well that's a given and she should be doing that anyway right?

If you've found the right woman yes lol

What do you tell a woman with two black eyes?

.............

Nothing...you already told her twice!

lewdog_5 ladies and gentlemen.... he'll be here all week.... please tip your waitress...


LMAO

How much would you offer Roy Oswalt?

Which Team Will Sign Roy Oswalt?

already eliminated from playoffs.

GTFO, Cardinals scum.

Royals Baseball: No more wait till next year

Royals Baseball: it is finally next year

That should be the winner of the slogan contest.

I like this one.

I'd actually offer the money to Kuroda first, Oswalt second. Durability trumps potential here for me.

I'm guessing it will cost somewhere in the $12 million range (for one season) for either of them.

Royals Baseball: Kyle Davies Is Not On The Team Anymore

Anybody have any idea how much it would cost for a ticket to the All-Star Game?

Minimum wage only. They have concerns and I'm not too keen on signing a guy who has back injuries.....

I too would like the answer to this as well as the HR derby.....

If Royals even just go .500... I will be happy... **** it, if we don't win the world series, I'll be pissed.

nothing from the website.
pretty much have to buy season tickets to guarantee a seat.
looks like i'm gonna have to win the lottery.

There will actually be people attending Kauffman during a Royal's game.... SINCE WHEN?!?!

Reaper16 has no sense of humor... So he gives me negative rep. Soz sad.

as the creator of last years slogan i officially endorse this one.

ok, I like it too.

The picture quality is great. I loved having it last year (I do it through Apple TV). The only downside is unless you pay more, you can only view the home team's feed, so you can get stuck with crappy broadcasters a lot.
Posted via Mobile Device

Hawk....."You can put it on the board!.....Yes!"

Oh I see. I guess since I'm not actually buying from the Royals that makes sense.

chopper, two hopper

Ducks on the pond

I want to burn Hawks eyes out with a soldering iron now.

The Hawk-tionary

Ball four, base hit: Usually when the bases are empty and a walk will be as good as a base hit.

Can o'corn: An easy fly ball. The outfielder reaches up to make the catch as easy as if he were pulling a can of corn off the shelf.

Catbird seat: When the count favors the hitter, generally 2-0 or 3-1.

Chopper, two-hopper: Routine ground ball in the infield.

Cinch it up and hunker down: A pressure situtation and time for the hitter or pitcher to take stock of himself and make something happen.

Duck snort: A big swing, resulting in a weak hit, usually just over the infield, as is a duck "snorted" the ball out of his beak.

Ducks on the pond: Runners on base.

Gas: A fastball.

Hang wif'em: When a hitter is in a slump and hits a rocket line drive that is caught. Hang in there, the ball will fall one of these days.

He got a cookie: A hanging curve ball, an easy pitch to hit for a home run. The hitter usually "devours" it.

Picks To Click: DJ, the crew, and I select/pick a player who we think will have the best game. The numbers after our names indicate how many times each of us has been correct. The numbers change because we keep a separate tally for WGN/WCIU games and Comcast games.

Right size, wrong shape: A long foul ball, usually with home run distance.

Sit back, relax, and strap it down: Get ready for another exciting night of White Sox baseball!

You can cancel the postgame show: The first hit of the ball game. The potential no-hitter is over and there will be no need for a show after the game to showcase the pitcher.

Hawk

lewdog................... stop it.


:)

Sorry....I got carried away. I actually enjoy hearing the home broadcasters sometimes (not Hawk) and I surely won't pay more because I am a cheap bastard.

I just don't know how the girlfriend will feel about me wasting 3-4 hours a day to watch games.

Again the convo should start with "Listen here woman"

It sounds like you might be a little whipped. You have to show her that your value is greater than her's right now and put her in her place.

Just messin with ya.

I really liked the broadcast team for the.... Rangers I think (?) that I heard on a Royals game stream last year.

Interesting concept. Are you married or living with your partner?

I read this with the voice of Jack Nicholson (in my head). It came through perfectly.

My favorite twitter follow

http://twitter.com/#!/NotHawk

LMAO


NotHawk Hawk Harrelson
To those of you complaining about the MMA tweets: I present to you my balls. Feel free to suck them.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_yl..._a_to_z_010112

We're probably going to see this a lot. No one will stick their neck out and pick the Royals over the Tigers, but you'll see a lot of "not that I'm picking them to win the AL Central, don't get me wrong, its probably not going to happen but... a few injuries in Detroit... a couple pitchers emerge... eh, crazier things have happened". Just so they can be on the record as seeing it coming if the stars all align.

I don't mind that. We're being noticed which is a good sign. I don't even really think it's our time to win the division yet... but I do think it's time to make a nice step forward. It's nice to have actual hope again.

Great article. Really enjoy Passan.

I think Verlander takes at least a small step back this season, and the Tigers likely step back a little bit with him. With the White Sox down and the Twins a big question mark and the Indians in the same type of boat as the Royals, things could get really interesting.

My brother who lived in Chicago sent me something from the newspaper called "Hawk Bingo." I like to play it during Royals-White Sox games. It has two Bingo boards with a bunch of Hawk quotes, and you play an opponent to see who can get a Bingo of them before the game is over. Tremendous fun.

MLBInsideNewsScott Swaim

Source: #Orioles and #Braves are making progress on an Adam Jones deal. Hearing Jurrjens is involved. This could mean Crisp to Baltimore.

Would you all do this deal?

I wouldn't give up Adam Jones if Jair Jurrjens is the main piece I get in return. Would need one of the Braves top young pitching prospects (Vizcaino, Delgado, Minor, back in return as well.

Jurrjens would get beaten like a drum in the AL East.

I think we now know why Edwin Jackson hasn't signed yet. His agent (Scott Boras) wants at least 5 years and $60MM, and even the Yankees are balking at that. I wouldn't object to $12MM necessarily in a short-term deal, but 5 years at that rate with what he's capable of is a very significant risk.

I think all the teams are staring at each other right now, seeing if anyone will pay him, and if not, how far down will he lower his price before someone blinks?

edit: ROFL

Apparently at the beginning of the offseason his asking price was $82.5MM. He's just now come down to 60/5

Oh, and to those who might say "well its high, but he could help us win, just do it!" I do agree that the Royals ought to be willing to overpay for a couple years, maybe even 3 if a free agent pitcher gives us a shot.

However, ideally you'd like to see our books stay clear 4 or 5 years from now, to give us the maximum flexibility possible to sign/extend our own prospects to long-term deals. We give Edwin Jackson 60/5 and his career starts taking a dive 3 years from now but he's still collecting checks, he might cost us a chance to keep one of our guys.

I would pay Edwin Jackson $60MM over 5 years in a second. He's young, productive, and durable.

If Gil Meche was worth $55MM over 5 years in 2006, why isn't Jackson worth 5/60?

I agree with this. I've actually never been real high on Jackson anyway. He's solid I know but I see quite a few Cardinals games and I saw a lot of less than impressive from him.

+1

Yup...nailed it. I don't see signing a guy like him (who I am unimpressed with) for more than 3 years. He is too much risk to tie up money with for that long when our younger guys might perform quite well and will need extending.

Too much risk...just like the Meche signing. That worked out well, didn't it?

The only reason Meche fell off was because Trey Hillman thought it would be a brilliant idea to give Meche 130 pitch counts. His shoulder was shredded shortly thereafter.

To quote the Yankees, I like him, "but not at that price".

I agree that he pretty much compares to Gil Meche before we greatly overpaid to sign him (though Meche had maybe a few more strikeouts). At that time, we basically had nothing and were destined to suck. We got him just to try to put a credible product out there and sell a few more tickets. We weren't going to do much with that money in years 3 through 5.

Now, though we should have some money to spend this year and next, that $12MM might be better-spent on our own guys in a few years.

Give Trey some credit. He was able to look Meche in the eye and see deep into his soul that he was able to throw pitches 110-130.

We still had to get lucky and discover that we bought a diamond for pennies on the dollar first, its not like his emergence was forseen by all, or he would have gotten a much better contract.

$60 million is a heck of a lot of money for a guy with a career 4.46 ERA.

Royals Baseball: Serious Bidness

Best 2 of the bunch. What are we going with?

I'm still a big fan of it is finally next year.

Difference being Meche's 5 years didn't tie up any resources that might be needed to resign someone because we didn't have anyone worth resigning.

Things have changed now, I hope.

I hate that we, as fans, have been so trained to worry exceedingly about the economic aspect of baseball.

Glass has the money, via revenue sharing, income (personal and team related), and it's time to ****ing spend it.

No excuses. Our payroll needs to be around $80M and looking to get to $100M quickly. If not, this is all pissing into the wind in the first place.

He's averaged a 3.7 WAR the last three seasons while throwing over 200 IP per year. I'm not sure but it doesn't look like he has missed a start the last 5 seasons, and he will only be 28 this coming season.

Go look and see what pitchers have performed similarly over the last three seasons and are also reasonably young. I think you will be surprised at how small the list is.

No he's not Verlander but he would definitely be a huge upgrade and is a legit #2/#3 starter, which we could sorely use if we really want to compete in the coming years. I'd rather not put all my eggs in the Montgomery bucket.

I would be willing to give Jackson pretty big money over a long-term stretch. Not sure 5 years/$60 million is required, since everyone is laughing at that request.

A lucrative 4-year deal with heavy incentives (possibly a vesting fifth year?) could get the job done, though.

He's a good pitcher. Solid No. 2/No. 3. Very similar to John Danks in terms of results, and Danks got a similar deal.

Chewing up a shit ton of innings with decent results is worth a good amount of money, particularly with (we hope) a bunch of young arms in the rotation. So...Jackson's worth might be greater to a team like the Royals than it would be to a more seasoned staff.

Okay I went and looked and this is the list of pitchers that have 1) averaged 3.7 WAR or better the last three seasons; 2) have averaged at least 200 IP the last three seasons; and 3) are still reasonably young (i.e. around 30 or younger).

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="156"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:5705;width:117pt" width="156"> </colgroup><tbody><tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt;width:117pt" height="17" width="156">Justin Verlander</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">CC Sabathia</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Felix Hernandez</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Zack Greinke</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Tim Lincecum</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Dan Haren</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Ubaldo Jimenez</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Jon Lester</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Clayton Kershaw</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Jered Weaver</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Matt Cain</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Cole Hamels</td> </tr> <tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17"> <td style="height:12.75pt" height="17">Edwin Jackson</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

I would be happy to have Mr.Jackson on this team but not 60 Mill for 5 years maybe around the 40+

I most definitely would give him 60 mil over 5 years. Would he come to KC for that much though?

The worst thing KC could do right now is throw Duffy\Crow\Random young arm out there for 150+ innings each so early in their careers... We might as well go ahead and hire a team surgeon for all the arm and shoulder surgeries we'll be performing in the next 2 to 3 years.

Jackson is durable, has experience and has shown he can perform at a high level. He's your prototypical #3 pitcher on a contending baseball team.

Very true, but if you are talking about 4-6 years down the road trying to resign most/all of our young players then you are going to need every $ of a 80-100 mil payroll. Jackson's 12 or whatever it would end up being could cause problems, especially if he is hurt/not effective.

The smart play would be to overpay for players now (next 2-3 years) and try to avoid overpaying tying up that money for when the time comes.

Who knows if Hosmer, Moose, etc will even be willing to re-sign with KC? Odds are they may not since they are Boras clients, and then we're sitting on this money for nothing. But what we absolutely do know is that they are under our control for a relatively cheap cost through 2017 - that is our window to compete.

I totally agree with Deez. It sucks that KC fans and other small-market teams have become obsessed with worrying over every little penny spent by the owners. This is pro baseball and it costs money. If one $12MM/year contract is too much to risk then Glass seriously needs to sell the team and move on with his life.

Also: The players many are worrying about are under team control for at least five more years, in some cases six.

Right when Jackson's deal would be coming off the books, worst-case scenario.

The idea is that we are banking whatever money we have under 70-80 million now.

I guess if you think the profits from this year will go to enhance Glass's lifestyle, never to be seen again, you'd have a point but he's already reportedly promised baseball and the player's union that although we're making money now, he expects to lose money later to break even.

Unless he's lying, then paying someone a lot of money does have an impact on the future. Maybe its worth it for this year and next, but 60/5? Similar contracts given to similar pitchers have been regretted more often than not.

You have no real reason to be concerned about this. Virtually all high-impact prospects develop strong ties to their organization and at least give their team the opportunity to come close to matching. Royals fans have been scarred by the 90's, but that is not the normal experience of a team who has the money to offer a fair deal.

Glass isn't looking to profit, again unless you think he's lying.

There is no owner in the entire country who is willing to long-term lose money. EVERY owner is looking to break even at a minimum, including Miami's owner. (If their new park and team doesn't pan out, they will blow it up again)

Our market is what it is (though certainly big enough to be the Twins), and it is logical to save money now to spend later. It would not make sense to spend money that does not need to be spent to compete, just for the hell of it.

How many of these were Boras clients?

Are we capable or even willing to match a $100-200+MM offer to Hosmer, Moose, and/or Myers when the time comes?

Where did I say Glass should be expected to lose money? Would an extra $12MM of payroll seriously cause the franchise to become unprofitable? I don't think our profit margin is quite that small.

I understand the theory of not spending any money for the next few years so we can try to keep our young players. I just don't believe it is the correct strategy.

Why the hell not? I'd think it would be a terrific strategy to go 30-40 for a while, blow it up to 100-110 for a while, hang on as long as possible, then when the time comes to rebuild, repeat the cycle, rather than just spend 70 million plus inflation (which basically means no youth movement) forever.

$100MM, yes.

$200MM (in today's dollars) is crazy fantasyland money. Not every star is A-Rod or Pujols, and those massive 10-year deals end up being horrible stupid albatrosses anyway. The Angels are going to feel the crushing weight of a lot of dead money in a few years.

Why can you not have a balance? Why does it have to be all or nothing?

because 70-80 isn't going to get it done in 5-6 years (thanks duncan idaho I didn't do my homework).

Alnorth has a point. Besides the clubs that spend 120mil + constantly, there has to be some strategy to resigning your stars. Especially when so many are going to come up for contract at approx. the same time.

12 mil a year for edwin won't kill you, but add another 2-3 contracts of this caliber (maybe at the trade deadline for an arm, or a bat in the offseason) and you are talking about 1/3 of your payroll being tied up in long term contracts.

Because it assumes that we will spend it in the future which I am not sure we will. I don't believe Glass is sitting there with his accountant saying to pass on Jackson and throw $12MM in a 3-year CD to be ready for the 2014 offseason. It doesn't work like that because a million other scenarios could happen between now and then.

I think we have a chance to win this division next year, and adding Jackson will help that goal without blocking prospects or giving up valuable talent.