The Royals plan to spend less in 2011
by Scott McKinney on Oct 5, 2010 7:44 AM EDT
Email
PrintBob Dutton wrote his annual looking to next year article today. It was a mix of comments from Dayton Moore, Ned Yost and speculation from Dutton. There were some interesting highlights including cutting payroll, not repeating mistakes (maybe) and Ned Yost understanding the marginal value of a win. So let's cut it up and see what's inside.
"We will continue to try to put the best team, the most competitive team, we can on the field going forward in 2011," general manager Dayton Moore said. "But at the same time, we will not do anything to restrict the advancement of our young players to the major leagues."
Ok, that sounds like what Moore says for every offseason. They are going to try to win as many games as they can, but not trade or rush prospects.
Moore plays his cards close to the vest, but at least there's a real, concrete piece of information here. The payroll is going to drop. This leads Dutton to jump to the conclusion that Moore won't be repeating Ankiel and Farnsworth-like mistakes.
So, no retread stopgaps? Or just less expensive retread stopgaps? I'm skeptical. And that low $60 million figure is interesting (BTW, that comes from anonymous "club officials" and not from Dayton Moore). Here's a quick snapshot of a partial 2011 payroll, which includes arbitration estimates.
| 2011 est. | |
| Gil Meche | 12 |
| Zack Greinke | 13.5 |
| David DeJesus | 6 |
| Yuniesky Betancourt | 3 |
| Joakim Soria | 4 |
| Brian Bannister | 4 |
| Jason Kendall | 3.75 |
| Kyle Davies | 3 |
| Luke Hochevar | 3.5 |
| Noel Arguelles | 1.38 |
| Alex Gordon | 2.25 |
| Robinson Tejeda | 1.75 |
| Aaron Crow | 1 |
| Billy Butler | 5 |
| Mike Aviles | 0.45 |
| Brayan Pena | 0.75 |
| Josh Fields | 0.5 |
| Chris Getz | 0.43 |
| Dusty Hughes | 0.41 |
| Mitch Maier | 0.41 |
| whoever | 0.4 |
| whoever | 0.4 |
| whoever | 0.4 |
| whoever | 0.4 |
| whoever | 0.4 |
| Juan Cruz | 0.5 |
| TOTAL | 69.58 |
In order to get payroll down to the low 60's, the Royals would have to either trade away a big contract for cheap players or non-tender multiple arbitration-eligible players like Bannister, Davies and Tejeda. Is that the plan? FWIW, if the Royals get rid of Banny, Davies and Pena and replace them all with league minimum players, the payroll would be about $63 million. Ned Yost appears to back up the idea that the Royals won't and shouldn't be spending much right now.
"We can go out and spend $10 million-$15 million and for what?" manager Ned Yost asked. "To get us to 70 wins? Or 75 wins? If it gets us from 70 wins to 80 wins, what does that do for you? Momentum? Forget momentum. I’d rather save that money. And when we get to the point where we can win 82 games on our own, then spend that money and go from 82 to 92. We do that, and chances are, we’re going to be contending for the division."
Wow. That does not sound like someone in the KC Royals organization. He's right. It really doesn't make sense to spend millions just to add a few wins to a losing season. This is basically diametrically opposed to the philosophy which has governed Dayton Moore's offseason spending throughout his Royals tenure. Has Dayton really changed his mind, or is something else going on? Other highlights:
- The Royals will listen to trade offers for Greinke but they'd need to be blown away, so he's unlikely to be traded anytime soon. Maybe at the deadline or next offseason. (according to an anonymous club official)
- Without citing even an anonymous source, Dutton says that Kyle Davies should return. That might just be Dutton's speculation. It's hard to see how the Royals get the payroll to the low 60's with Davies on the roster.
- Bannister likely to be traded or non-tendered.
- The Royals won't even consider trading Soria. [That is really, really stupid.]
- Dutton speculates that the Royals will look to acquire a cheap veteran catcher.
- Butler and Ka'aihue likely to split time at 1B/DH.
- Yuni set for another year at shorstop.
- Royals would like to have Getz at 2B and Aviles at 3B until Moustakas is ready, but Getz's position is not secure. If Getz doesn't improve, Betemit or Getz could play 3B with Aviles at 2B.
- Royals prefer Betemit as a utility player since his defense is horrendous.
- Royals could trade DeJesus this offseason, or just play him in RF until they probably trade him in July.
- Royals committed to Gordon as the LFer.
- Dutton appears to think that Dyson is the favorite for the starting CF job with Blanco and Maier as reserve OFers, but the situation is fluid.
140 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Wow
“We can go out and spend $10 million-$15 million and for what?” manager Ned Yost asked. “To get us to 70 wins? Or 75 wins? If it gets us from 70 wins to 80 wins, what does that do for you? Momentum? Forget momentum. I’d rather save that money. And when we get to the point where we can win 82 games on our own, then spend that money and go from 82 to 92. We do that, and chances are, we’re going to be contending for the division.”
That is a fascinating quote from Yost that I would never have expected a Royals official to make publicly. I like it.
I still expect we’ll go out and acquire a couple veteran FAs, but hopefully on cheap, 1 yr deals. I firmly believe we’ll go out and pickup a vet catcher to “lead” Pena and May. I also expect to see a handful of non-tenders – Banny seems like an obvious choice.
Catchers
I firmly believe we’ll go out and pickup a vet catcher to "lead" Pena and May.
That could be, and Moore probably wouldn’t mind carrying three catchers, but both Pena and May are out of options. May could be outrighted, but he’d have to clear waivers. He might make it, but I don’t know. I kind of feel like Moore will keep May and jettison Pena (to save a little money and because he doesn’t like his defense) and pick up a dirt cheap veteran catcher as a placeholder until Kendall is back.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 5, 2010 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions
I thought this was a really encouraging piece
Of course, predictably, BigRoy and the KCStar idiot commenter contingent were furious about it, but I think that the Yost quote shows the right attitude.
I don’t expect to see many of the young guys up any time soon. As long as they’re in the minors, Dayton gets judged on potential, and that’s going pretty well for him. Once they’re up, he starts getting judged on their MLB production, and nobody knows what that will be. I think Dayton’s job preservation instincts will keep our young guys off the team until September, which means (1) Kila and Mitch will get another chance to show what they can do, but (2) we’re probably staring at 100 losses again next year.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
by KSinDC on Oct 5, 2010 9:52 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
$4MM for Bannister? No way.
Glad to see the commitment to Aviles. I think he would be a good play at 3B next year. And to be honest, I could see a Callaspo like trade happening with him next year once Moose is here.
I fully expect an old shitty catcher to be added. Because we need one. Barajas, anyone?
I like Dyson at CF. More than Blanco or Maier I guess, though I like either or both of them on the roster next year. Im glad that we do have Dyson, because I think that will hault any OF acquisitions. I mean, if we were to get Frenchie, where would he play? You have to play Alex and DDJ everyday. I guess DDJ could play center, but if they like Dyson there (because he’s fast!!!!), I dont see room for him.
$4MM for Banny is probably a pretty good estimate for arbitration.
However, the more likely outcome if they wanted to keep him would be for the royals to release him and re-sign to something smaller ~$2MM.
Your out of your mind...Aviles is the worst defensive player on the team....it's not
even a close call. He needs to be sent down….and permanently this time…because he’s shown when they send him down, he doesn’t ever learn.
"You sons of bitches. Give my love to Mother."
Francis "Two Gun" Crowley, (1900-1931) (American bank robber and murderer, before his execution in the electric chair)
The biggest problem on the salary scales is Gil Meche.
We’ve got about 12 pitchers who we can bring up and fill his shoes in the bullpen for around 500k. Lefties too. We have to find a way to dump his salary of 12m this year, and the Meche era needs to end. Even if we have to eat half his salary and trade him just to free up 6M.
"You sons of bitches. Give my love to Mother."
Francis "Two Gun" Crowley, (1900-1931) (American bank robber and murderer, before his execution in the electric chair)
Too bad you weren't at Treasury when the financial crisis hit
All we needed to do was find a way to sell all of those securities for 100 cents on the dollar (or even 50 cents on the dollar). As simple as that.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
Don't tell Rany
Rany is going to be disappointed when he reads this article in the Star. I don’t know why, but he’s expecting big things next year:
Next year, the excuses end. Next year, the bill of goods comes due, and we have every right to expect to see the tangible results of this youth movement. If the Royals have a 2011 in which everything goes wrong – much like the Mariners’ 2010 – then you have my permission to jump off the bandwagon, because I’ll be jumping off with you. But right now, I’m feeling pretty good about the future.
http://www.ranyontheroyals.com/2010/10/how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love.html
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
I thought that was a particularly odd part of Rany's column
He expects tangible results of the youth movement next year? Really? I don’t think any current prospect should play the full season in KC next year. By that I mean both that I don’t think it will happen, and that I believe it would be a bad idea. Don’t rush them. Moustakas is the closest to the majors, and even he has some things to work on there (plate discipline and defense). The most reasonable expectation for next year is that the Royals stand pat, with perhaps the midseason addition of Moustakas and maybe a pitcher. That wouldn’t lead to many more wins. One shouldn’t expect real improvement until 2012.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 5, 2010 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
I guess I didn't worry
about that so much because I’d go with the idea that one can see “tangible results of this youth movement” even if the W-L record doesn’t show it. If a couple of kids make it up in the latter half of next year (say, Moose and a pitcher like Coleman or Collins?), maybe Kila shows something more in a full season, Dyson manages to look vaguely competent against ML pitching, and May looks like a ML contributor, that could qualify as “tangible results” without requiring that the Royals be contending for a playoff spot.
The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them. -- Albert Einstein
by The Ol' Perfesser on Oct 5, 2010 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions
That's a pretty low bar
In 2008, Gordon followed up on his strong rookie season with a similar campaign, we called up Aviles, who hit a ton and fielded pretty nicely, and then we called up Kila in September, who posted an OBP of almost .400. And the team sucked. And the excuses continued. I’m going to have to see a hell of a lot more from this wave — and I expect to, but not next year. Rany has just gotten overexcited.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
So what?
After this year, what wouldn’t look like progress? And I wouldn’t count Gordon as a product of Moore’s particular youth push. When the likes of Moustakas, etc. start appearing (or even a trade catch like Collins), it’s more directly a product of what Moore has been selling since who knows when. As for the likes of Gordon, Kila, Aviles, etc., they’ve tended to be dismissed as not Moore’s choices. From here on out, Moore won’t have that out to fall back on. Either his picks start to arrive, and don’t fall down, or it may be time for the pitchforks and torches.
The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them. -- Albert Einstein
by The Ol' Perfesser on Oct 5, 2010 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions
If we're using cheap young players
with some possibility of improvement, I’m happy. If not, not.
"I'm not proud of a lot of things I've done. I'm not proud of biting the head off a bat, or having a poor education, or drinking too much and taking illegal drugs. But it could be worse. I could be that c**t Sting." --Ozzy Osbourne
I thought maybe he was talking about the Mariners' farm system?
Maybe by ‘everying going wrong’ for the Mariners’, he meant that none of their prospects performed well either. But… ‘Next year the bill of goods comes due…’ How does that work if Yost has already stated that Moose will most likely spend a large part, if not most of the season in AAA, that the pitchers won’t be rushed, and obviously Hosmer won’t be coming up before September. I mean, which prospects are expected to contribute exactly?
by jackie ballgame on Oct 7, 2010 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions
I found the Yost quote encouraging as well
I suppose if you trade DDJ for prospects, you are almost down in the low 60’s in one fell swoop. Maybe that’s the plan.
"Shot by my own men."
Loved most of the points of the article, especially Ned's quote
Things I’m not as happy about though:
- The Royals won’t even consider trading Soria. [That is really, really stupid.]
- Dutton speculates that the Royals will look to acquire a cheap veteran catcher.
- Yuni set for another year at shortstop.
Why are they interested in a veteran C? I guess I wouldn’t mind one on a minor league deal, but the odds of Kendall sucking up ABs very early in the season are high.
Also, what does Aviles have to do to take his job back? With Betancourt having ZERO range to his left, you’d think they’d at least try swapping them between 2B/SS.
One other thing that was interesting:
The Royals will listen to trade offers for Greinke but they’d need to be blown away, so he’s unlikely to be traded anytime soon. Maybe at the deadline or next offseason. (according to an anonymous club official)
The Royals have convinced themselves (and are essentially announcing to the fans) that the 2011 season is going to be a waste. Greinke is only signed through 2012. If you’ve pretty much guaranteed that one of the two years is going to be an absolute disaster, shouldn’t you be listening pretty intently to offers trying to maximize the return? I guess I’d just like to know what they would consider the minimum offer to trade him.
Unless I'm wrong...
Why are they interested in a veteran C? I guess I wouldn’t mind one on a minor league deal, but the odds of Kendall sucking up ABs very early in the season are high.
Because old school traditionalism says that a team has to have an experienced catcher who is a good game caller and knows how to handle young pitchers. This would be doubly true if you have a lot of young pitchers. I think this archaic “wisdom” leads to bad moves like signing Kendall and signing whatever cheap oldster they find this offseason.
Also, what does Aviles have to do to take his job back?
Grow a few “plus hands.” That’s really what it’s about. The Royals people like Yuni’s defensive tools and don’t like Aviles’s tools. It’s all tools. Their great talent evaluators see it in Yuni and not in Aviles.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 5, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I actually like bringing in a veteran catcher
I’m not interested in a veteran for the sake of bringing in a veteran, but I’d be very happy to bring in a Molina (isn’t Bengie available) or some other catcher with a reputation of being good defensively and with pitchers. Heck, I’d be happy to have Olivo back.
It makes sense to me that a very young pitching corps would benefit from an experienced battery mate. Now, some old guys, like Kendall, suck. I believe it’s the memory of his former hitting and running that’s kept him around so long. But I’m not ready to give up on the idea. Our pitchers would benefit from a modern-day Jim Sundberg.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
Bengie is terrible defensively
and his bat doesn’t make up for it.
My choice would be (if he’s healthy and not retired) Gregg “Z-Game” Zaun. Not a defensive whiz, but he’s not awful, can actually hit a little.
by Matt Klaassen on Oct 5, 2010 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
And coming off an injury, the price may be right for Z-Game
Maybe Ramon Castro if his option is not picked up.
KC should
Take a look at that guy in Toronto who hit 20 bombs this season. What was his name again.
by Matt Klaassen on Oct 5, 2010 1:44 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
C'mon, you guys know who I'm talking about
…Adam Lind, obviously
by Matt Klaassen on Oct 5, 2010 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Now that I think of it
Yunel Escobar is probably pretty coveted by DM
Bautista can catch?
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Oct 5, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
If I Could
Hit 50+ HR’s, I could catch.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Oct 6, 2010 1:23 AM EDT up reply actions
is he going to be available?
I always liked him and would have rather had him this year than Jason
"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell
I'm not against the idea in theory
but the Royals are responsible for Kendall’s 3.75M regardless of what moves they make. Due to his play in 2010 and his rehab status, he’s almost entirely untradable.
If they were willing to eat the salary and pick up a decent veteran catcher, to split time with Pena it wouldn’t be a bad idea. However, I’m afraid they’d pick up Kendall 2.0 and we’d be treated to Kendall 1.0 and Kendall 2.0 catching 98% of the innings in 2011 with Pena and May getting released.
I’d rather just give the Pena/May tandem the catching spots and see what happens. Maybe pick up a AAAA catcher to stash in AAA as well.
Unless I'm wrong...
A Reasonable Plan
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Oct 6, 2010 1:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Pena/May seems fine to me
start May once a week. Pena is better than whoever we’d bring in.
by jackie ballgame on Oct 7, 2010 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions
The marketability of Greinke probably plays no small role in that.
Proud member of the Toledo Computer Club since 2010.
by KeepItCopacetic on Oct 5, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Bullpen
•On the way: Those young guys include left-hander Tim Collins, another Pan Am team member. He will get every chance to claim a job. Lefty Blaine Hardy also seems in line for a long look. Duffy, Teaford and others could also see bullpen duty as a transitional phase. Right-hander Louis Coleman is another prime candidate.
I like this method of easing minor league pitches into the MLB environment. I wouldn’t mind seeing Duffy, Teaford, and/or Monty start the year in Omaha, and then get brought up to KC mid-season to work out of the pen.
Personally, I hate using good SP prospects as MLB relievers
If it is a short-term thing, then it’s no big deal. Also if it is done to limit MLB innings, then it makes sense. But if it is more than that, I really don’t like it. I think the way to develop a SP is to pitch him as a SP. Most pitchers really need to work on their secondary pitches, and as a reliever, they rarely throw those secondary pitches. Pitching as a RP is different in a lot of ways. I think it can really hamper a SP’s development.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 5, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Twins have done it with quite a bit of success
and other orgs practice the philosophy as well. Maybe I should have been more specific, but yes, I would like to see it done on a short-term basis (as in, only the back-end of 2011) as a way to get a taste of MLB action in short increments and limit innings pitches. I would definitely expect them to be moved back to a full-time starter in 2012.
by deezle on Oct 5, 2010 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The twins usually have average ML pitchers in place at the time the rooks are in the Pen
Teaford could actually be are 3rd best starting pitcher next year. I really like the idea of throwing him in the fire and seeing if he is actually a ML pitcher.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Oct 5, 2010 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree
I hate rushing prospects, but he’ll be 27 next year, so I don’t think it’s a rush. It’s time for him to prove himself in the majors. And at his age, his service time clock isn’t an issue. It’s sink or swim time for him.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 5, 2010 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Agree on Teaford
If any of our pitchers should be thrown into the rotation at the outset, it’s him.
I see your point
but, at least now, the “risk” of losing a potentially good starter to the closer role is gone – as that has already happened once to the Royals, when Soria was so damn good, he ended up in a far greater role than they initially projected for him, and any plans for him to become a starter were ultimately scrapped.
So, we got that going for us, which is nice.
"We're gonna win with pitching and defense" General Manager Dayton Moore, circa winter 2009
"Where did all these Indians come from?" General George Armstrong Custer, circa summer 1876
Nice to see we are paying Mr. Cruz .5M, btw
"Shot by my own men."
Comments from Yost
were arguably the most refreshing, candid, encouraging thoughts I’ve heard from anyone in the front office in a LONG time.
"We're gonna win with pitching and defense" General Manager Dayton Moore, circa winter 2009
"Where did all these Indians come from?" General George Armstrong Custer, circa summer 1876
I've said it before, some of Yost's in-game decisions are bizarre (thought not nearly as bad as Hillman), but he seems to "get it' in terms of the importance of not only having young guys on the team, but letting them actually play.
Hopefully he rubs off on DM some.
Killing time until time kills me
Well...
he seems to "get it’ in terms of the importance of not only having young guys on the team, but letting them actually play.
With the notable exceptions of Yuni and Kendall. And he played Poz every chance he could until he was traded.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 5, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
i hated the Pos signing as much as anyone....
but him playing didnt really block anyone, nor has Yuni. We know what we have in Mitch…and its a 4th OF. Its not like OF and SS prospects were knocking down the door to KC. Gordon played once the organization deemed him ready in the OF. Aviles didnt exactly light the world on fire until september, and realistically, he’s likely a 2b if anything in the future.
Hopefully both Yuni and Bianchi have strong first halves next year and someone will want half a season of Yuni on the cheap and Bianchi can smoothly transition into our starting SS.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Oct 5, 2010 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Well he's certainly not perfect, but you can't expect him to take over as interim manager and completely exclude every one of DM's players from the lineup immediately
Certainly not saying Yost is some savior, but he could be much much worse.
Killing time until time kills me
I hate the idea of bringing in a veteran catcher
What would be the point? If Pena would make .75 mil, what kind of catcher could you get for less than that? You’re not going to save much I would think. If the team is as bad as everyone predicts then there’s no point in bringing in someone to get you a few more wins. I’d rather just use Pena, May, and/or Manny Pina until Kendall comes back (undoubtedly way ahead of schedule to the detriment of the team.)
This is absolutely awesome....
good job royals
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Oct 5, 2010 12:30 PM EDT reply actions
In year five of the first five year plan
management finally “gets” a few basic things just in time to begin the new five year plan. Better late than never, I guess.
Farsworth was a mistake, but was the gamble on AnKiel a mistake?
won’t be repeating Ankiel and Farnsworth-like mistakes
Sure it didn’t pan out, but it didn’t really cause harm other than some cash up in flames. The decision process was OK on that one.
The only people who really know where [the edge] is are the ones who have gone over it.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Oct 5, 2010 1:19 PM EDT reply actions
I was resigned to it at the time
but I now think that a team that isn’t a contender paying market value for a projected 1-1.5 WAR player is making a bad decision. There’s no point.
by Matt Klaassen on Oct 5, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
what saves it, IMO, is the upside coming off the injury
It was medium-risk, high-reward. If he returned to form and netted a good prospect in a deadline deal (or signs a team-friendly contract and is useful going forward), then great; if not, then the Royals are out a few million that were going to be spent on payroll anyways, he didn’t really block anyone or otherwise hurt the team (since playing bad is really irrelevant in a throw-away season).
The only people who really know where [the edge] is are the ones who have gone over it.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Oct 5, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Really?
Signing a guy with one reasonable year as a hitter, guaranteeing him CF (where he’s crap) and with no upside. Even if he’d been good, what was the point?
Maybe Yost is able to talk some sense into GMDM
I could see that Moore might consider Yost a “peer”, in a sense, who’s opinion is actually worth listening to. For example, Yost said Kila deserved some ABs, and (in a reversal of precedent) he got them.
The only people who really know where [the edge] is are the ones who have gone over it.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Oct 5, 2010 1:21 PM EDT reply actions
I wish Yost would have convinced DM to allow him to stop playing Yuni and Kendall everyday
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 5, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
except they agree.
But good point. If Yost get’s the meaningless of spending to get the 72nd win, why doesn’t he get the meaningless of playing Yuni everyday?
My hope (now all of a sudden I have hope that Yost bending Moore’s ear is the salvation for our GM problem) is that Yost can’t see past the Kendall issue b/c Yost has a special place in his heart for the scrappy veteran catcher. And the Yuni problem is just out of anyone’s hands, considering Moore’s indomitable lust after the Tools Of Yuni.
The only people who really know where [the edge] is are the ones who have gone over it.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Oct 5, 2010 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay, here's a crazy idea that probably can't be done but
Is it possible to “loan” players to other teams? Kinda like a sub-lease? Greinke is signed through 2012. He’s not happy with all the losing and 2011 ain’t gonna help with that. So… could the Royals somehow work out a deal with another (competitive) team to allow Greinke to play for them next year but we get him back for 2012? Or could it be a flat-out trade with some sort of clause that he gets traded back the next year? Anyway, Zack gets to see what the grass is like on the other side of the fence, would probably appreciate the Royals giving him the opportunity to do it, and then hopefully 2012 goes according to plan and convinces him to re-sign.
Lack of feasability aside, I do like that idea
Saves payroll if nothing else. But what if the grass really IS greener and Zack doesn’t want to come back to the putrid Royals….
The only people who really know where [the edge] is are the ones who have gone over it.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Oct 5, 2010 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
what if???
There really shouldn’t be any doubt. The grass IS greener on the other side of our fence – always.
22.
Except
The other team would have no incentive to limit innings or worry much about injury. They would want to extract as much value as possible that one year, then give us the remains.
Make it a lease
They get 200 regular season innings of Zack for $X.X million dollars with a non-trivial penalty for violating the limit.
Maybe Dayton is just sweet-talking his way into spending in the mid-$70s again
I could totally see that they’re trying to follow the “Ned Yost” plan of spending less now so that the can spend more later. But, I could also see that Moore is playing the old “Oh, I am TOTALLY going to cut spending, Mr. Glass, because 2011 is a rebuilding year. Buuuuut, if—and this is a BIG IF—something comes along that’s going to help us contend in 2012 and beyond, then it would be outright silly NOT to spend more money now” card. (Also, Moore was repeatedly winking at Ned Yost while he said that, as Ned cringed with embarrassment for Moore and his ham-handed strategies/winks.)
we will weigh any deal that puts us in a good position for the long term even if it requires us to take on some salarySounds like he’s setting Glass up to spend $70M again.
The only people who really know where [the edge] is are the ones who have gone over it.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Oct 5, 2010 1:44 PM EDT reply actions
OK Buddy Bell
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Oct 5, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm optimistic
but that’s probably because I’m drunk.
Place witty signature here.
by LaFLamme on Oct 5, 2010 2:03 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
about Brayan Pena
If they agree its not worth spending $X Million more for a handful more wins unless your on the cusp, whats the point of getting an aged old catcher to call the game? Pena has been around this team for the past two years and knows the staff better than someone new they would bring in. I think that stability and pitcher knowledge should account for something. If that means costing us a few runs in the WAR column from the catcher position and have Pena/May next year there, I’d rather have that. Then spend that money they would have used on a catcher somewhere else, ie middle infield or pitcher position. Hell, even hold onto the money for 2012 like they are suggesting.
I don't think knowing the current pitching staff is really a virtue
If we’re going to be good, the vast majority of them are going to have to go.
That said, I like Pena, and I hope he stays.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
Rather see them spend their $1.5-3 million on a couple of DR 16 year olds
than waste it on some 30 something catcher who is a “veteran presence.” I’m so tired of that mentality. Pena will be alright – switch hitter, good energy, and isn’t so bad as a catcher. May plays once or twice a week. Could he be worse than the veteran Jason LaRue?
by daveyork on Oct 5, 2010 8:49 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This seems like a false choice
I haven’t seen any evidence that the Royals drafts / international free agency budgets are dictated by the major league payroll.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
I haven't seen any proof of it
but it all comes out the owner’s pocket, right? Therefore, spending that money on international prospects would be a better investment.
Does that work?
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
people always make that argument....
that player deveopment and mlb expenses are separated….but theres no reason this needs to be the case. Glass can take a briefcase full of money and instead of giving it to some shitty vet he can send send it down to venezuela
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Oct 5, 2010 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions
A better way to spend money
Money spent on a couple DR 16 year olds is probably money wasted — player development is just too much of a crap shoot.
Statistics show that several of our pitchers who have already demonstrated their stuff in the high minor leagues will turn out to be busts in the majors. If $3M on a veteran catcher changes the odds on those pitchers even slightly, it’s money well spent.
Nobody is arguing for a generic veteran presence. There seems to be some value to major league experience, which is why some players don’t decline as quickly as their skills do. If there are catchers (like Jim Sundberg on the ‘85 Royals) who can use the benefit of their experience to help our young pitching talent, it’s money well spent.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
Really?
Nobody is arguing for a generic veteran presence.
Tell that to Dayton Moore.
The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them. -- Albert Einstein
by The Ol' Perfesser on Oct 5, 2010 9:31 PM EDT up reply actions
player development money is wasted money?
Moose, Hosmer, Lamb, Myers, Cuthbert, Eibner, Adam, etc wouldnt be in our system were it not for lavish spending in player development. What would we have then?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Oct 5, 2010 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Good job shooting down an argument I didn't make
The chances that any given 16 year old Dominican signee makes a contribution at the major league level is low. So the most likely outcome of a signing (or two) is no return. Survivorship bias (we only remember the successes) makes the returns look much better, so I just wanted to remind that there’s a lot of risk in throwing money at foreign teenagers.
And my larger point is: the farther a player is from the majors — the less he’s demonstrated in the pros — the greater the risk for the individual. If we want to generate major league players, we can increase the number and quality of people we’re feeding into the system, or we can try to do a better job of developing the ones in the system. There’s been a big push on the increasing the quality and quantity of the prospects, but there’s no reason to automatically redirect resources away from development and toward prospect acquisition.
I think an experienced catcher can help pitchers in the final stage of their development. I speculate (without running the numbers) that the surplus value of increasing our success rate at converting productive minor leaguers into productive major leaguers is substantial — likely more than the surplus value of 2 $1M Dominican teenager signings.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
how much did kendall help out this year?
and the upside of a cheap veteran catcher is very little…and its basically none in a year where we have no chance to compete. while the chances of find the next Miguel Cabrera, Vlad, Hanley, etc arent strong…its a better bet than a Kendall type out helping the organization in the long run.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Oct 6, 2010 1:23 AM EDT up reply actions
basically
$ 3 million at a couple latin guys is same risk huge reward possibility
$ 3 million at a veteran catcher same risk with little possible reward
i’ll take powerball over the $1 scratchers ticket where the max prize is $3
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Oct 6, 2010 1:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Back to basics
1. Do you believe that organizations can affect player development?
2. Are some personnel better than others at aiding player development?
3. Does a catcher aid a pitcher’s development?
4. Is pitcher development an identifiable skill in catchers?
If the answers to these four questions is yes (and the only one I wonder about is 4), then the Royals can increase the returns on this first wave of talent by bringing in a catcher skilled at handling pitchers.
Increasing the success rate of that first wave of pitchers is a huge reward — statistically, 2/3 will amount to little. If we can increase the success rate by one quality starter, it’s worth far more than $3M.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
There's nothing I've ever seen or read that has shown a catcher aids a pitcher's development.
Isn’t that what the Royals pay coaches to do? If you believe catchers can help, Kendall’s your man. And he’s already getting paid close to 4 million for 2011.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
There's no evidence one way or another
Unless I’ve missed something, we don’t even have statistically sound conculsions as to whether catchers affect a pitcher’s ERA, much less their development. But the lack of conclusions doesn’t mean it can’t work; it just means we don’t know. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
I don’t understand the stubborn resistance to this idea. It’s far different than playing Yuni (or Kendall) We know Yuni sucks. Running him out there every day damages the team. With this concept, we don’t know whether it will work (and we probably won’t be able to measure the effect even if it does work), but the response from the stat folks seems the same.
And Kendall is not my man. The money is a sunk cost. If there’s a player out there with a reputation for handling young pitchers well, I say we go get him.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
Isn't this supposed to be Kendall's reputation?
If there’s a player out there with a reputation for handling young pitchers well, I say we go get him.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
If so, it's kept very quiet
I ran a google search for Jason Kendall reputation, and I didn’t come up with anything about handling pitchers. I found a lot on ‘grit’ on his offensive ability in his prime, on his ball blocking, and on his throwing arm, but even on the site touting him for the hall of fame, there’s no mention of a reputation for working well with pitchers.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
There was a study done at Baseball Prospectus several years ago
Baseball Prospectus did a study on CERA (the ERA of pitchers when a certain catcher catches them) And found no stable relationship between catchers and ERA. The available evidence provides no support for the contention that some catchers are really good game callers or pitch handlers, while others are not.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 6, 2010 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
But the method was flawed, right?
Bill James singled out this study, the clutch hitting study and a few others in a recent piece pointing out that they likely wouldn’t have detected an effect, even if it was there:
http://www.sabr.org/cmsfiles/underestimating.pdf
http://www.philbirnbaum.com/mappingthefog.pdf
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
James did have a problem with the methodology
But didn’t debate the conclusion (although he considers it unproven). From my reading the vast majority of the sabermetric community agrees with Woolner’s conclusion. I don’t think I’ve read anything from any serious analyst suggesting that certain catchers make pitchers better.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 6, 2010 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I think he did debate the conclusion
On (4) above (catchers have little or no impact on a pitcher’s ERA), I don’t think that there is a scintilla of evidence that that is true. It is my opinion that it is impossible to evaluate a catcher’s defensive contribution by a comparison based on catcher’s ERAs.
From page 4 of: http://www.sabr.org/cmsfiles/underestimating.pdf
I think that’s pretty definitive that he doesn’t think there’s any reason to believe that claim.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
He was very clear that he wasn't debating the conclusions. He was just arguing that the studies have not sufficiently proven them.
From that same article (emphasis added):
For now, trying again to keep clear what I am saying and what I am not. I am not saying that these conclusions are false. What I am saying, and will try to demonstrate beginning in just a moment, is that a method used to reach these conclusions is unreliable to the point of being useless—therefore, that some of these conclusions may be wanting in proof.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 6, 2010 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
OK, we're just using terms differently then
So you would agree that it’s a fair description to say that the vast majority of the sabermetric community believes catchers have no effect on EPA, and Bill James says there’s no evidence to support this belief.
Is that a fair description?
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
Essentially
The only nitpicking I’d do with the above statement is that I don’t believe Bill James thinks that there is “no evidence to support” the claim, but that Woolner’s study didn’t come close to proving it.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 7, 2010 8:54 AM EDT up reply actions
The art of paraphrasing.
I think “there is no evidence to support” is a pretty fair paraphrase of “there is not a scintilla of evidence that that is true”
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
This is nonsense
Trey Hillman didn’t help, so let’s not have a manager.
"I think a tactical error might have been committed by the manager of the Royals"
Actually, we might have been better without him.
I’d certainly consider it, now that you mention it. How much did we pay him? Maybe not having him would have helped save Meche’s arm, leading to less money wasted there, too. Interesting….
It’s a testament to just how bad our GM is, that we all cheer when told that he will have less money to spend.
by sfeldkamp on Oct 5, 2010 6:22 PM EDT reply actions 5 recs
When KC has more money to spend, they just seem to spend it on players
who aren’t that good. I’d rather set the low payroll which forces them to go with the kids. That is what they should be doing anyway. If the lower payroll forces them to do that, so be it. Silver lining since we have talent on the way. In past years, KC hasn’t had the talent in upper minors. Now, they have it!
by daveyork on Oct 5, 2010 8:45 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
about the payroll
i think removing banny is a no brainer, which nets us 3.6 million…i also think the davies , butler and gordon awards are about a million too high each, so there’s 6.5 million and puts us at 63.5 million, which is technically “low 60s”…i don’t see us just cutting bait with davies, as we really don’t have many other options, so the possibility of further cuts just seems extremely limited since we’ve got about $50 million plus guaranteed to guys that either need to come back or are coming back because we can’t/won’t get rid of them.
BOOM YOSTED!
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Oct 5, 2010 11:10 PM EDT reply actions
FWIW
Nearly all the vet FA catchers require draft compensation. Many teams will not offer them arbitration, but that should be a consideration.
Rod Barajas (35) – Type B
Josh Bard (33)
Henry Blanco (39)
John Buck (30) – Type B
Ramon Castro (35) – club option
Ramon Hernandez (35) – Type A
Gerald Laird (31) – Type B
Victor Martinez (32) – Type A
Bengie Molina (36) – Type B
Jose Molina (36) – $1.2MM club option
Miguel Olivo (32) – $2.7MM mutual option with a $500K buyout – Type B
A.J. Pierzynski (34) – Type A
Yorvit Torrealba (32) – $3.5MM mutual option with a $500K buyout – Type B
Matt Treanor (35)
Jason Varitek (39) – Type B
Gregg Zaun (40) – $2.25MM club option with a $250K buyout
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Only Type A's require the signing team to forfeit a draft pick
That leaves only three Type A’s (Hernandez, Martinez, and Pierzynski), and I would be surprised if Hernandez was offered arbitration.
This has been the rumor within the organization for a while now.
Cut 10M and expect 100-110 losses this coming year. I wonder why he decides to write about it now?
Probably because this was the first time that DM came out and said it clearly. The rumor became fact. BTW, I don’t know that cutting payroll will lead to more losses. Without a bit of snark, I can honestly say that the team would probably be better off with the current personnel than with the FA’s Moore would get for $10-15M.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 7, 2010 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions
I Still Believe
This team would have been as good or better if they’d have gone into 2010 without making any moves outside the organization.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Oct 7, 2010 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, I think they'd obviously be better with $10-15M
Much like almost any team would improve with above replacement-level players in excess (and I’m still giving Moore credit for actually acquiring above replacement-level players…even if they are 0-1 WAR). However, it’s negated by the fact that ultimately, it doesn’t matter. I could see Moore spending ~$15M to improve from 67 to 70 wins, which he would gladly do (though his flawed methodology would probably lead him to believe he’s going from 67 to 80 wins).
Take the $10-15M on spend those resources on commodities that will matter to the eventual success of the club.
by Royals Nation on Oct 7, 2010 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
I think that is what the plan is.
Take $10-$15 M and store it away and make interest on it. And increase the draft (I think it’s budgeted around $15 Milloin for this coming year) and increase international scouting/signings.
I think the big spending early was part of GMDMs initial plan and then he knew he’d pull it back when the prospects were getting close to the bigs. He’s a much smarter guy than many of us give him credit for. He knew he’d get his butt beat the first 5 years…. I think he actually expected to get beat the first 8 but we might be able to pull out before 8 years. I HOPE.
The 2010 team would be better off had the management avoided
killing half the pitching staff. I read Dutton’s article, Yost’s comments, GMDM as usual blather loser organization talk.
In contrast KC Chiefs have developed a model for what creates success in (any) pro sports franchise. Develop your own players, condition them, insist on individual/team fundamentals, improve your players by correct coaching, make smart intelligent trades and drafts, AVOID INJURY BY CONDITIONING AND PROPER USE (see Royals ridiculous pitching coach/manager and they way they’ve used their staff—did an order come from above that Yost quit pitching his relievers 5 games in a row e.g.?).
Success in sports is other than shuffling players, switching positions—Aviles to 3b, how absurd is that?—payroll increases, the sort of stuff in Dutton’s piece. Royals have manager/GM who talk and act in platitudes instead of real time on the field effective management and coaching. Until the management changes, doubt it matters a lot in terms of these two floundering around running their clueless mouths.
3 games for the chiefs....
they’re still not making the playoffs and both of Savior Pioli’s first round picks look like absolute dogshit as does the golden boy $60 million qb
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Oct 8, 2010 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Stats aren't fair to the 3-4 D ends.
They do much more of the dirty work and don’t get credit in our fantasy value mindsets.
Yeah, The Outside
LB’s get all the sacks and tackles. Hali would not be a 4-3 LB.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Oct 10, 2010 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
not looking at stats to see that tyson jackson blows ass
he’s just not a good player
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Oct 10, 2010 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
depends on how good his conditioning is
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Oct 11, 2010 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Chiefs are a model of success???
My god…maybe time to put the red kool-aid down for just a sec? They are improved……but they still aren’t that good.
Killing time until time kills me
yes, i'm tired
of the “chiefs john” types that INSIST that a super bowl berth is imminent because we’ve gone 3-0 agains teams with a combined 3-9 record…mark it down, indianapolis will absolutely destroy the chiefs on sunday, and i’m a chiefs fan…this team is good at running the ball and stopping the run, which is good, but our passing game sucks.
without looking at the record, i see no better than 8-8 and 2nd in the west…this team needs a QB, one or two offensive lineman, at least one linebacker, and a decent corner opposite flowers.
BOOM YOSTED!
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Oct 8, 2010 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions
You forgot Tony
That 3 of those 9 loses are because we gave them a loss. :)
Take our games out of the equation. A combined 3-6 record. Sounds much better.
Seriously Tony?
Before the season started I thought this team had an outside shot at 9-7 just because their schedule is that easy. They play the NFC West teams this year. If they can’t beat 2 of Arizona, St Louis, and Seattle, they might as well contract the team. They already got SF easily. That puts them at 5-2. Assuming a loss to Houston, then they have Jacksonville, Buffalo, Oakland, Denver. Call it 2-2, now they are 7-4 and need 2 wins to likely make the playoffs or 3 to cement it. After playing 2 more NFC West teams that I’ve already counted, they have Denver, SD, St Louis (already counted), Tennessee, and Oakland, and I think they can win 2 of those too. Putting them at 9-7. They were never really out of the Indy game until the end, their offense is terrible with Cassell back there, but they stick around, and the defense is much improved. If they don’t make the playoffs it will be by just a game or 2.
Clearly they don't understand that winning is all about conditioning.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 8, 2010 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions
waiting suspensfully for you ladies' follow up posts, post game Sunday.
possibly drew blood again. NY Royal, can u say “Betancourt”?
What is the significance of Betancourt?
That he’s absolutely awful? Conditioning! Hilarious
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Oct 9, 2010 9:10 PM EDT up reply actions
He Must Be
Superbly conditioned, because he plays every inning of every game.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Oct 9, 2010 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions
He remains injury by simply limiting his movement while out in the field.
it works wonders
Killing time until time kills me
R.I.P. cwhitman412, Frederick0220, & Mets2k9
by doublestix on Oct 9, 2010 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
maybe late to the thread...
but I’ll post a couple of thoughts anyway…
I’m not sure what “Royals would like to have Getz at 2B and Aviles at 3B until Moustakas is ready” really means. I might be wrong, but it seems that Aviles has made a solid switch to 2B and will be solid there, and seems to be making his bat valuable there too. Putting him at 3B just makes him a seat-warmer and probably hurts his glove and bat value going forward. Do the Royals really value Getz over Aviles on both accounts? Maybe I’m faulty for projecting Aviles this way, but he looks like a good-maybe-pretty-good 2B from 2011 through say 2014. I know he’s nearly 30, but it seems like the Royals can get great value out of him at 2B in the near term. Maybe it’s just whimsy, but I’m not sold on Getz over the same time period.
“We can go out and spend $10 million-$15 million and for what?” manager Ned Yost asked. “To get us to 70 wins? Or 75 wins? If it gets us from 70 wins to 80 wins, what does that do for you? Momentum? Forget momentum. I’d rather save that money. And when we get to the point where we can win 82 games on our own, then spend that money and go from 82 to 92. We do that, and chances are, we’re going to be contending for the division.”
I intentionally bolded the line above in the quote. In a perfect world, you have all your options in free agency available when you’re in need (and want) but this isn’t a perfect world and if you think you’ll compete in 2012, now would be a nice time to spend a bit in free agency. It certainly wouldn’t hurt, I think. Perhaps next season is a good time to ‘stand pat’ and see what all these players can do in their growth, but this feels like a team that in 2012 will be lacking in several positions regardless of their own player development. I’m thinking of their COF, and the possible FA available this off season. Maybe they won’t be able to outbid other teams for either of Werth or Crawford but I’d be shocked to find them NOT trying. Who are the COF to be available in free agency after 2011?
Nick Swisher is handsome.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Please hold: Indians’ Joe Smith jumps the gun on relief appearance
- Local radio host honors Cubs’ Tony Campana with parody song
- Roy Halladay bobblehead with glove on wrong hand selling on MLB.com
- Will Smith shows why making your big-league debut at Yankee Stadium is less than ideal
- Steinbrenners selling the Yankees? Family denies New York Daily News report
