With the trade deadline looming and the continued pursuit of the roster/organization on everyone's mind  it's worthwhile to take a look at the moves Dayton Moore has already made. Part I takes a look at how the position players with the big club. Stay tuned for Part II (big league pitchers) and Part III (minor leaguers).

It was 2006, Lebanon and Israel were doing their thing, FEMA did a "heckuva job" in New Orleans and the Royals were supposedly beginning an era of competence (as per Posnanski after Opening Day) thanks to a bizarre December spending spree that brought in Mark Grudzielanek, Doug Mientkiewicz, Joe Mays, Paul Bako and Reggie Sanders. (Vintage RR posts here and here.) Meanwhile, the franchise was a full season behind the Beltran trade and preparing for the Jackson County Stadium Tax Subsidy Vote. In a stunning coincidence, Bud Selig "promised" Kansas City an All-Star game pending a proper allocation of JC's limitless public monies.

To a surprising extent, the 2006 lineup, as Moore more or less inherited it, remains the 2008 edition. You can find good teams that have had more turnover than this:

The 2006 Royals went 62-100.

You can quibble with some of these slots as they are crudely defined here -- for example, I'm considering Gathright a bench player in the table above, although he's actually played more innings in CF than anyone else -- but for quick and dirty purposes these are the positions according to the organizational masterplan for the two seasons. As in Gathright's case, for some of the players "bench" may not be quite the right label, but more or less it works, and I've included only the additional players who logged significant playing time.

What stands out is how much holdover there has been. Three of the positions are exactly the same, although perhaps not without some controversy. Buck is still the primary catcher, Grudzielanek is still at second base and DeJesus is still in center. Moreover, Mark Teahen remains an everyday fixture in the lineup, although he's shifted from third base to the outfield, and Esteban German is still a utility player. When you factor in that Alex Gordon and Billy Butler, lineup cornerstones if everything goes well, are also Baird-era draftees, the 2008 lineup remains a very Allard creation.

Subjectively and intuitively, the 2008 edition should be better than their 2006 progenitor: the holdovers (Buck, Teahen, DeJesus) should be hitting their peaks, Emil Brown has been upgraded to Jose Guillen and a decline-phase Mike Sweeney has been converted to supposed prospect and pure hitter Billy Butler. Miguel Olivo is a huge upgrade over Paul Bako. Unfortunately, the sum of their parts just hasn't quite added up to being much more better than the Minky era. The 2006 team ended up averaging 4.67 runs per game, better than the current squad's 4.06 average.

Huh?

To start, the holdovers, DeJesus somewhat excepted, have failed to truly break out. Grudz and German are still around and are, as the man sang, still the same. We wait still on Gordon and Butler to truly arrive. Seemingly really easy upgrades at SS and 1B have turned into, umm... Tony Pena Jr. and Ross Gload. This bears repeating. Just find someone better than the worst overall player in the game (Berroa) and one of the weakest first basemen (Minky). He couldn't do it. Where have you gone Doug Mientkiewicz? Jose Guillen has had one insanely awesome month and two bad ones. Finally, although Miguel Olivo has out-hit Paul Bako, Dayton Moore's first big league pickup, Joey Gathright, has eaten up a ton of playing time over the last three seasons and consistently failed to hit. In 237 plate appearances this year, Gator has three extra-base hits. Three. In 248 last year, he had eight. Gains like the Bako/Olivo and the Brown/Guillen exchanges have been mitigated by players like Gathright.

Over the last few months there's been a persistent meme that Moore is focused on rebuilding -- really, "building" should be used throughout this post, since it was so long ago that anything around here was actually built -- the organization's pitching coffers, and that the lineup will be more of a patchwork project. And while it isn't yet clear that the team's lineup core is actually enough of one to bother building around, it was certainly more than there was among the hurlers. Sure, in 2008, Butler and Gordon are disappointments, but they are near locks to improve, at least a little bit. There are problems however, and Moore is not immune criticism for his utter failure to upgrade the roster at two slots, SS and 1B, that looked to be no-brainer/any AAA lifer would have been better. He hasn't found better bench options than what Allard managed in Stairs/Costa/Graffy and it's possible he's done worse.

Lastly, there's the large but mysterious issue of defense. The quality of the team's defense is harder to definitively pin-down, but according to BP's defensive efficiency data, the 2008 squad is, relative to competition, an improvement. Then again, the 2006 team was terrible, posted a D-Eff of .682, good for 28th best in baseball and 13th in the AL. The current team stands at 19th overall and 9th in baseball. (Although the pure number, .698, is not much different.) So regarding defense, Moore has taken a terrible team and produced a below-average one.

The Royals hired Moore on May 31, 2006 and after over two years of his stewardship, the offense is worse than the bad one he inherited.  Considering that he also had nothing to do with Butler or Gordon, and with no notable position prospects in the system, we must conclude that Dayton's handling of the position players in blue and white has been akin to Argentina's performance in the Falklands War: at best, a disappointment, and at worst an abject failure.

This morning, over oatmeal and blueberry pancakes, Royals Review breakfasted with longtime blogger Royals Review at the Royals Review Midwestern-Eastern Headquarters on South Bass Island in Lake Erie.

The last time we did this the 2007 season was just getting started. What has changed since then?

Interesting question. My sense is you should have saved this one for last, since it really gets to the heart of much of my angst at the moment. Since the start of that season, some nice things have happened, specifically with the pitching staff. We've discovered that Joakim Soria and Brian Bannister can be significant contributors, we've seen Zack Greinke not only return to baseball, but become an above-average pitcher and, although it is early I suppose, we've seen Dayton Moore show some good skill in putting together bullpens. Oh, and the Meche signing turned out OK, although I really don't enjoy actually watching Meche pitch. So there has been some positive development, and beneath the surface the minor league system is slowly getting better. On the other hand, I didn't really like Ross Gload and Joey Gathright fourteen months ago, and through all the ups and downs, I still don't. I didn't think Tony Pena Jr. was very good then, and I don't now. Worse, I'm probably less excited about David DeJesus and Mark Teahen and John Buck than I was then. Alex Gordon is still decidedly not setting the league afire, and Billy Butler didn't either.

So overall...

So overall, it feels like we've hit another lull. If you think of getting to the playoffs as a cross-country drive -- let's say New York to Los Angeles -- then really all that's happened is that we think we have a car that will make it. Currently, we're still somewhere in Pennslyvania. Eastern Pennslyvania.

How far is this car going to make it?

I would say not past the boundaries of the Royals Radio Network. I think we die in the Rockies.

Why don't you trust Dayton Moore?

Why should I? I'm not trying to be difficult. I just...

You already mentioned the Bannister trade, and the snagging of Soria, and the Meche deal. And look at how well Miguel Olivo is doing, and Ramon Ramirez and on and on.

Yes, we now have two #3 starters, a three-innings a week closer, and a good option at catcher.

You do understand how bad the Royals were when he took over?

No, I just blogged about them for three years without noticing that. To go back the main point -- whether or not I trust Dayton Moore -- let's simply ask ourselves "why?" Why should I trust him, or to put it less creepily, why should I trust him to get the Royals into the post-season? Here's the information that I have to work with: a) "baseball people" love him, in this category we can include somewhat useful nuggets like the dalliance with the Red Sox (positive) and the anonymous quotes in Jayon Stark articles (not so much) then we have b) a handful of good moves he's made. That's it. For the Royals to reach the playoffs, he doesn't just have to be a good GM, he has to be a great one. And I just don't see how anyone can truly say that is a certain thing. As a fan, you have to have a certain amount of trust and I think your life is easier if you have in the back of your head that you've got a smart guy running things, but how can we say that now?

Well, would you rather have Allard back?

No, but that isn't the issue. In the last few days, I've started to think about this in a different way... maybe from a more psychological perspective. Think about it this way, lets say you have wanted to be a wedding planner for years. Years. You've worked in the industry, you've served as an assistant and you've been around weddings for a long time. But you've never been the guy. Then, you get hired to handle a major wedding. Major.

Yes...

So those first few decisions you make are probably going to be inspired, even brilliant. Years ago you discovered this cool little florist no one knew about, and you discovered this way of folding invitations that no one else was doing and you met a wonderful flower girl at another wedding, and within a week, you've made all those moves. The wedding industry is impressed and your clients are giddy. The only problem is, you're now out of ideas, and the material you have to work with, in this case, your clients and their preferences, are actually really really lame. Everyone still loves the paper fold you suggested, but now you're starting to get push-back from the familes about what you've setup as the dinner at the reception. Eager and confident, maybe over-confident, you've set the menu as lamb and goose. You keep explaining to people that this is very traditional, but...

I don't quite follow.

My point is, Dayton's first few moves were bound to be brilliant. They were probably the result of years of dreaming and observation. Who knows when he first noticed something about Brian Bannister or when he first made a little mental note about Soria. It's like why so many first albums and first novels are so much better than the next one, because the band spent ten years making the first album and ten months making the second. The bad thing, and what I think gets overlooked, is that Dayton's first flurry of moves also had some major misses: TPJ, Joey Gathright, extending Gload, extending Grudz, etc. There's also been a predictable reluctance to admit that some moves haven't worked, or even, more frighteningly, a blindness to failures. As in the Pena situation.

Where do you put Hillman in this wedding analogy?

Oh, he's the lamb and goose at the reception, or at least part of that.

That bad?

Well, lamb and goose, as long as there are some good sides and an open bar, might actually be kinda fun. It's certainly different, at least superficially. On the other hand, goose isn't much different from chicken, and lamb, isn't much different from beef. I am not a fan of Hillman, no. But honestly, he's just a guy. The baserunning silliness looks like it's slowing down, which is good, but the bullpen management remains uninspiring. As I wrote at the time of the hiring, the important thing is not so much what Hillman does in-game, but rather, what his philosophy reflects about what Dayton thinks is important, or what Dayton wants. Playing Whiteyball with this roster is stupid, but its even stupider if Dayton decides that what he needs to do is reshape the roster to fit Hillman's wishes.

You don't want Whiteyball?

No. Not unless the K goes back to artificial turf, along with half the other ballparks. Here's the thing: everyone gets a little silly about this stuff. Show me a team that supposedly won because of being small-ball-tastic and great on the basepaths and I'll show you a team that had a Top 5 pitching staff. It's really that simple. But for some reason there's this impulse to over-value the offensive side of the equation with those teams, even though that isn't how they are winning. It also works in reverse: since I live in Cleveland now, I just finished watching a four game set between the Tigers and Tribe. I couldn't tell you how many times I heard the Cleveland TV and radio guys go on about how bad the Tiger offense has been and how inconsistent and stationary they are. Here's the thing: the Tigers are losing because their pitching has collapsed. It isn't even really complicated, but extreme power lineups always operate on a short-leash with the baseball media.

I wanted to ask you about another player that you somewhat dismissed before. David DeJesus is hitting .296/.352/.429, why aren't you excited about him anymore?

Because he has already done that. He was a tick better in 2006 (.295/.364/.446). David is a tough guy for me to appreciate at this point, even though two years ago I really loved his game. It's hard coming to the realization that people are who they are and that they won't be getting better. But you're right, he's nicely bounced back. Which is more than can be said for Teahen, who's a similar case.

Do you have a favorite Royal?

No, not really. I don't think you really follow the game that way when you are an adult. I do have guys that I kinda have an extra-non-fandom of, but I still root for them because they are Royals. I like Jimmy Gobble because he's been around for so long and because I can remember writing about him on my first blog, back in 2004. I like Soria because he's awesome.

What about Alex Gordon?

Would it be impolite to say I'm disappointed? In over 800 big league PAs he's a .253/.322/.408 hitter. He is 24 years old, so he's right on the hinge between still being young and being in his prime. Look at his comparables on his baseball-reference page and tell me how I should feel. Whatever it is that we expected he'd be... we may have to give up those dreams. Fortunately, this is an experience that most of us should be familiar with.

What is one move you would make, or that, you wish Dayton would make?

I get asked that a lot, often as a kind of rebuke to my criticisms, but I don't really think it matters what I think. You should ask Jim Hendry that question. The Royals aren't one-move away, they're 20 moves away.

How do you feel about this season so far?

The Royals are 25-40 and have the second worst record in baseball now, which wasn't what I expected. I don't think anyone is happy about whats happened in the last month and a half. The question is: what is the relevant information before us?

What do you mean?

First, is the record relevant? Now most of us predicted -- myself included -- that the Royals would be something like an 78-80 win team. There was actually a frightening consensus about this, at least among Royals people. Well... it doesn't look like that is going to happen. If people viewed this season as an incremental step towards contention, I'd have to say, so far, that looks wrong. There's one line of thought that argues that you have to be a 80 win team before you can be a 90 win team, and if the Royals haven't even reached that level yet, then we're still very far from anything interesting. If the Royals end up winning 70 games instead of 80, we'll have to decide how meaningful that is, which in many ways goes to the second point. Namely, the players. Now you could say, look at the Rays, they seem to have skipped the 78 win step and could easily be a contender deep into the season and for years to come. What worries me, and has worried me since last season, is that the Royals are not overflowing with guys who figure to get much better. I don't think Banny is getting better. I don't think Meche is getting better. I don't think Buck/Teahen/Gload/DeJesus/Gathright/Guillen/Olivo are getting better. So that leaves us waiting on Gordon and Butler and a few pitchers to be named later to carry the Royals to contention in 2009 and 2010. I don't know if that can happen.

So was this your expectation?

It depends on how closely you focus the microscope. Individually, obviously the expectations are all over the place, and those change constantly anyway. Guillen was a disappointment in April, a hero in June, etc. I am more disappointed in the offense more than anything else, which I thought would be mediocre. The pitching is mediocre, despite an early tease that it would be incredible. It isn't and it hasn't been since tax day. We're slowly morphing back into the same old Royals, a team that truly has no strength.

Do you think the Royals can compete in 2009?

They should be competing now! A .500 team would be in... I'm not going to look this up... second-place in this division? But no, I don't know about 2009. Then again, the division has taken such a bizarre turn with Detroit and Cleveland faltering, it's hard to say. One of the things you have to fight against is an expectation that every team follows an inevitable arch to contention. Lots of teams don't. They just stay bad for years and years. They cycle through players, have a few youth movements, get slightly better, then fall back again. I always point to the late-90s Twins, who got all the way back to just short of .500, then collapsed again and had to completely start over. There first attempt at building through the system wasn't good enough, and by the time the won the division again (when it was much much weaker, I should add) basically Brade Radke was the only guy who was still around.

I have a user-submitted question about makes you more upset, Justin Huber or Jenna Fischer's ex-husband?

Both had happy endings. In a way, Huber's sojourn to San Diego has been a blessing, I get to follow Padres games now.

So many of your responses seem to be negative. Did I pick a bad time to interview you?

Maybe, considering last night's disaster. You have to remember though, I am probably a very negative and pessimistic person. That's really just my temperament with most things I 'd say.

How is Royals Review going?

Do you mean you? Or me personally? Or the website?

Umm... the website I guess. Royals Review is a greybeard now.

It's never been better. That being said, this could be a contentious summer if the team keeps playing poorly. It's pretty amazing, and terrifying, to think that RR celebrated its third birthday this May, not that I celebrated or anything. Most blogs die just because people realize no one is reading them, which can be very painful, not because it's an inherently challenging thing to do. The site pretty much runs itself now, thanks to the size and strength of the community. I hated the new site layout and design at first, but have come to love it, which is predictable I guess. And beyond that, you always want to write more and better, or wish that you had. That stays constant.

Do you think the auto-interview went well?

That I cannot say. Thank you for having me.

Thank you.

The Royals finished April with a 12-15 record and ended the fifth month of the year with a 22-34 mark (now 23-34). Considering the month contained the team's epic losing streak, an overall record of 10-19 in May wasn't a total disaster, and could have been much worse.

Let's take a look at how the boys in blue did at the plate in May. First, the team totals:

101 runs is actually not last in the league, it's tied for 11th. The Angels also scored 101 (in one fewer game) and the Mariners and Indians were worse, scoring 99 and 98 runs respectively, as the new deadball era sweeps across the American League. Despite the advantage of the DH, scoring in the American League is lower than in the NL, which of course can 100% be attributed to PEDs testing. 100%. Everyone who used PEDs was a hitter in the AL. Moving on... The Royals only hit 12 homers in May, which is remarkable. Not surprisingly, no team in the AL was anywhere close to this number, as the league average was 24 homers.It isn't anything like a full consolation, but the Royals did rip 65 doubles in May, second-most in the American League. Weirdly, the Royals continue to not hit triples, despite having some decent triplers getting regular playing time. They hit just 2 in May. Then again, no one ever got poor betting against Joey Gathright's extra base hit totals.

Speaking of Gathright, now about those individual numbers, sorted by OPS:

This is how you have a bad month. For a guy who probably won't be in the Major Leagues in 2010, Tony Pena Jr. has generated a ton of discussion this month, but he isn't standing alone in the forest of horribleness. Considering defensive value and where they play, it's certain that Ross Gload (another Dayton pickup) was the worse player in May, and Alberto Callaspo wasn't far behind. You can say the same for Billy Butler, who slugged .302 with no value on defense.

Other than Miguel Olivo's studliness and a decent month from Jose Guillen (characteristically a lack of walks drags down his performance, even when he's hitting over .300) nobody else stepped into the void. Although Gordon (and Teahen) continued to get his walks and John Buck tossed in his annual random month of hitting .300, there isn't much good displayed here. (Expect a .210 average from Buck in June.)

Pitching numbers will be up tomorrow.

Last night was apparently one hell of a game to miss. I remember, while watching the Celtics-Pistons post-game, seeing the final score on the ESPN Bottomline and saying something to the effect of "that stinks." It looked like it had turned out to be a close slugfest, one that, given it went into extra innings, could have gone either way. It was only when "KC Greinke - 8.1 IP, 3 ER" scrolled across the bottom of the screen that I began to suspect that it had been a painful loss, and even then I really didn't know until I checked the box score this morning. ESPN, as everyone here knows, would prefer to show the Red Sox failing to hit Erik Bedard all night than show Twins-Royals highlights. However, I think that might be a good thing in this particular case. Anyhow, the "earned run" tag meant I had no idea exactly how much the Royals had been leading by going into the ninth. Of course, that Greinke was still in the game indicated that they had been leading, and so my first thought was that Soria had actually had a bit of a meltdown.

Of course, that's not the way it went. You all know as well as I know what happened in the ninth inning last night, with Ramon Ramirez getting singled out of the game and giving way to the now-thoroughly dejected Joel Peralta.

One thing that would not change this night, though, was the despair felt by Peralta -- not for himself, he said, but because he let his teammates down.

"I won't sleep tonight, for sure," he said.

Yes, that definitely sound like a pitcher who gave two home runs in the span of three betters to heavily contribute to what I have little doubt will be the Royals most memorable loss of the year. I should make it clear I'm not attempting to get everyone blaming manager Trey Hillman rather than Peralta by evoking pathos, as I find it hard to blame Hillman for Peralta not being able to get Craig Monroe out. Really, with Nunez now hurting, and with Soria having pitched two games in a row, the decision last night came down to Mahay, Peralta, Yabuta, or keeping Ramon Ramirez in the game. Ramirez wasn't pitching well, so it's easy to see why Hillman turned elsewhere. Yabuta has a 6.00 ERA with no good peripherals. Craig Monroe historically hits lefties better than righties, to the tune of more power and a better OBP. Ron Mahay is left-handed, so assuming Soria wasn't ready to go, Peralta was left as the best choice for a high leverage situation. He blew it, he knows, let's move on.

We've already discussed this game at length, anyway. I'm just pointing this out because I've been critical of Trey, and others here have been a lot more critical of our fearless leader, but I don't think he takes the fall for the ninth inning. You can, as loyal2sdad pointed out, make an argument that Hillman should have just pitched either Peralta or Ramirez through the whole inning. You can also wonder why Greinke was allowed to start the inning with such a high pitch count and a 5-run lead. But either way, it's speculation that really isn't an indictment of the moves that were really made. If we all want something to complain about in regard to Hillman, it's much more debatable whether Peralta should have remained in to pitch to Justin Morneau with Mahay on the roster. Or the Gload in the outfield thing.

But I didn't write this whole thing to bury Hillman anyway. I didn't write to praise him either, because this entire team is in a funk that you usually only see once a year. If you want the bare bones consolation, we will probably go the entire year without the Royals ever playing this badly for this long. Feel better? Yeah, me neither. Maybe I'll just shut up about last night and get to the stuff I really wanted to touch on.

Notes on the Red Sox-Royals Series

Thanks to the heroic intervention of the MLB Extra Innings package, very soon I'll have the opportunity to follow more KC games without having to enlist the highlight reels and gameday. However, the four game set between the Red Sox and the Royals allowed me for the first time this year to actually see more than one Royals game in a row. It was pretty cool despite the obviously disappointing results. And yes, they were disappointing. Those of you who have been on this blog for awhile are well aware of my "split loyalties," but I was really hoping that the series would be a split so both "my teams" could have their moments. Well, I suppose I don't feel that bad that the Red Sox kind of beat up the Royals now that the Royals are getting beat up by everyone, if that makes sense to anyone. Anyhow, I have other places to go in this article, so onto the stuff that I jotted down during the series:

1. The improvements that Alex Gordon has made over last year were evident through the entire series, during which he was one of the few Royals offensive players who distinguished themselves. He looked more patient, more comfortable, and more disciplined than when I got to see him play last year.
2. Gil Meche looked as if he was starting to get turned around, K'ing 9 over seven innings and taking the hard luck loss in the second game of the series. Say what you will about the opposing points of view in the field of pitch count general pitcher workload research, but I think that poor Meche was suffering from a 200-inning, high-pitch count hangover that seems to finally be clearing up. It's like that time where I drank Ice 101 during finals week and didn't begin to function until approximately 2 PM the next morning. My god, that stuff is evil. Thanks to my friend Buddy, who recommended taking more shots of it than were necessary.
3. Joakim Soria - great man, or greatest man? Even though Soria only appeared in one game...and stuggled with his control...in the rain, I could still see the awesome stuff that he has. I was sitting next to a rather skeptical Red Sox fan during his outing, who made fun of me for saying that Soria had great control because Joakim walked two people in the rain. I had a good chuckle when Soria escaped the jam and then Mike Timlin struggled with his control and walked one in the rain on his way to creating his own save situation in the ninth. Funny stuff.
4. Contrary to whenever I saw him in the "highlights" earlier in the year, Jose Guillen had his timing down and more closely resembled the decent power hitter he's been in the past. You know this, but the difference was clearly visible.
5. Brett Tomko is not a victim of bad luck when it comes to his hittablility. After seeing his stuff, I don't think he's got enough to keep his BABIP at league average. I just bring this up because, other than his H/9, he looks like he is underperforming his peripheral numbers. After seeing how mediocre his stuff is, I don't think he's playing by the "normal" .290-.300 BABIP rule.
6. Billy Butler is sitting too far back in his stance, and almost never seems to get his weight forward into his swings. I know I'm not a scout, but it's odd to see a man that muscular trying to fight off pitch after pitch. In any case, he's a data point against the pitching coach. He looked completely lost in the Sox-Royals series.
7. Ross Gload is done. He doesn't look capable of hitting major league pitching. His numbers are terrible, and he's older than you think.
8. Leo Nunez and Ramon Ramirez both looked impressive in their outings. It's hard to believe that Nunez has come full circle and become a very good reliever, but he has. Ramirez looks like a good find, as if you look at his line in 2006 he was quite good before getting hurt last year.

Continue reading this post »

A brainchild of Royals Review reader "daveyork", the Mark Quinn Award is given annually to the most disappointing Royal hitter. Last season, Ryan Shealy, the preseason favorite, took home the hardware, thanks to a .221/.286/.308 campaign highlighted by a .113/.186/.208 that served notice that he wasn't messing around.

But to truly be a Quinn candidate, you can't just be bad, you have to truly disappoint when many held high hopes for you. While the Royals have had more than their share of disappointments over the years, it takes a special combination of circumstances to truly be a Quinn candidate. Essentially, you need to quickly rise to glory, then almost immediately fall off the face of the planet. Remember, here's the Mark Quinn career path:

Mark Quinn Through the Years:

1999: .333/.385/.733, 6 HRs (64 PAs)
2000: .294/.342/.488, 20 HRs (535 PAs)
2001: .269/.298/.459, 17 HRs (465 PAs)
2002: .237/.301/.368, 2 HRs (81 PAs)

Quinn peaked at age 26 and played his last Major League game at age 28.

Unfortunately, the composition of the current roster -- a blend of exciting young players and fairly generic veterans -- isn't conducive to the true spirit of the Quinn Award. Mark Grudzielanek, for example, might have a bad year, but he's 500 years old, and we all knew it had to end sometime. No, we were excited by Quinn, who peaked at a time when it seemed like the Royals could just generate hitters indefinitely (this was the Damon/Beltran/Sweeney Era), then completely fell apart.

Nevertheless, the show must go on, so without further ado, Royals Review is proud to announce the 2008 pre-season early-season nominees!

Continue reading this post »

The most anticipated Royals season since 2004 begins, weather permitting, tomorrow afternoon in Detroit. The odd thing is, while almost everyone is excited about 2008, no one seems too hopeful that the Royals can actually compete, just yet. It's an odd dynamic that speaks to some long-term faith in Dayton Moore and the young players on the roster, as well as the extremely low expectations of a beaten down fanbase. This tenuously balanced bit of patient optimism could make the 2008 campaign something like a leisurely pleasure cruise, with random individual performances and patches of good play appearing like spots of scenery -- oh, look, there's a great start by Greinke, oh neat, we swept the Twins this weekend -- or it might evaporate quickly, as the on-field product pales in comparison to the way it appeared in the ballfields of the mind this off-season.

Continue reading this post »

I was an awesome singles hitter in little league, as practically everyone was. You see, back then all you had to do to get a hit on the score was hit the ball not directly at a fielder and you had about a ninety percent chance of it getting through or beating the lollipop throw. Some kids have already learned how to drive the ball a bit in little league, but barely anyone knows how to field. There was about one pitcher in our league out of six that we faced that could get through a game without walking more than he struck out. It was definitely a hitter's league, and my last year on the little league field I hit .536. I couldn't tell you what my OBP was, but just to brag I'm going to write that it had to be at least .650. Slugging average? Not so much, but I was good.

A funny thing happens to you, though, when your average gets above .500. I realized, twelve years old at the time, that I could go 2-for-4 and my average would go down. 2-for-4 is a pretty gosh darn good day's work, but it was actually below average for me on the season (and god knows how many other players). It struck me as an odd pecularity at the time and, obviously, the memory has stuck with me. For those interested, my Indians defeated the White Sox for the championship that year, sweeping a best two-of-three series from those baseball villains that included my neighbor down the street who had sold out after coming up in the minors with me.

In the majors, you don't have many people hitting .500 these days, so 2-for-4's no longer a good example. You do, however, have players every year who hit .380 for the first month and then see their average decline even when they get a hit in every three at-bats. It's an unwinnable game that way, in that you'll come back to earth even if you hit reasonably well. The flip side of this is the player who starts out his season badly, to the point where a 1-for-4 night raises his pathetic batting average. If we're talking about a player who's sub-.200, one measly bingle in five at-bats can cause a rise.

Then, there's Jason LaRue. Jason could go 1-for-6 in the next game he plays, and his batting average would go up. That's how bad he's been at the plate this season. I know I've brought this up before, but he's managed to hurt the team well above and beyond the impact you can expect from a back-up catcher. LaRue has been--I love typing this--0-for-August. He's 0-for-19 since the month started. At least he avoided not getting on base all month, as he managed a walk against the White Sox on the 22nd. Yippee. Saying "at least he had a walk this month" is like saying "at least that ant is still alive" after an unfortunate insect has been torn in half by a particularly sadistic eight-year-old. It's not much consolation to the ant. Or the Royals.

For those wondering where all of this is going (other than to crow about my little league abilities) NYRoyal's diary below prompted me too examine just how badly of the Royals are compared to the theoretical "league average hitter" team. As all of you know, widely-felt preseason expectation were that this team was going to be pretty good offensively and bad at pitching. That hasn't even come close to being true, as heroes like Gil Meche, Joakim Soria, and Brian Bannister have saved the pitching staff from nigh-certain embarrassment. Meanwhile, the Royals--LaRue being the most extreme example--have flailed at the plate quite a bit this year despite notable improvements over the course by guys like Alex Gordon, Mark Grudzielanek, Billy Butler, and (shrug) Emil Brown. So how do the Royals measure up to the league averages by position?

Catcher LA: .252/.315/.391

John Buck - .226/.316/.459

Jason LaRue - .141/.230/.275

Buddy Bell's self-fulfilled prophecy has, uh, come true. Neither catcher is hitting well right now, but it still should be painfully obvious that Buck has waaaaaaaay more value than LaRue. In fact, even though he's hitting .228, Buck's OBP is one tick above average for AL catchers and his slugging percentage is a nifty 68 points higher. In other words, Buck's secondary skills (power, higher walk rate) are carrying him to the point where he's still above average. Was anyone else surprised to see how low the league average was for American League catchers?

Jason LaRue is terrible at hitting a baseball. No two ways above it.

First Base LA: .270/.348/.446

Ross Gload - .301/.321/.462

Ryan Shealy - .221/.286/.308

Anyone else long for the days where Ryan Shealy was going to be a slugging presence in the middle of the line-up for the Royals? Shealy OPSed nearly 800 in his first go-round with the Royals in 2006, but between injuries and general suckiness, he proved totally incapable of follow his 2006 act. It really was a bit uncanny how bad he was. Get well soon, Ryan, your MLB career depends on it.

For you Ross Gload fans out there, this is me acknowledging that Gload has exploded all the way up to the vicinity of the DH-diluted average line for an AL first basemen (though the loss in OBP hurts more than the gain in power). If he were a guy who played a position up the middle of the diamond, I'd like him. He's not, and the end result is he's logged a lot of playing time at first that hasn't turned out as bad as I would have expected. He's absitively posolutely not the future at first for the Royals, but keeping him around to sub at the corners is fine.

Second Base LA: .282/.339/.413

Mark Grudzielanek - .304/.346/.439

Esteban German - .265/.357/.369

Another fine season for Grudzielanek, as he ends up being a pretty nifty player at second when you factor in his (generally accepted) above average defense. He's outstripped the LA second basemen on all three hitting line fronts as his batting average his risen steadily after a slow start. The lone problem with Grudzielanek is that he has to keep hitting around three hundred to keep this up, and players with his skillset--low walk totals, no speed--can disappear off the map when they get old. No disrespect meant to Mark, of course. He's an oldie, and, for now, he's a goody.

German's batting average is running a little low for him, and so he really hasn't been as good as Grudzielanek to this point in the year. If he gets back up around .280, the Grudzielanek-German celebrity deathmatch needs to be arranged to settle this matter once and for all. In any case, German's been a useful reserve again this year, with a very good walk rate that suggests he could hold down a starting job at second if someone gives him a shot.

Shortstop LA: .270/.323/.394

Tony Pena Jr. - .262/.282/.345

Pena's got just nine walks all year long, which is impatience to the point where it's very very hard for any other skill to compensate for it. Pena's defense has got good, not great, reviews from the jumble of metrics and observers that one is forced to go by when getting into a serious defense evaluation discussion. He's contributed twenty doubles on the year as well, and he probably takes his vitamins and loves his mom. He's still not even close to being a league average shortstop with the bat. There are plenty of things that you can do to compensate for a .282 OBP. Examples include slugging .700, rescuing handicapped orphans from evil villains every morning, firing Joe Morgan from ESPN, feeding an entire third world country, and qualifying for sainthood. Actually the fact of the matter is that even if Pena takes the Mother Teresa life path, it would be hard for me to recommend him to an actual baseball team. He's too old to expect much in the way of improvement. Please pass the Moose Tacos.

Third Base LA: .263/.332/.425

Alex Gordon - .244/.319/.401

Another one where I expected the league average line to be higher, which just goes to show that there are some pretty crappy third basemen lying around. Gordon is not anywhere near as crappy as early in the season, and has broken the .400 mark for his slugging percentage. Amazingly, after hitting about .043 over the first eight months of the season, Gordon is twenty BA points from being almost dead-on league average.

Needless to say, we all expect Alex to be capable of greater things, but it's encouraging that he's managed to do better here in the second half. If there's anything un-obvious that bothers me here, it's that his OBP is hiked up because of HBPs. I asked Alex if he thought that was a repeatable skill, and all he did was smirk knowingly. Here's hoping he's the next Craig Biggio in that regard, because every little bit helps.

AL Left Field LA: .273/.333/.423

Joey Gathright - .347/.404/.388

Needless to say, there's more to this than meets the eye. Gathright, gosh love him for his positive contributions to KC this year, is OPSing thirty-six points above league average. If I was absolutely positive he could replicate his current line over a full season, I'd already have penciled him in as a starter for 2008 with "+" next to his name. He's a speedster who isn't bad in the outfield, and is virtually incapable of hitting for power (.41 IsoP[!]). In other words, he's kind of like good-year Scott Podsednik right now.

Joey's career line, even with this year's 160 PAs, is .269/.335/.320. That's not acceptable from a center fielder, much less a corner outfielder. How much you value Gathright depends on the weight you place on his at-bats this season as compared to the way he's hit in the majors in the past. Given this, it should be pretty unsurprising that I can't take him seriously as a good starting solution for next year. No matter how much you think 2007 represents an improvement for Gathright as opposed to a fluky 160 PAs, you are not going to convince me that he's going to hit .347 every year. Albert Pujols doesn't hit .347 every year. No one does. So, how high do you expect his average to stay once he comes back to earth? That's the question you need to ask if you want to project Gathright's value for next year. If Joey's "true ability" is hitting .305, for example, and you give him credit for his current level of power and patience, he'd hit around .305/.365/.355. Vintage Podzilla, and nowhere near good enough to start in left field and be a plus, but arguably good enough for center. If his true ability is around .285 (sixteen points higher than his career average)...well...it doesn't matter where he plays.

Center Field LA: .270/.333/.424

David DeJesus - .277/.356/.392

Super Joey - .347/.404/.388

NHZ Optimism Joey - .305/.365/.355

NHZ Pessisism Joey - .285/.345/.335

Career Line Joey - .269/.335/.320

Let the argument begin. DeJesus, with his solid hitting, patience approach, and low salary is both one of the Royals most reliable assets and at the same time one of their best trading chips. He doesn't have the "no power" rep that Joey does, and he's not paid much, so it's reasonable to assume that he could bring a pretty good return. The thing is, what with him already signed at below market prices and being a plus with the bat (if definitely not a star), trading him what with the Royals' lack of good bats seems loony when looked at from another angle.

DeJesus is probably a little above league average because twenty-odd points of OBP are worth more than the equivalent SLG points. DeJesus does have some extra base power, with fourty XBH from the lead-off position this year. His past history woudl suggest his BA is a little low right now, but not too low compared to what you expect. It appears that "this" is what he is, as preseason breakout predictions really haven't come true, but he's still a useful player at a key defensive position who you can expect to be at least average with the bat, maybe a little more. To facilitate the whole DeJesus-Gathright match-up, I include the four horsemen of Joey: Super, Optimist NHZ, Pessimist NHZ, and Career Line. Super looks like an improvement on DDJ for sure. Optimist is acceptable but nothing that DDJ can't do better. Pessimist is bad. Career line is worse. I report, you decide. Who's the better option in center next year if DDJ maintains his previous levels of performance?

Right Field LA: .287/.358/.464

Emil Brown - .245/.296/.346

Mark Teahen - .284/.351/.407

Shane "The Pain" Costa - .200/.219/.243

A recent topic on RR was that Emil and his Noodle Bat might be an illusion brought on by lack of playing time, and that Emil might be league average again if he had been allowed to play through his slump the whole way. Even so, even if you up all Brown's percentages by fourty points, his power is down this year and "league average, old, and with bad defense" is not exactly a performance that screams "he's a building block" anyway.

Mark Teahen I somehow forgot about when I initially put this article together, which must have had something to do with him being on the DL. Those familar with Mark's performance this season and his off-season shoulder surgery might have actually expected him to go the disabled left earlier as Teahen's power has been sapped compared to last year when he slugged .517. For now, it is kind of for us to know what to expect from Teahen in 2008, as I think shoulder surgery has both limited his power and upped his k-rate. While I would hesitate to predict Teahen slugging .517 next year, I think he can get back to league average for a RF--820 OPS--with room for improvement. For now, Mark's plate discipline has remained intact, which is encouraging, but he missed the LA slugging line by sixty points. We all like Teahen a lot, I think, but I really hope I'm right about a bounceback next season because a .407 SLG won't help much in a corner spot.

Shane Costa is included her so those so inclined can tell nasty jokes about him behind his back. Costa's performance this year is like a terrible sandwich from McDonald's: the next time around he'll be better, but that doesn't mean there should be a next time around for the McChicken...or for Shane.

Designated Hitter LA: .263/.350/.433

Billy Ray Butler - .295/.352/.436

He'a already a league average DH at age 21, which is yet another way of saying that Billy Ray is going to be a good one. With muscular maturation and experience will come the power he displayed in the minors, and I think I speak for us all when I say that thank god he hasn't been Huberized. Butler should be a very good hitter for a very long time. The only question now is if he can play first well enough to start there, or if he's a career DH. It's not the worst thing in the world to be a career DH.

In Conclusion, We Stink

Naturally, it's not as cut and dried as that. However, if you go by this year's batting lines, Grudzielanek, Gathright, and Butler are the three definite above averages for the Royals. If you read this closely, you know what I think about the chances of Gathright and Grudzielanek repeating their 2007 production next year. DeJesus is probably a little better than league average. Buck is defintely better than average thanks to all his dingers, but LaRue has ruined everything when it comes to catcher (maybe a slight exagerration).

In the end, we're left with a team that needs a healthy dose of power and patience in the line-up next year. For those of you who haven't already done so, I recommend you visit the FA diary by NYRoyal that's on the main page to view which guys you think could fit the bill. By my count, we need a 1B/DH, a corner outfielder (maybe two) who can hit the ball over the fence (preferably one without a BB gun), and a shortstop. Other than that, we're not bad off in the line-up if the young players like Gordon and Butler improve.

Spreadsheet Baseball returns next week but probably not at its regular time due to my return to my institute of higher learning. Sorry for my recent absence; I always get sick when falls sets in and the temperature changes, blah. For this week's edition of SB, comments/questions are welcome/encouraged.

Another blast from the past (a haunting?) on a rainy Thursday. Back in January, I looked at the Top Five Doubles Hitters in the post-Brett Era...

Continuing the life-changing examination of the post-Brett era in Kansas City. This time, with a nod to the problems inherent in taking RsBI very seriously, lets instead look at doubles.

Doubles are interesting because a double is a fairly good play, but, at the same time, a double is also sometimes just a home run that doesn't go as far, or do as much damage. Here are the run expectancies for doubles, or, more properly, for a dude standing on second base:

Run Expectancy for a Dude Standing on Second Base:

Dude on Second, no outs: 1.154 runs
Dude on Second, one out: .736 runs
Dude on Second, two outs: .3645

Note: these numbers are just from the 2006 season.

Thinking more about doubles, a fairly common double situation is "man on first moves to third on double" (at least if Sweeney or Buck aren't on first). In that situation, with no outs, the double moves the run expectancy of the inning from .926 to 1.807. With one man already out, the double pushes the expected runs from .567 to 1.173. All good things.

Anyway, here are the top five doubles men since 1993:

Top Five Doubles Hitters For the Royals Since 1993:

1. Mike Sweeney- 292
2. Joe Randa- 223
3. Carlos Beltran- 156
3t. Johnny Damon- 156
5. Jermaine Dye- 115

About what you would expect regarding doubles. Mike Macfarlane has 174 doubles as a Royal -- good for 9th most in club history -- but the majority of them came in the early '90s, which is for whatever reason outside the data-set I'm interested in presently. Berroa currently has 103 doubles as a Royal, and David DeJesus already has 82. If David doesn't catch Angel in this category by the end of 2008, then that probably means things are going horribly wrong.

Overall, Kauffman Stadium has played as a good hitters park over the last decade and change, usually posting solid pro-hitter park factor. Still, the dimensions have changed twice, and intuitively I would suspect that the moved in fences helped homers but suppressed doubles, while the new/old dimensions of the last three seasons have increased doubles while decreasing homers. Unfortunately, I don't have this data in front of me. If anyone knows where outcome-specific historical park-factors can be found, I'd love to know. However, it must be remembered that single-year PFs aren't terribly reliable as it is, and single-outcome ones can be fairly noisy.

Anyway, the beat goes on. Congrats to Sweeney on another post-Brett victory.

Update [2007-8-9 12:46:48 by royalsreview]:

While Sweeney's managed only a 10 double season to date, he's obviously in no danger of being caught any time soon. On other fronts, David DeJesus has, indeed, passed Angel on the All-Time Doubles list. As of August 8th, David has notched 108 2Bs, five ahead of Berroa's 103.

The sometimes maligned Emil Brown has snuck all the way up to 83 doubles as a Royal, passing Raul Ibanez's total of 81 with a two-double game against Texas back on July 28th. Amazingly, the Royals didn't honor this achievement with an in-game ceremony.

Mark Teahen now owns 73 career doubles (two behind our beloved Mike Tucker's total as a Royal), while Buck sits at 66.

Earlier this winter "daveyork" posted a hilarious diary entitled "A Royals Fan Top Ten List for the Offseason". In his post he coined/created a new honor, the Mark Quinn/Andy Sisco Award. Here was his definition:

One player who fans have hope for in the upcoming season will horribly regress and live on only potential for the next season - The Mark Quinn/Andy Sisco award. Zack Greinke would also be a good candidate for 2006 award. Early odds on 2007 include Ryan Shealy and Esteban German.

Thus, a player like John Buck or Angel Berroa doesn't really apply. Nor does, at this point, Sweeney or Grudzielanek. Those players might fail, but their failures aren't quite what the brilliant career of Mark Quinn was supposed to represent. With that in mind, lets take a look at the early candidates for the Mark Quinn Award, which honors the position player who will "horribly regress" after building up our hopes, starting with dave's own predictions, Esteban German and Ryan Shealy.

--------

Esteban German: In 2006 German did everything for the Royals, playing six positions (as well as DHing) and, incredibly, batting in all nine lineup slots. Not just a LaRussian utility player in the extreme, German also hit, posting a .326/.422/.459 line complete with 5 triples and 3 home runs. Most impressively, he maintained a high level of performance despite being jerked around by Buddy Bell during the season's first half. Once he became a semi-regular player during the dog days, he maintained his superficially high batting average, but also kept taking his walks and increased his power, slugging .494 in the second half of the year.

Why Is He a Candidate for a Quinn?

Of course, it was his age-28 season, and he'd never done anything remotely like that before at the major league level. (Although you could also make the case that he'd never been given the chance.) The Royals have seen this before, once relishing of the delights of the flexible Desi Relaford, who hit .288/.341/.435 in the first half of 2003. The other immediate comparison might be to Junior Spivey, a polished minor-leaguer who gained a sterters job at 27, had his career year, and now seems like a bust. Still, theres a positive-side to that story, namely German's aforementioned polish. His minor league stats reveal a guy who's always taken his pitches, taken his walks, which bodes well as a value-sustainer. However the high batting average and triples power may fall off as the league adjusts to him. This is essentially what PECOTA sees, projecting a .285/.357/.383 line. Thats a useful player if handled right, but not the fringe All-Star the Royals enjoyed last season.

---------

Ryan Shealy: You know the story: Shealy was blocked by Todd Helton in Colorado and Dayton Moore freed him. Once in Kansas City, Shealy showed up and immediately started raking.

Why Is He a Candidate for a Quinn?

Only he didn't. Shealy hit .280/.338/.451, an OK but still substandard line for a firstbaseman in the American League. The much-maligned Mike Sweeney hit .300/.347/.517 in 2005 and most Royals fans reacted like he was Angel Berroa. Like German, Shealy's a fresh face, but he isn't young; last season was his age-26 season. On the bright side, scouts love him, he's cheap and he was adjusting to a new league, level and city last season, so maybe he's about to blossom into an offensive machine. Still, whats the upside here? According to PECOTA his 90% projection (better than 90% of all other simulations) is a good but not great .297/.365/.549 with 26 home runs. This tepid projection is mirrored by John Sickels, who sees a similar player, a guy who's putting up 1980s firstbasemen numbers in a more offensive age. Credit Moore for getting Shealy for a reasonable price, but there's a good chance Shealy won't put up near as many runs as Royals fans seem to expect in 2007.

---------

David DeJesus: DeJesus is a nice player with a broad range of skills: he's a good average guy, he can work a walk, he's got some pop and he's good in the field at an important position. He's also a good baserunner, as long as he doesn't try to steal bases. He's already played 349 games with the Royals, and owns a respectable career line of .292/.362/.434, a line that includes a nice chunk of "playing hurt" time.

Why Is He a Candidate For A Quinn?

As we touched on PECOTA Day a lingering fear is brewing that DeJesus has already peaked as a player, that he's settled into a nice performance level, but isn't getting better. Like Shealy and German, he's not as young as you might think, turning 27 last month. Nevertheless, heading into his Age 27 season, PECOTA sees a .290/.357/.424 season, which is to say a worse hitting performance than he managed in 2005 or 2006. Like Shealy, DeJesus might be suffering from an upside-deficiency, although in a more acute sense: his 90% projection is a batting average-driven .323/.392/.483 season, basically Johnny Damon's peak year of 2000. Thats damn useful, however unlikely. Worse still, the Royals don't seem to be sure where to play DeJesus, leaving the door open to a huge value-decrease should they play him in left.

----------

Breaking down the odds:

No one else seems to fit as a potential Quinn winner. The Royals have other young players, but guys like Gathright, Costa and Maier are too unproven to truly qualify. Remember, here's the Mark Quinn career path:

Mark Quinn Through the Years:

1999: .333/.385/.733, 6 HRs (64 PAs)
2000: .294/.342/.488, 20 HRs (535 PAs)
2001: .269/.298/.459, 17 HRs (465 PAs)
2002: .237/.301/.368, 2 HRs (81 PAs)

Quinn peaked at age 26 and played his last Major League game (to date) at age 28.

The Quinn Award is fairly subjective, because you have to take into account what the preseason buzz/hype/hope for the player is. This perception should be based in reality: remember, Quinn showed up and started hitting right away. He was young, he was cheap, and life was good. With that in mind, German has clearly had his peak year, but everyone seems to understand that. I'm not so sure that understanding exists for Shealy and DeJesus, from whom the world expects greater things (and David is one of my favorite players personally). To this end, German could win the award, but he's have to really hit poorly to do so, whereas DeJesus might have an OPS 120 points higher than German, but run away with the award.

Still, they aren't the favorites. At the moment, Shealy is really a centerpiece of the Dayton Moore regime, right there along with the Meche-for-55 million moment and the Gathright "I'm old school, you win with defense" trade. In the post-Minky, post-Sweeney era, Shealy seems a refreshing return to a good, old-fashioned gigantic first baseman who can HIT... except I'm still not sure he's actually that good. Unlike German and DeJesus, Shealy doesn't contribute much defensively, hurts roster flexibility and is slow as hell.

But, he ain't Jeremy Affeldt.

2007 Mark Quinn Award Preseason Odds

Shealy: 40%
German: 25%
DeJesus: 20%
No One, Everyone Plays Well: 15%

On the heels of the Royals meltdown in Tampa Bay, it might be a good time to post a Q & A session I did with the SB Nation Devil Rays blog last week. Enjoy:

1. The Royals and Rays are actually very similar franchises if you think about it. Both are in areas with no major population center, both franchises have, to put it bluntly, sucked over the last several years, and both have stadiums in areas which some fans would desribe as "inopportune locations". We have a heavy farm system, and that is what keeps some of us sane watching the Rays play, but how do you guys preserve and maintain your sanity as Royals fans?

Royals Review: I think there are some important differences, although I agree with your general premise, that it is somewhat puzzling that these teams have any fans. For one, the Royals had a nice 20-year run of success during the 70s and 80s, which has helped create a fairly dedicated, if old and jaded, old-school fanbase. The Royals have been living on those dividends for years now, with smaller returns each season, but it still helps. Secondly, KC has no NBA, no NHL and only one (albeit hugely popular) NFL team. More importantly, beyond Kansas basketball and Nebraska football, the region doesn't really have a larger than life college program which consumes endless attention. So, all in all, we've got time. As for sanity however, I don't think there are any sane Royals fans left. You'd be amazed what one fluky 83-win season (2003) can do however; perhaps you guys can experience this soon.

2. Kauffman Stadium is a facility that has really stood the test of time. Built 33 years ago, it is still regarded as one of the most beautiful stadiums in baseball. However some of its 70s era facilities are needing an upgrade, and an initiative is on the ballot in Jackson County to upgrade the Truman Sports Complex, that is Kauffman and Arrowhead Stadium, the home of the Chiefs. A previous ballot initiative was rejected by the voters, and there has also been some talk of building a downtown stadium. Now, taking in all of this, what is your opinion of this whole stadium issue, and could we really be faced with the prospect of no more waterfalls in a Kansas City ballpark?

Royals Review: On April 4th voters in Jackson County Missouri indeed approved the funding measure, bringing $425 million to the Royals over the next 25 years. But hey, the Royals tossed in $25 mil, so we can now read about the "joint-funded" renovations for the next decade. Considering the joint Royals-Chiefs lobbying team spent over $1.5 million advertising their cause, as well as the generally positive coverage sports teams nearly always receive, its remarkable that the move only passed with about 53%. Personally, I was against the measure - which came complete with fake Seligean announcements proclaiming "KC Awarded All-Star Game!!" followed by the qualifier, "if funding measure passes" - and largely insulted by the arguments for it. But then again, it probably shuts off further demands for a new Park, and precludes a contraction threat, so it may have been a lesser evil. I also don't live in Jackson County, so perhaps it is inappropriate for me to say much at all.

3. Another connection the Royals have to the Tampa Bay area is their old spring training facility. The Royals moved their spring training headquarters to Haines City/Davenport in 1988 as part of the "Boardwalk and Baseball" theme park commonly known as Baseball City. Well, the theme park closed two years after the Royals moved in, and the Crown left Central Florida in 2002 for greener pastures in Texas. How are you guys liking Surprise, and was Baseball City really that bad?

Royals Review: Just about anything is better than Kansas during March. However I was just a kid when I went through Baseball City, so I don't have really solid memories of it. Regarding Arizona, hmmm... what is there to say really? Someone should really write a book on how Spring Training is really changing, especially with high-profile teams (which of course, isn't the Royals). The Cubs presence in Arizona is incredible, it is still relatively low-key, but it is not like it probably used to be. Last, the Arizona run-inflation tends to ruin us every spring; we already know our pitching will suck, but I get emails from Royals fans every March with lines like, "I think this team will score some runs", and it never happens.

4. Now on to the player's side of things. The Royals previously had one of the worst farm systems in baseball, Dee Brown was their top prospect, 'nuff said. But now the team is finally focusing on the farm, and you are starting to see some talents like Justin Huber, Alex Gordon, and Billy Butler rise through the farm system. Tell us a little about these three and, just generally, about the Crown's farm system.

Royals Review: The system is still weak, although with the Royals its almost impossible to objectively evaluate how they are doing for two reasons. One, their top players are almost all recently grabbed #1 or #2 picks, which are aided by their constant on-field failure. Its hard to mess up Alex Gordon and Billy Butler, they'll hit, but its also hard to truly praise the Royals for having them either. Congrats, you didn't draft an 18 year old who supposedly hit 100 mph and now is almost out of baseball. Secondly, if the Royals were a better team, some of there current players would almost certainly still be in the minors. In an alternate universe, players like John Buck and Mark Teahen might still be in AAA, along with about half the Royals pitching staff, and the Royals blogosphere would be filled with hope. Well guess what? Mark Teahen's never going to be an elite player. His upside is late 90s Joe Randa, but that's years away. The Royals have aggressively promoted their young pitchers to such an extreme that some have speculated they're actually attempting some kind of radical experiment in development. Still, essentially, it's a weak system.

5. Now on to the most depressing part of the interview, the actual Royals players themselves. First off, a relatively simple question. What the hell is up with Zach Greinke?

Royals Review: No one knows. He left camp on Feb 25th, and it seemed like a typical player-management meltdown that would blow over after a long weekend and a meeting over drinks at some Arizona gentleman's club. Instead, he never sniffed coming back, and was eventually placed on the 60 day-DL, sans an actual injury. The consensus seems to be, "he's a little different, one of those prodigy types that doesn't actually enjoy the game, and he clashed with the decidedly old-school Royals culture, especially Bell and the pitching coach, who tried to force him (amazingly) to throw 90% fastballs." The problem is (well beyond the incredible stupidity of that alleged coaching) that today Allard Baird is quoted as saying, "For the issues he's been going through, I'm really proud of him. He's a courageous young man." This seems to suggest something more substantial actually happened.

6. If nothing else, the Royals have a stable of talented pitchers. Tell us a little about guys like Ambiorix Burgos, Andrew Sisco, Mike Wood, Mike MacDougal, Jimmy Gobble, Runelvys Hernandez, and Jeremy Affeldt.

Royals Review: The upside is competence, the downside is 110 loses. Runelyvs Hernandez probably has the most potential, but he's currently represented by Scott Boras and signed for only one more season. Should he be anything but terrible, there is an almost guaranteed chance he won't be in Kansas City in 2007. MacDougal, Burgos and Sisco are a potentially strong 1-2-3 bullpen punch, and are more or less the only Royal pitchers that strike anyone out. There is so much variance with these guys, and their unlikely to be as good in '06 as they were last season. Jimmy Gobble and Mike Wood are two of my favorite Royals, capable of putting up a 5.00 ERA in their sleep. Wood's an old low-upside A's prospect which the team seems to have soured on: why accept his 5.00 ERA when LimaTime can get you 7.50? Jimmy Gobble has the distinction of posting some of the lowest K-rates for a full time pitcher in Major League history, the fact that he's still a well-liked Royal should tell you all you need to know.

7. A follow-up question on Sisco, what do you do with him, bullpen, or move him into the rotation.

Royals Review: Send him to AAA for a month to get used to starting and then give him at least 15 starts with the big club. It is simply an innings matter here, and Sisco himself demonstrates that quality relievers can be found. That being said, I don't have a major problem with what the Royals are doing either, which is keeping him in the `pen. I wouldn't mind seeing him packaged at the deadline either, though I doubt that will happen.

8. John Buck was among the players acquired in the Carlos Beltran deal a few years back. He has shown decent pop, but overall has been a disappointment. Tell us a little about him, and the hopes you have that he will indeed become a good catcher.

Royals Review: He's a regular, and with some luck and good managing, he might slug .500 this season or next. He's also already 25 and likely is what he'll ever be. His defense has had periods of murkiness, but he's more or less league average. Average defense, low batting and on-base skills, homers in the teens, that's John Buck for the next two or three years. The problem is, he's always good for a .150/.170/.200 month now and then.

9. Speaking of the Beltran deal....two years later, how has it turned out. Good deal? Or another addition to Allard Baird's Hall Of Fame of shitty moves?

Royals Review: The Royals ended up getting three members of their current big-league team, Mike Wood, Mark Teahen and John Buck in exchange for a half-season of Carlos Beltran. For a team on its way to a 58-104 record, this haul was probably Baird's finest moment. Factor in the emergence of David DeJesus in centerfield as well as the money saved playing regulars like Buck and Teahen, and it gets even better. On the other hand, no team with Buck or Teahen as one of its five best players will never be a contender. You need elite players to win, but the Royals had no chance of resigning Beltran, so the point is mute.

10. Angel Berroa has been disappointing since stealing the AL Rookie of the Year Award from our own Rocco Baldelli a few years back, but rebounded a bit last year. What are your hopes for him, and how realistic are they?

Royals Review: Lets see, in 2004 he posted a .262/.308/.385 line, followed up by a .270/.305/.375 gem last season. He's generally considered a poor fielder and his base running often does more harm than good. At least last season he was finally moved off the top of the lineup, although for two years Tony Pena couldn't seem to figure out that a guy with a .305 OBP wasn't the best dude to have in front of Beltran. This is his age 28 season, so he might hit .295/.340/.400, which would cause the Royals to promptly sign him to a ten year extension. It is funny, as a product of the 2001 Johnny Damon trade with Oakland, Berroa's been ridiculed, then lauded, then ridiculed again. For awhile though, we though that Baird may have actually won the trade (which also involved your D-Rays of course).

11. The recent claiming off waivers of Tony Graffanino apparently means that the Esteban German era will be tardy in starting. What is your opinion of this move?

Royals Review: Beyond pointless. Its odd that an aging team, with a huge payroll that needs to win NOW would dump (through waivers) a $2 mil backup to a team that wants to get young, can't win for years and has no money. Totally nonsensical. Then again, the goal for this season isn't winning, or building for the future, its much more simple, avoiding embarrassment. German had a decent chance of hitting .200/.210/.250 in limited duty, whereas Graffy doesn't. So it's Graffy.

12. Mike Sweeney....one of the only star players the Royals have had in recent years who has actually stuck around, continues to rake, but wouldn't it be better for the team to trade him at this point and get a few prospects in return?

Royals Review: I see a parallel with the Huff situation in Tampa. At a certain point, the window's closed, the deal has lost value, and you still have a fairly good player that's gonna be hard to replace. Sweeney's expensive, but at this point it may make more sense to keep him around rather than trading him for cash and a B pitching prospect. Of course, it all depends on the individual deal. The interesting thing is, Sweeney is something of a lightening rod amongst Royal fans; you know, the old saw Bill James had about bad teams always turning on their worst player. He's seen by some as holier than thou, soft (because being injury-prone is always a moral choice) and overpaid. Still, its funny how we spent a decade bemoaning an inability to keep homegrown stars around (Dye, Damon, Beltran) and then the one guy who stays is repeatedly chided.

13. Mark Teahen, yet another acquisition in the Beltran deal, has been plugged in at the hot corner for the past two years without doing much, but started to perform a little better last year. Similar to the Buck question, what are his chances of becoming a solid, major league third baseman.

Royals Review: It seems like I spend my whole life talking about Mark Teahen. The bottom line is that he simply has to hit more (.246/.309/.376 in `05). By all accounts Mark is a delightful guy, a hard worker and a good teammate. If the world was about 99% different in every way, Mark and I would probably be friends. Still, he's 24 and its time to start hitting more. With Teahen, Buck and Berroa down at the bottom of the Royals lineup, the outs come fast and furious. Still, Teahen's cheap, he's part of the Beltran deal and people like him. He'll be given every chance to show something this season, but if Gordon keeps mashing, or even if he doesn't, windows might close for Mark quick.

14. David DeJesus is one of the only prospects that the Royals have plugged in recently who actually has performed well within a short period of time from his debut. Is he the next Beltran in center for the Royals, how good will this guy end up being?

Royals Review: It is hard not to see a young Johnny Damon. He's fast, but a little raw on the basepaths and in center. He already has the plate discipline, and he's in his age 26 season with a career .290/.361/.427 line in over 900 PAs. I think there is something to be said for the possibility that he's just a fast developer and may already be near the ceiling of his potential. Signed through 2010, he should be the face of the franchise for the next few years. This being the Royals however, there is always a potential that things get messed up.

15. There have been some crazy rumors in the past about Jonny Gomes, our star outfielder who absolutely mashed the ball last year, possibly being headed to Western Kansas. Have you heard these rumors, and if so......why would KC have any interest in Gomes in the position they are in?

Royals Review: With apologies to the new Rays Front Office, how much combined logic does there have to be behind a Rays-Royals trade rumor?

16. The Royals were relatively active in the free agent market this offseason, signing a few players to improve their 56 win squad like Scott Elarton, Mike Redman, Mark Grudzielanek, Doug Mientkiewicz, and Reggie Sanders. Some of them, I think, were simply signed to make life difficult for Royals writers in terms of spelling. Anyways, is the $$$ the Royals invested in these veterans really worth it to a team who, in all likelihood, is still going to finish in the cellar?

Royals Review: I guess it depends on what your goals are. If the goal is not being a laughing stock, having something to hold a press conference about, and giving Buddy Bell some old dudes to hang out with, then the moves were a success. To be fair, not all the moves are equal: Sanders, Elarton, Redman and Grudz are decent players, who should make the Royals marginally better. On the other hand, Minky and Joe Mays have looked awful, and I haven't even mentioned Paul Bako yet. There has been some discussion that the -moves are Dave Littlefield-esque veteran-players-to-be-traded-later moves. Considering a) the Littlefield picks were stronger players and that b) he still didn't get much for them its an odd idea (either for Baird himself, or for fans to dream about). Honestly, the barrage of moves probably were at least half the idea of the Glass family cadre, as their inept attempt at talent evaluation, as well as a PR ploy in hopes of getting tax monies in April. Mission accomplished.

17. Here's hoping you guys have your "Under Construction" moment like we did, where you are able to clean out Baird and David Glass, but in the meantime, what is it going to take to make this franchise successful, on and off the field?

Royals Review: We need the AL Central to return to 2001-4 levels, number one. Secondly, having the Yankees sign Billy Beane wouldn't hurt. It is only possible for there to be so many good teams, and probably the talent market can only support a handful of small-market teams that are also competitive, so sending Beane to NY would kill two birds with one stone. Beyond that, its vaguely possible that the team could be good offensively in the next few years, with DeJesus, Alex Gordon, Billy Butler etc. If that's the case, we better hope that the pitching prospects (most of whom are already with the team) are there in '08 to help the cause. If not, the upside is the Royals teams of the early 00s, who had Damon-Dye-Beltran-Sweeney-Randa, but still couldn't win.

Thank you for submitting to these questions, I really appreciate your help, and best of luck to the Royals this season, they are one of the three AL teams I hope do well, along with Cleveland, and, of course, the Rays.