ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Royals ***Official 2023 Royals Season Repository Thread*** (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=346775)

ChiefsCountry 12-05-2023 04:49 PM

Royals get #6

ChiefsCountry 12-05-2023 04:50 PM

****ing Cleveland got the first pick

TomBarndtsTwin 12-05-2023 04:51 PM

Royals just got ****ed HARD (as did the A’s)

OKchiefs 12-05-2023 04:54 PM

So, another bust like Cross or Mitchell coming in the 1st?

DJ's left nut 12-05-2023 04:54 PM

Wow.

I was disappointed to land at 7. But I wasn't "Expected to be at #1 overall and landed at #6" disappointed...

Damn - y'all got rat****ed on that one.

DJ's left nut 12-05-2023 04:57 PM

I'll say this, though - I'm glad Oakland got hosed a little.

Cleveland is a deserving #1 (and really, KC would've been). Neither team openly tried to suck. Cleveland just never could get its offense straight and its pitching kept breaking down. Kansas City just didn't have the talent but I don't feel like it was for lack of trying.

Oakland openly tanked. They went full Rachel Phelps. **** those guys.

TomBarndtsTwin 12-05-2023 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKchiefs (Post 17262799)
So, another bust like Cross or Mitchell coming in the 1st?

Likely.

Too far out of range for a ‘can’t miss’ prospect, although I’m not sure there are actually any of those in this draft.

We seem to do pretty well when we draft in the Top 3. Not so much after that.

Still can’t believe neither the A’s or the Royals landed in the Top 3. You realize what the odds were for that NOT to happen?

Just crazy bad ****ing luck. Unreal. :shake:

DJ's left nut 12-05-2023 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomBarndtsTwin (Post 17262808)
Likely.

Too far out of range for a ‘can’t miss’ prospect, although I’m not sure there are actually any of those in this draft.

We seem to do pretty well when we draft in the Top 3. Not so much after that.

Still can’t believe neither the A’s or the Royals landed in the Top 3. You realize what the odds were for that NOT to happen?

Just crazy bad ****ing luck. Unreal. :shake:

Yeah, this isn't last year's draft.

The top of the draft isn't as elite and I don't think you have a really steep fall-off after 5 either.

It's a fairly linear draft; the picks don't fall off greatly at any point that I can see. There should be good talent at 6.

ChiefsCountry 12-05-2023 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17262803)
I'll say this, though - I'm glad Oakland got hosed a little.

Cleveland is a deserving #1 (and really, KC would've been). Neither team openly tried to suck. Cleveland just never could get its offense straight and its pitching kept breaking down. Kansas City just didn't have the talent but I don't feel like it was for lack of trying.

Oakland openly tanked. They went full Rachel Phelps. **** those guys.

Royals went full on young but still had close to a 100 million payroll - granted that is Salvador Perez and Greinke mainly but still it's not like they went to full on Rachel Phelps mode.

TomBarndtsTwin 12-05-2023 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17262809)
Yeah, this isn't last year's draft.

The top of the draft isn't as elite and I don't think you have a really steep fall-off after 5 either.

It's a fairly linear draft; the picks don't fall off greatly at any point that I can see. There should be good talent at 6.

I agree for the most part.

The problem, generally, is the Royals scouting can’t identify it. They have a hard time separating the wheat from the chaff.

But at least I don’t have to worry about them missing on a generational prospect this year, so there’s that . . . . .

OKchiefs 12-05-2023 05:07 PM

I believe I saw something about the Royals not being eligible for the lottery picks next year since they picked in the lottery the past 2 years, is that correct?

poolboy 12-05-2023 05:10 PM

no more first round pitching...Lets get some bats and speed out of this mug

TomBarndtsTwin 12-05-2023 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKchiefs (Post 17262817)
I believe I saw something about the Royals not being eligible for the lottery picks next year since they picked in the lottery the past 2 years, is that correct?

Not sure, but if that’s the case then we get ****ed again.

We get ‘rewarded’ from the lottery with the #8 and #6 pick two years in a row and then have to sit the next lottery out?

**** that. What a crock of shit baseball has become. On a mission to take away nearly every advantage small market teams could once exploit.

Wanna make sure we keep things equal for the Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, etc.

ChiefsCountry 12-05-2023 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomBarndtsTwin (Post 17262822)
Not sure, but if that’s the case then we get ****ed again.

We get ‘rewarded’ from the lottery with the #8 and #6 pick two years in a row and then have to sit the next lottery out?

**** that. What a crock of shit baseball has become. On a mission to take away nearly every advantage small market teams could once exploit.

Wanna make sure we keep things equal for the Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, etc.

No you have to a selection in the top 6 for two straight years. Royals didn't last year. They will be eligible for the lottery in 2025. But if they get that, they won't be in 2026. See Pirates this year.

TambaBerry 12-05-2023 05:19 PM

This is so dumb the lotteries are always rigged. It doesn't matter anyway we can't draft for shit and we won't spend money


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.