Royals 2012 Kansas City Royals Repository Thread - Page 11

**alnorth** · 10:54 PM

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:

Quote:

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.

**alnorth** · 01-04-2012, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

I hate that we, as fans, have been so trained to worry exceedingly about the economic aspect of baseball.

Glass has the money, via revenue sharing, income (personal and team related), and it's time to ****ing spend it.

No excuses. Our payroll needs to be around $80M and looking to get to $100M quickly. If not, this is all pissing into the wind in the first place.

The idea is that we are banking whatever money we have under 70-80 million now.

I guess if you think the profits from this year will go to enhance Glass's lifestyle, never to be seen again, you'd have a point but he's already reportedly promised baseball and the player's union that although we're making money now, he expects to lose money later to break even.

Unless he's lying, then paying someone a lot of money does have an impact on the future. Maybe its worth it for this year and next, but 60/5? Similar contracts given to similar pitchers have been regretted more often than not.

**alnorth** · 01-04-2012, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Who knows if Hosmer, Moose, etc will even be willing to re-sign with KC?

You have no real reason to be concerned about this. Virtually all high-impact prospects develop strong ties to their organization and at least give their team the opportunity to come close to matching. Royals fans have been scarred by the 90's, but that is not the normal experience of a team who has the money to offer a fair deal.

**alnorth** · 01-04-2012, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eazyb81

It sucks that KC fans and other small-market teams have become obsessed with worrying over every little penny spent by the owners. This is pro baseball and it costs money. If one $12MM/year contract is too much to risk then Glass seriously needs to sell the team and move on with his life.

Glass isn't looking to profit, again unless you think he's lying.

There is no owner in the entire country who is willing to long-term lose money. EVERY owner is looking to break even at a minimum, including Miami's owner. (If their new park and team doesn't pan out, they will blow it up again)

Our market is what it is (though certainly big enough to be the Twins), and it is logical to save money now to spend later. It would not make sense to spend money that does not need to be spent to compete, just for the hell of it.

eazyb81 · 01-04-2012, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

You have no real reason to be concerned about this. Virtually all high-impact prospects develop strong ties to their organization and at least give their team the opportunity to come close to matching. Royals fans have been scarred by the 90's, but that is not the normal experience of a team who has the money to offer a fair deal.

How many of these were Boras clients?

Are we capable or even willing to match a $100-200+MM offer to Hosmer, Moose, and/or Myers when the time comes?

eazyb81 · 01-04-2012, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

Glass isn't looking to profit, again unless you think he's lying.

There is no owner in the entire country who is willing to long-term lose money. EVERY owner is looking to break even at a minimum, including Miami's owner. (If their new park and team doesn't pan out, they will blow it up again)

Our market is what it is (though certainly big enough to be the Twins), and it is logical to save money now to spend later. It would not make sense to spend money that does not need to be spent to compete, just for the hell of it.

Where did I say Glass should be expected to lose money? Would an extra $12MM of payroll seriously cause the franchise to become unprofitable? I don't think our profit margin is quite that small.

I understand the theory of not spending any money for the next few years so we can try to keep our young players. I just don't believe it is the correct strategy.

**alnorth** · 01-04-2012, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eazyb81

I just don't believe it is the correct strategy.

Why the hell not? I'd think it would be a terrific strategy to go 30-40 for a while, blow it up to 100-110 for a while, hang on as long as possible, then when the time comes to rebuild, repeat the cycle, rather than just spend 70 million plus inflation (which basically means no youth movement) forever.

**alnorth** · 01-04-2012, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eazyb81

How many of these were Boras clients?

Are we capable or even willing to match a $100-200+MM offer to Hosmer, Moose, and/or Myers when the time comes?

$100MM, yes.

$200MM (in today's dollars) is crazy fantasyland money. Not every star is A-Rod or Pujols, and those massive 10-year deals end up being horrible stupid albatrosses anyway. The Angels are going to feel the crushing weight of a lot of dead money in a few years.

Fansy the Famous Bard · 01-04-2012, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

Why the hell not? I'd think it would be a terrific strategy to go 30-40 for a while, blow it up to 100-110 for a while, hang on as long as possible, then when the time comes to rebuild, repeat the cycle, rather than just spend 70 million plus inflation (which basically means no youth movement) forever.

Why can you not have a balance? Why does it have to be all or nothing?

jbwm89 · 01-04-2012, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeke

Why can you not have a balance? Why does it have to be all or nothing?

because 70-80 isn't going to get it done in 5-6 years (thanks duncan idaho I didn't do my homework).

Alnorth has a point. Besides the clubs that spend 120mil + constantly, there has to be some strategy to resigning your stars. Especially when so many are going to come up for contract at approx. the same time.

12 mil a year for edwin won't kill you, but add another 2-3 contracts of this caliber (maybe at the trade deadline for an arm, or a bat in the offseason) and you are talking about 1/3 of your payroll being tied up in long term contracts.

eazyb81 · 01-04-2012, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

Why the hell not? I'd think it would be a terrific strategy to go 30-40 for a while, blow it up to 100-110 for a while, hang on as long as possible, then when the time comes to rebuild, repeat the cycle, rather than just spend 70 million plus inflation (which basically means no youth movement) forever.

Because it assumes that we will spend it in the future which I am not sure we will. I don't believe Glass is sitting there with his accountant saying to pass on Jackson and throw $12MM in a 3-year CD to be ready for the 2014 offseason. It doesn't work like that because a million other scenarios could happen between now and then.

I think we have a chance to win this division next year, and adding Jackson will help that goal without blocking prospects or giving up valuable talent.

eazyb81 · 01-04-2012, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

$100MM, yes.

$200MM (in today's dollars) is crazy fantasyland money. Not every star is A-Rod or Pujols, and those massive 10-year deals end up being horrible stupid albatrosses anyway. The Angels are going to feel the crushing weight of a lot of dead money in a few years.

Again - how many Boras clients have re-signed with their original team? Would you agree that Boras clients are more likely to test free agent waters and seek the maximum deal?

duncan_idaho · 01-04-2012, 04:03 PM

Adding Jackson also provides some valuable insurance for the Royals' young arms. Prevents them from having to rush Odorizzi or Montgomery. Gives them some flexibility with Duffy.

Hochevar
Sanchez
Jackson
Chen
Paulino/Duffy/Crow

would look pretty great and get the Royals P depth where it needs to be.

Of course, all that said.... if the Royals think they can snag one of the 2013 on the FA market, I would be OK with waiting one more year. Much better talent out there in 2013.

**DeezNutz** · 01-04-2012, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Because it assumes that we will spend it in the future which I am not sure we will. I don't believe Glass is sitting there with his accountant saying to pass on Jackson and throw $12MM in a 3-year CD to be ready for the 2014 offseason. It doesn't work like that because a million other scenarios could happen between now and then.

I think we have a chance to win this division next year, and adding Jackson will help that goal without blocking prospects or giving up valuable talent.

Pretty much my thoughts as well. I don't believe this organization, which has been so ineptly run for for long (and DM continues to push the idiocy level at times) is now so detailed and forward-thinking with respect to overall payroll.

From Glass's perspective, I think all he knows now is that things are cheap. In other words, all is well.

We can re-sign Gordon and add Jackson at roughly $10M per and still be vastly underspending.

And any comments about "not being able to re-sign Hos" because of moves in '12 would be complete and utter bullshit.

**alnorth** · 01-04-2012, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Because it assumes that we will spend it in the future which I am not sure we will. I don't believe Glass is sitting there with his accountant saying to pass on Jackson and throw $12MM in a 3-year CD to be ready for the 2014 offseason. It doesn't work like that because a million other scenarios could happen between now and then.

I think we have a chance to win this division next year, and adding Jackson will help that goal without blocking prospects or giving up valuable talent.

then you believe Glass is a liar, which is fine, a lot of Royals fans have the same mindset. Its a fair assumption because he hasn't exactly proven that he'll lose money in a year, yet. If every dollar of profit in each fiscal year is going to be spent on upgrading him to the suite level in a Mediterranean island next winter, then it absolutely makes sense to pressure Glass to spend every dime, every year.

I just happen to think he's serious about using money saved now to accelerate to a Twins-level payroll or higher when the time comes

**alnorth** · 01-04-2012, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

And any comments about "not being able to re-sign Hos" because of moves in '12 would be complete and utter bullshit.

Hosmer can be Mauer'd regardless of whether we spend money now or not.

Since I don't believe Glass blatantly lied to baseball and the player's union, I'm more concerned about extending prospect #3 or #4.

01-04-2012, 04:03 PM	#162
duncan_idaho M-I-Z-Z-O-U Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Kansas City Casino cash: $-1889692	Adding Jackson also provides some valuable insurance for the Royals' young arms. Prevents them from having to rush Odorizzi or Montgomery. Gives them some flexibility with Duffy. Hochevar Sanchez Jackson Chen Paulino/Duffy/Crow would look pretty great and get the Royals P depth where it needs to be. Of course, all that said.... if the Royals think they can snag one of the 2013 on the FA market, I would be OK with waiting one more year. Much better talent out there in 2013. __________________ "You gotta love livin', cause dying is a pain in the ass." ---- Sinatra
Posts: 22,318