It is Time for the Royals to Become Competitive
by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 1, 2011 11:59 AM EDT
in Kansas City Royals News
Email
PrintThe 2011/2012 off-season looks to be fairly significant for the Royals going forward. 2011 was the year that Dayton Moore's highly touted prospects began to make it to the majors. The Royals are done rebuilding. It is over. They need to look at contending for the division every year and it can start in 2012.
It has been tough enough for the Royals to just to get to 0.500, not alone going beyond that point. Becoming competitive does not mean trading off every good minor league prospect to make a one year run. Instead, it means seriously putting a team on the field that just needs just one or two "ifs" to fall into place for them to play for the division title. The team currently is in position to make that final leap into contention. Here are the steps needed to put a competitive team on the field in 2012.
Mendoza, O'Sullivan and Mazzaro should not be in the discussion for a SP job going into Spring Training. These 3 are not good pitchers. They are not going to come in a make a difference on the 2012 team. If they are starting, they will be lucky to post a 5.00 ERA and suck up a few innings per game. If the brass in KC mention any of these 3 names are a solution for 2012, they have not done enough in the off season to bring pitching to Kansas City.
The Royals have some free agent and in-house options that should be tried first before any of those 3 get a sniff of a starting job. At Royals Review there have been way too many discussions on the possible cheap, decent pitchers. While none of these will be true #1's or aces, they are at least not the dredges the Royals played in 2011. Sean O'Sullivan got 10 starts. Kyle Davies 13. Teaford and Adcock 3 each. Having a 2 WAR to plug in is a better option than a -2 WAR pitcher.
The Royals need 8 starting pitching options. Paulino, Hochevar, Montgomery and Duffy are the only pitchers that should be on the 2012 staff. With this scenario, it looks like there is only 1 spots to fill, which is incorrect. 40% of all starters spend some time during the season on the DL. The Royals need to look at going into 2012 with 8 starting pitchers (8 pitchers * 40% = 3 on the DL or 5 healty ones), not named Mendoza, O'Sullivan or Mazzaro. Also, the additional pitchers will be available when other pitchers fall on their face. Real, decent solutions need to exist.
It would be nice to bring in 3 starters for the major league staff and have Duffy and Montgomery start in AAA. Just one other pitcher, internal or external, needs to be in place for a call up (like Bruce Chen in 2009).
Chris Getz is not in the 2B equation. Chris Getz will be Chris Getz, an OK fielding 2B with no power. He is not going to help the Royals win anything.
I am not sure that Johnny Giavoltella is the answer either, but the Royals need to find out in 2012. If Giavoltella, doesn't work out, fine. The team moves on with possibly Colon or Navarro playing 2B. They need to find a productive 2B, which Chris Getz is not.
Trade several bullpen arms. The Royals bullpen was really decent in 2012. Teams are always looking for bullpen arms. The royals need trade some with the highest current value.
The one pitcher to look at trading is Greg Holland. Fans may want him has the heir apparent to Soria. It is the bullpen and they can be put together easily. The Rays 2011 bullpen was anchored by 2 Royal castoffs, Kyle Farnsworth and Joel Peralta. People should not get attached to bullpen pitchers.
There will always be options to put failed starters in the bullpen. If the options arises for decent 2B or SP, bullpen arms should be the first to go.
With the need for starting pitching the should not trade Wil Myers. Wil came off a very rough 2011 season and his value could not be any lower. Teams may look to take advantage of his low value. He may be a nice bargaining chip to get some needed help, but the Royals will be selling low.
Wil has added some value will his play in the Arizona Fall League, but he is still not as highly regarded as he was last off season.
Conclusion
None of these moves will be easy to pull off or popular, but they are doable, and needed, in order to turn the Royals into a winning team. Some people look at 2012 as more of a rebuilding year. It may be, but it should not be written off. Without going all in, the Royals could put together a team that has a chance of being competitive. Several great pieces are in place for future, the rest of the puzzle now needs to be finished.
283 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Generally agree
Trading a bullpen piece is a good idea, but why Holland, the best option for high leverage situations since he can get both left-handed and right-handed hitters out, instead of Coleman or even Crow? The return would be about the same.
I assume he was speculating that the return would be higher for Holland
And I don’t know how other teams would value those three pitchers. If the return would be about the same for each, I’d definitely keep Holland over Coleman and Crow.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Crow, as the "name" former prospect, should bring back the most
Holland should bring back a little more, but I am not sure the difference would be huge, and teams still seem a little backward on valuing relievers.
I forgot about "All-Star" Aaron Crow's added value.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 1, 2011 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
If they can sell high on Crow right now, they should definitely do it
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agree
The way he declined, I’m not sure he should even be on the ML roster next year, much less in the rotation.
Agree.
I disagree with trading Holland. I don’t agree with the premise that his value is high right now. Other teams have probably not seen very much of him, and I don’t see how they could trust him to continue his performance. Having seen him quite a bit, I am confident in him.
no stars but with 5 or 6 years of team control, decent value
It looks like Holland and Crow have 5 years of team control left and Coleman has 6 years. A team would expect to get at least 1 WAR on average out of them per year (probably a little more for Holland and Crow). So for two to three years, the player would be all net value and then only slightly reduced value through the arbitration years (as relievers do not make much in arbitration unless they are closers and rack up saves). Then it just becomes a balancing act between the trade target’s years remaining, salary, and performance. Ramon Ramirez with multiple years of club control left brought back a decent CF on a year deal with an option.
Crow is kind of a wild card in that he has the “prospect” sheen — I would bet some teams think he can become a good closer or turn into Brandon Morrow (who himself was traded for a decent reliever in Brandon League).
cameron maybin was traded for two guys with much less team control last offseason i believe....
you’re not going to get a proven guy more than likely but you might be able to get a guy who still has a high ceiling
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I like this
I think you can get a good talent with some flaws. Like a good prospect who had a bad year. Or maybe you can get someone who has the “bad attitude” label.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
that's part of the problem...
there is a reason why there’s been so much focus on SP
the royals look semi-set with position players
although this may not actually be the case
yeah
I am not a real big fan of either Escobar or Giavotella (or Cain for that matter), but there is reason to believe that each could be viable major league starters for a number of years for little salary, and the only real way to find out is to let them play. Even Moustaka, despite his nice month to end the year, is far from out of the woods on whether he establish himself as the long term answer at 3B. The Royals need to use 2012 to figure these things out, while giving the minor league system time to develop help for the rotation and possibly an above average position player in Myers.
by Gopherballs on Nov 1, 2011 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
the only position players I'm not quite sure about
are Cain, Melky, Francoeur, Giavotella, Escobar, Moustakas, and Perez.
Other than that, I think the team is pretty solid on the non-pitching side.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
there's not a single guy that you can be sure isnt the answer though.....
outside of melky and frenchy but they dont really count
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
"Let them play! . . . Let them play! . . . Let them play!"
Yeah, I don’t think Matt was saying release all of these bums, just that it is foolish to “go all in” for 2012 when the position players are far from established themselves.
yep...and if its all going according to plan...
those guys are all playing well….we can think about making a move around the trading deadline to ‘go for it’…its stupid right now when so much has to go right
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions
You don't like Escobar?
Seems like average SS is pretty likely, even if he hits about like he did this season. Is that too optimistic?
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s not too optimistic, but he has some downside potential. His hitting only improved a little this year and his peripherals don’t suggest someone who will improve much more, if any. And the spectacular defensive numbers (+10.2 defensive runs) which led to his 2.2 WAR probably isn’t sustainable. Take him down to a merely good +6 defensive runs and he’s a below average SS.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Ridiculous.
In his final 98 games: .286/.323/.411.
Scott, thats NINETY EIGHT GAMES. Not exactly a small sample size. Thats roughly 2/3rds of a season. I think its entirely possible to expect him to still be getting better as a hitter….And now all of a sudden at age 25, his defense is going to drop 40% from outstanding down to “merely good”? How can you possibly claim that this is rational analysis? ….just a laughably stupid statement.
Scott, you remind me of the kid in first grade who picks his nose to get attention…..go suck on a lemon.
98 games is exactly a small sample size
You obviously cherry picked 98 games to include his one good stretch. But if you are going to cherry pick, Escobar hit 249/278/347 in his last 62 games
which obviously has more meaning because it happened more recently.
In his last THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY GAMES, Escobar is hitting 252/294/339 (1288 PA). There is a legitimate reason to be worried that Escobar is not going to develop into a viable hitter. His career UZR/150 is +5.9, which is over 2840 innings and a much better estimate of his expected defensive performance than just one year’s line.
Scott is right — unless Escobar posts spectacular defensive numbers or significantly improves at the plate, he is a below average SS.
No,
a small sample size is the 15 games that Wil has played in the AFL that everyone is so jizzed about.
In addition the the fact that UZR is a fatally flawed metric and not worth even a grain of salt, its silly to combine Al-Bars first and second season together as part of any prognostication. That would assume that he did not improve at all from his rookie to soph seasons when he clearly did.
His career is really too young to extract any kind of usable data in predicting his future. My entire point is the lunacy in suggesting he is going to regress to a barely above avg defensive player as Mcninny suggests. The dude has awesome range, an awsome arm and awesome athleticism. That is hardly going to suddenly nose dive in his mid to late 20’s. With repetition, and a much better 1Baseman than in Mil, it is only logical that he will improve or at worst plateau…..Bookmark my comment as you know I will be proven right. Unlike Scott, I have no problem with accountability.
In other words
any stats that makes what you said look stupid are meaningless and invalid. Got it.
by Gopherballs on Nov 1, 2011 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
the incorrect usage of oxymoron is the cherry on top
by Gopherballs on Nov 2, 2011 1:32 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
poetic license
I’ll call it an approximate analogy.
defensive aspects of baseball are incongruent with ‘metric’ attempts to measure them.
So baseball defense is not measurable?
I’m trying to figure out of that is just ignorance or anti-intellectualism. Do you know how play-by-play based defensive metrics like UZR, PMR and Dewan’s plus/minus are put together? Wait, don’t answer that.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Until Field/x data
is available, there is no defensive metric that is reliable. Positioning alone makes it impossible to accurately gauge a players contribution on any given play. Then you have the matter of how quickly he reacts to the ball, how efficient a path he takes to reach the ball, etc….These types of arbitrary issues are all common knowledge Scott. You know that….using play by play data? gimme a break. Too many intangible gray areas for me bro.
using a combination of scouting reports and advanced metrics...
you can get a pretty good idea of what a fielder brings to the table. while it may not be perfect, its better than saying they’re completely useless
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 2, 2011 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly. There are definitely limitations on advanced defensive metrics and I don’t think they should be used without reference to scouting reports as well. But saying they are useless is a joke.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
agreed.
I was exaggerating I suppose because I felt Scotts take on Escobar was latent and presumptuous. Devils advocate if you will.
You massively overreacted to a minor critique of Escobar which suggested that he might end up being a below average SS. Grow up and don’t get so bent out of shape when someone provides a little analysis that one of your favorite team’s players has downside potential.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I did and I apologize
Your a frustrating fellow scott.
You sometimes come across as…how should I put this….a jerk.
My comments are more a build up of reading hundreds of your stubborn, antagonizing, contentious and often blatently wrong opinions….I think you have a problem looking in the mirror so to speak.
I need to do a better job of controlling my reactions though, and I will.
uh oh, Scott
looks like you have an internet stalker
I don’t have a problem looking in the mirror. I understand and have frequently and readily conceded that on this site I am not infrequently jerkish. I am often blunt, dogged, impatient, and even intolerant. I can be unfriendly and even rude. I am not proud of any of the above, nor am I ashamed of most of that.
I don’t say that people should like me and think I’m a great guy they’d like to have a beer with. I hope they think that the content of my contributions on this site is honest, objective and worthwhile (the vast majority of it, at least).
Nothing that I post on this site (or elsewhere) is done to get attention, just to be negative for the sake of being negative or just to disagree with someone. I come by opinionjs and disagreements honestly and easily. I need not manufacture them.
None of this is to say that my analysis or opinions are “right.” Anything or even everything I say may be dead wrong (the opinions and analysis at least, I think I usually get the facts straight). But hopefully my points are at least arguable.
Interestingly, the comment that apparently pushed you over the edge with regard to me was a very mild comment, devoid of edge or attitude.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair enough,
I regret my derogatory comments and would like to start over.
Your a smart guy who knows a lot about baseball.
(….I am now sticking my hand out in a metaphoric and literal manner)
Consider your hand shaken
And, FWIW, I know some things about baseball and there’s a lot I don’t know. I’m continually trying to learn more. Everyday I find there are new things out there which show me how much I don’t know.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
weve got defensive stats that
show him as a slightly above average defender….a great defender….great scouting reports….a +6 defender is well within the range of possibilities for escobar as well as him not really improving his hitting
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 2, 2011 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions
True
the problem is, I dont know (trust) what a +6 defender actually is. Im not willing to commit to quantifying a player that way. If their is a +2 variance, than a +6 and a +10 might actually be very similar. I dont think healthy players in thier mid 20’s will vary much defensively from year to year. The fact that their metrics do, shies me away from them specifically.
I do think the sometimes significant variance from year to year is usually about the stat and not so much about the player. And that kind of significant variance is going to happen when you’re dealing with the inherently small sample sizes in defense (as mentioned in the Hosmer thread and elsewhere).
Anyone who says that Player X had a certain UZR in a given year and that therefore that is precisely his true talent level is being foolish. That, in part, is why I pointed to the downside potential of Escobar. It is rare for a SS to maintain +10 fielding runs. I don’t think we should exactly expect it going forward. That doesn’t mean that his true talent level is necessarily 0, +2 or something like that. But it is likely south of +10.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
agreed
you seem so much smarter all of a sudden scott…
Maybe you see Escobar’s +10 as unsustainable because its not really a +10. …Like you said about small sample size, if he does it again next year, it becomes more legit. If a metric needs at least 3 years to become worthwhile, that in itself is a red flag imo.
Maybe you see Escobar’s +10 as unsustainable because its not really a +10
This may just be semantics, but I think he genuinely was +10 runs over average for a MLB SS in 2011. But that doesn’t mean his true talent level is necessarily +10. For instance, just because a hitter hits .300/.400/.500 for two months doesn’t mean he’s really that kind of hitter. You need more data to get a better idea of how good of a hitter he really is.
If a metric needs at least 3 years to become worthwhile, that in itself is a red flag imo.
It’s the nature of fielding data. A batter gets 4ish PA’s per game. A fielder doesn’t average nearly that many chances. So when you are counting (in any way) what a fielder actually does, there’s less to count. So it takes longer for there to be enough data for the results to be very meaningful.
Does that mean that one season of an advanced fielding metric doesn’t reliably tell you how good a player is defensively? Certainly. It will tell you what that player actually did in that season, but not necessarily how good he is.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
hmmmmmm.....
Im not sure you can compare offensive and defensive measurables, but you make some good points.
How do you think Cal Ripkin would grade out using some of todays top metrics?
He seems like a guy with superlative positioning skills, but maybe avg range? ….another might be Jim Edmonds. Incredible jumps and angles, but avg CF speed (if I remember correctly).
Do you think their values would be accurately assessed using the latest tools?
i wasnt old enough when ripken was in his prime….but i would venture to guess that edmonds wouldnt grade out nearly as well by advanced metrics as he did in the scouts eyes. people seemed to be tricked by edmonds ‘outstanding’ diving plays…plays that i am confident that a guy like beltran made look routine
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 2, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
thats kinda
what i was leaning towards as well.
Jay Buhner always looked like he knew what the fuck he was doing and had a great looking overhand cannon, but he was probably a crappy RF.
Hell, Maier Makes
Most of those plays look routine. I am a huge fan of MITCH!’s defense. He makes everything look effortless, which is pretty amazing for a converted catcher.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Nov 2, 2011 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Ripken would do well in UZR, etc.
UZR and the other advanced metrics reward players for turning balls in their defensive zone into outs. It doesn’t really matter how you get it done. You might do it through great positioning, great instincts, great legs, glove or arm. All that matters is that you turned the chance into an out.
The best available fielding metric for historical players (before they started analyzing PBP data for UZR, etc.) is something called TotalZone which basically just counts up plays made per chances and compares that relative to others at the player’s position (there’s a little more to it, but that’s the basics). By that measure, Ripken does very well through most of his career, with the numbers really dropping late in his career (which is standard for all fielders).
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
People who fundamentally don’t understand a given statistic, concepts like sample size and statistics in generall, really shouldn’t so unreservedly bash stats and those who use them correctly. Such people should ask questions, read up on the subject and do their best to learn before criticizing.
You think that a player with say +6 defensive runs over a full season is “barely above average”? You think that a variance from +10 to +6 from one season to the next is uncommon? You think that +10 defensive runs is sustainable? Do you know how common that is for MLB SS’s? Of course the answer to all of the above is that you have no idea, because you don’t think; you react.
And how do you refute a very simple, straightforward statistical argument?
The dude has awesome range, an awsome arm and awesome athleticism
You get bonus points for using both “dude” and “awesome” in your "analysis. And the “awesome” parallelism was priceless.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 2, 2011 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions
I think it is more likely that the variance
between +6 and +10 lies in the inaccuracy of the tool used than an actual fluxuation of player performance from one year to the next.
I do not lack a fundamental understanding of anything you anoint yourself an expert on, I just see things from a broader perspective and see many types of advanced stats and metrics for what they are. Tools helpful in assisting an argument and not a foundation for which to build one around.
A's got Scott Sizemore for David Purcey
Sizemore looks like a decent league average starting 2B/3B who will be cheap for a few years anyway.
I was going to type "but he's never played well in the bigs"...
but then saw he did manage to SLG .433 in 93 games with the A’s
also little known A's fact
That washed up bum David DeJesus hit 270/342/438 (780 OPS) in the second half and ended up posting 2.2 WAR on the year.
hey....lookie there...he wouldve been our 4th best OF
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
at about the same cost as the 3 OF better than him
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Upside potential!
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions
just attempting to correct the narrative
that left DDJ for dead after 2 months into the season. He ended up posting about $5 million in net value.
I think everyone was fine with trading DDJ, just not with the return or timing.
Exactly
The “he’s done after that injury” was overblown and quite frankly just plain wrong.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions
the simple fact remains though that he was significantly worse than all 3 of our starting OF
for alot more money…and that $5 million in surplus value…you really dont think the combination of vin/marks will ever achieve that?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I think everyone was fine with trading DDJ, just not with the return or timing.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah...he probably shouldve traded him at the deadline the year before...
but waiting until last deadline, especially when he came out and had a career year wasnt awful….until he got hurt…and then last offseason, the market just wasnt there for the DDJ type, as evidenced by the even worse return for a similar player on a similar contract in Willingham.
you can say ‘oh, dm shouldve gotten this for DDJ’ but the reality is, nobody was willing to give that up for ddj…or they wouldve after the market settled for willingham
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I would have taken Henry Rodriguez over Mazzaro in a heartbeat
DDJ had a lot more value when he still more than a year left on his contract.
there was no reason statistically or scouting reports that i can find...
that give any reason to believe that rodriguez was more valuable than mazzaro at the time. and do you really think that after walking over 6/9ip this year that he’s more valuable?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Rogriguez was averaging 14 K/9 in AAA
and coming off a season in which he cut his walk rate in half. He throws three pitches, including a changeup and 98 MPH heater. He even pitched well in 27 MLB innings. He was a reliever, but with the potential to be a true high leverage one.
Mazzaro looked like a random 5th starter type that a team could pick up anywhere.
now you're talking about doing the exact opposite trade that
people were advocating earlier…trading relievers because they’re fungible for guys who’s stocked has dropped some….you dont trade legitimate assets for guys who might turn into a good reliever
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions
its a reasonable position...
i think i disagree though
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Did anybody say DDJ is done after the injury?
I know a lot of people, including me, said that DDJ’s value was reduced by the injury and a lot of the criticism of the trade didn’t take that into account.
yeah...it was a serious injury...
and he was getting older…bouncing back to his pre injury form was far from a sure thing…and probably unlikely
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I was talking about the comments "2 months into the season"
when DDJ’s poor start in Oakland was cited in the many “yeah, Mazzaro sucks but the Royals gave up nothing for him” discussions.
People criticized the trade based on what Mazzaro did since he came here
And other people defended the trade based on what DDJ had done since going to Oakland. It seems like that was the proper analagous point to make in response to the criticism of Mazzaro.
Then no one should have an issue
with pointing out how DDJ did the rest of the season.
I didn't object to that
And I’m glad you posted it because I’d never gone back to check.
I guess in five years we can figure out who won that trade.
yeah...factor in vin's whopping -.2 WAR and its still not even close
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
unless of courses marks did something so horrible in A ball that it had an adverse effect on the major league team
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions
He tried, but Kendall and Hos joined together to
form a mental force field, protecting the franchise and saving the day.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
What accounts for the difference between 2.2 fWAR
and 0.6 bWAR?
I assume bWAR is derived from triple slash stats mainly?
without looking id assume defense
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Defense
fWAR uses UZR (a defensive metric based on play-by-play data)
bWAR uses TotalZone (which doesn’t use PBP data and just goes by total plays made as compared to average)
PBP-based defensive metrics are greatly superior, which makes fWAR a much better measure than bWAR for position players.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
what Scott said
It also looks like Fangraphs give DDJ more credit for hitting a tough park than BRef, and I would trust Fangraphs’ use of park effects more than BRef (which if I remember correctly does not adjust based on handedness).
well...
Neither FanGraphs nor B-R use park factors based in handedness in their WAR calculations. This is the right decision because those adjustments are for the relative value of a run in that park, which is the same whether or not a right- it left-handed hitter created it.
Handedness-based and component factors do have a role in measuring player ability for projections, or course.
But yes, for all the energy expended on talking about fielding, park factors (along with runs-to-wind conversion) are very important differences between fWAR and bWAR that I believe are to fWAR’s favor.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 5:23 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Why not trade Soria?
His value is only going down from here, he still has some “name” value…
Of course, these options are not mutually exclusive.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Realistically, I don't think Moore would part with Soria anytime soon
But, yeah, Soria should have been traded awhile ago.
for Montero!
I wish I’d never even heard that b.s. rumor, now I can’t stop thinking about Montero hitting .320/.400/.500 for six years for the Royals.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
No, they'd probably try him in left and moved Alex to 2B
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
both to AAA for an indefinite period
while Getz and the-return-of-Bloomy man 2B and LF
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Ding! Ding! Ding!
Actually, Gordon would be fine at 2B, and his bat would make him an Utley/Uggla type.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Nov 1, 2011 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions
after all, there's no way the team can trade Butler until June 2015
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I really want to post a "trade Butler" piece...
but there’s so much dumb anti-Butler sentiment out here, that I don’t want to feed into
Sign Pujols to $300M/10 years...
trade Billy and Crime Horse for 2 top-tier starters. Move Frenchy to DH, Melky to RF, Cain to CF. Problem solved, Plaza parade planning starts now.
Man, this GM stuff is easy!
That information is somewhat classified.
I get it
“feed into”
your subliminal trash talk of Butler can't get past me
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I can't remember the whole story
GopherBalls?
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I mean Gopherballs had a really good reconstruction of how that rumor got started
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd like to know why you've abandoned
your signature.-PB
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions
It's not really Matt that's posting, naturally
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions
CLUBHOUSE CONFUSION!
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I Am PB
-PB
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Nov 1, 2011 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
And I'm
a Mac
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 6:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd definitely trade him this offseason.
He’s very expendable, he’s a good bargain, and yes, his value is still somewhat high.
How should the Royals get these starting pitchers.
You are proposing starting the season with Duffy and Montgomery in AAA. The rotation would then be:
1. Hochevar
2. Paulino
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
You want the Royals to contend and not just rebuild. And you don’t want the Royals to trade away top prospects like Wil Myers. And you want the Royals to have 2 WAR SP’s 8-deep. I’m guessing that you are assuming that Duffy or Montgomery will pitch well enough to become one of those guys. That still leaves five 2 WAR SP spots to fill. How are the Royals going to do this? Free agency? Maybe they can find another Paulino, but you certainly can’t count on that. Can the Royals really afford all of those 2 WAR SP’s? Will they all sign with the Royals? Is this eight-deep 2 WAR SP depth realistic?
Yes, I think the Royals can contend with eight 2 WAR starting pitchers. I just don’t think that kind of pitching staff is plausible for 2012
You may know me as NYRoyal.
I think it's a little simpler if you pencil in Monty and Duffy as the # 7 & 8 in that list...
…you’re really only looking for four guys to fill in 3-6. That’s still a tall order, but not quite as tall as you’re suggesting.
It is simpler, but that's very optimistic, if you're looking for an eight-deep 2 WAR rotation
It’s not crazy to think that one of them could be an average MLB SP in 2012. I think it is an unrealistic expectation to say that they both will.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Well...
…I don’t want to go too far down the path of putting words in Jeff’s mouth, but I think that’s part of why they are slotted at #7 and #8 instead of #4 and #5.
Maybe I’m reading it wrong, but the 40% DL calculation seems to leave room for this… unless you think 40% of pitchers will spend the whole season on the DL…
Correct kcemige.
I don’t see pitchers coming here on minor league deals. We could offer them a major league spot and if the get hurt or fail, Duffy or Monty could be brought up.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 1, 2011 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
So you're suggesting this?
1. Hochevar
2. Paulino
3. Inexpensive FA
4. Inexpensive FA
5. Inexpensive FA
6. Inexpensive FA
7. Duffy
8. Montgomery
All of those pitchers are going to end up making starts, because every MLB team ends up starting 8+ pitchers in a season. We have no idea if Duffy or Montgomery can perform at the 2 WAR level. And on top of that some of the cheap FA’s and under the radar guys aren’t going to pan out. So how good would this rotation really be? It requires bringing in a lot of new talent, which isn’t easy (there are only so many cheap 2 WAR pitchers). Certainly this would be an improvement over the 2011 rotation, but by how much? Enough to get the Royals into contention? And is it even realistic? I’m not sure.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know
Jeff is shooting for eight 2 WAR pitchers. But he recognizes that some will fail. Of the pitchers other than Hochevar and Paulino, you’re talking about 2 prospects and 4 inexpensive FA’s/under the radar pitchers. I’d guess that 3 of those pitchers actually perform at the level of an average MLB SP. And then there will be injuries too. And the injuries will force some of the “failed” sub-2 WAR pitchers to make starts.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you're actually shooting for 8 guys with a shot at 2 WAR production...
….unless you have three starters on the DL at the same time, you never actually have to use the #8 guy.
So, #7 and #8 could pretty easily be a couple of guys like Monty/Duffy.
….unless you have three starters on the DL at the same time, you never actually have to use the #8 guy.
There’s a reason that every team has to use the #8 guy every year (scratch the “every’s” and put in 99%). It’s not just DL’s. It’s injuries + failures/poor performances. With poor performances and injuries of some of the top 5, the 6+ SP’s end up making a lot of starts. And I think it is those starts (which will definitely happen) that Jeff was focusing on. Those guys will make starts and they can either be awful (current crop of 6+ guys in the Royals org.) or they can be decent. But they will make starts and more than a few.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually,
we could simplify this some by just talking about starts beyond the starting rotation. I believe most teams wind up needing something like 30 or so starts from their 6 through 8 pitchers, right? I would imagine a reasonable distribution there, where the #6 guy is getting something like 15 starts, the #7 is getting 10, and the #8 is getting 5. (Feel free to correct these assumptions if you have access to actual data).
Thus, if we assume basically competent roster management (I know, I know), the 8th best starter in your organization has to pitch something like 5 games. I’d be pretty comfortable going into a season with that guy being the lesser of Duffy/Monty. If that guy were to pitch, instead, at a replacement level, you’re still only losing 20% of 2 WAR (i.e. 0.1 WAR) over the course of the season.
I need to find that study. It was pretty simple and I think I used only one season of MLB data. And I don’t remember most of the data, but while I think 30ish is the number of starts outside the top 5, it is usually more than 8 pitchers that make those starts. I don’t think I averaged the number from #6, #7, etc. But I think the average distribution would probably be something like:
- 12
- 7
- 5
- 4
- 2
I’m comfortable with, theoretically, Duffy or Montgomery being the 8th SP. But I disagree with Jeff that the priority is improving the 6-8 SP’s. I think the real need is improving the top 5. And hopefully you have enough money and under-the-radarvision to find guys who can improve the SP depth in the minors.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
How many of those 30 starts
were from random #6-8 AAA callups on non-contending teams in August-October? It would seem like the number of starts a competitive team would have from the #6-8 spots would be lower than the average. Because if you’re a competitive team, chances are your #1-5 have been healthy and probably good, and also, you’re not going to be promoting your #6-8 for some extra starts at the end of the year if you’re still in a pennant race.
by Sweep_the_Leg on Nov 1, 2011 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Good points.
September call-ups could easily distort these numbers. So, excluding September might actually give a more realistic picture of things.
And the difference between playoff teams and the rest of the pack is an interesting point. The Rangers top five made 157 starts. Wow. The other 5 starts were split between Dave Bush and Scott Feldman. The Phillies pulled off a similar feat, of course (i.e. used only 7 SP all year).
The Rangers top five made 157 starts. Wow. The other 5 starts were split between Dave Bush and Scott Feldman. The Phillies pulled off a similar feat, of course (i.e. used only 7 SP all year).
And then there were the other playoff teams… But yes, if you have an excellent top five that stays healthy all season, you won’t need many starts from other pitchers. Of course the Royals aren’t anywhere near that. And even if they brought in a bunch of pretty good, cheap, under the radar SP’s, I think they would still likely be on the wrong side of average, and thus should expect 30+ starts outside the top 5.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 9:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure... the Royals are a ways off from the playoff teams.
But, to some extent that’s the point. You don’t get to the playoffs by improving from bad to mediocre. So, we should be asking whether it is possible to be better than mediocre while significantly relying on 8 or more different starting pitchers?
Of course I did “cherry pick” that quoted material a little bit, because I only looked at two teams (and the Rangers and Phillies were pretty obvious choices for good healthy rotations in 2011). But here’s an interesting trivia fact—I overlooked the Brewers, who only used 6 starting pitchers in 2011 (despite one of their starters opening the season with a basketball injury).
Anyway, it’s not that big a data-set, so it’s easy enough to look at all eight playoff teams. This year’s playoff teams got, on average 147 starts from their top five starters. That leaves just 15 starts from guys who would be the 6th (or worse) starter.
So, even if the average MLB team needs to squeeze 30 starts out of “plan-B” starters, the 2011 playoff teams only needed half of that. This leads me to suspect that teams who need to rely very much upon the 7th or 8th best pitcher in their organization just plain aren’t in the playoff mix. (Obviously it would be worth looking at more than one season before drawing sweeping conclusions, but still, you see where I’m headed here).
If that’s true, the lesson would be that you can’t significantly improve your odds at having a postseason by by acquiring starting pitching depth of the sort we’ve been talking about in this thread. If it’s true, you’re better off getting five good starters—maybe six—and then focusing your efforts on other areas.
Here's how I would fill those remaining 5 spots:
Bruce Chen is a viable option. Sure, he’s 34, but he posted 2 WAR last season.
Trade for Tom Gorzellany. He will be cheap.
Trade a couple of B+ prospects straight up for Gavin Floyd.
Lorenzo Cain and a B prospect for Jonathan Sanchez.
Fill the last two spots with Monty and Duffy.
Decent rotation. Boom.
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.
*6 spots.
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.
Boom indeed
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions
You really want to trade Cuthbert, Odorizzi, Montogmery, and Cain for two years of Floyd and one of Sanchez?
You need to attend a seminar on how to use credit cards responsibly.
by Gopherballs on Nov 1, 2011 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Hello, I'd like to put this Plaza Parade on my Visa please.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Nov 1, 2011 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
It would be nice to bring in 3 starters for the major league staff…
I’m not sure how to accomplish this without trading away the farm. I assume there’s at least one free agent in the mix. What sort of starters are you talking about here? Back-end stopgap guys, guys who might be around more than a year? Please elaborate.
Derrick Lowe was just had for 5 million
Jeff Francis and Bruce Chen were picked up for peanuts.
http://www.royalsreview.com/2011/10/27/2518745/who-is-the-next-felipe-paulino
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 1, 2011 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but let's break this down
1. Hochevar
2. Paulino
3. Inexpensive FA SP
4. Inexpensive FA SP
5.
6.
7.
8. Duffy or Montgomery
How many inexpensive, under the radar pitchers do you think the Royals could actually acquire? And, more importantly, how many would actually end up performing at the 2 WAR level? Some under the radar guys will pan out. Many will not. And two of these pitchers that the Royals acquire would have to start the season in the minors. Aren’t there some problems there? Wouldn’t the pitcher have to clear waivers to get to the minors? That is, unless you are signing 2 WAR pitchers to minor league deals.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
That is why you need to look for 8. SP going into the season that could give you decent production.
Some will fail, some will get hurt and the Royals can’t afford to go after C.J. Wilson.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 1, 2011 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't have any problem with SOS or Mazarro being #8 in our rotation.
Are those dudes really worse than other teams’ 8th starter?
I was thinking the same thing.
Also when looking for an 8th starter, why not Adcock?
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I definitely think it would be great to acquire five SP's who have a real shot at 2 WAR
I just don’t know if it is realistic. It’s a nice goal though.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
It doesn't even have to be unproven guys.
It could be just decent pitchers with #3 or #4 stuff.
All we need to do is add some quality depth to the rotation. Maybe some of the guys we get will blossom into #2 or higher starters.
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.
One pitcher I like is Chris Capuano.
Not over powering stuff, but 8 k/9, 2.5 bb/9 in 2011. Extreme FB pitcher with Kauffman would help control.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 1, 2011 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
A little more money, but I don't think anyone will give him a 2-year deal
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
is his stuff bad enough that Cleveland might consider him?
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Cleveland has been more the stereotypical "Moneyball" team since 2001 than Oakland
Mostly draft “safe” guys, tons of soft-tossing lefties, and not much upside. For upside, hope to rip off other teams in trades.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 1, 2011 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I like Capuano, too.
I realized this yesterday, while looking for “better than Chen” options in thread on his type-B status.
It looks better if Duffy stays on the ML team:
1. Hochevar
2. Paulino
3. Duffy
4. Inexpensive FA SP
5. Inexpensive FA SP
6.
7. Montgomery
8. Mazarro/SOS
You still need #6, but at least this situation is do-able. Is it a “competitive” rotation?
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Is it a competitive rotation?
Really hard to say. Does Duffy improve to become an average MLB starter? What kind of performance do we get out of the cheap FA’s? Can the 6-8 SP’s step and pitch at a decent level?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
how many starts do the 6-8 pitchers actually get?
i cant imagine it’s more than 30 for the most part
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I did a very simple study of this a few years ago
It’s on RR somewhere. I think I found that on average, teams get a full season of starts (something like 31 maybe) from their starters outside the top 5.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
i wish that teams would just get smart and skip the 5,6,7 guys when days off give them that option....
there’s no reason to start the 5 starter when the 1 starter is on full rest
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions
agreed
It seems like those four guys would appreciate the consistent 5-day routine, while only one guy (the least important one) has to deal with the odd scheduling.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
That number 6 guy has to be brought into the org. on a minor league contract...
…a la Ponson or something…
Is the D-Train available on that kind of deal? Is anything better available on that kind of deal?
What are we doing with Laffey?
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions
He's a possibility for SP depth
But just a possibility. I think he’s been a reliever the last two years, and he stinks as a starter. He’s got a shot at making some starts. But he’s exactly the kind of guy that Jeff thinks we need to improve upon.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh I agree,
I just wondered if we were all on the same basic page with him. Having him around does give us at least a little bit of flexibility with trying bullpen guys as starters though.
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Although, there's a real chance that he doesn't make it to spring training with the Royals
With players coming and going due to free agency, trades, protecitng players from the Rule 5 draft, etc., Laffey’s spot on the 40-man roster might be needed at some point. There’s a decent chance he gets DFA’d before ever wearing even a spring training KC uni.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I like Miner as SP depth
Laffey, not so much.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Agree regarding 2B, Bullpen, Wil Myers. Disagree regarding starting pitchers.
And ultimately disagree with the overall premise. I think the hitters and bullpen are ready to compete, but the starting pitching isn’t.
We have the potential to be contending for a long time if we can rely on internal options. I think Teaford and Mendoza have earned a look, and I think SOS and Mazzaro are too young to be written off already. If we can get just one of those guys to develop into a serviceable #4/5 and one of them to be a replacement, we get 5 years of control as opposed to 1 year of a FA. Then, if Duffy or Monty can produce (and the other one can be a serviceable replacement) we have another 5-6 years of control. Add that to Hoch and Paulino, and we have 6 pitchers. Once we’re at this point (where we only need one or two FA SPs, instead of 4 or 5), I want to see moves, but I won’t be pushing for them until then.
Like always, GMDM should be poking around, looking for the next Paulino, but if he can’t find him and/or sign him, then we can start settling on 1-year FAs like Francis/Chen/Capuano/Garcia/Harang if we need them come February
Agree
I don’t think Mazzarro can be dismissed so easily. He was above replacement in Oakland, he has a chance to be a young cheap back of the rotation guy – certainly a #5-#8.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Not saying much
but Mazzaro is better than SOS, although I think it was Yost who said they wanted to try Mazzaro in the pen next year.
V-Mazz And SOS
Both need to keep the ball out of the middle of the zone. This is a problem no matter how they are used.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Nov 1, 2011 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Im a little skeptical on Teaford, but Mendoza could be a find
Im kinda baffled at your notion that Mendoza is the same pitcher he was two years ago. You may be correct, but there is no evidence to support that train of thought based on his play from 2011..
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
by ChosenOneK on Nov 1, 2011 1:18 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
This is only true if ERA is the measure you're using
If you look at more telling measures of pitcher performance, Mendoza is the same pitcher he’s been for the last few years
2011 AAA
144.1 ip
5.1 K/9, 3.4 BB/9
Career AAA
422.1 ip over parts of five seasons
5.1 K/9, 3.1 BB/9
Where’s the improvement? BABIP luck?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Whats his BAA for 2011 and then also for the rest of his career?
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
Batting average against?
I don’t know and I don’t care. (I don’t mean that to be as aggressive as it sounds). I’m not interested in stats which are as much about defense and batted ball luck as they are about the pitcher. You might as well just ask what his BABIP was.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
lol, so you dont believe in pitching to contact approaches?
I get your last point and your correct.
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
Also am not trying to be combative
So you tell me a lower BABIP for 2011is luck. Why couldnt it be better command with a less than impressive fastball?
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
The huge, vast majority of pitchers have a personal BABIP which is around average. But from year to year, luck, and defense cause the BABIP for that year to vary significantly from the average. That isn’t about improved performance from the pitcher; it is about things outside of the pitcher’s control.
Now there are some few pitchers that can maintain a lower than average BABIP. Usually they are guys who can get a ton of groundballs, knuckleballers and some very high strikeout pitchers. I don’t see anything from Mendoza that suggests that he’s suddenly become one of this small group of pitchers.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Im, of course, more unfamiliar with babip trends than you. Assuming what you have said is true, it seems you have a fool proof method of evaluating pitchers performances……
Rule #1 If a pitcher does well over the course of the season and has an uncharacteristically low BaBip then they are a good bet to not do as well the next year…
I dont know, I guess I believe that all that stuff (or, luck) should even out over the course of a year…..if your line drives are always falling early on, they will start to be getting caught more often later on in the season
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
Mendoza's command and control were actually worse last year
Mendoza had a fluky low HR/FB rate and BABIP last year, and he’s never shown the ability to post low BABIP in his career. There is nothing in his profile to suggest improved last year.
Does the new Omaha ballpark
suppress home runs?
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
I think it's too new to have any firm statistical read, but the word was
that it helped RHH home runs (some guys developed power out of nowhere, IIRC, like Cain)
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Mendoza's command and control were actually worse last year
Mendoza had a fluky low HR/FB rate and BABIP last year, and he’s never shown the ability to post low BABIP in his career. There is nothing in his profile to suggest improved last year.
Im turnin around
slowly, but surely….All this stuff, collectively, makes sense
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
Also, out of curiosity, what is his Ground ball to flyball ratio....
and how does it compare to the major league average?
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
His walks didn't go down in 2011, so improved command is a little unlikely.
But, I also think he deserve a good hard look and a few starts at the major league level (assuming there’s nobody else deserving of the starts). He may have “figured out” how to “pitch” but, even if this is the case, I doubt this knowledge he found in Omaha will translate to the majors. Then again, we’re not talking about signing him to a multi-year deal, we’re just talking about giving him a few starts instead of Mazzaro, Duffy, or SOS.
Unless he was nibblin'
:)
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
Mendoza's approach changed and he is now establishing inside the first time through the order.
I would think ML hitters would ajust to that and look for inside pitches. I don’t know that throwing inside a lot is going to give him that much BABIP luck over a long period of time.
Go Royals!
Thoughts on Crow being in the conversation?
Or Holland for that matter?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Its been said.....
by many, and I agree. A two pitch starter wont make it far.
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
And A Seat
In the bullpen.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Nov 1, 2011 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions
I think most of the 'pen should be considered for the rotation...
…at some point. Crow, Holland, Teaford, Adcock, even Coleman…
But putting any of them in the 2012 rotations seems pretty antithetical to Jeff’s premise in this post. It does seem possible that some of those guys could go to Omaha to work on the transition, though. Is that any part of what you’re talking about?
I think its been a while since coleman has started...
Actually, without looking it up, I believe he has been a career minor league reliever….
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
You are correct.
He was drafted out of LSU, where he was already pitching out of the ’pen.
He did start a double-a game last year for some reason. But I also believe the FO has mentioned him as a potential rotation candidate. He’s an unlikely candidate, for sure, but I included him in the above list on purpose. My point is just that all options should be considered.
The story they told midseason
Was he was a starter at LSU, and was in danger of losing his scholarship, so he converted to a reliever and became the bad ass you see before you today.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
From what little I've seen of Coleman
he has a herky-jerky motion that makes me think he’s going to get hurt.
Relief pitchers are supposed to be pretty fungible, but it seems to me we’ve got a good group at a very limited cost, with nobody making more than the minimum but Soria. They might be worth hanging onto rather than being used as throw-ins on trades.
There’s not much downside in trying Holland as a starter. He’s got four good pitches. We’d have to break him in—couldn’t expect more than about 130 innings his first season. The worst that could happen is he might fail and we’d move him back to the pen. If we use Boom Boom or SOS as starters, we know they will fail. Try Herrera in his bullpen spot. Keep Wood in the pen—he’s basically a fastball-slider guy.
I looked through the free agent starting pitchers and Edwin Jackson seems to be the best option. He’s had a 3+ WAR over the last three years, is not fragile, is still 28, and could probably be had for Gil Meche money. Rich Harden would be a good gamble if you got him cheap. Bring back Bruce.
"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."
That could happen to anyone, anytime
You think converting Holland into a starter, while taking reasonable precautions on the pitch count and the number of IP, would make it significantly more likely that he gets seriously injured?
"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."
I'm in favor of keeping Crow in the pen
He’s a fastball-slider guy. He could be a very good relief pitcher over a long career. I’d like to hold onto him.
"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."
He's also 24 years old who has pitched fewer than 200 minor league innings.
It wouldn’t be crazy to send him to Omaha for a year to have another go at developing the third pitch as part of a transition to the rotation.
Let's see if we can do this
After the existing obligations for players already on the team and assuming a ~$55 million payroll, let’s say the Royals have about $12 million to spend this offseason. While not ideal roster construction, the team could conceivably get by with the current position players and relievers with maybe a veteran or two on minor league deals (which we will not count against the $12 million).
For $12 million, the Royals could conceivably sign 3 free agent pitchers with a decent chance of providing league average production, but it would take some obvious risks like signing one of the injury prone guys like Bedard or Harden who are almost guaranteed to miss 10 starts (if not more). Bedard is going to cost more than Harden, so if the Royals sign Bedard, they probably can sign only one other starter from the “Francis money” pool like Capuano. If they sign Harden instead of Bedard, they might be able to sign Capuano and either bring back Chen or sign someone else from that end of the talent pool.
Without adding any significant money to the payroll, the Royals also could target one of the relievers like Estrada or Lopez who could conceivably convert into a decent starter. It would likely cost one of the existing relievers (say Coleman) and at least one of the C+ prospects (say Adams) and a C prospect (pick one, any one).
That would get the Royals to 3 or 4 new starters within their budget and without sacrificing any young players that they would miss.
To get to 5 new starters, I think the team would have to try Holland as a starter (assuming medical clearance) or dip into the minor league free agent pool.
by Gopherballs on Nov 1, 2011 1:23 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Have they indicated anything about projected payroll for 2012?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
I thought the $60-65M number had been dropped by DM a few times.
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't recall him saying anything about payroll numbers for 2012
He was talking about the low 60’s about 12 months ago, for the 2011 payroll. But I really don’t think he’s put any numbers to the 2012 payroll. If he did, he’d either be lying or giving up his plan for the offseason.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Wouldn't it have to be close to that?
He’s going to be handing out raises through arb with some of these guys. Billy gets more expensive, and you know they’re working up a Gordon extension.
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
My payroll projection
Can be found here.
Including keeping Chen and totalling 22 players plus Arguelles, the Royals would be committed to about $47M. Add in a few more players around league minimum and you’re near $50M. Adding significant FA’s or a significant contract in trade would take you over $50M.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
On blogger night
Moore reportedly said "we can only sustain a $55 million or $60 million payroll in this market."
One of his more bizarre statements
Unless you think he was specifically talking about the 2012 season?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions
71 in both 2009 and 2010
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions
from USA today...
which probably didnt take into account the various payouts for random shit like trades and buyouts and whatnot
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions
And often times the published “opening day payroll” is just for the men on the 25-man roster, not all guaranteed money to guys on major league contracts.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions
few things to consider
1. economy went south, which likely affected price per ticket and things like concessions sales
2. attendance peaked in 2009, dipped in 2010, and rebounded somewhat in 2011
3. the organization has spread its baseball side spending around through the draft and a bigger push in international free agents.
4. Royals may not be receiving as much revenue sharing
At this point, I am just going to use Moore’s statements as to the payroll when discussing payroll issues, even if they could spend more (which is a different topic). The payroll is what it is.
All good points
I just don’t think we have a good idea what the 2012 MLB payroll budget is. And, quite frankly, I think it is flexible, depending on opportunities that arise…or do not arise. But I think your estimate is fair and reasonable.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
technically, it is Moore's estimate
His statements about where the 2011 payroll would end up were pretty close too (prior to the Meche adjustment), so I am fine using his estimate for now.
My numbers had them over 70 one year and over 75 another
(in Moore’s tenure)
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I think this has been debated over and over again before, but based on 2010/2011 attendance, he’s not completely out of his mind, especially if he is factoring in us being one of the top spenders in farm system development.
We COULD sustain a much higher payroll for a consistent winner, assuming the economy improves, businesses stay in KC, etc.
with the way the payroll was managed this season, the royals have some money sitting around
Payroll Savings: 36.8M
Added Ticket Revenue: around 4.36M
Minus Draft Spending: 14M
Minus Int’l Spending: 6-7M
So the Royals saved themselves around 20M this season when factoring in the slight increase in attendance. If it keeps going up, its entirely possible to see a larger and larger payroll.
Absolutely. The team can spend less in some years and more in others.
Revenue can increase too. I think DM was speaking about what their revenue, at that time, would support. We can support a 100M payroll if we average 3M in attendance.
i think 3M is unlikely to happen unless the team is good for years on end
3M would mean averaging only 866 short of a sellout for a full season. possible, not probable. if the hoped for somewhat better overall performance happens next season, i think a 24,250 average attendance would be a good baseline. that would bring in around 9.59M in new ticket revenue.
i think its just important to note that there is funny money out there from this past season’s payroll management for dayton moore to play with. i think it would be wise to hold onto that money instead of spending it now, but we will see.
also, the ASG itself will bring in about 15M in new ticket money
Dayton Moore is going to flush with cash soon, how he spends it is the million dollar question.
Speaking of the ASG
Is it weird that MLB hasn’t announced the 2013 host yet? My son is very excited about the possibility that it will be in Citi Field, and that’s the rumor, but it’s never been made official, and 2013 is just a season from now. I know that the K was announced for 2012 some time during the 2010 season.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
the Mets are considered the front runner
i think MLB is just making sure the ownership situation is under control before awarding them the profit boon that is the ASG. the Nationals want the 2013 game if CitiField falls through.
God, I hope the Nationals don't get it
Ownership here is terrible in many ways, including making the park a much worse experience than it ought to be.
I expect that if the team starts getting close to 3M, the capacity will rise
The team still sells SRO tickets on opening day, right?
Sorry, didn't read your text underneath
I guess I don’t really understand what the restriction is on selling SRO tickets, but I also figure that there are low-density areas of the park like the bar in right-center that can become higher-density seating if the team is winning.
are you talking about adding more seats?
i guess it could happen, i’m not sure the need will be there. Kauffman is among the lowest capacity stadiums in MLB, but that is probably in line with demand.
Adding more seats and selling more SRO tickets
I think that attendance is generally rising over time, and eventually the Royals will have to add seating capacity. If the team gets good fast, that day may come sooner.
Despite market size, the town has aleady shown it can draw far better than the rest of the league if the team is good. These days that would mean 2.5M – 3M
if the team is good, the attendance will rise
i’m just not sure adding seats again would ever be a wise move or will ever happen. during the fat years it would be nice to maximize profit, but i’m not sure i see it happening. in 2011, twelve teams averaged 35.9K or higher, if the royals did that under the current capacity, they’d be at 92% capacity for the season. only four of those twelve teams reached 92% capacity this season. i think it’s asking a lot in terms of consistent winning from the franchise and the fan base in general to start adding more seats when and if the royals start winning. the market isn’t going to change, i’m not sure there’s an untapped demand like we’ve seen in philadelphia recently. best case scenario would be milwaukee, and it will interesting to see how things play out there in terms of attendance and where ownership goes now that they have a taste of success.
4 of the highest drawing teams have smaller stadiums than the K?
That surprises me.
I think that teams have focused in recent years on maximzing average revenue per seat largely by creating more high-end tiers, and the Royals have certainly been a big part of that with the dugout suites and the crown seats and all that.
But I actually think that’s an area of relative weakness for KC. We don’t have as many corporate headquarters to buy those super-premium seats (although, now that I think of it, we are a regional financial hub, which is a big pot of money) so we need to maximize revenues by bringing in the middle-class fans, which means more tickets for non-premium locations (including lots more seats in the outfield)
Whoa, there! Easy, now!
Let’s fill the stadium more than once a year before we add seats and sell SRO tickets, OK?
That information is somewhat classified.
The Royals drew 3m
in the late ‘80s. They drew 2.5m in the years directly before and after that peak. 2.5m is doable with a good team, I think, but it’ll take a couple good years and the development of a genuine household-name star (Hosmer?) to go higher than that.
"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."
I sure wish the Gordon extension would happen soon.
I’d honestly be surprised if it does though.
My guess is that Dayton tries to lowball the AG extension due to 1) Dayton already has his personal hero and too much salary space in once COF slot, and 2) Gordon has put up only one A+ year.
Gordon is clairvoyant enough to know when he’ll start dominating, so why should he accept a Butler like extension, when instead he could take the 4/5 mil arbitration and rake in F.A. dollars next year?
I don't know that Gordon will want to turn down multiple years of significant, guaranteed money
And I think Moore will offer it. He locked up Soria, Grenke and Butler. Don’t know why he wouldn’t try hard to do so with Gordon. I think the announcement of the extension will probably come out in January when they would otherwise announce an arbitration settlement.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah...i dont see any way that gordon doesnt get an offer for a 4 or 5 year deal
and after 1 really successful year…why he wouldnt take it
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess my point is that he could get a ton more money after two
successful years. Also, this organization hasn’t exactly been kind to him, jerking back and forth from the majors/minors, needlessly switching positions on him. Although, he does seem to have taken that all pretty well and with a good attitude.
But he doesn't know that those two years will be successful.
A down year two years from now would really depress his value on the open market. And of course significant injuries can happen at any time. Security has its value, and many young players jump at those long-term extensions, including some FA years.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I certainly hope that's the case,
but a down year from Gordon two years from now isn’t going to hurt him, he just needs one more decent year to finish off his team control years. With Grenke, Soria and Butler (did BB have two arb years left?) the long term contracts weren’t given out during their final arb years.
why wouldnt a down year in the year before AGs FA significantly hurt his FA value?
we control gordon for the next two seasons under arb
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions
My bad, I thought 2013 was his FA year.
In which case… yeah, the extension shouldn’t be that much of a problem.
SOS was/is awful
but I love Mazzaros movement on his fastball. If he can ever command his fastball, it would be a PLUS PLUS pitch to lefties with it ‘backin it up’ to the inside corner. There arent many pitchers witht hat much break in baseball. Now I dont know how well he will do or if we should even have faith in Mazzaro, but not all hope is lost in him, IMO
Cap it, and watch the players association strike it. http://budtheclark.mlblogs.com/
I think the problem with acquiring a lot of Bruce Chens
Is that a lot of those guys will look to have a place in the rotation so they could enhance their future value.
Teaford is an interesting option. Adcock will be an Omaha/KC swing guy until he proves otherwise in 2012. I think a Bruce Chen type pitcher and one other option is all you can really hope for.
The Royals simply must develop better starting pitching from within though. I swear, it’s like watching the Chiefs try to develop a QB.
by WURoyal on Nov 1, 2011 1:28 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
But they aren’t blind to what you’re doing.
They know you will bring Monty and Duffy up if they’re pitching well with no regard to them. Sure they (the prospective FA pitcher) could be traded, but I think it’s still a factor.
by WURoyal on Nov 1, 2011 1:45 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
No one else in baseball has 3 rotations spots up for grabs
Every team in baseball has a minor leaguer who could potentially be brought up during the season. All the free agents will know that they only have to be slightly better than one other guy the Royals bring in to keep their rotation spot all year.
Hey, we've got out savior
Don’t idolize others, or Hos Himself will smite you down.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not convinced about the goal of having 8 good starters
Sure, it’d be great to be able to ride out a rash of injuries and poor performance, but I think you need to first set your team up so that if things go right, you can contend. Then you worry about how to contend if things go wrong.
Having Hochevar, Paulino and 3 Francis-level pitchers doesn’t make the Royals contenders even if they all stay healthy, so why would we make that a priority? We’d be better off going with Duffy and Monty in the rotation because they have a chance to hit the high end of their upside and push us into contention.
Similarly, we should shoot for a good SP or 2 rather than 4 mediocre SP’s because if they stay healthy and the young offensive players have strong sophomore campaigns, we can contend. With a rotation that goes 8 men deep in mediocrity, however, we won’t have much of a shot even if Hosmer wins an MVP.
Those zeroes at the back-end
would be a nice little improvement over the negative WAR we got from SOS/Mazzaro in 2011.
Ranked in order of games started, our “#8 Starter” this year was Vinny. He got 4 starts. While I like the basic premise of this post, I don’t think it would make a whole lot of sense to acquire a “2-WAR” pitcher at anything close to market rate so that you can give him 4 starts over the course of a season…
And we need to be evaluating players with years of cost control, if possible
Jeff Francis makes the team better, but not when we’re really competing.
Well... sorta...
…I mean the basic premise of this post (and this whole exercise) is that it could be possible to compete in 2012.
Yeah, I'm fine with Mazzaro and Teaford getting 10 starts between them
As long as we have impact guys at the top
Of course, I'm not sure where we're going to find the 5 and 4 WAR pitchers for the front end of that rotation.
A more reasonable distribution might be something like: 3, 2.5, 2.5, 2.5, 2, 2, 1.5, 0
I’d be happy with a 1 WAR pitcher in that #7 spot, but those don't exist.
FWIW, I think that distribution is even less realistic for the Royals in 2012 than eight 2 WAR pitchers.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
It'd take a lot of things going right
3: Edwin Jackson
2.5: Paulino
2.5: Hochevar
2.5: Harden
2: Duffy
2: Monty
1.5 Teaford
0: Mazzaro
First, I was saying it was unrealistic based on Jeff’s proposal of not spending a ton on FA’s and not trading away top prospects. Second, yes that works if a lot goes right for every pitcher on that list, especially the top 6.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, we're not getting 16 WAR out of our SP's next season
I was just lining up what the path of least resistance to see what it would take. Looks like about a 1% shot to me.
Cain+Shields+Oswalt+Kershaw+Hochevar+Paulino+Duffy+Montgomery
equals more than 16.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 1, 2011 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you mean The Old Jack Marsh.
The New Jack Marsh has had his fandom beaten out of him by us, so he knows there is no hope (also, you can’t make real life trades as if it were a video game).
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions
killing the hopes of the young...
is why I get up in the morning
by Freneau on Nov 1, 2011 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Hey, don't sell yourself short
We can kill hopes of young AND old.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 1, 2011 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Yet another reason why you should be a professor somewhere.
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Good point
If you need a starter midseason, you can usually find a Chris Capuano-type mid-season for a marginal prospect
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
MITCH!
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 1, 2011 3:22 PM EDT reply actions
Wil Myers value could not be any lower than a top 25/50 overall prospect?
You sure about that?
it could be...but i have little doubt that he'll have a good season next year
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 1, 2011 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought he was already ranked #23 by BA
maybe that was something else
I’m still on the Myers bandwagon.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.
by Matt Klaassen on Nov 2, 2011 8:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Disagree
Mendoza?? Who was the most consistent pitcher in the Royals organization? Billo? Maybe ? But Mendoza was great in spring training. Struggled a little at the beginning at Omaha. Then was very consistent in Omaha and KC. Suck? I don’t think so! I know there is a good chance he will suck again this year. But it seems like he learned to pitch. People thought Bruce would suck, but except for the injury and being rusty when he came back, he was pretty darn good. Trading Holland is stupid. He’s our best reliever. We have too many questions in the bullpen. Crow? Wood? Herrera? Minor? Collins is ok except for walks. Teaford ? Starter or closer?Getz? He’s a good backup fielder but doesn’t play many spots so you can’t keep a guy like C.Robinson or J.Dyson on your bench. You need a guy on the bench that can come through in late innings. But with Chris you need another infielder. Maybe Dayton will try to get Bloomquist back>!?!? hahaha! Duffy will probably improve but if he keeps a 5.00 era. You really would rather keep 5.00 era instead of Mendoza’s 1.25Era?
by Totally confused on Nov 3, 2011 12:46 AM EDT reply actions
ERA is not a good measure of pitching performance or talent
The rest of his stats were at his normal level. The uncharacteristically low ERA was the product of BABIP luck and HR/FB luck. Mendoza is not a good pticher.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Nov 3, 2011 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
