Are the Royals close to having a good team?
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 10:44 AM EDT
Email
Print
In a recent article at The Hardball Times, Josha Fisher argued that the Royals are probably close to having a good team in the fairly near future. While I think that is possible, I think it would take a hell of a lot of things going right for this to come to fruition. I posted the following comment about the Royals draft and Fisher's article and after posting it I decided it was long and rambling enough to be a fanpost. So, enjoy my stream of consciousness.
From the draft picks and comments from the Royals front office it looks like this draft was about selecting more sure-thing complementary pieces rather than high upside possible future stars who could also be future busts. In short, because the Royals are "close" they chose players with low floors rather than high ceilings. Gambling that the Royals are close just doesn’t make sense to me. I read Fisher’s article at HBT and it was, quite frankly, bizarre. Here is his possible 2012 team for the Royals:
1B Billy Butler
2B Mike Aviles
SS Christian Colon
3B Mike Moustakas
LF Alex Gordon
CF Mitch Maier?
RF Eric Hosmer
C Wil Myers
DH Kila Ka’aihue
SP Zack Greinke
SP Luke Hochevar
SP Mike Montgomery
SP Aaron Crow
P Joakim Soria
P Tim Melville*
P Danny Duffy*
P John Lamb*
P Chris Dwyer*
P Noel Arguelles?*
There are so many optimistic assumptions there, I hardly know where to begin. But Fisher deals with this to some extent. Let’s see how.
Now, I’ll admit, the partial roster above requires some assumptions. It assumes Alex Gordon and Eric Hosmer take to the outfield. Gordon, in particular, would need to hit surprisingly well to justify that spot. The list above also assumes Mike Aviles regains his 2008 form at the plate, and that Mike Moustakas can stay at third. It’s unknown whether Wil Myers can catch at the major league level, and the roster above requires Moore to acknowledge Ka’aihue’s value before he turns 35.
Looking to potential Royals rosters with optimistic assumptions is nothing new. But here’s why it’s different this time: the Royals don’t need everything to go right. In the past, the Royals were constructed such that every break needed to go their way for the team to be competitive. Only a couple years from now that will no longer be the case. Wil Myers might not catch, but it sure looks like his bat will play elsewhere. Alex Gordon might not make it, but there are other promising outfielders in the system. Some of the pitchers might not pan out, but there is enough depth to allow for that. The Royals’ system is finally built to withstand some misfires.
I’m sorry, but I have to call bullshit here. A ton of things have to go right for the above team to be "good" as Fisher describes them. Here’s a short list:
- Colon rockets through the system to the majors and becomes a decent MLB player in his rookie season.
- Hosmer is moved to the OF and becomes a decent OFer.
- Hosmer moves quickly through the system (certainly more quickly than he’s moved so far) and becomes a decent MLB player in his rookie season.
- Wil Myers rockets through the system to the majors and becomes a decent MLB player in his rookie season.
- Wil Myers sticks at C.
- Moustakas sticks at 3B.
- Moustakas becomes a good MLB player pretty quickly.
- Dayton Moore promotes all of these players in a timely manner.
- Dayton Moore allows Maier and Ka’aihue to be MLB regulars.
- Aaron Crow becomes a decent MLB SP in what would probably be his rookie season.
- Michael Montgomery becomes at least an average MLB SP in what would probably be his rookie season.
- Melville, Duffy, Lamb, Dwyer, Arguelles or a bunch of the Royals other pitching prospects (all currently in A-ball) will make it to the majors by 2012 and be at least decent MLB relievers.
And another couple big optimistic assumption:
- Dayton Moore doesn't trade away any of the above players for someone worse.
- Dayton Moore doesn't choose to play "proven veterans" who have "great intangibles" and show "leadership" rather than some of these younger, more talented young players.
While some of these things may happen, the likelihood that all or even most of them will happen is exceedingly small. Prospects very often fail. It should be expected. Highly touted prospects fail. Top prospects fail. It happens all the time. Prospect success is actually the exception to the rule. But we should think that most of the Royals prospects will succeed? Why?
Fisher says that things are different now because not everything has to go right. Well, almost everything would have to go right. As an example he says that maybe Myers won’t stick at catcher, but "it sure looks like his bat will play elsewhere." Really? We should feel confident that he’ll be a good MLB hitter? He’s in A-ball and isn’t a top 50 prospect according to anyone. But we should be confident that he’ll make it to the majors and hit well enough to play a position other than catcher? The odds are against EVERY prospect. But we know Wil Myers will make it. Why is that?
I’m sorry, but there is no reason to believe the Royals are close. Things could go just right for the Royals and the prospects could blossom early enough to contribute before Greinke, Butler, Gordon and Hochevar are gone. But the odds don’t support such a prediction. And that is why it is pure stupidity for the Royals front office to be drafting complementary pieces to a future 25-man roster which is no more than hopes, wishes and guesswork at this point.
228 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
One note, 18 of those player are from the Royals organization
The highest number of home grown talent is 14 with the Cardinals.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
Yeah, the above team is a lot like Baseball America's projected future teams
And those teams are always current players who are under contract through that future year with organization prospects filling every other hole. And the above 2012 team is about as realistic as BA’s projected future teams.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Which leads to another necessary factor in which the odds are against us...
Dayton would have to finally start making some good decisions about acquiring MLB veteran talent to fill the gaps, and at the right prices/contracts. I would say the failure rate for Dayton’s MLB veteran acquisitions is just as, if not higher, than the prospect failure rate.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Jun 9, 2010 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
Yea
But I’m confident the rest of the roster will be supplemented by crappy old ex-Braves who KNOW HOW TO WIN.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Gotta lock him up for 2013 as well
Moorean Prime
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
2 year minimum, with a 3rd year player option. If Chipper wants to be here, he will!
Although I believe a lot of the assumptions on postion are reasonable
I agree with NY that having a team full of (high-upside) rookies and 2nd year players does not usually lead to major league success.
I think the premise that they could be good is valid, but it will take a couple of those prospects reaching those lofty highs quickly and out-side the organization help through FA or trade, which DM has been very hit and (more often) miss.
Yeah, some of those things will almost certainly happen. Maybe a significant number of them. It is unlikely that most will happen, in my opinion. And it is extremely improbable that all will happen.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Exactly
It wouldn’t be wise to bet that the Royals will win the AL Central in 2012, but coming from the dark baseball places we Royals fans have been through in the past decade, it’s still exciting to note that the pieces will be in place so that the Royals COULD win the AL Central in 2012.
And in response to the main thrust of NYR’s post, yes, it’s unlikely that all of those players pan out as discussed in Fisher’s article, but I think he recognizes that. Moreover, as he notes in his article, the Royals don’t need all of those players to pan out perfectly to field a competitive team. This is most evident with the pitching. Out of the 8 “prospects” (I included Hoch because he still seems to have prospect-like upside), even if only 2 of them turn out to be good MLB starting pitchers while a couple others prove to be reliable bullpen arms, we’ll still have a strong pitching staff. In terms of position players, I think Gordon, Kila and Moose are good bets to be solid contributors in 2012. The rest is too far out to predict, but out of Gordon, Kila, Moose, Hosmer, Myers, Colon and the less-discussed prospects, I think it’s likely we’ll wind up with at least 4 productive big leaguers in 2012. We have all of our good players signed through at least 2012. Adding 2 good starting pitchers, a couple good relievers, and 4 productive position players to the current group would go a long way toward fielding a competitive team.
One big problem with this scenario is that it not only involves a certain number of prospects panning out, but it also requires them panning out in their rookie season (in the case of 2012), and/or their sophomore season (2013). And then after that Greinke, Butler, Gordon, Hochevar and Callaspo will likely be gone and success will depend entirely on the success of these prospects.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm guessing 2012 won't be the rookie season for a lot of those 4 pitchers and 4 position players I'd expect
2012 certainly won’t be the rookie seasons for Hoch and Gordon. Moose and Kila are both likely to lose their rookie eligibility in 2011. I’d argue that Crow, Montgomery, and Duffy are all candidates to spend a significant part of 2011 in the majors.
Yes, most of these players won’t have much MLB experience by 2012. But with 14 bullets, a bunch will hit and have good seasons. There are also a lot of players that we aren’t discussing that could wind up being productive MLB players in 2012 like Parraz, Lough, Derrick Robinson, Bianchi, Coleman, Sample, Giavotella and Salvador Perez just to name a few. Coleman is actually pretty likely to contribute in the 2012 bullpen.
We shouldn’t expect miracles from this crop of talent, but even tempering our expectations, we can reasonably count on several productive seasons in 2012.
I’m sorry, but I think expecting a bunch of good seasons out of these prospects in 2012 or several productive seasons is unrealistic. It is possible, but unlikely.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair enough
We understand each other’s positions. We just disagree about the likelihood. We’ll reevaluate next year.
Some questions
When you talk about “productive seasons,” what do you mean? A league average MLB player (or better)? And, what do you think is the average success rate for top 10 prospects in an organization. Do you expect the Royals to do better than that? And do you expect that success to come in the players’ first two seasons?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
It took Butler until his third season to put things together
We are still waiting on Gordon and Hochevar. And it is not limited to Royals. Most prospects, even most of the top prospects who rated as good or better than the current Royals top prospects, struggle past their rookie years and well into their second or third seasons:
Jay Bruce
Homer Bailey
Clay Bucholz
Matt Wieters
Adam Jones
Brian Matusz
Chris Tillman
David Price
Travis Snider
Rick Porcello
Adam LaRoche
Matt LaPorta
Jeff Clement
Brandon Wood
Joba Chamberlain
Phil Hughes
Cameron Maybin
I was thinking about that
By ‘productive,’ I mean ’doesn’t hurt you.’ I think that’s somewhere a little short of MLB average—maybe around 1.5 WAR for a position player or starting pitcher, or a little less for a reliever.
I think each of Gordon, Hochevar, Moustakas and Montgomery are quite likely to reach that level in 2012. (70%) Each of Kila, Crow, Duffy, Hosmer, Coleman, and Colon individually have a good chance to reach that level in 2012 as well. (40%) The rest are longer shots (maybe 20%?) to be productive in 2012, but I think it’s likely we’ll see one or more of them surprise us.
Don’t hold me to these percentages. They were thrown out as gut feelings without too much thought. Each of these players is obviously different—I just tried to break them out into tiers of likelihood to be decent in 2012.
plus
Greinke is sure to resign
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
He's resigned before
So yeah, I could see him giving up the game.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree with you NY
it is very unrealistic to assume that a team is going to be able to fill every single spot on the team with a homegrown player…most prospects do fail.
i also agree that i’m a little concerned that everything may be pointed towards one big “push”, instead of developing a steady stream of players that will continue to help the team years into the future.
finally, i do agree that DM would have to show that he is comfortable and committed to playing all of these players.
however, i will bring up a few counterpoints-
first, i do think that there is quite a bit of wiggle room for us with our roster. the 2012 lineup doesn’t include callaspo, dejesus, bannister, who could all be traded for other prospects or fill some of the open spots…it also doesn’t include wood or hughes in the bullpen which could move lamb/duffy/melville into the rotation (candidates at least)…it also doesn’t consider the possibility of other prospects (hayenga, tim smith, parraz, lough, giovatella, sample, etc.) progressing and being able to fill spots…finally, there are a number of other arms on the farm that could fill bullpen spots (coleman, osuna, castaneda, etc.) again freeing lamb/duffy/melville to the rotation.
second, the possible 2012 lineup mentioned above assumes zero free agent signings, which is also unrealistic…every team is going to have some free agents, ideally to fill holes that the system can’t fill. perhaps we fill one outfield spot and either C or SS with a free-agent and we fill the other two spots with trades, or vice-versa.
you bring up very good points, and who knows where this is going to head…we could have a rays-type turnaround, a brewers or indians-type turnaround (a few years of relevance and then falling back into mediocrity), or we could have an orioles or diamondbacks situation, where we bring up all the “kids” and the team still sucks absolute ass.
good post.
BOOM YOSTED!
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Jun 9, 2010 11:26 AM EDT reply actions
All valid points
While there is some wiggle room, I think it comes from lesser prospects who have lower ceilings. So I think it even less likely that they’d come up to contribute in a big way. In a little way, maybe. And of course I’m not optimistic about the prospects Moore would trade for if he trades DeJesus or anyone else. I think trading DeJesus is the right move, but I’m very concerned about the haul Moore would get for him (and anyone else). And yes there would be FA signings to fill holes, but Moore has shown that he stinks at this.
But I do think there is some genuine reason for hope. Just not a lot for the near future.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions
no doubt
about the FA signings…at least some of his trades have been good ones, but still it’s hit or miss.
BOOM YOSTED!
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Jun 9, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
“Dayton Moore doesn’t choose to play “proven veterans” who have “great intangibles” and show “leadership” rather than some of these younger, more talented young players."
This is why I don’t want DDJ traded. Because I can’t envision the talent we acquire/the monstrosity we will sign in FA will be anywhere near his production for 6 mil.
a long fly ball to deep center field, back goes Damon to the track, the wall, and Gone!
Frank and Ryan touched on this last night
currently we have 8 drafted Royals that are playing now. For all this to happen it would be crazy to see and also highly unlikely. Remember we will still sign Willy Tavares at some point and time so there goes another outfield position. And after Yuni’s 10 year 150 million contract extension you can kiss it all goodbye.
Are we the team to beat in 2010? I sure think so! Go Chiefs.
Another problem not touched upon by the article
Assuming Moore were to have all the guys mentioned above playing together in 2012 or thereabouts, and assuming they do as well as anticipated —
2014-2017 would be a clusterfrack of epic proportions as all of those guys would be hitting arbitration and free agency within a year or two of each other
Unless I'm wrong...
My Twitter feed
yep
that’s part of why i don’t think he’s necessarily trying to “build” for a specific year or years, he’s got to realize the problems that would cause.
BOOM YOSTED!
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Jun 9, 2010 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
I think we are "close" to being a .500 team
..as in we could be a 78-82 win team by 2012. It takes more than that to make the playoffs and that’s where either A. lots of things are going to have to go right or B. DM will have to make smart decisions to fill in all the gaps. B seems like a stretch of epic proportions at this point…so in order to be a truly “good” team (which I take to mean being a playoff quality team…87+ wins at least) I think we will have to depend on an awful lot going right….which is rather unlikely as well.
So, close to being “good.” I don’t think so. Close to being competitive…yeah.
Killing time until time kills me
Perhaps so
I do expect improvement, and some of the prospects will pan out. But the problem with slow, gradual improvement is that virtually all of the good, younger players currently on the Royals will be gone after the 2013 season (barring contract extensions). Then it will just be these prospects plus whatever Moore brings in from outside the organization.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
My concern is that we become the Orioles
Buster Olney just put up a video blog on why the young Orioles core is struggling and what this means for the team. It got me really thinking about how that could be the Royals’ young players in a few years. Obviously, they’re not being rushed and are being given chances to succeed at each level, but there is that lingering concern that, as Buster says, they will hit KC and not succeed, which could beat them down and make it difficult to build a winning team. I really think that the main thing we’ll have to watch for is whether Dayton can place strong FA or trade acquisitions around those young players. There’s no way we have everyone around when 2013 or 2014 rolls around. It just won’t happen. So, it seems to me that this will all hinge on whether Dayton can acquire some respectable players to fill gaps and whether they can work well with the young guys to make a productive team for at least a few years.
"You'll never make it to the bigs with fungus on your shower shoes."
And I'm trying to think of groups of good prospects coming up together
And a lot of them didn’t pan out. Like “The Big Three” with the Mets – Paul Wilson, Jason Isringhausen and Bill Pulsipher. Remember them? How bout Oakland’s “Four Aces” – Todd Van Poppel, Don Peters, Dave Zancanaro and Kirk Dressendorfer.
There Is No Such Thing As A Pitching Prospect
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
aren't the rays one of those "groups"
The first Oakland 4 aces was bad, but the 2nd 3 was good. Zito, Moulder, hudson.
a long fly ball to deep center field, back goes Damon to the track, the wall, and Gone!
There's always a chance
And certainly a much better chance in 2012-13 than there’s been since Moore came to KC.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, We Are
In Omaha. But seriously, I agree it would take an incredible amount of luck for this prediction to come true. It’s not impossible that this or some similar scenario could happen, but it’s beyond highly unlikely.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
Well, that is a poorly reasoned and supported article
NYRoyal hit it on the head. The two most fantastical elements for me are:
1. Every decent minor leaguer in the system (plus the guy the Royals drafted two days ago) only need eight more months in the minors (the three months remaining in this minor league season plus the five months in the 2011 minor league season) to make the majors . . . and will instantly produce as good major league players!
2. The article completely ignores the contract issues, as Greinke is a free agent after 2012, Butler and Gordon after 2013, and Hochevar after 2014. I doubt the Royals would hold onto each of them until free agency. I would put the over/under on the number of prospects on that list who will actually play in a major league game with Zack Greinke at 3.5 (excluding Kila, who already has).
by Gopherballs on Jun 9, 2010 12:22 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I'll take the under
I don’t think Greinke will be extended beyond 2012 and I doubt more than 3 current prospects who haven’t played with Greinke yet will be in the majors by then.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Had to put the 0.5 in there
for the possibility of the random Danny Duffy “bullpen needs a lefty” callup in the middle of 2011.
Speaking of Duffy
He’ll do some lower level work to get back into things of course, but where does he go for the rest of the season? Wilmington or NWA?
"You'll never make it to the bigs with fungus on your shower shoes."
by MinnesotaRoyal on Jun 9, 2010 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the minor league dir. said NWA
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I'll take the over
If Greinke is traded prior to the 2012 season, under is the safer bet. Crow, Moustakas, Montgomery, Duffy and Colon are the prime candidates. A lot of the other guys could get September cup of coffee call-ups if they have good minor league seasons. But there’s also a good chance Greinke plays for the Royals in 2012, in which case more than 4 of those prospects would almost certainly join the team.
In my opinion, summing the odds of 4+ prospects being called up in 2011 and the odds of Greinke playing for the Royals in 2012 gives you a number greater than 0.500.
but you might be ignoring
the fact that our payroll would be pretty damn low if we were sporting 18 home grown players with only Greinke, Butler and Gordon making decent money.
In this fantasy world of no stupid FA signings, and instead going for some Billy Beane AAAA moneyball players who are 28 years old, we wouldn’t have a big payroll.
a long fly ball to deep center field, back goes Damon to the track, the wall, and Gone!
Exactly what I was thinking.
The Royals may actually be able to afford some big ass contract for a stud.
they could
maybe if we’re lucky, moore will convince glass to shell out again, like he did for Guillen
They'll be some payrolll room, but less than you think
First off, the 18 home grown players is just not going to happen. Not all of those players will develop in the next year and a half. Some of the current players will still be around (and in their expensive arbitration years), and some will get replaced by players making more than the minimum.
The recent Royals payrolls have only had two big contracts — Meche and Guillen — plus one other decent contract over $5 million (Crisp last year, Greinke this year). There was still not enough money to sign another big contract.
By 2012, Greinke and Butler will basically be taking the place of Meche and Guillen, with Soria due $6 million and Gordon likely due close to that. Hochevar, Callaspo, and Bannister would all be in third or fourth year of arbitration, so they would be due close to that as well. If the other money is spent efficiently (not exactly Moore’s specialty), there is room for one or two decent-sized free agent contracts.
Then, in the fantasy world where all of these prospects start making the majors in 2011, they all start becoming arbitration eligible when Butler and those guys become eligible for free agency.
There are a couple of major flaws with his projected lineup here
First and foremost - Where does Bloomy play?
I once had hope...now I have Moore.
A couple changes to make it more realistic -- but is this a "good" team?
I left the pitching alone since that seems like the surest thing — decent at worst and great at best.
Moved Hos to 1B and Butler to DH; Aviles is still an option at SS; Gordon to RF, LF is easier to fill be it by a prospect or Pods 2.0 (basically, some combination of Maier/Gordon/Myers/prospect/FA should make for a good outfield without unreasonably good luck); catcher (per usual) is the spot where something has to go right — Pina and Perez play good defense, so maybe that is less of a long-shot for them to be average or better.
1B Eric Hosmer
2B Mike Aviles/FA
SS Christian Colon/Mike Aviles
3B Mike Moustakas
LF Dyson/Miller/Parraz/FA
CF Mitch Maier/Wil Myers
RF Alex Gordon
C Pina/Perez/Wil Myers
DH Billy Butler
At least with this lineup, the questions (aside from pitching) are reduced to
Can Hos hit?
Can Moose be average or better at 3B?
Can we find a decent catcher from our 3 options?
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2010 12:38 PM EDT reply actions
No I don't think it is good
In significant part because even if those prospects eventually become good, I don’t think they’ll be good in their rookie seasons.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I would like to know, instead of an "MLE", the % probability of a prospect "making it"
based on minor league statistical profile. Sure the MLE gives you some idea of how the prospect’s minor-league performance translates, but what are the chances a guy like Moustakas can OPS+ 100 at the ML level? 15%? 25%? 50%?
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2010 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
That would be great to have
And I think sabermetricians are working on that. I doubt they’re close. But every organization would love to have that.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Resetting every 2 years
I once had hope...now I have Moore.
by Dubya on Jun 9, 2010 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
the royals drafted colon to be their major league SS by 2012. this means that all these kids reach the majors pretty much at the same time for full year service. moose,monty,hos and crow as the definites with myers,robinson,duffy as possibilities. then the other will hit in 2013. this is going to be the youngest team in the bigs by far.
i dont really see moore spending too much money or time on FA this offseason or next for two reasons. 1)we have several players that are close 2)he does not want to make any more mistakes. his last straw will be if these draft picks pan out
we have several players that are close
Who are the prospects that are close to being ready for a MLB regular role? Moose and Montgomery perhaps. Any others?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Crow
he’s lighting it up
Also, don’t forget that the Royals already have their Bryce Harper “Fasho” player in Wil Myers
Montgomery’s debut (probably this September, at the latest) will make Strasburg’s look like Bruce Chen.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
yes
Myers’ 200 PAs in the minors have told me all I need to know
pencil him in as a 7 Win catcher in 2012
and no one seems to mention that Montgomery has been human in AA
7.8 K/9, 3.2 BB/9. Nothing to worry about given his age and all, but not exactly screaming for the fast track to making the opening day 2011 starting rotation either.
On the other hand
the Royals do need a lefty out of the pen
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
The rotation is set for 2011
What the Royals need is a good LOOGY.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not sure Moore is ready to rush one his his guys like that
maybe bring back Ho-Ram for the first couple months while Monty makes the transition to the ’pen in the minors
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Arrival Dates
Here is when I see some of these top guys appearing (re) in the Bigs :
2010 : Kaaihue , Gordon, B Hardy, Lough all late season
Gordon & Kila hopefully after some combination of Guillen/Podz/Ankiel/DDJ get traded/released in July. Hardy & Lough Sept
2011 : Montgomery, Crow, Duffy, Coleman, Osuna, Moustakas
At some point I think you see Coleman, Osuna, and Duffy appear in the bullpen, with Montgomery and Crow getting a few late season starts, and Moustakas showing up in Sep to stay
2012 : Lamb, Arguelles, Melville, Dwyer, Colon, Pina, Hosmer
I imagine only 2 out of these 4 SP’s will show up but think that they all could: My money is on Lamb and Arguelles
Also I think Colon will appear and Pina, and Hosmer in Sep
In summary I could see us finishing 2012 with a lot of these names headlined in this original post on the roster, however not very many of them established as everyday players from Day 1 of 2012 or even mid-season 2012. I also don’t think Myers appears until 2013/2014 possibly replacing Gordon or Lough in the OF.
To me the filler spots for Trades/Free Agents 2011 – 2012 are OF, SS , 2B, veteran SP, C – I am not willing to bank on D Rob, Tim Smith, Parraz, Giavotella, or any SS making contributions in 2011 & 2012 even though I would love D Rob to be quality enough offensively to man CF and bat 9th and steal bases.
Also, other thought I think B Wood will stick in the Big League bullpen
D – K
Wow, so essentially all of the Royals top 10 prospects (and more) get to the majors in the next two years?
I look forward to this unprecedented-in-the-history-of-baseball occurrence.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
If anything close to that occurs, then one of two things will have happened
1. The Royals will have had unprecedented prospect success in the minors. Basically a perfect storm of prospects all blossoming and becoming MLB-ready.
2. The Royals rushed a bunch of prospects.
The first is extremely unlikely. I think the second is unlikely as so far Moore hasn’t been rushing prospects. But if he does, then it is going to hurt the team and the organization. I don’t see evidence that the Royals are setting themselves up to rush a bunch prospects in 2011 or 2012.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
i dont think 2011 is an option in this for me…maybe monty and moose late season but im talking 2012.
how do you think royals will handle september call-ups these next couple of years ? maybe that is where my opinion differs
So far in Moore's tenure, he hasn't called up many players in September
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
This year may be different
If I’m counting right, this is the first year that Dayton draft picks become eligible for the Rule 5 Draft. College guys (signed at age 19+) have four years. If that four years is the same thing as four seasons (I think it is, the Pirates pick this year from the Marlins was a 2006 draftee), including the debut short season, then the Royals have a number of guys at AA and above that the organization has to make a decision on: Lough, RP Greg Holland, and 1B Clint Robinson are all eligible for the first time (so are Wilmington pitchers Ivor Hodgson and Alex Caldera, but there’s no chance anybody is going to pick them). Lough will be protected and the other two are real possibilities. Thus, if they have to be on the 40, you might as well call them up in September.
As to the others mentioned, Gordon and Ka’aihue are certainly getting called up. Hardy doesn’t have to be on the 40-man roster this year, so far more unlikely to get called up. So, there could be more callups, but I don’t think any of them are earth-shattering and don’t say anything about next year’s roster.
It's all ball bearings these days!
by CentralChamps20?? on Jun 9, 2010 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Hardly unprecedented
That’s pretty much Tampa Bay’s success story.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
I'll give you the trades
Kazmir was a total steal, and the trade with the Twins helped a ton – but that one wouldn’t have happened without their prospect stream delivering as expected.
What major FAs did they sign?
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
Carlos Pena
WIll said “FA signings,” and they nailed that one by not going major and taking a flyer on a guy could smash the ball
Also, don’t forget getting Ben Zobrist for Aubrey Huff
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Huff was another prospect of theirs, though
Part of the strategy of maturing prospects is that if they perform well enough, they can bring other pieces in trade.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
Huff was hardly a prospect at that point
he’d been a good player (even Dayton Moore Chuck LaMar developed some good players), but at that point he was a 29-year old decent hitter without a position he could play well. I mean, it was the Astros, they totally screwed them, who would have traded real prospects for Aubrey Huff.
Okay, Zobrist wasn’t seen as a huge prospect, but that just shows that Tampa Bay can actually spot talent that others can’t, and also knows that you don’t need to hold onto 29-year old above average players who won’t be around when the team can compete. It’s actually a good lesson about DDJ, who’s probably a better player now than Huff was then, but the situation is similar (assuming Moore actually has a rare flash of competence in valuing older players), and a good riposte to the "we can’t trade DDJ people.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
2008 Rays WAR by non-home grown players
3.9 Pena — free agent after being released
3.0 Navarro — trade (for Hendrickson and Hall)
3.0 Garza — trade
2.2 Balfour — free agent after being DFA’d
2.1 Kazmir — trade (for Zambrano, a former minor league free agent)
2.0 Gross — trade after being DFA’d
1.9 Hinske — free agent
1.7 Bartlett — trade
1.5 Aybar — trade prior to DFA
1.5 Howell — trade
1.4 Jackson — trade (for Baez and Carter)
1.3 Zobrist — trade
0.7 T. Miller — free agent
0.6 Floyd — free agent
26.8 Total
was about to post something similar
Also see Neyer’s recent piece (going off historical research by Sean Forman) on the limits of what can be done through the draft.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, remember then getting stud reliever J. P. Howell for Joey Gathright?
They must have ripped-off some stathead team that didn’t have a front office with great scouts, especially when it comes to pitching.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Terrible trade for them
Howell hasn’t jumped a single car or opposing pitcher, ever.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
The Rays had all of their top 10 prospects called up in one year and they all succeeded?
Or did they have a series of prospects called up in different years succeed? Look at the Rays top 10 prospect lists for the last several years and you’ll see a lot who have never succeeded in the majors.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
They had a series that came up
In such a manner that they got great performance out of a bunch of young players at the same time, plus some of them performed well enough in an earlier year to be traded for key pieces of the “target” year’s team.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
So it wouldn't be unprecedented for the Royals to have a bunch of prospects come up and succeed over the next five years
They would still be very fortunate to have that much prospect success, but it doesn’t all happen at once. Different prospects are going to come up and succeed (or not) in different years. It won’t all happen at once.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not sure, but I don't think he was saying that all of these players WILL be called up
He was just putting out best-guesses as to their ETA’s to the Majors assuming things go well. The guys who are closer the minors are obviously more likely to keep to this schedule since there’s less opportunity for things to go not-well.
and after 2012 Greinke leaves...
and I’m not sure how much longer Butler and Hoch will be around either
Unless extended, they’ll be gone after 2013. I doubt they’ll be extended.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
There's certainly room for him at DH
If Moore were smart enough to play him this year, next year, any year. But I don’t think he is. I think Kila might be bench player for the Royals next year, but probably not in the majors at all.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, Moore's passed on Kila a chance three seasons in a row
but fourth time is the charm!
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Moore learns from his mistakes
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
well, the last time the royals thought they were "close"
Moore a) was totally right and b) handled it well
I’ll always remember Jacobs hitting that key HR in the ALCS to get us past the Yankees
I'm sorry that house I built for you crashed down before I put the roof on
but don’t worry, if you let me build you a new one, I wlll use exactly the same design, materials, and tools.
insert "tools/Royals front office personnel" joke here
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I like that analogy
He bought the roof before making sure the house was finished.
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2010 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure what three seasons you're talking about
In 2008, Kila emerged from obscurity with a 1.085 OPS in AA and AAA. He was passed over in favor of Jacobs to beging 2009.
In 2009, Kila took a step back with only an .825 OPS in AAA. Kila doubters patted themselves on the back and noted his slider bat-speed. Jose Guillen started 2010 as the every-day DH.
In 2010, Kila has posted a 1.120 OPS in AAA through June. Kila fans scream as loud as their fingers can scream on message boards that he should be called up. Through June 9th, he has not yet been given a proper chance.
I’d say Moore has passed on Kila only twice. They weren’t going to call Kila up to the MLB team mid-season in 2008 since he’d never shown anything in the minors before that season. They certainly passed over Kila for the 2009 season instead opting for Jacobs. 2010 was a bit less of a snub since Kila didn’t hit well in 2009, and the Royals didn’t bring anyone in to take Kila’s place. Instead, they shifted Guillen to DH to avoid the embarrassment of releasing him.
Anyway, even given that Moore passed over Kila for 2009 and 2010, I’d say that passing over Kila for the 2011 season would still be surprising. The 2009 situation was bad, but it wasn’t indefensible. Kila’s minor league OPS in the three prior years going into 2009 were .602, .794, and 1.085. You’d like to have seen Moore give Kila more of a shot, but you can at least understand the logic behind making Kila prove 2008 was for real. And if the 2009 snubbing was bad but within the bounds of reason, the 2010 snubbing was quite understandable. In posting a .825 OPS in 2009, Kila had failed to make a strong case for himself and looked a lot like a AAAA player. The Guillen saga is its own problem, but it would have been hard to imagine the Royals either releasing Guillen or playing Guillen in the outfield to make room for Kila.
A 2011 snubbing, however, would be completely indefensible. The Royals clearly have an open spot on their roster for a 1B/DH going into 2011, and Kila’s performance in the last 3 years has been outstanding. He’s hit for average, he’s hit for power, and he’s walked much more often than he’s struck out. The cards are perfectly stacked in favor of making Kila the starting DH in 2011. It would be beyond idiotic to pay a FA to DH when the money could be so much more wisely spent elsewhere.
I can't ignore Moore's past moves with regard to Kila and other players whose tools he doesn't value
I’d say Moore has passed on Kila only twice
Ok. He had good opportunities to use Kila as a regular and chose worse options instead. Why is that going to change in 2011? I’m sorry but this sounds like wishful thinking on your part.
A 2011 snubbing, however, would be completely indefensible.
Prepare yourself. The Royals clearly had an open spot on their roster for a 1B/DH going into 2009. Moore filled that opening with another player. He’ll do so again.
It would be beyond idiotic to pay a FA to DH when the money could be so much more wisely spent elsewhere.
Moore has done other things which were beyond idiotic. Why do you think he won’t make any more such mistakes?
Look, your arguments for why it was a mistake or a partial mistake to not utilize Kila in the majors in 2009 and 2010, and your argument for why it would be a huge mistake to not use him in 2011 are all based on stats. Don’t you understand by now that Dayton Moore does not evaluate players based on stats? He looks at tools. And in his opinion, Kila doesn’t have the tools to be a good major league hitter (he only has “slider bat speed”). And since Moore wants to win now (every year), he’s not willing to invest PA’s on a player to see if he’s better than the FO’s estimation of his tools.
I don’t think Kila will even get a bench spot with the Royals next year. I think Moore prefers to have guys on the bench that can play multiple positions. Kila is only a 1B/DH. He’ll be back in Omaha, or traded, and will become a minor league FA when eligible, IMO.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions
what is his bench player deal?
He loves players that can play full games in multiple places (bloom), but almost never makes in game substitutions. Kila should be pinch hitting every game, and starting 25% of the games with no problem
a long fly ball to deep center field, back goes Damon to the track, the wall, and Gone!
Interesting
I’ll be interested to read your apologies for Moore if/when he does bury Kila next
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions
speaking of apologies
That’s sounds more personal than it should be, and I apologize for that. Wish hadn’t typed it.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I'll admit that I was wrong if it comes to pass that Kila gets snubbed again
but apologies—I don’t think I offended anyone
I disagree, obviously
I see at least three chances to bring in Kila that were better than what Moore chose to do, and I won’t include 2008:
1) In the 2008-2009 offseason, the Royals were looking for another 1B/DH. I guess that might have been okay if they had picked correctly. Instead, they picked MIke Jacobs, who somehow was even more horrible than expected by the nerds. Maybe Kila wasn’t the right choice over players like Russ Branyan or Eric Hinske, but he surely would have been a better choice (even before considering Jacobs was a likely a non-tender for the Marlins, his salary, and Nunez) over Jacobs.
2) During the 2009 After Jacobs shockingly failed and clearly hurt and Guillen obviously worthless at the plate, the Royals had nothing to lose by calling up even a mediocre Kila to see what he had to offer anyway, since he couldn’t have been worse. Who cares what the geniuses who brought in Yuniesky Betancourt and WIllie Boomquist think of his bat speed?
3) With Jacobs non-tendered (well-played, boy!) and Guillen having no trade value (I’m sure the phone will be ringing off the hook now once he goes on a hot streak. Wait, what?), Why not give him a chance to start 2010? I’ll count this whole season as one chance — Guillen clearly has no significant trade value other than saving Dayton Moore a bit of face on a contract everyone should have known was idiotic from the start, and Kila is raking in AAA (along with other non-Moore acquisition Alex Gordon, who might be able to hit fastballs, but doesn’t have the tremendous approach the Royals crave, like Rick Ankiel’s); now would be the perfect time to call him up. Hasn’t happened.
I guess altogether one could say that these choices were “defensible” in that taken as a group, one could type up or write a “defense” of them, but it really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Just another day at work for the worst front office in the American League.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess altogether one could say that these choices were "defensible" in that taken as a group, one could type up or write a "defense" of them, but it really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Yes, one can write up reasons not to call up Kila at every turn, but they just aren’t good ones. I could give you reasons to trade Cortes and Saito for Betancourt, but that wouldn’t make for a compelling case.
And since Moore failed to give regular MLB duty to Kila at every opportunity without a good reason, there’s no reason to believe this will change in 2011.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, you've listed 3 "chances"
but it’s only two seasons. I was responding to your comment that the FO passed on Kila three seasons in a row. Unless you count 2008 (and 2008 really shouldn’t count as a snub—he was a non-prospect who suddenly started hitting in AA at 24, and he did get a September call-up), he’s only been passed on for the 2009 and 2010 seasons, and the 2010 season is not yet completed.
How do you think Moore evaluates talent and makes decisions on players?
Does he and his team do this by looking at tools or stats? Or do you think he uses a good mix of both?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 10, 2010 8:34 AM EDT up reply actions
?
I’m guessing this wasn’t in response to the 2 vs 3 seasons of snub discussion, and that it’s directed toward the issue of how likely it is that DM will give Kila a good chance to be a starting 1B/DH next year.
I think it’s literally impossible to evaluate tools without allowing stats to at least color your views. You just can’t evaluate at a batter and think his swing looks powerful if you know he doesn’t have an extra base hit in the last month. Likewise, unless you’re us and you can’t watch the players in the minor leagues, you’d be stupid to not look beyond boxscores. Even on the extremes, player evaluation will be a mix of tools and stats.
As for DM, I think his emphasis on tools vs stats probably varies on a per case basis. It’s pretty clear from his track record that he doesn’t weight stats as heavily as we’d like him to. I don’t think that his lack of emphasis on stats will preclude him from giving Kila a shot to start in 2010. At the very least, Kila is a decent, substantially free way to fill a hole on a team that will have plenty of holes to fill. Yost has also strongly praised Kila, saying that he is a big part of the team’s future and is very close to establishing himself on the MLB team. I don’t think those comments were just to dick him around. Yost surely formed this opinion when he was a top advisor to DM on the farm system, so you can reasonably expect that DM feels similarly.
Precluding injuries or trades, if Kila keeps hitting well, I think he’s essentially a lock to enter spring training with the inside track on the open 1B/DH slot.
I’m guessing this wasn’t in response to the 2 vs 3 seasons of snub discussion, and that it’s directed toward the issue of how likely it is that DM will give Kila a good chance to be a starting 1B/DH next year.
Yes, I don’t really care about the 2 vs. 3 non-issue. The real issue is whether it is reasonable to expect that Moore will make Kila a regular in 2011.
As for DM, I think his emphasis on tools vs stats probably varies on a per case basis
From the acquisitions he’s made, I don’t see any evidence that he’s using stats as part of his evaluation of players. Or, if he is using stats, he must be using the wrong ones (like batting average, RBI and ERA). And using stats poorly is probably worse than not using them at all.
I don’t think that his lack of emphasis on stats will preclude him from giving Kila a shot to start in 2010. At the very least, Kila is a decent, substantially free way to fill a hole on a team that will have plenty of holes to fill.
Those two sentences don’t go together. It is your opinion that Kila is at least a decent hole filler. There’s no reason to believe Moore feels that way about Kila.
Yost has also strongly praised Kila, saying that he is a big part of the team’s future and is very close to establishing himself on the MLB team. I don’t think those comments were just to dick him around. Yost surely formed this opinion when he was a top advisor to DM on the farm system, so you can reasonably expect that DM feels similarly.
That is a real stretch. Because an advisor to Moore has said to the media that Kila is good, then Moore must also believe that Kila is good and will be a part of the Royals future. Public statements from Yost are public relations. He’s going to say good things about players. And Moore isn’t going to agree with every opinion of all of his advisors.
You are giving short shrift to the issue of how Moore evaluates talent. He uses tools. He’s said this. It’s all about tools to him. And his track record proves this. And the Royals have been very clear about Kila’s “slider bat speed.” Kila doesn’t have speed or good defense. So his only potential tools involve hitting. Moore clearly doesn’t value plate discipline highly (again, his many moves as a GM speak much louder than his words). He does value other hitting tools and he’s said he doesn’t like Kila’s bat speed.
There is absolutely no reason to think that Kila is a lock to be a starter on the Royals at any point. None. The fact that you like him doesn’t mean Moore does. All evidence points to Moore not valuing Kila much at all. If’ you’d like to make a bet about whether starts 2011 as a starter for the Royals, I’m in. Name the stakes.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 10, 2010 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Sure, a bet's fine
I don’t care about the stakes. An admission that the other person was right is fine by me.
I feel very confident that if Kila continues hitting ‘well’ for the remainder of the season, he will be given the inside track on a starting 1B/DH spot in spring training next year. If he stops hitting this year or sucks it up in spring training next year, he could still lose his opportunity. So let’s do it this way—assuming Kila continues to hit reasonably well the rest of the year (.900 OPS or better), I bet that DM will not acquire a FA 1B/DH (beyond the low-money depth guys/reclamation projections that every team seems to acquire in the spring) that would likely take Kila’s spot.
Ok
The last thing I’ll say is that faith in Dayton Moore to do something that really seems to make sense is unwarranted. He has a track record, and not just with regard to Kila. That track record is telling.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 10, 2010 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess I did jump around a bit
however you define it, Moore has had multiple chances to install Kila, and has passed in each instance in favor of options that were clearly worse even at the time.
What does that mean for 2011? I don’t know what he’ll do. The past isn’t always like the future. But I don’t see any reason to have confidence in him on this issue, or just about any other involving major league acquisitions or players not originally acquired by him.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 10, 2010 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions
If Dayton Moore is smart, Butler will get an Adam Lind contract soon
…in other words, hello Ryan Howard deal!
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
DM is in a tough spot with Greinke
because really, he won’t get anything for Greinke without a headache. If he trades Greinke, he’s going to get run out of KC within 2 years. If he lets Greinke go as a FA, we either get nothing, or the Braves second round pick
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo (follow me, because reloading my twitter page 40 times a day is kind of creepy)
The only thing that will save Moore is MLB success for the Royals
So that is what he has to push for. His failure will get him run out of KC eventually, so he might as well follow a strategy which might actually work.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions
what is "strategy?"
are you talking about the Process?
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm talking about a process, not The Process
Following an intelligent process is a good thing. Trusting The Process is not.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
8-10 years.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
moore's never going to get run out of town
he put together one of the worst GM stretches of the decade from 2007-9, and the worst we saw was a few Poz pieces (mostly on his blog which does not exist to the royals) an occasional half-bad/half-good column from mellinger, and whatever the radio guys were doing, which I think the royals just dismiss out of hand
and Poz is such a softie
we’re literally like two good hochevar starts or another nice month for Moose from him being won over again
Poz isn't working for the Star anymore
so I’m sure the royals don’t even read his stuff…Melinger is softy also, too bad whitlock doesn’t know jack about baseball.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
But he will eventually be fired
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
I am afraid the best case scenario might be
some improvement to, say, a 77 win season in 2011 followed by 69 win season in 2012.
Sounds familiar...
Like a similar scenario just happened…
"You'll never make it to the bigs with fungus on your shower shoes."
by MinnesotaRoyal on Jun 9, 2010 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I think with the Royals organization
history has to repeat itself more than once before the lesson takes.
Unless Dave and Dan Glass figure out what makes a good GM
…then history will repeat itself with the next GM. I don’t know if I could live through another fatally flawed process.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
if form follows
at the least the new GM will only be 10 years behind the times instead of 15
Progress
So does that mean that the new GM will talk about the importance of OPS and WHIP and then not acquire players with a good OPS and WHIP?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I feel bad for the owners in a way
they did what everyone said they had to do hiring a “top baseball man”, giving him control, and spending more money
just hasn’t worked out
Because of that, I give them a pass for hiring Moore, but not for extending his contract
By now, David or at least Dan Glass need to understand that there is something going on in MLB front offices in addition to tools evaluation and scouting. Moore isn’t doing it and he isn’t getting good results. It’s time to fire him and get into the 21st century, not extend his contract.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Dan Glass avoids the microphone at all costs
after the Buddy Bell incident…Life time contract for DM.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not sure how to put this into complete form
But, aside from agreeing that the Moore hire made sense at the time, what the Royals need is a complete organizational makeover — not just a new GM/F.O. personnel, but a new “model.” I’m sorry for bringing the Rays into every discussion like this, but their model of a more decentralized organization is, I think, maybe almost as important as their actual personnel (both progressive and their excellent scouts). While it’s not that widespread at the moment, it really makes so much common sense that I think that is going to be the new trend in F.O.’s above and beyond the stale-five-years ago scouts/stats non-debate.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions
What do you mean by "decentralized organization"?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
That's why I can't do a full write up on it
I’m not sure… the story is (and I could have this wrong, we’ll have to wait for Jonah Keri’s forthcoming book to get the real details, I may very well be full of crap) supposedly that Friedman (whatever his actual title is) is sort in the Gms role from the public perspective, but that they have a lot of guys in a lot of different roles so that their decisionmaking is less “one guy on top down” than in most organizations. Obviously, no organizational has one guy micromanaging everything, but seems like I read stuff about the Rays being more decentralized (“democratic” seems like an inappropriate word here) in that regard than others. I know it’s vague and perhaps wrong, so I’ll stop now.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
most investment bankers would probably suck as a GM
but I can see how the skillset works
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo (follow me, because reloading my twitter page 40 times a day is kind of creepy)
Sounds interesting
Of course in my mind, that raises the question of how other organizations work. How centralized are other organizations? I don’t really know. From what Moore and some of his top lieutenants have said, it seems fairly decentralized (for better or worse). Laidnier ran the drafts every year until he was fired. From what Laidnier said when he was still there, the draft was his. I’m sure Moore had a lot of input, but Laidnier really ran the draft. It would be interesting to find out how decentralized the D-Rays F.O. actually is and how that compares to other organizations.
Also, is it the Rays success which has led you to believe their decentralization is an important reason for their success? Or is there more to it?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
there's more to it, obviously
it’s ultimately the decisions that are implemented that matter
but I wonder if new/different ideas and perspectives don’t “get through” more frequently in a situation like that
like I said, though, I’m vaguely remembering things I read about the Rays a couple years ago, and could be way off
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions
That makes sense
but I wonder if new/different ideas and perspectives don’t "get through" more frequently in a situation like that
I’d love to see an organizational flow chart for the Rays front office. I wonder who has the power to make which decisions and how that all works.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
like the
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions
That's more of a decision tree
I started making one of those for the Royals FO but my tears shorted out my keyboard.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
From what I know, it's still pretty top-down
in the sense that everything still flows through the top 2 guys, BUT they understand that they have to trust their employees and that several opinions are better than one. The mantra, at least at the start, was that Friedman wants hard data to back up the scouting decisions (just like an investment banker should) — so, the FO has to rely on scouts, stats, doctors, etc. rather than just one guy.
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2010 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I think just about every amateur scouting director actually runs the draft
the GM is involved in the process, especially on the top picks, and sets the budget, but the scouting director generally makes the final calls. (And after the first round, the draft moves very quickly). Of course, there are instances when the GM or ownership might step in and say “take (or don’t take) player X,” but that is the exception rather than the rule. The GM hires and fires the scouting director, so it is not like the scouting director is going to adopt a philosophy or strategy at odds with the GM.
I’m just speculating here, but I also have a strong feeling that in most F.O.’s minor league development decisions (what level a draftee starts at, promotions, demotions, skipping levels) are made by primarily by minor league directors with the GM of course deciding who gets to the majors and when.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Indeed
and sorta off that point, I think the Royals are trying to do something that, philosophically, in many ways, just isn’t possible anymore
EVERY TEAM values their prospects and 90% of the teams out there invest pretty heavily in the draft, int signings, etc.
That’s what really kills me about the Royals’ arrogance about how great their “model” is. It’s not 1991 or even 2001 anymore, where a team like the Red Sox has a pretty lackluster farm system b/c they’re trying to build a team with all FAs.
one random comment I've been meaning to make...
sometimes when I read prospect hype, I get the impression that people think the royals have never had any good players before, that everything will turn around when we get 2 or 3 guys up
it doesn’t work like that
the royals actually have had some nice players in the last 15 years, the problem has been that spots 10-25 on the roster have been terrible
look at last year, using this kind of thinking: the royals had the best starter in baseball, one of the best closers, a good young hard-hitting first baseman
and they still sucked
by Freneau on Jun 9, 2010 2:07 PM EDT reply actions 4 recs
Great point
The Royals had some great prospect success with Damon, Beltran, Dye and Sweeney all on the team and having success at the same time (not all in their first year or two, but eventually their successes coincided). But it didn’t matter a damn for team success because that’s all they had. The other prospects didn’t pan out. The front office wasn’t able to put anything genuinely good around them.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Royals-colored glasses:
The difference now (albeit grasping at straws) is that the payroll is there to conceivably retain guys who are stars or semi-stars. What if we’d had the payroll to keep Beltran, Damon, and Dye around? And then support them with pre-arb guys who come from the thriving (maybe not “thriving”, but at least adequate) farm system. Is that a formula for sustained success? Who knows, but at least there can be some optimism from it.
(Did I just describe the Minnesota Twins?)
This is not a referendum on the current ownership/FO situation, just a thought on what is different now compared to then.
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2010 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, let's see who Moore retains
So far he’s retained Greinke and Soria. And the contract and arbitration commitments go up every year, only decreasing payroll flexibility. Let’s see if Butler, Gordon or anyone else gets an extension. I’m betting they won’t.
Oh, and adjusted for baseball’s salary inflation, is the Royals payroll significantly larger now than it was in the Damon/Beltran/Sweeney/Dye era?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
but hey
we can be the Twins (who have a $97 million dollar payroll)!
all we need is the KC Metro to get 50% bigger, get wealthier, furnish a new stadium even though they already decided just to revamp the K instead and then draft a once in a generation talent like Mauer to pull it all together
by 2013, at the latest, this should all happen
Getting a Mauer would be redundant
Even if Myers moves to the OF (and then where do the Royals put Tim Smith????!?!?), there’s always savvy Moore acquisition M. Pina blocking the way.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions
good point
my biggest concern at this point is figuring out where I stand on the debate between maximizing Myers value. Do I want a 7 WAR catcher with a shorter career, or a 5 WAR OF.
Thinking outside the box here
Is there any rule against playing two catchers in the catcher’s box? Imagine if the Royals had both Mauer and Mauer Myers playing catcher.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I say 5 WAR OF
since the Royals will clearly be able to lock him up long-term
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm thinking 8/240 should be fair to both sides
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions
With a vesting option for the 9th and 10th years
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
KU, KSU and MU
fans will have more disposable income to foot the bill…tickets are cheaper in the Mountain West.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd say it's pretty different
2010: $70,908,333 (21st) (median: 80M)
2008: $58,245,500 (24th) (median: 80M)
2001: $35,643,000 (26th) (median: 62.5M)
2000: $23,433,000 (28th) (median: 56.5M)
http://www.stevetheump.com/Payrolls.htm
(opening season payrolls, the 2010/2009 numbers seemed odd, so I included 2008)
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2010 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
OK, I think "2010" up there is 2009, but the numbers are similar
2010: $72,267,710 (20th) (median 84.3M)
http://baseball.about.com/od/newsrumors/a/2010baseballteampayrolls.htm
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2010 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I was surprised by how much the median has risen
about 50% in 10 years
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2010 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions
I was thinking the same thing
Didn’t the Royals have a pretty highly thought of system when Billy, Alex and Lubanski and MITCH were winning the Texas League in 2006?
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Going into 2006, they ranked 23rd by BA.
Going into 2007, they ranked 11th by BA
BA ruined Alex Gordon's career!!
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions
That 2007 ranking was all due to Dayton
(wait, let me see...) being involved in the 2006 draft.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Hey, when those guys get to the majors, the Royals are going to be genuinely good.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I can't wait 'til 2008!!!!
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I love how we setup Gordon and Butler to arrive at the same time
I think it’s really important that the organization has made it a priority that they play together
they are learning how to win
It's the chemistry they've developed which has made this team a contender
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Clearly, everyone overrated their talent since they were not GMDM draftees.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I bet those guys are inseparable on the road
they seem to have a great deal in common
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions
also why they left Greinke in the TExas league with them
“so they learn to fight for each other”
Actual silliness aside, Greinke and Butler strike me as two of the least likely Royals to actually get into a fight during a game, although the UCR would be through the roof.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions
treading on dangerous ground here...
but i see greinke as more of a slapper… when the bullets start flying, he’s going open palm all the way
butler’s heart rate might not ever get above 60, so I don’t know if he could get excited enough to fight
Butler's heart rate is probably 97 bpm when he's sleeping, to be fair
although that doesn’t effect your point about his disposition
I think we might see kicks from Greinke if it weren’t for the spikes
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Greinke would just karate chop the guy in the throat and run
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo (follow me, because reloading my twitter page 40 times a day is kind of creepy)
How has no one
mentioned the possibility of him retreating to the clubhouse…and then flying out of there expertly swinging his Mizuno samurai sword?
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Jun 9, 2010 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
The fight rule is
that Farnsy charges the whole other team and mows them down with taekwondo, while everyone else stays in the dugout to avoid getting injured and to watch Farnsy do one of those kung fu movie things where everybody stands in a circle and he takes them on one at a time.
"The bowler's Holding, the batsman's Willey" - Unfortunate cricket commentator
All Hail Dayton Moore's great drafts!
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
That Wichita team is a good model of the "single wave of prospects" approach
It was stocked with “the future”; almost every starting position was considered a real prospect for at least some MLB roster time:
1B: Kila Ka’aihue
2B: Donnie Murphy
SS: Angel Sanchez
3B: Alex Gordon
C: Matt Tupman
RF: Chris Lubanski
CF: Mitch Maier
LF: Billy Butler
DH: Dee Brown (not a prospect, but every team needs Kendall-esque “mentoring”).
The starting staff had at least partial seasons from the rehabbing Zack, Billy Buckner, Tyler Lumsden, and Hochevar for the playoffs, and the bullpen included Leo Nunez and Ryan Braun.
A great, great prospect team, maybe the best single minor league team prospect-wise in Royals history. How good are the Royals now because of it? And that’s even granting that Buckner was turned into Callaspo. A single wave of good prospects simply cannot be counted out to become a great major league baseball team: some will be good MLB players, some will disappoint, and some will never make it .
It's all ball bearings these days!
by CentralChamps20?? on Jun 9, 2010 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Yeah but Moose yelled at somebody one time..
so this is different. He knows how to win. Book the Plaza now.
Killing time until time kills me
Real Prospects??
Tupman was already pretty old, wasn’t he?
And Kila hadn’t done crap yet
and I’m not sure anyone thought too highly of Murphy and Sanchez.
I think pretty much all the hope was in Gordon, Butler, and Lubanski, with a sprinkle of Maier.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jun 9, 2010 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, that was four first round picks all playing together on the same team
5 if you count Zack, and 6 if Hochevar is included
Unless I'm wrong...
My Twitter feed
I'm not talking about stars here
Most of that lineup was expected to contribute at the major league level, although the Baird era Royals regularly overvalued their prospects. Tupman was realistically seen as a backup to Buck by some point in 2007, Murphy had fans to be at least a backup infielder, and Sanchez was actually quite highly thought of to be the next starting SS in KC—he got a Sept. callup but then had some bad injury problems.
It's all ball bearings these days!
by CentralChamps20?? on Jun 10, 2010 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions
You are using some hindsight, though...
…my 2006 BA Prospect Handbook lists Luis Cota as the best pitching prospect in the system. Behind him we had Buckner, and Hoch was drafted that year… but really, at the time there was no reason to think we had any pitching on the way.
Still, six of our top ten prospects (according to BA) were on that team:
Gordon, Butler, Huber, Lubanski, Maier, and Murphy.
As they did Buckner
Those guys were seen as just some time away from being in the MLB rotation.
It's all ball bearings these days!
by CentralChamps20?? on Jun 10, 2010 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions
All I got out of this and the comments
Is sarcasm and that the royals suck
Sorry, I meant “REALIST COMMENTARY”
Really?
Sure there were a lot of snarky/sarcastic comments, but there was also a lot of serious discussion. And the original fanpost has no snark.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions
I was a bit ambiguos
I knew your OP was serious, but it still says that the Royals suck and have to be really lucky to be any good. I simply choose to believe otherwise
However, it was the comments I was referring to the snark. I only have to look up a few lines to see:
It’s the chemistry they’ve developed which has made this team a contender
I know your opinions on DM and the Royals organization, but I would like to think that after a draft that has good reviews (although not all good), a fan of the Royals would have at least some positive hope for the future.
I know your opinions on DM and the Royals organization, but I would like to think that after a draft that has good reviews (although not all good), a fan of the Royals would have at least some positive hope for the future.
I think Moore has had some really good drafts with the Royals, but I don’t think this was one of them. I think it was ok. Not good or bad. And the reviews I’ve read of this draft have been similarly blah.
I try hard to be realistic about the Royals future. I hope they will be great, but my opinion of what the Royals future will be is (as much as possible) governed by reality. I’d love for all of the Royals top prospects to pan out and do so quickly. But I’ve been a baseball fan for a fairly long time and I’ve seen tons of highly touted prospects fail. More fail than succeed. So I’m not going to pretend that this 2012 perfect storm of prospect success in the majors is realistic. There’s a difference between what I want to have happen and what I think is most likely to happen.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Another side point in assumption
Even if all of this falls into place and then all the “Farm Hands” are good. Everyone else have to be good also in the same year.
Good Aviles vs Not so Good Aviles
Not only would the Royals have to be lucky to get all these players to perform at the MLB level, they are all going to have to do it in the same season.
- .... .- - .----. ... / .-- .... .- - / ... .... . / ... .- .. -..
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Jun 9, 2010 3:25 PM EDT reply actions
ok maybe not all of them, but a good majority of them
- .... .- - .----. ... / .-- .... .- - / ... .... . / ... .- .. -..
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Jun 9, 2010 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
You never know...
we could get some decent prospects for DeJesus and Callaspo. I’ve still got hope because thats all I have. The Rays did it (granted they hit on every single prospect), so I think it could be a possibility. You would think we could afford one big FA with all that home grown talent. And if we suck in 2012 then I guess we will ship off Zach and Butler to start all over again.
So all Dayton Moore & Co. have to do
is be as good as the Rays front office?
Book The Plaza.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes
and Moore is following the Rays' model to the T
Not everyone has to be awesome for the team to be good.
Pitching and defense need to be excellent or the hitting needs to be excellent and the other needs to be about average.
Obviously it doesn’t have to be that way. Both could be above average and have a good team. It just sounds to me that many are assuming you can’t win with a replacement level player. Hell, the twins trot out Nick Punto pretty regularly, and they keep winning. Not everyone has to be good. I think this was the quoted OP’s point. We have a lot of guys who look good in the minors. They aren’t all going to work out, but if they don’t, we can try more. We aren’t reliant on Mike Montgomery becoming Bret Saberhagen to have a chance at being decent.
Maybe we can just have a stars-align ‘85 thing happen again with a barely above average team. I’d take it.
Nick Punto has never been sub-replacement
and he was 3.2 WAR in 2006, 2.5 in 2008 (in only 99 games), and 1.3 in 2009 125 games).
He can actually play defense. The Twins actually have a gritty white guy that can do that, which often happens to traditional organizations when their scouts can actually, you know, spot guys who can play defense instead of just talking about it.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I should say, rather
Punto has never been sub-replacement since getting regular playing time with the Twins
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2010 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
fair enough
I know he can play defense, but the guy has no bat at all. He still fits my point. He’s hardly a superstar but he does do something well.
Yes, I know not everyone needs to be a star in order for the Royals to be a good team
But you need a lot of above average players to make a good team. And I don’t think a) the article’s 2012 team will ever happen, and b) I don’t think that the combined talent (hitting, fielding, pitching) of that team in 2012 would make for a good team. As I said above, too many good things would have to happen.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions
“But you need a lot of above average players to make a good team. "
I dunno about that. A team with league average production at every position plus a couple of stars can be competitive (except in the AL East).
by BlueEyes_Austin on Jun 9, 2010 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions
That is probably the most unrealistic possibility
No below average players? Forget it.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 9, 2010 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions
2012 is still too early
to expect hosmer, moustakas, montgomery, crow, etc… to be putting in a successful full major league season
Guys, stop worrying about the future of this squad
I just read that Jose is playing RF tonight! Let’s just have some fun with this baseball comedy team while we still can!
lol...if
Killing time until time kills me
by EspeciallyK on Jun 9, 2010 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
While it's unlikely
I’d love to see it. Even if they weren’t too good, it’d be great to see a bunch of hungry young guys playing instead of the old ass guys we have now
Good post, but...
You’re spot on w/r/t the big picture. I think the proper way to view the Royals’ future is that 2012 has a chance to be the first year in at least a decade (2000?) that it is actually fun to follow the major league team. Which is very different from saying that they may be good in 2012.
Regardless of whether we’re any good in 2012, you can be damn sure that I’ll tune in if the lineup includes Moustakas and Hosmer, and if the pitching staff has a half dozen or so draftees. This for the very same reason that I watched every game in 2007 to see glimmers of hope from Alex Gordon and Billy Butler and Zack Greinke. Anyone who expects the 2012 team to be good either has a very short memory or is letting two months of minor league stats distract them from the bitter truth about prospects.
That said, I think you’re committing a little intentional fallacy w/r/t the draft. You’re letting a single draft choice (Colon) convince you that the front office believes that 2012 will be a great team and that they’re putting all their eggs in that basket. I don’t see that at all. I see a single pick that helps complete a roster in 2012-2013 with a legitimate SS prospect and then a few of high-upside guys who won’t be ready for much longer in Eibner, Antonio and Adam. And I see that they’re convinced that Louis Coleman was a valuable pick and that they’d like to repeat it in Chapman.
At worst, I don’t believe that this draft has enough data points to determine whether DM is mortgaging the next GMs future for a run in 2012. Next year’s draft should be instructive though. If DM chooses a quick-to-majors college bat or arm over a high-upside HS bat or arm, then I think your argument has legs.
There’s no question that it would be fun to see all of those prospects and home grown players in the same lineup, rotation and bullpen. But I don’t think Moore would do that. I think he’d mix in some veteran leadership along with some young players.
That said, I think you’re committing a little intentional fallacy w/r/t the draft. You’re letting a single draft choice (Colon) convince you that the front office believes that 2012 will be a great team and that they’re putting all their eggs in that basket
No, no, no. I didn’t say that and I don’t think I believe that. I don’t necessarily believe that Moore is preparing for a 2012 team full of prospects. But I do see a draft that looks like it is based on short-term need, built to compete in the relatively near future. That isn’t just based on Colon. It is based on the entire draft. 37 college players. Lots of high floor, low ceiling picks. And it is also based on the front office comments. I wish I had the quote but I think it was Piccolo that said something about drafting for need and putting in complementary pieces around our good prospects. To me that sounded like he’s saying we’ve already got the top talent and we just need some other pieces to fill in around them. That assumes that the top talent is going to pan out. We have no idea if it will.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jun 10, 2010 7:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Is winning a given?
certainly not. A LOT of things have to go right to suddenly become a winning team.
However, we are at a point now where we can say if SOME of our AA/AAA prospects succeed we have a shot at being decent. That is a long ways from “Well we have a guy in A ball that will save the franchise”.
It’s no longer “when Zack & Gobble get here” or “Let’s just bring up Gordon now”. Now it’s we have a crop SUCCEEDING at AA/AAA and expected to advance on schedule.
Sure thing NO, is hope alive, Yep
~~~if there is one thing i absolutely know for sure its... ummmm uhhh.... uhhh
nevermind
Prospects on there own
However hyped, don’t win games.
See Orioles, Baltimore.
Does anybody have faith in Moore to build a solid team around his young guns? Because I sure don’t.
I feel like Baltimore...
…is used as an example of a “team full of prospects not working” a lot..and I think that is misguided. Yes, they have some young guys that are struggling, but they are also giving major playing time to 36 year old Miguel Tejeda (239 PA, .666 OPS), 32 year old Ty Wigginton (230 PA, .882 OPS), 32 year old Luke Scott (184 PA, .872 OPS), 30 year old Cezar Izturis, (175 PA, .542 OPS), 30 year old Garritt Atkins (145 PA, .567 OPS), 34 year old Julio Lugo (108 PA, .459 OPS), and 30 year old Corey Patterson (97 PA, .677 OPS).
On the pitching side, they have 35 year old Kevin Millwood, 31 year old Jeremy Guthrie, and some other 30+ year old relievers getting plenty of innings.
Yeah, they got Wieters and Jones and other prospects that are struggling, but they are FAR from a team that is “handing things over to prospects” and struggling…they suck because they have young players that are struggling AND a lot of old guys that pretty much suck overall.
The Rays are a team that truly handed things over to young guys..and it took some time, but now they are reaping the benefits. Doesn’t mean that will happen with the Royals if they try and go that route….but if anything, Baltimore is comparable to our situation NOW moreso than if we “go young.”
Killing time until time kills me
by EspeciallyK on Jun 10, 2010 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I think we actually kind of agree
It is true that Baltimore perhaps isn’t as young as we sometimes think. But put that aside for a sec.
The point we are both trying to make in different ways is what goes with the young core. The Orioles are padded out with Miguel Tejada, Garrett Atkins and Kevin Millwood et al. The Rays in ’08 were padded out with Carlos Pena, Grant Balfour and Eric Hinske and the like who contributed themselves.
The two are not comparisons in a ny real sense and it isn’t fair to to try and too make too much of them, but the overarching point that you need to skillfully integrate productive “others” in with young young guns is important. Baltimore haven’t done it, and I have no faith in Dayton being able to either.
When you assume...
I think it’s too much to think that Crow, Moose, Hosmer, Colon or any of the pitchers will be there in 2012. I think the fun might be in speculating what unnecessary/overpriced player is going to block each of these, in the same way Guillen is blocking Kila.
Chipper Jones blocks Moustakas
Yuni gets an extension, blocking the Colon.
Brayan Pena blocks Wil Myers. (Yes that is a joke. I would have gone with Miguel Olivo blocking Wil Myers, but we all know he can’t block a damn thing.)
Russ Ortiz blocks Mike Montgomery/Crow/etc.
Willy Taveras blocks DRob/Paulo Orlando.
Isnt
Julio Franco out there somewhere? I’m sure Ricky Henderson has another year or two in him too.
~~~if there is one thing i absolutely know for sure its... ummmm uhhh.... uhhh
nevermind
Monty For Moyer
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jun 14, 2010 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions
John Goodman just lost 100 lbs.
He deserves a shot at 2B in 2011.
Killing time until time kills me
by EspeciallyK on Jun 14, 2010 2:29 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Moore has failed and deserved to be fired
instead he gets his contract extended. How ridiculous is this?
He had one supposed strength at the Major League Level: building solid bullpens
This “strength” was exposed as a total fraud when our bullpen became garbage the past two years after our two best setup guys were traded for absolutely horrible baseball players .
That was a make or break aquisition, and he failed
by GobbleforCyoung on Jun 14, 2010 6:00 PM EDT reply actions
My dream team
2B-Aviles
SS-Colon
1B-Butler
3B-Moustakas
LF-Hosmer
C-Myers
DH-Kila
RF-Gordon
CF-Ebnier
Pitching staff
1.Greinke
2,Montgomery
3.Lamb
4.Argulles
5.Crow
Probably Hochevar somewhere in there
Mellville
Coleman
Osuna
Chapman
Dwyer
Soria.
That is obviously a pipe dream but atleast most of those guys are actually producing in the minors.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
Related FanShots on Royals Review
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.
