Royals Destroy Tigers, Decimate The Division Leaders' Fragile Psyches
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 29, 2011 10:26 PM EDT
in Royals Game Recaps
Email
PrintAgainst a first-place Tigers team whose Pythagorean Win-Loss Record (6.5 games better than the Royals' heading into tonight) suggests that a their 18.5 game lead over the Royals is not necessarily representative of their run-scoring ability, the Royals thoroughly throttled the Tigers.
The Royals offense jumped all over the Tigers early, tagging Max Scherzer to the tune of seven earned in three innings (two came in the fourth, where Scherzer was unable to record an out).
Every Royal recorded a hit.
Alex Gordon lead the game off with a solo shot on a 1 - 2 count, and there was no turning back. Salvador Perez and Alcides Escobar had back-to-back solo shots to kick off the fourth. Gordon, Perez, Escobar, Johnny Giavotella, and Melky Cabrera all had multi-hit games.
It was actually enjoyable.
165 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
you forgot to mention that Chris Getz led the Royals to a victory tonight
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo
Chairman, The Melky Cabrera Seasoning Sauce. It's great on your outfield!
If you're gonna mention Getz's contributions,
You better not forget Tiny Timmy
Thunder and Lightning
Salcidores Perezcobar.
by OnixConcepcion on Aug 29, 2011 10:30 PM EDT reply actions
Salcidores when you're thirsty,
Perezcobar when you want to get drunk.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Aug 30, 2011 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Back in May
I would’ve bet money against Alcides ever hitting a HR for the Royals.
by Black and Gold on Aug 29, 2011 10:32 PM EDT reply actions
Guess the fact that he hit 5 in Spring Training
means that he doesn’t have enough power to get it to the wall?
The Royal Pork T....between inning snack of prized Royal Designated Hitters
i see the ball i hit the ball it really nice i feel so happy - Sal Perez
Do these effectively hide my thunder?
Perez is my favorite post game interview since Sasha Kaun
by YouDon'tPhaseMeGobble on Aug 29, 2011 10:41 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Hella Money, Coach
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 29, 2011 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions
For such a giant, with such a deep voice
Andre always seemed surprisingly nonthreatening. Maybe my perception is colored too much by the Princess Bride.
'You know....sportsman like'
He was indeed a gentle giant, still remember the 60 Minutes interview.
The Royal Pork T....between inning snack of prized Royal Designated Hitters
The last two guys I would ever expect to hit back-to-back homers
(Excluding getz) Would be El Salvador and Escobar. Oh how I love Max Sherzer!
by YouDon'tPhaseMeGobble on Aug 29, 2011 10:39 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
One of our better game threads in awhile, too.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!
by KeepItCopacetic on Aug 29, 2011 10:44 PM EDT reply actions
Yeah,
Good thread. Good game.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 29, 2011 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
needed more dong photos
Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Since 2006: Royals win% = .4218, Chiefs win% = .3625
by averagegatsby on Aug 29, 2011 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Reverse Ewing effect -
DaytonSucks had been holding us all back.
by Loose Seal on Aug 29, 2011 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I've been out of town and wasn't in the thread tonight.
So I share some credit.
by Black and Gold on Aug 29, 2011 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, there's plenty of credit for everyone
But you weren’t banned, you just didn’t show up tonight…so you really had the MITCH! effect.
Did DaytonSucks get banned?
What did I miss?
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions
In the Moustakas thread from earlier today
Jack Marsh had a little fun at his expense in the post-game thread last night, and DaytonSucks embarked on a scorched earth campaign beginning there and reaching it apotheosis in the Moustakas thread earlier today. Actually, there’s some pretty funny stuff once he started madly attacking everyone in the thread before he got banned.
his random abuse of philofthenorth was amusing in its utter nonsense randomness
at that point you knew he was gunning for the ban. i told him off once earlier this season and have since just ignored the guy. calling scott “darth mckinney” was amusing in an epic flameout fashion.
by BeauJackson on Aug 30, 2011 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Caught up on DaytonSucks Banning '11
Not that epic. I was hoping for more, honestly.
What a weird, angry cat…
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 1:47 AM EDT up reply actions
The idea that a (presumably) grown man
would get enjoyment out of repeatedly picking on a 15 year old online is downright creepy.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!
by KeepItCopacetic on Aug 30, 2011 2:34 AM EDT up reply actions
It's a little absurd
And by a little, I mean a lot.
Kindly ribbing about their youth is one thing.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 2:44 AM EDT up reply actions
He and I got into it months ago,
and then he just picked up where he left off. The dude has some issues…picking fights with kids on blogs is just downright degenerate material.
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Aug 30, 2011 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, more about quantity than quality.
Ban-worthy in a ho-hum sort of way.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Aug 30, 2011 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
He was just negative for the sake of being negative.
Never saw any sort of hope or glimpses of anything positive, and then if you didn’t agree with him that this team was only going to get much much worse then you were a Dayton apologist.
Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Since 2006: Royals win% = .4218, Chiefs win% = .3625
by averagegatsby on Aug 30, 2011 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Really like Sal Perez - so does Ned
When he was saying that Perez might catch 140 games in 2012 that makes me a little nervous but I appreciate the enthusiasm. He is a big guy but didn’t hit for lots of power in the minors. Maybe he’ll grow into it as he gets older. Reminds me of Sandy Alomar Jr. with his size and ability.
If KC has Perez catch 140 games, does BP or Treanor stay on board as an expensive caddy in 2012? Or go with M. Pina to sit on the bench for most of the year?
My guess would be Pina
Or maybe even more likely, some unknown veteran cast off. I guess thats what treanor is, so pretty much anyone but pena.
by YouDon'tPhaseMeGobble on Aug 29, 2011 10:49 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
neither one of those guys would be cost prohibitive...we're talking like a million dollars.
i think it’d be worth the extra 600k to have a somewhat capable PH replacement for perez if necessary…and a mlb caliber backup in case something happens to sal
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 29, 2011 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I just dont think pena is any good
Offensively or from what little I know, defensively. He’s had spurts of limited good hitting in his career, but is typically the most consistently easy out in the lineup, including getz. He was a good alternative to kendall, but it’s time to lose faith in pena.
by YouDon'tPhaseMeGobble on Aug 29, 2011 11:02 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
What would treanor cost?
by YouDon'tPhaseMeGobble on Aug 29, 2011 11:06 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
probably around a million
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 29, 2011 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions
No upside and his OBP's a fluke
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
uhh...his OBP is 91 points better than his average for his career
not really flukish
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 29, 2011 11:10 PM EDT up reply actions
If only avg-obp were a meaningful stat
his walk rate is way out of line with his career numbers.
Even with walk rate, at less than 250, who cares?
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 29, 2011 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions
he's a catcher...the standards are pretty low
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 29, 2011 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions
the standards for using the right statistics are lower for catchers?
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 29, 2011 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I'd be fine with either, but prefer Pena
Treanor’s line this year is ridiculous (AVG/OBP/SLG): .226/.351/.306
Why would you pinch hit pena for perez?
Why would you pinch hit pena for anybody?
by YouDon'tPhaseMeGobble on Aug 29, 2011 11:05 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Late innings versus a right handed pitcher
Pena versus righties: .263/.300/.388 with 9 HRs in 465 ABs.
Even with Ned at the controls
I’d like a decent, switch-hitter, so I’d rather see Pena as the back-up, with Pina in AAA in case one of them goes down. I don’t think Pena would be very expensive, would he?
a million or less i'd say
definitely not cost prohibitive
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 29, 2011 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd keep Peña
He hits OK for a catcher, especially from the left side, and his defense is slightly above average. El Salvador is a righty, so that balances out just fine. Pina ought to be a perfectly respectable third catcher at AAA.
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
There was a report around may I want to say
That Pena basically asked the club to sign him to a long term(6-8 year) deal for the bare minimum. He apparently loves it here.
"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.
March and 10 years
http://www.kansas.com/2011/03/11/1757579/pena-tries-to-hold-onto-spot-in.html
Get your facts straight or GET OUT!!1!!
Ehh Either way I still don't really get why they didn't do it.
Pena’s no worse than any other option as a backup and its not like you’d lose any money on it since you’d just be paying him the minimum.
I mean when guys like Jeff Mathis, Dioneer Navarro and Drew Butera are all still getting significant looks behind the plate, Pena doesn’t seem so bad.
"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.
I would love if the Royals took him up on the offer.
He’s at least worthy of a back-up spot on a MLB team. Why not us?
I thought that as well
But he’s likely never going to make much more than that, and they did sign off on Wakefields…interesting…contract with the BoSox. So I don’t see how this would be any different.
"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.
It would be odd to get concerned about, considering it gives him
a guaranteed contract for the next six years.. which he’s probably not likely to expect anyway.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!
by KeepItCopacetic on Aug 29, 2011 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I think they might be worried about giving away a spot on a roster
for basically MLB minimum. That sort of thing – locking up spots for cheap, might spread. It might foster management attitude of guaranteeing costs for set time frames, but perhaps not what the union wants. Again, I’m not sure, but my suspicion is that the union wants the most money for the most players and it would want to do away with players wanting to play for the low end of the spectrum.
I'm don't know the perameters of Wakefield's contract is, but maybe they needed
to fill a quota or something, perhaps an age or knuckleball-related category?
perpetual team options at $4 million/yr if i recall
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 30, 2011 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions
I looked up some of it
2006-09 he made $4M each year, $3.5 in 2010 and $1.5M in 2011, but I’m not sure of 2011 incentives.
This
It was basically word for word one of the old “Evergreen” contracts that were basically the reason the baseball union formed in the first place.
"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.
Needs more mutual options.....
…..about 10 of them.
/MLBPA meltdown in 3….2….1….
/tweeting.... @displacedsptsfn
I don't see him enough to really judge him as a ballplayer
And I don’t know crap about evaluating catchers. But he seems like a cheery guy to have on the team. Disposition isn’t a reason to pick a starting outfielder, but when choosing between three comparable choices for backup catcher, I’ll give it a little bit of consideration.
well said
I believe the NFL Lockout will effect my view of the NFL for the next 10 years. If the Chiefs win a Super Bowl earlier than that all will be well in my opinion.
by Cowboynchrist on Aug 30, 2011 9:06 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
hmm...dunno what happened there
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 30, 2011 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
why do you have to be so negative?
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Aug 30, 2011 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I like Perez. Maybe not 140 games/season, but I like him.
I really like how he blocks the plate, like a brick wall.
im sick of this platoon catcher shit...
get us a real catcher and let him catch 130-140 games
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 29, 2011 11:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Perez is big enough that I worry about killing his legs playing that much.
Maybe 130 games, that’s basically catching four guys in the rotation.
Not just anyone can out-hit Alcides Escobar!
I mean, almost anyone can, but there are exceptions.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 29, 2011 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions
still...21 year old defense first catcher...i'd say this is a pretty good showing
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 29, 2011 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions
its been a lot more tolerable than i expected
long term i dont see him being more than an average hitter, but i’ll take this start
by BeauJackson on Aug 29, 2011 11:04 PM EDT up reply actions
I actually like Sal
personally I wish they would have left him down until at least the middle of next season to see if his bat could develop more in the minors, since it seems to have some potential. I don’t see the point in bringing him up this fast. But then again I missed the “fun” of that big thread, and what do I know? He did hit some really impressive shots in Toronto.
But yeah, it’s been a fun week or so of Sal. But if I’m not going to get worried about Mike Moustakas after 260 horrific plate appearances, I’m not going to get pumped about Sal having 60 PA of around .300 wOBA (or whatever it is after tonight).
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 29, 2011 11:18 PM EDT up reply actions
.336 wOBA
And since I expected about a .250 wOBA, I’m excited. His swing looks long to me, but he makes contact well and he has some pop when he hits it squarely.
I don’t think he’s really a .295 hitter right now, but he’s making me think that he may be able to hold his own from Opening Day next year, which I really didn’t expect.
in 65 plate appearances
again, if Moose’s sample isn’t meaningful, then what is Sal’s?
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 30, 2011 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Enough to show that he isn't hopeless against Major League pitching.
He might not be getting their best stuff yet, but it’s not like their throwing BP for him.
I'm sorry, 65 PA or whate4ver it is proves nothing either way
What if he had a .373 wOBA over 92 PA? Is he holding his own? Well, I dunno. He’d actually be Yuniesky Betancourt in August of 2010.
In fact, think Sal will be okay as long as his defense lives up to his reputatoin. But to base it on his current sample so far (and only a couple of games ago he was at .275 wOBA) in the majors… well, that would mean the Royals need to be looking for a third baseman pretty desperately.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 30, 2011 9:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Small samples aren't useless
A small sample can prove a negative statement.
I need a huge sample to support the proposition “All men are baseball fans” but a sample as small as one can prove “Not all men are baseball fans.”
It’s good to caution against overreliance on small sample sizes, but kdcc1 and AMS are making extremely narrow, weak claims (“he may be able to hold his own from Opening Day next year” and “he isn’t hopeless against Major League pitching”) of exactly the type that can be supported with small samples.
it depends on how weak of a claim they mean to make
because the sample is so small that you could make t hose same claims if his wOBA was .200 over those same ~70 PA
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 30, 2011 9:45 AM EDT up reply actions
We're probably splitting hairs, but...
I think the claims were “not hopeless against MLB pitching” and “making me think he’ll be able to hold his own from Opening Day next year.”
Do you think any performance over 65 PA’s proves that he won’t eventually prove himself to be hopeless against MLB pitcing or that he will be able to hold hs own next year?
I’m not saying that speculation is unwarranted. Speculation is fine. I’m just saying that any level of performance over 65 PA’s provides little support for or against those assertions, much less actually proves them.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 30, 2011 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
I'd put it this way
I believe that we know more now than we did 65PA ago. We can rule out some extreme possibilities (e.g. Sal Perez will be totally overmatched by MLB pitching, Sal Perez doesn’t have the power to hit homers at this level).
Saying that 65 PAs doesn’t prove anything is essentially saying that we don’t know any more than we did 65 PAs ago, and that’s not how data works. Knowledge doesn’t just burst into existence at 300 or 600 or 1000 PAs.
It’s good to be very careful about drawing conclusions off of small sample sizes, but kcdc1 and AMS were being careful (changing “may” to “will” in quoting kcdc1’s conclusion makes him sound a lot less careful), and I think it’s too extreme to say 65 PAs doesn’t prove anything.
We can rule out some extreme possibilities (e.g. Sal Perez will be totally overmatched by MLB pitching,
Can we? I doubt it is uncommon for players to have something like a .336 wOBA over their first 65 PA’s and then eventually prove themselves to be genuinely bad MLB hitters. I remembered that Phil Hiatt had a good start for the Royals, so I looked up his numbers. He put up numbers very similar to Perez over his first 60ish PA’s and eventually showed himself to be a .287 wOBA hitter.
Saying that 65 PAs doesn’t prove anything is essentially saying that we don’t know any more than we did 65 PAs ago, and that’s not how data works. Knowledge doesn’t just burst into existence at 300 or 600 or 1000 PAs.
What we know is how well he hit over 65 PA’s. What we know about his true talent level as a Major League hitter is very, very little. It appears that kcdc and ams believe that him hitting pretty well over 65 PA’s shows that he is not and will not be an awful major league hitter. We don’t have enough data to jump to that conclusion yet. I don’t think this tiny sample of data proves that at all.
I think it’s too extreme to say 65 PAs doesn’t prove anything.
What do you think it proves? “Prove” is a strong word. This data can be evidence of something. It can provide support for some assertion or conclusion. But what does it actually “prove”?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 30, 2011 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, for example, it proves Perez can hit HRs against MLB pitching
We’d all agree on that.
I think it proves that Perez may be able to hold his own from opening day next year. I worried that, at this time, he wasn’t capable of stretches like this. Obviously, the fact that he has done so proves he is capable. If the point of the Phil Hiatt example is to show that even very bad hitters are capable of stretches like this, then I take note that my expectations/fears may have been unrealistically bad, but I was expecting below-TPJ level hitting.
Well, for example, it proves Perez can hit HRs against MLB pitching.
We’d all agree on that.
Certainly.
I think it proves that Perez may be able to hold his own from opening day next year
I agree as well. As long as “may” is in there, then we can say it proves that he may do anything.
Obviously, the fact that he has done so proves he is capable [of stretches like this]Ok, the fact that he’s done X proves that he is capable of ever doing X. It doesn’t prove that he’ll ever do X again or anything close to it.
If the point of the Phil Hiatt example is to show that even very bad hitters are capable of stretches like this, then I take note that my expectations/fears may have been unrealistically bad, but I was expecting below-TPJ level hitting.
And you may still see below-TPJ level hitting from him overall this season, or much better. Anything is still possible. One thing that hasn’t been proven (or anything close to proof) is what his current true talent level is. It might be at the .150 wOBA level or the .400 wOBA level. We still don’t know. And these 65 PA’s don’t tell us much about his TTL.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 30, 2011 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Enough to show that he isn’t hopeless against Major League pitching.
Tell that to Phil Hiatt. Over his first 59 PA’s in MLB, he hit .309/.339/.509 (.848 OPS). Over his career, he ended up hitting .216/.278/.367 (.645 OPS).
I’m not saying Perez is going to end up hitting like Hiatt or that Perez will never be a decent hitter. But Matt is right that 65 PA’s don’t prove anything either way, regardless of how well or poorly a player performs over that period.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 30, 2011 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Ladies And Gentlemen
The inimitable stylings of Mr. Tony Pena, Jr..
2007- 536 PAs .267 .284 .356 .640
Need I say more?
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 30, 2011 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
zing!1!!!1
i love this stuff. keep it coming!!!!
by billexgordler on Aug 29, 2011 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions
For a guy who gets so upset about people being negative and snarky
you rarely post anything except negative and snarky comments about people being negative and snarky.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 29, 2011 11:11 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
I find that comment about cycles being "Vicious"
To be negative and Snarky.
Please tone it down.
"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.
@No respect@
ESPN’s boxscore of the game says “SALVADOR PEREZ AND ALCIDES ESCOBAR OF THE TIGERS HIT BACK-TO-BACK HOME RUNS IN THE TOP OF THE FOURTH INNING.”
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!
by KeepItCopacetic on Aug 29, 2011 11:06 PM EDT reply actions
Every game thats played at this point
Only increases the snub that was done to Gordon not making the All-Star team.
5.7 WAR going into tonight, 13th best in baseball and could easily be in the top 10 with another game like tonight’s.
but it was cool to see Crow sitting on the bench.
"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.
well, they had to make a choice being pushing him or Francoeur
They chose Frenchy. We don’t have access to their incremental scouting knowledge, so who are we to say they made the wrong choice?
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Aug 29, 2011 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions
infinitesimally incremental
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Aug 30, 2011 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
more evidence that all star games being used as HOF criteria is complete bunk
not that alex is a HOF’er, just the idea that the all star game matters at all. oh wait, it determines home field advantage in the championship series of the whole season, nevermind.
by BeauJackson on Aug 29, 2011 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions
OT: Barcelona 5, Villarreal 0
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
I know nothing about soccer abroad, but Arsenal giving up 8 goals did catch my attention.
Are they really that bad, or was that just some odd sort of fluke?
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!
by KeepItCopacetic on Aug 29, 2011 11:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Man U absolutely tore them to shreds, it was embarrasing
Arsenal had a PK shot to tie it at 1 around the 23rd? minute and Van Persie made a terrible attempt. then the floodgates opened wide, it was a clinic. Arsenal isn’t that bad either, should be a top 5 finisher this year.
by BeauJackson on Aug 30, 2011 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions
As much as I hate the money imbalance in baseball
I always felt like the Premier league was the league that they could point too and say, “at least we aren’t as bad as them”.
Frankly I can’t imagine cheering for any team other than one of the top 5 or 6 simply because financially there’s no way any other team can compete.
"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.
that is a problem, i agree.
i couldn’t imagine being a bolton wanderers or wolves fan. then again, most of the time i get the same response when i tell people i’m a royals fan.
by BeauJackson on Aug 30, 2011 12:54 AM EDT up reply actions
What's the Royals?
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 1:48 AM EDT up reply actions
I imagine finding a close equivalent might be a challenge
because of the promotion/relegation system?
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!
by KeepItCopacetic on Aug 30, 2011 2:53 AM EDT up reply actions
It's largely the same teams getting promoted and relegated over and over
Teams like Aston Villa have been in the Premier League since its founding, but have never been close to the championship.
No,
simply what’s the Royals? I don’t know what they are.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 2:54 AM EDT up reply actions
I had a dream I forgot.
It was the happiest I’ve ever been.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 2:58 AM EDT up reply actions
What you lack in coherence
You make up in poetry
(it was more the blank stare that I've gotten from people who didn't know where the Royals played or who they were, but whatever)
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 3:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Ah
Like if someone tells you they’re a fan of “Aye-ox.” Even if you’re one of the Americans who knows Ajax is the best team in Dutch football, it’s hard to place that pronunciation with that word, especially with a foreign accent layered over top.
But I was mostly mimicking responses from people who are barely even casual sports fans
sincerely not know what the Royals were. It’s happened. More than once.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 4:11 AM EDT up reply actions
I think this sentence pretty much sums it up
Of the 45 clubs to have competed since the inception of the Premier League in 1992, four have won the title.
And that includes Blackburn Rovers’ early win before the money really got out of control.
Only 59 teams have competed in the Spanish First Division
which was founded in 1929. Only nine of those teams have won the title. Real Madrid has won 31 times and FC Barcelona has won 21. Three of the nine have only won once and a fourth only won twice.
Since the 1984-85 season, either Barcelona or Real Madrid has won every season except four: one title for Atlético de Madrid, one for Deportivo de la Coruña, and two for Valencia. (The Depor-Valencia victories occurred during a down spell for Barça circa 2000-03.)
Español has played in the First Division for 76 seasons. They have never finished higher than third. That’s even worse than the Cubs, who have been to a couple of World Series since 1908 and therefore have at least had the pleasure of coming in second.
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
And, get this, ten of the 59 teams have since folded
and one of them has changed from the Spanish to the Moroccan football league (northern Morocco was a Spanish colony until 1956).
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
I am a huge Liverpool fan, so I hope that they kick Man U's asses in a couple of weeks.
I'm a 14 year old freshman in high school with a love for all things Royals and Packers.
I thought La Liga wasn't playing yet
Because players paychecks were bouncing or something like that.
they missed the first weekend due to backpay owed being demanded
turns out the owners owed players around 50M. its been cleared up now and the games missed were re-scheduled
by BeauJackson on Aug 30, 2011 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Yep. We got League. Adiós strike.
Note: I’m not sure why they call it La Liga in English. La Liga refers to the entire Spanish Football League, including all the various divisions all the way down to Second Regional. Barcelona and Fake Madrid play in the Primera División, the First Division. That said, it is true that the team that wins 1st Division is said to have “won the League.”
A whole bunch of teams are going to go broke pretty soon.
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
b/c we're lazy when it comes to pronouncing foreign words
If the Spaniards want us to call it First Division, then they better come up with a shorter word than Primera for First – We call the French and Italian leagues by their proper names (Ligue Un, and Serie A) because they’re mono-syllabic.
"Primera" isn't that hard to say
Kind of rolls off the tongue, actually.
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
How about this
Calling the First Division “La Liga” is like calling the Premier League “The Football League.”
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
Interesting
I always thought it meant reduce to one tenth. Reducing by one tenth doesn’t seem like the sort of serious destruction that modern use of decimate connotes.
If you'd like to take the third definition from dictionary (dot) com,
then yes.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Not surprisingly, Verlander was selected for decimation, the Royals left Scherzer and Betemit
alive.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Aug 30, 2011 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
It's reduce BY one-tenth
As y’all know, it was a punishment for a Roman legion that showed cowardice in battle: one in ten of them were condemned to death by lot.
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
In terms of etymology yes,
It has obviously taken on a much broader definition as time has passed and Latin has been forgotten.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 30, 2011 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I'll agree that in informal sports English
“decimate” has come to mean “wallop, massacree, stomp, pound, clobber, crush, and/or beat the living shit out of.” Gotta be a descriptivist when usage is all going that way. But the origin is still important.
I still don’t like “journeyman.” It means a skilled worker who gets paid by the day, and who is not a guild master, and it’s derived from French “journée” rather than English “journey,” which originally meant something you did in a day, a day’s work or a day’s travel.
It’s been transferred to baseball as “a mediocre player who hangs on long enough to play for several different teams,” but that doesn’t mean I ain’t gonna bitch about it.
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
Maybe Vagabond Would
Be more appropriate.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 30, 2011 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Reading about the history of the word makes more sense
A reduction by 10 percent is pretty devastating to a military unit — I believe 50 percent casualties are considered to reduce effectiveness by 100%. A decimation would be a very serious punishment for a unit that was soon to return to battle.
But when the word moves beyond the military, it moves into contexts where a 10% reduction just isn’t that devastating. In one way or another, the word is going to have to change meanings as it moves into sports or politics or other contexts — either it’s going to have to stop meaning a 10% reduction or it’s going to have to stop meaning serious damage. In the sentence “Over the last week, the Indians decimated the Tigers lead in the Central” decimate can’t have its original meaning because a 10% reduction in a lead just isn’t that significant.
Yeah, I’ll agree that in informal sports English "decimate" has come to mean "wallop, massacree, stomp, pound, clobber, crush, and/or beat the living shit out of." Gotta be a descriptivist when usage is all going that way. But the origin is still important.
Isn’t it true that the primary dictionary definitions of decimate are about destroying or almost destroying and that the historical meaning of killing 1 in 10 is somewhere further down the list? I don’t think it’s just a sports thing. I think it’s a language thing. Language evolves. The meanings of words change over time. By now the historical definition of decimate has become archaic.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 30, 2011 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions
You're going all the way descriptivist
(that is, what native speakers really say is the “correct” form of the language), rather than prescriptivist (there are a set of rules that are “correct” and must be followed, no matter whether nobody really talks that way). I lean toward descriptivist, as a linguistics rather than philology guy. But I’ve got enough philologist in me that I still don’t like the current usage of “journeyman.”
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
Are dictionary definitions descriptivist or prescriptivist?
Wouldn’t a dictionary’s definitions be the very epitome of vocabulary rules that are “correct” and must be followed?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 30, 2011 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Depends on the dictionary
There have actually been long, drawn-out debates over this. Generally, I think an American dictionary would tag as informal the sports usage of “decimate” and “journeyman.” They would, however, include them.
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
But what about the common, everyday usage of "decimate"
I think the most common usages of decimate are to kill or destroy a large portion of something. This can be used in sport, but is more often used in some other context. I think that’s how dictionaries tend to describe the word. I think that’s the primary definition, with killing one-tenth being strictly an historical/antiquated/obsolete usage.
Here are some quick dictionary definitions of decimate I found on the internet:
Dictionary.com
dec·i·mate /ˈdɛsəˌmeɪt/ Show Spelled
[des-uh-meyt] Show IPA
–verb (used with object), -mat·ed, -mat·ing.
1. to destroy a great number or proportion of: The population was decimated by a plague.
2. to select by lot and kill every tenth person of.
3. Obsolete . to take a tenth of or from.
World English Dictionary
decimate (ˈdɛsɪˌmeɪt)
— vb
1. to destroy or kill a large proportion of: a plague decimated the population
2. (esp in the ancient Roman army) to kill every tenth man of (a mutinous section)
dec·i·mat·eddec·i·mat·ing
Miriam Webster Online
Definition of DECIMATE
transitive verb
1: to select by lot and kill every tenth man of
2: to exact a tax of 10 percent from <poor as a decimated Cavalier — John Dryden>
3a : to reduce drastically especially in number b : to cause great destruction or harm to
Cambridge Dictionaries Online
decimate
verb /ˈdes.ɪ.meɪt/ v [T usually passive] Definition
to kill a large number of something, or to reduce something severely
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 30, 2011 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I dunno
Dictionary.com’s #2 usage is: “to select by lot and kill every tenth person of.”
World English Dictionary’s #2 usage is : “(esp in the ancient Roman army) to kill every tenth man of (a mutinous section).”
Merriam-Webster’s #1 usage is: “to select by lot and kill every tenth man of.”
Agreed, these dictionaries also admit something like “to cause great destruction to,” meaning that the prescriptivists (conservatives) accept that the meaning’s broadened, while maintaining the older meaning from the Roman army, showing that the descriptivists haven’t taken over the asylum yet.
"When asked who was responsible for his going down in flames
He pointed to the offices and said 'You all know their names'
So hurry home early, hurry, let's go
Boom Boom Mazzaro's facing Robby Canó" --Not Warren Zevon
Yes, it appears that the older meaning is included along side a newer, more commonly used meaning. Long story short, I think both are acceptable usages. I’d bet the OED has the newer meaning included in its definition of “decimate” and not as “informal” or “slang.” But I wouldn’t bet a large sum of money.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 30, 2011 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions
The OED, FWIW
Lists Decimate as follows (paraphrasing):
1. To exact a tenth of, as in tithe.
2. To divide into tenths, divide decimally
3. The Roman military sense
4. To destroy or remove a large proportion of, to subject to severe loss, slaughter, or mortality
It lists #4 as “rhetorical”.
Edgar knows best.
It also
Has examples of #4 going back 350 years. So it is clearly not a modern thing.
Edgar knows best.
I didn't think my input would get much attention.
The word decimate just reminded me of a Monk episode where he applied for a job as a magazine editor and explaind to his interviewer that decimate was perhaps not the word that should have been used in an article.
The young Royals got a little love from MLB Network
They said they’d love to see the Giants pitching staff added to the young royals hitters. That would be quite a sight.
I dare say we'd love that too
Heck, we could have had Lincecum instead of Hoch.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
I find it difficult to visualize Lincecum playing for any team other than SF.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!
by KeepItCopacetic on Aug 30, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
one day Seattle will overpay for him.
Just kidding! But he is from Washington so I could see him being there at some point in his career, maybe waaaaayyyy later
SBN's most random and mysterious lurker guy who posts too much
Follow me on Twitter if you want: Lum_SM
by Lum on Aug 30, 2011 10:45 AM EDT via iPhone app 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
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- 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
