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

I heard from Carl that Chester McGlocktin is available for DH

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.

HUH??????

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

Can bonds play the catcher position?

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.

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.

Since when does Flanagan write columns about the Royals? Weird.

After over a decade of simply terrible, terrible baseball, Glass decides that maybe he should actually start trying to win.

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.

hahaha....true

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.

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.