Can the Royals win the AL Central?
by Peter Bendix on Dec 29, 2008 3:40 PM EST
Email
PrintIn this space, I have been quite critical of the Royals this offseason – from the Coco Crisp trade to the Mike Jacobs deal to the Kyle Farnsworth signing, I disagreed with the direction that the team was heading. In short, I believed that the Royals were being short-sighted, and making moves designed to aspire to mediocrity, rather than long-term success.
I more or less still believe this to be true: it’s not that moves such as the Coco Crisp trade were bad in a vacuum, but they represented only short-term marginal upgrades, not enough to get the Royals into contention in a year or two, and not enough to give them long-term hope of contending.
That being said, I want to examine the question: can the Royals win the AL Central in 2009?
This idea is not a preposterous as it may first seem. The Central was relatively weak in 2008 and is poised to be underwhelming again in 2009. Last year, the White Sox won the division and also had the most third-order wins of any team in the division, posting a third-order record of 88-75. The Royals finished last, with a respectable third-order record of 76-86. The 12 game difference between the first place and last place teams was by far the smallest difference of all of the divisions in baseball. Furthermore, the division looks like it will be tightly bunched again in 2009: there are no teams that stand out as being awful, and there are no teams that could claim to be elite, either.
In 2008, the Royals were poor at run prevention, but not awful. Although their 4.48 team ERA ranked 22nd in baseball, they weren’t far off from the 16th place team, which had a 4.36 ERA. The Royals actually had the 12th best Park Adjusted Defensive Efficiency in baseball, despite running David DeJesus and Joey Gathright out in center field; replacing them with Coco Crisp should help their defense considerably.
Furthermore, the Royals were 25th in runs scored, thanks in large part to a pathetic .320 team OBP, tied for fourth-worst in baseball. Ironically, the Royals publically stated their need for more OBP and traded for Mike Jacobs (and his .299 OBP) soon afterwards. However, even though Jacobs is probably not going to top a .320 OBP next year, he will likely be an improvement over Ross Gload, who hit .273/.317/.348 in 388 at bats at first base last year. If the Royals turn to young slugger Kila Ka’aihue, who posted an MLE of .243/.392/.443 last year, they could see further production from their first base position.
Billy Butler is also a good bet for improvement, as the 22-year-old hit .275/.324/.400 last year but is probably better than that (his minor league track record is immaculate, and after being recalled from the minors on June 28 Butler hit .284/.320/.444 over the rest of the season this year).
Mike Aviles is very likely to decline, but could remain a solid shortstop, and even a decline from Aviles should make the Royals be awfully glad that they got rid of Tony Pena Jr., who hit an incredibly bad .169/.189/.209 last year (I don’t know what’s more amazing – that Pena was that bad, or that Pena received 225 at bats despite being that bad).
As my colleague David Golebiewski wrote over at RotoGraphs, Alex Gordon is also a good bet to improve in 2009. Additionally, after being the beneficiary of some good luck in 2007, Brian Bannister was afflicted with some bad luck in 2008; Bannister’s 5.56 tRA* doesn’t exactly inspire visions of grandeur in his future, but suggests that Bannister may be able to improve upon his abysmal 5.76 ERA.
Additionally, Luke Hochevar may be better than his 2008 indicated as well: although Hochevar posted a 5.01 ERA, it was accompanied by a 4.98 tRA* (which translates to an ERA of around 4.58). Again, not amazing, but better than 2008.
Finally, the Royals will benefit from playing in the AL Central. None of their competitors is likely to be among the league’s elite, as each has significant question marks about their team. It’s very possible that the 87-88 wins could win the division. If you assume that the Royals are somewhere around a 78-win team right now, it only takes one or two surprise performances and/or a little luck to get that number up to 87 wins.
The key to the Royals having a legitimate chance of contending in 2009 is threefold: they need their players to perform well (and need something somewhat unexpected to happen, like Billy Butler breaking out); they need to outplay their Pythagorean record (although probably not by that much), and they need other teams in the division to perform relatively poorly (in other words, they need everyone to be under 90 wins). While each of these elements is unlikely, it’s not altogether unreasonable that the Royals could contend for the division in 2009.
40 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Correction- The Royals 2nd to last, with a respectable third-order record of 76-86.
Detroit was last
Actually, no.
The Tigers had a third-order record of 79-83.
by Peter Bendix on Dec 29, 2008 4:13 PM EST up reply actions
The article is little confusing there ...
… if he means 3rd order wins or not.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Dec 29, 2008 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry about that...
I meant that the Royals had the worst third-order record in the division. I also meant that the difference between the first place team and last place team in the Central was the smallest difference – according to third-order record – in baseball.
by Peter Bendix on Dec 29, 2008 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
I'd love the Royals to win
or at least seriously compete in the division. However, I wonder whether some of the assumptions about the division overall might be suspect. I seem to remember last year that the Central was foreseen to be a very tough division but that the Tigers with all their new spending would ultimately blow everyone else away.
As it turned out, all that was wrong. The Tigers sucked and the division proved not to be a very tough division.
I may not be much, but I've got great intangibles.
According to whom?
I know what you mean, and I agree that the assumptions about the other teams could be wrong. But please don’t lump me in with “others” who assumed that the Central was going to be tough last year (even though I did expect the Tigers to be far better than they were…).
by Peter Bendix on Dec 29, 2008 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
Nope...
In the interest of full disclosure, my macro picture of the AL Central was correct (five teams bunched closely together, nobody great and nobody awful), and my micro picture was dead wrong (I had Cleveland/Detroit switched with Minnesota/Chicago).
by Peter Bendix on Dec 29, 2008 4:52 PM EST up reply actions
isn't a tightly bunched division by definition a tough one?
i guess maybe we’re defining ‘tough’ in different ways.
Good point.
Like you said, it depends on how we define “tough.” I’d argue that the East is far tougher than the Central, even though more teams in the Central seemingly have a chance of winning the division…
by Peter Bendix on Dec 29, 2008 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
Not meaning
you specifically. I just recall that being sort of the “general wisdom”. Perhaps it was from the sports media, umm, ESPN.
I may not be much, but I've got great intangibles.
Well reasoned and well written
I have been quite critical of the Royals this offseason – from the Coco Crisp trade to the Mike Jacobs deal to the Kyle Farnsworth signing, I disagreed with the direction that the team was heading. In short, I believed that the Royals were being short-sighted, and making moves designed to aspire to mediocrity, rather than long-term success.
As a Royals fan who isn’t knee-jerk negative about the moves the Royals and Dayton Moore makes, you are exactly right.
As far as winning the Central, I think the Royals are likely to be about an 81-win team in 2009. The Royals would need significant breakouts from two of Butler, Gordon and Hochevar and avoid injuries to key players to win much more than that. While the teams in the AL Central aren’t great, there are multiple pretty good teams. So beating the Indians, Twins and Tigers will be no cake walk. So I think 85 wins is unlikely and I still think that wouldn’t win the Central.
The immoderate moderator
If the Royals just focus on becoming an 81-win team
Then the next thing they know, they may have won the division.
Eye-opening post, by the way.
Well, I'll appreciate for you to keep my zingers out of your mouth!
what about the Central Champions?
Chopped liver? ;)
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 29, 2008 9:00 PM EST up reply actions
In my opinion, yes
I think they overachieved in 2008 and the offseason moves have made the 2009 team worse.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 29, 2008 9:04 PM EST up reply actions
Overachieved how?
There wasn’t a whole lot flukish about them, and guys like Floyd being lucky was overcast by Swisher and Vazquez being awfully unlucky. They had a third order win record that mirrored their first 162 games, IIRC. They have lost nothing in production that is irreplaceable from last season. It doesn’t matter, though, because either way they’re always counted out.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 31, 2008 12:33 AM EST up reply actions
They have lost nothing in production that is irreplaceable from last season.
Who is it that is replacing Vazquez? I’m sorry but the loss of Vazquez and the aging of your offensive core and the fall back to reality from Floyd is going to make the White Sox considerably worse. That team really did overachieve. It significantly overperformed projections and reality likely awaits the 2009 team.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 31, 2008 2:16 AM EST up reply actions
"overperformed projections"
that’s a rather poor way to judge actual performance. or project future performance, for that matter.
Aviles is very likely to decline...
But even the declined-version of Aviles is going to be an upgrade at shortstop, since the Royals wasted over 200 at bats on Tony Pena Jr. last year.
by Peter Bendix on Dec 30, 2008 9:47 AM EST up reply actions
I still have a big mancrush on Gordon
So I’d like the Royals to win the AL Central, but the world might explode if that happens.
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
The answer is no...
They’ll be better, but the answer is still no. The Twins are going to be 85+ wins almost by default, and, if things go right, the White Sox and Tigers have the explosive potential that the Royals don’t, and you have to figure one of them will be up there. I think the Indians have a slim chance this year, but they also have the strongest young talent, IMO. If their offense comes back together, and their rotation holds, they have the potential to be explosive. Of course, the Royals have a chance, but I’m not lead to be a strong believer. Baby steps are key for them, as they don’t have the pure talent the Rays had, and I don’t see them pulling out an 07 Rockies either.
The White Sox have explosive potential how?
Paul Konerko, Jermaine Dye, Jim Thome?
Dude, in baseball terms they’re older than John McCain
Dye will be traded, Thome started the season cold and will continue to decline and PK is PuKe
Besides the scoreboard shooting an occasional firework from/for Carlos Quentin/Alexi Ramirez
nothing else in the dreaded southside will be explosive. (Well, not in baseball terms at least.)
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy."
- Dodgers, Astros, Brewers, A's & Angels pitcher Don Sutton
those are overstatements
Jim Thome is a lock for the HOF, that’s nothing anyone on the Cubs right now could say really. they still have Quienten and Danks, two truely good young players.
However, I think the general premise that the WhiteSox is unlikely to be better in 09 is quiet accurate, they were fairly healthy last year. and overachieved a bit, most noteablly their pitching staff, now that Vazquez is gone it’s Danks / Floyd / Contreras / Buerhle and ??? the 08 White Sox were a lot like the 05 version (and the 08 Rays) that their first 5 guys were remarkablly healthy, averaging over 30 starts. that just doesn’t happen too often in baseball. and now with Vazquez gone it’s even less likely. I see a major collaspe in their starting pitching next year, with Floyd being a bit flukey to begin with, Danks good but also a injury risk. Contreras already on his last legs and Buerhle being the only somewhat reliable guy in the mix.
Yes Jim Thome will be a HOFer but
He is on the decline
not an overstatement
BTW
Thome will enter the Hall as an Indian
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy."
- Dodgers, Astros, Brewers, A's & Angels pitcher Don Sutton
Right
something that hasn’t happened and has no recent indication of happening is a sure thing; Thome started the season cold, so they’re doomed to failure in the future; Konerko is PuKe. Very convincing argument, but I’ll stick to listening to people without misguided reasoning and complexes of… inferiority, superiority, I can never tell.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 31, 2008 12:37 AM EST up reply actions
Perhaps the most dangerous thing is the team thinking they have a chance
Then they might behave like the Mariners last winter.
Of course the Royals have a younger core than Seattle did, so things will hopefully look up over the next few years, but going all in too early can be as bad as waiting too long.
by Dan Turkenkopf on Dec 29, 2008 10:24 PM EST reply actions
Thinking you have a chance to win is bad
Wow! Tell that to Joe Madden
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy."
- Dodgers, Astros, Brewers, A's & Angels pitcher Don Sutton
and Joe Maddon
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy."
- Dodgers, Astros, Brewers, A's & Angels pitcher Don Sutton
That team didn't succeed because they thought they could win
They won because they had a hell of a lot of talent, and the manager and GM recognized how much talent they had. Dan is right that a team that thinks it is close but isn’t close is in serious danger of making stupid win-now moves that aren’t enough to actually win now and end up hurting the team over the longer term. Thankfully although Moore’s moves this offseason have been, on balance, stupid, he hasn’t mortgaged the future.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 30, 2008 1:08 AM EST up reply actions
I agree DMGM has not mortgaged the future
I like the additions
This team has enough young/key pieces to win 80+ games
which just might be enough to compete in this division
San Diego Chargers? I know different sport but the division is up for grabs!
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy."
- Dodgers, Astros, Brewers, A's & Angels pitcher Don Sutton
The answer is yes
The question is not will the Royals win the division, but can they win the division.
They sure can. I made a serious/goofy post last month that’s its realistic to think that they can win an extra 15 games to win the Central. (goofy info..ie Jacobs playing third.. DH/1B just a log jam…..)
But on a serious note, it may not even take 15 games maybe just 10-12. I agree with you, there is no clear favorite. A clutter division with no smash mouth leader. I like the moves GMDM has made and he is not done yet with off season moves & I hope he adds a couple of more vets to join this young talented team. With a couple of break outs this season and avoid bad-streaks like last season, KC will contend.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy."
- Dodgers, Astros, Brewers, A's & Angels pitcher Don Sutton
The trick for me is to compare what has really changed and what SHOULD change.
In the outfield you replace Joey Gathrights and Teahens offense with Crisp’s numbers and DDJ’s and Teahens defense with Crisps glove. If Crisp can return to his pre-injury form in offensive output, its not hard to see the royals gaining a win or two there.
At third Alex Gordon should improve, his post-ASB numbers being MUCH better(especially against lefties), resulting in half a win.
At SS, I don’t think people realize just how bad Pena was. How bad was he you ask? Well if we assume Aviles would have maintained similar offensive and defensive numbers(not that big of a stretch) then the diffrence between the players was 5 wins during the time Pena played. yes you read that right FIVE WINS! Even a 10% drop in production from Aviles still puts the royals up 2-3 wins next year.
At second the royals replaced a slap happy .300/.340/.420 defensivly adequite 2b with….a slap happy .300/.360/.430 defensivly adequite 2b. its practically a push. The best thing Callaspo brings to the table is that he will never ever strike out.
At first the Royals replace Ross Gload with Mike Jacobs. Although a lot of people didnt like this trade, again I dont think people realize just how bad Ross Gload was and are over emphasizing how bad Mike Jacobs is on D. (Stop for a second. go check out the defensive numbers for Jacobs and Uggla the last couple of years. go on. now you realize that last year, Uggla went from well below average 2b to almost average, while Jacobs went from below average to awful. So is Jacobs that bad, or did he just have a {caution incoming made up stat} unlucky defensive babip last year?)
At C the royals replace the catching tandem of Buck and Olivo with the tandem of …Olivo and Buck. Nothing will change Olivo will rock lefties like always and K like crazy against righties. Buck will be Buck.
As for their starters, Greinke should improve benefiting the most from Crisp in the outfield. Meche will be much better. (little known fact: Meche was actually the better pitcher after the second week of May posting a sub 3.2 ERA from then till the end of the season. A Horrific april weighed down his numbers, if Gil can stay consistent, then the royals could have one of the best 1-2 tandems in the league.) #3 should be Davies, who if he repeats september, could be the best pickup of DM’s career. Hoch and banny should improve. Wouldnt be too suprised to see Rosa or Cortez given a cup of coffee in Sept.
The bullpen is where the team lives or dies, and more importantly it lives or dies on Farnsworth. IF! he can become the pitcher he should have been, and replace Ram-ram, then their set. Otherwise the royals are going to have to turn to either Rosa, Musser, or Bale to solidify that spot…At the cost of time and money.
Right now I’d say this team is sitting at about 85 wins. With a breakout from Butler, hoch, banny or Gordon, this team could push 90 wins.
Overall I’d have to say I’m happy with Daytons offseason. He did little to improve this teams longterm (2010+) prospects, but also did nothing to hinder them, while putting the team in a position to succed.
I refuse to set up a signature....DAMMIT
More on Pena vs Aviles
Pena as regular Royal’s record: 23-37
Aviles as regular, Royal’s record: 52-50
by Jeff Zimmerman on Dec 30, 2008 10:44 AM EST up reply actions
At first I thought 90 wins were needed but
I think 87-89 wins will be enough to win the Central
Royals still need another veteran or two.
I would love another solid bat in this line up and a veteran 4 or 5th starter
Like the Brad Penny deal…
Nice to dream but maybe not enough funds at the moment
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy."
- Dodgers, Astros, Brewers, A's & Angels pitcher Don Sutton
Pitching pitching pitching
September’s 18-8 is the model for this team. Remember, Meche Greinke and Davies were each 4-1. The rest of the ball club was 6-5. IF those big three each take the ball thirty plus times and post sub 4.0 ERAs then this team gets very interesting very fast.
If Banny can be league average and/or Luke pops then yes they will contend post-Labor Day.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Beyond the Box Score
Related FanShots on Beyond the Box Score
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow us on Twitter!
BTB: @BtBScore
Justin: @justinbopp
Satchel: @SatchelPrice
J-Doug: @RationalPastime
Daniel: @CamdenCrazies
Peter: @CapitolAvenue
Josh: @garik16
Julian: @splashinpumpkin
Matt: @devil_fingers
Bill: @BillPetti
JD: @JDSussman
Lucas: @DBITLefty
Jeff: @jeffwzimmerman
Lewis: @LewsOnFirst
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
