|
New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2012 6:23 PM
New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2012 7:35 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2012 8:13 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
skikstate wrote: Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA. True, but if all goes according to plan, we'll also have some of the lowest draft positions the organization has seen a while too.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2012 9:17 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
After 20 years of having high draft picks, I'll take wins on the field. Shields is one of four pitchers in MLB to have 15 wins and 200 IP in each of last two years. Others are Zack, Galliardo, and Verlander (per Jason Stark in BA).
I like Ringolsby article. Focused KC on winning and Tracy has been around long enough to know a prospect just means a guy hasn't done anything yet.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2012 9:41 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
ouweatherman wrote:
skikstate wrote: Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA. True, but if all goes according to plan, we'll also have some of the lowest draft positions the organization has seen a while too. Pretty sure we just traded a third round draft pick for Shields. A low second round is almost the same as a high third.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2012 9:44 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
Agree. Upon reflection, the media is turning around to this way of thinking. Royals at a point when the top priority is the major league club NOW and not the farm system. Revisroyalsfan wrote: After 20 years of having high draft picks, I'll take wins on the field. Shields is one of four pitchers in MLB to have 15 wins and 200 IP in each of last two years. Others are Zack, Galliardo, and Verlander (per Jason Stark in BA).
I like Ringolsby article. Focused KC on winning and Tracy has been around long enough to know a prospect just means a guy hasn't done anything yet. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2012 10:15 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
uwanttosmellthis wrote:
ouweatherman wrote:
skikstate wrote: Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA. True, but if all goes according to plan, we'll also have some of the lowest draft positions the organization has seen a while too. Pretty sure we just traded a third round draft pick for Shields. A low second round is almost the same as a high third. A third round pick that went WAY above a slot system that doesn't even exist anymore. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2012 11:02 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
KanoBurger wrote:
uwanttosmellthis wrote:
ouweatherman wrote:
skikstate wrote: Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA. True, but if all goes according to plan, we'll also have some of the lowest draft positions the organization has seen a while too. Pretty sure we just traded a third round draft pick for Shields. A low second round is almost the same as a high third.
A third round pick that went WAY above a slot system that doesn't even exist anymore. Yep, unfortunately that loophole has been closed. The Royals can still get the supplemental pick which helps some. But, it's going to be harder to build a strong farm system under the new CBA IMO.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 6:58 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
So are you saying that you're counting on the young players in the lower levels? I sure hope you weren't someone who was okay with trading Myers because he's JUST a prospect then. skikstate wrote: Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 7:57 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
JockItch34 wrote: So are you saying that you're counting on the young players in the lower levels?
I sure hope you weren't someone who was okay with trading Myers because he's JUST a prospect then.
skikstate wrote: Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA. Why does this have to be all one-or-the-other? Even the Yankees have developed their own guys (Cano, Jeter, Rivera, Hughes) and even the Rays and As have relied on free agents (C. Pena, Farnsworth, B. Colon, Cespedes). |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 8:05 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
GeorgeBrettsPineTar wrote:
JockItch34 wrote: So are you saying that you're counting on the young players in the lower levels?
I sure hope you weren't someone who was okay with trading Myers because he's JUST a prospect then.
skikstate wrote: Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA. Why does this have to be all one-or-the-other? Even the Yankees have developed their own guys (Cano, Jeter, Rivera, Hughes) and even the Rays and As have relied on free agents (C. Pena, Farnsworth, B. Colon, Cespedes). There are people who are defending the trade by saying that it's ridiculous to count on prospects and all that. Then they turn around and say that even though losing Myers may hurt, there's another crop in the lower levels. In this scenario, they are, wait for it, counting on prospects. I guess it just depends on what fits the agenda.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 8:45 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
I've missed the past few WorkersUnite! meetings around here...to what "agenda" are you referring?
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 9:51 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
Moore's biggest credit is that he's created a lineup almost entirely from players within the organization or young players acquired through trade. The main problem Moore has had in the past is his inability to acquire good players to surround the existing talent in the organization. In the past few years, we've mostly had stopgap players who contribute very little to the organization. In particular, his inability to fix the rotation has left the Royals with a serious problem. His moves to improve the rotation this offseason will ultimately make or break his tenure as GM.
In any event, if the youth movement is successful and the Royals become a contender, I'm curious how the Royals will adapt the farm system to the new CBA. I think the Royals have an above-average to excellent scouting department for position players and a below-average scouting department for pitching. So, I suppose it's best to play toward your strengths and maybe acquire pitching through trades (or address the inability to obtain and develop quality pitching).
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 9:57 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
JockItch34 wrote:
GeorgeBrettsPineTar wrote:
JockItch34 wrote: So are you saying that you're counting on the young players in the lower levels?
I sure hope you weren't someone who was okay with trading Myers because he's JUST a prospect then.
skikstate wrote: Sometimes I think people forget that the Royals will have two drafts and a lot of talent moving through the minors by the time James Shields is a FA. Why does this have to be all one-or-the-other? Even the Yankees have developed their own guys (Cano, Jeter, Rivera, Hughes) and even the Rays and As have relied on free agents (C. Pena, Farnsworth, B. Colon, Cespedes).
There are people who are defending the trade by saying that it's ridiculous to count on prospects and all that. Then they turn around and say that even though losing Myers may hurt, there's another crop in the lower levels. In this scenario, they are, wait for it, counting on prospects. I guess it just depends on what fits the agenda. It's possib;e they are counting on the existence of prospects so that we can make deals similar to this one, though, instead of as the replacements for existing guys or something along those lines. Prospects are a form of currency in baseball. Even if you don't count on them to save your franchise, you have to have them in order to make trades, and yes, to supplement and replace players in the big league roster. "Counting on" prospects is a fact of life in baseball. All players were once prospects. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 10:26 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
Dayton Moore is an all around **** up. Even when he manages to do one thing right (draft some talent) he screws it up. Why not overpay Edwin Jackson and keep Myers? You get slightly less WAR from Jackson but a huge WAR boost in Myers>Franceour. And have Myers for 6 years and Jackson for 4 years. I won't be surprised if Myers is the one guy who dominates right away unlike Gordon, Hosmer, Moose, etc. That's the Royals luck. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 10:31 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
Why are we still arguing over this crap? This was an excellent trade for the 2013 Royals. Any arguement to the contrary is flat out ill-informed. Wil Myers is even money at best to get more extra base hits or throw out as many runners as Frenchy in 2013. James Shields and Wade Davis are probably even money to win as many games as all 5 of our original starters from last April.
When you speak of me, speak well. -- Crash Davis
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 10:39 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
hawkinmichigan wrote:
It's possib;e they are counting on the existence of prospects so that we can make deals similar to this one, though, instead of as the replacements for existing guys or something along those lines.
Prospects are a form of currency in baseball. Even if you don't count on them to save your franchise, you have to have them in order to make trades, and yes, to supplement and replace players in the big league roster. "Counting on" prospects is a fact of life in baseball. All players were once prospects. So lets just say you're right, and it's possible those counting on the existence of prospects are doing so for the express purpose of trading them. I think you're very wrong on that and that basically people are just talking out of both sides of their mouths, but lets just accept it as fact. We will never have a better chance to improve the big league club than we just did based on that line of thinking. Because we will likely never have another Minor League Player of the Year to deal. So with that thought in mind (that the next time you trade prospects for veterans, you WILL BE GETTING LESS THAN YOU JUST RECEIVED, accept it as fact, because it's true) lets look at the Royals chances over the next 2 years. Is it likely they become a 90+ win team before Shields is set to depart? If the answer is yes, then you think we're good. I'm fine with that. We disagree on how good this current team is, but that's a disagreement I understand and can accept. One of us will be proven right eventually, and we will wait and find out who. If the answer is no, then what chance do they have to get better? Prospects fail all the time, so we can't count on them. Trade those fluky prospects for veterans then? Wait...but we can't get enough in return to get us over the hump! We know this because we just traded the most valuable prospect we're likely to have anytime soon, and it didn't make us into a 90+ win team and we have a 2 year window. With no big time prospects to deal in that 2 year window, where does that leave us? What chance do we have to improve the team to a 90+ win team? Spend on the open market? This team needs to take a huge step forward, but where is the talent going to come from? See the issue? |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 11:54 AM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
Gbwoy wrote:
We know this because we just traded the most valuable prospect we're likely to have anytime soon, and we have a 2 year window. With no big time prospects to deal in that 2 year window, where does that leave us? I seriously doubt Wil is even the best hitter to come out of our orgainization over the past 3 or next 3 seasons. You are also TOTALLY discounting both the opportunity to extend Shields or what we MIGHT get back if we decide to deal him before August 1st, 2014. Oh, and before you ask, Bonifacio? Mondesi? When you speak of me, speak well. -- Crash Davis
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 12:02 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
--------------------------------------------- --- KidDynomite wrote: Gbwoy wrote:
We know this because we just traded the most valuable prospect we're likely to have anytime soon, and we have a 2 year window. With no big time prospects to deal in that 2 year window, where does that leave us? I seriously doubt Wil is even the best hitter to come out of our orgainization over the past 3 or next 3 seasons. You are also TOTALLY discounting both the opportunity to extend Shields or what we MIGHT get back if we decide to deal him before August 1st, 2014. Oh, and before you ask, Bonifacio? Mondesi? --------------------------------------------- There's so much wrong with your post, I don't know where to begin. First: what? Who the hell in our current minor league system is better than Myers? That's just crazy talk. Second: the extension we can discuss if it happens. As of right now, it hasn't. Third: who the hell cares what we get to deal Shields? It simply won't even come close to what we gave up to get him, and if you think it will, you're high. And more important: if he's traded at all, thatmeans we are out of it and the trade was a failure. Bonafacio? Mondesi? Neither are likely to even come CLOSE to the prospect status of Will Myers. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2012 12:09 PM
RE: New BA take on the trade - Tracy Ringolsby
its just not as simple as now we can or now we cant win 90 games next year. if it were, this decision would have been easy. i guess the real question is, does this trade give us the opportunity to win 90 games?
the pitching is greatly improved, but not enough to go from 72 to 90 wins. it very well get us half way there. so that puts us to 81 wins. i think we all pretty much agree with this.
so now the question is how much faith do you have in the offense. do you you believe that hosmer, gio, moose, cain, perez, and yes, frenchy can produce the other 9? (assuming that gordon, butler, escobar stay the same)if you do, then you like this trade. if you don't, then i am sure you don't like it.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
