How much do you blame Alaird Baird ?

05-12-2005, 03:55 PM

Reading from the Star articles , he mentioned no spending cap this season. Therefore , he believed if we brought in some expensive free agent bats then it would reerun the 'new' guys. But the new guys may not pan out !

4th and Long · 05-12-2005, 03:57 PM

This is his youth movement. He won't pay any big money for big names. Get used to it. It's not going to change.

**HemiEd** · 05-12-2005, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4th and Long

This is his youth movement. He won't pay any big money for big names. Get used to it. It's not going to change.

I wish they would go ahead and get rid of the rest, like Sweeney. When they got rid of Randa, the message was very clear. He was an absolute bargain IMO. At least two full years of suckage on tap.

Eleazar · 05-12-2005, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HemiEd

I wish they would go ahead and get rid of the rest, like Sweeny. When they got rid of Randa, the message was very clear. He was an absolute bargain IMO. At least two full years of suckage on tap.

SweenEy

4th and Long · 05-12-2005, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HemiEd

I wish they would go ahead and get rid of the rest, like Sweeny. When they got rid of Randa, the message was very clear. He was an absolute bargain IMO. At least two full years of suckage on tap.

Sweeney's batting .328 and slugging .612. Getting rid of him at this juncture makes zero sense, unless you're one of those people that's into self inflicted suffering.

Eleazar · 05-12-2005, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4th and Long

Sweeney's batting .328 and slugging .612. Getting rid of him at this juncture makes zero sense, unless you're one of those people that's into self inflicted suffering.

It would make sense to trade him for prospects, but think about it. When you go to the K, who gets the loudest cheer during the lineups? Who makes everyone pay attention when they get to the plate? Who's the one that all the little kids in the seats know and want to be like?

Maybe it's the right time to deal him. But he's about the only thing left out there tearing tickets. Take sweeney off the team, and it has NO identity if it even has one now with Pena gone. Talk about your faceless, unremarkable team with no one that endears themself to anyone.

4th and Long · 05-12-2005, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cochise

Take sweeney off the team, and it has NO identity if it even has one now with Pena gone. Talk about your faceless, unremarkable team with no one that endears themself to anyone.

Hey, it worked for Miami and their no name defense.

**HemiEd** · 05-12-2005, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cochise

SweenEy

Thanks for the spelling help. A little lazy on that one!

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4th and Long

Sweeney's batting .328 and slugging .612. Getting rid of him at this juncture makes zero sense, unless you're one of those people that's into self inflicted suffering.

So with Sweeney playing maybe the Royals win 50 games instead of 40?
If you are trying to only suck 80% I guess he needs to play. Sucking 80% still sucks. Who could be getting playing time with the rest of the young ones that isn't? I guess that is the way I look at it.

FringeNC · 05-12-2005, 07:05 PM

Baird has grown as a GM. At first he was awful, as bad as his predecessor, Herk Robinson. Last year, he stole some serious talent, getting Bautista and Justin Huber, who is one of the best-hitting prospects in all of baseball for absolutely nothing.

The reason we suck is we are still paying the price for Herk Robinson and early Allard Baird drafting strategies.

tk13 · 05-12-2005, 04:06 PM

Well how are you going to know whether or not the "new guys" are going to pan out unless you play them? I don't understand why Kansas City sports fans have such a hard time with the concept of developing young players. Seems like if you aren't signing proven free agents or if rookies don't come in playing at peak potential, it's not good enough. You see it with the Chiefs, look at Larry Johnson, no one thought he'd ever become anything because he didn't blow the league away right off the bat, same with Dante, and now I'd say it's with Kawika Mitchell... maybe all sports fans are like that, I don't know.

Eleazar · 05-12-2005, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk13

Well how are you going to know whether or not the "new guys" are going to pan out unless you play them? I don't understand why Kansas City sports fans have such a hard time with the concept of developing young players. Seems like if you aren't signing proven free agents or if rookies don't come in playing at peak potential, it's not good enough. You see it with the Chiefs, look at Larry Johnson, no one thought he'd ever become anything because he didn't blow the league away right off the bat, same with Dante, and now I'd say it's with Kawika Mitchell... maybe all sports fans are like that, I don't know.

This is, at its heart, a fairweather city. The fairweather fans are gone now, but rest assured they'll be choking up the ticket lines when the team is good again, to make it harder on those of us who have been here all along.

Eleazar · 05-12-2005, 04:07 PM

I would say 80% of the blame for the team's futility lies in the BS competitive balance of baseball. 20% lies in poor draft picks and development (Not all of which is baird's fault, much of that was happening before his tenure)

DeepSouth · 05-12-2005, 04:08 PM

The only problem I have with Baird, it seems he might be too involved in the role of the players on the team. An example, it seems that HE is the one that determined that Afflect would be in the bullpen versus the starting rotation. I can't tell you if that's the right move or not but the manager (Pena) should make those decisions.

Deberg_1990 · 05-12-2005, 04:50 PM

Hmmm...yea, id say it has alot to do with Baird. Im sure hes a "Nice Guy" but so far he sucks at running the Royals. Lets see...he hired Pena, what did he get in return for Beltran? for Dye? for Damon? What pitcher has he develeped into a consistant winner?? Most of this falls on him and Glass of course...

tk13 · 05-12-2005, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Hmmm...yea, id say it has alot to do with Baird. Im sure hes a "Nice Guy" but so far he sucks at running the Royals. Lets see...he hired Pena, what did he get in return for Beltran? for Dye? for Damon? What pitcher has he develeped into a consistant winner?? Most of this falls on him and Glass of course...

Are you on drugs? Seriously? That's the one area where Baird has been outstanding. The Dye trade was horrific but the last 3-4 years you'd be hard pressed to find many GM's who've done a better job wheeling and dealing for prospects than Baird.

05-12-2005, 03:55 PM	Topic Starter
Ninjaman Guest Casino cash: $	How much do you blame Alaird Baird ? Reading from the Star articles , he mentioned no spending cap this season. Therefore , he believed if we brought in some expensive free agent bats then it would reerun the 'new' guys. But the new guys may not pan out !
Posts: n/a

05-12-2005, 03:57 PM	#2
4th and Long Baby Andy Loves Chiefs Planet Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: In a house Casino cash: $6374925	This is his youth movement. He won't pay any big money for big names. Get used to it. It's not going to change. __________________
Posts: 21,611

05-12-2005, 07:05 PM	#9
FringeNC MVP Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: NC Casino cash: $-1773986	Baird has grown as a GM. At first he was awful, as bad as his predecessor, Herk Robinson. Last year, he stole some serious talent, getting Bautista and Justin Huber, who is one of the best-hitting prospects in all of baseball for absolutely nothing. The reason we suck is we are still paying the price for Herk Robinson and early Allard Baird drafting strategies.
Posts: 10,234

05-12-2005, 04:06 PM	#10
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $-1897500	Well how are you going to know whether or not the "new guys" are going to pan out unless you play them? I don't understand why Kansas City sports fans have such a hard time with the concept of developing young players. Seems like if you aren't signing proven free agents or if rookies don't come in playing at peak potential, it's not good enough. You see it with the Chiefs, look at Larry Johnson, no one thought he'd ever become anything because he didn't blow the league away right off the bat, same with Dante, and now I'd say it's with Kawika Mitchell... maybe all sports fans are like that, I don't know.
Posts: 56,717

05-12-2005, 04:07 PM	#12
Eleazar Beyond the Rapids Join Date: May 2003 Location: Langley, VA Casino cash: $-370000	I would say 80% of the blame for the team's futility lies in the BS competitive balance of baseball. 20% lies in poor draft picks and development (Not all of which is baird's fault, much of that was happening before his tenure)
Posts: 80,659

05-12-2005, 04:08 PM	#13
DeepSouth War Eagle !!! Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Mobile, AL 36608 Casino cash: $9489387	The only problem I have with Baird, it seems he might be too involved in the role of the players on the team. An example, it seems that HE is the one that determined that Afflect would be in the bullpen versus the starting rotation. I can't tell you if that's the right move or not but the manager (Pena) should make those decisions.
Posts: 2,179

05-12-2005, 04:50 PM	#14
Deberg_1990 In Search of a Life Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: San Antonio Tx. Casino cash: $104454	Hmmm...yea, id say it has alot to do with Baird. Im sure hes a "Nice Guy" but so far he sucks at running the Royals. Lets see...he hired Pena, what did he get in return for Beltran? for Dye? for Damon? What pitcher has he develeped into a consistant winner?? Most of this falls on him and Glass of course... __________________ Originally Posted by Cassel's Reckoning: Matt once made a very nice play in Seattle where he spun away from a pass rusher and hit Bowe off his back foot for a first down. One of the best plays Matt has ever made.
Posts: 68,673