2010 Kansas City Royals Repository thread

[SPchief]

All Royals All The Time!

After consultation with others who peruse the game threads we decided to create this as a repository for all things Royals. Minor league news, AL (ahem) Central (thanks Vonne) news and anything Royals can be found here.

alnorth, me and atleast 5 others will continue the game threads as usual. But if you locate something of interest.. ANYTHING.. deals on apparel, best ways in/out of the stadium, giveaways, great stories from this season or from seasons gone by, rumors, trades, anything.... feel free to post it here.

If a big story breaks, you can still start a thread about it. There is merely an all inclusive thread that will make a easy for us all to keep up with all things Royals.


Welcome! "Grab a Brew... don't cost nuthin"...[spills beer on feet]

[WilliamTheIrish]

I think he played at Burlington
Posted via Mobile Device

[WilliamTheIrish]

and I'm watching TONY PENA JR. Pitching for the Goants.
Posted via Mobile Device

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by WilliamTheIrish

I think he played at Burlington
Posted via Mobile Device

Blaine Hardy.

[WilliamTheIrish]

thanks Deez..
Posted via Mobile Device

[shakesthecat]

Originally Posted by WilliamTheIrish

and I'm watching TONY PENA JR. Pitching for the Goants.
Posted via Mobile Device

As well as former Royals Horacio Ramirez and Denny Bautista.

Between the 3 of them, 5 innings and 0 runs.

They may as well bring out Affeldt to close it out.


Dammit Carl!

[tk13]

Next we'll trade Juan Cruz and watch him light it up as setup man for the Rockies in their playoff run.

[jbwm89]

What about the idea of Callaspo batting 2nd? then either Dejesus or Pods leading off. I like Callaspo's low K's. I don't know how many times I watched Dejesus/whoever was batting second K with a guy on first and 2 or 3 down. The problem is were do you put Pods if david is leadoff and he is not second, and why does the bottom of our order suck so badly, we need Aviles back asap

So something like this:
Dejesus
Callaspo
Butler
Ankiel
Guillen
Yuni
Getz
Kendall
Pods

or I almost like
Pods
Callaspo
Butler
Ankiel
Guillen
DeJesus
Yuni
Getz
Kendall

[WilliamTheIrish]

SF's RF Bowker has had a nice game. Talkinh to 1B coachRoberto Kelly, says Bowker is out of options and will be dealt or given. Away. He actually looks like a MLB, which would be a welcome change for my team. Course we have a logjam of sucky players in the OF so there would be no sense in acquiring ML talent.
Posted via Mobile Device

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by jbwm89

What about the idea of Callaspo batting 2nd? then either Dejesus or Pods leading off. I like Callaspo's low K's. I don't know how many times I watched Dejesus/whoever was batting second K with a guy on first and 2 or 3 down. The problem is were do you put Pods if david is leadoff and he is not second, and why does the bottom of our order suck so badly, we need Aviles back asap

So something like this:
Dejesus
Callaspo
Butler
Ankiel
Guillen
Yuni
Getz
Kendall
Pods

or I almost like
Pods
Callaspo
Butler
Ankiel
Guillen
DeJesus
Yuni
Getz
Kendall

Honestly, I look at those 2 lineups and think:

Would you rather have the worst 7-8-9 in the league or the worst 6-7-8?

That said, leave DeJesus at lead-off and Butler in the 3 spot. Oh, and acquire whomever the **** WTI has scouted, since I trust his baseball acumen more than Dayton Pioli's.

[alnorth]

Now for something really fun (or depressing). Here are some 2010 AL Central projections and/or playoff odds from a bunch of computer simulations. One thing thats weird, everyone is obviously down on the Royals and optimistic about the Twins, but no one knows what to think about the Indians.

PECOTA (Baseball Prospectus)

1. Twins 81-81
T2. White Sox 79-83
T2. Indians 79-83
T2. Tigers 79-83
5. Royals 77-85

FANS (Fangraphs)

(division, wild card)

1. Twins - 38%, 1%
2. White Sox - 24%, 1%
3. Tigers - 19%, 1%
4. Indians - 13%, 1%
5. Royals - 6%, 0%

CHONE (baseballprojection.com)

1. Twins 86-76
2. Indians 82-80
3. White Sox 81-81
4. Tigers 74-88
5. Royals 73-89

Predictionmachine.com

(50,000 seasons played) (average record, highest win total, lowest win total, division, wild card, ALCS Win, World Series Win)

1. Twins 82.5-79.5, 100, 69, 36.4%, 5.4%, 8.4%, 4.2%
2. Tigers 82.3-79.7, 99, 68, 33.6%, 4.9%, 4.8%, 2.2%
3. White Sox 80.8-81.2, 98, 66, 28.4%, 4.3%, 4.7%, 2.1%
4. Royals 75.7-86.3, 91, 58, 1.7%, 2.0%, 0.0%, 0.0%
5. Indians 69.2-92.8, 87, 51, 0.0%, 0.0%, 0.0%, 0.0%

(0.0% means it happened fewer than 255 times in 50,000 seasons)

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Tushy.

But batting order is where theory and reality need to meet.

Just as Dayton Moore is naive to turn a blind eye to statistical analysis, it's equally misguided to turn a blind eye to the human element.

Fact: it matters where DeJesus hits. Last year should have provided all the additional evidence anyone needed. I made the case all season, and I was right.

all anecdotal evidence, witchcraft, and voodoo. The difference between the perfect batting order and a batting order intentionally designed to fail (lead off with #9, then power guy, then #8, then leadoff guy, then #7, etc) is a couple games or so. The difference between an average lineup and a perfect lineup is almost non-existent.

Anyway, batting order, deciding who should rest and who should play, managing the bullpen, figuring out the best season ticket sales strategy, talking to the commissioner about the next CBA, none of that is DM's job. Barring a player revolt, I want him focused only on aquiring talent right now.

[DeezNutz]

We're going to have to agree to disagree about an individual player performing differently (because he's reacting differently) when hitting in a different spot in the lineup. For DeJesus, hitting lead-off forces him to assume a more productive approach at the plate, one that he doesn't bring to the table when he's hit 3.

Again, should everything be the same, in theory? Yes. But the human element is involved.

And, I can speak with much experience when I say that players do think of themselves differently based on where they're hitting in the order.

I largely agree about DM's role, but he has to provide oversight, as well. For example, he needed to be the voice of reason when it became obvious that Hillman was abusing our starting pitchers.

A GM's duties are more thorough than only focusing on talent acquisition, though this is an ENORMOUS and important responsibility.

[alnorth]

Looks like I misunderstood you (though looking again, your point was obvious, so thats my fault. It's late). You weren't talking about the macro view of batting orders in general, you were talking about DeJesus specifically and where he bats.

Well, ok. On DeJesus, the last few seasons (I checked), we had maybe 200 AB's of him out of the leadoff spot. I'm just not going to get excited about ANY conclusion someone might draw from such a tiny sample. We'd need to get a thousand or so before we could tell how screwed up his head is.

Anyway, I dont necessarily disagree that he should leadoff. The batting order doesn't mean much, but its not totally worthless, and David basically gives you what you want for a traditional leadoff guy. So yeah, all things being equal, he probably is a pretty good choice for #1.

I'm just not going to care much at all if he isn't leading off (based on the macro theory of batting orders in general not making much of a difference), until we have a lot more AB's showing that he sucks when he doesn't leadoff.

[Demonpenz]

winning and hitting ins contagous.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Looks like I misunderstood you (though looking again, your point was obvious, so thats my fault. It's late). You weren't talking about the macro view of batting orders in general, you were talking about DeJesus specifically and where he bats.

Well, ok. On DeJesus, the last few seasons (I checked), we had maybe 200 AB's of him out of the leadoff spot. I'm just not going to get excited about ANY conclusion someone might draw from such a tiny sample. We'd need to get a thousand or so before we could tell how screwed up his head is.

Anyway, I dont necessarily disagree that he should leadoff. The batting order doesn't mean much, but its not totally worthless, and David basically gives you what you want for a traditional leadoff guy. So yeah, all things being equal, he probably is a pretty good choice for #1.

I'm just not going to care much at all if he isn't leading off (based on the macro theory of batting orders in general not making much of a difference), until we have a lot more AB's showing that he sucks when he doesn't leadoff.

I completely understand your concerns about sample size, and we're in agreement about the macro view of lineups.

One thing, though, optimizing output is particularly important this year because the division is so weak. A couple of games or so might be the difference between winning the division or finishing third...