Applications Google
Menu principal

Post a Comment On: Rany on the Royals

"Royals Report Card, 2010: Part Four."

26 Comments -

1 – 26 of 26
Blogger sw said...

Clearly the problem with the Royals is not enough of their pitchers are named Victor.

November 2, 2010 at 11:20 PM

Blogger sm7600 said...

I would be interested in knowing how Ted Abernathy and Tom Burgmeier stack up relative to Quiz, Monty and Soria, particularly in 1971. It seemed like once those two entered a game that year, it was all over but the shouting

November 3, 2010 at 9:01 AM

Blogger Kyle said...

Is a bullpen of Soria, Tejeda, Meche, Collins a good start? I think so! If they can shorten the game to 6 innings every night, I think there could be a few more wins in line for the Royals. Then you can pick three from Texeira, Wood, Chavez, Hughes, Coleman, Hardy, and Holland to round out the pen.

Then Replace McClure with a better pitching coach. I know that can't happen in 2011 now, but maybe before 2012. 2012 might start to look like a really good baseball team.

November 3, 2010 at 11:09 AM

Blogger Unknown said...

1. Kyle I like everything you said except for about McClure. McClure seems to be pretty well liked, and for what I can tell he has taken on some projects and produced results. Maybe there is a better candidate out there, but from my vantage point he is what this team needs.
2. I know this is will be considered foolhardy, but why write off 2011? The young talent will start to emerge and I don't see any reason why this team can't be a .500 team. A few breaks and 90 wins is a possibility. "Do you know what the difference is between 80 and 90 wins? A few gorks faling, a few groundballs with legs, a dying quail reaching the outfield..." Not the exact quote, but I think you get what I mean. And anyone who is still a Royals fan has to think that way, don't we?
3. I had totally forgotten about Tejeda as a starter, but I love that idea. Completely better than throwing some money at a free agent. There is not a free agent worth throwing money at. Better the devil you know than the devil you don't. And Tejeda has had some success.
4. Overpay a bit for Chen for one year. The rotation of Greinke, Hochevar, one of the kids, Tejeda and Chen could win some games. Slowly move Chen to the bullpen when another of the kids is ready.
5. Meche at 11 mill is a horrible price to pay, but he solidifies the bullpen. Just throwing all the kids out there would be a horible idea. But with Meche and with Soria, I think that could really work.
6. Holland, Wood, Collins, Hardy and Coleman along with Hughes or maybe Tex or someone else could be fun to watch. Some youthful errors along the way. But better than watching some retread you just know in your gut is not pitching to win for the Royals but is auditioning to get a chance somewhere else.
7. I apologize for being so optimistic, but pitching is the currency, and we have it coming in spades. Time to get excited.

November 3, 2010 at 11:54 AM

Blogger Kyle said...

B, you make some really good points. McClure has had a couple of success stories in Meche and Tejeda, but he has also failed Davies and others. Davies has all the talent in the world, but he just can't put it all together.

I am right there with you on the 2011 season. We may be the only to "real" Royals fans. If you are a true fan, you can't write off any season.

The pitching is coming along, and I think there is a good chance that Collins, Coleman, and Hardy could start in the bullpen in 2011. Monty, Duffy, Lamb, and Dwyer are on the cusp, but I think they may be close to a year away. Let's hope they start trickling in during the year. Build the rotation around a renewed Greinke, and they could along ways.

November 3, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Blogger Michael said...

Kyle,

McClure isn't the only one who hasn't been able to figure out Davies. At some point, you just have to wonder if Davies just doesn't take well to coaching.

Under McClure, Meche jumped up from disappointment (like Davies) into a solid #2 starter on a good team (#1 for us, obviously). We even got a couple useful seasons out of Brian Bannister, whose stuff would suggest he had no business being a major leaguer. Tejeda and Texiera are a couple relievers we got off the scrap heap that performed well under McClure. And while it took a year, he even got some quality innings out of Farnsworth.

Overall, I'd say his body of work is quite good, and he should stay here as long as he wants.

November 3, 2010 at 11:11 PM

Comment deleted

This comment has been removed by the author.

November 4, 2010 at 8:43 AM

Blogger ScottM said...

Michael is right that McClure is not the only one that couldn't "figure" Davies out. Neither could a guy of Leo Mazzone's stature. You know the same Leo Mazzone that got one or more good seasons out of guys like: Denny Neagle, Steve Avery, and a host of others that flamed out every where but under his tutelage.

Of course, there is the camp (to which I belong) that believes that Davies just ain't that good. He has had countless (read 700+ IP at the MLB level) to prove that he is a good, consistent pitcher. He has failed to do so in almost every measurable way (xFIP, FIP, ERA, etc.), but the FO disregard any statistical analysis makes all of these things not matter.

I will go one further and speak to them in a language they do understand. Back when I was coming up, I tried out for the Royals. There was a pitcher at that try out that was almost a perfect clone of Kyle Davies. He was 6'2" 200+ lbs and threw upper 80's to low 90's. Here is what the scout to him:

"Son, I can fill a stadium with 6'2" RHP that throw low's 90's. You just ain't good enough, sorry."

November 4, 2010 at 8:45 AM

Blogger Kyle said...

The thing is Davies throws mid 90s, not upper 80s. He has 4 above avg pitches, and had about 17 QS of his 32 starts. He has the stuff to be a #5 starter in MLB. That is what he is.

I am not really here to bash on McClure. Some might think that he is a good coach, I just think he is okay, and replaceable. All I am saying is something's got to give. There is alot of talent coming through the pipeline, and is about to explode onto the seen. If McClure can't performance out of any of these kids coming up, he might be the problem.

November 4, 2010 at 10:00 AM

Blogger ScottM said...

Feel free to go on drinking the Front Office's Kool Aid about Davies. I mean I understand that you seem like him, probably because he shares the same name as you, but facts are facts. He does not have 4 above average pitches. Heck he really only has ONE. He now has thrown five pitches in his MLB career, and I will break each down for you so you don't have to go to FanGraphs yourself (although I will provide that link as well).

Fastball 2010 -13.1 runs below average, career -66.7. Oh and btw his average speed is 91.8 MPH which is pretty much an upper 80's to low 90's type of pitcher. I am sure he can crank it up to mid 90's on occasion, but we judge based on consistency not the rare occasion.

Slider 2010 NR, career 1.7 runs above average. A couple of runs better then average over 700 IP isn't much, but I guess I will amend it to he has two above average pitches. Then again he didn't throw a single one in 2010 so that is at best a wash.

Curveball 2010 -2.4, career -5.3. This pitch is some what interesting as it seems to bounce back and forth between below and above average. It makes one look a little further. The normal correlation is present here. When he throws it less often, it is more effective. Typically that means that hitters are caught off guard by the pitch which is what makes it effective.

Change Up 2010 0.8, -1.6 career. This is the most interesting pitch because it defies the normal correlation between usage and effectiveness. Since it is defying that correlation, it might actually be a decent (read on the top side of or possibly better then average). Of course this could be skewed by one really good run as well (since nearly all his positive results were in one season).

Cutter 2010 4.2, career 4.4. A new pitch in his arsenal but does seem that he has a good handle on it. The sample size is pretty small on this one, but so far it looks like a winner. Beings that he will be given at a long look at somebody's rotation next year, chances are we will see if it really is a plus pitch or not.

Oh and here is the link to FanGraphs on Davies. It is probably the premier site for pitching statistics that are free:
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=3642&position=P

November 4, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Blogger Jacob G. said...

Guys I do appreciate the bullpen optimism and agree we should have a very solid 'pen when Collins/Coleman/Hardy join the current crop of relievers.
But there is no way I see us having enough starting pitching to be a .500 team next year, even is 2009 Greinke shows up in Surprise, Arizona instead of 2010 Greinke.
Even if Hochevar suddenly puts it ALL together (not just part of the way together), I don't see Chen/O'Sullivan/5th starter to be named later getting enough games to that bullpen after six innings.

November 4, 2010 at 5:14 PM

Blogger Antonio. said...

Before we give Farnsy some quality innings, can we at least get a look at his WPA or WXRL?

I think McClure's only real victory is Meche. And I also think he's wrongly given credit for the drastic turn around between the '06 and '07 seasons, when anyone can clearly point out that the man was simply working with superior talent.

Also, cool it on Mazzone not being able to turn around Davies. Davies' pitched 87.67 major league innings under Mazzone...as a 21-year old. He didn't do great, but he was a 21-year old.

November 4, 2010 at 9:52 PM

Blogger Michael said...

I'm still holding out hope that Moore steers clear of Francoeur. Until he signs a contract, I will not consider him a Royal! If he does sign with us, it'd better be a minor league deal. That's the only way it makes any sense.

November 6, 2010 at 1:58 AM

Blogger John said...

Unless they don't count because he usually made a handful of spot starts, I would think three of Steve Farr's seasons were better than that one by Mahay.

In 1990, Farr was 13-7, 1.98, in 127 innings over 57 games. He did make six starts, though.

In 1988, he was 5-4, 2.50, with 20 saves, and started only one game.

In his 1986 season, Farr was 8-4, 3.13 with eight saves over 109.1 innings, with all 56 appearances in relief.

November 8, 2010 at 11:29 AM

Blogger Jim M said...

I am assuming that we are not addressing the 2 new pickups because it is too depressing... they mean that we leave 2 younger, higher upside guys unprotected? can somebody comment? thanx (and I am pleased to have something to read in the offseason this year--thank you)

November 8, 2010 at 1:14 PM

Blogger Michael said...

Jim, As Rany pointed out in an earlier article, most of the Royals talent is not yet available in the Rule 5 draft. So there's not a lot to worry about there. And it's the beginning of free agency, so they have some roster spots open. If they end up signing someone or trading for someone better than these guys, then Moore can waive them just like their previous teams did. But I honestly expect a quiet offseason from the Royals, although MLBTR predicts them signing......Jorge De La Rosa.

Good lord, I hope not. He's a waste of big money waiting to happen...

November 8, 2010 at 1:58 PM

Blogger Antonio. said...

Most of the Royals talent isn't available to the Rule V yet, but I'd still rather take my chances on the guys he mentioned in that article than on some of the guys they've added since the article. Arias? The Guillen PTBNL? Zawadzki?

November 8, 2010 at 7:41 PM

Blogger Michael said...

Like who Antonio?

November 8, 2010 at 9:50 PM

Blogger Antonio. said...

People Rany mentioned in that column...

Ed Lucas
David Lough
Clint Robinson
Paulo Orlando
Everett Teaford
Nicolas Francis
Bryan Paukovits

All of those Teaford and above interest me more than those three I mentioned. Not that I'm interested in them on the level of the Moose/Hosmer/Myers/Montgomery/Lamb quintet, but definitely more so than the guys they've added since the end of the season. And, of course, it's not like above seven will all be taken if exposed, but seriously, more no-stick, ish-glove guys?

November 9, 2010 at 10:57 PM

Blogger Michael said...

yeah, the only ones on there that MIGHT be taken are Lough (IF he's available, I'm not sure on him) and Teaford. I just don't see anyone else being taken.

I guess Robinson could be taken by an AL team looking for a cheap DH, but I doubt it.

These guys aren't blocking anybody special. I would say there's a 90% chance we don't lose anyone worth anything in the Rule 5. And when it comes time for Spring Training and roster cuts, if there is someone that breaks camp (Moustakas?), any of these guys can be waived and then its no harm, no foul.

November 10, 2010 at 10:45 AM

Blogger Michael said...

Two other names some of the guys over at MLBTR think the Royals may go after...

Kevin Millwood-Only one guy picked KC as his prediction for where Millwood would end up. I'm 50-50 on this. I think in a spacious ballpark like Kauffman, he could be serviceable. Nothing special though, just someone to come in and chew up 190-210 innings.

Johnny Damon-Wow, that's a stretch. But 2 guys picked KC as his landing spot. I guess he could play left field, move Gordon to right, and put DeJesus back in center, or put Damon in center and leave Gordon and DeJesus where they are, but either way, that's not a very good defensive outfield. I don't see Damon DH'ing here unless they decide to either cut ties with Kila or send him back down. I'd prefer they sign a defense first centerfielder myself.

November 10, 2010 at 10:49 AM

Blogger Michael said...

Well scratch that part on Dejesus. He was just traded to the A's for Vin Mazzaro and a minor leaguer. I'm not thrilled with the return myself.

November 10, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone feel good about this Dejesus trade? I mean I know, as Royals fans, we're probably inclined to overvalue Dejesus since we've been so starved of any above average everyday players since the days of Damon/Beltran/Dye/Sweeney but this return is so UNDERwhelming its kind of hard to swallow.

I mean, it appears to be the same kind of return we got for Callaspo and I dont think there is any doubt that Dejesus is a much more proven commodity and a much better player overall. I think Mazarro will prove to be a better player than O'Sullivan who sucks and will amount to absolutely nothing but I dont think Marks is the level of prospect that Will Smith was in the Callaspo trade, hence my evaluation as virtually equal hauls. Thoughts?

November 11, 2010 at 1:24 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone feel good about this Dejesus trade? I mean I know, as Royals fans, we're probably inclined to overvalue Dejesus since we've been so starved of any above average everyday players since the days of Damon/Beltran/Dye/Sweeney but this return is so UNDERwhelming its kind of hard to swallow.

I mean, it appears to be the same kind of return we got for Callaspo and I dont think there is any doubt that Dejesus is a much more proven commodity and a much better player overall. I think Mazarro will prove to be a better player than O'Sullivan who sucks and will amount to absolutely nothing but I dont think Marks is the level of prospect that Will Smith was in the Callaspo trade, hence my evaluation as virtually equal hauls. Thoughts?

November 11, 2010 at 1:25 PM

Blogger Michael said...

I agree that Mazzaro is better than O'Sullivan, but I think the jury is still out on Marks. Obviously, someone in the Royals scouting department liked him. Last year wasn't a good year, but he was also coming off injury. He's going to High A this year, with a nice spacious ballpark, so maybe year 2 after surgery will prove to be a breakout year.

November 11, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Blogger Michael said...

I agree that Mazzaro is better than O'Sullivan, but I think the jury is still out on Marks. Obviously, someone in the Royals scouting department liked him. Last year wasn't a good year, but he was also coming off injury. He's going to High A this year, with a nice spacious ballpark, so maybe year 2 after surgery will prove to be a breakout year.

November 11, 2010 at 3:48 PM

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

This blog does not allow anonymous comments.

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.