with Singer pitching so well is it coaching? I read your articles all the time and i know how you feel about the pitching coach, but why has Singer turned the corner?
I think it’s pretty apparent that whatever they did in Omaha to help with getting his timing on his delivery down has been a huge help. He’s seen much better location on his sinker and his slider has always been a swing and miss pitch. I’m hesitant to credit the big league staff for helping him get to the point that he’s actually good and not just useful, but I do credit them for being able to help him keep up with the improvements.
I think that Zach Greinke is a big reason for Brady Singer's success. Why? I refuse to give credit to the current big league pitching coach because his ineptitude is on full on display. Anyhow, If this is true about Zach, then I hope the rest of the staff listen and take notes when he speaks to them about the art of teaching. This might be the reason that the team didn't want to trade Zach.
I think Zack Greinke has helped quite a bit. I don't give Cal much credit for anything and there's enough bad on this staff that his ability to simply not screw Singer up being his best trait is pretty damning in itself. I personally think the credit is due in Omaha more than anything.
There was a big heated discussion about this at The Athletic from March all the way through May. I was in the minority but I'm gonna stick to my guns here: if Zack really is "pitching Yoda," why did he mostly wait until after the All-Star break to "Yoda-ize" them?
Zack is a unique pitcher who can be very fun to watch. I'm just not sure that what he does can be taught to others because there are so few others who have his level of talent.
It reminds me of Ted Williams' failed career as a manager. When he tried to teach hitting to others, he simply couldn't comprehend how they were unable to do what came to him so easily. He couldn't help guys fix problems that he had never personally experienced.
Perhaps, they weren't ready to listen to the pitching Yoda until then. As well, there is ample evidence that Brady Singer is stubborn. As for the others maybe they were just in awe of Zack so they had a hard time listening to his words since he's accomplished so much in his career.
My favorite part about Vinnie being the third Royals rookie to homer in both games of a doubleheader is that it hadn't happened since 1969. Lou Piniella and Bob Oliver both did it that season. So it happened twice that year, then not again for 53 years. If I may quote Jayson Stark, "Baseball!"
You know of any reason that teams wouldn’t have provided decent offers for Barlow at the deadline? Because…relievers were flying so I find it very interesting they wouldn’t have had anything decent. The only thing I can think of is the royals said they listen….but A) they either have the reputation of asking too much and other teams thought it wasn’t worth the time. Or B.) The royals weren’t really listening or working all that hard on it. None of which are really great. Just curious if you heard of any actual reason behind it. Because the player was one of the better ones which makes me think they didn’t try too hard.
Jeff Passan was on 810 last week and said the offers weren't nearly what most expected because of both the fact that he'll be entering two expensive years and the drop in his fastball velocity. Passan is obviously WAY more clued in than me on that stuff, but I asked around to a couple of people who said the Royals were right to hang on to him. We talked a lot about that relief market, but as I've said before, if the Royals traded Barlow for the return the Orioles got for Jorge Lopez, I'd be mad they moved him, so I think there's every chance in the world that he just didn't get the offers many of us expected.
yeah, in that case right to hang onto him. It does however….make me a little nervous to see how the market view him. We’ll see whose right next year I guess. You aren’t wrong for hanging onto a good player…but clearly the sounds like the market might be expecting a drop off? Or at least not willing to take the risk.
I think a bigger thing if they're looking to trade him in the winter is that his velocity remains back. It's been fine for a month or so now. If it's back for two more months, there'll be a market for him, especially with how few closers are on the free agent market.
One more comment and I’m done for today. But can I just say how refreshing it is to see a Royals team that plays baseball finally like the rest of the league. No longer do you have to look at this lineup and think….”man, if they can just string together 3 hits in a row here…”. It is nice to see 5-6 guys that can actually cause damage in a row. A walk and a bomb….bloop and a bomb…boom two runs like the first game yesterday. I still can see a situation where they struggle a bit next year (thinking of 2013 a bit) but still. Welcome to playing like the rest of the league now guys!
Oh for sure. We're starting to see the fruits of the changes from after 2019. The Royals still value things a lot of clubs don't, and I don't have a problem with that, especially when they're also valuing the things they should be valuing. Looking at the game one lineup, I feel like you could find a walk or an extra base hit from any of the first seven hitters. And I didn't include Isbel, who hit eighth, and he had four extra base hits in the Red Sox series, so maybe I should have. It's a nice change.
Speaking of bizarre calls from broadcasters, I noticed a really "good" (i.e., bad) one over the weekend. Couldn't believe it. In the bottom of the 6th Saturday night, Hud solemnly informed us, "Man, what a pitchers duel we have here tonight!"
At the time, Lynch's game ERA was 6.00. Eovaldi's was 7.20. There had already been 4 HR's. Sometimes it's hard to believe that the man ever actually played the game. Both starters were out of the game after the 6th inning. A "pitchers duel"? Really????
God, it must have been annoying to have that guy as a teammate. The incessant mindless babbling day after day after day for endless months…whew! No thank you!
When I stream the games I try to get the radio audio since the quality is so much better. I'm also spoiled living in the sf bay area where some of the best in the business are calling games for both local teams here on TV and radio. The difference is night and day once Rex starts talking...
Yeah, I found that odd when I was watching the replay later because I was at that game. But I will say that Rex is one of the absolute best people out there, so I'm guessing his teammates loved him just like everyone else loves him...other than some of his moments on the air.
We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one. The way he generally speaks to the viewing audience as if we're all a bunch of addled 7-year-olds - I find it professionally incompetent and personally insulting.
And I will add that no one who (approximately) speaks English for a living should ever say "coulda went" instead of "could have gone." When he first came here, my wife and I had a hell of a time getting our kids to cut out all the Rexspeak they picked up from him. It made them sound ignorant and unintelligent when they were neither.
And would someone please inform the man that there is no such thing as a "Tommy Hawk" or as "tommyhawking"?!?!?!
Oh I think he's a terrible analyst for the most part, but he is a genuinely fantastic human being, so people who actually know him probably aren't terribly bothered by him being a character.
with Singer pitching so well is it coaching? I read your articles all the time and i know how you feel about the pitching coach, but why has Singer turned the corner?
I think it’s pretty apparent that whatever they did in Omaha to help with getting his timing on his delivery down has been a huge help. He’s seen much better location on his sinker and his slider has always been a swing and miss pitch. I’m hesitant to credit the big league staff for helping him get to the point that he’s actually good and not just useful, but I do credit them for being able to help him keep up with the improvements.
I think that Zach Greinke is a big reason for Brady Singer's success. Why? I refuse to give credit to the current big league pitching coach because his ineptitude is on full on display. Anyhow, If this is true about Zach, then I hope the rest of the staff listen and take notes when he speaks to them about the art of teaching. This might be the reason that the team didn't want to trade Zach.
I think Zack Greinke has helped quite a bit. I don't give Cal much credit for anything and there's enough bad on this staff that his ability to simply not screw Singer up being his best trait is pretty damning in itself. I personally think the credit is due in Omaha more than anything.
There was a big heated discussion about this at The Athletic from March all the way through May. I was in the minority but I'm gonna stick to my guns here: if Zack really is "pitching Yoda," why did he mostly wait until after the All-Star break to "Yoda-ize" them?
Zack is a unique pitcher who can be very fun to watch. I'm just not sure that what he does can be taught to others because there are so few others who have his level of talent.
It reminds me of Ted Williams' failed career as a manager. When he tried to teach hitting to others, he simply couldn't comprehend how they were unable to do what came to him so easily. He couldn't help guys fix problems that he had never personally experienced.
Perhaps, they weren't ready to listen to the pitching Yoda until then. As well, there is ample evidence that Brady Singer is stubborn. As for the others maybe they were just in awe of Zack so they had a hard time listening to his words since he's accomplished so much in his career.
It also takes time to learn the stuff, work on it, get it 'game ready', and THEN feel comfortable throwing it.
It's not like Luke just showed up able to pull the X-wing out of the swamp.
My favorite part about Vinnie being the third Royals rookie to homer in both games of a doubleheader is that it hadn't happened since 1969. Lou Piniella and Bob Oliver both did it that season. So it happened twice that year, then not again for 53 years. If I may quote Jayson Stark, "Baseball!"
Yeah that’s freaking crazy. Looking forward to Bobby Witt IV doing it in 2075.
You know of any reason that teams wouldn’t have provided decent offers for Barlow at the deadline? Because…relievers were flying so I find it very interesting they wouldn’t have had anything decent. The only thing I can think of is the royals said they listen….but A) they either have the reputation of asking too much and other teams thought it wasn’t worth the time. Or B.) The royals weren’t really listening or working all that hard on it. None of which are really great. Just curious if you heard of any actual reason behind it. Because the player was one of the better ones which makes me think they didn’t try too hard.
Jeff Passan was on 810 last week and said the offers weren't nearly what most expected because of both the fact that he'll be entering two expensive years and the drop in his fastball velocity. Passan is obviously WAY more clued in than me on that stuff, but I asked around to a couple of people who said the Royals were right to hang on to him. We talked a lot about that relief market, but as I've said before, if the Royals traded Barlow for the return the Orioles got for Jorge Lopez, I'd be mad they moved him, so I think there's every chance in the world that he just didn't get the offers many of us expected.
yeah, in that case right to hang onto him. It does however….make me a little nervous to see how the market view him. We’ll see whose right next year I guess. You aren’t wrong for hanging onto a good player…but clearly the sounds like the market might be expecting a drop off? Or at least not willing to take the risk.
I think a bigger thing if they're looking to trade him in the winter is that his velocity remains back. It's been fine for a month or so now. If it's back for two more months, there'll be a market for him, especially with how few closers are on the free agent market.
One more comment and I’m done for today. But can I just say how refreshing it is to see a Royals team that plays baseball finally like the rest of the league. No longer do you have to look at this lineup and think….”man, if they can just string together 3 hits in a row here…”. It is nice to see 5-6 guys that can actually cause damage in a row. A walk and a bomb….bloop and a bomb…boom two runs like the first game yesterday. I still can see a situation where they struggle a bit next year (thinking of 2013 a bit) but still. Welcome to playing like the rest of the league now guys!
Oh for sure. We're starting to see the fruits of the changes from after 2019. The Royals still value things a lot of clubs don't, and I don't have a problem with that, especially when they're also valuing the things they should be valuing. Looking at the game one lineup, I feel like you could find a walk or an extra base hit from any of the first seven hitters. And I didn't include Isbel, who hit eighth, and he had four extra base hits in the Red Sox series, so maybe I should have. It's a nice change.
Speaking of bizarre calls from broadcasters, I noticed a really "good" (i.e., bad) one over the weekend. Couldn't believe it. In the bottom of the 6th Saturday night, Hud solemnly informed us, "Man, what a pitchers duel we have here tonight!"
At the time, Lynch's game ERA was 6.00. Eovaldi's was 7.20. There had already been 4 HR's. Sometimes it's hard to believe that the man ever actually played the game. Both starters were out of the game after the 6th inning. A "pitchers duel"? Really????
God, it must have been annoying to have that guy as a teammate. The incessant mindless babbling day after day after day for endless months…whew! No thank you!
When I stream the games I try to get the radio audio since the quality is so much better. I'm also spoiled living in the sf bay area where some of the best in the business are calling games for both local teams here on TV and radio. The difference is night and day once Rex starts talking...
Yeah, I found that odd when I was watching the replay later because I was at that game. But I will say that Rex is one of the absolute best people out there, so I'm guessing his teammates loved him just like everyone else loves him...other than some of his moments on the air.
We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one. The way he generally speaks to the viewing audience as if we're all a bunch of addled 7-year-olds - I find it professionally incompetent and personally insulting.
And I will add that no one who (approximately) speaks English for a living should ever say "coulda went" instead of "could have gone." When he first came here, my wife and I had a hell of a time getting our kids to cut out all the Rexspeak they picked up from him. It made them sound ignorant and unintelligent when they were neither.
And would someone please inform the man that there is no such thing as a "Tommy Hawk" or as "tommyhawking"?!?!?!
Oh I think he's a terrible analyst for the most part, but he is a genuinely fantastic human being, so people who actually know him probably aren't terribly bothered by him being a character.