If Coleman isn’t on the roster bring out the pitchforks! The only thing that makes sense is Anne forgot to mention him and missed him. Unless they have him in a potential trade package…in which at all times I’m fine with trading relievers.
Love reading your stuff and getting your opinion. I think after reading the roster projections here the last few days - I’m not quite as high on the offense (plenty of potential, just worried about ALL taking steps forward as everyone expects) but think they will be fine. Maybe not as high on the starting pitching as you (mainly because I’m worried about Grienke, more than young pitchers improving believe it or not). And at all times I worry about starting pitching injuries….i.e. this team is screwed looking at it now should Singer miss any time (one could argue they aren’t going to win anyway….). But bullpen…I think I’m a little higher an opinion right now. The depth they have is great and bullpens can be remade each year. I do think Barlow will and needs to be moved and probably another relief arm because one of these starters will need to go to the pen. But Chapman, Garrett, lets just say they are the same player…..I don’t even care if both flameout because they now have 5 other lefties who should be able to get the job done. One will work…two probably wont but they now have much better numbers on its side. I dare say strength will go bullpen, offense, and then a wide gap back will be starting pitching. Probably not enough to make a dent over 70-73 wins…but still at least moving in right direction it seems. Unless of course, bullpen gets burned out by so many innings from the starting pitching. Lol.
She mentioned him in the other candidates part, so she remembered. That's what's weird about it, but we'll see.
I think it's interesting that you think I'm high on the starting pitching. I just think they're better than last year, mostly because they've got more depth. But you're right that if Singer goes down, it's a huge problem unless another young guy steps up in a big way. I was thinking the bullpen could be a strength, though, before they made all the moves to add depth. With the depth and the people making the decisions theoretically moving on faster than the past, I'm pretty high on that unit.
But to add to your point about the bullpen getting burned out, I think it would be kind of difficult as long as they're handled correctly. Let's say they can fix Chapman. With Barlow and Coleman (who, yeah, I'm fine trading too...really both of them), they've got three late-inning relievers. No need to burn any of them out. Clarke, Garrett and Taylor are all solid in the middle I think. Yarbrough/Keller can eat innings in blowouts. And that's not even including guys who can come up to give breathers throughout the season. It's certainly possible they wear down if they only get 830 innings from starters again but I think they've got the depth to avoid that.
Ah, maybe you aren’t high on the starting pitching I guess. I do think they will be better than last year. I just worry about all the blame being put at the feet of Eldred and not enough on the player. Everyone thinks the talent is there….but pitch data is pretty meh on these guys. But I didn’t think Singer would get to this point last year so gotta believe someone someone will step up. I just know reality is somewhere in the middle where its on Eldred but also the players why they didn’t succeed. I am at least excited to finally get some answers on that this year instead of just guesstimating how much is whose fault.
The reason why I think the coaching staff will make a big difference is because the best organizations are able to improve that pitch data. I'll have something on Friday about a factor that doesn't even include the pitchers too, but look at a guy like Lynch. He's a tall lefty with a mid-90s fastball, a potential wipeout slider and a changeup that was very good in 2022. The reason people believe he'd succeed elsewhere (and now elsewhere is Kansas City in a lot of ways) is because they see what his fastball *could* be and see that Eldred & Co. had no answers of how to get it there. Stuff like that is why I'm optimistic on the coaching staff.
Man you are right; very hard to predict and as I was reading I realized your summary was spot on: "The position players have a ton of upside and are fun. The pitchers, well, hopefully the new coaches can fix a few of them."
And by the time I finished reading, I realized your conclusion was spot on, "I’ve asked this question before and don’t know the answer, but we know they have depth but will that depth be quality?"
So great article Lesky - appreciate you digging into those weeds so I didn't have to figure out what the whole mess adds up to!
I’m too optimistic and hopeful for my own good, but I believe that Sweeney and the rest of the new coaches on the pitching side can get more out of at least some of the young arms. We’ve seen Lynch, Bubic, and especially Keller (still young-ish) have stretches of success at the big league level. If one or two of those guys can become more consistent and if any of Kowar, Zerpa, Heasley, etc can take a step forward to become even a decent big league starter, this could be a solid starting rotation. It’s probably a long shot that enough of those things will happen, but hope is part of the fun this time of year. :)
I don't think it's out of line to think there is hope for the rotation with this coaching staff. There's talent in this organization, so the obvious big question is if Sweeney/Bove/Stetter can get it out of them. I don't think it's impossible at all to see two of the group take a big step forward.
Great article, David. Like you, the guy I'm most looking forward to seeing how he responds to the new staff is Daniel Lynch. To me, he's been the source of the most untapped potential among our starters.
Outside of just not being able to pitch up to expectations, I have a concern regarding Lynch that may be harder to solve: blisters. How much concern do you have with his blister issues - I think he went on the injured list twice last year due to this? Seems like pitchers who are prone to blisters struggle with them their entire careers. Thanks again for all the great insight.
Lynch is someone I'm watching very closely to see if he can improve, but Heasley is another guy who I think will benefit from what Sweeney and Bove do well specifically.
As for the blisters, yes, he went on the IL twice, but I would argue he shouldn't have come back the first time. If I'm remembering correctly, he was brought back for the Blue Jays series when they needed a starter and I don't think he should have been but they needed a starter. So I'm not sure if it's a problem yet or just seemed worse than it was because they didn't have available pitching to travel to Canada.
You know who Lynch reminds me of a little big. Remember Affeldt? He went on and had a good career for himself in the bullpen. I think Lynch can do better so it’s not a super great comparison…but tall lanky lefty, good stuff, blister issues early in career. That’s the name that popped into mind as a Royals fan.
I'll maintain that having a blister doesn't mean he's having blister issues. It very well may get to that point, but I wouldn't say it's there yet. I think it's pretty easy to see Affeldt when you talk about Lynch, but Affeldt was never even in Lynch's ballpark on either prospect pedigree or stuff.
I thought Yarbs had a good chance at being in the rotation to begin season, but your case for Keller is compelling and maybe its just sentiment on my part.
As much disdain as I have for the signing of that yankee closer, I am thinking they must feel fairly confident they can fix him (his pitching at least) if they are willing to bring in his baggage. So I think he helps get some wins. Maybe, if nothing else, a low risk gamble and the young guys get exposed to "that guy" in the clubhouse- and how to deal with him.
I do kinda wonder if they might go Rays "and now for something completely different" on pitching - as they are looking for just the slightest edge to turn a close loss to a win. My guess is the new staff will get their feet wet before going in the deep end; but wouldn't it be a hopeful fan fun if they mixed things up a bit? An opener or two? A bulk inning guy(oh is that a given now)? Is innovation/experiments the way to get a younger pitching staff into contention until they get nasty?
And oh yeah, I think its good for the old guys to take some innings pressure off the yunguns until they hone their craft, its not about taking innings from them - give them a little less pressure in AAA to figure it out with more encouragement and coaching. While I think it may be helpful for position players to run with the dogs, I don't like feeding the much more mental sided pitching kids to the wolves
I think it's important to remember this is an Opening Day roster. If I had to set the over/under for Yarbrough starts at 14.5, I'd probably take the over. And I do think they'll utilize an opener. I've heard from people within the organization that Josh Staumont is someone they think can thrive similar to how Stanek thrived a few years ago. The perfect bulk guy? Yarbrough. But the truth is that they'll only do it if it gives them an edge and as much fun as doing something different can be, the best method is still to have legitimate starting pitching. Even looking at the Rays coming into this season, they have five legitimate starting pitchers, even going so far as to give a guy like Zach Eflin a three-year deal. You make do with what you have, but the best option is to try to find real-life six+ inning starting pitching.
I thought it was an interesting observation on Staumont and I agree. It's a radical change for him as he was so laboriously slow before. No telling how he reacts but it not likely cause improvement... He pitched OK in April and May and then it degenerated into a shelling in the second half. Something was wrong before that last 50 pitch or whatever effort. But hope springs eternal. Ya never know. Maybe he gets tunnel vision and rediscovers his 98-100 FB and that nasty curve with command.
For sure, don't do something different just to be cutesy. And yes interesting to see the rays going to more traditional approach, but probably because they finally can? Took some time to get there but they are busting at seams with pitching talent now. I am a definite novice when it comes to really paying attention to pitching, so any knowledge appreciated. Just on being familiar with rays tho I think they still may pay more attention to pitch count for starters versus 6+ innings, especially with the talented bullpen? Guessing more concerned with season longevity than being ready for next week? idk? But I enjoy wondering if quatraro/sweeney occassionally gamble on a little pitching razzle dazzle edge a la Reid/mahomes to try for a couple extra wins while they gradually build the talent. Thanks as always for the knowledge!
But just to continue looking at the Rays, if they believed utilizing the staff the way they did was best, they'd have continued on with it. For a team on a limited budget, it's a lot less expensive than giving guys like Eflin $40 million or even extending Jeffrey Springs for $31 million. I think the Royals will likely use some different techniques than we've seen in Kansas City and maybe different than we've seen everywhere, but it doesn't change the point that the smartest teams still think a traditional pitching setup, at least with regard to starters, is the best approach, so it's going to be all about finding out if the Royals can get to that with this group or if they need to look elsewhere before 2024 .
Gotta ask today. Saw the Royals won the arb hearing against Singer. Maybe you’ll have more on this in tomorrow’s newsletter….but what in the world is going on here? Why are we going to arb with our best pitcher over a couple hundred thousand when willing to throw money away on O’Hearn? My hope is they are working on a long term deal and this won’t matter. But if you are actually going to arb with him over this…the fear is he will never sign long term here anyway. Any ideas what this was all about?
I won't have anything else because there's not much to it. They didn't come to a deal before the hearing, so they had to go to the hearing. Is it shortsighted? Probably. Not that it makes it right, but this isn't a Royals thing. The Brewers went to a hearing with Corbin Burnes over less than $750k. I've gotten assurances that they knew what the arguments were and it isn't a big deal and they're still working on something long-term. It just didn't get done before the hearing.
I just find it odd of all the people you want to keep pretty happy seems like he would be towards the top of the list and I’ve heard these hearings get pretty negative. Sounds like you are hearing they are still working towards a deal though so thats good. Hopefully just a bump in the road. Just seemed so unnecessary.
I don’t think Singer is even in the room during the hearing. And given that they’ve been negotiating, it’s pretty likely that any reason they’d argue against him is already known.
Mr. L, thx for this excellent breakdown. Your hesitant optimism about Kowar, while unsurprising, is fitting. Man, I sure hope he comes through, if for no other reason that I get fatigued from the continual hoping. Really, really worried about Staumont and the clock.
I personally haven't seen anything to indicate his fastball can move enough to matter, but I also don't know what this new instruction can do to help. They tried to do some things with his arm slot last year that seemed to work at times, so maybe it's just a matter of him getting comfortable. We'll see if the people who know more than me are right. I hope they are.
No, I wouldn't touch that with a 100 foot pole. There will be disagreements with that and that's fine. But from a baseball perspective, there are questions too. He very clearly stated that the only way spin rate could increase would be to use the sticky stuff and he said it in a way that was accusing others. The next year his spin rate spiked significantly. The speculation is that he was using sticky stuff. The last pitch he threw was on June 28, 2021. The use of sticky stuff was banned like a week before that. Was he successful because of it? The guy had an ERA of 4+ in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2019 before a great (and brief of course) 2020 and an excellent start to 2021, but is he actually a great pitcher? Nobody knows! He's 32 now. I just don't think the risk is worth it at all.
I agee with you except for the risk part. Per the reinstatement agreement he receives no pay for the first 40 games and then the aquiring team pays the league minimum.
I know what he'd make. That signing would also alienate way more people than even the Chapman one did. Would they come back? Probably? I don't know though. There's a pretty big risk of angering an already diminishing base.
Yea, It would be a heavy lift for the Royals to convince fans that he was being scammed by this young woman, especially after all of the sensational press the story received.
If Coleman isn’t on the roster bring out the pitchforks! The only thing that makes sense is Anne forgot to mention him and missed him. Unless they have him in a potential trade package…in which at all times I’m fine with trading relievers.
Love reading your stuff and getting your opinion. I think after reading the roster projections here the last few days - I’m not quite as high on the offense (plenty of potential, just worried about ALL taking steps forward as everyone expects) but think they will be fine. Maybe not as high on the starting pitching as you (mainly because I’m worried about Grienke, more than young pitchers improving believe it or not). And at all times I worry about starting pitching injuries….i.e. this team is screwed looking at it now should Singer miss any time (one could argue they aren’t going to win anyway….). But bullpen…I think I’m a little higher an opinion right now. The depth they have is great and bullpens can be remade each year. I do think Barlow will and needs to be moved and probably another relief arm because one of these starters will need to go to the pen. But Chapman, Garrett, lets just say they are the same player…..I don’t even care if both flameout because they now have 5 other lefties who should be able to get the job done. One will work…two probably wont but they now have much better numbers on its side. I dare say strength will go bullpen, offense, and then a wide gap back will be starting pitching. Probably not enough to make a dent over 70-73 wins…but still at least moving in right direction it seems. Unless of course, bullpen gets burned out by so many innings from the starting pitching. Lol.
She mentioned him in the other candidates part, so she remembered. That's what's weird about it, but we'll see.
I think it's interesting that you think I'm high on the starting pitching. I just think they're better than last year, mostly because they've got more depth. But you're right that if Singer goes down, it's a huge problem unless another young guy steps up in a big way. I was thinking the bullpen could be a strength, though, before they made all the moves to add depth. With the depth and the people making the decisions theoretically moving on faster than the past, I'm pretty high on that unit.
But to add to your point about the bullpen getting burned out, I think it would be kind of difficult as long as they're handled correctly. Let's say they can fix Chapman. With Barlow and Coleman (who, yeah, I'm fine trading too...really both of them), they've got three late-inning relievers. No need to burn any of them out. Clarke, Garrett and Taylor are all solid in the middle I think. Yarbrough/Keller can eat innings in blowouts. And that's not even including guys who can come up to give breathers throughout the season. It's certainly possible they wear down if they only get 830 innings from starters again but I think they've got the depth to avoid that.
Ah, maybe you aren’t high on the starting pitching I guess. I do think they will be better than last year. I just worry about all the blame being put at the feet of Eldred and not enough on the player. Everyone thinks the talent is there….but pitch data is pretty meh on these guys. But I didn’t think Singer would get to this point last year so gotta believe someone someone will step up. I just know reality is somewhere in the middle where its on Eldred but also the players why they didn’t succeed. I am at least excited to finally get some answers on that this year instead of just guesstimating how much is whose fault.
The reason why I think the coaching staff will make a big difference is because the best organizations are able to improve that pitch data. I'll have something on Friday about a factor that doesn't even include the pitchers too, but look at a guy like Lynch. He's a tall lefty with a mid-90s fastball, a potential wipeout slider and a changeup that was very good in 2022. The reason people believe he'd succeed elsewhere (and now elsewhere is Kansas City in a lot of ways) is because they see what his fastball *could* be and see that Eldred & Co. had no answers of how to get it there. Stuff like that is why I'm optimistic on the coaching staff.
If Singer goes down... SSSSSHHHHH. You're gonna get the pitchforks brought out for you Joel!
Man you are right; very hard to predict and as I was reading I realized your summary was spot on: "The position players have a ton of upside and are fun. The pitchers, well, hopefully the new coaches can fix a few of them."
And by the time I finished reading, I realized your conclusion was spot on, "I’ve asked this question before and don’t know the answer, but we know they have depth but will that depth be quality?"
So great article Lesky - appreciate you digging into those weeds so I didn't have to figure out what the whole mess adds up to!
Yeah, it's a mystery! But mysteries are a lot better than knowing they stink, so at least we have the unknown for at least a little while.
Great point!
One thing that was frightening was that the Zips projections only project 33 wins for our starting rotation - yikes!
Give us an O/U of about 60 please!
The ZiPS standings had the Royals at 72 wins, I think. I'm leaning toward the over on that, but it's close.
Love your writing, David! Thanks for what you do!
I’m too optimistic and hopeful for my own good, but I believe that Sweeney and the rest of the new coaches on the pitching side can get more out of at least some of the young arms. We’ve seen Lynch, Bubic, and especially Keller (still young-ish) have stretches of success at the big league level. If one or two of those guys can become more consistent and if any of Kowar, Zerpa, Heasley, etc can take a step forward to become even a decent big league starter, this could be a solid starting rotation. It’s probably a long shot that enough of those things will happen, but hope is part of the fun this time of year. :)
I'm with you Dustin. As Royals fans we have been trained to look for glimmers of hope and all I see is possibilities. Never tell me the odds!
I don't think it's out of line to think there is hope for the rotation with this coaching staff. There's talent in this organization, so the obvious big question is if Sweeney/Bove/Stetter can get it out of them. I don't think it's impossible at all to see two of the group take a big step forward.
Great article, David. Like you, the guy I'm most looking forward to seeing how he responds to the new staff is Daniel Lynch. To me, he's been the source of the most untapped potential among our starters.
Outside of just not being able to pitch up to expectations, I have a concern regarding Lynch that may be harder to solve: blisters. How much concern do you have with his blister issues - I think he went on the injured list twice last year due to this? Seems like pitchers who are prone to blisters struggle with them their entire careers. Thanks again for all the great insight.
Lynch is someone I'm watching very closely to see if he can improve, but Heasley is another guy who I think will benefit from what Sweeney and Bove do well specifically.
As for the blisters, yes, he went on the IL twice, but I would argue he shouldn't have come back the first time. If I'm remembering correctly, he was brought back for the Blue Jays series when they needed a starter and I don't think he should have been but they needed a starter. So I'm not sure if it's a problem yet or just seemed worse than it was because they didn't have available pitching to travel to Canada.
You know who Lynch reminds me of a little big. Remember Affeldt? He went on and had a good career for himself in the bullpen. I think Lynch can do better so it’s not a super great comparison…but tall lanky lefty, good stuff, blister issues early in career. That’s the name that popped into mind as a Royals fan.
I'll maintain that having a blister doesn't mean he's having blister issues. It very well may get to that point, but I wouldn't say it's there yet. I think it's pretty easy to see Affeldt when you talk about Lynch, but Affeldt was never even in Lynch's ballpark on either prospect pedigree or stuff.
How can we watch the Royals on television this summer?
They're on Bally Sports still. I don't have any inside information of where Bally will be available other than their app and cable.
I thought Yarbs had a good chance at being in the rotation to begin season, but your case for Keller is compelling and maybe its just sentiment on my part.
As much disdain as I have for the signing of that yankee closer, I am thinking they must feel fairly confident they can fix him (his pitching at least) if they are willing to bring in his baggage. So I think he helps get some wins. Maybe, if nothing else, a low risk gamble and the young guys get exposed to "that guy" in the clubhouse- and how to deal with him.
I do kinda wonder if they might go Rays "and now for something completely different" on pitching - as they are looking for just the slightest edge to turn a close loss to a win. My guess is the new staff will get their feet wet before going in the deep end; but wouldn't it be a hopeful fan fun if they mixed things up a bit? An opener or two? A bulk inning guy(oh is that a given now)? Is innovation/experiments the way to get a younger pitching staff into contention until they get nasty?
And oh yeah, I think its good for the old guys to take some innings pressure off the yunguns until they hone their craft, its not about taking innings from them - give them a little less pressure in AAA to figure it out with more encouragement and coaching. While I think it may be helpful for position players to run with the dogs, I don't like feeding the much more mental sided pitching kids to the wolves
I think it's important to remember this is an Opening Day roster. If I had to set the over/under for Yarbrough starts at 14.5, I'd probably take the over. And I do think they'll utilize an opener. I've heard from people within the organization that Josh Staumont is someone they think can thrive similar to how Stanek thrived a few years ago. The perfect bulk guy? Yarbrough. But the truth is that they'll only do it if it gives them an edge and as much fun as doing something different can be, the best method is still to have legitimate starting pitching. Even looking at the Rays coming into this season, they have five legitimate starting pitchers, even going so far as to give a guy like Zach Eflin a three-year deal. You make do with what you have, but the best option is to try to find real-life six+ inning starting pitching.
I thought it was an interesting observation on Staumont and I agree. It's a radical change for him as he was so laboriously slow before. No telling how he reacts but it not likely cause improvement... He pitched OK in April and May and then it degenerated into a shelling in the second half. Something was wrong before that last 50 pitch or whatever effort. But hope springs eternal. Ya never know. Maybe he gets tunnel vision and rediscovers his 98-100 FB and that nasty curve with command.
For sure, don't do something different just to be cutesy. And yes interesting to see the rays going to more traditional approach, but probably because they finally can? Took some time to get there but they are busting at seams with pitching talent now. I am a definite novice when it comes to really paying attention to pitching, so any knowledge appreciated. Just on being familiar with rays tho I think they still may pay more attention to pitch count for starters versus 6+ innings, especially with the talented bullpen? Guessing more concerned with season longevity than being ready for next week? idk? But I enjoy wondering if quatraro/sweeney occassionally gamble on a little pitching razzle dazzle edge a la Reid/mahomes to try for a couple extra wins while they gradually build the talent. Thanks as always for the knowledge!
But just to continue looking at the Rays, if they believed utilizing the staff the way they did was best, they'd have continued on with it. For a team on a limited budget, it's a lot less expensive than giving guys like Eflin $40 million or even extending Jeffrey Springs for $31 million. I think the Royals will likely use some different techniques than we've seen in Kansas City and maybe different than we've seen everywhere, but it doesn't change the point that the smartest teams still think a traditional pitching setup, at least with regard to starters, is the best approach, so it's going to be all about finding out if the Royals can get to that with this group or if they need to look elsewhere before 2024 .
Gotta ask today. Saw the Royals won the arb hearing against Singer. Maybe you’ll have more on this in tomorrow’s newsletter….but what in the world is going on here? Why are we going to arb with our best pitcher over a couple hundred thousand when willing to throw money away on O’Hearn? My hope is they are working on a long term deal and this won’t matter. But if you are actually going to arb with him over this…the fear is he will never sign long term here anyway. Any ideas what this was all about?
I won't have anything else because there's not much to it. They didn't come to a deal before the hearing, so they had to go to the hearing. Is it shortsighted? Probably. Not that it makes it right, but this isn't a Royals thing. The Brewers went to a hearing with Corbin Burnes over less than $750k. I've gotten assurances that they knew what the arguments were and it isn't a big deal and they're still working on something long-term. It just didn't get done before the hearing.
I just find it odd of all the people you want to keep pretty happy seems like he would be towards the top of the list and I’ve heard these hearings get pretty negative. Sounds like you are hearing they are still working towards a deal though so thats good. Hopefully just a bump in the road. Just seemed so unnecessary.
I don’t think Singer is even in the room during the hearing. And given that they’ve been negotiating, it’s pretty likely that any reason they’d argue against him is already known.
Mr. L, thx for this excellent breakdown. Your hesitant optimism about Kowar, while unsurprising, is fitting. Man, I sure hope he comes through, if for no other reason that I get fatigued from the continual hoping. Really, really worried about Staumont and the clock.
I personally haven't seen anything to indicate his fastball can move enough to matter, but I also don't know what this new instruction can do to help. They tried to do some things with his arm slot last year that seemed to work at times, so maybe it's just a matter of him getting comfortable. We'll see if the people who know more than me are right. I hope they are.
Do you think the Royals should consider adding Trever Bauer?
No, I wouldn't touch that with a 100 foot pole. There will be disagreements with that and that's fine. But from a baseball perspective, there are questions too. He very clearly stated that the only way spin rate could increase would be to use the sticky stuff and he said it in a way that was accusing others. The next year his spin rate spiked significantly. The speculation is that he was using sticky stuff. The last pitch he threw was on June 28, 2021. The use of sticky stuff was banned like a week before that. Was he successful because of it? The guy had an ERA of 4+ in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2019 before a great (and brief of course) 2020 and an excellent start to 2021, but is he actually a great pitcher? Nobody knows! He's 32 now. I just don't think the risk is worth it at all.
I agee with you except for the risk part. Per the reinstatement agreement he receives no pay for the first 40 games and then the aquiring team pays the league minimum.
I know what he'd make. That signing would also alienate way more people than even the Chapman one did. Would they come back? Probably? I don't know though. There's a pretty big risk of angering an already diminishing base.
Yea, It would be a heavy lift for the Royals to convince fans that he was being scammed by this young woman, especially after all of the sensational press the story received.