GO ROYALS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bobbyhawks]

I found a strange metric that is an interesting way of measuring the recent trade that isn't really fair, but I think could eventually shed some light on the value traded here. If you compare the inputs we got (Shields and Davis) to the production of Gil Meche for 5 years, $55 million (exactly what it would cost us to pay for Shields' 2 years and Davis' 5 years), the combined efforts of Shields and Davis will have to amount to 616 and 2/3 innings with a 4.28 ERA to be as good of a deal before you consider the loss of Myers and other prospects. So, five or so years from now, it will be interesting to look at the difference in productivity. Myers and all of the other Royals prospects could be terrible, and the deal would still be bad in comparison if those two don't amount to Meche's productivity.

[aknowledgeableperson]

the trade is still worth it if Davis is the lynchpin of a WS-winning pitching staff even after Shields leaves, but given Davis's track record, that seems even less likely than Shields hoisting the trophy as a Royal.

Just curious. Where is it written that Shields will leave the Royals after 2 years? Yes, he will be a free agent isn't is possible for him and the Royals to come to an agreement?

[smh]

It is known.

[KansasCityCraka]

Shields has said he is interested in a long term contract if the Royals are.

[NKC]

Shields is owed $21 million over the next two years. I wonder if be would extend that out to a third year if we bump him up for the next two years as well. If the Royals want to extend Shields they should do it now. If he puts up the same numbers for another year there is no chance the Royals will be able to afford him.

[chaglang]

the trade is still worth it if Davis is the lynchpin of a WS-winning pitching staff even after Shields leaves, but given Davis's track record, that seems even less likely than Shields hoisting the trophy as a Royal.

Just curious. Where is it written that Shields will leave the Royals after 2 years? Yes, he will be a free agent isn't is possible for him and the Royals to come to an agreement?

It's written in David Glass's checkbook. The cheapness that drove this deal will also cause Shields to leave.

[knucklehead]

there are basically two possible scenarios.

Shields does great - at which point his market value is $20 million a year at age 33. Don't see the Royals paying that.

Or, Shields does mediocre to bad, then who cares if he resigns or not.

[phuqueue]

the trade is still worth it if Davis is the lynchpin of a WS-winning pitching staff even after Shields leaves, but given Davis's track record, that seems even less likely than Shields hoisting the trophy as a Royal.

Just curious. Where is it written that Shields will leave the Royals after 2 years? Yes, he will be a free agent isn't is possible for him and the Royals to come to an agreement?

It's not impossible, but when is the last time the Royals retained a marquee free agent at market price? They've had these deals where they've bought out the first couple years of free agency when the price was still relatively low, eg Greinke, Gordon, Perez, etc, pretty sure that's even what they did with Mike Sweeney way back when, but when's the last time they retained a guy who was at that moment a free agent who was as highly sought after as Shields is likely to be (assuming he doesn't suddenly lose his stuff, get injured, etc)? If they manage to extend or re-sign him, the deal isn't as bad as it stands right now, but I don't see any reason to assume they're going to be able to pull that off.

[phuqueue]

Not to keep beating a dead horse, but this hits the nail on the head

This trade makes them more likely to reach the playoffs next season and possibly in 2014, too, depending on how quickly Myers comes into his own, but it seemingly lowers their ceiling in 2015 and beyond, even with Davis signed through 2017. The Royals won the prospect lotto, but instead of opting for the annual annuity that could have kept them in contention as regularly as the Rays, they chose to receive the lump sum and splurge. Even when they aimed high, they set their sights low.

* * *

it looks like the Royals have imposed some limitations on their own success, despite having already demonstrated a knack for keeping their pre-arb pipeline flowing.

* * *

But whatever Myers is, he wouldn’t have been redundant on the Royals’ roster. Moore might not agree that Francoeur was last season’s least valuable player, but he’d probably agree that Myers is likely to be both cheaper and more productive than Francoeur by the end of 2013, when Frenchy will be a free agent. (If the best minor leaguer isn’t at least as good as the worst major leaguer, then there’s something wrong with replacement level.) The Royals’ roster is skewed toward position players, but as Sam pointed out on the podcast today, a run scored is roughly as valuable as a run saved, and the boost from [insert Royals rotation candidate here] to Shields might not be much bigger than the one from Francoeur to Myers, especially after this season.

(emphasis mine)

The article also goes on to discuss how the Royals win the trade if they "out-Rays" the Rays, which is to say if Myers, like Delmon Young before him, ends up fizzling. It covers a lot of the same ground I already have, but Baseball Prospectus is probably a more credible source than a guy on a message board.

[KCMax]

the trade is still worth it if Davis is the lynchpin of a WS-winning pitching staff even after Shields leaves, but given Davis's track record, that seems even less likely than Shields hoisting the trophy as a Royal.

Just curious. Where is it written that Shields will leave the Royals after 2 years? Yes, he will be a free agent isn't is possible for him and the Royals to come to an agreement?

It isn't known, but at that point the Royals will have the same opportunity to get Shields as if they would had they never given up Myers. So I don't see how it factors into things unless Shields signs an extension before he reaches FA which seems rather unlikely, although not impossible.

[chaglang]

Bo's top 5 similarity scores:
1.Jay Bruce (957)
2.Carlos Quentin (957)
3.Jonny Gomes (939)
4.Nick Esasky (938)
5.Nelson Cruz (935)

[KCMax]

Bo's top 5 similarity scores:
1.Jay Bruce (957)
2.Carlos Quentin (957)
3.Jonny Gomes (939)
4.Nick Esasky (938)
5.Nelson Cruz (935)

Funny you post that, I've read Jay Bruce listed as a comp for Wil Myers a lot this week. Very good, not great corner outfielder who strikes out a lot, but has 25-30 HR potential.

[bobbyhawks]

Bo's top 5 similarity scores:
1.Jay Bruce (957)
2.Carlos Quentin (957)
3.Jonny Gomes (939)
4.Nick Esasky (938)
5.Nelson Cruz (935)

Funny you post that, I've read Jay Bruce listed as a comp for Wil Myers a lot this week. Very good, not great corner outfielder who strikes out a lot, but has 25-30 HR potential.

K's are bad, and potentially an indication of weakness to a certain type of pitch or of bad pitch identification. Still, I think it is funny that some old school people would rather have a guy that is constantly hitting ground balls than a guy with extra base potential who strikes out, yet is on base just as much. If your OBP is good, I don't see why your K's should be an issue. Ground balls increase the likelihood of double plays. I'd rather a guy have the same OBP and strikeout more than ground out, though I'd almost always like to have a guy with a higher OBP regardless of what his biggest flaw is. You could do worse than Adam Dunn, Darryl Strawberry, Reggie Jackson, Jim Thome, Dale Murphy, Andruw Jones, or Curtis Granderson. Heck, Alex Gordon struck out a lot, and he had the second best OPS on the team by 101 points.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Ground balls increase the likelihood of double plays. I'd rather a guy have the same OBP and strikeout more than ground out,

A strikeout with no one one is the same as a groundout. However a groundout with a runner on can advance a runner a base or score a runner from 3rd, something a strikeout cannot.

[pash]

.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Now that MLB has computed 2012 salary costs for the season the Royals ended up with payroll costs of $83,462,428. Amount computed y the following:

Figures are for 40-man rosters and include the average annual values of contracts and $10,799,590 per club for benefits and extended benefits, which include items such as health and pension benefits; club medical costs; insurance; workman's compensation, payroll, unemployment and Social Security taxes; spring training allowances; meal and tip money; All-Star game expenses; travel and moving expenses; postseason pay; and college scholarships.

Salaries include earned incentive bonuses, non-cash compensation, buyouts of unexercised options and cash transactions. In some cases, parts of salaries that are deferred are discounted to reflect present-day values.

[knucklehead]

Detroit resigned Anibal Sanchez for five years for $80 million.

Since he resigned with his current team, Royals would probably have had to throw in at least $5 million more.

Should the Royals have given him $17 million a year? I say no. that is too high.

[KCMax]

Now that MLB has computed 2012 salary costs for the season the Royals ended up with payroll costs of $83,462,428. Amount computed y the following:

Figures are for 40-man rosters and include the average annual values of contracts and $10,799,590 per club for benefits and extended benefits, which include items such as health and pension benefits; club medical costs; insurance; workman's compensation, payroll, unemployment and Social Security taxes; spring training allowances; meal and tip money; All-Star game expenses; travel and moving expenses; postseason pay; and college scholarships.

Salaries include earned incentive bonuses, non-cash compensation, buyouts of unexercised options and cash transactions. In some cases, parts of salaries that are deferred are discounted to reflect present-day values.

Where are you getting that number from? This says $68 million - 26th in baseball.

Oakland was dead last in payroll, yet won 94 games.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/2140 ... l-30-teams

[phuqueue]

Oakland was dead last in payroll, yet won 94 games.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/2140 ... l-30-teams

Luckily the Royals have wisely chosen to invest their limited funds in Hochevar and Francoeur (and twice upon a time, in Betancourt), who combined last season for 5.6 wins below replacement level (and the replacement level guy would only have made league minimum).

[KCMax]

Detroit resigned Anibal Sanchez for five years for $80 million.

Since he resigned with his current team, Royals would probably have had to throw in at least $5 million more.

Should the Royals have given him $17 million a year? I say no. that is too high.

I agree.

However the contracts signed by Ryan Dempster, Brandon McCarthy, and the rumored deal Edwin Jackson is close to signing are all quite reasonable. Had the Royals topped any of those deals I think that would have been a far better move than trading for Shields or Santana or signing Guthrie.