Would the royals really trade all their top prospects and sign Stanton to a massive contract when it's time?

Hardly. Just dealing with reality. Once the stars see that they can't fix this team singlehandedly, it just gets harder and harder to care.

Or we'll just go with the "trying too hard" excuse. I'm adding it to the list of excuses my engineers can hand me when they don't get the work done. NOT! :)

**** NO!!! We'll trade them all for a few minor league prospects to play in Single-A squad for five years, and tell the fans they're now targeting 2018 as "our year". They learned a few tricks from King Carl!

Look, the fact the general manager, the team manager, and Moose have survived this without so much as a public lashing has to tell you something.

What can I say, people like Cool-Aid, and we keep drinking it.

The ownership couldn't care less as long as the money keeps rolling in.

Man this thread really went to hell.

Royals
35-38, third in AL Central, 6-1/2 games back

So much for the impact of George Brett as interim hitting coach.

The Royals are 14-9 since Brett and Pedro Grifol replaced Jack Maloof and Andre David as the team’s hitting instructors, as opposed to 21-29 before the change. But the team is actually scoring fewer runs, dropping from 3.98 to 3.74 per game.

Pitching and defense are the primary reasons the Royals are near .500. Yet, even the pitching is something of a mirage.

While the team leads the American League in ERA, it is only 11th in Fielding Independent Pitching, which measures the effectiveness of pitchers based on results that do not involve fielders. What’s more, the Royals’ pitchers have the league’s sixth lowest strikeout rate, and their opponents’ batting average on balls in play is the fifth lowest.

In other words, they’re getting lucky.

Some rival executives criticized the Royals’ blockbuster with the Rays as a reach, reasoning that the Royals were not good enough to sacrifice a prospect such as Wil Myers in a win-now deal.

I disagreed with that assessment initially, but not now. I’m skeptical that the Royals can catch the Indians, much less the Tigers.


http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/c...-season-062313

Damn. Harsh ROFL

Can you two pump each other in the O's thread? Thanks.

According to their Pythagorean data, the Royals are 2 games worse than their expected W/L record which should be 37-36. So in fact they are not getting "lucky", but rather they are 2 games unlucky.


Sorry to inject facts here.

Is there anything more pathetic then those two? Why the **** are you obsessed with the royals?

The article is basically saying they are getting lucky to have the current Runs Scored and Runs Allowed numbers that they have. Pythagorean data says that given their RA and RS they are two games unlucky. Doesn't mean that they aren't getting "lucky" getting t their current numbers.

I would say the Royals are pretty lucky to be 6.5 back given how badly moose/hoz/butler have sucked, among others.

I understand perfectly what the article is trying to say. However, using FIP and BABIP here can make you say what you want it to. The Royals built a team around pitching and defense so it's quite expected that their ERA would out-do the typical team given their defenders. Maybe it's not the way to win in the AL (their hitting has suffered for it) but it explains the guy's points.



To put it another way: had we signed Melky types we'd be better offensively but worse defensively and we'd still probably wash out the same run differential.

I find it incredibly funny and ironic an Orioles fan posts a link about a baseball team getting lucky.

Trolling at its finest.

Hey.... go **** yourself.

Who cares where they rank in "Fielding Independent Pitching"? Talk about grasping at straws.