Jason

Bad luck and bad calls certainly play a part in the result of a single game, perhaps even a series (small sample size). But over the course of a season, it is reasonable to expect that luck and bad calls will even out, or come very close. Of course, a fan’s perception comes into play – we (almost) never remember the bad calls that went our way for more than a day or two, and the same goes for good luck. The result is that at the end of the season, we remember all these bad calls and bad bounces, and have forgotten about most of the bounces that went our way.

A final thought: my opinion is that if a team is, year-in-and-year-out, victim to bad luck and bad calls, the team is probably not very good.

And if your owner only wants to spend $70 million a year on payroll while other teams spend two or three times that, don’t complain about it, just tough it out, it’s your job to win anyway. Right?

Actually, I disagree. There are real factors beyond the team’s control that come into play and have a real impact on a team’s success. Stating reality isn’t making excuses. The problem with the Royals management is that they aren’t stating reality.

Joe’s right that injuries aren’t the reason they are a bad team. Umpiring isn’t the reason they are a bad team. Payroll’s got a bit to do with it, but it can be overcome with smart management. The Royals don’t have that, and that’s their main problem.

But this tough talk about how injuries are never a reason for losing, and bad calls are never a reason for losing, etc. is pure exaggeration. There are teams out there this year who have been decimated by injuries, like the Mets, as many have pointed out. The Royals aren’t one of them, and when their management claims they are, THAT is making an excuse.

The Royals have no excuse for not having more useful talent at AAA, it should have been management’s mission this past offseason to collect potentially useful players for AAA, looking under whatever rocks it took and throwing a couple of million dollars into it. That would be a much smarter investment for a team like the Royals than wasting money on veterans like Farnsworth or Betancourt or Bloomquist.

It doesn’t even really matter if guys like Farnsworth play well or not, because the team isn’t contending even if they do, and they still cost millions. A middle reliever is not going to make the difference between contending and not contending. Save the millions for picking up a key player who might make a difference in the long run, and use minimum salary guys for middle relief and the bench.

Giving up young pitchers and taking on Betancourt’s contract is a joke. If the Royals needed a “name” to occupy the position for the rest of the season, they could’ve waited a week and picked up Lugo and paid him the minimum salary, while keeping the minor league pitchers. They would’ve saved money and prospects (while still having a well-known scrub as a placeholder for the job, because apparently that’s something that they feel is important.) At least Lugo is getting on base decently, which is more than Betancourt has ever done or will do.

And then there’s the pitching. There’s is no reason in the world for a rebuilding team out of the race to have both Bruce Chen and Sidney Ponson starting games for them. (Both starting on the same day, is that some kind of a joke??) That’s inexcusable. If you’re collecting old useless pitchers and giving them starts in the majors, why not sign Pedro Astacio or bring back Jose Lima while you’re at it?

These guys are 30-somethings who will never be any good again (and Chen never was any good at any point.) At least have some guys in their 20s in AAA who you can throw out there, maybe one of them will turn into a decent pitcher. Chen and Ponson will be out of baseball well before the Royals are contenders, these starts should’ve gone to players who will still be with the team in a few years who might learn and profit from the experience, win or lose.

Not having some possibly useful pitchers in their mid-20s in AAA is something that should never happen to a team like KC.

If you’re a 27-year-old guy who’s got some ability but never really got a shot in the majors and now you’re a minor league free agent scrambling for a job in the offseason, would you sign with Boston or KC? Which team would you have a better shot at making? Players looking for jobs in the offseason want to go to teams who might have openings for them, and KC is a team that looks like it might have openings. It shouldn’t be hard to find a few younger guys for those roles.