It really is the little things that make all the difference between the perception of good and bad baseball teams. The royals could very fall right back into the LOB trend thats plagued them throughout the year in the next series but its nice to see them capitalizing off mistakes they were making prior to the break. Those extra pitches and base hits all add up in baseball and the the royals were on the opposite end if the spectrum from where they are now. Credit to young men that are getting it done. They’re winning more than the veterans did so maybe we should lay off the diminutives... they’ve earned it in my opinion.
Wins are best. Fun is second best. And when you're winning AND fun, well that's really awesome, so yeah, they're getting it done and making it much more enjoyable to watch.
Checked out the Lesky notes on RR this morning. One question. Do you think this offseason is not the right time to move? I guess I’m thinking if you don’t do something this offseason to very much improve the pitching you are wasting another year of Bobby, Melendez, Pratto. I guess I want this window open for AS LONG as humanly possible. Which means starting next year. Right now it looks like a window….but that could certainly all change in 5 years. But point is….they have the payroll flexibility now, you are eating into Bobby Witt Jr’s time here. Let’s not Trout this thing and try and get a bigger arm to help the pitching. Because if they do nothing……one injury to Singer or maybe Lynch and you are riding a bunch of 4-5’s int he rotation which won’t get it done if serious about being a 86-88 win team.
I think I do think it's the right time. My point really was just to be careful because it can really blow up in your face. And I think they need to make sure they're targeting the right types of players. I said at the time for the Tigers that Eduardo Rodriguez felt no different than the Ian Kennedy deal. It's blown up on them, but not really for any reason anyone could have predicted. And I feel like Baez was just a big risk. Maybe that'll still pay off.
So I think the time is right, but they just need to make sure it's done right. I think they've done it right before. James Shields, for all my concern over that trade, was the type of consistent performer who can change things. It's why I worry a bit about someone like Pablo Lopez if that's the route they do decide to go.
Add Pratto and Massey to the list of reasons not to trust defensive metrics in small samples. Both have looked great, there's no way they can be worth -2.6 and -1.5 fielding runs respectively already. To that end I suppose you also shouldn't trust Eaton's 2.9, though he has also looked quite good.
Defensive metrics tend to take a long time to stabilize, so a few weeks is certainly not enough. One play here and there can skew them so much. Massey has looked good, but he did make the error on Wednesday and then bobbled one yesterday. I don't have any worries, but he's had a couple small issues. Still, certainly far too early to worry about that stuff with them.
Do the Royals really hype up the defense for these guys coming up as a way to try and sell them? I’m not talking about Massey and Pratto because I haven’t seen enough of them. But all we heard was about Bobby Witt Jr defense and Melendez behind the plate. Those two have not been good at all at those respective positions. Different game and speed I get…..but is it just org standard in case you are trying to trade any of them, or just get the hype train going?
I don't think they do because it's more than just the organization talking about it. I heard from scouts last year and others who watched Melendez play regularly that he might have some framing issues but has a great arm and is a good receiver. It's just been a rough transition. Witt at shortstop is interesting because as I've said, all I heard is that he could stick at shortstop but then as the season went on, I heard more and more concern. It was never to the point of worry really, partially because there was some question of if he was just fatigued, but he's been rough at shortstop. So I don't think it's the org. I think those two in particular have just struggled in their defensive transition.
David - I know this won't change your mind about anything but FWIW: opponents seeing Bubic for the third time in a game are hitting .370 with a >.940 OPS. He turns hitters not just into all-stars but into MVP candidates. And yes I understand that the third time through the order starts with (presumably) the opponent's best 5 or 6 hitters, so those numbers are likely inflated a bit. I see that as even more reason to take him out before their best hitters get a chance to add to those numbers.
Also FWIW: Passan and Soren agree with me on the 18-batter thing. Passan thinks his starts should pretty much be automatically regarded as "piggyback" starts with a "bulk guy" warmed up and ready to go as soon as he has faced those 18 batters.
Is there a little wiggle room there (after those first 18 batters) if he's pitching extraordinarily well with a nice lead and a low pitch count? Of course there is. But not much. Not to me, anyway. We've both seen more than enough baseball to know that things can go VERY wrong for a pitcher in an incredible hurry.
As I said I don't expect to change your mind here. I just wanted to let you know that there is some actual logic and some strong statistical evidence behind my POV.
Sure, the numbers aren't great. And I'm not even saying he should be someone counted on a third time through. I just think there's no sense in determining that today. Let him work things out. As I said, for four straight starts, he was excellent the third time through the order. He's 24 years old and has thrown 13.2 minor league innings above high-A. I just don't think there's a need to limit a young pitcher in a season that was lost before Memorial Day.
And in a vacuum, it's a great idea to get starters out too early vs. too late, but there's still the case of 162 games and a bullpen that can burn out very easily if you have too many starters who you can't count on past 18 batters. Should they have bulk guys? Sure, but that's easier said than done. They've had a hard enough time finding five guys to throw five plus innings. Having guys you can count on multiple times per week for 8-12 outs is a nice idea, but not so easy in practice. If you've got a rotation of six to seven inning guys, yes, never let a guy like Bubic face a lineup a third time, but the Royals don't right now. I just think it's significantly easier said than done.
Agreed as to the difficulty of finding really good bulk guys! I recall how valuable Chris Young was in that role (at times) during the WS seasons. I also recall being surprised that they had found a guy who was not only able but willing to play that role so well. But my sense is that even though some of the youngish pitchers are showing promising signs, soon they'll have no shortage of "failed starters" to audition in that bulk guy role. Heasley immediately comes to mind but of course he's not the only one.
But the other thing about a “bulk” pitcher is you might need them for three innings on two days rest. Or maybe they don’t pitch for a week because the starters are on a good run so they get put into a game for an inning and then aren’t necessarily able to go three the next day when needed. All I’m saying is it’s a lot easier on paper than in reality.
David - Your appearance with Soren today (which I thoroughly enjoyed as usual) led me, in a roundabout way, to a question....
I wonder if there's any practical, real-world difference between the way a starting pitcher would pace himself in the hopes of being able to go maybe eight innings, versus the way he would pace himself knowing he'd be facing 18 batters and that's it?
My amateur, off-the-cuff guess is that it would make no difference first time through the order. Second time through, he'd probably be more likely to "let 'er rip" to one extent or another.
I'd imagine there is some obscure velocity data out there somewhere that might shed some light on this. And I'm certain that I'm absolutely the wrong guy to go digging for it!
It really is the little things that make all the difference between the perception of good and bad baseball teams. The royals could very fall right back into the LOB trend thats plagued them throughout the year in the next series but its nice to see them capitalizing off mistakes they were making prior to the break. Those extra pitches and base hits all add up in baseball and the the royals were on the opposite end if the spectrum from where they are now. Credit to young men that are getting it done. They’re winning more than the veterans did so maybe we should lay off the diminutives... they’ve earned it in my opinion.
Wins are best. Fun is second best. And when you're winning AND fun, well that's really awesome, so yeah, they're getting it done and making it much more enjoyable to watch.
Checked out the Lesky notes on RR this morning. One question. Do you think this offseason is not the right time to move? I guess I’m thinking if you don’t do something this offseason to very much improve the pitching you are wasting another year of Bobby, Melendez, Pratto. I guess I want this window open for AS LONG as humanly possible. Which means starting next year. Right now it looks like a window….but that could certainly all change in 5 years. But point is….they have the payroll flexibility now, you are eating into Bobby Witt Jr’s time here. Let’s not Trout this thing and try and get a bigger arm to help the pitching. Because if they do nothing……one injury to Singer or maybe Lynch and you are riding a bunch of 4-5’s int he rotation which won’t get it done if serious about being a 86-88 win team.
I think I do think it's the right time. My point really was just to be careful because it can really blow up in your face. And I think they need to make sure they're targeting the right types of players. I said at the time for the Tigers that Eduardo Rodriguez felt no different than the Ian Kennedy deal. It's blown up on them, but not really for any reason anyone could have predicted. And I feel like Baez was just a big risk. Maybe that'll still pay off.
So I think the time is right, but they just need to make sure it's done right. I think they've done it right before. James Shields, for all my concern over that trade, was the type of consistent performer who can change things. It's why I worry a bit about someone like Pablo Lopez if that's the route they do decide to go.
Add Pratto and Massey to the list of reasons not to trust defensive metrics in small samples. Both have looked great, there's no way they can be worth -2.6 and -1.5 fielding runs respectively already. To that end I suppose you also shouldn't trust Eaton's 2.9, though he has also looked quite good.
Defensive metrics tend to take a long time to stabilize, so a few weeks is certainly not enough. One play here and there can skew them so much. Massey has looked good, but he did make the error on Wednesday and then bobbled one yesterday. I don't have any worries, but he's had a couple small issues. Still, certainly far too early to worry about that stuff with them.
Do the Royals really hype up the defense for these guys coming up as a way to try and sell them? I’m not talking about Massey and Pratto because I haven’t seen enough of them. But all we heard was about Bobby Witt Jr defense and Melendez behind the plate. Those two have not been good at all at those respective positions. Different game and speed I get…..but is it just org standard in case you are trying to trade any of them, or just get the hype train going?
I don't think they do because it's more than just the organization talking about it. I heard from scouts last year and others who watched Melendez play regularly that he might have some framing issues but has a great arm and is a good receiver. It's just been a rough transition. Witt at shortstop is interesting because as I've said, all I heard is that he could stick at shortstop but then as the season went on, I heard more and more concern. It was never to the point of worry really, partially because there was some question of if he was just fatigued, but he's been rough at shortstop. So I don't think it's the org. I think those two in particular have just struggled in their defensive transition.
David - I know this won't change your mind about anything but FWIW: opponents seeing Bubic for the third time in a game are hitting .370 with a >.940 OPS. He turns hitters not just into all-stars but into MVP candidates. And yes I understand that the third time through the order starts with (presumably) the opponent's best 5 or 6 hitters, so those numbers are likely inflated a bit. I see that as even more reason to take him out before their best hitters get a chance to add to those numbers.
Also FWIW: Passan and Soren agree with me on the 18-batter thing. Passan thinks his starts should pretty much be automatically regarded as "piggyback" starts with a "bulk guy" warmed up and ready to go as soon as he has faced those 18 batters.
Is there a little wiggle room there (after those first 18 batters) if he's pitching extraordinarily well with a nice lead and a low pitch count? Of course there is. But not much. Not to me, anyway. We've both seen more than enough baseball to know that things can go VERY wrong for a pitcher in an incredible hurry.
As I said I don't expect to change your mind here. I just wanted to let you know that there is some actual logic and some strong statistical evidence behind my POV.
Sure, the numbers aren't great. And I'm not even saying he should be someone counted on a third time through. I just think there's no sense in determining that today. Let him work things out. As I said, for four straight starts, he was excellent the third time through the order. He's 24 years old and has thrown 13.2 minor league innings above high-A. I just don't think there's a need to limit a young pitcher in a season that was lost before Memorial Day.
And in a vacuum, it's a great idea to get starters out too early vs. too late, but there's still the case of 162 games and a bullpen that can burn out very easily if you have too many starters who you can't count on past 18 batters. Should they have bulk guys? Sure, but that's easier said than done. They've had a hard enough time finding five guys to throw five plus innings. Having guys you can count on multiple times per week for 8-12 outs is a nice idea, but not so easy in practice. If you've got a rotation of six to seven inning guys, yes, never let a guy like Bubic face a lineup a third time, but the Royals don't right now. I just think it's significantly easier said than done.
Agreed as to the difficulty of finding really good bulk guys! I recall how valuable Chris Young was in that role (at times) during the WS seasons. I also recall being surprised that they had found a guy who was not only able but willing to play that role so well. But my sense is that even though some of the youngish pitchers are showing promising signs, soon they'll have no shortage of "failed starters" to audition in that bulk guy role. Heasley immediately comes to mind but of course he's not the only one.
But the other thing about a “bulk” pitcher is you might need them for three innings on two days rest. Or maybe they don’t pitch for a week because the starters are on a good run so they get put into a game for an inning and then aren’t necessarily able to go three the next day when needed. All I’m saying is it’s a lot easier on paper than in reality.
Thanks for the interesting give-and-take on this topic. I learned a lot!
Which, after all, is the reason I subscribed in the first place.
That’s the whole reason we’re all here! To talk baseball!
David - Your appearance with Soren today (which I thoroughly enjoyed as usual) led me, in a roundabout way, to a question....
I wonder if there's any practical, real-world difference between the way a starting pitcher would pace himself in the hopes of being able to go maybe eight innings, versus the way he would pace himself knowing he'd be facing 18 batters and that's it?
My amateur, off-the-cuff guess is that it would make no difference first time through the order. Second time through, he'd probably be more likely to "let 'er rip" to one extent or another.
I'd imagine there is some obscure velocity data out there somewhere that might shed some light on this. And I'm certain that I'm absolutely the wrong guy to go digging for it!
If anyone ever tells you that you're "as dependable as Fernando Tatis Junior," please feel free to punch them right in the nose.