The Royals can contend this year
Whether the Royals can realistically hope to contend this year has become a hotly debated topic with the promotion of Eric Hosmer. It seems that the general consensus of the Royals saber community is that the team, simply put, is not anywhere close to contention. Neyer says he can't see the Royals topping the mid-70's in the win column, Scott has made it abundantly clear that he thinks the team has no shot, BP's playoff odds calculator pegs the Royals for 70 wins and a 1% shot at the playoffs, and this article at beyondtheboxscore.com suggests the Royals have been lucky to win as many games as they have so far.
Of all the respected writers I've seen give opinions on the topic, only the eternally optimistic Rany has given the Royals a puncher's chance in the division. Obviously, I'm siding with Rany here, and my reasoning is pretty simple: the Royals offense is a lot better than it's being credited for.
To start, the Royals are 3rd in MLB in wOBA and lead the league in runs scored. They're hitting for average, they're walking, they're hitting doubles, they're stealing bases at a high rate of success, and they're peppering in the occasional home run. The BP playoff calculator cited above that pegs the Royals for 70 wins is using woefully outdated PECOTA projections for the Royals and for the league in general. To reach 70 wins, the system relies on projections setting the Royals offensive slash lines to be .264/.327/.392--projected numbers that haven't been updated since March 30. Meanwhile, the Royals have hit .272/.338/.434 so far and are further upgrading their offense by replacing Kila with Hosmer.
Just as importantly, none of the other teams have been updated either, and offense across the league has taken a historic dip so far this season, so while the Royals .272/.338/.434 line looks only decent in previous run-environments, in the depressed run environment so far in 2011, that offensive line has produced more runs than any other team in the Majors so far.
To understand what the offensive drop means in the AL Central, compare the Twins projected .273/.337/.406 to their actual .230/.292/.323 or the White Sox projected .264/.327/.426 to their actual .236/.307/.363. It’s only 30 games, but the 70 win projection hasn’t accounted for ANY of this data. And this data screams that the Royals offense is better than originally projected as compared to the league.
To better understand how outdated that 70 win projection is, we can take a look at how individual players have improved estimations of their true talent so far this season. I don’t have access to PECOTA’s original offensive projections or recently updated projections, so we'll take the freely available and daily updated ZiPS projections from Fangraphs:
Francoeur’s initial projected wOBA: .308
Francoeur’s updated projected RoS (rest of season) wOBA: .330
Gordon’s initial projected wOBA: .330
Gordon’s updated projected RoS wOBA: .343
Betemit’s initial projected wOBA: .328
Betemit’s updated projected RoS wOBA: .340
Butler’s also seen a 10 point jump, Aviles has seen a 10 point jump, and even Melky’s seen an 8 point jump.
~30 games doesn't sound like a lot, but the key cogs in the Royals offense have played so well this season that they've significantly upgraded the level of production we can expect from them going forward. When you replace Kila's .281 wOBA with something like a .325 wOBA and much improved defense from Eric Hosmer, factor in potential further improvement from additions like Lorenzo Cain and Mike Moustakas, and project some degree of offensive improvement from Escobar, you start to see a line-up forming that is vastly improved over pre-season projections even as offense across the league takes a giant step backwards.
Perhaps we can't count on a Top 3 offense all season, but this is absoultely an above average line-up that is plenty good to compete in the AL Central where the Royals are already 30+ runs ahead of every team except Cleveland in run differential.
Beyond the offense, I think we all accept that the Royals bullpen is very good. Soria, Collins, Crow, Coleman....even the mop-up men in Adcock and Texeira are pretty decent in the world of middle relievers.
With a good offense and a very good bullpen, that leaves the starting rotation as the club's obvious weakness. Quite simply, more moves are required in the starting rotation for the team to have a shot. Fortunately, the Royals have options--they can promote Montgomery, Duffy or potentially Lamb or Dwyer if they get it together soon, they can transition Crow to the starting rotation, and they can trade prospects and/or offer salary relief to pick up help. In Hochevar, Francis and Chen, the Royals have a solid back end of a contending rotation. They just need to find 1 or 2 pitchers to stick at the top.
With multiple near-ready prospects to plug in, a bevy of trading chips available should they decide to pull the trigger, and $20M+ of available budget this year to sweeten the deal by taking on an effective but overpaid pitcher, the Royals have the resources to make an upgraded rotation a reality. They just need to find a way to get it done without mortgaging the future. If Moore sees a way to accomplish that feat, then he has every reason to expect a good offense and a better bullpen to keep his team in contention all year.
79 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I agree with this article completely.
Although if they are still playing this well through June, then I think they deserve due credit from the blogosphere. I honestly don’t think this team is a fluke.
I’m going to guess that in order to promote Hosmer, Moore had to have had some sort of plan to improve the rotation (otherwise, why wouldn’t he have waited a month to get past the super-2 deadline). Taking some degree of improvement to the rotation into account, I’ll predict 84 wins this season. 84 wins might be enough to take the division. Alternatively, a team with 84 win talent can get a little lucky and win 86 to have a better shot at the division.
Very nicely written and well-argued
But you’ve been hitting that Kool-Aid spiked with Everclear a bit too hard. No way they’re contending with the rotation we have, and let’s not buy an expensive veteran pitcher. We have a lot of young arms coming up and at least a couple are not going to bust.
For 2011 75 wins would be successful, for 2012 a .500 record, and in 2013 we go for the playoffs. No matter how much fun it is, this is still a building year for the franchise, and let’s not commit lots of money right now. And if we are going to commit lots of money, let’s get a dependable catcher who can hit.
"¿Por qué no te calles?" --King Juan Carlos
No way they’re contending with the rotation we have,
And no way the rotation we have now is the one we’ll have at the end of the year or the ASB or even in a couple of weeks if Francis continues to look fatigued. Duffy within two weeks, probably Montgomery by the break to replace Davies if he slips again. Based on very recent history, Hoch and Francis are the weak links, so just a matter of matter getting a little more control.
“this is still a building year for the franchise, and let’s not commit lots of money right now.”
Management seems to disagree and I agree with them. Since Hos is now up, Getz is the biggest problem and a couple of middle infielders in Omaha are performing. Treanor may be a weak hitter with good OBP, but he’s a manly defender and Pena’s defense is much improved, so catching is survivable til Perez shows he can hit. The future is now.
by Jim Fetterolf on May 7, 2011 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
"n Hochevar, Francis and Chen, the Royals have a solid back end of a contending rotation. They just need to find 1 or 2 pitchers to stick at the top. "
Easier said than done. Where exactly are they going to find that? The prospects look good, but I doubt they’ll be MLB aces from the get-go.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
I think they need to get one of Monty, Duffy, Crow, Lamb or Dwyer to pitch well in the rotation
They don’t need to be ace-level; they just need to be above average.
If they don’t get 2 effective starters out of that group, then they’ll need to trade for another. I’d like to see Moore go after an effective but overpaid pitcher on a non-contending team looking for salary relief so that we don’t have to part with our most premium prospects. It’d be dumb to give up Moustakas or Myers, but if the Royals are still looking good near the deadline, trading Dwyer might make sense.
Only
one of them is pitching well in the minors, so Duffy is the only possibility at the moment.
“I’d like to see Moore go after an effective but overpaid pitcher on a non-contending team looking for salary relief "
Worst possible move. We have the pieces to build in-house. If we trade prospects it should only be AAA for more AA and A players, reload. Too many pitchers, in a group in high minor, too many DH/1B at AAA and AAAA. Of course, Milwaukee would probably trade us that Greinke kid for Escobar, Jeffress, Cain, and Jake? That would give us another 3 or 4 wins over Davies.
by Jim Fetterolf on May 7, 2011 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly what I'm afraid of
The idea of trading a bunch of these chips to acquire an Ace is just chilling. The pitching staff is not ready to contend this year and we could seriously undermine the ceiling of this team if we trade away our prospect for a rent-an-ace. Bringing up Hosmer is bad enough, but if I see two future aces or one and Myers get traded for half a year of Cliff Lee or something, I’m going to puke.
They could trade prospects and go all-in on 2011
Yikes!
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Let's say the Royals are in it in July
Would trading Dwyer and Lough to relieve the cash-strapped Dodgers of Kuroda’s 1 year $12M contract be that bad?
This hypothetical is about 6 layers removed from reality, but I wouldn’t disapprove of the move in that situation.
It would be interesting if that would get us over the top
But one good starting pitcher isn’t going to get this team over the top. I think you are assuming that the Sox, Tigers and Twins are going to be as bad all season as they were in April. There really is no reason to assume that.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah...itd be a non horrible option if the team was legitimately competing at that point....
thats a bridge i dont think we’ll have to cross though
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on May 6, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Fortunately, we'd have better information before we'd have to make that decision
I wouldn’t trade anyone now, but in July, we might be in a different situation. You still wouldn’t want to mortgage the future by trading Moustakas, Myers or Montgomery, but you could entertain a mid-level trade with a guy like Dwyer in the right situation.
Why?
The assumption is that you wouldn’t do it unless the Royals are leading or close to the lead in the AL central in July and look like they’re 1 starter away from a complete team. Losing Dwyer would hurt, but it wouldn’t be the end of the world. Dwyer is, what, our 5th or 6th best pitching prospect?
He's still a very good pitching prospect
For a few months of a pretty average to barely above average pitcher, and a useful OF. Terrible deal.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
That is probably selling Kuroda short
But he’s what a 3-4 WAR pitcher? No way. Dwyer is a Top 100 prospect.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Yeah, it would
Don’t mortgage the future for short-term, expensive players. This is not the playoffs year.
"¿Por qué no te calles?" --King Juan Carlos
What would it take to pry Kuroda from the Dodgers?
He’s on a 1 year, $12M contract, and if the Dodgers aren’t in contention in June/July, I have to think they’ll be doing everything they can to unload salary. MLB won’t want to foot the bill for them all season.
An excellent article
Right now, the Sox and Twins have played themselves into a massive hole—and as Scott’s reaction in the other thread shows, I don’t think he and other critics truly understand how big a hole those two teams are in.
Making a small move—replacing Kila with Hosmer—at this point in the season makes a ton of sense. If the situation continues, add Duffy or others later.
I think you are overestimating the whole they are in
Historical precedents are one thing, but you have to look at the situation the Sox, Tigers and Twins are in. The two teams at the top of the division are overperforming and should fall back. That means making up the stagger will be much less difficult than most teams with a bad start have ever had to deal with.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
And by "whole", I mean "hole"
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions
hate when that happens....
i fuck that one up far too frequently
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on May 6, 2011 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
My argument is that the Royals aren't overperforming as much as many people seem to think
Also, the Twins are just bad. They’re lucky to have the record they do given their god-awful run differential. If they don’t get back a full-strength Mauer, they’re done.
The Sox are a 7 games behind the Royals. They’d have to be significantly better than the Royals to pass them. It could happen, but I don’t think it’s particularly likely. The Royals would have to be quite bad or the White Sox would have to be very good.
The Tigers are still in it. The Indians are the favorite in the division. The Royals have a puncher’s chance.
That's right
Is it so crazy, for example, that Alex Gordon and Wilson Betemit—two of the biggest prospects of the last half decade—begin playing at a high level?
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 6, 2011 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
As I noted on BtBS
The same metric you used to prove the Royals are overperforming actually shows that the putrid Sox and Twins are “overperforming” to an even greater degree. I’m honestly not sure WHAT you see in the Twins that makes you think they’re going to play at a 95 win or so pace the rest of the year.
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 6, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
And interestingly, that article agrees that the Royals have had the best offense in the AL
The metric just dings the pitching really hard for all the home runs they’ve given up and give the Royals the worst run-prevention in the league by about 30 runs.
The pitching is bad, but I think they’ve also been a little unlucky with all the home runs. Either way, there’s no doubt that the Royals need starting pitching help to contend.
Right
What we have is a confluence of factors:
1) Collapse of Minn/Sox
2) Ready availablility of two elite AAA SP prospects
3) Ready availability of a player top fill the biggest offensive hole at 1B
Put it all together and some effort to try and win this year makes a ton of sense.
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 6, 2011 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Offense
The problem is I think the offense is going to fall back a lot. Here is a list of the players with significant playing time that I think will hit a lot worse for the rest of the season than they have so far (with the difference between their current wOBA and ZiPS ros wOBA in parentheses):
Francoeur (77)
Gordon (42)
Aviles (50)
Betemit (33)
Melky (26)
And those guys get a hell of a lot of PA’s. That’s a ton of regression to expect over the next five months. And I don’t think Hosmer in his rookie season and improvements from Escobar, Pena and Treanor are going to mitigate the expected offensive deterioration.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, the Royals offense will cool off some
But remember that we’ll likely gain offense at 1B and SS relative to what we’ve gotten so far:
Escobar: +51
Hosmer compared to Kila’s .281: +~50?
I don’t think we need to worry a whole lot about regression from Melky because if he falls off at all, Cain, Maier, or Dyson will step in. I expect Cain can maintain Melky’s current level of performance—and if he can’t produce 100% of the offense, the defensive upgrade will cover the difference.
The Royals current team wOBA is .343. Accounting for losing the points you’ve listed and gaining the points I listed at 1B and SS, the team wOBA would drop roughly 10 points. That would still leave at 5th in the AL just behind the Indians (who have also been lucky) and more than 20 points ahead of the Tigers.
by kcdc1 on May 6, 2011 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Well, as long as ZiPS is being used as the basis...
Kila ZiPS ROS: .335
Hosmer ZiPS pre-season (no RoS yet): .320
I guess it depends how much do you think 70 BABIP-heavy AAA PA would alter that RoS if Dan incorporated his MLEs into the RoS updates. My guess is that it wouldn’t put it over .335, and almost certainly not 10 points (~half a win).
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 7, 2011 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Oliver current "true talent" projections
Kila: .356 wOBA
Hosmer: .326 wOBA
…just to have it out there
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 7, 2011 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
A couple days ago, I had Hosmer’s ROS at 276/333/421 compared to his preseason of 263/321/413. That’s including translation (FG isn’t equipped for that yet, but I am).
ZiPS was pretty low on Kila relative to others. By some 100 points on Oliver and PECOTA, IIRC.
Thanks, Dan
MLEs (as far as I understand them, which isn’t very) are a pain in general, and I imagine incorporating them into automated in-season updates would be a royal pain.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 8, 2011 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Have to steal this from Matt Klaassen's twitter
2011 Royals at 17-14
.772 OPS,
4.32 ERA
2009 Royals at 18-11
.782 OPS
3.53 ERA
Was the 2009 team for real? Why is 2011 different? And if it is different, is it a lot different, because the 2009 team ended up with a Pyth of 65.6 wins.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
That team was getting its offense from Podsednik, Kendall, Guillen and Bloomquist
Maybe it’s fool’s gold, but I’ll take Gordon, Butler, Francoeur and Betemit over that group.
That team was getting most of its offense from Butler, Callaspo, DeJesus, Olivo and Buck
(the Royals top 5 wOBA from the 2009 season) And while I think Gordon and Butler are good hitters (if not necessarily at the level they’re at now), Francoeur and Betemit are certainly questionable. The whole offense is.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Royals
are a better team now; better hitting, better defense, better speed, better ‘pen, and better chemistry. Even much better with possible replacements. Not like ’09 had Hosmer and Duffy waiting for a call up or Monty a little fast ball command from making the show. ’09 was stuck with who they had, basically Butler and that one-shot wonder who got dumped on Milwaukee and an SS that couldn’t field and two catchers who couldn’t field, either. This year’s team is much deeper and broader. I’m not saying you should be optimistic, a violation of the blogger code of conduct, but it may be time to allow a little objectivity to enter your view and to give a little more weight to what we actually are seeing on the field.
by Jim Fetterolf on May 6, 2011 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
YOSTIFIED
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on May 6, 2011 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Boy articles like these are going to look really funny come July.....
Killing time until time kills me
by EspeciallyK on May 6, 2011 3:09 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
But we'll be A-holes if we bring them up
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
That could be true
But if the shoe is on the other foot, are the hardcore skeptics going to run an apology article?
I’m skeptical, too, but I’d just rather not get to the point where I’m deriding someone for their outlook (although…meh, I’m guilty of that sometimes, too). A lot of folks were doing that last year about the SF Giants, and they ended up looking incredibly stupid — although the Giants were, in my opinion, uncommonly lucky as well as being pretty good.
You want optimism? My glass is half full of emptiness.
What if they win 83 games, like they did in 2003?
Is it time for me to now write my apology article for thinking during that season that the team wasn’t for real?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure
I’d say you’ve got some pretty serious crow to eat if the Royals end up over .500.
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 6, 2011 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I'll eat it
(even if the 2011 Royals eventually prove to be a 2003-like fluke)
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Will you (all) do likewise if this doesn't happen?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't think most of the optimistic folks
are predicting good things will happen. I think they’re just opening themselves up to the possibility that good things COULD actually happen. This is the first time Royals fans have been able to say that in a long long while.
While I still look at this team as having a low 70s win upside, I don’t discount that we could get career years from a couple of guys and a couple of prospects arrive early and we somehow manage to contend. In the past, we all knew the wheels would come off at some point and there would be nothing in the minors to help out.
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
Saying "there's a chance"
and concluding that the 2011 Royals ARE legitimate contenders are two very different things. And putting aside the fans’ attitude/beliefs, it’s part of Moore’s job to have the right answer to those sorts of questions. Hosmer’s promotion, and the probable promotion of Duffy, et al., are predicated on him making the right call.
If Moore has engaged in poor analysis of this team’s contention chances, then that’s bad.
If he’s utilized a good analysis to make the Hosmer move (and any others involving prospect promotions), and he’s decided on this course of action anyway knowing there is only a very slim chance of contention this year, then that’s bad, too.
I’m not sure which would be worse.
by Sweep_the_Leg on May 6, 2011 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree
I am yet to see anyone say they ARE legitimate contenders. The OP uses the word “Can”. I’m sure someone has been more committal on this issue, but I suspect they are in the extreme minority. Scott was asking if they will eat crow if it doesn’t happen. I’m just suggesting they shouldn’t need to eat crow for having a tiny little bit of optimism…no matter how misplaced.
As for DM, I’m not ready to say that Hosmer’s callup is an indication that the Royals are ready to go all-in on this season. All we know for sure is that they think Hosmer is ready. If the floodgates open in May, I think anyone would and should question his sanity. As of now, all he’s committed to is adding the piece that looks the most ready and see how it goes.
I’m as skeptical as the next guy about DM’s decision making abilty, but I don’t see any evidence (yet) that he’s changed the professed committment to wait until prospects are ready (whatever that means) for a callup.
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
My argument is that the Royals have a viable path to contend
If they’re in the low 70’s at the end of the year, I’ll admit I was wrong. If they don’t make any moves to fix the rotation and wind up at 78-80 wins, I’m going to feel like I was right, and that the Royals did have a reasonable shot. I’m predicting ~83 wins, so I’ll definitely feel like I was right if they make it that high or higher.
"I think they’re just opening themselves up to the possibility that good things COULD actually happen. "
That’s exactly right. My guess is that they Royals finish with around 76 wins. But I think it is POSSIBLE with a little bit of luck to be considerably better than that. Replacing Kila with Hosmer to collect an additional couple of WAR seems prudent to me. If the Royals manage to avoid pooping the bed in May /early June, I think it would be prudent to, say, bring up Duffy and send Kyle Davies to Japan and collect another marginal win or two. If by the ASB the wheels haven’t come off and Monty is pitching well, bring him up and send SOS to the International League while looking for a little additional help on the trade market.
I’m not saying go all in right now….but folding now would be like folding with a pair of 2s after a couple of guys at the table folder before you. Pretty stupid.
If you think the Royals are most likely going to win 76 games, what do you think their odds of makng the playoffs are?
As I think they are more of a 72ish-win team, I’d say less than 5%.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions
This might be a great time
to re-poll the RR readers to get their take on win totals this year.
Personally, I’m still at 75.
Now with 30% less snark!
Were you at 75 before the season started?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Given the division
I’d say with the current squad around 5 percent. Adding in Hosmer/Duffy/Monty I think trat rises to, say 15 or 20 percent.
Remember, though that there are MAJOR benefits to the Royals for finishing with a respectable record this season—additional income, higher season ticket sales and, most importantly a much more credible argument for getting free agent talent to sign with the team.
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 6, 2011 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Is there any evidence
For this?
most importantly a much more credible argument for getting free agent talent to sign with the team
KC won 75 games in 2008
The following off-season they were able to sign not only Kyle Farnsworth, Juan Cruz, and Horacio Ramirez, but Willie Freaking Bloomquist en route to an 18-11 start to 2009.
BOOM, ROASTED!
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 7, 2011 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Are you in favor of using up a year of service time for each of those prospects for a maybe 1-in-5 chance of making the playoffs?
And I can’t say I necessary agree with the “major” benefits of a "respectable record’. There would be some attedance increase, but would the greater revenue be major? And would a 80-win season make it much easier to sign FA’s? Neither of us knows, but I doubt it.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions
I do think the attendance bump from contention into, say, August...
could be enough to pay for a good chunk of Hosmer’s salary bump due to his Super 2 status (if Glass were to actually put all that extra revenue into a Hosmer Arbitration Cookie Jar). Will his presence alone be enough to keep the Royals in the race that late into the season? Doubtful. I just hope Moore doesn’t compound the issue by giving Duffy and/or Montgomery a potential extra year of arbitration, too.
by Sweep_the_Leg on May 6, 2011 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Service Time
I think you are being completely unreasonable if your argument is some predicated on bringing Hosmer up in April 2012.
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 6, 2011 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Still don't get why that is completely unreasonable
He’s still very young and inexperienced. This is his one and only AAA season. But it is unreasonable to keep him in AAA for that one year? I don’t get it why that is unreasonable and I don’t think that there is downside there that is more than negligible.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 6, 2011 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
It's not unreasonable
But bringing up young players who have already been successful in AAA is not unreasonable, either.
"¿Por qué no te calles?" --King Juan Carlos
If it makes sense for the team, given it's particular circumstances, yes
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 7, 2011 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Free Agents
Let me get this straight-
You are seriously arguing that, all other things being equal, the team’s previous year W-L record doesn’t make a significant difference in signing a free agent over the winter? That a free agent is equally likely to sign with a team that won 90 games as 80 games as 65 games?
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 6, 2011 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions
How often are all other things equal?
More often than not someone will offer more than someone else, and that is where the decision is made for most players.
Unless you think that winning 80 games means we can underbid the Pirates and still get our man? I don’t see that at all.
by kcbottom9th on May 6, 2011 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm saying that the huge, vast majority of a FA's decision is about dollars and years on the contract offer
I think the player, media, agents and others involved in PR make a big deal about players “just wanting to win” and “wanting to play for a contender” but in reality they almost always take the biggest contract offer. And I think 80 wins vs. 72 wins isnt’ exactly radically changing FA’s opinion of the Royals (if such an opinion had much importance at all, and I don’t think it does).
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 7, 2011 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions
The most important factor in attracting free agents is $
Some may prefer to play on a winning team, which they know the Röyals are likely to be within a couple of years. A few may prefer to play close to home, in which case we’re screwed on those guys.
The Röyals really don’t need anybody but a catcher and three or four starters. The starters will come from AAA, or be rented by the year Francis- or Chen-style. Catcher is where I would spend money.
"¿Por qué no te calles?" --King Juan Carlos
Outfield
The Royals need a Big Ass Bat in a corner slot of the outfield, actually.
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 7, 2011 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Why does a corner outfield slot or any position need a big bat?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 7, 2011 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
The team needs big bats
Doesn’t matter what position they play, but you need a few of them to, like, score runs. And the most common place to stick them is COF and 1B, because they have to play somewhere in the field.
"¿Por qué no te calles?" --King Juan Carlos
What any team needs is run differential
It really doesn’t matter where that run differential comes from. Ideas like “this team needs a power corner OFer” are the kind of things that get the Royals locked into signing someone like Jose Guillen.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 7, 2011 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
If you're playing good teams
they’re going to score runs, and you need to score runs too to keep your run differential positive. “This team needs a power hitter” doesn’t mean sign José Guillén. Besides, I don’t think we’re going to need any more power hitters, with Hosmer, Alex, Billy, Mr. President, and Moose on the way. Those guys are going to hit some doubles and homers. We’re going to need a catcher who can hit acceptably, but he doesn’t have to be a power guy.
"¿Por qué no te calles?" --King Juan Carlos
Um
Because that’s where the most forseeable holes in the lineup are given the existing group of prospects.
Would have thought that was obvious.
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 7, 2011 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, the Royals need good OFers. That is an obvious weakness. But a “good player” does not necessitate a “big bat” at any position. A good player is one who has a large difference between the runs he adds to the offense and runs he prevents on the defense. The old school focus on power or hitting on the corners and defense up the middle is unnecessarily and inappropriately limiting. The Royals don’t need a big bat in the corner OF positions or anywhere. They need good players, regardless of that player’s particularly profile.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on May 7, 2011 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Being a good player involves playing better
than most of the other guys in the league, right? You can be a good player without hitting for power, e.g. Ichiro. It doesn’t matter where the goodness comes from, as long as you’re good. And one thing that often helps make a good player is hitting for power.
A good team needs at least a couple of guys who can whack the ball. It doesn’t matter what position they play, but it’s most common for them to play COF or 1B, since these are the least demanding defensive positions. If we can get Joe Morgan or Bobby Grich, I’ll take him, but we’re more likely to get some hands of stone guy like Billy to bash the ball.
I know you know all this. I’m just not sure you’re laying it out logically.
"¿Por qué no te calles?" --King Juan Carlos
We are only a Zack Grienke away
from contending lol.
and a Yunieski Betancourt away
from last place.
by don_jerovanni on May 8, 2011 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions

by 




















