Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

Why the Best Rotation Option is to Look Within


While the headline may seem like a somewhat cheesy and oddly baseball-related inspirational quote, what I mean is that the Kansas City Royals should look within their organization to fill their rotation unless a particularly Royals-friendly free agent signing or trade presents itself, which is unlikely in this market.

This would mean no trades for James Shields, Matt Cain, Gio Gonzalez, and no signings of CJ Wilson, CC Sabathia, or even Mark Buehrle.  Essentially, I'm arguing that the Royals should not trade any of their top prospects and not spend much money for the rotation.  Reasons:

1.  The Royals are likely not ready to contend.

This is the core reason why they should not spend loads of money or highly ranked prospects yet.  This is because they are not ready to contend this year (unless a good amount of luck is on the Royals' side).  This has been discussed in length here at Royals Review, so I will not delve into an explanation.

2.  The pitching market is thin next this year, while more plentiful next year.

The number and quality of available free agents not only affects the price of those free agents--it also affects the worth of pitchers that are on the trading block.  Apart from Wilson and Sabathia, the most valuable free agent is arguably Edwin Jackson.  When you consider that Wilson and Sabathia might go back to Texas and NY, that means that every single other team in baseball who is looking to upgrade their rotation in a meaningful way must either pay a premium on the other FA's or compete with each other for trades.

Next year the FA class is more talented, and while some are likely to sign extensions in the next year, this still will likely leave a greater number of more valuable FA's than this year.  This means that more teams will be able to sign impact FA's, which means that less teams will compete for trades, keeping the trade cost down.  What this means is that the Royals will likely pay more for less this year. 

3.  Royals would be selling low on many of their prospects

Monty didn't have a good year.  Neither did Myers.  Nor Dwyer.  Lamb just had Tommy John surgery.  Colon wasn't particularly good either.  If the Royals were to trade their top prospects, they would be selling low.  Not good for value.

What I do think is ok is if the Royals make a trade for, say, a number 3 starter with Melky and a couple of prospects not mentioned in the previous list.  But they should not go for the big guns. 

Star-divide

So, here's my solution:  fill the rotation with young arms that have promise from within the organization

Here's the thing that people always leave out:  this is (hopefully) the last year of ambiguity in terms of success.  The Royals might compete, but they probably will not.  When 2013 comes here, the Royals will likely be able to compete.  So, this is the last year in which the Royals can spend any significant amount of time experimenting. 

The Royals simply don't know what they have in many of the players.  They should give Crow a chance to be a starter--he was a number 1 pick after all.  They should give Teaford a chance to be a starter.  They should give Montgomery a chance to win a rotation spot.  They should let Duffy grow.  So in spring training, this is what should happen:

Rotation 2012:

Locks:  Luke Hochevar, Felipe Paulino

Competitors for other 3 spots:  Aaron Crow, Danny Duffy, Everett Teaford, Mike Montgomery, Vin Mazarro, Sean O'Sullivan, possibly Chris Dwyer or Jake Odorizzi (though not likely, could happen a la Nate Adcock/Crow)

If the rotation sucks?  Fix it with next year's better pitching class, but then the Royals know what they have with their own players.  If it doesn't?  Then they have a good rotation, more money, and their best prospects.  Win-win situation.

Comment 140 comments  |  5 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

That's pretty much what I posted on the Gio thread...

…so I obviously concur. I DO think the Royals will need to go outside the organization for depth, at the very least. I still don’t think Wandy Rodriguez would cost a lot in terms of talent, and Tom Gorzelanny may be non-tendered. Not the guys I’d build a division-contender with, but someone along those lines will be needed, especially when the most innings pitched by any on the above list was Hochevar’s 198 last year.

If women only slept with nice guys...guys would only be nice. And they don't. And we're not.

by setupunchtag on Oct 14, 2011 10:15 AM EDT reply actions  

Me too

Sufficient fill-in for a year, or a comp pick.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

Chen makes a lot of sense...

and I should have included him— and that’s a good point about arbitration.

If women only slept with nice guys...guys would only be nice. And they don't. And we're not.

by setupunchtag on Oct 14, 2011 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

I completely agree with your general premise

but I also think the Royals NEED to identify and acquire a decent starter via trade or FA for next season. Dwyer and Odorizzi just aren’t realistic options for next season’s rotation. Teaford, Mazzaro, and O’Sullivan are all long-relief/emergency 5th starter/Omaha depth. So, without making a move, you’re relying on Crow to become an effective starter (which he has yet to do at any significant level), and Duffy and Montgomery to suddenly start throwing more strikes.

I would offer Chen arbitration, and take the pick if he declines. Like you said, try to find a youngish #3-#4 starter, preferably with at least 2-3 years of team control left, by trading Melky + lower-level prospects. If Chen declines and you can’t pull off a decent trade, then I would definitely sign 1 or more guys like Maholm, Bedard, maybe Francis again, etc. I don’t want Moore to spend a ton of money or prospects going after any of the big fish this year, but I also wouldn’t want him to roll into the season just expecting and relying upon Crow, Duffy and Monty to spend the entire year in the rotation.

This also carries over to 2B. Play Gia all year, perhaps spelled here and there by Navarro, and let him sink or swim. If every option you try is a disaster, then there will be guys like Hudson, Keppinger, Izturis, etc. available on reasonable, short-term deals for 2013 or beyond (until Colon proves he’s ready or a bust).

by Sweep_the_Leg on Oct 14, 2011 10:49 AM EDT reply actions  

When I say lower-level prospects I'm thinking Melky + Colon + Eibner, etc.

i.e. not Montgomery, Myers, or Odorizzi. I would think that should be plenty to get a guy with a #3 ceiling and at least 2-3 years of control left.

by Sweep_the_Leg on Oct 14, 2011 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

you're not getting a league average starter under cost control for those guys

I mean Mazzaro’s ceiling at the time he was acquired was as a no. 3 starter. Colon and Eibner are legitimate prospects, but no team is going to get excited about either one.

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Was it really? According to Beane when he was whispering sweet nothings in Dayton's ear?

One year of DDJ (at $6M) for Mazzaro and Marks vs. one year of Melky (probably cheaper than $6M?), Colon, and Eibner for a guy like Kris Medlen (not that the Braves would want Melky back)? I don’t see that the value changing hands in those two trades as being completely out of whack.

by Sweep_the_Leg on Oct 14, 2011 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Don't want to get into a semantics debate

but yes, if using the common definition of ceiling as best case scenario within reason for baseball purposes, Mazzaro at the time projected as a back end starters (4/5 type) but his ceiling would be higher if a few things went right for him (some combo of fewer walks, extra strikeouts, extra groundballs).

Medlen (who I really like) might be available for something like that, but only because he is currently damaged goods. A healthy, established league average starter with multiple years of team control would require a better primary piece than Melky or Colon or Eibner.

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

I also wouldn’t want him to roll into the season just expecting and relying upon Crow, Duffy and Monty to spend the entire year in the rotation.

I kinda sounds like you don’t agree here. If we’re willing to accept that 2012 isn’t a “contention” year, they this simply shouldn’t be a significant factor in your decision. If we agree that 2012 is to figure out what we’ve got, and not to win the division… you slot the 2012 version of Jeff Suppan into any vacated spots that crop up.

by kcemigre on Oct 14, 2011 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm all for having 2012 being a "sort out the rotation" year

But I just think you’re dreaming if you are banking on Crow successfully transitioning back to a starter role, Duffy improving to the point where he doesn’t need to go back down to (or start at) AAA, AND Monty breaking camp as a lock for the rotation. You’re going to need at least one Chen-type innings-eater. I suppose Mazzaro, SOS, Teaford, etc. could do that for you, but I think each of those guys has shown to varying degrees that they aren’t worthy of being a starting MLB pitcher.

by Sweep_the_Leg on Oct 14, 2011 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

From northern New Jersey came Boom Boom Mazzaro
A righthanded starter signed out of high school
He pitched in the minors at Stockton and Midland
And blew them away with all of the tools

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well, I'm not expecting all of them to succeed...

…or even any of them.

I’m saying I’d give them all a good hard look, and most of them would get a shot… and, frankly, by the time I’m done cycling through all of the potential solutions, it would be 2013.

By the way, no one has mentioned Zack Miner. Are we gonna re-sign that guy?

by kcemigre on Oct 14, 2011 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

I would definitely give him another minor league deal of a decent size

He should be back to 100% next year and probably was at least by late season 2011. And I think he’s a better back-end rotation candidate than Mazzaro or SOS. Mostly he just provides decent depth to have in the minors.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 15, 2011 2:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

If 2012 is not a competitive year, why is 2013?

What changes from 2012 to 2013? The offense/defense and bullpen is in place. Are Monty, Odorizzi, Lamb, Dwyer, W.Smith guaranteed to make strides to be ready to be the Ace of the 2013 staff? I think 2012, will be a competitive year. They should go after one of the top FA and a middle of the rotation trade, or vice a versa. Does everyone think that Myers is going to take strides to be ready for RF in 2013, or is Francoeur still going to be out there?

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 10:56 AM EDT reply actions  

A year of development from young players

Especially the pitchers, like Duffy, Montgomery, etc. And it’s not like we’re sure that the rookies beyond Hosmer are ready to perform at a high level. 2013 looks much better.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions  

I guess it doesn't really matter what we think.

If the Royals think they can compete in 2012, then they will go after someone. I tend to agree with them if they do. But what do I know, I’m just a stupid fan. I don’t read into Sabremetrics much, but I did watch about every game. There were a lot of players that looked like they made a turn.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

TRUST THE PROCESS

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

It never matters what we think

It’s just fun to talk about it.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

It is fun.

I like reading this site, b/c it is the exact opposite of other blog. This blog throws the negative spin on every move the Royals make. Not everything is rosey with the Royals, like facebook/kcroyals/etc. try to spin it. But it is definitely not as bad as most posts/posters tend to think it is on this site.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ya know...

…if you actually spend time on those sites, you’ll notice that there’s actually a significant amount of negativity there, too. The primary difference around here is that many posters make it a habit to support there arguments (whether negative or positive) rather than making bald assertions.

by kcemigre on Oct 14, 2011 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

DaytonMooreSucks

Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Oct 14, 2011 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Frenchy is signed through 2013 and I don't foresee Myers replacing GMDM's man-crush.

If Myers is knocking down the door at AAA and there’s no spot for him in KC, lets just appreciate that wonderful problem when we get to it.

by Loose Seal on Oct 14, 2011 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think we should add a poll

Go for it now

or

Wait a year

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 10:56 AM EDT reply actions  

Needz Moar Opshunz

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Oct 14, 2011 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

Place head in sand?

Hope all is well.

"If I stop drinking all at once, I'm afraid the cumulative hangover will kill me."
Twitter stole my soul.

by Joseph Landis on Oct 15, 2011 2:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

Crow is not going to be a starter.

He will be a very good bullpen arm, but if he was going to be a starter they should have left him in AA to learn the other pitches.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 10:57 AM EDT reply actions  

It's an option

I’m not saying that it is an option that they are going to with. But we’re talking about what we think they should do, not what we think they will do.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions  

Holland has only started one game since HS, right?

Wouldn’t they have to baby him for a year or so before he could pitch more than 70-100 innings?

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's also been said that his delivery is problematic

and would be a major injury concern if he converted to a starter

by Loose Seal on Oct 14, 2011 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

maybe

Has the team said that?

It may not be successful, but the payoff is huge if it works, and he can always go back to relieving. He has a better chance that Crow or the others who struggle with control and do not have a good pitch to throw lefties.

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

no - something that's been said around these parts

but it’s been said about pretty much everyone, so maybe it’s not worth putting much stock into

by Loose Seal on Oct 14, 2011 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree with you that Holland should be given a shot at the rotation...

But, you can’t just plan on putting him back in the ‘pen if it doesn’t work out if the primary concern is injury. For many people around here that is the primary concern… and I’m willing to accept that’s a reasonable concern, given his lack of experience starting.

I just think the risk is worth it.

by kcemigre on Oct 14, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

as discussed the other times this has come up

you obviously need the medical staff’s clearance to do so. And with Soria, the organization itself has specifically come out and said that he decided against moving him to the rotation due to medical concerns. I just have not heard anything specific from the team or a reliable source like BA — in fact, I though Yost specifically mentioned that the team wanted to look at Holland as a starter (even before the Crow talk came up).

The idea would be with any reliever that if he was stretched out in spring training, but he did not respond well to the longer outings or starts to feel pain in his elbow or something, the tryout as a starter would be scuttled pretty quickly.

In the end, the odds are probably against it working out even with Holland, but as you say, it is worth the risk.

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well we're not exactly World Series favorites next year

So I don’t mind a transition year for Holland

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is if he can transition at all.

Would you rather have a healthy closer type, or an injured possible #3?

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Bullpen arms are the most fungible commodity in baseball

The reward of having a young, cost-controlled quality #3 SP far outweighs any risk of possible injury.

by Sweep_the_Leg on Oct 14, 2011 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Coleman would likely be disaster

poor control and lefties can mash him because he lacks a real change

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

I would like to try Holland and Crow as starters

Coleman’s delivery is all over the place. That guy is going to get injured in the near future (knocks on own head to reverse jinx).

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh, yeah, I saw that Adcock

struck out seven of twelve batters in the Arizona league.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

Better than giving up seven walks

in the Arizona league.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

its not bad

still not sure what the royals have in that guy. any good news from him is solid.

by BeauJackson on Oct 14, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

There's also his arm angle...

….which should make it harder for righties to pick up the ball, but probably doesn’t bother lefties at all.

But, in the small sample that was 2011, the splits aren’t too bad. He intentionally walked 6 left-handed batters and 0 righties. Given the sample size those six walks are significant. Still… the difference between his numbers against righties and lefties basically comes down to 6 IBBs.

We’ve got plenty of “he probably won’t work out” options.

Coleman is one of them, and I’d give him a shot, just like the other guys.

by kcemigre on Oct 14, 2011 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh, but for the record...

…when I posted that comment about putting him in the rotation, I was sort of joking.

But I do honestly think we should just plain give ‘em all a shot. There’s really nothing to lose in 2012, and if one-out-of-a-hundred guys works out… hey, you have one starter. So, we just need to find a hundred guys who each have at least a 1% chance of making it…

by kcemigre on Oct 14, 2011 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed. My thoughts in bullet point form:

- Dwyer shouldn’t be included on 2012 SP candidates. Earliest we could hope to see him in KC is mid-2013. Mendoza should be on the list.

- I also think Chen is going to re-sign after the Royals offer arbitration.

- My main thought is that we have 11 potential starters who are 28 or younger and 7 who are 25 or younger (Hoch-28, Paulino-28, Duffy-23, Crow-24, Teaford-27, Monty-22, Mendoza-27, SOS-24, Mazarro-25, Odorizzi-21, Dwyer-23). Their potential is debatable, but a case can be made for all of them.

- I’m not opposed to Moore looking around at FA SPs – that’s his job, he should do it. But it seems like there are going to be very few good deals this year and there will be lots of bad ones. I don’t trust Moore to find the gem amongst the lemons.

-Lets see what we have. 2011 was a fluky year – career years for lots of players. Lets see if they can repeat it. If they can, lets make some moves (maybe SP, maybe a 2B) in July and next off-season. 95% of the players on the roster aren’t going anywhere between now and 2013 unless we let them go. So lets not go for it now, when the timing isn’t ideal.

by Loose Seal on Oct 14, 2011 11:07 AM EDT reply actions  

I have my doubts about Chen re-signing

As Yodazilla said, the pitching market is thin this year, and Chen has performed well over the past two years (Duh, Winning!).

It’s a no-brainer to offer arbitration, but the acquiring team does not have to give up a pick. I think he will sign a 2-year deal with someone, but it won’t be the Royals.

That information is somewhat classified.

by Karte on Oct 14, 2011 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

But, but, but he said he wanted to come back and play for the Royals?

But yeah – it’s no guarantee. With the attention he got towards the end of the year, and with the Red Sox considering acquiring him, he might think he has options and decline. In that case, I’d gladly take the compensation draft pick and sign some other random FA SP or re-sign Francis to get a little depth in the rotation.

by Loose Seal on Oct 14, 2011 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

I’m assuming he has a competent agent and I think the agent will likely advise him to accept the Royals offer of arbitration. Even in this market, I don’t think he’s going to get a multi-year deal, given his age, significant injury history, and the fact that his recent performances have beeen pretty good but not great. I think he’ll get about $5M in arbitration and I think that is likely more than he’d get on a one-year deal on the FA market. While there is the possibility for more on the FA market, there’s also the very real risk that he’s still unsigned in late January and has to take a deal for $2-3M. A guaranteed approx. $5M is going to very hard to turn down. I think Chen and his agent will choose to take that deal.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions  

Good analysis

I’d pay $4-5m for Chen. The guy is a 2 WAR starter who is going to miss five or seven starts.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, first prize in this little game is a compensation pick.

Second prize is landing Chen for $5M on a one-year deal.

The thing that makes this simple is that both prizes are better than not offering arbitration.

by kcemigre on Oct 14, 2011 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

Very unexciting

But affordable and probably an ok value. Next year, 1 WAR is probably going to be worth about $5.5M on the open market. He works as a stopgap to get us to 2013. I wouldn’t offer it to Chen as a FA, but I’d offer arbitration, knowing he’d cost that much because of the chance to get a comp pick of he declines.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd rather let Chen walk

Offer the same deal to someone of his ilk, but younger. Someone who might be able to stick around when the contention is supposed to happen. Chen offers nothing for the future, thats why I see it as a complete waste of a roster spot.

by BeauJackson on Oct 14, 2011 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

Two things

1. He offers some chance of getting a comp pick.

2. He’s a one-year stopgap which is what the Royals should be doing about the rotation. Let young pitchers develop and fill other holes with stopgaps that won’t cost the team anything after 2012.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Some chance of a comp pick, but if he's going to be getting 5M in arbitration, that chance is almost none

As for the stopgap, I just don’t like the idea of Chen filling that role. I’d rather someone with at least a little bit of upside be brought in. Or, instead of giving Chen 5M, spread that money out and take a chance on two pitchers. I just don’t see the point in keeping the relationship with Chen going. Unfortunately because of the comp pick rules, I’m probably not going to see things go how I’d like.

by BeauJackson on Oct 14, 2011 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

He guarantees the loyalty and goodwill

of the extensive Panamanian-Chinese-American community to the Royals. That’s gotta be worth, what, eighteen or twenty bucks?

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

I have a friend who is, of all things, Japanese-Peruvian

He runs a nice restaurant—he’s the chef—in my neighborhood. Interesting food. He tries to be creative. Not expensive, either—you can get out for twenty bucks a person. He’s the guy who hung the nickname Juancho on me.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

Japanese-Peruvians need love, too.

That information is somewhat classified.

by Karte on Oct 15, 2011 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

I’d rather someone with at least a little bit of upside be brought in.

If you bring in someone with upside for a one-year deal, then if they do well, they are gone. They accept the one-year make-good contract so that they can build up their value to go on the FA market to get a bigger multi-year deal. The alternative is givng that pitcher with a little upside a multi-year deal, which isn’t a good idea for obvious reasons.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

The guy with upside could if all goes right add more to the team next year than Chen though

I don’t want to go all out to win next year by trading away the farm when the team isn’t ready, but signing someone who could add a win or two more than Chen could be worth it. I’d rather see a progressive risky one year move than staying stagnant and just banking on Chen’s 1-1.5 WAR season.

by BeauJackson on Oct 14, 2011 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

I see what you're saying

And that’s why I wouldn’t offer Chen that if he were a FA. But if 2012 isn’t about contending, but continuing to build for the future (near future), then I’d take the move that might net a comp pick. The downside is having Chen for maybe $5M instead of another stop gap who might be a win better. I like the upside of the comp pick and the downside isn’t a major issue for me.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Plus, if Chen pitches well,

GMDM will trade him at the deadline for prospects

by Loose Seal on Oct 14, 2011 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't think that has to be in sarcasm font

It’s a very plausible scenario. Chen would need to outperform his FIP numbers again, but that could happen either b/c of luck and/or b/c he really does have a bit of lefty soft tossing magic (with some Kauffman HR/FB help).

I realize you weren’t making a statement or anything, but we should consider that Chen does have some back-end value if he can be flipped for a C+ guy or maybe is Type B again.

Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Oct 14, 2011 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't know

If he wouldn’t or couldn’t flip Francis or Chen this July, I doubt there’s much of a chance for him to trade Chen next July.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

If Chen is playing well enough to garner trade interest next year

I’ll bet Dayton will be looking to ADD players to TRULY “go for it” in the 2nd half.

by Sweep_the_Leg on Oct 14, 2011 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

It Depends

Is Boston going to need a play-in game for the playoffs next year?

by BrRoyal on Oct 15, 2011 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

that's my thought

Chen was a great trade candidate this past year but Moore was unwilling to trade him and/or was unable to convince teams to value him for what he was worth.

(notice that the Chen pitching well part is not in sarcasm, but the GMDM trading somebody part is)

by Loose Seal on Oct 14, 2011 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

Good call, I did forget Mendoza

But he’s already 27 and his peak is probably being like Bruce Chen in that he doesn’t strike out many but somehow manages to pitch decently into his 30s. This is not what the Royals need.

Also, I don’t think Dwyer or Odorizzi will actually compete because they are both just AA. But I’m saying it could happen; after all, it happened twice this year.

by Yodazilla on Oct 14, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

Paul Maholm's option has been declined by the Pirates

Does that make him a free agent? It looks like his contract’s up. The guy is not too bad a pitcher (3.66 ERA, 3.78 FIP, 4.03 xFIP, 2.1 WAR in 2011), and he’s a Francis-type junkballing lefty packing 88 MPH heat. He’s 29. Seems like he’d be worth it if you could get him for $5m a year or so. Great one-two combo with Chen (who I’d like to re-sign).

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 11:10 AM EDT reply actions  

Seems like a modest improvement over what we have

If we get a guy I want it to be a guy with frontline potential. Otherwise I’d rather see what our internal options can do.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

I think he gets more than $5MM,

I can’t see him being anything worse than a 1 WAR pitcher and he could be a 2+ WAR pitcher (barring injuries of course). Given that, I bet he gets 2 years/$15MM at least this offseason.

by Loose Seal on Oct 14, 2011 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions  

Tend to agree

I don’t mind picking a pitcher up if he’s here for the next three years, but if we’re good in the next 3-5 years, we’re going to need a few internal options become really good starting pitchers. And there are a few candidates to take leaps in performance – Paulino, Duffy, and longer shots like Crow and Hochevar.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 11:11 AM EDT reply actions  

Sorry, meant to rec this, accidentally flagged.

I'm a 14 year old freshman in high school with a love for all things Royals and Packers.

2012 is the year we shine.

by Jack Marsh on Oct 14, 2011 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

ALOT OF GOOD POINTS

That’s exactly what I have been saying.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

We have all the pieces in the lineup we need.

Perhaps, but don’t you think our outfield is all in line to regress quite a bit? Maybe not Gordon so much, but Franceour and Melky’s 2010 performance seems wildly out of whack with their past performance.

OTOH, 2B and maybe even SS and catcher should be upgrades.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well, Gordon will probably be good

and I’m as big a Gordon fan as there probably is on here, but he is going to regress a lot.

I mean, it won’t “hurt” as much. Melky and Frenchy each go from 3-4 to 1-2. Gordon goes from about 7 wins to 3-4 wins.

I wonder who is going to get ripped by the causal fans more.

Impossible to tell.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.

by Matt Klaassen on Oct 14, 2011 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm going to call it already

After a slow start in mid-April the line is going to be that he got complacent and lazy after a good season. He does have that smirky attitude, you know.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

We Can Sell

Low on him at the deadline for a 30+ year old starting pitcher, allowing Melky to move to LF and Cain finally to take over in CF.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Oct 15, 2011 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

I'll call my shot now too.

He’s 6.5WAR next year, and he’s the reason the Royals cling to .500 at the break.

He starts LF in the ASG.

Nick Swisher is handsome. Johnny Giavatella close second.

by ChrisCEIT on Oct 15, 2011 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

Francoeur and Cabrera had great 2011,

and pretty bad seasons before that. You have to use this years stats just as much if not more to predict future expectations. Don’t you? Maybe they are in shape (Greatest Shape of their lives), or maybe they learned a new approach (Seitzer), or maybe they just hit their peak years.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

You have to use this years stats just as much if not more to predict future expectations. Don’t you?

I don’t know about more. Why should recency trump quantity? We’ve seen temporary spikes all the time in player performance.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

yeah

the good projection systems weigh the most recent years more heavily, but you need the multiple years of data to get any sort of accuracy. Even a “dumb” system like Marcels (which simply weighs the last three years on something like a 3-2-1 scale with an age adjustment) consistently beats just taking the player’s most recent season by a wide margin.

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

it's even less drastic than that

more like 5-4-3 for hitters

3-2-1 for pitchers

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.

by Matt Klaassen on Oct 14, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Also, for young players, I think ZiPS looks at 4 years, something like 5-4-3-2

I think I remember reading that. Don’t remember what his “young player” cutoff age is. But I have a feeling that Melky and Francoeur aren’t in the “young” group anymore.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

really?

there arent all that many players out there who’d qualify for ‘young’ players who have 4 years of data for the projection

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Oct 14, 2011 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

That's why I said as much, if not more.

I wasn’t sure what the scaling was, but I knew the most recent year would be weighted more.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

How do you attact FA?

Do you win a WS every 10 years like the Marlins and be pretty bad the other 9 years? Or do you stay competitive for 10 years (over .500, occasional playoffs)?

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

with money

the team just has to be smarter about spending it than mid to high revenue teams.

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Haven't the Royals offered more money to players and still lost?

Or are those rumors? I am thinking about Beltran, Hunter, and it seems like more.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Beltran and Hunter were less IIRC

I think they offered more to Orlando Hudson to have it turned down.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

the point is not to sign free agent pitchers ever

just avoid any big money long term deals until the team is in a better position to actually win.

But in any case, under this logic, wouldn’t the Royals be in a better position to attract free agents if they are coming off a 80 win season with lots of press about how they are a team on the rise than where they are now coming off a 91 loss season?

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's what I was trying to get at earlier.

Besides money, how do you attract FA. Do you win a WS every 10 years like the Marlins and be pretty bad the other 9 years? Or do you stay competitive for 10 years (over .500, occasional playoffs)?

I know it should ever be the first place the Royals look for talent. They seem to be doing a very good job of flooding the system with over slot draft picks and high dollar international FA. They have been able to lock up certain players over the past couple of years for longer contracts. But sometimes they will need to spend a little extra to get a FA.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

I really am not following you

This seems like a completely different topic. No one is saying never pay for a big free agent or trade top prospects for a good player under any circumstances. The point is that the Royals right now are at the point when they should not do so, at least for a pitcher.

Money is going to drive most players. A secondary consideration would be chances of winning at that time — free agents this offseason are not going to care if the Rays or Jays used to be bad if they think the team is in a position to win now and offers them sufficient money.

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't really think FAs should be a major part of the equation anyway

The great Royals teams of the past never had any significant FA contributors. Other small market teams that are succeeding aren’t doing so with major FA contributions. I’d rather save the money to make shrewd trades and lock up the nucleus we have.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

True,

but I think you have to at least sprinkle in a FA or 2 to fill holes. Sometimes they are bigger contributors and other times they are just role players.

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

Sure

For role players, bullpen jobs. I don’t think small market teams like the Royals can really afford to get “frontline starting pitchers” or middle of the order hitters as FAs.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 14, 2011 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

The spending the money to sprinkle those guys in should be done at the right time

Like when the team is close, and/or when there’s a good FA class. Thankfully hopefully next offseason will fill the bill.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

See, I figure you can pick up two 2 WAR starters

for 2012 for not a lot of cash—say Maholm and Chen, eight or ten million bucks. And if you were willing to swap a non-Myers prospect or two or Melky, you can probably get Gio González. González, Maholm, Chen, Hochevar, and Paulino are probably worth 10-12 WAR collectively, and you wouldn’t be sacrificing the future because the payroll would be what, $70m? In fact, you’d send Duffy back down and let him refine his technique in AAA. Crow would be next in line for a move to the rotation. González would be ours for three years. By then we have more pitchers coming up.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

First, I don’t think Chen and Maholm are 2.0 WAR starters. Chen, largely because of injuries and some regression. Maholm from moving to the AL. Second, I think it would take a lot of top prospects to get Gonzalez, and I wouldn’t want to give up multiple top prospects for Gonzalez right now. And I think Duffy should be continuing to develop in the majors.

González would be ours for three years. By then we have more pitchers coming up.

Who do you think you traded to get Gonzalez?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

Would it take

Myers/Monty, Dwyer, Colon, Herrera? Or do you think you have to include BOTH Myers and Monty?

by royal_in_cincinnati on Oct 14, 2011 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

My speculation

Myers plus Monty or Odorizzi plus one or two lesser prospects.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

thats not a bad offer really

I’d imagine the A’s wouldn’t mind having Myers to pair with Grant Green in the outfield. With Brett Anderson out for next year though, its hard to me imagine Gonzalez going anywhere.

by BeauJackson on Oct 14, 2011 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Gonzalez would be a Royal for 4 years actually

If Moore makes a trade, he’s someone worth getting because of the 4 year window.

by BeauJackson on Oct 14, 2011 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

it wasn't my point...
Who do you think you traded to get Gonzalez?

But I think a lot of teams would be in the mix for Gio. Enough so that Monty + Melky + (2) B-ish prospects from the Royals don’t get it done. Once it’s known that he’s on the market, I honestly can imagine the Yankees dangling Montero. I know it’s stupid, but that’s what I see happening.

Nick Swisher is handsome. Johnny Giavatella close second.

by ChrisCEIT on Oct 15, 2011 11:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

I am certainly fine with adding a decent starter on a one-year deal

or flipping a non-core prospect for one, as this would not affect 2013 and beyond. The specific names are a different conversation.

by Gopherballs on Oct 14, 2011 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

A non-Myers prospect or two and/or Melky

I’d give them, say, Monty, Colón, and Melky. I don’t know if they’d take that, and I’d add another lower-level prospect that they wanted for some reason. Chen did have a 2.0 WAR in 2011, right? He will miss a few starts, he always does. Maholm, I dunno, but I’d take him if we got him relatively cheap, and I don’t think the Red Sox are beating down the door.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:43 PM EDT reply actions  

Oh, yeah, if anyone asks about Frenchy's availability

we suddenly get really interested.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

I’d give them, say, Monty, Colón, and Melky. I don’t know if they’d take that, and I’d add another lower-level prospect that they wanted for some reason.

I can’t imagine that Beane would be interested in one year of Melky (or multiple years of Melky, for that matter). If you’re trading someone like Gonzalez, you want your return to be a lot of good young players with multiple years of team control. Monty can’t be the only really good prospect in the deal. That wouldn’t be close to enough for the A’s.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

You think they'd take anything less than Myers

plus two more prospects?

If they did, would it be worth it?

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think they might do it for Myers plus another good prospect plus more

Beane knows how often prospects fail. And he’s trading 4 cost controlled years of a good, young pitcher. I think it would take Myers, plus Monty or Odorizzi plus a couple lesser prospects. Beane has no reason to trade him for less than that. And given how valuable 4 cost controlled years of a good young pitcher are, the two other prospects are probably going to have to be pretty good too.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd give them either Myers or Monty

plus others, but not both our best prospects at both pitcher and hitter.

Oh, well, maybe they don’t want to trade him anyway, but there sure has been some talk.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Oct 14, 2011 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

They'd probably trade him for a huge haul

But there’s a reason that good, young, cheap SP’s with 4 cost controlled years remaining; they are very, very highly valued. It takes a ton to get such a pitcher.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Oct 14, 2011 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

I am very confident.

Monty will bounce back next year. This guy has ace stuff and this was his first real bump in the road. I think if he preforms well for the first month or two he will be up soon.

I would also bring Chen back as well. If he doesn’t, he should be a type B compensation i believe.

Chen
Paulino
Hochevar
Duffy
Monty

I wouldn’t mind it. Then we have the year after with a better class of free agents.

by vic1124 on Oct 15, 2011 7:57 PM EDT reply actions  

"2. The pitching market is thin next this year, while more plentiful next year."

Shouldn’t the Royals be selling this offseason, then?

(yeah, I know)

Nick Swisher is handsome. Johnny Giavatella close second.

by ChrisCEIT on Oct 15, 2011 11:43 PM EDT reply actions  

No pitcher on this team

is good enough to be considered a lock for next year.

Luke Hochevar #1? He had a good second half this year, and I hope it continues, but he still has the exact same career ERA as a Royals starter as Kyle Davies. (and had to have the good second half to get there) They are the same age. Kyle had a good end of the season a couple of years ago, and it did not change who he was.

Felipe showed some promise this year, and could either improve or regress. If he is the same, he will not be good enough to be a #2 starter on a good team. Duffy flat out sucked this year. He is young and should get better, but you cannot count on it and he has options. We should offer Chen a one year deal. It puts in a winning situation whether he chooses to stay or go.

I am all for trying to go after Jackson. Not to drastically overpay for him if the market goes crazy, but to make an honest effort to get him. You compare him to Wilson and Sabathia, instead you should compare him to our pitchers. He would be the odds on favorite to be OUR best pitcher next year. Also, when you sign a pitcher, what you get is the difference between him and whoever would be your #5 if you did not have him, and that difference is drastic. I am all for offering a short term deal to Javier Vasquez. I am all for at least shopping Melky to see what his perceived value is, and seeing if we can get a plus starter for a package including him.

Starting pitching is something which should be addressed every year! You cannot stagnate and try to fix it all in one year or hope people get better. If you improve your pitching AND your other pitchers step up, then Hallelujah! It means you have a great staff or perhaps even a surplus for trading.

Whether they are able to add one or more pitchers or whether they fail, I will state again that none of our current pitchers have proven enough to be GIVEN a job next year. We should look at every in house option, throw all the darts at the board and see who earns a spot. Teaford? absolutely, see what we’ve got. Crow? Why not try it out? Mendoza? I think it is all smoke and mirrors but give him a chance as well. Monty? He will be in spring training so we look at him too. If Odirizzi gets an invite, he gets an even chance. Even longshots SOS and Mazarro would get a chance.

Even if we don’t think we have a chance to contend this year, building for 2013 means at least attempting to begin to upgrade your staff. Worst case scenario, we get a player or two closer to contending, and another year for someone else to step up.

"Trying is the first step to sucking" -Jimmy Chance

by KHAZAD on Oct 16, 2011 5:14 AM EDT reply actions  

That's not true

You know as well as I do that Hochevar and Paulino (aside from FA Chen) are the best starters on this team. Did I say they were #1/#2 quality? No. But you’ve got to be kidding me if you think that both of those pitchers won’t be starting next year.

Jackson would be fine (I would like that addition), but somebody’s going to overpay for him. You know that’s going to be the most probable case.

And if the team goes fully in-house, they ARE improving their rotation by giving more time to guys who wouldn’t get a chance otherwise and seeing if they are legit. It is improvement by refinement. They Royals would be upgrading their staff by giving valuable possible members experience at the big league level.

by Yodazilla on Oct 16, 2011 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

You make me think of a circumstance not many have mentioned....

The past tells us that Frenchy and Melky won’t live up to what they did this year. The past also tells us Paulino won’t live up to it either. Why don’t we use that argument there? Everyone pencils Paulino in as improving next year and the following years…

Just saying…

by 306008 on Oct 17, 2011 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

Cheaper options

I think you should avoid rushing your pitching prospects, and look for some relatively cheap SP alternatives who have enough upside to make them attractive deadline deal candidates.

I would take a look at Chien-Ming Wang. He came back from surgery last year and pitched pretty well for the Nats, but not so well as to make him a high-demand commodity. He is a ground-ball pitcher who keeps the ball in the park, and if he demonstrates that he’s healthy over the course of the year, and puts up numbers consistent with his career stats, he might draw alot of interest for contenders next year.

Bedard is another possibility. When healthy (54-font asterisk), he is an above-average pitcher. A pitcher who is injured enough to scare off contenders this off-season. But for a team like the Royals, if the price is right, and he stays healthy, he could put up #1 or #2 SP numbers, and would once again be a trade candidate who could net your team some good young player(s). A similar injury-prone pitcher who when healthy puts up good numbers is Chris Young.

Now, if you’re looking to spend a little more, and maybe get yourself a front-line starter who also could help mentor your younger pitchers, how about Mark Beuhrle? He is the type of pitcher who generally ages well, and might be a good transition pitcher who could take the young guns under his wing and show them the finer points of pitching in the bigs, and could still be an asset in a few years when you’re potentially contending.

Finally, there’s the innings-eater. Don’t expect much, and you won’t get disappointed. if you’re just looking for someone to eat a bunch of innings, there’s John Garland.

by Ghost_of_Brien_Taylor on Oct 19, 2011 11:54 AM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Royalsretro_small
Would Royals Review Make Better Decisions Than Dayton Moore?
Funny-tattoos-hey-look-they-found-a-royals-fan_small
Mitch On the Bench
Royalsretro_small
Happy Mother's Day From Royals Review

Recent FanPosts

Dignan_small
Friday Game 43 Open Thread
Funny-tattoos-hey-look-they-found-a-royals-fan_small
MORE Mitch on the Bench
Sexy-beast-original_small
OT Friday: The generic boilerplate template desert island gambit
Tumblr_lwfiy4qkgv1r204zxo1_500_small
RR Poetry Contest
Small
Extrapolating the First 43 Games over the Full Season
Small
Is Dave Eiland doing ... anything?
Small
Alcides Escobar's Bat
Download_small
Was Dayton Moore Right on Bruce Chen?
Chalmers2_small
2012 Royals vs 2012 Ex-Royals

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Cimg0036_small Freneau

Editors

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

Authors

Royalsretro_small RoyalsRetro

Headshot_small Old Man Duggan