Royals Review: Front Page Posts

Baseball in Kansas City Still Hasn't Recovered From the 1994 Strike

royalsreview — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 10:00:04 -0000

Summers in Kansas City can make one feel like it's 1995. Not because people are still watching Toy Story and Apollo 13 in movie theaters or because Kansas Citians are looking forward to the upcoming season of The Drew Carey Show and Seinfeld. Instead, a mid-90s baseball malaise and sense of resentment continues to hang over Kansas City, nearly a decade after the rest of the country has moved on.

Attendance at Kauffman Stadium Since 1994:

	Per Game Avg	AL Rank
1995	17,132	10th
1996	17,838	10th
1997	18,853	10th
1998	18,570	10th
1999	18,709	11th
2000	19,319	12th
2001	18,968	13th
2002	16,334	13th
2003	21,974	11th
2004	20,512	13th
2005	16,928	13th
2006	16,946	13th
2007	19,961	13th
2008	19,493	14th

We can make two quick observations from the numbers above: 1) attendance at the K has been fairly stable and 2) the Royals have not been able to keep up with the rest of the American League at the gate. While Royals fans may have not noticed, in the last decade attending baseball games in person has become extremely popular, and from 2003-7 Major League baseball set a new attendance record each season. The overall average attendance? In 2007: 32,785, in 2008: 32,539. The Royals are lucky to draw the Major League average, average mind you, ten times in a season.

Certainly, caveats can be made. To be sure, the Royals have been a consistent and indeed a spectacular loser since 1995, so much so that the team's hot start in 2003 -- and months spent in first-place -- was only able to provide a modest (very modest) bump in attendance. Moreover, Kansas City remains one of the smallest markets in baseball and a middling one economically. (According to Nate Silver's exhaustive and very math-heavy research, Kansas City is MLB's 29th largest market.) Finally, the un-balanced schedule has concentrated well-attended Yankee and Red Sox road games within the AL East, and the AL Central lacks a single team that travels well or that consistently interests casual fans at the gate. Nobody comes to the game just because the Twins are in town.

What makes the attendance figures since the strike even more telling however is the clear bright-line formed by 1994. In the interests of avoiding another table, going backwards, here are the game averages from 1994 to 1980: 24,356, 23,884, 23,058, 26,686, 27,888, 30,589, 29,195, 29,537, 28,652, 26,700, 22,346, 24,097, 28,203, 24,843, 28,256. The lowest average from that period, 1984's 22,346 is nevertheless higher than any average since 1994. When you consider how much lower attendance was during the 1980s, those totals are even more impressive. Then again, those numbers also underscore just how much the core of the Royals' fanbase has eroded.

How much might winning, real, sustained winning, improve things at the K? While it is difficult to find a truly comparable situation to the one in Kansas City (non-new stadium, small market, beaten-down fanbase) one would have to look at the Twins over the last five years and, weirdly enough, the White Sox as decent data points. The Twins are obvious enough, but the White Sox are roughly comparable as well, given their minority market share in Chicago, negligble regional appeal and convienent yet bland stadium. You might also throw in a variable covering "contentious relationship between ownership and fanbase" as well.

	CWS-Comisky II	MIN-Metrodome
2000	24,047	12,355
2001	21,805	22,011
2002	20,703	23,906
2003	23,945	24,025
2004	23,834	23,599
2005	28,924	25,114
2006	36,511	28,210
2007	33,141	28,350
2008	30,496	28,425

Although attendance at the Cell was something of a punch line for many years, the White Sox have drawn well since winning the World Series, and in fact were rebuilding their attendance base as early as 2000. The Twins meanwhile, were supposedly so poorly supported that Baseball's best option was simply to contract the team. Well, emphasis on "supposedly". Truly, Minnesota's per game averages in the late-nineties were miserable, hovering around 14,500 at the end of the decade before collapsing to the 12,355 average you see above in 2000. The Royals have avoided sinking that low, however given the overall increases in league attendance, Kansas City's recent rut of 18,000 fans per game is hardly better than the performance of the contraction-era Twins.

In terms of both on-field success and market potential, the Twins are the more reachable model, and in part that table above reveals just how valuable actually winning a World Series is: even through a miserable 2007 season, the White Sox were still drawing well.

Unfortunately, with the economy headed south again, it's likely that we'll see attendance figures drop again next season, and depending on just how bad things get, a return to the bad old days of anti-Yankee protests with fans throwing trash and or fake money at supposedly greedy players could very well be possible. Spending 365 days a year on this website and the rest of the Royals blogosphere, I can confidently state that quite a few Royals fans remain on the verge of bitterness over salary imbalances in the game and that resentment towards the game's haves, both franchises and individuals is strong.

The Royals are two good summers away from drawing something like 24-26,000 a night at the K, maybe a notch more depending on how well the renovations go over and how low prices remain. However, if the current batch of players, namely the Alex Gordon Generation fail to materialize into a contender, attendance could drop all the way down to the mid-nineties levels. Unlike so many inside baseball, the Royals spent the boom years barely getting by, leaving them in a precarious position as storm clouds gather.

Kenny Williams: the Royals are the AL Central team to watch next season.

royalsreview — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 23:34:14 -0000

Kenny Williams: the Royals are the AL Central team to watch next season.

-As reported by defrocked ex-BBTNer Harold Reynolds during Game Four of the Rays-Sox series.

The 100 Greatest Royals of All-Time - #43 Doug Bird

RoyalsRetro — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:39:12 -0000

The Bird is the word! At #43, Royals pitcher Doug Bird.

Today there is a lot of talk about whether to keep Joakim Soria as the closer, or move him to the rotation. Although Dan Quisenberry and Jeff Montgomery never started a game for the Royals, many good Royals relievers did make the transition, with varying results. One such pitcher who was probably better off remaining in the pen was Doug Bird.

Bird was a Southern California kid, taken in the third round pick by the Royals in the June Secondary Phase of the draft in 1969. He had plans to instead head to USC or UCLA to play college ball, but was convinced by a Royals scout named Spider Jorgensen (later his manager in rookie ball), that he would get to the big leagues quickly with an expansion team like the Royals.

Just a year into his professional career, it looked like Bird would have to put baseball on hold to serve his country in Vietnam.

"I got a notice to report for a physical and immediate induction into the Army. Then somebody blew up the draft board in South Pasadena. All the paperwork went up in smoke. By the time they got everything straightened out, they had switched over to a lottery system where they drew lots with birthdates on them. My number was up in the 280s, and they never called me.

If I knew who blew up the draft board, I'd thank him, cause otherwise I'd have been gone. End of baseball career."

Bird was used primarily as a starter in the minor leagues, posting a 1.84 ERA in 22 games in 1970 with Waterloo (but finishing with an 11-9 record!) and winning fifteen games the next season in San Jose. At the end of the 1972 season he was promoted to AAA Omaha, where he pitched out of the pen for seven ballgames. After four relief appearances in Omaha to start the 1973 season, the Royals called up him up to the big leagues to pitch out of their pen.

Gene Garber had been the most called upon late inning Royals reliever to begin the year, racking up a few saves along the way. Manager Jack McKeon found his 1.21 ERA to be too valuable to be used in the pen, so he called on Garber start some games in May and June. Garber tossed two complete game victories, then was shelled in his next two starts.

Bird was used sparingly in the pen at first, but by June 6, had had posted a 1.99 ERA in 22 2/3 innings of work. McKeon was now using Bird in many close games, often times in save situations. This was in the days before Tony LaRussa had institutionalized the "closer" position, so many of these saves were more than an inning of work. And there was not really a designated "closer". Save opportunities went to Bird, Garber (who was now back in the pen), Bruce Dal Canton, Joe Hoerner - whoever had the hot hand. The best reliever was instead known as a "fireman", a guy who could come into a tight situation, ninth inning or otherwise, and put out a fire. Bird was McKeon's most trusted fireman, and along the way got a bulk of the save opportunities.

"So the manager, Jack McKeon, made me the closer. Nobody asked me, but it was okay. I preferred it to doing nothing for four days between starts."

That season the Royals enjoyed their first ever winning season, with Doug Bird leading the team in saves with twenty. It was the second most ever in a season by a Royals pitcher, and stood as the franchise record for saves by a rookie reliever until Mike MacDougal in 2003. Bird led Royals relievers with a 2.99 ERA and fifty-four appearances, despite spending the first month of the season in Omaha.

Most Saves in a Career, Royals History
Jeff Montgomery 1988-1999 - 304
Dan Quisenberry 1979-1988 - 238
Joakim Soria 2007-2008 - 59
Doug Bird 1973-1978 - 58
Roberto Hernandez 2001-2002 - 54

In 1974, Bird was again the primary fireman in the pen, but racked up just ten saves. Why? Royals starters finished fifty-four complete games, twenty coming from Steve Busby. Bird would again lead Royals relievers in ERA at 2.73 and appearances with fifty-five. McKeon even let him start a game in the last week of the season and Bird went the distance in a 2-1 loss.

By 1975 the Royals were looking to contend, but by July they were barely over .500. On July 23, they fired McKeon and hired former Rangers manager Whitey Herzog. The club got red hot over August and closed what had been an eleven game lead by Oakland to just five by September 6. Bird had been the most frequently used reliever throughout the year, collecting eleven saves along the way. Nonetheless, Whitey had Bird start the second game of a crucial doubleheader that day against the Angels. Bird responded with seven plus innings and the win, completing the sweep and drawing the Royals to within four and half games of Oakland. Bird would start three more games down the stretch, but would fail to build upon his success. The Royals would fail to catch the A's, although they did enjoy their best season ever with ninety-one wins and a second place finish.

Bird began 1976 in the pen, but May he was back in the rotation.

"I wasn't as strong as I should have been. I'd begin to fade about the sixth inning."

It didn't help that Whitey drove Bird pretty hard, as he did with all his pitchers. Bird made twenty-seven starts, and went at least eight innings in eight of those starts, including a ten inning affair against Milwaukee. Despite the long outings, Bird continued to exhibit masterful control, going 46 2/3 consecutive innings in July without yielding a walk, a team record. Bird finished the year with a 12-10 record and a 3.37 ERA in 197 2/3 innings of work. In thirty-eight games, he walked just thirty-one batters. He pitched in relief in the American League Championships Series, picking up the win in Game Four.

Whitey had Bird pitch out of the pen most of 1977, with spot starts along the way. It was clear where Bird was more effective. He posted a 2.61 ERA as a reliever and a 9.55 ERA in five starts. He led the team with fourteen saves and fifty-three appearances. In the playoffs, he appeared in three games in relief without giving up a run.

In 1978 Whitey had an experienced pen full of colorful characters. Steve Mingori was the loony lefty. Al "The Mad Hungarian" Hrabosky was known for his wild antics on the mound. Marty Pattin was known for cracking up his teammates with his "Donald Duck" impression. And then there was Doug Bird. Whitey affectionately labeled the foursome "Mungo, Hungo, Duck and the Bird." Although the other three put together the foundation for a solid pen, Bird struggled through his worst season in Kansas City, compiling a 5.29 ERA.

For the third straight year, the Royals faced the Yankees in the playoffs. The teams split the first two, and the Royals were leading the pivotal Game Three by a score of 5-4 in the eighth inning thanks to three George Brett home runs. Paul Splittorff retired the first hitter in the eighth before allowing a single to Roy White. Whitey brought in Bird to relieve. After falling behind 2-0, Bird offered up a fastball to Yankees catcher Thurman Munson that ended up 420 feet away from home plate, over the left centerfield wall.

"The story of my year. I knew he hit it good. I didn't even bother to watch."

That was the final straw for Bird in Kansas City. At the end of spring training of 1979, the Royals dealt Bird to Philadelphia for shortstop prospect Todd Cruz. Bird would bounce from the Phillies to the Yankees to the Cubs to the Red Sox.

"The Cubs made me a starter again. In my last start in '82, I tried to score from second on a hit. I collided with the catcher, flipped up in the air and came down on my right shoulder. That winter they traded me to the Red Sox. The shoulder didn't feel right. I had some good days, some bad. They talked about an operation, but I was 33. There would be a year of rehab. It wasn't worth it to me. So I quit."

Doug Bird was a solid reliever, but his stuff was so good it was worth seeing if he could contribute as a starter. Somehow, those teams back in the 70s were able to win without a ninth inning "closer." I don't know whether Joakim Soria is good enough to become a solid starting pitcher, but the Royals should not be afraid of finding out.

Bob Schaefer's Revenge: An Angel Berroa Resurgence?

royalsreview — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 00:07:50 -0000

From a story by Dylan Hernandez in the LA Times last week:

After the hailstorm of criticism he received for his high-priced free-agent signings that didn't work out, Colletti was asked whether he felt vindicated when the midseason trades he made pushed the Dodgers to the top of the NL West.

"I have great confidence in what I do," he said. "I know what my relationship with the McCourts is. I don't need to be vindicated."

Colletti could point to how he plugged several holes this season that were created by injuries to the likes of Rafael Furcal, Brad Penny, Nomar Garciaparra, Jeff Kent and Takashi Saito.

Though Ramirez and Blake might have thrust the Dodgers into the postseason, moves involving lesser-known players such as Angel Berroa, Pablo Ozuna and Blake DeWitt helped keep them in the race.

On the advice of bench coach Bob Schaefer, Colletti acquired Berroa, a former AL rookie of the year who spent the previous year and a half with the Kansas City Royals' triple-A affiliate. A player who cost the Dodgers almost nothing -- the Royals paid what remained of the $5.25 million owed Berroa and received only Class-A infielder Juan Rivera in return -- was their starting shortstop over the last two months of the season.

A month ago, Hernandez profiled Berroa's comeback with the Dodgers. Yes, that's what he called it:

Angel Berroa said the way he has felt over the last week reminds him of when was the American League's rookie of the year in 2003.

"I've got my confidence back," said Berroa, who spent most of the last two years with the Kansas City Royals' triple-A affiliate in Omaha traveling on commercial planes and sleeping in cramped motel rooms.

Oh, Berroa ended up hitting .230/.304/.310 with the Dodgers during the regular season, eating up 246 PAs. Nevertheless, he's like a double next week away from becoming one of Joe Torre's guys, insuring him a place on the roster for the next five years.

Then there's this bizarre Berroa note, also from the LA Times:

The Dodgers are so confident, Angel Berroa bought a Ferrari

Technically, at least.

The actual car in question isn't, say, one of these bad boys, which run about 200K, but rather a battery powered, 1/10 scale model. Cherry red with a racing stripe, the kind of car that would get a man pulled over by battery powered, 1/10 scale members of the Highway Patrol. Berroa, who also has two remote controlled helicopters and a "Robotic Construction System" in his locker, arrived for the Dodgers' team workout today at the Ravine to find his newest toy at the bottom of a stack of boxes on his chair. The ones on top were filled with useless athlete paraphernalia. Shoes, gear, etc. "I don't want that stuff," Berroa said, quickly putting it aside and pulling out the big prize, which he unveiled with a kid-at-Christmas smile before the assembled media.

Jonathan Broxton, who didn't realize earlier in the season his locker would soon be Toys'R'Us adjacent, could only shake his head. "I don't know how he's gonna get this _________ home," he said with a grin.

By the end, weren't we seeing more than a few "Berroa is very childlike" stories emerging from the KC clubhouse? Seriously, you read stuff like this, mix in your favorite Emil Brown story maybe, and remember, say, a third of the things you've ever read on Deadspin about these guys, and it honestly makes you feel ashamed you even follow sports. Really, to consider the men of Jockdom longtime inhabitants of High School is too generous. Many are still emotionally and intellectually in Middle School.

Jose Guillen Just Wins Awards

devil_fingers — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:51:05 -0000

Jose Guillen Just Wins Awards

The Hardball Times gives our boy JoGui their prestigious Joe Carter Award, saying this:

'Jose Guillen drove in 97 runs in his 598 at-bats this season. However, only having walked 23 times, he had a meager .264/.300/.438 line.'

Add this to Tom Tango's recognition of Guillen's 2008 achievements as well as the KC press's constant reminder of his 'good run production', and I'm sure Dayton Moore will ribbing Joe Posnanski for his foolish criticism of the signing all winter.

THT does give AL Rookie of the year to Evan Longoria over Avilanche, but, in their words, 'it is pretty close'.

Mike Barnett No More

royalsreview — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 19:42:33 -0000

Via a Royals Press Release:

Kansas City, MO (October 2, 2008) – The Kansas City Royals today announced that the following coaches have been offered contracts to return for the 2009 season. The list includes: pitching coach Bob McClure, bench coach Dave Owen, first base coach Rusty Kuntz and bullpen coach John Mizerock.

Mike Barnett (hitting) and Luis Silverio (third base) were not offered Major League coaching contracts for 2009. Silverio has been offered another coaching position within the organization. An announcement regarding the full 2009 coaching staff will come at a later date.

McClure has served as pitching coach since 2006.
Barnett was hired as the Royals hitting coach on May 1, 2006. Last season the Royals finished 6th in the American League in batting average (.269), but just 12th in OBP (.320) and slugging (12th), en route to finishing 12th in runs. As mentioned earlier this week, the Royals did not reach 700 runs scored (691) for the first time since 1995. Looking at this low-patience, low-power roster however, it's hard to blame Barnett for these numbers too much.

I Guess Ryan Dempster's Glove-Flicking Wrist Flipping Thing Doesn't Work in October

royalsreview — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 06:10:17 -0000

Angel Berroa just wins ballgames.

Dayton Moore's Optimistic Projection

devil_fingers — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:54:15 -0000

In a recent radio interview, Dayton Moore said that, despite the Royals' strong September, he was disappointed in the season, as he had the team projected to win 78-82 games. Maybe he is just putting on a tough face to show what a "winner" he is and what high expectations he has for the team, I dunno. I can only assume he was serious. I don’t know what other people had the team projected to do, but, with the benefit of hindsight, well...

The importance of a general manager getting a correct read on his team’s true talent level was vividly illustrated in Seattle this year, where disastrous moves were made based on the teams miraculous 2007 in which the Mariners overshot their Pythag by a large margin. Predictably, they suffered a massive collapse this year (exacerbated by the palyer they trade most of their best young talent for -- Eric Bedard -- getting hurt early in the season). I don't think that Dayton Moore is the next Bill Bavasi (Xenu have mercy on us all if that is the case). However, given Dayton's projection for this season, this is a fair way to get an evaluation of part of his skills.

Dayton Moore then...

...Dayton Moore now. Look at the hair. Does GMing the Royals really age a person that much?

I think Dayton Moore has done a good job overall. That said, I don’t think anyone here thinks he’s above criticism. Even the best GMs make mistakes -- think of Billy Beane and Terence Long, or Theo Epstein and Julio Lugo.

I assume that Dayton Moore thinks of winning projections in terms of the run differential as projected by Bill James’ Pythagorean Formula for team wins. The Royals, of course, overshot their Pythag by three wins. Some will argue that this isn’t necessarily luck because teams with strong bullpens (and with Soria, Ramirez, and Nunez leading the way, the Royals did have a good bullpen in 2008) often overshoot their Pythagorean projection. I don’t know about the bullpen stuff. I can only assume there is something to it because people who know more about this stuff than I do say that it is so. However, for the sake of this little excursion, I’m going to leave it aside in favor of assume that the Royals a 73-win team this season, for three reasons:

Many attempts to show how teams can 'outsmart' Pythagoras are often a bit suspect.
To the extent that the "strong bullpens = better than Pythag record" is true, I still think it’s hard to see how that would work into a specific projection of how a precise number of wins the team would get over its projection.
The bullpen pitchers' performances are already taken into account when figuring out the projection, so drawing on the bullpen performance again to modify the projection seems like "double dipping."

Again, my purpose isn't to debate the "Pythag and bullpens" issue. Rather, I'm simply saying that I'm not sure how to account for it either way, so I'm not going to deal with it, here.

Below, I've listed a few areas in which I think Dayton Moore may have been overly positive (given the end result) about going into this season. I will admit this involves a bit of guesswork as to how Moore projected certain players to perform, and I've tried to be careful in my deductions. Note also that I've left out the Butler and Gordon issues, since it's not clear to me what Moore (as opposed to the fans) expected of them this year. Sometimes, Billy seemed to be in the organizational doghouse (which totally doesn't exist!!!11). I also don't think Gordon drastically underperformed realistic expectations.

I’m not presenting this is an exhaustive list of good and bad decisions and projections by Moore, but I do think it points to some things that he may have thought or expected to be better this year than they actually were. I will then say whether they were foreseeable or not before the season -- that’s the more evaluative part of my own process, and the most subject to debate.

[Update: This wasn't very clear when I originally published this, probably because I didn't have it in my mind. I didn't really have a win total in mind before the season, so it's quite easy for me to sit here and say "so-and-so made a mistake." I acknowledge the time-based cherry-picking. My point is to see what projections went wrong, yes, but more obviously, to sort out which ones should have been expected to go wrong (less hindisight necessary) and which ones Moore couldn't be expected to see, and thus shouldn't count as much "against" him.]

1) The (un?)remarkable declines of Tony Pena, Jr. and Ross Gload. This is certainly a shocker. This is a tough one to judge. Could Moore have seen it coming? As for TPJ, he did have a year last year in which his BABIP matched up with his performance, which wasn’t great, but, given his defense, was defensible as a stopgap, at the very least. On the other hand, his OPS last year (.640) was higher than his career OPS in the minors. and higher than all but one year he had in the minors (2004 in AA -- .644), so I’d say that the offensive collapse was at least a bit foreseeable (although he had extremely bad luck with BABIP this season).

Ross Gload is a bit more difficult to figure out. He was a poor offensive first baseman before this year, and given his skills, I think it’s unlikely that he culd be expected get any better, and pretty likely that he’d collapse. As for his defense, well, he wasn’t one of the top defenders at his position last year, despite Hillman and Moore constantly swooning over his alleged Gold Glove in the press. So I’m not sure what to make of this. I'm going to say this is slightly forseeable.

Evaluation: Moore might be criticized for making not replacing these guys earlier in the season, but we’re talking about pre-season projections here, so I think that this is only a bit foreseeable. So this is an in-between case. It's not clear what he could have done with TPJ (no one saw Aviles coming, at least before the season started, and not this good). He seems to have had a high enough opinion of Gload to give the Man with the Gloaden Glove a two-year extension.

[Update: The stuff about Gload and TPJ was the stuff I wish I'd written better the first time. Along with Bannister, these were clearly the individual players hurting the Royals the most. I should have made it more clear that the impact of their performances were as bad or worse than anything else. Both these players, for example, hurt the team when they started far more than Jose Guillen. However, since I assume that Moore had lower expectations, and that they weren't that good in the first place, and that both suffered from bad luck regarding BABIP, that the amount of drop-off these two suffered vis-vis Moore's reasonable expectations weren't as high.]

2) The implosion of Brian Bannister. No use beating this into the ground. As is well-known, everyone, including Banny, knew that his 2007 fielding-independent stats did not match up to his 2007 performance. Nonetheless, he still managed to FIP worse than most publicly available projection systems had him doing. So, while few expected him to be a #2 or #3 starter this year, no one expected him to be among the five worst starting pitchers in the AL (among qualifiers).

Evaluation: It's hard to tell what Moore thought he could get out of Bannister this year. Of course, part of this little exercise depends on a sort of psychological guessing-game. We all knew Banny couldn't keep it up, but I don't think anyone saw this coming. So I'll just say, again, that this was only slightly forseeable.

3) Mark Teahen's rapidly decreasing offensive returns. In 2006, Mark Teahen started poorly, went to Omaha, then came back on fire, giving fans hope that he might be "another Jason Giambi." In 2007, he didn't look like the next Jason Giambi, as the power mostly disappeared, although, in retrospect, a 98 OPS+ doesn't seem like the end of the world for a corner outfielder, especially with a .353 OBP. In 2008, BABIP chickens (pictured right) came home to roost.

Evaluation: On one hand, I say stick to the numbers -- a quick 'n dirty xBABIP analysis shows he was lucky in 2006 and 2007. On the other hand, when someone regularly does that sort of thing, it may be a skill. Moreover, most publicly-avilable projections systems like CHONE, ZiPS, Bill James, and Miner showed him to be somewhere between last year and 2006. I'm working on a different post that will (in part) reflect on Mark Teahen's bizarre ways with chance. I guess, given all of this, I would say that Teahen's disappointing offensive performance this year was not foreseeable to slightly foreseeable.

4) The collapse of the Royals team defense. Wow, did the Royals ever suck on defense this year. Fielding is hard to measure exactly, and I'm no expert, but let me give some arguments for it.

There was some discussion earlier in the season about how, despite everyone talking about how the pitching had improved, the runs allowed were still poor. Indeed, when the year ended, the Royals were 10th in the American league in runs allowed. I know that defensive metrics and stats still have a long way to go, but unless you think that Dayton Moore is just really unlucky (and given his close relationship to the Deity, I find this highly unlikely), fielding is the primary culprit.

Looking at the 2008 league averages from The Hardball Times, we see that the Royals were below league average in runs allowed. AL team average for runs allowed was 758, while the Royals allowed 751. AL average ERA was 4.35, while the Royals' team ERA was 4.48. So the pitching still sucks, right?

Not necessarily. Let's go a step further. The Royals team FIP (Fielding independent pitching) was above average. The league FIP average was 4.35, while the Royals' was 4.28. According to Stat Corner's park- and league-adjusted version of FIP, the Royals staff was a bit over 16 runs above average.

You are probably starting to get the idea. Looking at the THT's defensive analysis of the team as a whole, while the Royals (.829) are above AL average (.817) in Revised Zone Rating as a team, they are last in the league in OOZ, and their overall +/- (-33) (in THT's team version of the stat) is below average (-10).

Taking a look at the performances of individual fielders (I'm taking stats from different systems as they are available to me -- please do not take the team stats given above and my use of UZR and Dewan's taken from various places to be commensurable). I don’t subscribe to the services that provide +/- evaluations of players, but last I heard, Mike Aviles was the only Royal who was above average at his position. As jonfmorse put it in a game thread, according to one +/- system, the Royals fielding this year has been like Babe Ruth (Avilanche) batting in a lineup of Tony Pena, Juniors. I think we have a diagnosis, doctor.

Evaluation: Well, in 2007 TPJ had the best UZR of all shortstops in the AL (last I heard, he was negative this year, but Aviles replaced him before the break). Alex Gordon, Mark Teahen, and David Jesus were all in the top three at their respective positions (strangely, G-Load did not make the top three last year. But I thought he was a stud defender!). This year, all were below average, and Gordon may have been the worst everyday defensive third baseman in the majors (Chris Davis is probably worse, but there’s a relatively small sample size. He does project as a 1b). As my post about RBI for fielders (linked above) showed, some metrics have Ross Gload as one of the worst defensive first basemen in the majors this year. I have no idea whether these defenders just hit a bump in the road this year, or whether this is the future. Given past performance, though, I'd say the Royals' problems with fielding this year were unforeseeable.

5) The JoGui Issue. His OPS+ of 91 (or 95, b-r has it different on the his main and splits page), just to remind everyone, doesn't simply indicate that his park-adjusted OPS just below average (average being 100) for a right fielder, it’s below average for the American league. He did lead the Royals in home runs and extra-base hits. Despite that, JoGui was 8th among Royals hitters in VORP (just barely better than the 6.0 the undead Reggie Sanders put up last year). Granting that VORP for pitcher is somewhat problematic, he was 17th on the team in value. He’s 13th in OBP (non-September call-ups, non-pitcher, non-Tupman divison), and in 5th OPS. He leads the team in extra-base hits, but not slugging. He’s barely second in ISO (to Miguel Olivo) over Alex Gordon. Keep in mind this is all on a team that scored 691 runs this year. Guillen also shares the team lead for grounding into double plays with Billy Butler (23).

I’ll skip the section demarcation and just get right to the evaluation. I think Dayton should have seen this coming, but, given the contract he gave Guillen, he clearly didn't (I just can't believe he saw this performance coming. If this is really what he expected, he should be fired forthwith -- as Rany put it in a different context, preferably from a cannon). I want to emphasize that, although I think the signing was a mistake, this doesn't mean I "hate" DMGM and want him fired or that I "hate" Jose Guillen. Good GMs make mistakes like this all the time -- see the examples of Beane and Epstein cited at the beginning of this essay. I non more "hate" Guillen and want him to fail than people who point out Mike Aviles luck with BABIP or left-right splits "hate" Avilanche and want him to fail. I only write this because I know that people might (and probably still will) overreact to this. I'm not saying that I'm smarter than DMGM. I'm sure I'm not. I'm sure that Allard Baird and (deep breath) Ned Colletti are better at evaluating baseball players than I am. Still, I didn't like this signing to begin with, and it somehow turned out worse than I expected -- and yes, that's based purely on Guillen's performance. A peformance that, particularly when his perfectly predictably (he had the worst UZR of any right fielder in the AL last year) worst-on-the-team defense is factored is, is quiet accurately described as a "swirling vortex of suck." (Well, OK, that's probably a bit unfair given that Ross Gload and Tony Pena, Jr. got significant at-bats this season. But he was pretty bad.)

People probably think I’m piling on. Well, maybe, I can be a vindictive bastard. However, you’d be surprised how often people come up with "Guillen brings a little something extra" (super idiotic) or "hey, he leads the team in RBIs" (only slightly less idiotic). We can only assume, given Guillen’s contract, that DMGM thought that Guillen would at least reproduce his 2007 numbers. Is that a good assumption? Well, out of Chone, ZiPS, Bill James, and Marcels, only one has him coming close. If you look at his 2007 BABIP versus his xBABIP, he was even luckier last year than Mike Aviles was this year. Look at his splits -- he hasn’t been a good hitter against righties since 2005. He's been declining. He's 32. Do you really think he's going to bounce back next year?*

*Let me add a note about Guillen’s alleged use of performance enhancing drugs. I am not mentioning this out of some sort of self-righteous moral indignation. I don’t know if Dayton Moore knew anything about this at the time -- I think the reports came out after the signing. But, although not everything can be credited to steroids, and 2003 (by far Guillen’s best year) was his age 27 year, doesn’t anyone else find it interesting that his 2003-2005 peak (which departs significantly from his previous 6 seasons of performance) coincides almost exactly with his (alleged) use of PEDs from 2002-2005? That might explain at least partially Guillen's inability to repeat that peformance since that time.

Again, I believe this is all totally foreseeable. Guillen is the anti-Meche. Both were controversial signings by Dayton Moore that were widely decried. Their paths depart from there. Meche’s rise was perhaps a bit foreseeable. Meche is positive, says he wants to stay in Kansas city. Meche has been one of the best "#2" level pitchers in the AL the last two years. Despite all this, some fans still aren’t buying in. Guillen’s decline was totally foreseeable. He bitches and moans constantly, yet shows up out of shape, sucks both offensively and defensively, yet somehow, despite getting booed by fans and some people going so far implying that the bad things coming out about him are due to some irrational hatred of him by the fans, gets defended on the basis of some mystical leadership ability and RBIs.

Let’s me repeat: Jose Guillen ~~sucks~~ is not a very good baseball player anymore. He’s 32, just in time for a performance spike, right?! Anyway, I’ve said it was foreseeable. If people want to skip over the rest of the Guillen section due to repetition or because they can’t stand to see such a hero to Royals fans everywhere impugned by my obvoius irrational hatred of Guillen and falsification of statistics, that’s fine. I didn’t want to pile on, really. But I want to add one more paragraph on Guillen, since most of my frustration with the "Guillen issue" is connection with people pulling out the "RBI" argument and crap like that I want a "clearinghouse" for this information that people can draw on for when someone claims that Guillen is an "RBI man" or whatever.

I think the best explanation of "how" Guillen racked up so many RBIs has a special skill (or lacks it, for that matter) for getting RBIs, but rather that he had the most plate appearances on the team, the most plate appearances with runners in scoring position, and that he hit 3rd or 4th in the order all year behind guys with better OBP like Dejesus (especially), Aviles, and (before Hillman got stupid) Gordon. So I do not, to reiterate, think that stats w/ RISP represents a repeatable skill or anything. For for those who do think that they represent a skill and that Guillen has it and that is why he leads the teams in RBIs, here we go. I’ve excluded the averages of guys with small sample sizes like Ryan Shealy, Zack Greinke (!), and Gil Meche (!!), who all ranked ahead of Guillen on this stuff. Here are Guillen’s ranks (taken from my research in another discussion) amongst Royals with runners in scoring position this year:

BA w/ RiSP: 9th, behind such hit machines like Esteban German, Miguel Olivo, and Ross Gload
OPS w/RiSP: 7th, behind studs like German, Olivo, and Buck
SLG w/RiSP: 7th, behind fearsome sluggers like German, Olivo, and Buck
GIDP w/RISP: 1st by a wide margin with 13

Evaluation: Quite foreseeable.

Conclusion: There are, I suppose, other things that I could have mentioned. One thing I might have discussed is Gathright, since I sometimes got the feeling that Moore saw him as a starting CF possibility, but this post is too long to begin with.

My conclusion is that Moore's optimistic projection was based on at least 5 miscalculations on his part. The two projections that failed in teh biggest way were Jose Guillen's offensive performance and the team's ability to field.

I found that he should have foreseen that Jose Guillen would not meet his expectations (as one can only assume from the large contract he gave Guillen -- a "risk-reward" contract isn't a bad idea as a one year contract with perhaps a second year option, not a 3/36 contract, in my opinion). This is not saying that the Royals would have been better off without him, keep in mind, but simply that Moore's projection of 78-82 must have assumed that Guillen would be much better than this.

As for fielding, that was a projection that Dayton missed, but I doubt many would have gotten it right, given the individual player's performance last year, that this was unforeseeable, and Moore can't be blamed for that.

As for Gload, Pena, Teahen, and Bannister, well, that's the middle ground. Individually, I don't think there is much one can blame Moore for there, at least at the beginning of the year when he was projecting the team's final record (the issue of when he should have given up on Pena, Gload, et. al as individual players is separate -- I hope this is clarified in the update above). Taken together, though, it was unlikely that they would all live up to last year's peformance.

That's my take on where Dayton's projection went wrong and where he should have known better. Feel free to ream me out or point out potential other areas of discussion. I have to catch the train now or I'm dead!

[Update: Well, I wish I'd have taken more time to work through all this stuff before I published it. Thanks for your patience.]

Looking Back at When We Looked Forward

royalsreview — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:32:50 -0000

Back on March 30th, in a season opening piece, I wrote:

So where are we? I'm hard pressed to come up with a team that's legitimately harder to project in the short term, although from the other end of the competition arch the White Sox may rival our Royals. In 2008 the Royals will score 770 runs and allow 790, which comes out to about 79-83, a number consistent with what I've been telling people all off-season. That runs allowed number is factoring in a breakout from Greinke and some roster trash being erased from 2007, but small steps backward for a number of other players and increasingly difficult competition.

The win-loss prediction ended up not being that far off, although it took an abberant September (18-8) to even sniff 79 runs. Still, 75-87 isn't far afield from where many of us thought the team would end up. Actually, my prediction of 79-83 ended up being exactly the community average.

Nevertheless, the Royals came up four wins short in what turned out to be a much weaker AL Central than anyone expected. There was no 95-win behemoth in the Central this year, much less two, which looked possible at the beginning of the season. Instead, the Twins & White Sox ended up tied at 88 wins, while the Indians and Tigers combined to be fourteen games below .500. The Royals ended up 31-41 against their division, but only 20-34 against non-Tigers. Overall, you'd have to say that those were a soft 75 wins for the Royals. If the 79-win team we thought we we're getting had shown up in this year's Central, the Royals may have ended up with 81 or so wins.

The runs scored & runs allowed data further reveals how far the 2008 Royals slid off of our imagined tracks. For the first time since 1995, the Royals failed to score over 700 runs, topping out at 691, the third lowest total in the American League. Instead of improving upon 2007's total of 706 runs scored, the Royals lost ground. On the whole, more players disappointed at the plate in 2008 than surprised. This team still doesn't get on-base and it still doesn't hit for power.

What saved the 2008 Royals however was the pitching staff. Unlike some Royals fans, I was worried about the staff being unable to improve on their 2007 performance, and predicted 790 runs allowed, twelve more than the 2007 total. This is what happened. The Royals allowed 781 runs, three more than in 2007. Getting an extra 80 quality innings out of Zack Greinke erased a lot of minor problems, and the Royals held on to their 2007 level of performance despite seeing their purported #3 starter blow up. Had the Royals really regressed and allowed something like 820 runs, it would have been a much longer year.

So grading myself, I'd give my overall Royals prediction a B-, thank you. Next week, we'll take a look at the 2008 season in greater detail.

Any Interest in a RR Book Club?

royalsreview — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:54:12 -0000

Any Interest in a RR Book Club?

I'll have to think more about how to do this, but does anyone have any interest in a RR book club? Maybe once a month this offseason or something we have a big thread/fanpost/story etc about a baseball book? Thoughts?

Moore interviewed on 810 this morning

KC Chris — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:48:04 -0000

Moore interviewed on 810 this morning

GMDM was interviewed on 810 this morning. I didn't catch the whole interview, but I assume it'll be up on 810's website.

He stated that he was expecting between 78 and 82 wins this year, so we were only slightly off in reality. He pointed to May and August, and said we're not giving young guys free passes anymore just because they're young guys. Expects to be better and expects to compete.

Most impactful move he's made since becoming GM is hiring Hillman. Said he was "disappointed" in Posnanski's "sensationalized" article on Hillman losing the clubhouse... "someone with his reputation..." I believe he threw "irresponsible" in there somewhere also. Basically said every clubhouse has 2-3 guys who will say whatever to air their beef regardless of truth.

Didn't specifically mention any position players that I remember... might have come later in the interview.

Said Davies is a hot topic for almost all MLB scouts right now. Said he pitched better than anytime since DM's been watching him (since 17 years old).

There were some other tidbits, but I had to tune out. So someone please fill in what I've missed, and Hillman will be giving a year end press conference today.

Roy Halladay for Cy Young

royalsreview — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:19:07 -0000

Of AL pitchers with at least 180 innings pitches in 2008, guess who faced the weakest competition according to BP's Quality of Hitters Faced Report?

Cliff Lee.

26th out of 26th. Lee's average challeger was a .262/.330/.405 hitter.

At play here is the unbalaced schedule and an additional dose of good fortune. Lee faced the Royals five times, his most common opponent. His second most common foe was Minnesota, who he battled with on four occasions. Lee also snuck in two starts against both Oakland and Seattle each, as well as matchups against Oakland and San Diego. Really, all that was missing was a game against the Nats.

Halladay on the other hand, faced the second toughest set of hitters out of the 26 ALers who had over 180 IP. Slogging through another season of hell in the AL East (even Baltimore had a weirdly good offense this year). Halladay's average hitter was a .266/.342/.425 guy. Sure, that's not hugely different, but remember, we're talking about hundreds and hundreds of individual pitcher-hitter confrontations over five months.

Just something to think about when you cast your nonexistent Cy Young ballot.

Kila Ka'aihue Finishes With 24 Plate Appearances

royalsreview — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:00:51 -0000

Well, we're all still in a bad mood after today's season-ending loss. Remember the Kila Ka'aihue PA Prediction Contest however? We'll have plenty of time to digest the day's/month's/summer's events of course, so we might as well discuss our little contest before we all forget it.

You'd have to be a real genius to guess exactly how many plate appearances Kila would end up with, wouldn't you?

So, let me extend my heartiest congratulations to...

(reading the entries)

Some user named "Royals Review", who predicted that Kila would end up at 24 trips to the plate. Wow, and first guess too. This dude must have known people on the inside to claim one of the most likely numbers so quickly after the story was posted.

Thanks to everyone who played.

Game 162 Overflow Thread

royalsreview — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:18:02 -0000

Down, but not out...

Game 162 Open Thread - Royals (75-86) at Twins (87-74)

royalsreview — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 14:00:05 -0000

I can't believe this is the last Game Thread of 2008. Between games 1 & 162 I moved from Iowa City to Cleveland to Washington, got married and honeymooned. And then there were the games... it all seems like a blur right now, from the season opening sweep in Detroit (which coincided with the debut of RR 2.0) to the Battles for Grass Creek and all the usual Royal losing streaks. Nobody does a losing streak like the Royals, as well all know, and that isn't even hyperbole. I will not lie to you: I did not see this September coming. Maybe a .500 September, but nothing like this. Many of us felt like the Royals were a 75-80 win team at the beginning of the year, but after four months they had decidedly not played at that level. Yet, here we are.

If real life was like a movie, the Royals would have to win today, wouldn't they? Trey would simply walk into the lockerroom five minutes before the first pitch, close his office door slowly and say, "we aren't losing now are we?" in his John Wayne voice and that would be it.

Unfortunately, there's also a Twins movie being made, one that we can only hope gets killed in production.

The Royals starter today will be Brandon Duckworth (5.06 ERA). Ducky pitched well against the Twins earlier this month, contributing to an eventual 3-2 Royals victory, thanks to an ability to scatter seven hits over five innings. In 23.1 innings against the Twins in his career, Ducky has posted a 3.86 ERA, allowing 25 hits, eight walks, but just 11 runs (10 earned) thanks to 19 strikeouts and zero homers. Team splits are usually pretty useless, but these numbers may be instructive, since the Twins have had similar lineups/approaches/personell for the entirety of Ducky's career.
Of course, there is very little chance that we don't also see three or four other pitchers. Had the Royals not already beaten the Twins twice this weekend, we may have seen a minor controversy about the team's justified decision to sit Greinke. It will 100% not happen, but as a fan I'd love to see Hillman throw Greinke out there for two innings to bridge to Soria, should the Royals be protecting a lead, though the rational side of me can acknowledge all the reasons why that's a bad idea. Still, close your eyes and imagine it for a moment. Talk about a dagger.
The Royal offense will get a chance to display its maturity against Scott Baker who seemingly has nearly no-hit them like four times. An ability to punish someone like Baker -- who has a bit of Joe Randa in him appearance wise -- seperates a functional offense from those that aren't, which is precisely why Baker's dominated the Royals in the past.
I don't know how the White Sox win today. Essentially, in both literal and figurative terms, they've ended up with a bad Royals bullpen, and have been made to try to win a must win game with those players. And it isn't like they're losing 3-2 but everyone's blaming the bullpen because of a run in the 9th inning (hello Mets). They've scored 14 runs the last two games and have only barely been competitive. Paul Konerko is hitting home runs! They're at home! And none of it matters. They catch a break today in facing Bullington, but they may need to score 20 runs to win. Worse still, before the bullpen can even ruin things, they've got to rely on an increasingly over-rated Mark Bueheheheireelee. I'm reminded of Tom Glavine's final start with the Mets on the last day of the season last year on this one.

Kyle Davies has done something no other Royals pitcher has ever done

NYRoyal — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 06:37:04 -0000

Kyle Davies has done something no other Royals pitcher has ever done

When was the last time a Royals pitcher won three consecutive starts (in any number of innings) and allowed no more than 4 hits and 2 walks in each start?

Try never.

That's actually pretty impressive. I don't know how meaningful it is, but damned impressive. And Davies really has improved as his major league season has progressed. It really looks like he's been a different pitcher in September than he was in June, July and August. I hope we see more of the former next year.

You're Welcome, Chicago

royalsreview — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:37:10 -0000

In the bottom of the eighth with two outs & two on, Carlos Gomez swung at the first offering from Ramon Ramirez. After a four-pitch walk. The batter before that walk, Brendan Harris, probably should have walked. Along with Casilla's failed bunt in the 7th, the Twins did as much to help out the Royals in the seventh & eighth as they did to hurt them.
A fitting farewell for Gil Meche, who kept the Twins down for six innings in the most dramatic game he's pitched in since, I dunno... maybe his first start as a Royal against the Red Sox two years ago.
John Bale: justifying two years of my irrational support of him now.

Can anybody else absolutely not wait for tomorrow's game?

Game 161 Overflow Thread

royalsreview — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 22:04:52 -0000

We go to the 7th. The Royals are right there...

Game 161 Open Thread - Royals (74-86) at Twins (87-73)

royalsreview — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 17:00:04 -0000

On August 31st the Royals were 57-79. Another 100-loss season was improbable but definitely possible. Another 90-loss season seemed certain. Since then, of course, the Royals have gone 17-7, the team's best monthly stretch, at the moment, since probably August of 1989 when they went 21-8. (Either May 1993, when the Royals went 16-7, August of 1991 (18-11) or April of 2003 (16-7) are runners up.)

Considering the context, last night was the best start of HIram's career, and the kind of shutdown performance that I'd previously thought only Greinke was capable of delivering, amongst members of this staff. Slight to today's starter, Gil Meche? No, not really. That's just not what Gil is. You're never going to tune in to a Meche start and after three innings start wondering if he might throw a no-hitter tonight, or think he might strike out 12 guys. (Although actually Gil has struck out 10 twice this season.) What Meche has been is healthy, steady and consistent. After a rough April, his monthly ERAs have been: 3.65, 3.13, 3.05, .3.49, 3.96. Looking at his game log, he's really only had two bad starts since May.

Facing an arch-Twins pitcher type in Glen Perkins (4.50 ERA), the Royals have a perfect opportunity to continue their brilliant September and make the Twins nervous.* All they have to do is keep winning.

*Perkins was a first round pick in 2004. Seems like a non-impact player to me.

Game 160 Overflow Thread

royalsreview — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 02:21:57 -0000

We're all in post-season form tonight...