2013 Kansas City Royals Repository Thread

[duncan_idaho]

Proposed 2013 Slogan: Tigers: They're what's for dinner
Actual 2013 Slogan: Come to Play
A better, more accurate, or alternative slogan: All in, no panic, we promise.

Dayton Moore has pushed all his chips in and is riding on King/Jack suited, hoping it comes together, he gets some good luck, and he hits the nuts by the river card. There's potential, oh yes, there's potential. There's also risk.

At the midway point, Dayton is left counting on the river card. The flop and turn didn't help him, and he's looking at the Tigers holding a pair of Queens and the Indians holding a pair of 9s. His 2013 plan hasn't failed - yet - but the odds are not in his favor.

Burning questions updates below.

Burning Questions for 2013:

1) Will the improve rotation be improved enough? Does James Shields pitch like a fringe No. 1 away from Tampa Bay? Does Ervin Santana pitch to his highest upside in his walk year? Can Jeremy Guthrie build on his strong performance as a Royal in 2012? Can Wade Davis bring his new mentality- and velocity - back to the rotation?

Midseason check-in: Yes, the rotation is certainly improved enough. Shields has pitched like a fringe No. 1 and Santana is having his best season. Guthrie has horrible peripherals but has continued to perform well at his home park and eat innings on the road. Davis brought neither his kick-ass mentality or improved velocity back to the rotation and is in Luke Hochevar/Hiram Davies territory.

2) When will Luke Hochevar be shown the door?
Midseason check-in: It appears, never, at this point. Hochevar has been solid in non-leverage situations, though pretty much every time he has been used with men on base in an inning, it has been a disaster.

3) Does Hosmer bounce back?
Midseason check-in: It took some time, but Hosmer's performance from June 1 on is probably the most encouraging thing about the 2013 season so far.
4) Can Moustakas hit for a whole season like he did in the first half of 2012?
Midseason check-in: Nope. Moustakas was god-awful, then great for about 3 weeks, then god-awful again. He has been better since he started working with Brett and Grafol but still has a long way to go.
5) Who regresses?
Midseason check-in: Welp, Alicides Escobar is not a surprising name here (though Yost's stubborn insistence on hitting him second is ridiculous). Billy Butler is a surprise. He isn't having a terrible year - still contributing a lot to the offense - but he's not hitting for the average or power he has displayed over the past several years.
6) Who plays 2B?
Midseason check-in: A whole bunch of people, and not that great. Gio is at least getting a shot, though he once again is not doing much with it.
7) Can Jeff Francoeur be at least replacement level, rather than epic horrible level?
Midseason check-in: Hahahahahahahahahahaha
8) Will Dayton Moore survive to see 2014?
Midseason check-in: Outlook uncertain. Probably still around, unless the team completely tanks in the second half and he does something foolish. My guess - he sacrifices Ned Yost this offseason and gets one more shot with a new manager in 2014.
9) Will Danny Duffy come back healthy? And if he does, is he the same, better or worse?
Midseason check-in: Yes. Velocity looks the same, and it looks likely he is the same guy as before.
10) And the big one: Has KC added enough to run down the big-money Detroit Tigers?
Midseason check-in: Doesn't look like it, does it?

[Ceej]

Any good BBQ places open on Sunday?

Looking to put some down after the game on Sunday.

[Hootie]

then talking about Alex Gordon we have to throw out his first few seasons...he's not that player anymore

it's the same thing with Alex Smith

on a stacked team...you're right, perhaps he's an ideal #2

on this team? He has to hit #3.

and alnorth, I just don't see it

I understand that the math probably shows that Barry Bonds would have been best served as leadoff since he got on base 60% of the time (that's a real stat one year)...

but it just defies logic IMO

I don't look at a lineup as an extrapolation over a 162 game season

every single game the objection is to win

are you going to win more games with your best .OPS guy at #1 or at #3 behind guys who are better hitters and get on base more than Jeff Francouer and Chris Getz?

I just don't understand how, potentially 1 MORE AB PER GAME (and that rarely works out that way) where, in the very same scenario it GUARANTEES one at bat with your best hitter hitting with no one on base no matter what...is a lineup that guarantees more victories over putting your best hitter who had over 50 doubles the previous year #3 behind two superior hitters and on base guys than the black hole of our lineup

I just don't see how you can argue when EVERY SINGLE MAJOR LEAGUE MANAGER EVER, even the forward thinking GM's like Billy Beane, never used this math to submit a lineup

Miguel Tejada batted 3rd.

[Fansy the Famous Bard]

Originally Posted by Hootie

and alnorth, I just don't see it

I understand that the math probably shows that Barry Bonds would have been best served as leadoff since he got on base 60% of the time (that's a real stat one year)...

but it just defies logic IMO

I don't look at a lineup as an extrapolation over a 162 game season

every single game the objection is to win

are you going to win more games with your best .OPS guy at #1 or at #3 behind guys who are better hitters and get on base more than Jeff Francouer and Chris Getz?

I just don't understand how, potentially 1 MORE AB PER GAME (and that rarely works out that way) where, in the very same scenario it GUARANTEES one at bat with your best hitter hitting with no one on base no matter what...is a lineup that guarantees more victories over putting your best hitter who had over 50 doubles the previous year #3 behind two superior hitters and on base guys than the black hole of our lineup

I just don't see how you can argue when EVERY SINGLE MAJOR LEAGUE MANAGER EVER, even the forward thinking GM's like Billy Beane, never used this math to submit a lineup

Miguel Tejada batted 3rd.

Like Hootie says, the value of your SLG% diminishes greatly when you don't have OBP% people in front of you...

The very few additional at bats obtained by batting leadoff as opposed to #3 over the course of the year is minimal at best. The impact of the diminished return on the SLG% far outweighs it.

[jbwm89]

Originally Posted by Hootie

I don't look at a lineup as an extrapolation over a 162 game season

every single game the objection is to win

This is the one thing I don't think the saber heads understand, you can't just extrapolate everything out over the course of the entire season. Some runs and AB's matter more than others.

It's baseball, not a roto fantasy league.

[Fansy the Famous Bard]

Originally Posted by Hootie

then talking about Alex Gordon we have to throw out his first few seasons...he's not that player anymore

Right, which is why I also used the last 2 seasons' stats in discussing the points.

[Hootie]

the "math" just doesn't take into account in game scenarios

it's a lot easier to win a game when Alex Gordon comes up in the 1st inning and hits a 2 run HR and the pitcher suddenly has the lead which instills confidence

these "extra ABs", and they do exist...IMO, are negated by the fact that, NO MATTER WHAT, once every game our best .OPS guy is hitting with no one on base.

Now...if he leads off the game with a double I agree, he is going to score more often than not because Escobar and Butler are hitting behind him...

but the fact of the matter is...we need to count on Alex Gordon to be a run producer first, not a run scorer first.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Right, which is why I also used the last 2 seasons' stats in discussing the points.

he's not a superstar hitter at this point

Butler almost achieved that status after his great 2012. Gordon had a good 2012. His doubles line was amazing.

A guy that hits that many doubles doesn't belong as a leadoff hitter on a power starved team.

Of course he's going to thrive there. He would thrive at any spot in the lineup. The dude can rake.

...I just think our fans were so disappointed with the early years Gordon that when he finally worked at leadoff they didn't want to **** with it. Understandable. But once a guy figures it out and he has that many extra base hits, you just have to hit him 3rd with this particular lineup. It is going to produce the most runs. Runs win games.

[Sannyasi]

Originally Posted by Hootie

then talking about Alex Gordon we have to throw out his first few seasons...he's not that player anymore

it's the same thing with Alex Smith

on a stacked team...you're right, perhaps he's an ideal #2

on this team? He has to hit #3.

and alnorth, I just don't see it

I understand that the math probably shows that Barry Bonds would have been best served as leadoff since he got on base 60% of the time (that's a real stat one year)...

but it just defies logic IMO

I don't look at a lineup as an extrapolation over a 162 game season

every single game the objection is to win

are you going to win more games with your best .OPS guy at #1 or at #3 behind guys who are better hitters and get on base more than Jeff Francouer and Chris Getz?

I just don't understand how, potentially 1 MORE AB PER GAME (and that rarely works out that way) where, in the very same scenario it GUARANTEES one at bat with your best hitter hitting with no one on base no matter what...is a lineup that guarantees more victories over putting your best hitter who had over 50 doubles the previous year #3 behind two superior hitters and on base guys than the black hole of our lineup

I just don't see how you can argue when EVERY SINGLE MAJOR LEAGUE MANAGER EVER, even the forward thinking GM's like Billy Beane, never used this math to submit a lineup

Miguel Tejada batted 3rd.

Major league managers are very conservative in their approach to the game. They've always been years behind the statistical community, but you are starting to see them catch up.

I'd compare the lineup thing to 4th downs in football. All the math shows that coaches should be going for it on 4th down much more often. However, it is still being under-utilized due to years of conventional wisdom, and because no coach wants to risk their job doing something different.

[Hootie]

math doesn't take into account anxiety or crowd effect on 4th down

it simply doesn't

math doesn't have the gray area professional sports has

[BigCatDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hootie

math doesn't take into account anxiety or crowd effect on 4th down

it simply doesn't

math doesn't have the gray area professional sports has

That anxiety and crowd were also there on the previous 4th downs that the stats were based on.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Hootie

the "math" just doesn't take into account in game scenarios

it's a lot easier to win a game when Alex Gordon comes up in the 1st inning and hits a 2 run HR and the pitcher suddenly has the lead which instills confidence

these "extra ABs", and they do exist...IMO, are negated by the fact that, NO MATTER WHAT, once every game our best .OPS guy is hitting with no one on base.

Now...if he leads off the game with a double I agree, he is going to score more often than not because Escobar and Butler are hitting behind him...

but the fact of the matter is...we need to count on Alex Gordon to be a run producer first, not a run scorer first.

Even leading off the game with a double serves to illustrate the fact that he would be better off batting third. If Cain and Escobar bat before him, percentages say that one of them will get on base. That double would have driven them in.

[Saul Good]

The way I see it, it comes down to this: you are better off having a single followed by a double than a double followed by a single...even moreso if you single then homer versus homering then getting a single. You increase your likelihood of scoring multiple runs simply by switching the order in which the hits come.

[duncan_idaho]

I was in favor of leaving Gordon at the top to start the season because I was hopeful the Royals could get decent production behind Butler in the 4-5 spots.

As the season has gone on and that has NOT happened, it became a little different. I didn't think Lorenzo Cain would be this productive at the plate.

I still don't like Escobar in the leadoff spot - OBP issues - long term, but now that the lineup has been shaken up, I think you roll with it for a little while and see what happens.

[Prison Bitch]

Bill James has done the math, and says your best hitter should hit #2.

[BigCatDaddy]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

I was in favor of leaving Gordon at the top to start the season because I was hopeful the Royals could get decent production behind Butler in the 4-5 spots.

As the season has gone on and that has NOT happened, it became a little different. I didn't think Lorenzo Cain would be this productive at the plate.

I still don't like Escobar in the leadoff spot - OBP issues - long term, but now that the lineup has been shaken up, I think you roll with it for a little while and see what happens.

Why not Hosmer short term? If Hosmer starts hitting for power swap him and Cain.

Hos
Cain
Gordan
Butler
Moose
Escobar
Salvy
Frenchy/Dyson
Johnson/Getz