clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Game 83- Royals 6, Twins 3 (29-54)

New, comments

As "loyal2theroyals" pointed out last night, the Royals, incredibly, are actually ahead of their pace from last season. Forget the 1962 Mets, the Royals are now ganging up on the immortal 2005 Royals.

Through 83 Games

1962 Mets: 23-60
2003 Tigers: 20-63
2005 Royals: 28-55

2006 Royals: 29-54

The KC Star noted today that the Royals would have to lose 33 straight games to "catch" the '62 Mets. Those Mets didn't grab win #29 until game 108 (29-79, the end of a three-game winning streak) and didn't hit win #30 until game #112.

Buddy went crazy, but then he felt better later.

After some readers pointed out that Reggie Sanders have been arguably worse than whipping-boy Angel Berroa, Reggie responded with a 2-3 game (2 singles) that also featured a sac fly and a run scored. Thanks to his efforts, Reggie raised his season line to .249/.306/.433. Always good to see that OBP safely back over .300. Well, at least until his next 0'fer. For the curious, Reggie hasn't homered since June 18 against Houston and hasn't grabbed an extra-base hit since June 30 against the Cardinals. For as much as we hate on Berroa for his strikeouts, Sanders has this ugly ratio to deal with:

Sanders: 69 strikeouts; 20 walks drawn
Berroa: 48 strikeouts; 8 walks drawn

And yes, I know that isn't actually a ratio at all, but merely two totals side by side.

If I were a Twins fan, which I'm not, I'd be devastated today, after losing two of three in KC. For a team that still cares about 2006, you just can't let that happen. On the other hand, considering how they won the first game, maybe they should just be happy that they got a game at all. In fact, this was just what was admitted over at TwinkieTown. Personally, I'd love to see a three-way race in the Central, especially if all three teams are playing .650 ball, but the last three days in KC may have damaged that a bit, considering the Twins are still so far back.