2012 Kansas City Royals Repository Thread

[alnorth]

2012 Slogan: Our Time

A better, more accurate 2012 Slogan: It is Finally Next Year
(from Great Expectations)

An alternative slogan if you don't like that one: Someone has to win this crappy division
(from alnorth)

With the beginning of a new year, it is time for the 2012 version of the Royals Repository Thread. We've got Hosmer, we've got a 2011-dominating Gordon, we've got Moose, we've got hopefully a killer bullpen, we've got a stereotypical slow slugging DH, we've got easily one of the best defensive shortstops in the AL, we've got a promising catcher in Salvador Perez. Hell, we've got offense and promising prospects galore.

We do not have starting pitching.

Oh yeah, we've also got this:



Get ready for, (as of January 2012 anyway), one of the most confusing puzzles of a baseball season in recent Royals history. Will they suck? Maybe, I don't know. Will we be given a year of 0.500 baseball? Possibly, I don't know. Will they win the division and go to the playoffs for the first time in 27 years? For the first time in a long time, it could happen, I don't know. 92 losses, 92 wins, or anything in between would not surprise a lot of us.

Everything goes here except Gameday threads and really big news. If a giant story breaks, the Royals achieve some awesome milestone, or we sign/lose a highly significant player/coach/mascot/whatever, then it might also deserve its own thread. This being Chiefs Planet, please do not clutter the board with new threads about trivial Royals news or you will only annoy those who come here for just Chiefs football. If you aren't sure and its not a Gameday thread, it goes here.

What sort of stuff often goes here? SPchief explained it well, so I'll just copy that:

If you locate something of interest.. ANYTHING.. deals on apparel, best ways in/out of the stadium, giveaways, great stories from this season or from seasons gone by, rumors, trades, anything.... feel free to post it here.

[duncan_idaho]

Also...

The Angels are apparently going to be major players for Zack Greinke and will need to shed some salary afterwards (Dan Haren or Ervin Santana or both). Both are intriguing buy-low candidates at the moment, especially Haren.

Considering that both have expensive options that are unlikely to be picked up and are basically rentals for the rest of the season, I can't imagine the price will be high at all.

I'd be interested to see what the Angels would want for them, especially Haren (who has bad numbers because of a small injury and a back problem).

[AndChiefs]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Re: Melky/Sanchez...

Last thing I'll say on that topic is that it's easy to look back now and say they should have known something was wrong with Sanchez, or they should have evaluated and known Cabrera was going to continue to be good while Sanchez was never going to bounce back.

But... Sanchez cleared medical evals just fine (there's nothing structurally wrong with his shoulder/elbow/forearm)

Cabrera was an extreme risk factor. He'd just done something he'd never done before - hell, something he'd never come close to doing before - and few believed he would replicate his 2011 performance, let alone surpass it.

Both were high-risk, high-reward. The Giants just got the good end of it.

Re: Montgomery. That's interesting, considering the scouting info I just got about his velocity being back to old standards and his curve being much better. It's from a guy whose connection has long been a Monty backer, so it might be a little slanted.

He's still young and has plenty of time to harness that stuff IF it truly is back. Starting him at AA and giving him a chance to rebuild some confidence is probably a good thing, because he certainly wasn't getting it done in Omaha.

If his stuff is truly back and he still continued to do poorly...they probably figured he might need some confidence building. I have no problem with the demotion.

[DeezNutz]

Was Sanchez's velocity down considerably last year? If so, it becomes a bit harder to justify trading for this particular player.

As I've said all along, though, I thought it was a good move at the time, so I'm not going to go crazy Monday morning QBing this thing. However, as eazy notes, someone is paid a lot of money to know a lot more than me about these things...

[AndChiefs]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Was Sanchez's velocity down considerably last year? If so, it becomes a bit harder to justify trading for this particular player.

As I've said all along, though, I thought it was a good move at the time, so I'm not going to go crazy Monday morning QBing this thing. However, as eazy notes, someone is paid a lot of money to know a lot more than me about these things...

I wanted to trade Francoeur as opposed to Cabrera. I felt like Cabrera's improvement was more sustainable then Frenchy's but I understand why they went the route they did. Melky had a "ready-now" prospect behind him while Frenchy didn't.

[jbwm89]

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Isn't Moore paid handsomely to be correct on calls like this though?

If he misses this badly on his player evaluations (and lets not pretend this is an outlier and he's been a great GM otherwise), shouldn't that be a sign that he's not good at his job?

I agree the trade seemed like a good gamble on paper, but the results are all that matter.

The trade is what it was, a good gamble. Gambles don't usually work out, it wasn't a good trade for a good player. Our other option was most likely trading Melky for a low A guy with some upside. In that case no one would be upset because we got something out of a guy who was leaving anyways. DM took a high risk/high reward chance on Sanchez. People forget that the market for Cabrera wasn't very large, we couldn't move him at the deadline.

Basically it was ML guy who most likely is done, but has shown flashes and there is a small chance he will get it back. Or, somebody who we might see in 4-5 years but most likely will never get to the bigs.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Isn't Moore paid handsomely to be correct on calls like this though?

If he misses this badly on his player evaluations (and lets not pretend this is an outlier and he's been a great GM otherwise), shouldn't that be a sign that he's not good at his job?

I agree the trade seemed like a good gamble on paper, but the results are all that matter.

Yes, but so are a lot of people. No baseball exec comes close to hitting on 100 percent of their moves.

Moore was ridiculed for signing Melky Cabrera on the cheap in the first place (by other executives, scouts, fans, writers, everyone). It worked out, obviously, last year. But I don't remember ANYBODY thinking Cabrera would even repeat what he'd done. His BABIP was seemingly unsustainable, and most scouts thought he would regress (possibly significantly) due to his career high K rate, low walk rate, and good luck in 2011. Folks I talked to all thought it was a great trade for KC.

So instead of sitting on the seemingly small gold claim he'd hit, Moore tried to flip an excess commodity (offense-based outfielder) for a significant need (starting pitching). The trade partner was a team that had tons of starting pitching but needed more offense. It was a good and logical match for both sides. Many Giants fans were pissed, even, in giving up Sanchez and getting only Cabrera back. There was risk involved with Sanchez, but he came back with a clean bill of health.

I'm not saying it wasn't a bad move, in hindsight. Just that it was a logical and understandable move when made. It just happened to work out that there was a talent in Cabrera that pretty much no one saw coming, and Jon Sanchez is in Oliver Perez/Steve Glass-land.

If the Royals had more control over Cabrera (he turned down an extension like the one Francouer was offered, and if he'd been signed to an Alex Gordon-like extension instead of the trade, people would have been outraged), I'd be much more upset.

As it is, it freaking sucks. But giving up one year of Cabrera is not something I'm going to say is fireable. Moore's time is running out. I can't see him surviving past next season unless the Royals are a winning club. But this is a back-breaking straw, IMO.

[jbwm89]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Was Sanchez's velocity down considerably last year? If so, it becomes a bit harder to justify trading for this particular player.

As I've said all along, though, I thought it was a good move at the time, so I'm not going to go crazy Monday morning QBing this thing. However, as eazy notes, someone is paid a lot of money to know a lot more than me about these things...

You can't "win" every trade, especially when you have zero leverage. I hope we make moves for high risk/reward guys all that time and eventually we will hit on one.

The real flaw in this whole thing is that Sanchez continues to pitch for this team. I have no defense for that.

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Beltran or Melky will win game MVP


Bank on it.

Wow, im a prophet! Posted on July 2nd.

[eazyb81]

Originally Posted by jbwm89

The trade is what it was, a good gamble. Gambles don't usually work out, it wasn't a good trade for a good player. Our other option was most likely trading Melky for a low A guy with some upside. In that case no one would be upset because we got something out of a guy who was leaving anyways. DM took a high risk/high reward chance on Sanchez. People forget that the market for Cabrera wasn't very large, we couldn't move him at the deadline.

Basically it was ML guy who most likely is done, but has shown flashes and there is a small chance he will get it back. Or, somebody who we might see in 4-5 years but most likely will never get to the bigs.

You're ignoring many other options, including:

1) keeping Melky this year;

2) increasing our multi-year contract offer to him;

3) trading him for someone who didn't end up being the worst pitcher in the league.

I sure would have liked Cabrera's 3.3 WAR this year over Frenchy's -0.9. No one held a gun to Moore's head and told him to trade Cabrera instead of Frenchy.

At what point does the fanbase stop making excuses for why Dayton Moore fucked up?

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by AndChiefs

I wanted to trade Francoeur as opposed to Cabrera. I felt like Cabrera's improvement was more sustainable then Frenchy's but I understand why they went the route they did. Melky had a "ready-now" prospect behind him while Frenchy didn't.

Oh, they could have easily slid Cabrera over to RF had they traded Francouer. Only problems with that:

1) Cabrera turned down a two-year deal, and they wanted insurance for Myers (who has jumped his progression schedule considerably. After his struggles last year, a mid-season 2013 ETA seemed more likely)
2) Cabrera had more trade value (but not a ton). No one was really interested in Frenchy.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

Guys we all know the Melky trade sucks buy I think it is time to let it go. Melky was offered a deal and didn't take it. Sure we could have offered more but we needed a starting pitcher and we like what we had in Cain, who if returns to his preseason form or close to it, we will be happy as can be.

And if we are talking worst trades, the one we did to the Brewers in the Greinke deal is far worse for them than what happened to us. We got one of the best young shortstops in the league, a potential legit CF starter, and a pitcher in Odo with ace potential. Brewers got Greinke for a few years to chase a ring before Fielder bolted. Oh and we unloaded Yuni on them. They took one step forward and two steps back. What happened to them in that deal is much worse than what happened to us in the Sanchez deal IMO.

Yeah right. Greinke was 16-6 with them last year and helped get Milwaukee to the postseason. I understand he's a FA after this season but getting to the playoffs is the goal.

If anything the Brewers have already won that trade.

I understand that Escobar is a good player but I don't see him in any All Star Games yet...Cain is completely unproven who can't stay healthy....Odorizzi from all accounts is NOT an ace, more like a 3rd starter...and Jeffress or whoever sucks.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by eazyb81

You're ignoring many other options, including:

1) keeping Melky this year;

2) increasing our multi-year contract offer to him;

3) trading him for someone who didn't end up being the worst pitcher in the league.

I sure would have liked Cabrera's 3.3 WAR this year over Frenchy's -0.9. No one held a gun to Moore's head and told him to trade Cabrera instead of Frenchy.

At what point does the fanbase stop making excuses for why Dayton Moore fucked up?

1) This would have been fine, though trading from a (seeming) surplus is good baseball roster management, most of the time.
2) Could have done that, but would have been roundly mocked if Cabrera was offered a Gordon-like contract.
3) Teams were not beating down the door for Melky. He was available at the deadline last year and no one really wanted him.

I won't make excuses for Moore on a lot of the things he's done, but when he's being criticized for something that 99 percent of baseball thought was a good move at the time, something that almost every exec in his situation would have done, I'll defend that.

No one saw this coming for Cabrera. No one. Heck, no one even really saw Cabrera duplicating his efforts from last year.

[eazyb81]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Yes, but so are a lot of people. No baseball exec comes close to hitting on 100 percent of their moves.

Moore was ridiculed for signing Melky Cabrera on the cheap in the first place (by other executives, scouts, fans, writers, everyone). It worked out, obviously, last year. But I don't remember ANYBODY thinking Cabrera would even repeat what he'd done. His BABIP was seemingly unsustainable, and most scouts thought he would regress (possibly significantly) due to his career high K rate, low walk rate, and good luck in 2011. Folks I talked to all thought it was a great trade for KC.

So instead of sitting on the seemingly small gold claim he'd hit, Moore tried to flip an excess commodity (offense-based outfielder) for a significant need (starting pitching). The trade partner was a team that had tons of starting pitching but needed more offense. It was a good and logical match for both sides. Many Giants fans were pissed, even, in giving up Sanchez and getting only Cabrera back. There was risk involved with Sanchez, but he came back with a clean bill of health.

I'm not saying it wasn't a bad move, in hindsight. Just that it was a logical and understandable move when made. It just happened to work out that there was a talent in Cabrera that pretty much no one saw coming, and Jon Sanchez is in Oliver Perez/Steve Glass-land.

If the Royals had more control over Cabrera (he turned down an extension like the one Francouer was offered, and if he'd been signed to an Alex Gordon-like extension instead of the trade, people would have been outraged), I'd be much more upset.

As it is, it freaking sucks. But giving up one year of Cabrera is not something I'm going to say is fireable. Moore's time is running out. I can't see him surviving past next season unless the Royals are a winning club. But this is a back-breaking straw, IMO.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing that the move was logical and understandable. But it was WRONG, period. Baseball trades aren't a success if Keith Law and the guys at Baseball Prospectus give their approval, they are a success if they are backed up by results.

Moore's original signing of Melky was great, but it appears it was more of a blind luck scrapheap signing than any magical evaluation by Moore, as he traded him after one year.

And I agree that giving up one year of Cabrera is not something that is fireable. What is fireable is an inability to build anything approaching a winning baseball team despite seven years on the job.

The only ability he's shown is that he can convince Glass to throw millions of dollars at elite draft prospects in the 1st round.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

Yeah right. Greinke was 16-6 with them last year and helped get Milwaukee to the postseason. I understand he's a FA after this season but getting to the playoffs is the goal.

If anything the Brewers have already won that trade.

I understand that Escobar is a good player but I don't see him in any All Star Games yet...Cain is completely unproven who can't stay healthy....Odorizzi from all accounts is NOT an ace, more like a 3rd starter...and Jeffress or whoever sucks.

All star game selections is what you're using? Come on, man. It's a popularity contest. Dan Uggla, Mike Napoli and Derek Jeter were all starters last night.

Escobar has a strong case for best SS in the American League this year. If he plays at this level for the rest of his time in KC, the Royals win the trade based on that alone, regardless of what is received from Jake Odorizzi and Lorenzo Cain.

[eazyb81]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

I won't make excuses for Moore on a lot of the things he's done, but when he's being criticized for something that 99 percent of baseball thought was a good move at the time, something that almost every exec in his situation would have done, I'll defend that.

No one saw this coming for Cabrera. No one. Heck, no one even really saw Cabrera duplicating his efforts from last year.

You keep saying this but you really have no clue if it's true. Did you conduct a survey of everyone in baseball?

"Everyone" also roundly mocked Moore for signing Frenchy. Can we blame him yet for that brilliant acquisition or is too early? What about Yuni Betancourt, who might literally be the worst position player in the game? We acquired him not once, but twice.

Clearly Brian Sabean thought Cabrera was capable of a repeat performance. But he has a WS ring so I guess he is content to not just go with what "everyone" else thinks about player evaluation.