PDA

View Full Version : Flanagan: Glass likes way Royals are playing the game


Deberg_1990
04-11-2008, 09:46 AM
Personally, Glass should be the last person to ask for advice on how to win a pennant.




http://www.kansascity.com/sports/columnists/jeffrey_flanagan/story/570924.html



You won’t get Royals owner David Glass to gloat. Not yet at least.

But deep down inside, you know Glass is loving the fact that his small-market Royals with a payroll under $60 million have had their way with the big-spending Tigers — the Yankees of the Central Division — and the financially-bloated Yankees themselves.

As always, Glass is preaching the message of spending money wisely (something the Royals haven’t always done, mind you).

“It really comes down to the fundamentals,” Glass told me. “The Twins have proven over the years that (it’s not about payroll). If you execute and play the fundamentals and don’t beat yourselves, you can compete and you can win.

“What I have liked so far is that we’re not beating ourselves. Last year and the year before, you could sense that there were games we lost just because we beat ourselves. I think we’ll do a lot less of that this season.”

Trying to buy a pennant — something the Tigers obviously think they can do — isn’t necessarily the guaranteed route to go.

“Smaller markets can’t do financially what the bigger markets can do,” Glass said. “But we can compete if we execute. That’s why I really like our new manager and what he’s trying to accomplish.

“You take the players you have and get the most out of them and then if you need to possibly add another piece (in August), you can still do that.”

Guillen’s influence

Glass did drop $36 million on one piece to the puzzle — cleanup hitter Jose Guillen. So what does Glass think of that investment?

“I think he’s going to be fine,” Glass said, “and I think he’s going to end up being a good influence on our younger players. I really do.”

Demonpenz
04-11-2008, 10:00 AM
Please mr glass if we are contending late in the year add some pieces! It might be the best time!

SNR
04-11-2008, 10:00 AM
Is it can be print super bowl tix time now plz?

Reerun_KC
04-11-2008, 10:09 AM
Please mr glass if we are contending late in the year add some pieces! It might be the best time!
Thats right Mr Glass and if you need help about how to aquire that savy vet that will push you over the top. Just call Queen Carl.. He knows so well about adding those final pieces to the puzzle..

How about we develop the talent we have?

Demonpenz
04-11-2008, 10:12 AM
you can develop the talent all you want but you know the big boys are going to be buying bats for the playoff push. Maybe we can add bonds !

MIAdragon
04-11-2008, 10:39 AM
you can develop the talent all you want but you know the big boys are going to be buying bats for the playoff push. Maybe we can add bonds !

I dont know why you guys didnt push harder to get him now.

Sure-Oz
04-11-2008, 11:02 AM
Seattle probably will get bonds, no one will touch him anyway and we got Butler at DH

Demonpenz
04-11-2008, 11:06 AM
could you imagine bonds on the new jumbotron? His head would have been as big as epcot center

markk
04-11-2008, 12:45 PM
bonds doesn't make any sense for the royals. a team that is a little short on talent and playing on chemistry doesn't need him. he's a black hole of chemistry.

plus, no team is going to bring in a guy who has felony charges hanging over his head. especially at the price he thinks he is worth.

i might be in the minority but i think that Bonds has played his last game.

keg in kc
04-11-2008, 12:46 PM
I can't think of a player that would be a worse fit for KC than Bonds. Maybe we can get Canseco out of retirement.

alnorth
04-11-2008, 12:50 PM
bonds doesn't make any sense for the royals. a team that is a little short on talent and playing on chemistry doesn't need him. he's a black hole of chemistry.

I disagree. Bonds would add a LOT of chemistry. He is practically a living walking chemistry laboratory.

Adept Havelock
04-11-2008, 12:53 PM
I disagree. Bonds would add a LOT of chemistry. He is practically a living walking chemistry laboratory.

LMAO :clap:

Demonpenz
04-11-2008, 12:53 PM
i was being dumb with the bonds comment (as if i need to do that anyway) but i would like to add another pitcher or bat somewhere if we are in contention

MIAdragon
04-11-2008, 12:55 PM
I can't think of a player that would be a worse fit for KC than Bonds. Maybe we can get Canseco out of retirement.

Like him or not (I cant stand him) he puts butts in seats. AND is a legit superstar not to mention he would DRASTICLY improve your O. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

keg in kc
04-11-2008, 01:02 PM
Like him or not (I cant stand him) he puts butts in seats. AND is a legit superstar not to mention he would DRASTICLY improve your O. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>I don't have a problem with Bonds. Like I said, I just can't think of a worse fit. He's a constant distraction with the media, he (purportedly) doesn't bring anything to the table in terms of mentoring younger players and I think he'd actually hurt the image of the franchise in this market, rather than "put butts in the seats". Not to mention he'd take at bats away from Billy Butler, which would be the last thing you want long term.

This isn't a franchise that's in a position to add a player like Bonds. If this was 2010 or 2011 and Butler/Gordon/Teahen/Moustakas/Hochevar/ Cortes/Lumsden/Grienke are established major leaguers for a contending Royals team, it would make sense. Right now it would be a short cut that would hurt the long-term growth of the Royals for a few home runs and (maybe) meaningless wins now.

They're going about it the right way.

As for the original article, I like the way they're playing now, too.

markk
04-11-2008, 01:04 PM
the royals have a young player who needs to be out there every day in left already. there's no place to put bonds because Butler is the DH. Signing bonds makes sense if the royals hate giving ABs to young talent and instead need a locker room cancer to create a media craze/distraction and if they have 10 million bucks to throw away that they dont want to spend on a starting pitcher next year or something. and while we're at it the royals have a roster full of guys who hit .270 already

DJJasonp
04-11-2008, 01:13 PM
Thats right Mr Glass and if you need help about how to aquire that savy vet that will push you over the top. Just call Queen Carl.. He knows so well about adding those final pieces to the puzzle..

How about we develop the talent we have?


I heard from Carl that Chester McGlocktin is available for DH

MIAdragon
04-11-2008, 01:21 PM
the royals have a young player who needs to be out there every day in left already. there's no place to put bonds because Butler is the DH. Signing bonds makes sense if the royals hate giving ABs to young talent and instead need a locker room cancer to create a media craze/distraction and if they have 10 million bucks to throw away that they dont want to spend on a starting pitcher next year or something. and while we're at it the royals have a roster full of guys who hit .270 already

Right Id take Bucks 8-10 HR's over Bonds 30-40. The guy would be the best talent the Roylas have had in the last 10 years.

Deberg_1990
04-11-2008, 01:28 PM
Right Id take Bucks 8-10 HR's over Bonds 30-40.

HUH??????

markk
04-11-2008, 01:28 PM
Right Id take Bucks 8-10 HR's over Bonds 30-40. The guy would be the best talent the Roylas have had in the last 10 years.

buck? is bonds a catcher now?

the royals are not a playoff team, therefore, they have no use for a 44 year old DH. it is really quite simple

Sure-Oz
04-11-2008, 02:08 PM
Right Id take Bucks 8-10 HR's over Bonds 30-40. The guy would be the best talent the Roylas have had in the last 10 years.


Can bonds play the catcher position?

MIAdragon
04-11-2008, 02:10 PM
Damit thats what i get trying to talk on the phone, answer a co worker and post at the same time!!

Buttler.

keg in kc
04-11-2008, 02:20 PM
Damit thats what i get trying to talk on the phone, answer a co worker and post at the same time!!

Buttler.Butler or Bonds, that's what you're asking?

I think I'd take Butler at 22 with his current .400 average over Bonds. Maybe that's just me. It's crazy, I know, but I'd rather give at-bats to a 22-year old future batting champion's development than a 44-year old, even if the poor kid might not hit more than 20 home runs this year.

ChiefsCountry
04-11-2008, 02:33 PM
Could Bonds play first? I know he has never done it, but he was a damn good outfielder so you wouldnt think it would be that hard of a switch for him.

Dr. Van Halen
04-11-2008, 02:42 PM
Since when does Flanagan write columns about the Royals? Weird.

Spicy McHaggis
04-11-2008, 06:07 PM
After over a decade of simply terrible, terrible baseball, Glass decides that maybe he should actually start trying to win.

DeezNutz
04-11-2008, 06:15 PM
Yeah, things seem a lot different. Glass is pleased we're doing well AND working on a shoe-string budget. :rolleyes:

I really like the Royals, been a fan my entire life, but I want to see a serious financial effort from ownership. When the payroll is damn near the amount you're receiving via revenue sharing, that's a joke. This team should have a payroll of around 80 mil. After the stadium improvements, we need to be 90-100 mil. And I don't want to hear any bs about Glass spending more on the farm system and on scouting. Guess what, that's what pro teams do; it's the cost of doing business. If you don't want to spend it, don't own a fuggin team.

Deberg_1990
04-11-2008, 07:13 PM
After over a decade of simply terrible, terrible baseball, Glass decides that maybe he should actually start trying to win.


hahaha....true

keg in kc
04-11-2008, 07:44 PM
An 80 million payroll probably isn't as far off as it seems. IIRC, they're at 68 million this year. I don't have a problem with keeping the payroll under control as long as they keep adding pieces every year, and have enough down the road to hold onto their own draft picks.

That'll be the telling sign, 3 or 4 years from now, when all these guys start hitting the time where we'll need to try to sign them to extensions before they hit the market.

DeezNutz
04-11-2008, 10:11 PM
We're at 58 mil right now. I'm saying we should spend stupidly, but, in the short term, this team must overpay to get results. I know we went pretty hard at Hunter this offseason, but we have to be the team that comes in a blows a top-notch player away with a package, not the Angels. Same thing with drafts. We must be willing to draft the best player, not caring too much about slot.

Unless we get lightning in a bottle, which is possible, these are the things that must happen to bring a championship here. People point to smaller market teams like the Marlins that have won it all with a relatively low payroll, but this comparison is misleading. They were also the same team that drafted Beckett, who was paid far beyond any kind of slot value. Not surprisingly, he was nails in October. We have to be willing to take these kinds of risks.

beavis
04-12-2008, 06:58 AM
We're at 58 mil right now. I'm saying we should spend stupidly, but, in the short term, this team must overpay to get results. I know we went pretty hard at Hunter this offseason, but we have to be the team that comes in a blows a top-notch player away with a package, not the Angels. Same thing with drafts. We must be willing to draft the best player, not caring too much about slot.

Maybe it's just me, but I think this is the kind of thing we need to avoid doing. I would have liked to have had Hunter as much as the next guy, but I think there's a good chance his production starts to decline towards the end of that contract. Sign guys while they in their mid to late 20's, while they are ascending, not decending in terms of production.

keg in kc
04-12-2008, 07:32 AM
The Royals payroll is actually 68 million. Back when Dutton reported the payroll on opening day roster as 57.4 million, he only included the actual 25-man roster that day and didn't include guaranteed money the Royals still owe other players (even if they're not on the 25-man roster...) like Berroa, Hochevar, De la Rosa, and a few others. Combined that adds another 10 million to the payroll.

And they've already started overpaying, for guys like Meche last season (who looks like a total bust right now, damnit) and Guiillen this year.

Keep in mind how much of an increase 68 million really is over Royals payrolls in recent years. Their 2005 payroll was 36 million, and their 2006 payroll was 47 million. This year's is roughly comparable to last year's, an increase of more than 30 million in four years.

DeezNutz
04-12-2008, 12:14 PM
Keg (good catch regarding the numbers) and Beavis both make good points. But I still contend that we haven't changed the public perception of the franchise. I agree that Meche and Guillen are a great start, and I'm certainly happy about these moves, but these aren't cornerstone-type players. We need to make a move akin to Pudge to the Tigers. Splashy (and sensible) move that catches everyone's attention.

Hunter could be on the downslope of his career, I agree. But getting him to KC, in my opinion, would have opened the door for others. Players around the league would then be sure, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that KC was serious about winning.

All this could be moot, I admit, if Dayton ends up being the best GM in the game. He'll find a way to get in done in KC, while working with a limited budget. Still, this is asking an awful lot. Dayton seems to be really good, but we can't expect him to be a magician. At some point, we'll need serious dollars to be serious contenders. Payroll cannot equal the money we get via revenue sharing.

keg in kc
04-12-2008, 12:20 PM
You mention the Tigers, and I think what they're doing is following a pattern similar to what Detroit did, where they slowly built up the payroll while bringing a bunch of minor leaguers along. Then when everything's in place, they spend money on guys like Ivan Rodriguez and Kenny Rogers, the last pieces of the puzzle.

They need to find their Pudge in 2009 or 2010; 2008's a little premature, I think. They need more development from Gordon and Butler and the young pitchers before they take that next step. And my guess is that's what they think, too, and all of this will be timed to coincide with the end of the renovations.

milkman
04-12-2008, 12:28 PM
Keg (good catch regarding the numbers) and Beavis both make good points. But I still contend that we haven't changed the public perception of the franchise. I agree that Meche and Guillen are a great start, and I'm certainly happy about these moves, but these aren't cornerstone-type players. We need to make a move akin to Pudge to the Tigers. Splashy (and sensible) move that catches everyone's attention.

Hunter could be on the downslope of his career, I agree. But getting him to KC, in my opinion, would have opened the door for others. Players around the league would then be sure, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that KC was serious about winning.

All this could be moot, I admit, if Dayton ends up being the best GM in the game. He'll find a way to get in done in KC, while working with a limited budget. Still, this is asking an awful lot. Dayton seems to be really good, but we can't expect him to be a magician. At some point, we'll need serious dollars to be serious contenders. Payroll cannot equal the money we get via revenue sharing.

I'd rather have home grown players as my cornerstone players.

Free agency and trades should be used to fill holes where necessary, and to make late season runs.

tk13
04-12-2008, 12:34 PM
I'm pretty sure Dayton has said that he plans for the payroll to be in the 80ish million dollar range within about two years, which would be about middle of the pack, which is perfectly fine. That will take the team playing well and fans coming out to the renovated K.

They probably came pretty close to getting there this year. We had the highest offer on the table for Torii Hunter until the Angels came in at the very last minute and swooped him away. And as much as people want to spend money, there's just no way to justify beating the Angels offer and giving Hunter $20 million a year.... that's just too much. Then people would complain about spending money poorly when Hunter was 36-37 years old (just like they did with Sweeney) And if I'm not mistaken, we did have the highest offer on the table for Kuroda, but he went West Coast and took less money to play in LA. Either one of those two would've upped the payroll quite a bit and the Royals would've been middle of the pack in payroll, but it just didn't work out.

At least we've gotten to the point where FA's will seriously consider KC, now we just need to continue playing decently, even if it's .500 ball, just to make the big FA's think they can come and help push the team into playoff contention. Once that happens, the Royals will probably be in that middle ground where most teams stand in-between the Yankees/Red Sox/Tigers and Marlins/Pirates groups.

Demonpenz
04-12-2008, 12:36 PM
Is meche really a bust? I think he will be fine

keg in kc
04-12-2008, 12:38 PM
Is meche really a bust? I think he will be fine'Bust' might have been a little strong, since he pitched well last season, but I don't think he's going to have a good year. The question is going to be whether Bannister or Grienke can allow the Royals to drop him in the roation.

And even if he doesn't have last year's ERA, I'd like to think we can still count on him to effectively eat innings. But if his first 3 starts are any indication, it's going to be a long year.

Demonpenz
04-12-2008, 12:40 PM
as long as meche can give us some innings that will be worth it

DeezNutz
04-12-2008, 01:05 PM
You mention the Tigers, and I think what they're doing is following a pattern similar to what Detroit did, where they slowly built up the payroll while bringing a bunch of minor leaguers along. Then when everything's in place, they spend money on guys like Ivan Rodriguez and Kenny Rogers, the last pieces of the puzzle.

They need to find their Pudge in 2009 or 2010; 2008's a little premature, I think. They need more development from Gordon and Butler and the young pitchers before they take that next step. And my guess is that's what they think, too, and all of this will be timed to coincide with the end of the renovations.

I agree that this would be an ok plan, but I don't believe that this is what Pudge did for the Tigers. His first season with them was 2004, the year after the team went for a near record 43-119 in 2003. I don't know enough about other mitigating factors, but he wasn't coming as the final piece of anything, since the organization was a turd at the time. Once Pudge arrived, this signaled that big changes were occuring in Detroit.

We certainly need the players we've drafted highly to develop. Gordon must be a high-quality everyday player. Butler must continue to develop (though he's pretty bad ass right now). All I'm saying is that I don't think we can understate the impact of a stud FA, even if a team must overpay to get him. Hypothetically, if a Santana type shakes free in the off-season, there are worse things a team could do than to overpay by 3 mil or so to get him.

DeezNutz
04-12-2008, 01:06 PM
Regarding Meche, in an ideal world I think he's a number 3, maybeeeee a number 2 starter, but I'm still happy we have him.

Deberg_1990
04-12-2008, 01:09 PM
Regarding Meche, in an ideal world I think he's a number 3, maybeeeee a number 2 starter, but I'm still happy we have him.


I agree. Hes a solid "innings eater" but im not sure he will ever be elite. Hes going to be one of those Tim Belcher types: 12-15 wins a year. 200+ innings.


Maybe Greinke or Bannister will develop into a #1 this year??

DeezNutz
04-12-2008, 01:10 PM
Maybe Greinke or Bannister will develop into a #1 this year??

I'm hoping for the same thing. Through their first two starts, either or both look like they're more than capable.

tk13
04-12-2008, 01:13 PM
It's possible Meche could have a bad year, but I think some of it is Royals fans are just used to one-hit wonders happening. We'll see.... but I don't think Meche is like a Darrell May or Paul Byrd.... his stuff is so much better than guys like that, and he's a smart pitcher. For the first time in ages the entire pitching staff actually has good stuff, guys who don't throw junk, aren't lazy, etc. That doesn't mean they'll all pitch well but the chances are certainly better.

Deberg_1990
04-12-2008, 01:16 PM
It's possible Meche could have a bad year, but I think some of it is Royals fans are just used to one-hit wonders happening. We'll see.... but I don't think Meche is like a Darrell May or Paul Byrd.... his stuff is so much better than guys like that, and he's a smart pitcher. For the first time in ages the entire pitching staff actually has good stuff, guys who don't throw junk, aren't lazy, etc. That doesn't mean they'll all pitch well but the chances are certainly better.


IM not sure what it is about Meche. Hes got good stuff, but do teams just not score for him???

Look at his past. hes always been a 10-15 wins a season guy. His career ERA isnt that great.

DeezNutz
04-12-2008, 01:19 PM
One very positive thing about Meche, though, is that he gives a team a chance, even when he's having a bad night. Last night's a great example. His performance, by Meche standards, sucked, but he still kept it relatively close and went six innings. Things went to crap in the second, but he didn't quit and thus saved the pen for the rest of the series. I respect this attitude and approach. Definitely a team guy because it would have been easy for him to consider quiting, especially given the weather conditions.