*** Official 2016 Royals Repository, Version 1 ***

[duncan_idaho]

And so it begins: The Royals' second straight attempt to repeat as AL Champions, and first attempt to repeat as World Series champions.

In this thread, we'll track all non-gameday action. Roster moves, prospect news, etc.

I'll start the thread as usual, with division rivals thoughts. I still like KC to repeat as AL Central champs. Here's how I see the rest of it shaking out:

2) Indians - they have the pitching (and seem to have at least semi-Kluber-ed Cody Anderson, who added 3 mph to his fastball in the offseason). Will the offense hold up? I think this is a team that ends up looking a lot like the 2014 Royals. Francisco Lindor will solidify their IF defense over the full season, and is a help with the bat. I think this club is still a year away from really breaking through - the offense still has a lot of question marks - but I like them to nab a wildcard spot.

Key Player(s): Michael Brantley. When Brantley returns - and how he hits when he does - will be critical to the Indians' ability to be good enough on offense.

Jason Kipnis. Kipnis has been an enigmatic offensive performer for the past several years. If he finally has a good offensive campaign from start to finish, Cleveland could make real noise.

Something of interest to me: For all the acclaim the Twins' farm system gets, I look at the Indians young players, and would much rather have them. Brad Zimmer is going to be a very good all-around CF. Clint Frazier has huge power potential and should arrive soon (2017). Lindor is a young stud.

3) Tigers - Old and dependent on a few stars. If Verlander and Sanchez are healthy and effective, they will be playoff contenders. I'm sure JD Martinez will continue to hit roid-aided bombs. I'm also pretty sure Victor Martinez's days as a huge power threat are gone.

Key player: Justin Verlander. Detroit people would have you believe he figured out how to succeed without his big fastball in September of last year. If that's true, and he returns to dominant form, Detroit will likely contend again.

Something of interest to me: Will Jose Iglesias stay healthy and not try to kill teammates in the dugout? His defense makes the whole group much better.

4) Twins - They won't lead the division or be in playoff contention for as long this year, but Minnesota will avoid the cellar.

Key Player: Miguel Sano. Huge power, huge K rate. Can he continue to drive the ball and be a plus offensive player? Probably needs to cut that 35 percent K percentage to do so.

Something of interest to me: Will teams challenge Sano inside with hard stuff? Working away, away, just lets his power play up. Also - will Mike Berardino continue to be the biggest beat writer homer in MLB?

5) White Sox - still managed by a shitty manager who can't control his clubhouse (The blame for the LaRoche thing really should fall on him, not the GM). Still have a shitty overall defense and a lot of douchebags on the team. They will once again look better on paper than they actually perform.

Key player: Carlos Rodon. The White Sox need Rodon to take a big step forward to make an actual move this season. He's got the talent...

And, as always, here are the prospects.

Duncan’s Top 20 for 2016:

Spoiler!

1. Raul Adalberto Mondesi, SS, BOTH: Tools, tools, tools. RA has tools galore. At his best, he’s an All-Star SS who plays elite D, hits 15-20 HR, swipes 40 bags, and is an ideal 1, 2 or 3 hitter. At his worst, I think he looks a lot like Alcides Escobar. Plate discipline is his biggest challenge at this point, but evaluators are confident that will come with time. Clear No. 1
2. Kyle Zimmer, RHP: He’s pitching again and staying healthy, which is nice. He’s pitcing out of the bullpen to build back his arm strength, which is less nice. But still has that high upside, just a lower floor now. Ideally, the team will use him as a bullpen weapon in September (because he has earned it) and then give him a chance to transition back to starting for 2016.
3. Bubba Starling, CF, RH: Starling has been up and down this year but put himself back on the map by greatly improving his K rate while also improving across the slash line as a hitter. His defense and baserunning are MLB ready; if Starling can work himself into a league average hitter, he can be a solid MLB regular who plays great D in CF while hitting 15 HR and swiping 20 bags.
4. Miguel Almonte, RHP: Still love the body, FB/CH combo. Results aren’t eye popping, but he’s still low enough and early enough in the development to prize those things over performance. Still a solid No. 3 starter upside, and just a year and some change away from potentially being ready to contribute at the MLB level.
5. Jorge Bonifacio, RF, RH: Emilio’s little brother got off to a horrible start in 2015 but has heated up as the season went on. He also is translating BP power to game power for the first time, with 15 HR just past the mid-way point of his season. Despite his disappointing 2014, he has a chance to build his way back into legit prospect status – and still is only 22. Next challenge for him should be Omaha, but that may wait for the start of the 2014 season.
6. Scott Blewett, RHP: Blewett has a nice two –pitch mix already and is off to a strong start. With his size (6-6) and a good fastball/curveball combo, Blewett could eventually turn into a good No. 3 starter, with a MLB-average changeup.
7. Nolan Watson, RHP: The Royals’ 2015 sandwich pick is a polished prep arm who is adding velocity and explosiveness to a good, polished base. Likely to move quickly.
8. Ashe Russell, RHP: The 2015 top pick probably needs more work than Watson, but the upside is really nice. Again, advanced two-pitch mix that will depend on him adding a changeup. Could be a very good NO. 2 if it all adds up.
9. Balbino Fuenmayor, 1B/DH, RH: The Balbino came out of basically nowhere in 2015 to earn a Futures Game spot. Big power and an improved two-strike approach have turned the late bloomer into a legit prospect. He’s blocked at the MLB level currently by Eric Hosmer and Kendrys Morales, but Fuenmayor’s combination of power hitting and good average/strike zone control makes him intriguing.
10. Cheslor Cuthbert, 3B, RH: Cheslor probably is not going to be the star KC was hoping for when signing him out of Nicaragua, but he does look like he can be a solid reserve for an MLB club. Good defense at 3B paired with a solid plate approach and some gap power plays fine off the bench. He becomes a lot more interesting if they think he can stick as a 2B, which they have experimented with.

Spoiler!

11. Chase Vallot, C/DH/1B: I really like Vallot’s power and plate discipline combo. His bat will probably force him from behind the plate, but he’s held his own despite being extremely young for every level he has faced.
12. Alfredo Escalera-Maldonado, OF, RH: Escalera-Maldonado earned a promotion to Wilmington at age 20, which is pretty advanced movement for that age. He’s an athletic outfielder who has shown some plate discipline at an early age, which is encouraging. Doesn’t sound like he can stick in CF long term for KC, but his bat has become one to watch.
13. Pedro Fernandez, RHP: I haven’t seen much of him, but like the reports I’ve heard on his fastball and general makeup. Could become the next Almonte/Mondesi, though he’s more likely to land in the pen than either of them.
14. Elier Hernandez, OF, RH: Elier Hernanez teamed with Escalera-Maldonado in breaking out at Low-A and earning a promotion to Wilmington. It’s still early for this guy – he is just 20 years old – but he doesn’t take walks and hasn’t developed the prodigious power many thought he had the potential for. Still worth watching.
15. Hunter Dozier, 3B, RH: Dozier is reworking his swing mid-season, which generally will cause production to do what his has done: Nose dive. The changes he made entering the season (seemingly geared towards increasing his power production) were a disaster, and now he’s trying to get back to what he used to be. Still looks great and checks most of the scouting boxes, but the performance hasn’t matched, and it almost knocked him out of the list.
16. Christian Binford, RHP: After a breakthrough 2014, Binford struggled mightily at AAA and suffered a demotion. His upside remains similar – a back-end starter who can eat innings – but Binford’s lack of velocity and reliance on command have caught up to him so far.
17. Marten Gasparini, OF, SH: Gasparini is intriguing because of his speed and athleticism. He’s a LOOOOONG ways from the majors and young for his level, but reports on his bat speed, swing, and speed remain positive enough to keep him on the bubble.
18. Eric Skoglund, LHP: Skoglund had a nice year at Wilmington. I'm skeptical because his K rate is lower than I like to see for a guy at A+ - just 7/9, and usually guys lose a strikeout or two/9 as they move up the chain from there - but he has excellent control, walking 1.17 batters/9. 6-7 lefties with great control who get lots of ground balls - like Skoglund - have a chance to overcome bad K rates.
19. Ryan O'Hearn, 1B/LF: A lefty stick with power, O'Hearn was a savings signing as an 8th round pick, but a change in his approach increased his power - while increasing his K rate. After Vallot, probably the best pure power prospect in the Royals system.
20. Josh Staumont, RHP: I was terrified of this guy's control problems, and he walked nearly a batter an inning in his pro debut (32 BB in 40 1/3 IP). Staumont's nasty, nasty stuff (plus-plus fastball, plus slider) could make him a very good late-inning reliever who strikes out more than a batter an inning, if he can develop average or slightly below-average control. If he really masters the control, you're talking about a potential Greg Holland type, but that's a TALL task.

[KevB]

As bad as Kendrys has been this season, he and Esky have a nearly identical OPS. Esky is obviously valuable for his defense and speed, but that OPS compare is another strike against Esky batting leadoff. If you have a squad with 2 of your top 5 hitters in the order with an OPS under .600, you've got issues.

[KChiefs1]

Keith Law's Mock 3.0:

http://espn.go.com/blog/mlb-draft/insider/post?id=2754

Rankings:

http://espn.go.com/blog/mlb-draft/insider/post?id=2744





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[siberian khatru]

MONDAY RANT

I stopped reading this piece after its first point:

1. There is no way either of those teams should have won the AL pennant. It was wild and a delight to watch. The 2014 AL Wild Card Game and the team’s comeback in Houston during the ALDS last season will live forever in so many memories, as will the entirety of both World Series. They earned it, and they deserve it. That doesn’t change the fact that, barring some means of evaluating baseball talent that is so far beyond our comprehension that we can’t even comprehend our lack of comprehension, those Royals teams were inferior to the 2014 A’s, 2015 Astros, 2015 Blue Jays, and others.

This kind of stuff just infuriates me.

I consider myself a sabermetrics guy. I started reading Bill James in 1981 and embraced analytics, but more importantly, James' way of simply looking at things differently. It was more than numbers, it was a mindset.

But over the last 10 years or so, I think the analytics have gone off the rails. You have lots of people now who seemingly refuse to accept what actually happens on the field. They say, well, the math says this is what is supposed to happen, and it didn't, so what happened must've been a fluke. Yeah, you got a trophy, but you didn't REALLY win. You just got lucky.

The analysis has swung too far in the other direction. James burst that lazy, old school thinking of Joe Morgan and Joe Garagiola and all that other conventional wisdom that had piled up over the decades but had never been challenged, tested or authenticated. Now, though, the numbers guys are as closed-minded and arrogant as the old school ones who mocked "computers" etc., by ignoring the human element, intangibles. No, we can't quantify it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. How much it influences results, I (we) don't know. But it sure seems to skew the Royals' math, to where ACTUALLY PLAYING THE GAME produces wins that "shouldn't" exist.

I don't think two years is a fluke. The 2007 Colorado Rockies were a fluke. The 2014-15 Royals weren't. Besides, the 2015 Royals won 95 games, the best record in the AL. Yet they were inferior to the Astros (who didn't even win their division) and the Jays just because they outperformed their Pythagorean and the Astros and Jays vastly underperformed theirs? Maybe that 8th inning comeback against the Astros wasn't a fluke but rather a form of regression -- the Royals proving that, on the field, they were indeed the superior team.

Sorry, just had to vent.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by siberian khatru

MONDAY RANT



I stopped reading this piece after its first point:







This kind of stuff just infuriates me.



I consider myself a sabermetrics guy. I started reading Bill James in 1981 and embraced analytics, but more importantly, James' way of simply looking at things differently. It was more than numbers, it was a mindset.



But over the last 10 years or so, I think the analytics have gone off the rails. You have lots of people now who seemingly refuse to accept what actually happens on the field. They say, well, the math says this is what is supposed to happen, and it didn't, so what happened must've been a fluke. Yeah, you got a trophy, but you didn't REALLY win. You just got lucky.



The analysis has swung too far in the other direction. James burst that lazy, old school thinking of Joe Morgan and Joe Garagiola and all that other conventional wisdom that had piled up over the decades but had never been challenged, tested or authenticated. Now, though, the numbers guys are as closed-minded and arrogant as the old school ones who mocked "computers" etc., by ignoring the human element, intangibles. No, we can't quantify it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. How much it influences results, I (we) don't know. But it sure seems to skew the Royals' math, to where ACTUALLY PLAYING THE GAME produces wins that "shouldn't" exist.



I don't think two years is a fluke. The 2007 Colorado Rockies were a fluke. The 2014-15 Royals weren't. Besides, the 2015 Royals won 95 games, the best record in the AL. Yet they were inferior to the Astros (who didn't even win their division) and the Jays just because they outperformed their Pythagorean and the Astros and Jays vastly underperformed theirs? Maybe that 8th inning comeback against the Astros wasn't a fluke but rather a form of regression -- the Royals proving that, on the field, they were indeed the superior team.



Sorry, just had to vent.

You nailed it. Nothing I would add to that. The Royals have far surpassed expectations for three straight years. The analytics and projections miss things when it comes to the Royals of recent years.

But make no mistake, analytics guys are eager to jump on KC and show they were right about them being a fluke.

I hope it keeps happening, and I hope the team shoves it down their throats again.

What you missed by stopping was him speculating KC could nab Carlos Gomez-like returns for both Hosmer and Cain. Meh.

The idea that KC will sacrifice the last year of its window for those types of packages is a silly one. KC will hold on to all its 2017 free agents through at least the trade deadline next year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Prison Bitch]

You can always find haters if you search hard enough.


I haven't read many articles that deny the Royals were an excellent team that deserved the title in 2015. I've read some that said it about the Pennant in 2014 but our own fans even agreed largely. Baseball America wrote that the Royals are no fluke and 3-yr run winning the most games in the AL proves it.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

You can always find haters if you search hard enough.





I haven't read many articles that deny the Royals were an excellent team that deserved the title in 2015. I've read some that said it about the Pennant in 2014 but our own fans even agreed largely. Baseball America wrote that the Royals are no fluke and 3-yr run winning the most games in the AL proves it.

Many have accepted that they miss things when it comes to KC, but some still are hanging on for dear life, like Trueblood and like the Washington Post guy a few weeks ago who wrote them off when they were 20-20 (right before they reeled off that hot stretch).

[duncan_idaho]

I also think the talking point that the Royals don't have any bullets with which they can trade for reinforcements this year is a stale one.

The farm system didn't freeze on March 1 (fortunately for everyone not named Kyle Zimmer).

Chase Vallot, for example, compares VERY favorably with what Jacob Nottingham was doing when the Astros traded him for Scott Kazmir basically straight up. Kazmir was also very, very good before that trade - with an ERA under 2.50.

Jake Junis compares quite nicely with Cody Reed, who was the key part of the deal with the Reds. He popped up out of nowhere, basically, after being highly regarded but not performing at a great level early in his minor league career.

Jorge Bonifacio has been a highly regarded prospect in the past and is having a strong year at AAA - and is just 22. He also has greatly improved his body (leading to better agility and speed) since last year, a nice reversal from the previous few years.

Hunter Dozier has also experienced a resurgence. He endured a week long slump at AAA but looks to have come out of it.

The Royals may not have the pieces to get a Johnny Cueto if he comes available, but they can get some rotation help.

Same thing re: a bat. Carlos Beltran would be a pretty great fit and is not going to have the same cost as a Zobrist or Cueto, for example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Many have accepted that they miss things when it comes to KC, but some still are hanging on for dear life, like Trueblood and like the Washington Post guy a few weeks ago who wrote them off when they were 20-20 (right before they reeled off that hot stretch).

I welcome the hate. For 30 years nobody hated us.

[Bowser]

Frankly we should have been in the playoffs in 2013 as well with the pitching we had that year.

[Mama Hip Rockets]

Originally Posted by siberian khatru

MONDAY RANT

I stopped reading this piece after its first point:



This kind of stuff just infuriates me.

I consider myself a sabermetrics guy. I started reading Bill James in 1981 and embraced analytics, but more importantly, James' way of simply looking at things differently. It was more than numbers, it was a mindset.

But over the last 10 years or so, I think the analytics have gone off the rails. You have lots of people now who seemingly refuse to accept what actually happens on the field. They say, well, the math says this is what is supposed to happen, and it didn't, so what happened must've been a fluke. Yeah, you got a trophy, but you didn't REALLY win. You just got lucky.

The analysis has swung too far in the other direction. James burst that lazy, old school thinking of Joe Morgan and Joe Garagiola and all that other conventional wisdom that had piled up over the decades but had never been challenged, tested or authenticated. Now, though, the numbers guys are as closed-minded and arrogant as the old school ones who mocked "computers" etc., by ignoring the human element, intangibles. No, we can't quantify it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. How much it influences results, I (we) don't know. But it sure seems to skew the Royals' math, to where ACTUALLY PLAYING THE GAME produces wins that "shouldn't" exist.

I don't think two years is a fluke. The 2007 Colorado Rockies were a fluke. The 2014-15 Royals weren't. Besides, the 2015 Royals won 95 games, the best record in the AL. Yet they were inferior to the Astros (who didn't even win their division) and the Jays just because they outperformed their Pythagorean and the Astros and Jays vastly underperformed theirs? Maybe that 8th inning comeback against the Astros wasn't a fluke but rather a form of regression -- the Royals proving that, on the field, they were indeed the superior team.

Sorry, just had to vent.

How in the hell were the 2014 A's better than the Royals? They won 88 games, didn't win their division, and lost the wild card game.

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by thurman merman

How in the hell were the 2014 A's better than the Royals? They won 88 games, didn't win their division, and lost the wild card game.

The A's were on a white hot streak that year, right up until they traded Cespedes. It was all downhill from there. Terrible, terrible trade.

[Mama Hip Rockets]

Originally Posted by Bowser

The A's were on a white hot streak that year, right up until they traded Cespedes. It was all downhill from there. Terrible, terrible trade.

Yeah, they were good in the first half. They were 22-33 in August/September in the middle of a pennant race. They were also 2-5 against the Royals in the regular season. I'm not sure why the author of that piece is acting like the Royals were somehow inferior to them.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by thurman merman

Yeah, they were good in the first half. They were 22-33 in August/September in the middle of a pennant race. They were also 2-5 against the Royals in the regular season. I'm not sure why the author of that piece is acting like the Royals were somehow inferior to them.

Because their run differential was awesome.

I like analytics, but one problem with run differential and Pythag records is that they overwhelmingly reward teams that have offenses that beat the shit out of bad teams, starting pitchers, bullpens, etc.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Bowser

Frankly we should have been in the playoffs in 2013 as well with the pitching we had that year.

Not one team wanted any part of us in the playoffs that c year. We were on ****ing fire

[suzzer99]

We should be going for our 4th WS win in a row dammit!