
And it’s by no means a guarantee that he could return to ace-closer status if the experiment failed.
Why is that? How would a failed SP experiment keep him from returning to be a dominant closer?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah...but its by no means a guarantee that he'll be at ace closer status this year either....
theres really nothing out there to say that 7 or 8 starts this year when were out of contention will harm his closing ability for next year
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I would have to say
that I would make fewer complaints about keeping Soria in the ’pen if he were pitching 100 innings per season rather than 75.
+100 innings
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
by Sweep_the_Leg on Apr 14, 2009 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
The closer
Soria would have to post an ERA below 4.00 to make it worthwhile. And I think he should be able to do that.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Maybe he wasn't making the case for keeping Soria as the closer
Maybe this was just another “Soria is great” article.
The immoderate moderator
har har
We’re not unreasonable. It’s just that 80% of the JoPo piece was recounting Soria’s strikeouts, and it ended with, “The team has made up its mind, and on days like today, that decision feels right.” It didn’t even pretend to make a conclusion.
its still just the same anti-stats argument
what “feels” good is better than “is” good…
I understand both points, but Mellinger used a lot of assumptions and false choices to back his arguments he didn’t really need to.
anyways, count me in the camp of someone who once was adamant about moving him to a starting role and now am indifferent. If Hillman still uses him like last night to secure any win that is in doubt, his value as a reliever is going to still be very high.
my thoughts exactly
I used to be strongly in favor of trying him in the rotation, and now I’m indifferent. I’d be curious to see how it would work out, but I don’t feel strongly that it would be a worthwhile experiment. I think a lot of the Soria-to-rotation push would evaporate if they could get him up closer to 100 innings this year, so let’s lead the Soria-to-fireman charge instead of the Soria-to-starter charge.
I would be all about a Soria-to-fireman charge
It would still represent a marked upgrade over how he was used last year.
i LOVED how hillman used him last night...
none of this ‘we wanted to make sure he was available tomorrow’ bullshit. We need to win every game that we have a chance to, not worry about tomorrow. if it comes down to it, and soria isnt available today, thats fine, but to not pitch him, holding him out for an opportunity that may never come is insanely stupid
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Isn't this the "closer role"?
“holding him out for an opportunity that may never come is insanely stupid”
If you are facing the other team’s best hitters or your “setup man” starts getting trouble in the 8th, isn’t holding Soria for the 9th in a “save situation” essentially the same thing?
As long as we are still running a Sidney Ponson or his equivalent out there every fifth day, our rotation is not in a position where it wouldn’t be drastically upgraded with Soria out there. And nothing we’ve seen from Soria indicates he’d be anything but highly successful at whatever role we put him in.
Overlooked in all this discussion is that Soria is NOT Affeldt or even Papelbon; there’s no reason to think he’d stop being the best executer of his pitches I’ve ever seen because he went to the rotation. And his stuff translates well to being a starter.
yes, it is the closers role....
but what i meant by it was that there were a couple times last year when trey was worried about possibly having to use soria three days in a row, that he left him in the pen the 2nd day, and that 3rd day never came. oh, and last night was really a traditional save situation per se. He saw we were in trouble and went to the best guy, regardless of it not being the start of the inning
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed
Thus far Trey has been a pretty good manager, opening day notwithstanding.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
It takes a while to regain trust...
when it is destroyed in such a dramatic and egregious manner.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
by Sweep_the_Leg on Apr 14, 2009 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions
dunno why....clearly players arent affected by managers terrible decisions robbing them of wins
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Perhaps this will quell the growing revolt in the clubhouse
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
The only thing that could keep me from wanting Soria to be a starter
are 3-4 games a week like last night….Him getting out of that was just awesome to watch and makes me go against my better judgement. I know that won’t happen 3-4 games a week, though, soooo there ya go.
by I need more Esteban on Apr 14, 2009 1:33 PM EDT reply actions
Unfortunately, last night was just more traditional closer usage
Closers are rarely used as firemen, except in the 9th inning. If things go south in the 9th inning (and especially if a non-save situation turns into a save situation), then a manager will bring in the closer. So far I still see no signs that Hillman is going to actually use Soria more than last year. But it’s early; I hope I start seeing those signs.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
were you surprised he brought in Soria when he did?
I was kind of expecting him to let Mahay have another batter
by I need more Esteban on Apr 14, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Not surprised at that point
Mahay hadn’t gotten anyone out and was looking pretty hittable.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
i just liked that he actually did it....
even with that dreaded 4 run lead…throw in that he did it in the middle of the inning and at the exact right time and i like it
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions
It was a good move
It wasn’t outside-the-box thinking or anything but it was a good move and not every manager would have done it (but most probably would have).
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
going back to opening day....
and me just wanting him to be able to do the inside the box stuff
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
In the postgame last night
Trey called Soria “Jack”, is this new or have I been missing it? I love it…why not Mike Olivo, Joe Guillen? Has he made up his own nickname for Coco yet?
We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan
I'm pretty sure he did last year too
by I need more Esteban on Apr 14, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I remember that from last year.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Trey cant pronounce Joakim
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
you would think he would be more adept
given all the weird names in the old testament
by Freneau on Apr 14, 2009 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
yeah...but joakim doesnt appear specifically....
i dont think so at least, i’m no bible expert, catholic education notwithstanding
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't think Joakim does...
…but Jehoiakim does (he’s one of the last kings of Judah before the sacking of Jerusalem by Babylon), and if you can handle the name Jehoiakim, then mastering the name Joakim should be easier than hitting a three-run jack off of Professor Farnsworth.
Are you Protestant or Catholic?
Susanna, a Septuagint (written in Greek) addition to the Book of Daniel, is about a woman married to a man named Joachim. I assume Trey is Protestant and doesn’t go for the Deuterocanon (also known as the Apocrypha).
Joachim is also the name of the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus
according to non-Biblical sources.
Yep
“Joakim” is pretty clearly a snazzed-up version of “Joaquín” – there’s a trend in LatAm to make up your own version of a traditional name for your kid – and Joaquín is Joachim in English. I have no idea how you pronounce it in English. In Spanish it would be “hwa-KEEM,” which isn’t that tough.
I remember a couple of quotes from last year when Hillman called Soria “Jack.”
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
its my experience as a Christian
(and a white guy, by the way, so, yes, I am one of the stupidest, most vile people on the planet), that the more people talk about reading the Bible, the less they know what is in it.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Apr 14, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
i'm not going to listen to you besmirch treyball
unless you are besmirching me, which is fine
I haven’t read the OT in seven or eight years (though will still stand by the fact that there are some awesome/difficult/weird names in there)
i dunno...i've had some crazy bible verses quoted at me for various indiscretions...
very impressive really
some people know movie quotes (me) some people know bible verses
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Apr 14, 2009 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish...
We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan
by Royal Kingdom on Apr 14, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Funny thing is
I am not sure if there is a version of the Bible that reads anywhere close to the movie quote.
We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan
by Royal Kingdom on Apr 15, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions
absolutely
those who have read the thing realize for every blanket statement, there is (almost) always a contradictory blanket statement.
"red bull is amaZing" -Coco Crisp
I think this is Germane to the Soria's velocity discussion
This THT article from a couple weeks back.
Very roughly speaking, it’s something like:
2.5 mph = .025 K per PA = 0.25 ERA
but read the article, I’m not sure I caught it all, lots of stuff about BABIP
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.
I need to read that article more thoroughly
…but are your above numbers saying or implying that a decrease in FB velocity of 2.5 mph leads to an increase in ERA of 0.25?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
should have mentioned that I got that interpretation from Tango's blog
that’s why I don’t think I properly understood the article
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Apr 14, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know that it's wrong
It just seems a little light. I’d think that 2.5 mph would be a bigger deal than 0.25 points of ERA. I’d have to dig deeper into it.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/25_mph_025_k_per_pa_025_era/
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions
ya, MGL has a comment on that post I really like
There is some nasty sampling issues with Dan’s data, however I do think the relationship is reasonable enough to work with.
But the 2.5 mph = .025 K per PA = 0.25 ERA is really questionable because it makes an implicit assumption that pitch speed is the one and only cause of K’s which in turn is the one and only cause of era. Its not a controlled variable from what i can tell, i.e. the increase of pitch speeds causes more strikeouts, as well as other things, which in turn have their own effects. All the being said, it is probably good enough a ratio to work with, but don’t rely on it.
there it is
should have just posted that
I really don’t uhderstand the whole thing — i was hoping other people would read it and figure it out for me
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Apr 14, 2009 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
It's interesting
But one problem with applying it to the Soria velocity discussion is that it’s comparing across pitchers rather than looking at a single pitcher’s effectiveness at different velocities. Every player in the Majors has earned his way there somehow. The players with inferior velocity can be expected to, on average, compensate at least partially for that lesser velocity with other skills. If you’re looking at a velocity drop in a single player, it’s less clear how that player would compensate for a velocity drop by having better secondary skills.
I would actually think that Soria would be able to compensate for a velocity drop better than most. Many pitchers rely on velocity to get batters out. It’s the biggest and best tool. But for Soria, it is one tool among many, and it’s not even his best tool.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
if the curveball is his out pitch
doesn’t that mean the contrary for Soria?
Just asking
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Apr 14, 2009 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know what you mean
What I was saying is that Affeldt is in the Majors because of good fastball velocity while Moyer is in the Majors because of a good change-up. Comparing the two makes sense—you’re looking at the effect of a velocity difference between MLB pitchers. It doesn’t necessarily make sense to apply those conclusions to the Soria situation though. At this point, it seems like Soria is in the Majors because of reasonably good fastball velocity with pinpoint control and a devestating curve. If you take away some of the velocity, you wouldn’t expect his control or curve to improve. It’s a different scenario than the analysis between pitchers where when you take away some velocity, you would expect the secondary pitches to improve.
It's not that there aren't any good arguments against moving to the rotation
it’s just frustrating that the people that write the articles don’t ever even try to use them as justification.
- Maybe Soria never wants to leave the closer role
- Maybe his mechanics are really, really bad,
- Maybe he has some genetic disorder that causes stamina issues, or
- Maybe he’s allergic to pitching in major league games in innings 1-3, and breaks out in terrible, DeJesus-esque hives if he even thinks about it.
Either way, go and get some quotes from Hillman/Moore/McClure/Arbuckle/Wong and print that. Don’t go with the generic “Allard Baird had terrible bullpens, so if anyone other than Soria closed, the Royals would immediately lose every save situation with a non-proven closer*.”
* despite Soria not being a PROVEN closer before being handed the job.
+100
Exactly. There’s at least one potentially very good reason to not use him as a starter (mechanical issues and injury risk). But instead of that, we get arguments about the ghosts of former closers, “feel,” and how good closers really are more valuable than good starting pitchers, which are the weakest arguments out there.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Apr 14, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Wait...
so you guys are suggesting that the “reporters” who write these pieces should actually leave their computers and go be REPORTERS? Granted, I never went to journalism school, but this collecting information/actual quotes thing seems rather antiquated to me.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
by Sweep_the_Leg on Apr 14, 2009 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
this is a BLOG post from Mellinger
I’m not going to defend his post, but I will say that it seems kind of below the belt to say he never actually reports. If you read any of his articles for the paper you would see lots of ‘reporting’.
The Alex Gordon era - www.number4thesmirk.com
by CollininCalifornia on Apr 14, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I have read his official newspaper "articles"...
in addition to his unofficial “blog posts.” I know that he “reports” for those articles, and most of them are very good. I guess I just don’t understand the distinction. To me, if you are a professional member of the media, then anything you submit for public consumption should be held to a higher standard, whatever it may be characterized as.
In the world of modern media (at least sports media), there is one last advantage/distinction that professional reporters have over random posters and commenters on RR or any other blog: Access. With the internet and satellite TV, everyone can watch the same game, access and organize the same statistics, and write about what they saw. The one thing that reporters are able to do is go straight to the source(s) to get information and quotes.
Both Mellinger and Posnanski (and others) have written articles, posts, etc. regarding the “psychological/emotional,” “gut feeling,” “confidence,” etc. side of the Soria as closer/starter argument. In very few of those articles have I seen more than one generic, random quote about that side of the argument. I just wish that someone whose job it was to gather such information would actually make a sustained effort to interview Moore, Hillman, Arbuckle, McClure, etc. (as mentioned by Top Ramen above) to see how much of the perceived “ghosts of former closers,” psyche of the organization, etc. is really behind the decision to keep Soria in the closer role.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
by Sweep_the_Leg on Apr 14, 2009 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Star reporters seem to be forgetting
We’ve had some pretty awful starting pitchers too that have cost us games.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
They seem to do a good job of remembering, however,
that GMDM is their key to access to the organization.
I’m not criticizing Moore here, but I suspect his has a lot to do with it — even through two horrible offseasons, Mellinger (in particular) and even JoPo haven’t directly said, well, that they’ve been populated by moves that were mostly bad, and obviously so at the time.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Apr 14, 2009 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Posnanski
has questioned several of Moore’s moves in his blog. I particularly remember one when he talked about the Royals having a lousy OBP in 2008 and then going out and getting low-OBP players like Jacobs.
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
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.
