Smith signing is a great signing. If for no other reason that you got him when I’m very surprised he didn’t want to play for a contender at his stage in career. Maybe he figures he’ll get the money now and if they are out of it he will end up on a contender. Who knows, and at this point who cares. Just take it as it makes the bullpen better. Another sneaky signing or two….and the bullpen looks a lot better. I do believe though that bullpens are much easier fixes. I mean, it is amazing how much better we feel with Smith and Anderson in the fold and they are not exactly great players. They are good. And that’s what the Royals need so don’t get me wrong. But you feel better with a couple of solid options.
I'm not surprised the Royals got someone like him, but I am surprised he signed with them this early. But I like it. You're right, he and Anderson make it a little easier to see how they can actually hold a few leads this season. That grows even more if they get someone like Stanek. I'm kind of interested in some of the starters transitioning to the bullpen too, but that's probably for another newsletter edition.
Signing Smith is the exact type of move the Royals should be making. Improves the bullpen and could be flipped if the season goes south. I love putting the squeeze on the hold over starting pitchers. Signing guys that definitely make the bullpen and definitely make the starting rotation cuts down those roster spots even further. Time for the vaunted class of 2018 to perform or get left behind.
They've already been mostly left behind. I had a chance to talk to JJ before the 2023 season and he was pretty adamant that 2023 was sink or swim for them. Singer's had success, so he gets a little more time to figure things out, right or wrong, but Lynch doesn't really anymore. It'll be nice to have that depth, but that's what he's entering 2024 as.
I've been thinking a little bit about what a good season looks like for the Royals this year. You mentioned the p-word; I think that's an unreasonable hope (but obviously I'm hoping, unreasonably), even in the AL Central. After all, we're talking about a team that just went 56-106.
Looking at the list of the top year-to-year improvements in baseball history (according to mlb.com, who compiled the list last fall), the Orioles provide a couple of interesting comparisons. In 1988, they won 54 games, 2 worse than our Royals. In 1989, Baltimore improved by 33 wins, recording an 87-win season, missing the playoffs by 2 games. However, they slipped back to fifth place the following year.
In 2022, the Orioles won 83 games, a 31 win improvement over the year before, as their youth movement began. They jumped another 18 games last year, winning the AL East with a 101-61 record, a ridiculous 49 game improvement over 2 seasons.
I think it's reasonable to look at those 2 examples of teams that had win totals in the mid-50s and turned things around dramatically as the upper range of what the Royals could do if everything falls into place perfectly. Dial that back by about 15-20% and we're looking at a 25-27 win improvement as a stretch goal. If KC wins 83 (+27) games this year, we should see that as a huge success. Anything more and they're breaking into the list of the top 10 all-time best improvements, even better than the Miracle Mets (+27 in 1969).
If we can go .500, that's a huge win. But I'm genuinely not thinking about this next season. If we can contend at all in 2026, that'll be good enough for me. In the meantime, I'll just enjoy being able to sit wherever I want at the games.
It's sort of tough to think about the record because as I wrote the other day, do you look at the number of wins that they actually put up or what their third order numbers indicated? Their Pythag record was 64-98. Their base runs record was 66-96. If that's the true talent level and you feel like they were just a non-horrific bullpen away from that, maybe you can start with that baseline. Add in some arms and maybe you get an extra 10-12 wins. That's 75ish. I felt like they had very little "good" luck last year. Add in that and maybe it's five more. So I think there's a path to respectability for sure.
I'm sure a lot of those crazy year to year improvements reflected a swing in luck (especially the ones that fell back significantly the next year, like the '89 Orioles).
I’m sure you’re right there. But if you play that right, you can use the improvement to sell free agents on your future to help fill the holes that luck doesn’t handle the next season.
.500 is absolute topside. But I pretty much agree with everything you said. They are due for some good luck…..but I don’t see the talent even if they add a couple of decent starters to be anything higher than .500 on the upside of things. I’d take 75 as that’s a start and can see .500 (hopefully better in 25). But they need to be sniffing that .500 range in 25 or I think people are going to be in trouble. But…I do think that is possible.
Again, it depends on what you think the baseline is. If they're a 56-win team like they were in reality, yeah, I'm not sure how they can make up 25 wins without some crazy things happening. But 66 wins? 15 is doable with cleaning up the bad part of the bulpen and getting a legitimate starter or two in. My guess, like most things, is that it's somewhere in the middle.
Stanek was used a lot as an opener in ‘18 and ‘19 in Tampa. And then was traded to Miami for Nick Anderson, which I find kind of funny. I think Stanek would be a great fit in KC - and everyone can have a little reunion. Plus, he can perhaps revive his opener role if needed.
I swore I hit post yesterday when I replied to this. Weird. Anyway, I just think it has to do with when he signed. He waited until early March last year and this year signed earlier. The $5 million is roughly the same as Andrew Chafin got from the Tigers and I think Smith had a better year.
Ha thanks. I guess Eduardo Rodriguez today has a presser and didn't realize he had signed 4/$80, so it makes me more hopeful royals can sign a starter or two near his caliber without crazy $$
Been a great day for Royals fans with Lugo and Stratton. Lugo isn’t/wasn’t my first choice, but I’m not ever going to complain with a competent pitcher. Giolito to finish it off fellas. Come on!
Question is Greinke, I see he is going to pitch again this next year. I’d love to have him back, but it can only be a 1 yr/5 million type deal as strictly a reliever at this point. I just can’t convince myself they will give him a starter role again. They can’t right?
Just finished up a late edition with Lugo and Stratton, but I don't think they'd sign Greinke to be a starter at this point. I wrote late in the year that if he's in a multi-inning role, though, I'm fine with that and may even love it.
Literally I just finished reading another well written article here about Smith and I love the move too! Then I make the rounds to RR, ITC, KCR.com, and KOK and couldn't help but laugh. I mean Stratton is kind of like Stroman and Hugo and Gioloto both end in "O"... I digress.
The good news is that we're making moves. I initially had some concerns when I read that Stroman had never pitched more than a bit over 100 innings before last year and then I thought to myself; "Self, that's pitching and the life of being a pitcher". So then I thought - is two starters really enough for this team. I'd say no.
Top three is some version of Ragans, Hugo, Singer I'm guessing and then I read that Greinke wants to pitch another year, which I expected. Is he a #4, ahead of everyone's favorite Royals starter? Or does he move to the bp and is an occasional opener?
Smith signing is a great signing. If for no other reason that you got him when I’m very surprised he didn’t want to play for a contender at his stage in career. Maybe he figures he’ll get the money now and if they are out of it he will end up on a contender. Who knows, and at this point who cares. Just take it as it makes the bullpen better. Another sneaky signing or two….and the bullpen looks a lot better. I do believe though that bullpens are much easier fixes. I mean, it is amazing how much better we feel with Smith and Anderson in the fold and they are not exactly great players. They are good. And that’s what the Royals need so don’t get me wrong. But you feel better with a couple of solid options.
I'm not surprised the Royals got someone like him, but I am surprised he signed with them this early. But I like it. You're right, he and Anderson make it a little easier to see how they can actually hold a few leads this season. That grows even more if they get someone like Stanek. I'm kind of interested in some of the starters transitioning to the bullpen too, but that's probably for another newsletter edition.
Signing Smith is the exact type of move the Royals should be making. Improves the bullpen and could be flipped if the season goes south. I love putting the squeeze on the hold over starting pitchers. Signing guys that definitely make the bullpen and definitely make the starting rotation cuts down those roster spots even further. Time for the vaunted class of 2018 to perform or get left behind.
They've already been mostly left behind. I had a chance to talk to JJ before the 2023 season and he was pretty adamant that 2023 was sink or swim for them. Singer's had success, so he gets a little more time to figure things out, right or wrong, but Lynch doesn't really anymore. It'll be nice to have that depth, but that's what he's entering 2024 as.
I've been thinking a little bit about what a good season looks like for the Royals this year. You mentioned the p-word; I think that's an unreasonable hope (but obviously I'm hoping, unreasonably), even in the AL Central. After all, we're talking about a team that just went 56-106.
Looking at the list of the top year-to-year improvements in baseball history (according to mlb.com, who compiled the list last fall), the Orioles provide a couple of interesting comparisons. In 1988, they won 54 games, 2 worse than our Royals. In 1989, Baltimore improved by 33 wins, recording an 87-win season, missing the playoffs by 2 games. However, they slipped back to fifth place the following year.
In 2022, the Orioles won 83 games, a 31 win improvement over the year before, as their youth movement began. They jumped another 18 games last year, winning the AL East with a 101-61 record, a ridiculous 49 game improvement over 2 seasons.
I think it's reasonable to look at those 2 examples of teams that had win totals in the mid-50s and turned things around dramatically as the upper range of what the Royals could do if everything falls into place perfectly. Dial that back by about 15-20% and we're looking at a 25-27 win improvement as a stretch goal. If KC wins 83 (+27) games this year, we should see that as a huge success. Anything more and they're breaking into the list of the top 10 all-time best improvements, even better than the Miracle Mets (+27 in 1969).
If we can go .500, that's a huge win. But I'm genuinely not thinking about this next season. If we can contend at all in 2026, that'll be good enough for me. In the meantime, I'll just enjoy being able to sit wherever I want at the games.
It's sort of tough to think about the record because as I wrote the other day, do you look at the number of wins that they actually put up or what their third order numbers indicated? Their Pythag record was 64-98. Their base runs record was 66-96. If that's the true talent level and you feel like they were just a non-horrific bullpen away from that, maybe you can start with that baseline. Add in some arms and maybe you get an extra 10-12 wins. That's 75ish. I felt like they had very little "good" luck last year. Add in that and maybe it's five more. So I think there's a path to respectability for sure.
I'm sure a lot of those crazy year to year improvements reflected a swing in luck (especially the ones that fell back significantly the next year, like the '89 Orioles).
I’m sure you’re right there. But if you play that right, you can use the improvement to sell free agents on your future to help fill the holes that luck doesn’t handle the next season.
.500 is absolute topside. But I pretty much agree with everything you said. They are due for some good luck…..but I don’t see the talent even if they add a couple of decent starters to be anything higher than .500 on the upside of things. I’d take 75 as that’s a start and can see .500 (hopefully better in 25). But they need to be sniffing that .500 range in 25 or I think people are going to be in trouble. But…I do think that is possible.
Again, it depends on what you think the baseline is. If they're a 56-win team like they were in reality, yeah, I'm not sure how they can make up 25 wins without some crazy things happening. But 66 wins? 15 is doable with cleaning up the bad part of the bulpen and getting a legitimate starter or two in. My guess, like most things, is that it's somewhere in the middle.
"I’ve been big on expected numbers this winter and they painted basically the same pitcher."
Come for the baseball IQ, stay for the puns.
I'd love to say that I only get one a year, but, well, I think we all know that's not true.
Stanek was used a lot as an opener in ‘18 and ‘19 in Tampa. And then was traded to Miami for Nick Anderson, which I find kind of funny. I think Stanek would be a great fit in KC - and everyone can have a little reunion. Plus, he can perhaps revive his opener role if needed.
Thanks for what you do, David. Happy Holidays!
Thanks for reading, Michael! Happy Holidays to you too!
Stroman and Wacha would be awesome. You actually make me think Stroman may be amenable with the ground ball/good infield/looking good thought.
Good to see Smith and rumors of Stanek.
But why do you think there was a big increase in the $1.5 Smith got last year from the Rangers?
Bad team tax, trickle down ohtani, inflation? And if it is the bad team tax, do you think the midtier starters rates would be double?
I swore I hit post yesterday when I replied to this. Weird. Anyway, I just think it has to do with when he signed. He waited until early March last year and this year signed earlier. The $5 million is roughly the same as Andrew Chafin got from the Tigers and I think Smith had a better year.
Ha thanks. I guess Eduardo Rodriguez today has a presser and didn't realize he had signed 4/$80, so it makes me more hopeful royals can sign a starter or two near his caliber without crazy $$
I hope he has 40 saves for us, but I am afraid to get on the over hype train.
YEEESSSS! LFG!! We Got Lugo!! Competent baseball here we come! This offseason excites me..
Been a great day for Royals fans with Lugo and Stratton. Lugo isn’t/wasn’t my first choice, but I’m not ever going to complain with a competent pitcher. Giolito to finish it off fellas. Come on!
Question is Greinke, I see he is going to pitch again this next year. I’d love to have him back, but it can only be a 1 yr/5 million type deal as strictly a reliever at this point. I just can’t convince myself they will give him a starter role again. They can’t right?
Just finished up a late edition with Lugo and Stratton, but I don't think they'd sign Greinke to be a starter at this point. I wrote late in the year that if he's in a multi-inning role, though, I'm fine with that and may even love it.
Literally I just finished reading another well written article here about Smith and I love the move too! Then I make the rounds to RR, ITC, KCR.com, and KOK and couldn't help but laugh. I mean Stratton is kind of like Stroman and Hugo and Gioloto both end in "O"... I digress.
The good news is that we're making moves. I initially had some concerns when I read that Stroman had never pitched more than a bit over 100 innings before last year and then I thought to myself; "Self, that's pitching and the life of being a pitcher". So then I thought - is two starters really enough for this team. I'd say no.
Top three is some version of Ragans, Hugo, Singer I'm guessing and then I read that Greinke wants to pitch another year, which I expected. Is he a #4, ahead of everyone's favorite Royals starter? Or does he move to the bp and is an occasional opener?
What say you Lesky?