Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Except that you don't really know until they reach the major league level.
I understand the club control concept, and there's a balance to be achieved.
I still don't understand throwing money at Duda and Billy. It's dumb.
I agree on Duda. But Hamilton... they had a big black hole at CF. Starling had struggled mightily and Phillips was a bit of a stretch there.
People are mad Starling stayed down a month longer than they wanted, but what does that really hurt? We see him for 3 months instead of 4 at the major-league level.
There's a balance between getting guys to the major leagues and letting them work through struggles and making sure they're ready for the challenge. Some players need more seasoning and more of a background of success before they're promoted (because failure at the MLB level would break them). Some can go through the worst performances and come back from it. Just another challenging aspect of the process of player development.
It's not as easy as the Astros and Dodgers make it appear. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
I agree on Duda. But Hamilton... they had a big black hole at CF. Starling had struggled mightily and Phillips was a bit of a stretch there.
People are mad Starling stayed down a month longer than they wanted, but what does that really hurt? We see him for 3 months instead of 4 at the major-league level.
There's a balance between getting guys to the major leagues and letting them work through struggles and making sure they're ready for the challenge. Some players need more seasoning and more of a background of success before they're promoted (because failure at the MLB level would break them). Some can go through the worst performances and come back from it. Just another challenging aspect of the process of player development.
It's not as easy as the Astros and Dodgers make it appear.
But Hamilton's a big black hole himself. We've used Whit in CF a fair amount to try to have some offense. If Starling stunk it up, at least you know he's not an answer.
I'd rather have spent that money on middle relief, knowing that your starting staff is somewhat shaky.
We went to two World Series with a mediocre starting staff, good defense, an excellent bullpen, and a fast, high contact offensive concept.
We got away from that. I still think that team design best fits our stadium and payroll limitations. Why spend on guys who have proven they're not any good? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
But Hamilton's a big black hole himself. We've used Whit in CF a fair amount to try to have some offense. If Starling stunk it up, at least you know he's not an answer.
I'd rather have spent that money on middle relief, knowing that your starting staff is somewhat shaky.
We went to two World Series with a mediocre starting staff, good defense, an excellent bullpen, and a fast, high contact offensive concept.
We got away from that. I still think that team design best fits our stadium and payroll limitations. Why spend on guys who have proven they're not any good?
If I’m running a team that I know has no chance to contend, I’m going to spend any FA money I spend either on:
1) long-term pieces that will be here once the rebuild switches to contention mode
2) pieces that don’t block a “ready-now” prospect, that I think I can move for something of value.
Due to his defense and speed, Hamilton was an Ok bet to me. It didn’t work out, because his bat continued to deteriorate.
I wouldn’t spend much of anything on middle relief unless I’m legitimately trying to win a lot. I don’t think the Royals are at that point yet. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
If I’m running a team that I know has no chance to contend, I’m going to spend any FA money I spend either on:
1) long-term pieces that will be here once the rebuild switches to contention mode
2) pieces that don’t block a “ready-now” prospect, that I think I can move for something of value.
Due to his defense and speed, Hamilton was an Ok bet to me. It didn’t work out, because his bat continued to deteriorate.
I wouldn’t spend much of anything on middle relief unless I’m legitimately trying to win a lot. I don’t think the Royals are at that point yet.
I get what you mean, and it's conventional wisdom. I don't think 1) is ever really likely, we never do that unless it's taking a chance on a pitcher.
2) worked reasonably well the last couple years, but this year we whiffed.
I'll add that we're going to be renegotiating the TV deal soon, and we currently have the worst deal EVAH. It benefits the team long-term to at least be watchable enough to engage the public. Signing Lucas Dudas doesn't. Hamilton? I didn't like it, but I'll give Moore a mulligan.
A decent pen and this is not a terrible squad. I just think the approach has gotten away from how we won. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
He's really struggling to deal with all the sliders teams are feeding him. He has a really hard time with quality sliders.
The defense and plate approach are solid. Just really struggles to do much with a good slider.
Sergio Romo just completely chewed him up with sliders. Now 3 for his last 25 with 13 K.
Doesn't take long for major leaguers to figure out where your weakness is and attack it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by tk13:
I was okay with the Hamilton signing, and did not like the Duda signing at all.
But to be fair, Duda honestly didn't hit any worse than O'Hearn has. Cuthbert's the one who came in and saved the day.
O'Hearn's BABIP would indicate bad luck. He hits the ball hard, but often at people. In theory, that should drift back to some normality.
Cuthbert has been pretty okay, but I think he's a part-time player. Dozier I think plays better all-around when he's at 3rd. If you want to platoon O'Hearn and Cuthbert at 1st, with the occasional Dozier off-day at 3rd, I can see that.
Phillips in RF, Starling in CF, Gordon in LF might be the best defensive outfield in baseball. Seriously.
Lopez at SS until Mondesi's back and then utility guy after; and the starting 8 is a pretty nice mix of some veteran leadership at every level and young players with upside. [Reply]
Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
Another wonderful contract given out by Moore to a mental midget.
Duffy was well worth that contract. No one thought he was going to turn into the shitty pitcher he is today. I think DM is pretty damn incompetent, but I'm not going to criticize him for the Duffy contract. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
Duffy was well worth that contract. No one thought he was going to turn into the shitty pitcher he is today. I think DM is pretty damn incompetent, but I'm not going to criticize him for the Duffy contract.
Duffy to be honest, is the same guy he's always been, a talented pitcher that is wildly inconsistent. [Reply]
