PDA

View Full Version : Will the royals go over .500 for June?


Moooo
06-28-2006, 01:25 PM
They're on a good streak, are at .500 now, and they have to win 2 out of the next 3 in order to be over.

Their next 3 games are at Cin twice and then the first at Stl...

Moooo

DaKCMan AP
06-28-2006, 01:26 PM
magic 8 ball says "Don't count on it."

booyaf2
06-28-2006, 01:27 PM
Sorry pal, but they are not at .500, nor will they reach it at any time this year.

hypersensitiveZO6
06-28-2006, 01:28 PM
121

Do we still have a chance?

I'm sick of this winning/streak shit.

sedated
06-28-2006, 01:28 PM
They're on a good streak, are at .500 now, and they have to win 2 out of the next 3 in order to be over.

Their next 3 games are at Cin twice and then the first at Stl...

Moooo

:hmmm:
25-50 = .500?

DaneMcCloud
06-28-2006, 01:29 PM
There's absolutely no way to get even close to .500 this year. I still think the "winning streak" is a fluke. I hope I'm proven wrong, but I highly doubt it. They'll still be lucky to avoid the worst winning percentage in MLB history.

Moooo
06-28-2006, 01:29 PM
:hmmm:
25-50 = .500?

Read the title...

Brianfo
06-28-2006, 01:29 PM
Sorry pal, but they are not at .500, nor will they reach it at any time this year.

Read the original post. He said .500 for the month of June. I think they can do it. Elarton is on the mound tonight and they are swinging the bats well. If this team can win 70 games, it would be a major turn-around.

shakesthecat
06-28-2006, 01:29 PM
For the month of June, sure.

bkkcoh
06-28-2006, 01:29 PM
:hmmm:
25-50 = .500?

Not for the season, only for the month. One must be happy for the small things... :clap: :p

Moooo
06-28-2006, 01:32 PM
Read the original post. He said .500 for the month of June. I think they can do it. Elarton is on the mound tonight and they are swinging the bats well. If this team can win 70 games, it would be a major turn-around.

Yes. I'd take 65 and run with it :)

That'd be 9 games better, and in a season starting with references to the Mets, that's good.

Moooo

KingPriest2
06-28-2006, 01:38 PM
Not for the season, only for the month. One must be happy for the small things... :clap: :p


Yeah considering they only hav 3 in the last 33

HemiEd
06-28-2006, 01:40 PM
Last time I checked they only needed to go 75 and 12 the rest of the way to win a 100 games this year.

Brianfo
06-28-2006, 02:10 PM
Yes. I'd take 65 and run with it :)

That'd be 9 games better, and in a season starting with references to the Mets, that's good.

Moooo

I need them to win at least 65 games or I will lose $500. I took the over at the beginning of the season. Am I a homer or what?

Moooo
06-28-2006, 02:13 PM
I need them to win at least 65 games or I will lose $500. I took the over at the beginning of the season. Am I a homer or what?

No, but I do the opposite. I have only bet like twice on Chiefs games, but I always bet on them to lose. Thataway if they win, I am happy, and if they lose, I got 5 bucks...

500 clams though... that makes me nervous just thinking about...

Moooo

JBucc
06-28-2006, 02:15 PM
Last time I checked they only needed to go 75 and 12 the rest of the way to win a 100 games this year.Hey, it could happen.

RockChalk
06-28-2006, 02:16 PM
I need them to win at least 65 games or I will lose $500. I took the over at the beginning of the season. Am I a homer or what?

at the start of the season i was telling people to take the over, thinking we could easily win 65 games. now i'm a bit nervous, but I think we can do it. we just have to go 40-47 the rest of the way.

RockChalk
06-28-2006, 02:17 PM
There's absolutely no way to get even close to .500 this year. I still think the "winning streak" is a fluke. I hope I'm proven wrong, but I highly doubt it. They'll still be lucky to avoid the worst winning percentage in MLB history.


we have to lose 13 games in a row to get back on pace for the worst record of all time. i heard that at the beginning of last week, so it's probably even higher now.

tk13
06-28-2006, 02:29 PM
I think we're going to have a better 2nd half. I've said that since the start of the season though, and it's a lot easier to say after how bad everything started. Plus we just look like a better team now.

But... we had a lot of road games in the first half. In the 2nd half we play at home more often. Starting at the end of July, we have a stretch where we play 17 of 20 at home. Then alternate for a couple weeks, then play 15 of 21 at home. That's a lot of home games. We've been alright at home. Not great but much more respectable. Believe it or not, the Royals are actually 5th in all of baseball in home batting average.

StcChief
06-28-2006, 02:32 PM
The Royals win 50 season could be in danger with all those 2nd half home games.. :rolleyes:

kc1977
06-28-2006, 02:39 PM
at the start of the season i was telling people to take the over, thinking we could easily win 65 games. now i'm a bit nervous, but I think we can do it. we just have to go 40-47 the rest of the way.

I hope we do, but I don't think we will, and I also hope that we don't. This stretch is nice to have, particular if it carries into a series win at the Cardinals. Like last year, we had the stretch right after Buddy Bell took over where we swept the Yankees. It's nice to have at least one decent stretch where you can tune in and watch some good baseball. And, obviously, the longer the stretch the better.

That being said, at some point, and that point my be losing less than 100 games, I unfortunately have to consider the possibility of Buddy Bell returning next year. Two weeks ago, I wouldn't have bet a nickel that he would return. A respectable finish would start to scare me. This guy is a career loser and terrible manager and for the culture of this organization to change long term, he needs to be shown the door as well.

tk13
06-28-2006, 02:41 PM
Hey, laugh all you want. Our offense does okay at home. We actually have pretty similiar offensive numbers at the K as the Cards do at Busch. Our pitching hasn't been nearly as good though, that's the key. Plus we've just been terrible on the road.

Royals - .291 AVG, 184 runs, .357 OBP, .441 SLG

Cards - .276 AVG, 191 runs, .343 OBP, .417 SLG

And the Cards have the best hitter in baseball.

Plus the Cards have played more home games, we actually average more runs/game. And as bad as your pitching has been lately, it's been worse than ours, so you have no room to run smack.

StcChief
06-28-2006, 03:56 PM
Hey, laugh all you want. Our offense does okay at home. We actually have pretty similiar offensive numbers at the K as the Cards do at Busch. Our pitching hasn't been nearly as good though, that's the key. Plus we've just been terrible on the road.

Royals - .291 AVG, 184 runs, .357 OBP, .441 SLG

Cards - .276 AVG, 191 runs, .343 OBP, .417 SLG

And the Cards have the best hitter in baseball.

Plus the Cards have played more home games, we actually average more runs/game. And as bad as your pitching has been lately, it's been worse than ours, so you have no room to run smack.

Not running smack, the 50 win prediction is in danger, you may only loss 100 games..... :p

I just highlighted the operative word here. Cards will solve the pitching issues. they have played badly lately. Pitching and hitting.
We are seeing pitchers we never see. WS/Tigers are hot.

tk13
06-28-2006, 04:10 PM
Yeah, well we have to play the Tigers, Sox, Twins darn near 60 times. That's part of the reason our record is so bad, we've got a lot of work to do, the division is just brutal. You guys play in a much weaker division, I think that's been proven the last couple weeks, the AL central is beating the crap out of your division. Even the Royals are 8-2 against the NL Central in this round of interleague play. The Tigers, Sox, and Twins have done even better than that. That's incredible.

The Cards could solve the pitching issues, but that'll take a lot of work. Izzy just hasn't been consistent all year, Mulder has to get healthy, and I don't know what they'll do about Marquis, Suppan, and Ponson. There definitely is a bit of arrogance there to act like you know they'll solve the pitching problem. Just becuase it's not one guy, the entire staff is struggling. Lucky for them the rest of the NL sucks too. They probably could still make the playoffs with 3 guys having an ERA over 5. Maybe not, we'll see.