I think several players are hurt and are playing injured. Benni's throws from left field have been atrocious. He doesn't have the strongest arm but lately he can't even get them to the plate. I know Salvy's knee is worse than they are saying. MM had this problem in STL, playing injured guys. I agree about Whitt. Ed
Benny has never had an especially good arm, Salvy just hurt his knee two days ago. If they're playing hurt and being allowed to with top prospects at almost every spot, then that's even more reason they gotta go.
I like it David! Not that your frustrated per say but the message….which is stemming from you being frustrated. You’ve actually been more level headed than I have in this. One of my frustrations is not even due to this year or the record so far. It’s how we’ve gotten there. If you are playing all the younger kids and we are 9-17 so be it. But this is an awful product and I’m tired of being sold how close we are to contending (I know you still think next year is possible and I don’t think you are wrong necessary it just is hard to see at the moment)…when the product is NOT close to contending. My only struggle is that if we end up with 70ish wins again…are we really expecting a 20 win increase next year? It’s happened before, but that seems like a bit of a stretch to me. Its just so unnecessary as well because all the message had to be this year is “we expect to compete, but we need to get the Kids up together this year.” That’s it, just leave it at that. Management has a way of finding a way to get another “year” out of this job the last few years (making JJ in charge to reset things comes to mind) and it is feeling like they will find a way to extend that again this year.
Yeah, I mean it's fair to be frustrated with all of that. I understand some of the young guys not being up, but I can't understand someone being up and sitting. Rant away!
Great article David, if I could have I would have liked this 10 times. Dayton Moore is no doubt a good man, I know he respected, I think through out baseball. I am with you though, I think it time for a change. I would love to know what causes their love affair with ROH.
If they had promoted Dayton to manage the people and let JJ manage the roster, I'd have loved that move, so I definitely agree. Good man, but woof on the team he's built.
Sometimes in life, business and sports we tend to overthink things. We believe something will work a certain way or a logical progression of decisions will lead to a conclusion. However in a climate of transition, things can often go astray quickly. Decisions often get made for you before your planned moves can be made.
I believe Royals management thought they could manage this transition. Instead of preparing for a season trying to win a division, they were preparing for the move to young players they believe are the future.
I believe instead of slowly moving prospects into the Major League roster, it maybe time to strip it of those being moved aside. For those prospects struggling, let the next player in line get an opportunity especially the pitchers. It still maybe ugly, but at least we get to see something different and hopefully some positive progress.
Yeah, that's a good way to look at it. Just like watching the All-22 in football gives a different view of what the QB might see down on the field, it can be easier to see it from a bird's eye view in any situation. I still fear that the instruction at the big league level isn't good enough for the finishing school that is the big leagues, but I think you're onto something with what was believed to be a solid plan being, well, not.
We are on the same page here. This is really a management problem. At some point you need to let results do the talking. Let the players tell you who is best for a position and when they are ready. Not contracts and best wishes.
I'm sure everyone here will want to shoot me for saying this, but I've seen a lot of good things happen for this team so far. They have Benintendi back on track. Witt is playing every day and improving. Keller is showing he's still really good. Lynch is making progress. Melendez looks great at the plate. The bullpen (and Matheny's management of it) continues to shine.
Look, I know the bottom of the roster is a huge problem, and I'd love to read a story about why the Royals value O'Hearn as much as they do. Mondesi is done. Kowar might be one of the inevitable busts from 2018. Whit looks ... bad.
Losing sucks. My mood is always better after a Royals win. But I'm finally in a place where I can see the big picture and know that success in anything is almost never linear. I really think this is going to work with a few adjustments to the roster and coaching staff. Good things are ahead.
I see a lot more positives than most, I think, but my question to you is what makes you believe the adjustments will be made? If they make the adjustments, I think they have a real chance. But as I said, if they're unwilling to make the adjustments, then Sherman is going to have to step up and make the adjustments himself even if it means moving on from the people who were so hesitant to adjust in the first place.
I believe they'll make adjustments because it's what they've always done ... just not on the fans' schedule.
They found the defense and dominant relief pitching market inefficiency and changed course after 2012. They brought Hosmer and Moustakas and Gordon and Cain and others to the majors and helped them become good players. Then there's the Saylor/Zumwalt change.
I 100% believe Dayton when he says that if fans had the same information that the Royals do, that we'd make the same decisions. On the surface, from numbers scouting, I would've moved on from a few guys well before now. I'm just willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a group that's won a championship and transformed the Royals into a model organization.
He gets credit for the championship run for sure. We are 7 years removed from that however and its probably time for a change at the top. Typically, new owners bring that change. We’ll see what happens. Picollo isn’t really the GM…that’s the frustrating part to me. It was a “see we are changing the guard”…..but I’m still around and running the roster.
A lot of what you said is why I'm more optimistic than most, but they've also been VERY slow to make any changes. Yes, they made the change in the hitting development and added advanced work in the pitching development, but it also took until they had a historically bad collapse from their top prospects.
I personally don't believe Dayton when he says that and I don't believe it because of conversations I've had with people far more in tune than I am. That's what has led me to this belief when I honestly wasn't there (other than with Cal) a couple weeks ago even. There are people worried about the direction who do have the same information Dayton does and that very much worries me.
Every bit of it is fixable, but they have to actually do it.
I'll close with this: My perspective on life and baseball has really changed in the last five years. (Antidepressants are lifechanging.) Plus, I got my Super Bowl and World Series titles, so ... I'm good. It's enough for me, regardless of what happens going forward.
I understand managers and coaches in general deal with a lot of the personal side of sports that we do not see, but the playing time that gets handed out to guys who clearly have hit their ceiling and aren't of a major league caliber (O'Hearn) or guys who have clearly run the tread out of their tires and at best need to be relegated to part time duty (Santana, Whit sadly) is a major issue here. Dayton prides himself on leaning towards the human side of sports and not worrying about service time manipulation and that playing time is handed out based on ability, but Olivares shredded in ST and couldn't even sniff the lineup for weeks. I know anytime a big leaguer struggles then the chants to bring up the young prospect to replace him are super loud, but it feels like the front office is the last to know in all of baseball when a guy they have is actually just below average and isn't going to bounce back or take a leap. I didn't even get to pitchers, prior to his injury, Brentz looked abysmal but that personal connection of knowing Matheny from his Cards days is so strong that I'm sure he'll be right back out there once he's off the IL.
I'm with you completely. A lot of what makes Dayton such a good person honestly probably hurts him as someone to put together a team. And then when the manager isn't utilizing the players who could help him or could help him in the future, the issue gets magnified. It's like I said in a comment above, the Royals utilize the strategy of hope far too often when that isn't a viable strategy at all. They need to have some level of buying low in order to get players for a price they can afford, but their evaluation of those players clearly needs work.
I agree that buying low is the play for a team of our market size, and perhaps its all a crapshoot on hitting (Volquez/Morales) and missing (Hammel/Moss). The idea though is that when buying low, a big breakout is still the more unlikely outcome, so move off of those guys who aren't performing as soon as possible if younger options with upside exist on the roster, and we seem to ride the bad options for way longer than other teams. I'm okay that we rolled the dice on Santana rebounding and becoming OPB king and really any experiment with a reliever who throws hard is worth a shot, but when the experiment fails, admit it, pack it in, and move on.
Totally agree with that. I think that's part of why we see some teams as having the magic touch with the reclamation projects. It's because they don't let it linger when it doesn't work, so you forget they were even there. Example - the Rays took a chance on Yoshi Tsutsugo. It wasn't working. He got 185 PA in 2020 (which was basically a full season that year) and then got 87 more before they moved on. If that was the Royals, I'd wager he'd have gotten 400 PA last year and then have started this year in the Opening Day lineup too. Now, he went on to do well with the Pirates last year, but they cut their losses when they realized it wasn't working. If the Royals did that, it'd be fine. Go ahead, take a shot but don't double, triple and quadruple down on it.
Hi David! I love the newsletter, I've read almost every one.
What's frustrating at least for me is that the front office seems to get stuck on two very bad habits: making decisions fearfully, and sunk cost fallacy. It seems like they're afraid to make risky decisions and end up looking the fool or like they can't bring themselves to admit when a decision turned out poorly, and move on. Or maybe that being a small market team drives the decision more than winning, and can't bring themselves to eat a loss like Santana even if it's disrupting their future. Committing to a sunk cost is the only thing that makes the handling of O'Hearn make any sense. Or hesitating for 3 years before questioning Cal Eldred or what will be 3-4 years from moving on from Merrifield. I've heard from several military guys that it's much easier to teach restraint to someone who's aggressive than to teach aggression to someone who's passive. For trades, it seems like they only make decisions that have a 90% chance positive outcome, instead of like 55%. As much as we all like him, getting Greinke wasn't exactly risky.
Correct me if I'm wrong, cause I'm not a very analytical person, and maybe I'm speculating way too much, but this is what seems to be happening, to me at least.
No, I think that's a very apt assessment of the situation. They don't take a lot of risks, and what gets me is that the biggest risk they've taken as a front office is likely what resulted in winning the World Series. The trade for James Shields and Wade Davis was both risky and not terribly popular. And it worked. You can argue trading Greinke back before 2011 also carried some risk, though it's a little different because he wanted out so bad. So they have a track record of the risky move working. But otherwise, they do play it very safe and that's an interesting point about the military perspective.
Never apologize for rambling. That's what I do every day here!
If your assumptions are correct, that the front office doesn't take risks, and the one time it really worked out to take a risk was around a time where there were grumblings about the front office's long term future, maybe we get John Sherman to heat up the seat just a tad for Dayton and we see some more fireworks soon on a prospect trade from a logjammed 1B just like Myers for Shields (Pratto/Vinny for a SP this summer?)
PS I like Pratto and Vinny both pls don't throw trash at me.
Ha, I don't know that I'd trade both, but I do think they need to do something and I'm surprised they didn't heading into the season. Though the lockout made a lot of things more difficult on everyone. But I'm hoping Sherman does light that fire somewhere.
My hope is that the lockout made the offseason logjam very difficult, so the Royals have opportunity to clear a lot of space at the deadline and trim the fat, as it were, that was less possible in the frenzied off season.
Oh yes for sure I don't want both traded but perhaps they decide which horse they are hooking the cart to and they trade the other, similar to the Myers Hosmer situation
Loved this. I thought Hernandez was visibly frustrated right before unraveling yesterday and I don’t blame him at all. Honestly, it was good to see someone that seemed to care about winning the game - even if that hurt us in the end. Not saying other guys don’t, but I still liked to see the frustration from one of the players. It’s the complacency that seems like it’s driving me off a cliff this season. Whit talking about his hard hit rate as a reason for not being worried, Matheny running out (mostly) the same lineups everyday with the worst offense in the league, and just a lack of urgency from a 9-17 team. I didn’t expect a playoff team this season, but I didn’t expect this either.
Really enjoy your stuff. It’s nice to be able to read about the royals from someone with a similar outlook. I’m just trying to hold onto the positives for as long as I can.
Thanks for reading, John. If there's one thing I can assure you of it's that no matter what they say publicly or show while they're on the field, the vast majority of these guys care very deeply about winning. A guy like Whit puts on a front, but I can promise you he's pissed behind the scenes.
You are right David, since the Royals can't hit and the suspect pinching must be perfect this is going to be a grim year. I don't think i will be around to see the finish unless so major changes are made quick.
I think you are overanalyzing things. The Royals offense is 27th or 28th in MLB; the pitching is 27th or 28th. Thus, it is unsurprising their record is 27th/28th. I do think things will get a little better on the offensive side. Witt Jr. is clearly improving; Olivares will return; Melendez looks like a keeper; Salvy and Merrifield will be less terrible; Dozier will have a couple hot streaks. (I think it would help him if they would just install him at first for the rest of the year and give him some coaching there, rather than moving him around constantly.) But that will only get us to, say, 23rd or 24th in MLB. Further improvement would require improved starting pitching. But I don't see any help on the horizon there, and "Greinke, Keller and Lynch and pray for two days of rain" isn't a realistic strategy, or even a rhyme.
I'm not sure what I could be overanalyzing here. I'm saying that there should be penalties for them playing as poorly as they are and that there have basically never been consequences in the past for poor performance. Showing that they're bad doesn't change any of that. In fact, it reinforces my point, I think.
Essentially, I'm making three points. First, the Royals are a below average team because they have below average players. Second, though their offense will surely be below average for the year, it is likely to improve somewhat from where it is now. (This has already begun to happen--Whit had an RBI last night!) Third, the starting pitching is bad and is not likely to improve much. In fact, it may regress as Greinke and Keller so far have been rather lucky.
To put it more simply, the Royals are above average at some secondary skills (relief pitching, team speed, team defense), but they are well below average at the primary skills of baseball: hitting (for average, power, and OBP), and starting pitching.
More simply still: the Royals are not very good because in every game they start a lineup and starting pitching that contains more below average players than above average ones.
Does that mean people in the organization should be punished for poor performance? I'm not so sure. The Royals' team payroll ranks 23rd in MLB. I imagine their coaching, scouting, and training payroll is in the bottom 10 as well. If so, then if they wind up with something like the 23rd best record this year (as seems likely), then I'd say their performance was average rather than poor.
Maybe I'm dense, but it seems like you're saying they should be bad and they are bad, so nobody should take the fall for that? I just don't get that. Shouldn't the person putting the team together take a fall for that? And you say they have bad starting pitching, which they do, but isn't that a problem considering what they've invested in the pitching staff?
It's not just about the payroll. It's about the capital. I just don't think the idea that they're doing what they "should" be doing based on the personnel means everyone just sits happy. There should be consequences that they're still not making strides.
You are definitely not dense. And your perspective is totally reasonable. (I love your column; that's why I read it almost daily.) But here I do disagree with you, on two points. One, pitching prospects are totally unpredictable. Something like 1 out of every 20 top prospects becomes an above average major league pitcher, and 1 more becomes average, and half never make the majors at all. So if Lynch winds up being an above average major league starter and one more member of the class of '18 becomes a marginal starter, and a few others get a cup of coffee, then that actually would be par for the course.
The second point is that I think you basically get what you pay for in life. If you go to an Italian restaurant that costs $150 for two for dinner and another one where it costs $75 per couple, you are likely to get a significantly better meal at the first. Doesn't mean that is going to be the case every single time, but in general the odds favor the more expensive restaurant, because they are usually buying higher quality food and hiring better, more creative chefs. Similarly, in baseball the teams with $150 million+ in annual player contracts and with proportionally high salaries for coaches, scouts, and trainers will tend to be better than teams that spend less than $80 million annually on player contracts and also pay their coaches, trainers, and scouts less. I mean, the 13 teams with the highest annual salary expenditures are the Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, Phillies, Padres, Red Sox, White Sox, Angels, Braves, Astros, Blue Jays, Cardinals, and Giants. 9 of the 13 made the playoffs in 2021, the Blue Jays who didn't won 91 games, and none of those teams lost more than 85 games! So the correlation between payroll, staff salaries, and wins in MLB is extremely high. Therefore, I conclude that it is 1) entirely unsurprising that a team like the Royals with low staff salaries and a payroll that ranks 23rd would have a losing record in most seasons; and 2) unreasonable and unfair to blame the management and staff for those entirely predictable results. If anyone is to blame, it would be the ownership for not spending more, but I don't know the Royals' profit/loss situation, and without that info I don't think I can form a meaningful opinion on that issue.
My opinion is you're using an old trope on pitching prospects that has changed with organizations for more advanced. Developing pitching used to be almost a guessing game, but teams have gotten it down to a science. No, not every one will pan out, but so many teams, some with fewer resources than the Royals, are seeing much higher success rates on their arms. The Royals, for all their warts, do a great job of finding relievers, so I'll give them that, but the idea that one in 20 becomes something is archaic, in my opinion.
As for getting what you pay for, I'm not asking them to be like the Dodgers. Heck, I'm not even asking them to be like the Rays. I'm asking them to be competitive regularly. The Twins payroll is far more similar to the Royals than it probably should be based on market size, but if we're using the payroll as a crutch, let's do it. Since Dayton took over, they have made the playoffs five times and had a winning record seven times. They've rebuilt and tore down multiple times. The Guardians have spent less than the Royals generally. Since Dayton arrived, they've made the playoffs six times and had 10 .500+ seasons. The Brewers are in a similar market. They've made the playoffs six times and had 10 winning seasons.
The market and the payroll is an excuse that needs to go away. No, they probably can't become the Yankees or Dodgers or even the Giants because they play in a different world. But they can do more than four .500+ seasons in 16 years and showing no signs of life in the fifth year of the latest rebuild. They have done a lot to get with the times in their development, so maybe we're going to see the start of that soon, but we haven't yet.
Small correction: I meant to say only 1 top pitching prospect in 20 becomes an above average starting pitcher. I'll do some research and get back to you. My plan is look at the top 15 pitchers drafted from 2008-2015 (120 pitchers in all) and see how many of them developed into above average starters. I'll define above average = they started at least 20 games a year for at least 3 consecutive years and during those years posted an ERA of at least 10% below league average. (That is overall average for the 3 years--an off year won't disqualify someone.) If my 1 in 20 guess was correct, that would mean approximately 6 of them did. If more than 12 did (20%), I will gladly admit I was wrong.
I think management--including the manager and the batting and pitching coaches are the problem. They start the wrong players, some of whom need to be traded, and the batting is awful--so many pitchers throw strikes first, knowing that the Royals batters are going to just look at them and not swing. I remember Alcides Escobar in the World Series who swung at most first pitches and he was very successful at it. The Royals need to keep most of their players and overhaul the management team in my opinion.
I only follow the Royals so I may be wrong about these next few statements; I don't believe there is a ROH on any other roster in MLB. That being someone who stinks so bad and still gets ran out there AND ran out there in the 4 hole??? I don't there's another MLB team with Pitching and Hitting Coaches with such consistent failures that have the tenures they have. I don't believe there are many, if any, teams out there with someone in DMs spot who have delivered this consistent futility (did you say three years with more than 81 wins???) and still have the same job.
We can't blame ownership not spending money anymore. So if it's not the money, it's the management. It pains me to say this as a Royals fan but the reality is this franchise stinks and the stench starts at the top.
Oh I don't know if there is or isn't a guy like him on other rosters. I can tell you there isn't the same guy every year for four seasons. I think the only thing you can blame ownership for right now is holding Dayton's feet to the fire to actually enact some change.
I think the main difference in scenarios like that is that other teams with guys like O'Hearn play them when they have that solid period like O'Hearn did a couple years ago. But when that proves to be a fluke, they move on thinking "well, we got all we could outta that". The Royals keep going "yeah, but there was that 10 minutes where he was great" over & over & over again. I mean we all have great days or weeks where everything comes up gold. How many of us have those streaks that last years?
Yep, that's what I'm saying. A lot of teams have guys like O'Hearn. They all move on from him when his 15 minutes are up. The Royals continue to assume the best thing he ever did is just around the corner from happening again.
I think several players are hurt and are playing injured. Benni's throws from left field have been atrocious. He doesn't have the strongest arm but lately he can't even get them to the plate. I know Salvy's knee is worse than they are saying. MM had this problem in STL, playing injured guys. I agree about Whitt. Ed
Benny has never had an especially good arm, Salvy just hurt his knee two days ago. If they're playing hurt and being allowed to with top prospects at almost every spot, then that's even more reason they gotta go.
I like it David! Not that your frustrated per say but the message….which is stemming from you being frustrated. You’ve actually been more level headed than I have in this. One of my frustrations is not even due to this year or the record so far. It’s how we’ve gotten there. If you are playing all the younger kids and we are 9-17 so be it. But this is an awful product and I’m tired of being sold how close we are to contending (I know you still think next year is possible and I don’t think you are wrong necessary it just is hard to see at the moment)…when the product is NOT close to contending. My only struggle is that if we end up with 70ish wins again…are we really expecting a 20 win increase next year? It’s happened before, but that seems like a bit of a stretch to me. Its just so unnecessary as well because all the message had to be this year is “we expect to compete, but we need to get the Kids up together this year.” That’s it, just leave it at that. Management has a way of finding a way to get another “year” out of this job the last few years (making JJ in charge to reset things comes to mind) and it is feeling like they will find a way to extend that again this year.
That’s it, there is my rant. Lol
Yeah, I mean it's fair to be frustrated with all of that. I understand some of the young guys not being up, but I can't understand someone being up and sitting. Rant away!
Great article David, if I could have I would have liked this 10 times. Dayton Moore is no doubt a good man, I know he respected, I think through out baseball. I am with you though, I think it time for a change. I would love to know what causes their love affair with ROH.
If they had promoted Dayton to manage the people and let JJ manage the roster, I'd have loved that move, so I definitely agree. Good man, but woof on the team he's built.
Sometimes in life, business and sports we tend to overthink things. We believe something will work a certain way or a logical progression of decisions will lead to a conclusion. However in a climate of transition, things can often go astray quickly. Decisions often get made for you before your planned moves can be made.
I believe Royals management thought they could manage this transition. Instead of preparing for a season trying to win a division, they were preparing for the move to young players they believe are the future.
I believe instead of slowly moving prospects into the Major League roster, it maybe time to strip it of those being moved aside. For those prospects struggling, let the next player in line get an opportunity especially the pitchers. It still maybe ugly, but at least we get to see something different and hopefully some positive progress.
Yeah, that's a good way to look at it. Just like watching the All-22 in football gives a different view of what the QB might see down on the field, it can be easier to see it from a bird's eye view in any situation. I still fear that the instruction at the big league level isn't good enough for the finishing school that is the big leagues, but I think you're onto something with what was believed to be a solid plan being, well, not.
We are on the same page here. This is really a management problem. At some point you need to let results do the talking. Let the players tell you who is best for a position and when they are ready. Not contracts and best wishes.
Yep, hope isn't a strategy and it's far too often a strategy with this group.
I'm sure everyone here will want to shoot me for saying this, but I've seen a lot of good things happen for this team so far. They have Benintendi back on track. Witt is playing every day and improving. Keller is showing he's still really good. Lynch is making progress. Melendez looks great at the plate. The bullpen (and Matheny's management of it) continues to shine.
Look, I know the bottom of the roster is a huge problem, and I'd love to read a story about why the Royals value O'Hearn as much as they do. Mondesi is done. Kowar might be one of the inevitable busts from 2018. Whit looks ... bad.
Losing sucks. My mood is always better after a Royals win. But I'm finally in a place where I can see the big picture and know that success in anything is almost never linear. I really think this is going to work with a few adjustments to the roster and coaching staff. Good things are ahead.
I see a lot more positives than most, I think, but my question to you is what makes you believe the adjustments will be made? If they make the adjustments, I think they have a real chance. But as I said, if they're unwilling to make the adjustments, then Sherman is going to have to step up and make the adjustments himself even if it means moving on from the people who were so hesitant to adjust in the first place.
I believe they'll make adjustments because it's what they've always done ... just not on the fans' schedule.
They found the defense and dominant relief pitching market inefficiency and changed course after 2012. They brought Hosmer and Moustakas and Gordon and Cain and others to the majors and helped them become good players. Then there's the Saylor/Zumwalt change.
I 100% believe Dayton when he says that if fans had the same information that the Royals do, that we'd make the same decisions. On the surface, from numbers scouting, I would've moved on from a few guys well before now. I'm just willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a group that's won a championship and transformed the Royals into a model organization.
He gets credit for the championship run for sure. We are 7 years removed from that however and its probably time for a change at the top. Typically, new owners bring that change. We’ll see what happens. Picollo isn’t really the GM…that’s the frustrating part to me. It was a “see we are changing the guard”…..but I’m still around and running the roster.
A lot of what you said is why I'm more optimistic than most, but they've also been VERY slow to make any changes. Yes, they made the change in the hitting development and added advanced work in the pitching development, but it also took until they had a historically bad collapse from their top prospects.
I personally don't believe Dayton when he says that and I don't believe it because of conversations I've had with people far more in tune than I am. That's what has led me to this belief when I honestly wasn't there (other than with Cal) a couple weeks ago even. There are people worried about the direction who do have the same information Dayton does and that very much worries me.
Every bit of it is fixable, but they have to actually do it.
I'll close with this: My perspective on life and baseball has really changed in the last five years. (Antidepressants are lifechanging.) Plus, I got my Super Bowl and World Series titles, so ... I'm good. It's enough for me, regardless of what happens going forward.
I understand managers and coaches in general deal with a lot of the personal side of sports that we do not see, but the playing time that gets handed out to guys who clearly have hit their ceiling and aren't of a major league caliber (O'Hearn) or guys who have clearly run the tread out of their tires and at best need to be relegated to part time duty (Santana, Whit sadly) is a major issue here. Dayton prides himself on leaning towards the human side of sports and not worrying about service time manipulation and that playing time is handed out based on ability, but Olivares shredded in ST and couldn't even sniff the lineup for weeks. I know anytime a big leaguer struggles then the chants to bring up the young prospect to replace him are super loud, but it feels like the front office is the last to know in all of baseball when a guy they have is actually just below average and isn't going to bounce back or take a leap. I didn't even get to pitchers, prior to his injury, Brentz looked abysmal but that personal connection of knowing Matheny from his Cards days is so strong that I'm sure he'll be right back out there once he's off the IL.
I'm with you completely. A lot of what makes Dayton such a good person honestly probably hurts him as someone to put together a team. And then when the manager isn't utilizing the players who could help him or could help him in the future, the issue gets magnified. It's like I said in a comment above, the Royals utilize the strategy of hope far too often when that isn't a viable strategy at all. They need to have some level of buying low in order to get players for a price they can afford, but their evaluation of those players clearly needs work.
I agree that buying low is the play for a team of our market size, and perhaps its all a crapshoot on hitting (Volquez/Morales) and missing (Hammel/Moss). The idea though is that when buying low, a big breakout is still the more unlikely outcome, so move off of those guys who aren't performing as soon as possible if younger options with upside exist on the roster, and we seem to ride the bad options for way longer than other teams. I'm okay that we rolled the dice on Santana rebounding and becoming OPB king and really any experiment with a reliever who throws hard is worth a shot, but when the experiment fails, admit it, pack it in, and move on.
Totally agree with that. I think that's part of why we see some teams as having the magic touch with the reclamation projects. It's because they don't let it linger when it doesn't work, so you forget they were even there. Example - the Rays took a chance on Yoshi Tsutsugo. It wasn't working. He got 185 PA in 2020 (which was basically a full season that year) and then got 87 more before they moved on. If that was the Royals, I'd wager he'd have gotten 400 PA last year and then have started this year in the Opening Day lineup too. Now, he went on to do well with the Pirates last year, but they cut their losses when they realized it wasn't working. If the Royals did that, it'd be fine. Go ahead, take a shot but don't double, triple and quadruple down on it.
Hi David! I love the newsletter, I've read almost every one.
What's frustrating at least for me is that the front office seems to get stuck on two very bad habits: making decisions fearfully, and sunk cost fallacy. It seems like they're afraid to make risky decisions and end up looking the fool or like they can't bring themselves to admit when a decision turned out poorly, and move on. Or maybe that being a small market team drives the decision more than winning, and can't bring themselves to eat a loss like Santana even if it's disrupting their future. Committing to a sunk cost is the only thing that makes the handling of O'Hearn make any sense. Or hesitating for 3 years before questioning Cal Eldred or what will be 3-4 years from moving on from Merrifield. I've heard from several military guys that it's much easier to teach restraint to someone who's aggressive than to teach aggression to someone who's passive. For trades, it seems like they only make decisions that have a 90% chance positive outcome, instead of like 55%. As much as we all like him, getting Greinke wasn't exactly risky.
Correct me if I'm wrong, cause I'm not a very analytical person, and maybe I'm speculating way too much, but this is what seems to be happening, to me at least.
Sorry for rambling!
No, I think that's a very apt assessment of the situation. They don't take a lot of risks, and what gets me is that the biggest risk they've taken as a front office is likely what resulted in winning the World Series. The trade for James Shields and Wade Davis was both risky and not terribly popular. And it worked. You can argue trading Greinke back before 2011 also carried some risk, though it's a little different because he wanted out so bad. So they have a track record of the risky move working. But otherwise, they do play it very safe and that's an interesting point about the military perspective.
Never apologize for rambling. That's what I do every day here!
If your assumptions are correct, that the front office doesn't take risks, and the one time it really worked out to take a risk was around a time where there were grumblings about the front office's long term future, maybe we get John Sherman to heat up the seat just a tad for Dayton and we see some more fireworks soon on a prospect trade from a logjammed 1B just like Myers for Shields (Pratto/Vinny for a SP this summer?)
PS I like Pratto and Vinny both pls don't throw trash at me.
Ha, I don't know that I'd trade both, but I do think they need to do something and I'm surprised they didn't heading into the season. Though the lockout made a lot of things more difficult on everyone. But I'm hoping Sherman does light that fire somewhere.
My hope is that the lockout made the offseason logjam very difficult, so the Royals have opportunity to clear a lot of space at the deadline and trim the fat, as it were, that was less possible in the frenzied off season.
Yeah, my hope is that too. I'm not sure that's what'll end up happening though. I guess we'll find out.
Oh yes for sure I don't want both traded but perhaps they decide which horse they are hooking the cart to and they trade the other, similar to the Myers Hosmer situation
Yeah, definitely. I think they're going to have to, which is part of why you build a strong system.
Loved this. I thought Hernandez was visibly frustrated right before unraveling yesterday and I don’t blame him at all. Honestly, it was good to see someone that seemed to care about winning the game - even if that hurt us in the end. Not saying other guys don’t, but I still liked to see the frustration from one of the players. It’s the complacency that seems like it’s driving me off a cliff this season. Whit talking about his hard hit rate as a reason for not being worried, Matheny running out (mostly) the same lineups everyday with the worst offense in the league, and just a lack of urgency from a 9-17 team. I didn’t expect a playoff team this season, but I didn’t expect this either.
Really enjoy your stuff. It’s nice to be able to read about the royals from someone with a similar outlook. I’m just trying to hold onto the positives for as long as I can.
Thanks for reading, John. If there's one thing I can assure you of it's that no matter what they say publicly or show while they're on the field, the vast majority of these guys care very deeply about winning. A guy like Whit puts on a front, but I can promise you he's pissed behind the scenes.
You are right David, since the Royals can't hit and the suspect pinching must be perfect this is going to be a grim year. I don't think i will be around to see the finish unless so major changes are made quick.
I think you are overanalyzing things. The Royals offense is 27th or 28th in MLB; the pitching is 27th or 28th. Thus, it is unsurprising their record is 27th/28th. I do think things will get a little better on the offensive side. Witt Jr. is clearly improving; Olivares will return; Melendez looks like a keeper; Salvy and Merrifield will be less terrible; Dozier will have a couple hot streaks. (I think it would help him if they would just install him at first for the rest of the year and give him some coaching there, rather than moving him around constantly.) But that will only get us to, say, 23rd or 24th in MLB. Further improvement would require improved starting pitching. But I don't see any help on the horizon there, and "Greinke, Keller and Lynch and pray for two days of rain" isn't a realistic strategy, or even a rhyme.
I'm not sure what I could be overanalyzing here. I'm saying that there should be penalties for them playing as poorly as they are and that there have basically never been consequences in the past for poor performance. Showing that they're bad doesn't change any of that. In fact, it reinforces my point, I think.
Essentially, I'm making three points. First, the Royals are a below average team because they have below average players. Second, though their offense will surely be below average for the year, it is likely to improve somewhat from where it is now. (This has already begun to happen--Whit had an RBI last night!) Third, the starting pitching is bad and is not likely to improve much. In fact, it may regress as Greinke and Keller so far have been rather lucky.
To put it more simply, the Royals are above average at some secondary skills (relief pitching, team speed, team defense), but they are well below average at the primary skills of baseball: hitting (for average, power, and OBP), and starting pitching.
More simply still: the Royals are not very good because in every game they start a lineup and starting pitching that contains more below average players than above average ones.
Does that mean people in the organization should be punished for poor performance? I'm not so sure. The Royals' team payroll ranks 23rd in MLB. I imagine their coaching, scouting, and training payroll is in the bottom 10 as well. If so, then if they wind up with something like the 23rd best record this year (as seems likely), then I'd say their performance was average rather than poor.
Maybe I'm dense, but it seems like you're saying they should be bad and they are bad, so nobody should take the fall for that? I just don't get that. Shouldn't the person putting the team together take a fall for that? And you say they have bad starting pitching, which they do, but isn't that a problem considering what they've invested in the pitching staff?
It's not just about the payroll. It's about the capital. I just don't think the idea that they're doing what they "should" be doing based on the personnel means everyone just sits happy. There should be consequences that they're still not making strides.
You are definitely not dense. And your perspective is totally reasonable. (I love your column; that's why I read it almost daily.) But here I do disagree with you, on two points. One, pitching prospects are totally unpredictable. Something like 1 out of every 20 top prospects becomes an above average major league pitcher, and 1 more becomes average, and half never make the majors at all. So if Lynch winds up being an above average major league starter and one more member of the class of '18 becomes a marginal starter, and a few others get a cup of coffee, then that actually would be par for the course.
The second point is that I think you basically get what you pay for in life. If you go to an Italian restaurant that costs $150 for two for dinner and another one where it costs $75 per couple, you are likely to get a significantly better meal at the first. Doesn't mean that is going to be the case every single time, but in general the odds favor the more expensive restaurant, because they are usually buying higher quality food and hiring better, more creative chefs. Similarly, in baseball the teams with $150 million+ in annual player contracts and with proportionally high salaries for coaches, scouts, and trainers will tend to be better than teams that spend less than $80 million annually on player contracts and also pay their coaches, trainers, and scouts less. I mean, the 13 teams with the highest annual salary expenditures are the Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, Phillies, Padres, Red Sox, White Sox, Angels, Braves, Astros, Blue Jays, Cardinals, and Giants. 9 of the 13 made the playoffs in 2021, the Blue Jays who didn't won 91 games, and none of those teams lost more than 85 games! So the correlation between payroll, staff salaries, and wins in MLB is extremely high. Therefore, I conclude that it is 1) entirely unsurprising that a team like the Royals with low staff salaries and a payroll that ranks 23rd would have a losing record in most seasons; and 2) unreasonable and unfair to blame the management and staff for those entirely predictable results. If anyone is to blame, it would be the ownership for not spending more, but I don't know the Royals' profit/loss situation, and without that info I don't think I can form a meaningful opinion on that issue.
My opinion is you're using an old trope on pitching prospects that has changed with organizations for more advanced. Developing pitching used to be almost a guessing game, but teams have gotten it down to a science. No, not every one will pan out, but so many teams, some with fewer resources than the Royals, are seeing much higher success rates on their arms. The Royals, for all their warts, do a great job of finding relievers, so I'll give them that, but the idea that one in 20 becomes something is archaic, in my opinion.
As for getting what you pay for, I'm not asking them to be like the Dodgers. Heck, I'm not even asking them to be like the Rays. I'm asking them to be competitive regularly. The Twins payroll is far more similar to the Royals than it probably should be based on market size, but if we're using the payroll as a crutch, let's do it. Since Dayton took over, they have made the playoffs five times and had a winning record seven times. They've rebuilt and tore down multiple times. The Guardians have spent less than the Royals generally. Since Dayton arrived, they've made the playoffs six times and had 10 .500+ seasons. The Brewers are in a similar market. They've made the playoffs six times and had 10 winning seasons.
The market and the payroll is an excuse that needs to go away. No, they probably can't become the Yankees or Dodgers or even the Giants because they play in a different world. But they can do more than four .500+ seasons in 16 years and showing no signs of life in the fifth year of the latest rebuild. They have done a lot to get with the times in their development, so maybe we're going to see the start of that soon, but we haven't yet.
Small correction: I meant to say only 1 top pitching prospect in 20 becomes an above average starting pitcher. I'll do some research and get back to you. My plan is look at the top 15 pitchers drafted from 2008-2015 (120 pitchers in all) and see how many of them developed into above average starters. I'll define above average = they started at least 20 games a year for at least 3 consecutive years and during those years posted an ERA of at least 10% below league average. (That is overall average for the 3 years--an off year won't disqualify someone.) If my 1 in 20 guess was correct, that would mean approximately 6 of them did. If more than 12 did (20%), I will gladly admit I was wrong.
I think management--including the manager and the batting and pitching coaches are the problem. They start the wrong players, some of whom need to be traded, and the batting is awful--so many pitchers throw strikes first, knowing that the Royals batters are going to just look at them and not swing. I remember Alcides Escobar in the World Series who swung at most first pitches and he was very successful at it. The Royals need to keep most of their players and overhaul the management team in my opinion.
Great article and couldn't agree more.
I only follow the Royals so I may be wrong about these next few statements; I don't believe there is a ROH on any other roster in MLB. That being someone who stinks so bad and still gets ran out there AND ran out there in the 4 hole??? I don't there's another MLB team with Pitching and Hitting Coaches with such consistent failures that have the tenures they have. I don't believe there are many, if any, teams out there with someone in DMs spot who have delivered this consistent futility (did you say three years with more than 81 wins???) and still have the same job.
We can't blame ownership not spending money anymore. So if it's not the money, it's the management. It pains me to say this as a Royals fan but the reality is this franchise stinks and the stench starts at the top.
Oh I don't know if there is or isn't a guy like him on other rosters. I can tell you there isn't the same guy every year for four seasons. I think the only thing you can blame ownership for right now is holding Dayton's feet to the fire to actually enact some change.
I think the main difference in scenarios like that is that other teams with guys like O'Hearn play them when they have that solid period like O'Hearn did a couple years ago. But when that proves to be a fluke, they move on thinking "well, we got all we could outta that". The Royals keep going "yeah, but there was that 10 minutes where he was great" over & over & over again. I mean we all have great days or weeks where everything comes up gold. How many of us have those streaks that last years?
Yep, that's what I'm saying. A lot of teams have guys like O'Hearn. They all move on from him when his 15 minutes are up. The Royals continue to assume the best thing he ever did is just around the corner from happening again.