hey, I love the world-view of saber guys who can't help but to judge things by their favorite pet stats:

Rob: Okay, okay, you’ve convinced me! I actually didn’t realize how well Hernandez had pitched in his career, though his strikeout rate does ring a few alarm bells, no? As a major leaguer, he’s struck out 5.04 batters per nine innings. And as I’m sure you know, it’s the rare major leaguer who can pitch effectively for long with that sort of K-rate.

I’m not saying this particular pitcher can’t do it, because of course I’m an Eternal Optimist. And K’s or no K’s, he probably does deserve that spot in the rotation (though I think Mike Wood might be just as qualified). But I’ve got a hard time believing that, long term, Hernandez has any sort of star potential.

wow, it's tough to predict a guy is not going to become a big star in the major leagues, huh? since it's so common and all.. mr. neyer has risen again to bring us this supreme nugget of wisdom: he'd rather see a pitcher strike out more guys per game! incisive! let's see, rob and company don't like low strike out rates, they don't like low doubles/triples/home runs percentage, they like guys that get on base a lot...well, goddamn why don't we just go out and get those high strike-out, power-hitting fellas? oh, wait, that's what every team in history has looked for in an effort to get better. you mean dominant strike-out guys aren't prevalent in MLB? you're telling me high-powered on-base machines don't come cheap in the age of extreme disparities among teams in the major leagues? teams don't take risks and draft guys like, oh, colt griffin and roscoe crosby in the hopes of enjoying the rare talents of those guys that actually have the ability to be the type of dominant player everyone -- stat guys and, um, "other" guys -- enjoy watching? you'd think every team would stock themselves up with power guys, instead of relying on an old low-strikeout mule like hernandez.

it's easy to play saber-baseball in the comfort of your computer screen, but you have to remember that every "good" draft pick becomes a success after the fact, and every team can't pick the "good" ones ahead of time. so, while every saber guy can wish for a high-strikeout pitcher to compliment your high OBP, slugging 3rd baseman, you have to remember that you've had scouts out there trying to find the best possible player at whatever position at every point in the scouting process. and, please don't think that finding a guy that can crush the ball and be selective at the plate, or throw strikes with every pitch and strike guys out at an amazing rate is an everyday thing. those guys are not available to every team, every year – it takes luck and/or money. there's not a high contingent of these "ultimate" players just waiting to join your team. so, in evaluating players, it's just as easy to take their saber-stat lines and project them as (mostly) nobodies and (a few) "prospective" stars as it is to scout players and draft them based on "potential" vs. "stats". basically, as much as the saber/stat contingent would like to believe they've corrupted the scouting area, I've really yet to be convinced that they've actually stumbled upon something that says anything different than what anybody with a bit of common sense already knows – basically, that good hitters will be able to look for good pitches, and that good pitchers will be able to take advantage of lesser-skilled batters. this is, obviously, complicated stuff. required all sorts of trigonometry and calculus-ish formulas. or, you know, common sense. this "sabermetric revolution" can calculate all the complicated formulas it wants, and all the numbers boil down to is commen-sense garbage that any intelligent baseball mind could comprehend: hitting = good. dominant pitching = good. ability to recognize strikes = good. ability to steal bases well = good (just now catching on with the saber-crowd). GOOD DEFENSE = good (though apparently, until the metrics are perfected, this is still a work in progress as far as being more that a sidenote in current discussions). numbers can tell you so much, but if you get caught up in them, you'll NEVER see the big picture. and, trust me, I love numbers as much as anyone. the problem is, you either get it or you don't. and, as much as numbers guys want to get it, some of them can't see outside of their own little sphere. baseball is not numbers itself, and if you can't appreciate an entirely different realm than just sabermetrics, you are missing out on half of the game.

until then, guys like runelvys hernandez will always be looked at questioningly, seeing as how the current pet stat says they probably won't ever be a star. and even if he were to become one, i'm sure someone would be quick to point out how his peripherals and assorted formulaic values show he's just "lucky" to succeed while defying whatever it is that's supposed to predict success these days..

the funniest thing i heard all weekend..

"bucknell".

anyway, a nice friday...especially nice since I took a day off of work to celebrate what are (especially being a royals/kansas city sports fans in general) the two best sports days of the year. yeah, a whole afternoon of drinking leftover stout from yesterday and watching NCAA tv on the couch. yesterday's tournament games were a little boring, but, I ain't complaining. I haven't actually entered a paid bracket contest for years, seeing as how I wouldn't want to ruin my one and only victory in the first one I ever entered like 10 years ago. I do fill out the free ones online, though – as far as my national espn/yahoo contest-type brackets: go washington! cause, if they win it all, I gotta say...I have a good chance of winning. over millions. otherwise: go bucknell.

anyway, I cracked open some stouts and cranked up the screeching weasel, so as I could bounce around the apartment while waiting for basketball to start..

as far as the royals: they still playing? are the mathematically eliminated yet? um, spring training, yeah yeah, some guys doing good, some guys not – you know the team's already set, right? but, anyway, the few "contests" going:

pickering vs. harvey: I really think they could use both of those guys. thing is, harvey's a fan favorite, due to being a little tubby and pretty jolly, plus providing some obscenely fortunate hits at very opportune times. thing is, putting a winning team on the field isn't exactly allard baird's #1 priority right now – see, you get rid of one of the only players actually recognizable to most standard royals "fans", and even more people will write off this team (apparent by the fact that, currently, 37% of the voters at kcroyals.com think that ken harvey should bat cleanup after mike sweeney, as opposed to 18% john buck, 19% calvin pickering, and 27% matt stairs. seriously, *any* of those guys should bat cleanup over harvey. I even like harvey – he's just not as good as any of our other 1st baseman candidates). obviously, winning will bring tons more people back, but I doubt calvin pickering alone would make this team more than it is. that said, he goddamn sure should be on this team. that whole "For every two he drives in, he's going to let in one" quote by allard is really, really stupid. first basemen catch throws from professional fielders most of the time, field actual ground balls and bad throws occasionally. I hope allard is not as dumb as that quote makes him sound. I don't know why the royals are averse to, you know, sluggers, but seeing as how, in the age of players with tree trunks posing as legs swinging at expansion-addled pitching staffs our club record home run total is less than half of the artificially-achieved single-season home run "record" – shit, can't we jump on the power bandwagon, too?

gotay vs. graffanino: graffanino is fine, gotay isn't going to ever be a superstar. honestly, for every person calling for gotay to replace graffanino at 2nd, you realize they're gonna be like the same player, right? and, with graffanino already under contract, you have to play him. plus, gotay just doesn't have that much power. he'll be a solid fielder with a decent bat – oh, right, like graffanino. if tony's hurt (again) though, there's no harm in having gotay start the season. and, for those worried about his "free agent" clock ticking – just hope he's still a major leaguer in six years, all right? that's the first concern.

5th starter: bautista vs. gobble vs. tankersley vs. wood vs. jensen vs. appier vs. george – bautista obviously has it. gobble will be up at some point when a starter gets injured, tankersley will be in AAA, wood will be in long relief, jensen will be the kris wilson of last year (always rumored to be coming up for an injured/ineffective starter after gobble), appier is done, and george is gone. it seems pretty obvious to me right now, anyway.

3rd base: teahen vs. truby – well, of course, truby's out with a broken wrist right now. teahen will start, won't be anything special, and, like gotay, you just hope he's even *in* the major leagues in 6 years as something more than a journeyman backup. hey, like truby! good thing we have one to replace another..

shortstop: blanco vs. berroa – why is this a contest? seriously, is this a joke amongst royals fans I'm just not following? blanco make flashy plays – so does berroa! blanco runs fans and hustles hard – so does berroa! blanco hits like shit – berroa can actually hit! I really don't understand why there's a comparison. blanco is wimpy. no one would give us shit in a trade for blanco. he can't possibly top berroa. I don't understand how this discussion is still happening.

outfield: guiel vs. nunez vs. brown – dee brown? whoops, no, emil brown. who? exactly. needs to prove something in the minor leagues. as in: 20 at-bats is not enough to judge a player. nunez? needs to prove something in the minor leagues. as in: has the guy ever proved anything. guiel? I don't mind guiel. I'd actually like to see him playing every day to begin this season. no, he'll probably never be a long-term solution, but I think he's proven enough to actually let him have a shot over a guy who is apparently physically more impressive (nunez) or fortunately lucky (brown). I don't understand why guiel didn't give everything he had to work during the offseason. I mean, really – especially after what happened last season:

“Even from my perspective,” Guiel admitted, “I feel like I probably should have gone to winter ball. Not because I feel like I needed it. Because I feel like they needed it. I don't regret it.”

no shit, aaron? you really kinda screwed yourself there. why would he not go? goddamn man – and I even want to root for you! bad, bad move.

other things: no reason at all to carry 12 pitchers. of course they will. terrence long? I really don't think he'll be that bad. the signing of matt stairs? kind of like carlos febles – the royals apparently like to sign guys that they hope will come back as coaches. fine for your minor league teams, I guess. not fine for the major league ones. matt stairs would be an effective guy, if he didn't clog up two different positions where you've brought in way too many players to play anyway.

last thing – local adult baseball league update:
I went to the local batting cages last weekend. pretty rough at first, considering I haven't actually swung at a fast pitch baseball in pretty much 10 years. I started in the 60 mph cage, and after the second set of pitches was hitting the ball pretty well, so I moved up to 80 mph. took a couple ridiculous misses before I actually started making better contact with the 80 mph balls than in the 60 mph cage. I went through 3 sets of 80's before I called it a day, but I'm pretty pleased with how I did the first time out. honestly, if these guys in the local nobody league can actually even throw 80, I'll be surprised. tryouts are a week from tomorrow – I'm pretty confident right now.

anyway, basketball's up and going – and that's all I got for now.

stoutly,

Joe Blow

wow, two weeks goes by like nothin', huh? stepping away from royal blues for a bit has brought about – um, has anything happened in royals land? same old, same old, I think. it is spring training, after all.

well, just to beat something into the ground first before I get to today's topic: are you thrilled with guy hansen's carefully crafted program for brian anderson yet? you know, the "take four months off, then throw together a delivery much different than you've been doing your entire professional life" thing? it seems there aren't many who really agree with me about this being a cause for concern, so hopefully it won't be. although Jeffrey flanagan's article about the previous problems with hansen, including the little editorial note about hansen's previous work ethic ("Naturally, there were whispers that Hansen should have been concentrating on his job description, which didn't include video making.") don't really speak too highly of his preparation skills. I'll just say, the results for mr. Anderson so far:

days missed due to a stiff neck: 2 ("It's probably from practicing my (new) delivery 10,000 times in the mirror,” anderson said. sounds like something to work on, oh, before you face actual batters, huh?)
IP: 4.0
ERA: 6.75
H: 4
BB: 4
K: 1

24 days to get good!

* * * * *

anyway, the thing that's caught my attention most so far this spring – it's probably not ever going to be "this guy has been GREAT in four innings!" or "this guy is hitless in his last seven at bats!" because, uh, 1-2 games worth of stats is exciting? – is the article yesterday where a couple of "royals" expressed their opinions of zack greinke's lame performance in a spring training game against the brewers. woo boy, that's news!

I mean, the nerve! experimenting with pitches during spring training! at least he knows how to do his wind-up at this point, right? honestly, it's sad that major league players are whining about playing in the 80 degree sun – "A complete waste of time" is how one "player" characterized it, obviously experiencing a brief moment of nostalgia for the awesome spectacle of last season – although that attitude is not surprising coming from a player. still, I'll always find it sad, considering that after accounting for all the time I spend at work all week, I actually think the idea of spending my free time catching fly balls in a completely meaningless game sounds like fun – that would certainly suck to get paid for it and all. of course, that's why 'ol Joe Blow's planning to try out for the local adult baseball league here in a couple weeks.

not that I've actually played competitive baseball in, oh, 10 years, but there is no goddamn way I'm going back to softball this year. and if these guys are anything like most of the guys that populate the local softball circuits – and all signs from the message board indicate they are – I'm content to sit out the summer parked next to the radio. anyway, as I'm sure you're now dying to know how it goes: I will keep you informed.

but enough of that – back to our point here, what's bothering me about this whole "coach! coach! greinke ain't tryin'!" thing the most is the reaction of the coaching staff itself. to read into it, here's a quote from greinke himself about talking to some veteran players:

"It's spring training. It doesn't really mean anything. But they told me they still like to see everyone give 100 percent. After talking to them, I know I can't go out there and just (experiment) anymore."

no, no, no! that is not a good attitude to instill in a young player. practicing during the offseason is one thing, but actually getting to face live hitters from a different team with an opportunity to work on techniques and ideas in a game situation is not something you have unlimited chances to do. from what I've read since he joined the organization, greinke seems to be the type that actually approaches the game with a plan in mind. he seems to realize that while possessing unusual abilities is what gets you to the major leagues, understanding the game and applying some thought and intelligence is what allows you to succeed. the problem with a lot of players – royals especially, it seems – is that they're either old, weak, or "tools guys". basically, most of the players either don't possess the abilities to succeed on talent alone, or they don't seem to understand how to play the game. hence, you end up with a team full of players that always end up out of position, throwing pitches that are expected, getting hit in the back with relay throws, etc. the pitchers don’t seem to grasp the philosophy of pitching, and the hitters always seem off-balance against every pitcher.

and I think it's players with ideas like the above that are the problem. you take a guy that tries to be ahead of the game, and whine to him that you don't like standing in the field while hitters hit the ball in spring training. shut up! and, what (finally) brings me to the coaching aspect is: these guys seem to (quietly) agree with the complaining!

allard baird:

"I don't think he wasn't competing," Baird said. “That would be an issue with me. I like the approach. I like the upper-echelon level of thinking for such a young man. That's great.
“But as you start to move to the next game, you want to see him throw a change-up that paints the black. That his fastball at that speed hits the spot. That you stay out of the middle of the plate.”

ok, ok, not bad. although I would also say, "no shit, allard!" at the same time. of course we have tony pena and guy hansen offering such dynamite information as "But he said he wanted to throw the ball down the middle to see if they could handle it. I guess they could.” and " “I think he stayed with that too long.” funny guys, those coaches. he obviously didn't expect to blow that shit by 'em, but nothing positive about his willingness to experiment is ever going to come out of these guys' mouths, you know?

unfortunately, what allard's done is, while not directly chastising greinke, thrown in that, "but…" and indirectly indicated that he didn't really like what he was doing at the same time. as in, "but, next game, he better do it different." the thing is, allard is the one that needs to celebrate his approach and not add any caveats. by saying nothing more than what he's said, he seems to be allowing the other players' complaints to stand as is. there's nothing wrong with experimenting, and the royals can't be afraid of acknowledging that. unfortunately, while lately they seem to be spouting more common-sense, intelligent approaches to their player selection and development, the royals will seemingly be forever behind the curve. this team needs just about everyone to take a different, thoughtful approach to the game, not a team full of guys trying to stop the ones that are. we need smarter players, and we need smarter characters in the front office that are able to identify them. it just doesn't seem that there's anybody in this organization that's a forward-thinker at all. what we get instead is a front-office desperately trying to keep up-to-date on what other organizations are doing, and a coaching staff built on cheerleading and "hunches".

but, hey, I hear we're working on teaching our catchers/first basemen to tag up from first and all.

thoughtfully,

Joe Blow