[Note by royalsreview, 01/08/09 3:17 PM EST ] From the Fanposts.

--

 

I am so tired of the popularity contest that MLB has become.  If I have to see any more Yankee ass kissing, I'm going to throw up.  The national media's blantant bias towards the Northeast and California is disgusting.  I know it's nothing new, but baseball writers and analyst continuealy defend the Yankees outrageous payroll by saying that there is still "competitve balance" in baseball regardless of how much money the large market teams spend.  Well that is just hogwash.  Do they honestly think that the other 25 teams and their fans are THIS stupid.  How many times have you heard this lately?   

"Over the past 4 years there have been 8 different teams in the world series.  That proves that there is competitive balance in baseball"

Thats a load of crap!  That stat means nothing. 

First off, 4 years is a small sample size.  Second, when small market times like the Rays make it to the world series, it's clearly the exception not the rule.  And third, it's called "COMPETITIVE Balance", not "world series balance".  You can't just make the leap that the entire league is competitve because different teams are making it to the WS.

Perhaps a more meaningful stat would be (someone has probably already done this) to rank all of the MLB teams by their average annual payroll over the last ten years.  Then, over the same ten year period, how many times did each team finish the season at .500 or better (defining "competitive" as being .500 or better).  Then compare the number "competitive" seasons that the top 8 payroll teams produced, to the number of competitive seasons that the bottom 8 payroll teams produced.  I'd bet that the top 8 payroll teams have had far far more competitve seasons.

There is no such thing as competitive balance in the current system.  It's insulting when the "experts" say that there is.  Everyone in baseball will talk about it, and throw the term around as if it's something good, and something that they strive for.  But the truth is that competitive balance is NOT good for baseball, and they know it.  As long the big market teams (Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Dodgers, Angels, Phillys) stay on top, sign all the big names, compete for the WS titles, and the small market teams stay out of the way, then ratings will be up and merchandise will be sold and everyone will be happy.  Without a salary cap, they are simply insuring that there will be competitive balance among the large market cash cow teams.

Is there any hope for the Royals?  Beyond a fluke season here and there?

I know many people are questioning the Farnsworth and the Jacobs deals (myself included), but I stiIl think the more important discussion should center around the middle infield.

Continue reading this post »

Today I had a rather heated debate with a friend of mine about who is the better starting pitcher, Zack Greinke or Brian Bannister.  It is an interesting debate because the two of them are such polar opposites.  We asked the following questions:

1.  Which one will have more success as a starting pitcher in coming years.
2.  Which one has a better shot at becoming an ace, a dominant #1.
3.  What is the more important to a good starter:  a) athleticism, a great arm, and great "stuff".  OR  b) intellect, pitching knowledge, "baseball smarts', a strong mental make-up.

Obviously, we both agreed that if we could somehow transplant Bannister's brain into Greinke's body, we would have the next Cy Young.  I am of the opinion that Bannister is more likely to succeed than Greinke at this point.  I've seen enough of Greinke (aka..Wacko Zacko) the last four years to know that he DOES NOT have what it takes to be a consistently successful starting pitcher, not to mention an ACE.  I don't believe he can stay focused and motivated for a full season.  I think he's better suited for the bullpen.  As for which one is more likely to become a dominant #1?  I say neither.  To be an ace, you need the entire package.  You obviously need great "stuff", but an ace also must have brains and a strong mental make-up.

My friend disagreed.  Believing that Greinke's amazing stuff, his athleticism, and his success late last year as a starter, are enough to prove that he is the better pitcher.  Quite possibly the best pitcher in our rotation, and the one most likely to succeed.   He also believed that Greinke is more likely to become an ace, for some team, if not the Royals.

I think if Zack were in the bullpen, he could get by on his stuff, but as a starter his mental stamina will break down over the long season.  And I think, in the long run, there are more examples of successful starters with Bannister's traits, those with less than great stuff who have succeeded by knowing how to pitch, knowing their opponents, being focus, determined, and mentally prepared.  He may never be an ace, but I'll put my money on Bannister over Greinke.

What do you think?

Have you heard any recent news or rumors on Mike Sweeney?  Is there any chance at all that the Royals might still make an effort to resign him?  Other teams do not appear to be showing much interest in him.

I know, based on his performance the last few years, you would think he was pushing 40, but the guy is only 34!  There is no doubt he can hit, WHEN HE IS HEALTHY.

Why doesn't DM resign him, simply to pinch hit.  We could use somebody with some pop to come in off the bench.  We don't really have that kind of a player on our bench.  Just picture it, Sween-dog stepping into the on-deck circle in the late innings, with runners on and the game on the line at the K.  The old franchise player and fan favorite.  The crowd would love it.  Give him that opportunity.  Let him finish his career as a Royal.  

He can still hit.  He won't have regular playing time, but that might keep him healthy.  He'd be an excellent pinch hitter.  Think of the drama!  Come on Dayton, make it happen.