Royals Authority - A Kansas City Royals Blog
|
Written by Craig Brown
|
|
Tuesday, 22 December 2009 01:06 |
|
As I’m pecking away at the keyboard this month, polishing off the player profies for the 2010 Royals Authority Annual, all is quiet in the Royal Universe leading up to the holidays.
Although there is a rumor the Royals are interested in acquiring Brian Anderson. Anderson is a former number one pick by the Chicago White Sox, who has failed to make any kind of a mark in nearly 900 major league plate appearances. With a career line of .227/.290/.370, he seems to be filler for the Omaha roster. With former number one’s Phillip Humber and Bryan Bullington already in the fold, this seems to be an interesting track the Royals have chosen to fill out their minor league system. I can’t remember a team who has been so intent on collecting so many first rounds busts.
Maybe they’re looking to give Luke Hochevar some company. Boom! Thank you! Try the veal.
Here is my holiday wish list for the Royals:
For Dayton Moore - A clue that can help him solve the riddle that is the construction of the major league roster. And the return of Bill Bavasi as a general manager for some team. Just because.
For Trey Hillman - The ability to resist the temptation to bat Yuniesky Betancourt second and the ability to effectively manage a bullpen. And the ability to understand platoon splits. And the ability to… Forget it. There’s too much here.
For Gil Meche - A bionic arm to withstand the managerial incompetence.
For Brian Bannister - The ability to effectively use advanced statistics to improve his performance.
For Billy Butler - Continued improvement for the best hitter on the team.
For Yuniesky Betancourt - A new home.
For Alberto Callaspo - A really, really large glove.
For Zack Greinke - A competent infield defense behind him and some run support.
For Alex Gordon - The opportunity to fulfill potential. Barring that, the opportunity for a fresh start.
For Jason Kendall - The ability to fly, since he’ll apparently be doing all kinds of traveling to mentor our young catchers.
For Brayan Pena - A chance.
For Wee Willie Bloomquist - A seat on the bench. Often.
For Jose Guillen - Someone to take him off the Royals hands while not soaking the Royals for all of his $12 million. Unfortunately, not even Santa Claus can deliver on this.
For Joakim Soria - More three out saves, instead of the five or six out variety. Of course, that means the existence of a quality set-up man.
Anyway, things figure to be slow around here over the next week, so I’d like to take this opportunity to wish everyone a happy holiday and a brilliant new year. Thanks for making this blog a fun place to hang around and vent (or even sometimes, celebrate) about our Kansas City Royals. Stay safe and try to resist the urge to bring up the Betancourt trade or the Kendall signing at your holiday gathering. Stick to something safer, like politics.
Read 17 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Clark Fosler
|
|
Monday, 21 December 2009 10:21 |
|
While deals still get done over the holidays, it is likely that there will be very few between now and after the first of the year. Sadly for many of us, there will also be fewer and fewer rumors, too, as reporters and team officials all take time off to celebrate. Given this quasi-lull in the off-season, let's take stock of where the Royals are right now.
If the season opened today, the likely 25 man roster would look something like this:
Catchers- Jason Kendall, Brayan Pena
Infielders- Billy Butler, Alberto Callaspo, Yuniesky Betancourt, Alex Gordon, Chris Getz, Willie Bloomquist, Mike Aviles
Outfielders- David DeJesus, Mitch Maier, Jose Guillen, Josh Fields
Starting Pitchers- Zack Greinke, Gil Meche, Brian Bannister, Luke Hochevar, Robinson Tejeda
Bullpen- Joakim Soria, Juan Cruz, Kyle Farnsworth, Edgar Osuna, Carlos Rosa, Ramon Colon, Dusty Hughes
You will notice Colon, Hughes and Aviles appear in italics. In my opinion, those are currently the three 'up for grabs' spots on the 25 man roster. In the case of Aviles, the question is will he be healthy by opening day and will Royals' management have forgiven him for the transgression of trying to play through an injury to start the 2009 season?
In the case of Colon and Hughes, the question is simply isn't there someone better and will the Royals recognize as much? If you were asking ME who I would have at the back of my bullpen to start 2010, I would offer Chris Hayes and Chris Nicoll simply because, well, neither one of them is Ramon Colon or Dusty Hughes. I'm being unfair here to be cute as I am not totally against giving Hughes a decent shot in the spring and early regular season, but does anyone want to see more Colon?
The variable here is Tejeda. His strong run as a starter at the end of last season virtually assures him a roster spot, but probably has not (or should not) make him a lock for the rotation. Certainly, a strong spring from Kyle Davies might persuade Dayton Moore and Trey Hillman to saddle up that horse one more time. While a long shot, I would give Anthony Lerew a look at that number five spot, too.
Either occurrence would send Tejeda to the bullpen and pretty much leave just one open spot. That assumes, of course, that Carlos Rosa does not implode during the spring, but let me go on record right now as saying that in the seventh inning of a tight game next April, I'll take Rosa's 97 mph fastball over that of Kyle Farnsworth no matter what happens in the spring.
Moving onto the starting rotation, the biggest variable is the health of both Meche and Bannister. Assuming both are ready to go in the spring (something I'm sure the Royals will let us know about June 14th) then the question would be the aforementioned battle for the fifth spot. Essentially, the winner of that battle is simply the guy who gets to hold Aaron Crow's spot until September....at least that is what the Royals hope.
Looking at the position players, there is not a lot of roster spot competition as it stands at this moment. Who plays where and how much is somewhat up for grabs, but roster spots are not.
As mentioned above, the health of Aviles is one issue and really the only other spot that could be up for grabs is that of Chris Getz. While I think the Royals intend to play Getz at second next year, they might consider starting him in Omaha (he has an option) if they cannot move Callaspo. I'm higher on Getz than a lot of people, but I think the Royals are right there with me. As such, look for Getz to be on the roster come April.
Other than those two variables, do you see anyone listed that you honestly believe Dayton Moore would cut? I know, there are guys you WANT to cut...I know. I feel your pain. Truthfully, I am on the verge of a cut Jose Guillen, eat the $12 million and play Buck Coats post...really!
So, there is the status of the Royals right now. If I am Dayton Moore, the 40 man roster is right beside my plate of ham on Christmas Day. I'm wondering 'is this the team I want to through into the mix in 2010?' The answer cannot be 'yes'.
The above roster is certainly within five wins of last year's dismal squad. Like every roster since 2007, it is banking on Alex Gordon become that coveted 'middle of the order impact bat' and either hoping that Chris Getz actually does become Brian Roberts (anyone tired of me saying that yet?) or that Alberto Callaspo learns how to stop bouncing white spheres AND hit like he did in 2009. Frankly, it might be hoping for all three things to happen and even then, is it competitive?
We will theorize about potential options (some realistic, some not) as we pass the time until the end of the year, but for now, THIS is your 2010 Kansas City Royals. How do you feel about that?
Read 14 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Clark Fosler
|
|
Friday, 18 December 2009 12:57 |
|
Some trade rumors are just pure speculation, some based on heresay and other a true inkling of actual discussions. Most of us know that and take said rumors for what they are: rumors.
My own little slant on the issue, and I'm sure this is not unique, is to take a rumor unrelated to the Royals and try to interject the organization into said rumor. Today, the rumor of interest to this writer is courtesy of Ken Rosenthal at Fox Sports and involves the Mariners' inclination to trade pitcher Brandon Morrow for a corner infielder or designated hitter type.
Morrow, the number five overall pick in the 2006 draft, has spent most of his three seasons as a reliever in the majors, but started 10 games in 2009. Interestingly, his WHIP was 1.481 as a starter and 1.855 as a reliever. While Morrow was something of a sign-ability pick, he was certainly a first round talent and at age twenty-five still has some upside either as a number three/four starter or as a setup man with closer potential.
Anyway, it got me to thinking, if the trade value of Alberto Callaspo is so low as to not entice the outfield flush Orioles to trade Felix Pie for him, what about Brandon Morrow? The Brewers balked at a Mat Gamel/Morrow exchange at the winter meetings, so the Mariners might well be discovering that Morrow's trade value is not quite what they thought it would be, either.
Would Callaspo fit in Seattle?
He might if the Mariners were willing to believe Alberto could be a competent fielder at third base. If Seattle was willing to swallow his below average defense at second (which would generally go against their defensive minded acquisitions over the past year or so), that would allow them to slide Jose Lopez to first if they wanted. While pure speculation, it would seem one could make a case that Seattle might be a fit for Callaspo.
So, the question becomes, would you trade Alberto Callaspo for Brandon Morrow? Read 13 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Clark Fosler
|
|
Wednesday, 16 December 2009 10:06 |
|
I think we are all done talking about Jason Kendall for a while....hopefully. There was so much reaction to this signing that the discussion actually deteriorated to the point that an argument was made that sophisticated fans would not react, or overreact, to any signing.
That is pretty much the same point of view that plagues the political environment of the country today: my side is smart, yours is dumb. It is sophisticated and knowledgeable to use this particular sound byte, but simply ignorant and uniformed (or un American even) to disagree with it. Of course, this is a world where a 'distinguished panel of climate change experts' includes Darryl Hannah. I don't know, maybe the research she did to play a mermaid in Splash gave her some unique insight into temperature change.
Anyway, let's talk about some things that really matter........like Philip Humber.
Dayton Moore added to his collection of former number one picks this week by signing the former number three overall pick out of Rice University in the 2004 draft to a minor league deal. Without question it is a good move in that it costs nothing (in baseball terms) and at one point a couple of organizations liked his potential. Besides being a top pick of the Mets in 2004, he was included in the deal that sent Johan Santana to the Mets.
Now, the downside of Humber is that he will turn 27 next week and has logged 29.2 innings of major league work spread over four seasons. Having started 70 games in AAA over the last three seasons, Humber has seen his strikeout rate decline and walk rate increase in each of those three years. Not surpisingly, Philip has essentially allowed one more hit per nine innings with each successive season.
For those of you who just got a Tyler Lumsden flashback, I cannot say that I blame you. However, the odd thing about Humber's development is that he spent just two seasons and 28 starts below AAA. A single rookie league game and just seven AA starts are were sandwiched around two half seasons in Advanced A ball and then BOOM, welcome to AAA.
Obviously, having come out of a major college program and already 22 years old when he signed, Humber was fasttracked and it did not work. The question is will the Royals be able to find something to add to Humber's repertoire that allows him to succeed? Or may it be a case of letting him work out of the pen? It is, after all, a lot easier to move someone else's first round pick to the bullpen than it is one of your own.
Like me, those of you looking for the 'big splash' of the off-season, were kind of ho-hummed by the Humber signing, but this is a guy worth watching in spring training and, frankly, who would you rather have as a backup in AAA: Bruce Chen and Brandon Duckworth or Philip Humber and Bryan Bullington?
Moving on.......
Who else got a vision of 'Podsednik' on the back of a Royals' jersey after the White Sox traded for Juan Pierre yesterday? I can deal, in some respects, with the Jason Kendall signing because a small part of me can see the intangibles that Jason might bring to the table. However, the spectre of a Kendall AND Podsednik off-season might just cause serious mental damage (more than already incurred).
Dayton Moore, like his predecessor Allard Baird, seems to fall prey to tunnel vision at times. He decided the Royals needed a different catcher and he got one. He knows, as our review of the Royals versus the AL Central a while back also revealed, that Kansas City must upgrade in centerfield. I am afraid that means that Moore will be compelled to make a change...any change, just to 'upgrade' that position.
Right now, unless you can swing a deal for a Chris Dickerson type prospect - I'm not sure Brett Gardner is that type of guy, by the way - I would rather take my chances with a Buck Coats/Mitch Maier/David Lough experiment to start the season. The Royals have all but said that 2010 will be another building year, so don't waste time with stop-gaps or use one of the few trading chips they possess to reach for a player that might not be able to man the position for the long-term.
One last thought on the Pierre deal. Did you notice that the Dodgers are picking up roughly three-quarters of Pierre's salary? Given that Juan can actually field, actually still hit and even run, does that give you an indication of how much of Jose Guillen's paycheck the Royals will have to kick in if they try to move him? Yep, you got it: one hundred percent of it.
Read 8 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Craig Brown
|
|
Tuesday, 15 December 2009 00:00 |
|
Lost in the shuffle of Saturday’s Jason Kendall Jamboree was the news the Royals agreed to contracts for the 2010 season with three of their arbitration eligible pitchers. Brian Bannister will earn $2.3 million while Kyle Davies is the luckiest man on the planet, earning $1.8 million. In related news, I’m considering suing my old 3&2 coach who routinely exceeded a rational pitch count when I was on the mound for Jackson County Bank.
The contracts mean the Royals have only two outstanding arbitration cases in Robinson Tejeda and Alex Gordon. I’ll be interested to see how much Gordon will earn. I’m assuming somewhere in the neighborhood of $3 million. Actually, I would think that’s his ceiling. I can’t imagine him making more than that.
Here are the salaries we currently know about for next season:

The Royals will also pay $1 million to the White Sox as part of the Mark Teahen deal. They also owe $1.1 million to Coco Crisp, Yasuhiko Yabuta and Miguel Olivo. They’ll receive $1 million from Seattle in the Betancourt trade, so overall there’s an additional outlay of $1.1 million. That is a total of $60.735 million that is now guaranteed.
Earlier, I mentioned Gordon and Tejeda. Let’s give those two a combined $3.5 million.
Alberto Callaspo, Billy Butler, Brayan Pena, Josh Fields and Chris Getz are all under club control and will make roughly $500,000 each.
That’s a total of 21 players for a total of $66.835 million. I figure the Royals will carry an additional two pitchers and they are still looking for that “speedy” center fielder and another bat to fill out the bench. If the payroll is supposed to remain close to last year’s Opening Day number of $70.5 million, that doesn’t leave Dayton Moore with much wriggle room.
Given Moore's penchant for foolish spending, I view this development as a positive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those of you who haven't had enough Kendall analysis, I'll point you to Tangled Up In (Royal) Blue who isn't impressed and Kings of Kauffman who points out there were better options.
And if you're looking for a dissenting viewpoint, there's 124 Monkeys and his contention that Dayton Moore is having a great winter. Obviously, I disagree but it's always interesting to hear all the arguments that can be made. Read 10 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Craig Brown
|
|
Monday, 14 December 2009 11:06 |
Who do you have in the Jason Kendall vs. John Buck debate?
Think a moment before you answer. Because your answer will illuminate on which skill you place a higher value.
In my hypothetical world (a place where I’m on a sandy beach and the temperature is a constant 80 degrees) both Kendall and Buck receive the same amount of playing time. The total amount doesn’t matter. (We all know Kendall has caught over 130 games a season going back to 2000. Resident genius Dayton Moore will tell you that means he’s durable and can be counted upon. I’ll tell you that means he’s likely to finally break down. But I digress.) What matters is, their playing time is exactly the same.
I’m willing to submit that Kendall will provide the higher OBP by about 20 - maybe 30 - points. I’m also willing to submit that Buck will out-slug his counterpart by at least 100 points. Given these assumptions, I’ll take the potential for a solo home run over the potential for a hit by a pitch. On this team, a runner on first is merely fodder to be the first out of the double play. The solo home run (because of the team’s woeful OBP, nobody will be on base) at least gives you a run.
This is all water under the bridge since Kendall is wearing Royal blue for the next two seasons and Buck will be earning Canadian dollars next year.
The issue, we’ve been led to believe, is partly a financial one. The Royals operated with an Opening Day payroll of roughly $70 million last year - a team record and an increase of 17% from the previous year. Unfortunately, a similar increase isn’t in the offering for 2010. The Royals aren’t looking to slash the budget, but they aren’t looking to pump it up, either. That’s fine. The status quo is OK. Certainly, I'd like to have a higher payroll, but I can live with a world where the Royals aren't making cuts. However, several ill-advised contracts (Mr. Guillen, I’m looking at you) and the maturation of several young players who are taking the first steps into the arbitration process mean that continuing to improve on the field while maintaining the status quo in the budget will be a monuental struggle.
John Buck, eligible for arbitration for the third time, was looking at a payday around $3.5 million. Too much money for a player the Royals brain trust deemed a backup. And with a payroll for 2010 that can be generously called “inflexible,” the Royals found themselves in the market for an inexpensive catcher. (Do not fool yourself into thinking Buck would have accepted a pay cut to remain with the Royals. Would you want to stay with a team that chose you as a backup? Would you agree to take less money when there are rules in place that practically guarantee an increase? Yeah, me either.)
Hello, Jason Kendall.
Kendall’s contract calls for $2.25 million for 2010. Given the $3.5 million that Buck likely would have earned, the Kendall deal buys the Royals some salary relief. Granted, it’s not much, but every little bit counts.
Unfortunately, the salary relief in 2010, becomes the salary albatross in 2011.
Sure the Royals will have Guillen’s contract off the books for 2011, but Zack Greinke’s salary increases to $13 million. Gil Meche could still be around at a cost of $12 million. David DeJesus has a club option at $6 million which should probably be picked up barring an unforseen development. Joakim Soria and Yuniesky Betancourt will both be paid $4 million. And Billy Butler will join Alex Gordon and Brian Bannister (among others) as being eligible for arbitration.
Arbitration candidates aside, the Royals were already on the hook for $39 million. Add in the arbitration guys, and the 2011 payroll balloons to over $55 million. (Yes, I realize I’m engaging in some extended speculation here. A number of things can happen over the next 12 months - injuries, guys get cut, guys get sent to the minors, etc. When I’m formulating the salaries going forward for the arbitration guys, I’m figuring the 2010 production will be roughly the same as it was in 2009. It’s an estimate.)
Now, the Royals will have to add Jason Kendall and his salary which actually increases to $3.75 million to the 2011 payroll. Yes, the Royals, in their infinite wisdom, backloaded Kendall’s deal. So while they’ll conceivably find some flexibility now in 2010, they are on the road to finding themselves in the same position next year. Despite losing insane contracts like Jose Guillen’s $12 million.
This is my main problem with Dayton Moore. He continually makes moves with no regard for the long-term implications. A two year deal? Couldn’t he found someone who would have taken a single year? (Another example of this poor decision making was found in last year’s Betancourt trade. The Royals needed a shortstop after Mike Aviles went down with Tommy John surgery. Instead of finding someone with an expiring contract, he grabbed Betancourt. Not only is he the worst everyday player in baseball, he’s signed through 2011. Unreal.) There are a plethora of decent-field, no-hit catchers. Many of them have "veteran experience."
Likewise, Moore becomes so single minded in a quest to improve an area, he fails to notice he’s making his team weaker in categories where they were already lacking. This happened last year with the Mike Jacobs deal. The Royals were horrible at getting on base, but felt they really needed an infusion of power. So Moore got a 30 home run guy, ignoring the fact his on base percentage was abysmal.
It’s happening again. The 2009 Royals were just a horrible defensive team. That’s a fact. Moore and the rest of the front office realize this. Everyone in baseball knows this. Years from now, when we’re relieving Greinke’s Cy Young year of 2009, we’ll be obligated to mention how much better his ERA could have been if the Royals had employed able bodied defenders. Upgrades were needed at second base and at catcher. (And shortstop and right field and center field…) Again, that’s a fact.
Unfortunately, Moore has targeted improving his team’s defense while completely ignoring what such moves will do to the offense. He acquired Chris Getz to presumably replace Alberto Callaspo at second. Getz is definitely better with the leather, but there’s no way he’ll ever approach the .300/.356/.457 line Callaspo posted last year.
Last year the Royals team OBP was .318 which was 13th in the American League. If they replace Callaspo with Getz, that number is going to go lower. Last year the Royals team slugging percentage was .405, 12th in the league. Replacing Buck and Olivo with Kendall and that number is going to plummet.
Getting on base and driving the ball is how teams score runs. Last year, the Royals scored an average of 4.2 runs per game, 13th in the league. Removing the Olivo/Buck tandem and if they go ahead and take Callaspo out of the lineup, they’re certain to sink even lower.
It’s truly sad Dayton Moore can’t see the forest for the trees.
Ah, all is not lost because Kendall will now be counted on to bring the catcher intangibles, meaning he will develop the pitchers, call a great game and be an all around good guy in the clubhouse. However, ask yourself this: If Kendall is so great at handling a pitching staff, why did the Brewers allow over 5 runs per game last year, the second worst rate in the National League last year? If he is so great behind the dish, why did Jeff Suppan, Manny Parra and Braden Looper all perform worse in 2009 than the previous season? Wouldn’t we expect them to at least maintain form if a receiver is so important to a pitcher’s success?
I don't blame Kendall for the Brewers failings at pitcher. My point is, there’s absolutely no way we can tell if a catcher is having an impact on a pitching staff. I know the Royals (as will many other teams) will post what they call Catcher ERA in their daily game notes. The stat is basically the ERA when that particular catcher is in the game. I always thought it was a silly stat that proves nothing. I mean, the catcher who works with Zack Greinke is going to have a lower Catcher ERA than the one who works with Kyle Davies just based on general principles. It gives the catcher way too much credit for the performance of a pitcher.
We all know the defense behind the plate was pathetic last year. Miguel Olivo has hands of stone and lacks the intestinal fortitude it takes to block the plate. John Buck has a noodle arm. And Brayan Pena is an unhealthy amalgamation of the two. Here’s the rub. Moore has found a catcher who isn’t appreciably better from a defensive standpoint from the guys he’s replaced. Kendall has thrown out 20%, 43%, 15%, 30% of all would be base stealers over the last four years (most recent season first.) That’s crazy. What do numbers like that prove? He’s consistently inconsistent. Overall, his arm is probably better than Buck’s, but I’m thinking he’s more likely to post a 20% success rate than one over 40%. And don’t forget, a catcher’s caught stealing rate is dependent on how well a pitcher delivers the ball to the plate while holding a runner, as well as the ability of the shortstop and second baseman (whomever is covering the bag) to catch the ball and apply the tag.
As far as blocking the plate, he’s shown some decent consistency which is a relief. Generally, he’s allowed a combination of roughly 50 wild pitches and passed balls per season throughout his career. He can catch the ball, which on the Royals, immediately gives him some value.
I suppose there is something to having a veteran presence on a team. I’ve seen enough “Youth Movements” to know that having some players who have experienced the ups and downs of the day to day major league lifestyle is a benefit. Somebody has to show the rookies how to button their jerseys. I just question putting the reigns of leadership in the hands of a 36 year old catcher with a line of .243/.320/.313 over the last three years.
Besides, what’s up with this “mentoring?” Can someone explain how Kendall is supposed to “mentor” Wil Myers given that Kendall will be in Kansas City and Meyers will be… Somewhere else. Certainly, there will be opportunities for them to talk in Spring Training. For a couple of weeks. Until Myers gets assigned to the minor league camp. I guess I can’t blame the Royals for saying stuff like that. After all, they have to sell this deal to an increasingly intelligent (and skeptical) fan base. I’ve already had numerous conversations with friends who are season ticket holders who won’t be renewing. Not based solely on the Kendall signing, but because it’s the latest in a pattern of organizational misconduct.
More GM speak: Dayton Moore says that, “He still runs well for a catcher. You’re not going to have to pinch-run for him. But, he’s not going to have the same speed he once had before that sever ankle injury in 1999.”
Really? He’s not the same player as he was in 1999? That’s insane!
And I’m relieved the Royals won’t have to pinch run for him. Lest we take that potent bat out of the lineup. (I looked at Miguel Olivo's game logs from 2009. He was lifted for a pinch runner exactly once. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought big league managers didn't like to remove their starting catcher from a game prior to the ninth inning because most teams only carry two catchers and they're worried about what they would do if their backup went down because of an injury. Of course, the Royals carried three catchers on their roster last year.)
Anyway, I'm with Posnanski: This is how you know the signing is a stinker: The GM references an injury that occurred 10 years ago. Ten years!
The killer for me is the second year. I remember how I laughed at the Washington Nationals when they signed Ivan Rodriguez to a two year deal. (I was also relieved because the Royals were reportedly interested in Rodriguez.) I thought it was funny the Nats would overpay for an old catcher. Little did I know, they were setting the market. Thanks, idiots.
Bottom line, this is a bad move. Is it any worse than the Mike Jacobs trade, the Kyle Farnsworth contract or the Betancourt trade? Eh. I don’t think it’s any worse than those moves. Instead, what I see is a general manager who has a track record of some really questionable decision making at the major league level, bringing in fringe players at high wages. Exactly the sort of moves a team like the Royals, in the Kansas City market, absolutely, positively cannot afford to make. And given the examples I cited occurred within the last year, is it any wonder the Royals took a step back in 2009?
As bad as it seems, the Jason Kendall signing isn’t the end of the world. However, it is a further sign the Royals will never be a competitive team with Dayton Moore in charge.
Read 6 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Clark Fosler
|
|
Saturday, 12 December 2009 09:08 |
|
That headline is pretty bland, because this is a pretty bland move for the Royals. In fact, it kind of reeks of an Allard Baird like signing: Dayton Moore did not like his catching situation as a combination of money and glaring weaknesses made Miguel Olivo and John Buck unpalatable, so Dayton Moore headed to the Winter Meetings needing a catcher and by God he was going to come home with one.
Ladies and gentlemen: the Jason Kendall era begins.
Kendall brings a ton of experience (1872 starts behind the plate) and a career line that looks pretty good: .290/.369/.383. He has six seasons on his resume where Kendall posted an on-base percentage above .390 and has more career walks (684) than strikeouts (641). Even better, his two year salary checks in several million lower than what John Buck would have received going through arbitration.
Problem is, the player I described in the above paragraph is not the player the Royals just signed. Kendall's on-base percentages the last three seasons are a very Buck/Olivo like .301, .327, .331. Okay, that's an exaggeration. Miguel and John seldom posted any percentage stats that began with a '3', but when you factor in Kendall's complete lack of power, the offensive output Royals' fans can expect from their catchers in 2010 will pale in comparison to what they kind of sort of enjoyed in 2009.
Of course, the company line this morning is the defensive prowess, pitcher handling, young catcher mentoring skills that Jason Kendall brings to the table. Handling a pitching staff and calling a game are certainly the two baseball skills hardest for fans and statheads alike to quantify. It would be interesting to get some comments from A's and Brewers' fans with regard to their view of Kendall's abilities, but given Jason's experience and pedigree, I'm willing to give him a thumbs up in this area for now.
Defensively, Kendall threw out 20% of would be base stealers in 2009, 43% in 2008 and just, gulp, 15% in 2007. In 410 games behind the plate the last three seasons, Jason did commit (is that the right term?) just 13 passed balls. By contrast, Miguel Olivo committed 10 passed balls in 97 games last season.
Maybe Kendall's biggest strength is that he simply shows up. In 14 big league seasons, Jason has started 130 or more games behind the plate 12 times. If you have signed a veteran catcher to handle your staff, then you might as well have him back there everyday.
Bottom line, you can expect a John Buck non-tender this morning, because Dayton Moore got his catcher (Kelly Shoppach and Dioner Navarro be damned). It is not a horrible move simply because the money is almost low enough to be irrelevant (at least in baseball terms) and the Royals are, after all, only replacing John Buck and Miguel Olivo. Most of us were simply hoping for something more, something that would give us some hope that the Royals were actually building something. That move may yet come.
For today, the Royals signed Jason Kendall.....yawn. Read 9 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Craig Brown
|
|
Thursday, 10 December 2009 10:31 |
|
The Royals made a pair of moves this morning, releasing Mike Jacobs and John Bale prior to the Rule 5 draft. We know about the level of suckitude (and in Bale's case - the injuries) involved, so there's no point in a rehash. The Jacobs deal was a huge bust, so credit to the Royals for realizing that and cutting their losses.
With the 40-man roster at 38 players, the Royals were able to select LHP Edgar Osuna from the... Wait for it...
Atlanta Braves!
Osuna is a soft throwing lefty who features a slooooow curve and decent change. In 349 career minor league innings, he's struck out 324, walked 78 and posted a 3.37 ERA. He's pitched as both a starter and reliever. Last year, he reached double-A for the first time and threw 77 innings with 49 strikeouts, 21 walks and a 3.72 ERA.
Obviously, he'll come out of the bullpen for the Royals.
And now the Royals 40-man roster stands at 39, so there's room for the club to add a rotten catcher on a multi-year deal. Read 8 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Craig Brown
|
|
Thursday, 10 December 2009 00:15 |
|
I’m not exactly a scholar on the history of baseball’s winter meetings, but this year’s edition seems kind of sleepy. If the best baseball can do is a Curtis Granderson trade (to the Yankees!) and a Randy Wolf signing, that’s not going to capture anyone’s attention. (Maybe the Chone Figgins deal would have carried a little oomph, but we all knew about it last week.)
The Royal rumors especially have been absolutely depressing. Unless you get excited debating the merits of catchers who suck.
At least Trey Hillman was around. He held court with the media and shared some of his views on the upcoming season. The Royals haven’t changed much of anything since the end of last season, but it’s still interesting to get the head man’s take of how he would use his current roster.
Hillman on Butler:
"I’m not going to say Billy is going to be the American League Gold Glove winner at first base, but I’m hopeful you’ll look out there at the All-Star break and say, `You know what? I don’t even think about him being out there at first base anymore.”
I think I'm already at that point. Butler is the first baseman. As it should be. Good.
Hillman on the situation at second base: "It’s difficult to put a .300 hitter (Alberto Callaspo) with his run production (on the bench). Getz fits best at (defensively) second."
I think the Royals have decided to focus almost entirely on defense this winter. That’s a good thing. But Hillman has a point. On a team as offensively weak as the Royals, you absolutely cannot remove Callaspo’s bat. As brutal as he was with the glove at second, I’m not sure you want him patrolling a corner outfield spot. I think he needs to start the year as the DH.
Getz doesn’t really do anything for me, but look at it this way - Getz should be better than any Royal DH was last year. And he’s a better glove at second. Don’t get me wrong. He’s probably an average to below average fielder and his bat is awful. But removing Callaspo from the field and having Getz in the lineup instead of some of the crap DHs the Royals used last year, this team actually improves.
Sad.
Hillman on shortstop: "With the unknown of Aviles, I still like Yuniesky as our shortstop,"
He should have added, “By default.” It’s not like the Royals have options at this position. Although I found the first part of Hillman’s comment interesting. It’s as if he’s open to playing Aviles over Betancourt. Oh boy, just the idea of Hillman even thinking that makes me happy.
Although I harbor serious doubts it will ever happen.
Aviles has said he’d like to return by spring training, but that’s pushing it for someone who had Tommy John surgery in June. You have no idea how badly I want this to happen. If Aviles’ offensive production from 2008 was cut in half, he’d still be twice as good as Betancourt.
Hillman on Alex Gordon: "At the moment, for me, Gordon is our third baseman. We are all hopeful that he's going to be fully recovered and have a healthy season,"
Not exactly a ringing endorsement. It's possible he will be feeling the heat from Josh Fields, but what are the Royals really going to do here? Gordon is going to get a raise and will have to be played. I suppose the Royals could move him to a corner outfield spot.
Of course, both will probably split time at third in spring training and Hillman will decide to put one of them in the outfield for the first time on Opening Day. SABR Trey!
The latter part of Hillman’s comment caught my attention as well. So, Gordon wasn’t healthy when he returned from hip surgery? I’m not surprised, given the fact he lost his power, but this is the first time I think I’ve heard someone from the team talk about that. Oh, well. That’s all water (and service time) under the bridge.
Hillman on the outfield: "I'd like to leave DeJesus [in left]. The only thought of moving him is ... if we felt Jose Guillen wasn't going to be able to play in right and we had a better fit in left.”
So it sounds like the Royals will create space for Fields by moving DeJesus to right. I’m sure he would be fine, but it’s worth pointing out DeJesus has played around 160 innings in right in his career. Fields has played 180 innings in left.
I really don’t get this Royal philosophy of the defensive shell game where they just throw guys out there willy-nilly. Last year the Royals defense sucked. There was only one guy who was decent with the glove and now they want to move him to a different position? Explain that one to me?
Hillman mentioned DeJesus’ throwing accuracy and “strength of his arm.” Huh?
Am I missing something? I never thought DeJesus had a particularly strong arm. The data at The Hardball Times backs this up, as he regularly has finished with a negative runs saved rating when measured by his arm. I don’t think his arm is bad - It’s not like he’s Johnny Damon - but I think he’s probably average to below average in this department. And I certainly don’t think he’s going to be throwing out many runners at third base from right field.
It’s comments like that from Hillman that make me question his suitability to manage in the major leagues.
Hillman on his injured pitchers Kyle Davies, Brian Bannister and Gil Meche: “All very healthy, very strong and in great condition.”
And what I call the Spring Training Sunshine Stories have begun. “(Insert player’s name here) is in the best shape of his career!” Yeah. I’ll believe it when I see it. Read 3 Comments... >> |
|
Written by Clark Fosler
|
|
Wednesday, 09 December 2009 10:36 |
|
Quote of the week from a Cubs official via Bob Dutton at the Kansas City Star on the rumored Milton Bradley for Gil Meche discussions:
"If that had been possible, there would not have been time for it to be a rumor."
Somebody in Chicago is smart. Hopefully, somebody in Kansas City is, too.
Well, here we are on Day Three of the Winter Meetings with a whole lot of nothing. Given the rumors we have heard, 'nothing' is the best we could hope for at this point.
The thought of watching the worst of the Molina brothers catch (or to be more exact, bat) everyday kind of made my stomach hurt. The signing of Jason Kendall or Rod Barrajas was not much more intriguing.
Felix Pie is a fun name to discuss, but are you willing to trade Billy Butler or Alex Gordon (the apparent asking price of the Orioles)? Interesting, however, that Gordon still commands some value.
The big three way deal centered around Curtis Granderson might get the real activity started, so today could be interesting....maybe.
Now, what about the Rule 5 draft?
MLB.com raised some interesting possibilities and Kings of Kaufmann had been running down draft possibilities over the past week. You can make virtually any prospect sound intriguing, or awful, so Rule 5 is a true crapshoot. Then again, I like shooting craps.
The Authority (or at least this half of it) is going to plant both feet firmly aboard the Zach Kroenke bandwagon. The 25 year old lefty reliever had a great year in AAA last season, holding opponets to a .213 average. He has Midwestern roots, having been born in Lincoln, Nebraska (where we have a foot of snow this morning and 30 mph winds, by the way) and pitched at the University of Nebraska - for whatever that's worth.
I like Kroenke for the simple fact that he is a reliever (by far the most successful position to consistently emerge from Rule 5) and he's lefthanded (which means the Royals could avoide the temptation to retain John Bale...again).
Now, there are a lot of other players out there: Colin Curtis, an outfielder from the Yankees' system, for example. I am not sold on position players simply because they are harder to hide on a 25 man roster and it is hard to see the next Shane Victorino or Josh Hamilton in this year's bunch.
Of course, the Royals have some roster moving to make to clear room for a Rule 5 pick and also Noel Arguelles, once that deal grinds through the system. That should not be an issue on a roster with John Bale, Victor Marte, Roman Colon, Luis Hernandez, Mario Lisson and Josh Anderson on it. Not to mention potential non-tenders John Buck and Mike Jacobs.
Running down those names, and given the Royals prospects for 2010, it would be almost criminal for Dayton Moore to pass on the Rule 5 Draft this year.
As I mentioned above, we're basically snowed in here at Royals Authority HQ North, so check back for any breaking news throughout the day. Read 5 Comments... >> |
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 5 of 14 |
|
Final AL Central
| TEAM |
W |
L |
GB |
| Minnesota |
87 |
76 |
-- |
| Detroit |
86 |
77 |
5.5 |
Chicago
|
79 |
83 |
7.5 |
Cleveland
|
65 |
97 |
21.5 |
Kansas City
|
65 |
97 |
21.5 |
There's always next year.
|