Games » Boston Red Sox
May7Home runs cost money
Lee Judge
The Kansas City Star
According to USA Today, the 2012 Boston Red Sox have a total payroll of $173,186,617. According to the same source, the 2012 Kansas City Royals have a total payroll of $60,916,225. Home runs cost money, speed is cheap. The Royals are trying to win with speed. They can’t afford big home-run hitters and if they could, those big home-run hitters wouldn’t be big home-run hitters while playing in Kauffman Stadium. No Kansas City Royal has ever hit 40 home runs in a season.
So when the Royals get down by a bunch, it’s harder for them to come back than it is for a team like the Red Sox or the Yankees. And lately, the Royals have often been down by a bunch. That takes them out of their game. They become a conservative team without power — a bad combination. Playing in Kauffman Stadium makes the problem even worse. If the Royals need to hit a couple of bombs to get back into a game, it’s probably going to be a long wait. The Royals need a low-scoring contest — or at least a close contest — to play the game the way they want to.
For those of us old enough to remember when the Royals were good, the winning combination was obvious: pitching, defense, line-drive hitters and aggressive base running. Until the Royals starting pitching improves, that recipe has a missing ingredient.
Game notes
Jonathan Sanchez didn’t seem to think he pitched all that badly. There’s an awful lot of evidence that says otherwise. Throwing more balls than strikes, walking three in three innings, using 73 pitches without getting out of the 4th and giving up six earned runs would seem to indicate Sanchez did not pitch well. Being in denial — if that’s what he is — won’t solve the problem.
Ask enough questions and you get a good sense of who is a standup guy and who isn’t — and most baseball players are standup guys. If they screw up, they’ll say so. Alex Gordon has been willing to admit a mistake in the past, so when Alex says he lost the ball in the twilight on that catch he missed, I believe him. Plus, the ball hit him in the wrist. Gordon’s awfully coordinated to have a ball he was seeing well miss his glove by half a foot — even if he was jumping up against the fence.
Gordon saved two runs with another diving catch in the 7th, Mike Moustakas had another web gem in the second, but there was another nice play that was easy to miss: Moustakas had an off-line throw to Eric Hosmer‘s left that was pulling the first baseman into the runner. Hosmer went backwards over the bag, caught the ball in foul territory and danced out of the way before he got flattened by Marlon Byrd. Lesser first baseman might let that one go, allow the third baseman to take the error and avoid getting tangled up with the runner.
Billy and the runner in motion
I talked to Billy Butler about having a runner in motion. When Alex Gordon is on base, Ned Yost has been sending him at some point during a lot of Butler at-bats. Billy said he tries to hit the ball hard and low, so Yost is trying to avoid double plays. Butler said if the runner breaks when he has two strikes, it’s not a hit and run; if it happens before he has two strikes, it probably is.
Billy handles the hit and run by trying to stay on top of the ball — barrel above ball until contact — and looks for a slider away. He then adjusts to any other pitch. If Billy gets a good fastball to hit, he may not get all of it because he’s looking slider and his timing won’t be perfect.
If he gets the slider he’s looking for, Billy tries to hook it through the hole at short. He figures they’ll leave the second baseman home on a hit and run so the shortstop will be covering the bag. So if you see the runner break and Billy hits a grounder through the vacated hole at short, you’ve just seen a heck of a piece of hitting.
You won’t hear this on ESPN
The Royals tried out a new pitcher Monday afternoon. The team needs someone to throw batting practice from the left-side — all of the coaches are righties — so former college pitcher Mike Jacobs got a look. Mike’s 24, works in a bank and found himself throwing to Mike Moustakas, Mitch Maier, Jeff Francoeur and a few other big leaguers, while Kevin Seitzer, Ned Yost and assorted coaches looked on.
Afterwards I asked Mike if he was nervous, and he said yes. Accidently drilling a big leaguer would not be the best way to land a dream job: wear a uni, hang with the players and feel like part of a major league team. Kevin Seitzer talked to him afterwards, shook his hand and said, “We’ll let you know.”
When they let him know, I’ll let you know.
Hottovey’s homer
I asked Tommy Hottovey if he thought he would’ve gotten away with the pitch Alex Rodriguez hit for a home run on Sunday, if Tommy had thrown the same pitch in the minors. Tommy didn’t think it was a good pitch and A-Rod did exactly what good hitters do to bad pitches: crushed it.
It was supposed to be a change-up down and away, Tommy got under it a bit, the pitch stayed up and ran right into A-Rod’s wheelhouse. We talked about that if the score had been different, Tommy probably wouldn’t have faced A-Rod. But in a blowout, Ned didn’t want to use another pitcher and Tommy stayed in to face Rodriguez. Hottovey think his future here still depends on what he does with left-handed hitters — that’s why he’s here.
Stay put
Eric Hosmer is hitting line drives — right at people. So I asked Kevin Seitzer if he ever employed the hitting trick that calls for moving in the batter’s box. Move up or back in the batter’s box and the hitting lanes change. A ball that was right at the shortstop now goes to his left or right.
Sounds great — at first. Kevin said hitters work so hard on timing and moving in the box changes that timing. So Hosmer needs to find a different solution — or just wait out this spell of bad luck. And he’s tied for second on the team for RBIs, so it hasn’t been all bad.
Gordon
Moustakas
Pena
Scott Harrison
1 year agoNed says it’s not time for changes yet, but it probably will be time in the very near future. It’s almost mid-May now. Will mid-June or mid-July be the right time? Also, I know that Hosmer has been hitting the ball hard with nothing to show for it, but don’t we need someone hitting better than .179 in the cleanup spot? And finally, Odorizzi is pitching well in AA. Why not call him up the way we called up Saberhagen and Gubicza from A ball? We can’t do any worse in the rotation, can we?
Donald Wilson
1 year agoLee - I can’t exactly remember why we changed pitching coaches but it’s in the back of my mind that I think it was said that our pitchers were giving up too many walks so McClure had to go. Am I right? If so, what was our reasoning for hiring this guy? It sure doesn’t seem to have anything about finding out why our pitchers can’t throw strikes!!! And I’ll say it again and you’ll probably disagree again but I don’t think he has a clue as to what to say to a pitcher who is strugling out on the mound. Once in a great while he gets lucky but that’s few and far between. He may have good credentials but I sure don’t see them materalizing. I would like to think that if I had a professional job and was an expert in my field that I would have figured out something by now on Hochaver and Sanchez if nothing more than having them throw with the other arm!
Jim Wilson
1 year agoHosmer is the best hitter on the team, plain and simple. He should be batting third or fourth.
Lee Judge
1 year agoScott: I’ve got to agree with Jim, there’s no point in messing with Hosmer. Unlike Sanchez, Eric is performing well—hitting the ball hard—and not getting results.
There’s a lot of evidence Sanchez is not performing and not getting results—that’s the difference.
The one thing everyone worries about is Hosmer making some unnecessary change out of frustration. If the message to him is you’re OK, just keep doing what you’re doing, what’s the message if the team panics and makes a change?
He’s hitting the ball hard, he’s driving in runs, the hits will come.
Lee Judge
1 year agoDonald: Yes, Bob McClure was let go because the team wanted someone who could get the pitchers to throw strikes.
Bob wanted them to throw strikes and so does Dave Eiland. At some point, the pitchers have to take responsibility for getting it done.
I’ve spent time with both guys and they have very different personalities. Bob was soft-spoken and Dave is a much more in-your-face type, which might be part of why they made the change. Same message, different voice.
In the off-season Dave got Tim Collins to adjust and now Tim is throwing strikes. Some of the other pitchers may be more resistant to the message, but doing it their way isn’t working—maybe now they’ll listen.
To me, Dave seems to have a very good clue about what needs to change, but the pitchers need to buy in—or they can keep doing it their way. As Paul Splittorff used to say, “How’s that working out for you?”
Jim Kissane
1 year agoMy son and I were at The K last night and saw the same game you did, Lee. Sanchez was constantly behind in the count, which makes bad hitters decent and good hitters even better. The Royals kept struggling to get back in the game, but the DP in the seventh was a killer. Don’t know what to do about that - can’t start the runners with the bases loaded, and Butler is the guy you want up there in that situation. Still, we were only down 7-5 at that point and Boston pitchers were struggling as much as ours were.
Then in the eighth, we give up a couple more runs and it’s 9-5, and a runner on second. I turn to my son and ask, “With first base open, shouldn’t we be walking the guy who’s hitting .350 (Will Middlebrooks) and pitching to they guy hitting .180 (Darnell McDonald)?” (CRACK!) “Well, never mind then.”
Both Middlebrooks and McDonald are right-handed, so the left-handed Tim Collins wouldn’t have been gaining a lefty-lefty matchup, but still, wouldn’t it make sense to walk Middlebrooks, who had homered earlier, to face a floundering McDonald? Or at 9-5 do you just figure a pitcher’s got to man up and get an out, besides, my brain hurts?
Jim Wilson
1 year agoPart of being a good coach is finding a way to get the players to buy in to what you’re saying. Sometimes you need to try another coach even though the basic message may be the same. When you’ve tried a couple of coaches and the message still isn’t getting through, it’s time to look at the player(s).
Jim Wilson
1 year agoOn Hosmer, I think it’s very encouraging to see that he’s not panicking. He’s not overmatched. He’s having very good at-bats. He’s hitting the ball hard. He’s being patient.
Jim Kissane
1 year agoI also wonder what role catching might play in the pitching woes. I’m assuming Quintero and Pena know what Eiland is trying to do, and that they take part in in the pre-game pitching meeting. They’re both veteran catchers, so they should be calling the game according to that strategy (i.e., don’t try to be too fine, throw strikes and pitch ahead in the count), right? And is Salvy Perez sitting in, too, so we don’t lose ground when he returns?
Lee Judge
1 year agoJim K.: Can’t tell you what is is, but there’s always a reason they do what they do. The other day Ned Yost and I talked for a while and he went over the possible bullpen matchups the night Chen pitched.
I take as few notes as possible—the conversation changes once you pull out that notebook or turn on a camera—but it was one of the few times I wished I’d been using a tape recorder.
It was mind-boggling, I couldn’t keep up: “if this then this, if that then that” kind of stuff, running through the entire Yankees lineup. Ned may not make the decision you think is right, but whatever decision he reaches, there’s been some thought put into it.
Lee Judge
1 year agoJim W.: Baseball has a way of doing things and one of them is to give a player enough rope to hang himself. “OK, I don’t like what you’re doing, but show me you can make it work.”
Then if they don’t, the hammer falls: “We tried it your way, look where you are—time for a change.”
I don’t know if that’s what Eiland’s doing, but I can tell you he has definite ideas about what needs to change.
Last night Ned made it sound like something needs to change pretty soon. The next trip through the rotation should be interesting.
Lee Judge
1 year agoJim K.: Yes, catching’s definitely part of it. Perez is around, but I don’t know how much he’s in on the meetings. I’d be surprised if he wasn’t right there, though.
Sanchez is a throw it down the middle guy, so you might’ve noticed Pena not moving to corners behind the plate. Throw it down the middle and let it move, but the ball still has to be down in the zone.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year agoI do appreciate the access you provide Lee, but sometimes it makes things even more frustrating. If we’re trying to win with speed, it’s even harder to understand why we brought in Yuniesky Betancourt this offseason or Melky Cabrera the offseason before. Both of those guys are among the slowest at their positions (so far this year, Yuni has been the slowest guy on the team).
It’s similar to how it’s difficult for an outsider to understand why we would bring in Jonathan Sanchez at the same time we were trying to limit walks.
I actually liked the trade for Sanchez at the time (if he harnesses his great stuff, he could be a great pitcher), but when it takes place at a time the organization is supposedly putting an emphasis on fewer walks, it makes it hard to believe anything the Royals say.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year agoLee -
Most of what I know from those 1970s/1980s Royals teams, I know from studying baseball cards when I was little, but I don’t see how those teams are going to be a model for today.
Obviously, the simplest reason it’s hard to emulate those teams is that we don’t have the artificial turd any more (thank God), so runners are slower between the bases.
But I don’t think we ever had a team that didn’t have power, but generated good offense through speed. Here’s where we ranked (among 14 AL teams) on SLG/SBs/Runs through our best decade:
1976: 4/2/4
1977: 4/2/5
1978: 3/1/3
1979: 4/1/2
1980: 4/1/4
1981: 5/2/12
1982: 3/4/4
1983: 9/9/12
1984: 6/6/11
1985: 8/5/13
The 80s teams mainly won through pitching, and that’s obviously not on the horizon for the current team. The 70s teams won with offense, but they did it with power and speed (also, their success rate on stolen base attempts is very impressive — if we could convert more than 3 out of 4 stolen base attempts, I’d be fine with our small ball game).
Matthew LaMar
1 year ago“Can’t tell you what is is, but there’s always a reason they do what they do.”
Lee, I appreciate that you don’t want to get too opinionated on this site. However, just because Yost has a reason doesn’t mean it’s a good one. An admittedly extreme example: if a guy goes outs and beats his girlfriend, but has a reason for it (she’s cheating or whatever), it doesn’t automatically make the decision a good one.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago“Artificial turd” above should obviously be “artificial turf.”
How’s that for Freudian!
Jim Wilson
1 year agoThe rope thing is not unique to baseball. Some people only learn the hard way. That’s a bad trait for most professions. It’s good to know that Yost is putting a lot of thought into managing the game. I would hope so. I’m interested in knowing whether, during the game, he follows through with his thinking before the game or let’s the “heat of the moment” or his “gut” influence his actions.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago“The rope thing is not unique to baseball. Some people only learn the hard way.”
That idea is a part of Dayton Moore’s thoughts when taking risks on Frenchy, Melky, Sanchez, and Yuni, guys at the end of their career ropes who might finally be willing to listen and adjust, guys that the coaches think they can fix. It doesn’t always work, sometimes it works well. Just part of the job for a GM with a $60 million payroll.
“Here’s where we ranked (among 14 AL teams) on SLG/SBs/Runs through our best decade:”
Try HRs instead of SLG. Royals have often hit a bunch of doubles and triples, not a lot of homers, even when they brought the fences in.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoGood idea on the first three anyway (Sanchez hasn’t worked so far but it was worth a try).
Larry Tindle
1 year agoBrendan, it’s interesting that 1978 was our best year and 1985 not so much. Next to last in runs and middle of the pack in SLG. I have heard Brett say 1985 was not the most talented team, 1978 was. Guess he knows his stats.
Guess you don’t need the best stats to win but good starting pitching would sure help.
Think it was the 2008 Tigers that were projected to clean up because they would score 1000 runs. Piching failed and they finished 5 in division. Very difficult to out slug everyone.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year agoJim F -
When we’re talking about how to get runners home, there’s no reason to differentiate between a home run and a triple. Both clear the bases. And there’s no much difference between a home run and a double, which clears second and third and scores 45% of runners from first.
If the idea is that we don’t have power, therefore we need to manufacture runs through small ball, the definition of power needs to include all extra base hits instead of myopically focusing on home runs.
And this Royals team has power. We were 5th in the AL and 2nd in the Central in SLG last year.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoThe mid to late 1970s was a much differnt era. The Royals’ model for scoring runs was the same model the other top teams were following. (Speed and gap power; but a lot of those doubles off the wall in those big, old ugly parks would be HRs in today’s beautiful bandboxes.) It’s hard to believe, but in 1976 the Red Sox won the AL team HR title with 134 homers! Even with home runs down today, the Yankees are on pace for 255 this year. Amazing! Btw, the 2012 Royals are on pace for 127 homers in 2012, which would have put them in second in 1976.
Larry Tindle
1 year agoI am a realative short time Royals fan, moving here in 2004. The one really bright spot I see with this team is they do not quit. The teams I saw in 2005-2010 would have rolled over and played dead if the starter had dug them into a deep hole. Emil Brown and others looked more like they just wanted to get the game over so they could go to dinner.
If they keep it up I think we have our main core of position players and would be surprised if DM does not get aggressive in the starting pitching arena in the off season.
But be ready you may see some of your favorite players getting traded. It will be costly.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoI agree with Brendan. The Royals are a mixed bag of some speed and quite a bit of power. Playing 81 games on the road, many in small parks, small ball alone is not going to work.
KC Guy
1 year ago“When we’re talking about how to get runners home, there’s no reason to differentiate between a home run and a triple. Both clear the bases. And there’s no much difference between a home run and a double, which clears second and third and scores 45% of runners from first.”
Of course, doubles drive in runs, but they only score if you get a hit after them. Which is part of the reason why the Royals can be at the top of the leader board for hitting doubles, and still be near the bottom for runs scored..
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago“And this Royals team has power. We were 5th in the AL and 2nd in the Central in SLG last year.”
Doubles and triples helped. I think what Lee is talking about is home runs, something Boston hit four of last night compared to zero by the Royals. The had eight extra base hits, Royals one.
“small ball alone is not going to work.”
True. Wil Myers hit his 10th HR last night. Big ball is good, but requires the big bats to do something with the opportunities.
Lee Judge
1 year agoIn retrospect, I probably should have done a better job of explaining what I meant last night—that’s what happens when you’re writing at 1AM and dog-tired.
While Kauffman is tough on home run hitters, it’s excellent for hitting doubles. The good Royals teams had that gap power which is part of what I meant—but didn’t express—when I referred to line-drive hitters.
What the Royals can’t rely on is a couple of walks and then somebody hitting one out—nice when it happens, doesn’t happen often enough. So scoring runs in bunches is tough, they need to string hits and walks together.
As for speed: six of the eight position players are capable of stealing or taking the extra base, depending on the situation.
For me bottom line: they get way down in Kauffman, hard for them to come back.
Lee Judge
1 year agoOnce again, Jim said it better than I did: look at the home runs put up by the Yankees and Red Sox and how many the Royals hit in comparison.
The Royals can’t play that game with them, the pitching needs to keep the score low enough so the Royals can play their game.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoTerrific (re Myers)! It’s looking more and more like we’re going to have to turn some of our (excess?) positional talent into pitching.
I don’t think it’s black or white; big ball or small ball. Station-to-station or aggressive baserunning. There’s a happy medium. The threat helps but also the element of surprise. Unfortunately, last night the Red Sox went big ball in a big park. It’s hard to compete with that.
As you (Jim F.) have pointed out, the Royals have toned down their over-aggressive baserunning earlier in the season. That may have been pressing on the coaches part (trying too hard to make something happen or, probably more accurately, letting the players try to hard to make something happen) during the losing streak. With the exception of Frenchy’s aggressiveness a time or two, I can’t think of anything to quibble about for the past 10 games or more as far as baserunning.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year agoI understand that you guys are focused on home runs. I don’t understand why you guys are focused on home runs.
If we’re a good slugging team (and we are), it doesn’t particularly matter whether the slugging is coming from 2 doubles or 1 home run (in fact, SLG significantly overstates the relative value between a HR and a 2B). Either one of them will score both guys who walked (and the second double will also score the first double).
If we were the Mariners or the Twins, it might be smart to sacrifice some outs in order to “manufacture” runs, but we’re not the Mariners or the Twins, it doesn’t make sense to imagine that we are just because we play in a park that suppresses home runs and creates doubles/triples rather than the other way around.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year agoHere’s a good thought experiment.
If you had control over a baseball team that hit 150 HRs and 250 doubles, and you had the power to make that 100 HRs and 350 doubles, (holding all the rates of HBP, BB, 1B and 3B constant) would you make that trade?
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago“Terrific (re Myers)! It’s looking more and more like we’re going to have to turn some of our (excess?) positional talent into pitching.”
Myers has also been playing quite a bit of CF, interesting as Cain is starting a fairly long rehab for a torn flexor and has a history of leg injuries. Pine Tar Press is the place to follow the Royals’ minor leaguers. I also noticed that Christian Colon is starting to hit and Johnny Giavotella’s bat is making a comeback, although his defense isn’t improving.
“I can’t think of anything to quibble about for the past 10 games or more as far as baserunning.”
Doug Sisson mentioned a month or so ago that some pitchers were speeding up delivery times to the plate. Adjustments to other adjustments aren’t always instantaneous.
“If we were the Mariners or the Twins, it might be smart to sacrifice some outs in order to “manufacture” runs”
Less a matter of being the Twins than a game situation. Against Verlander or last year against Ubaldo, the Royals have to play a different game than against a pitcher that makes mistakes and isn’t dominating. Small ball is a tool. Team scored five runs last night with only a double for an extra base hit.
For those wondering about Jon Sanchez last night, I visited Brooks Baseball and three things jumped out: Sanchez couldn’t hit the strike zone, he couldn’t throw his fastball for strikes, and his velocity decayed from 91 to 88 over the course of the game. His offspeed stuff also slowed down. Was he trying to adjust to hit the ‘zone or is there a fatigue issue? Don’t know. From what I saw on highlights, his stuff was staying a little flat, not a lot of down on the pitches. The charts also suggested great difficulty in throwing a strike on the first and second pitch, a recipe for disaster.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year agoJim F -
We were third in MLB (second in the AL) in stolen base attempts last year. This isn’t a complaint about how we approach the very best pitchers 5 or 6 times a year. It’s a complaint about how we play over 162 games.
Jim Wilson
1 year ago“Here’s a good thought experiment.
If you had control over a baseball team that hit 150 HRs and 250 doubles, and you had the power to make that 100 HRs and 350 doubles, (holding all the rates of HBP, BB, 1B and 3B constant) would you make that trade?”
Turning 50 outs into doubles and 50 homers into doubles? Yes, I would do that.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago“If we’re a good slugging team (and we are), it doesn’t particularly matter whether the slugging is coming from 2 doubles or 1 home run”
9th in SLG, 21st in HR, 22nd in R, best in K%, 25th in BB%(just below the Tigers and Orioles). Two doubles in an inning is good, but we don’t seem to get that a lot. The homer does score the run. Braves are the top scoring team and don’t stand out in any one stat besides runs and ribbies, so maybe timing is everything.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoIt’s early. The Cards lead in RPG (played one less than the Braves) and also lead in OBP. For full years, if you run team stats on runs and then on OBP, they line up close to the same every time. When I talk about OBP, I’m talking on a team basis just for that reason. It’s amazing what not making outs will do.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year agoJim W -
I would too - in a heartbeat. For a given slugging percentage, I’d always take the team that achieves it with more doubles and fewer home runs. But I gather that many people here would not.
Jim F -
I don’t put a lot of stock in five weeks of statistics, but to your point on the Braves, I assume that timing evens out over the season (or longer), and I don’t think teams can do much to control it anyway. Over the long run, I think it’s basically just the quality of hitters a team has and the degree to which they help or hurt themselves on the bases.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoYes, in a heartbeat. OBP up, slugging the same. OBP is the better correlation to runs scored and I’ve still got the same SLG (power). Duh.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago“5 or 6 times a year. It’s a complaint about how we play over 162 games.”
We face good pitchers more often than five or six times, already have seen Verlander twice, Weaver once, and my suggestion is that small ball isn’t the only tool used, although sometimes, like last night and the night before, it’s the only tool available.
“help or hurt themselves on the bases.”
According to BsR the Royals are between the two LA teams and 1.2 runs behind the Tigers and 1.6 runs behind Cleveland.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year agoJim F -
I understood Lee to be saying that small ball is a tool we want to use every game (including last night) but are unable to when we get behind. It sounds like you’re advocating for a different strategy, which is one I’d be much more amenable to.
Also, BsR only looks at extra bases taken and outs made by base runners on balls in play. It does not include stolen bases. If you inlcude our stolen bases (and pickoffs), we’ll drop in the rankings.
KC Guy
1 year ago“If you had control over a baseball team that hit 150 HRs and 250 doubles, and you had the power to make that 100 HRs and 350 doubles, (holding all the rates of HBP, BB, 1B and 3B constant) would you make that trade?”
It’s a pretty easy answer in basic terms — you’re adding 50 extra-base hits in the second scenario. But, at the same time, you’re taking away 50+ automatic runs in the hope that 50 extra doubles results in more. You could hit all of those doubles and potentially never score any runs. So, while it might seem pretty clear-cut, at least when you hit the HRs, you have guaranteed runs..
Jim Wilson
1 year agoIt’s one hundred doubles.
You are offered the following deal (which you can accept up to 50 times): With Alex Gordon at bat (1) receive $1 regardless of the outcome or (2)get $4 if Alex Gordon gets on base (OBP .365). You could take option 2 and potentially never get a dollar. At least if you pick option 1 you are guaranteed $50. KC Guy, that’s your argument in a nutshell. Brendan and I will choose option 2.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoSorry, to clarify what is hopefully obvious, in option 2 if Alex Gordon does not get on base you get nothing.
KC Guy
1 year agoScenario 1: 400 extra base hits Scenario 2: 450 extra base hits
It’s trading 50 home runs for doubles, and adding 50 doubles on top of it.
So, sure, I would take an extra 50 extra-base hits if that’s the question. But, in real life, they may not amount to anything. Take it for what it’s worth..
Jim Wilson
1 year agoAh, now I understand where the 50 comes from.
The point is to pick the scenario that gives you the best chance of success (most likely scores more runs). While it is “possible” that 100 doubles would result in zero runs the probability of that happening is, I would guess, close to zero. I also would guess that you cannot find a team in the history of MLB that had 100 doubles in a season that did not result in a single run. That would be some incredibly bad luck. It’s also “possible” that 100 doubles results in 400 runs. (Same for 50 homeruns.)
I looked at several studies (Brendan will know more than me) and it appears that doubles are valued at about 0.75 runs and homeruns at 1.40 runs. So it’s closer than I would have expected.
KC Guy
1 year agoUsing those figures, it’s almost identical (I assume that’s why Brandon picked those numbers). In that case, then, I would take the extra HRs. Those are runs on the board. A team’s W/L record doesn’t care how well they hit throughout the course of a season — it only cares how they did in individual games.
KC Guy
1 year agoErr, sorry, typo…didn’t mean to slight Brendan by misspelling his name..
Jim Wilson
1 year agoIf the numbers are right, it would be reasonable to pick the largest number. Fangraphs has it at .77 runs for a double and 1.39 for a HR. Or 7 or 8 runs over the course of a season.
KC Guy, if I ever buy a casino, you will be at the top of my guest list.
KC Guy
1 year agoThanks. I appreciate the free drinks most of all.
Kurt Vancil
1 year agoI too would take the 2nd option (100 doubles over 50 homers). I believe a team would score more runs with the extra doubles (plus it puts a man on second which puts pressure on the defense and not-so-smart managers would sometimes give us a free base runner to keep the double play open…)
I don’t have a problem with the idea that “small-ball” is useful because it absolutely can win you some ball games, but I do not think the Royals are a “small-ball” team and I think stating that they are is slighting their offensive ability. We can put up a lot of runs when the offense is clicking. If Hosmer and Frenchy start to find holes and Moose, Gordon and Butler continue to hit that is a recipe for runs (with doubles and/or homers). Our offense is much much better than it has been in some time. We are no longer batting Bloomquist in the cleanup spot or Ken Harvey or Calvin Pickering or Ross Gload or Aaron Guiel and Tony Pena Jr. is long gone too. Those were some teams that absolutely had to be good as small ball in order to compete.
The other problem I have with this notion about trying to win with pitching, defense and small-ball is that the first ingredient (pitching) is by far the most important. And right now our pitching is atrocious. I have no theory on why - it just stinks (its so bad I am wondering if Kyle Davies is available… just kidding, maybe). I read that our starters are averaging under 5 innings a game. Just think about how bad that is. If we are trying to win with pitching and putting up a few runs a game we will have a lousy year. I honestly think our offense can score with the Yankees, Red Sox, etc. because we have great talent.
Also - Will Middlebrooks is not expensive and he hit two homers last night.
That ends my rambling. Hoping Duffy pitches well tonight. He is the only starter we currently have (on MLB roster) that I think will be with the Royals if/when we contend.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoI’m hoping Paulino will prove to be worthy of a number 4 or 5 starter. Hoch maybe in the pen. That’s about it.
Jim Wilson
1 year agoYes, the free drinks are like runs on the board.