*** Official 2015 Royals Repository ***

[duncan_idaho]

In this thread: All things related to the AL Champions.

Duncan's Official Team Record prediction: 90 wins
Duncan's Official Team MVP prediction: Eric Hosmer

I can't wait for this season to start. The AL Central should be a very entertaining race. I'll give brief thoughts on each team the Royals must contend with to make it back to the postseason - strengths and weaknesses.

Detroit Tigers:
Strength: The offense is still full of powerful hitters, and Miguel Cabrera may be healthier.
Weakness: Rotation is questionable after Price and Sanchez, bullpen continues to be horrible.

Cleveland Indians:
Strength: Great manager and a deep, versatile lineup.
Weakness: The rotation is a question mark past Corey Kluber, and even he has a few questions about him.

Chicago White Sox:
Strength: 1-2-3 combo of Sale, Quintana and Samardzija is pretty formidable. Offense is anchored by Jose Abreu, too.
Weakness: Defense still has major questions, and this team has 20 games to improve by if it really wants to make the playoffs.

The Royals will be a division winner IF ...
1) Ventura and Duffy combine for 375+ innings of high-quality work
2) Eric Hosmer delivers on his potential with a FULL season of success rather than bursts
3) The deeper bullpen lessens the critical load on Herrera, Davis and Holland
4) Lorenzo Cain stays healthy
5) Either Alex Rios or Kendrys Morales bounces back to 2013 form

Let's get this started!

[TLO]

Originally Posted by 1moreTRich

Yeah, opening day was on March 31st last year, if I remember right.

Yeah, the season started in Match last year.

[Raiderhater]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Most of the Angels fans seemed pretty cool. It's just a vocal minority that get pouty over getting stared down after they bean us 5 times in 3 games.

This is the biggest non-story ever. They're lucky Trout didn't take 98mph to the ribs. It would have been totally justified in response to them plunking us (not to mention Aybar mean-mugging Holland after he got punched out).

For all of the talk about the cockiness and over all attitude of the Royals, the fact that they have let all of these hit batters go by with out incident so far tells me the real attitude problem lies some where else.

It had better come to a stop before one of our guys takes a serious hit.

[Hootie]

I've never seen anything like Lorenzo Cain in my life, by the way.

he makes spectacular plays look easier than any OF'er I've ever seen

he never wastes a step out there ... and he has blazing speed ... and he gets ridiculous reads. It's just ... unbelievable.

[DeepSouth]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Most of the Angels fans seemed pretty cool. It's just a vocal minority that get pouty over getting stared down after they bean us 5 times in 3 games.

This is the biggest non-story ever. They're lucky Trout didn't take 98mph to the ribs. It would have been totally justified in response to them plunking us (not to mention Aybar mean-mugging Holland after he got punched out).

Pitcher plunking batters is one of the negatives of having a DH. As it is, the pitcher never has to worry about getting a ball thrown at his head. Would these pitchers that are hitting batters have the balls to do it if they had to bat.

If I was the commissioner, I might consider making a rule that would force a team to forfeit their DH and make the pitcher bat if he plunked someone. And, when the NL adopts the DH (like they should have many years ago), you'd see less hit batters in that league also.

[Hootie]

ha

the pitcher will have to hear about it if he's unnecessarily plunking the opposition and then one of his teammates takes one in the middle of the back

trust me

[Sure-Oz]

Really Rob....?

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-...central-041315

Sorry for weird characters... Copied from my phone

@robneyer

Are the Royals for real?

The answer is that no, of course they'€™re not for real. After all, it'€™s only six games. And then there'€™s the little matter of all those projections that showed the Royals finishing third this season. Or fourth.

What's more? Every season, teams get off to hot starts of one sort or another, only to fade badly.

Last year, one week into May the Colorado Rockies were 22-14 and the Milwaukee Brewers were 22-13; those were the two best records in the National League. Afterward? The Brewers went 60-67 and the Rockies went*44-82, easily the worst post-May 7 record in the majors.

Do you remember when everyone was raving about the Rockies last spring? Because I sure do. Granted, Troy Tulowitzki'€™s injury didn'€™t help. But by then, the Rockies'€™ record was already 40-57.

I remember when the A'€™s seemed unbeatable, too. On the morning of Aug. 10, the Athletics' record stood at 72-44, tops in the majors. Their record the rest of the way: 16-30, worst in the American League.

All I'm saying is the past isn'€™tnecessarily*prologue, although of course usually it is. Of the 10 teams in line for a postseason spot at the All-Star break last summer, seven eventually made it (exceptions: Seattle, Milwaukee, Atlanta).

But the Royals are 6-0 in this young season. The Tigers, too. Yes, it's only six games. Do you know how rarely teams open their season with six straight wins? Unless I missed someone, just one team has done that in the past 10 years: the 2011 Rangers, who won their first six, lost their seventh, and ultimately won 96 games and lost the World Series by thenarrowest of margins.

Granted, that'€™s just one team and one season. Not a season without hiccoughs, either. The Rangers just sort of muddled along for a few months, and in early July were only three games over .500. But they dashed off a 12-game winning streak, then six-game streaks in August and September (to finish the regular season).

Yes, the Rangers were*particularlystreaky. And it'€™s certainly not the case that*bad*teams won'€™t put together winning streaks. Last year, six teams lost at least 90 games ... but four ofthem*did post winning streaks of six games. In fact, three of*those*teams racked up seven-game winning streaks.

Ah, but that was it. Those three seven-game streaks, and one six-game streak. Meanwhile, the Twins' longest streak was four games; the Diamondbacks', only*three. If there'€™s a message here, it's probably that*badteams don'€™t win six straight.

Wait, didn'€™t I just say that four bad teams did that just last year?

Why, yes. But here'€™s the key difference: The Royals and the Tigers have done it*already. Which means they'€™ve got nearly six months to run off more streaks. And they probably will, since neither team was in the "€œbad"€� bucket before the season began.

I should also mention what the message here is not: It'€™s not that the Royals or the Tigers are going be great. Yes, the 2011 Rangers were pretty tremendous but one team in one season just doesn'€™t tell us much. I guess I could go back*another*10 years, but even th- oh, okay. Beats real work.

In 2003, the Giants opened the season 7-0, and the ROYALS opened with NINE STRAIGHT WINS. Yes, the Royals. Now it's all coming back to me. The Royals finished that season seven games out of first place; the Giants won 100 games.

In 2002, the Giants started 6-0 and finished the season with 95 wins.

In 1998, the Indians started 6-0 and finished with 89 wins, good enough for first place in a lousy division.

In 1996, the Rangers started 7-0 and finished with 90 wins, good enough for first place.

That'€™s it. In the 20 seasons before this one, only six teams opened their seasons with six straight victories. Which seems like a ridiculously small number and*maybe*I missed somebody, but I don'€™t think so. And of those six teams, five wound up in the playoffs. Now, it'€™s*probably*true that most or all of these teams were better on Opening Day --€“ on paper, I mean --€“ than the Royals were this season.

It'€™s*certainly*true that the Royals can'€™t keep hitting the way they'€™ve been hitting, with seven or eight of the regulars outperforming their projections. But then, you knew that already, just as you knew the Royals won'€™t go 162-0 this season.

What we don'€™t know is how many Royals*will*outperform their projections this season. Might be one, might be five or six. You don'€™t want to bet against projections because you'€™ll lose your money. But of course they're not always right. Maybe Mike Moustakas really*did*find himself last season, and*Ned Yost'€™s optimism*is well-founded. Jon Paul Morosi watched the Royals sweep the Angels, and says*Kendrys Morales has never before moved around this well.

There are things we just don'€™t know until they'€™ve actually happened. The Royals finished ninth in the American League in scoring last year, and I certainly didn'€™t expect them to fare much better this year. Still don'€™t.

But it wouldn'€™t be the first time we whiffed on one of these things.

[Hootie]

ok Rob Neyer

sounds like you've watched a lot of Royals baseball this year

[Saul Good]

That is one of the most poorly constructed arguments I've ever read in my life. Given that I post regularly on CP, that's saying something.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

That is one of the most poorly constructed arguments I've ever read in my life. Given that I post regularly on CP, that's saying something.

They're not for real!

(and then he goes on to tell us exactly zero reasons why they aren't for real other than 6 games is a small sample size and last year they finished 9th in the league in runs scored)

[Saul Good]

Of course the Royals aren't for real. As proof, here is every team to start 6-0 (lists off teams who all finished with 89+ wins). Those teams had a track record of being good the prior year, though. (Leaves out the whole World Series thing)

[Nightfyre]

Since end of July 2014, the Royals are 51-25. Keep doubting.

[duncan_idaho]

Rob is as burned out by the Royals as I am on the Chiefs.

It's blinding him a little here - he's putting too much stock in projections.

[Strongside]

So weird watching baseball tonight and seeing them basically say it's a coin toss for the top spot in the power rankings between KC and DET.

Seems all of the pundits are hopping on the Royals wagon lately, too. I've read/heard/seen a bunch of guys wanting to take back their preseason predictions for the team and saying they've made a mistake.

It's early. I get it. The Royals will lose eventually, but this isn't a team that will lose often.

[Hootie]

but the Royals won NINE in a row to start the year in 2003!

Clearly they aren't for real knowing that!

[Hootie]

it's hysterical to me ... it was hysterical to me all offseason

the Royals won 89 games last year (forget about the postseason) and did so without 1 guy on our team hitting to their ability

not one

MAYBE Lorenzo Cain, but that's it. Bill Butler was a NEGATIVE WAR DH.

But yeah ... 89 wins, improved the roster, tasted professional success for the first time ...

71 wins sounds about right! 4th place!