SportsNation Keith Law: (2:29 PM ET ) It's possible, and they would want young pitching. I was...

SportsNation Keith Law: (2:29 PM ET ) It's possible, and they would want young pitching. I was told today that they're not interested in dealing Butler - they want to platoon him at DH instead - which, in addition to being a bad way to develop a player, is kind of a waste of an asset too. So I don't really know what their strategy is.

The Royals are no longer amusing to me.

about 3 years ago R.J. Anderson 19 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

You mean the Royals front office makes bad decisions?!?!

by mittens on Nov 20, 2008 3:04 PM EST reply actions

I don't wanna hear how the Royals aren't dumb

Not after trading 2 great relievers for a 1B and OF, neither of which they need and trying their hardest to make Butler fail.

by joeybw on Nov 20, 2008 3:09 PM EST reply actions

I beg to differ in one respect

The only teams they outscored last year were Oak, Sea, Was, SF, and SD. I could build a better offense centered around the mooks on this board. As I have repeatedly stated, there is no point in having an above-average bullpen if the rest of the team is not there. So they get Jacobs who gives them a legitimate slugger for the middle who will have DeJesus on about 36% of the time in front of him and some sort of Guillen/Butler combo after. I agree that stunting Butler is dumb. Crisp is a boy-lover, but he gives them a solid glove in center. They need an upgrade at 2b whether it is bat or glove that is a must. Perhaps they put Aviles over there and sign a guy like Everett or even a Punto to get a pretty good up-the-middle combo.

Good bullpen on a bad team is inefficient in my book. It looks like they added a much-needed bat, and a solid glove at the most important OF position. All it cost was two relievers. Throw Bannister in that bullpen and he covers for one of the guys, grab some FAT, and you still have Soria in the mix as either a starter or reliever. Frankly, I would like to see them trade him for 3 on the verge prospects.

Let me ask this, could anyone see a Soria for Justin Upton trade?

Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found
a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up
that much.

~George Costanza~

by Sandy Kazmir on Nov 20, 2008 3:38 PM EST up reply actions

hell no

do you think Soria holds THAT much value?

Rays 2009 Slogan: "Come back with your shield or on it"

by PriceMultiCyYoungs on Nov 20, 2008 4:09 PM EST up reply actions

Not alone

Arizona has a front line staff and a wobbly bullpen. They need a 2b with Hudson jetting so maybe a Grudz throw-in. In almost 600 PA Justin has been average. Ton of upside, I mean an absolute shit-ton, but Arizona has to play for this season. After Andy’s DY for Garz and friends last year some GM is going to make a move like this.

Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found
a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up
that much.

~George Costanza~

by Sandy Kazmir on Nov 20, 2008 4:21 PM EST up reply actions

Trading Justin Upton would take a ton more

He did better last year as a 20 YO in the bigs than DY ever has (OPS of .816 vs DY’s .724 and .741). If he had put up those numbers in AAA this year he’d still be the number 1 prospect in baseball; Delmon had an .815 in AAA at 20. The difference is that Delmon’s .815 was driven by singles, not BBs and XBH. Justin Upton is an absolute stud. Best player in the world that is 20 or younger.

by rglass44 on Nov 20, 2008 7:01 PM EST up reply actions

The DBacks bullpen is shot to hell.

No Cruz. No Lyon.

Yusmerio Petit probably in the rotation due to Unit’s non-signing.

Soria and friends for Justin. The “friends” part would be key though.

Although, then there’d be a mass sell-off of outfielders from the Royals.

I know that's a pisser, baby.

by Blicks on Nov 21, 2008 12:55 PM EST up reply actions

Good bullpen on a bad team is inefficient in my book.

Trading good bullpen pieces for marginal mid-career players isn’t very efficient use of their few assets either.

by RATW on Nov 20, 2008 9:12 PM EST up reply actions

They should've gotten prospects for them :<

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 20, 2008 9:59 PM EST up reply actions

This allows them to get prospects for others, and I would not be surprised to see them get picks for Crisp next year.

by rglass44 on Nov 21, 2008 10:49 AM EST up reply actions

The draft picks part is possible.

But in a market where Kevin Gregg nets Jose Ceda, while Willingham nets Bonifacio, which would you rather be dealing, relievers or outfielders?

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 21, 2008 12:45 PM EST up reply actions

Valid point

I don’t think it was a good trade, but maybe the market for their OF is stronger than their RPs. Who knows what is coming across Moore’s desk, but I won’t second guess the whole process until they’re done.

by rglass44 on Nov 21, 2008 12:52 PM EST up reply actions

Is it?

Teahen is meh, DeJesus is good, but is he even available? Gathright?

Thus far they’ve been incapable of understanding what positions they have needs at and who fills those needs; that’s why they have Killa, Shealy, Gload, Butler, and Jacobs two fill two positions.

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 21, 2008 12:56 PM EST up reply actions

Read this:

Pos

by rglass44 on Nov 21, 2008 1:03 PM EST up reply actions

My point is this:

Concerning Crisp/Gathright:

Is Crisp 5 mil better than Gathright?
Is he 5 mil + Ramon Ramirez better than Gathright?

If yes, what about on a 75-80 win team?
If yes again, why? Doesn’t upside count on a non-contender?

Who has better value: one of the 30-35 best relievers last season, or Teahen?

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 21, 2008 1:25 PM EST up reply actions

Teahen could be a top 10 RF...

by rglass44 on Nov 21, 2008 1:57 PM EST up reply actions

I highly doubt that.

by R.J. Anderson on Nov 21, 2008 2:08 PM EST up reply actions

Teahen? Doubt they'll trade him for prospects either.

I don’t believe Moore is looking for prospects. They didn’t acquire a $6 mil CF’er and aren’t spending $65-70 mil. on payroll next year with an eye to the future; this is Moore’s idea of making the Royals contenders in 2009. Otherwise they could have traded for someone other than “established” (but not good) Jacobs and gone with non-established in-house options like Kaaihue/Shealy or F.A.T. at 1B/DH and see where that goes or just cut out the middle man and trade the bullpen along with DeJesus and Soria for a boatload of really good prospects. They also would have done something at the trading deadline last year instead of sit on Mahay, Olivo, etc.

All this says to me, other than rightly cashing in the bullpen, Moore still values the wrong players and has miscalculated the extent of what it would take to make the Royals true contenders, the result of which is a $65+ mil payroll to nowhere and no firm long-term blueprint for sustained success.

Now if he trades Mark Teahen and Jose Guillen for Pujols, kindly disregard this post.

by RATW on Nov 21, 2008 12:57 PM EST up reply actions