Comments on: A Day In Surprise – Without Any http://kingsofkauffman.com/2011/03/28/a-day-in-surprise-without-any/ A Kansas City Royals Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and More Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:29:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: Free Aviles « Kings of Kauffman | A Kansas City Royals Blog http://kingsofkauffman.com/2011/03/28/a-day-in-surprise-without-any/#comment-4804 Free Aviles « Kings of Kauffman | A Kansas City Royals Blog Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:12:39 +0000 http://kingsofkauffman.com/?p=7655#comment-4804 [...] Royals best lineup is still Betemit at third, and Aviles at second. Will some defense be sacrificed? [...] [...] Royals best lineup is still Betemit at third, and Aviles at second. Will some defense be sacrificed? [...]

]]> By: Michael Engel http://kingsofkauffman.com/2011/03/28/a-day-in-surprise-without-any/#comment-4589 Michael Engel Tue, 29 Mar 2011 05:18:03 +0000 http://kingsofkauffman.com/?p=7655#comment-4589 I agree - with qualifications. I don't see the batting order as the biggest deal in the world and there has been research that supports the futility of a batting order. Where I agree is that sabermetrics should definitely have a role in constructing a team - but when a team consistently bats a player who's among the worst in the game offensively second for half a season, it's going to have an effect on your team's production. And, I dunno, reading the tweet that Kevin referenced, I don't think something facetious like that isn't saying "Gordon looks like a ballplayer, thus he should be good." More like, "Dammit, Gordon, you look the part, now go hit some homers (and stay healthy, and don't get sent down, and etc. etc.)" I replied on Twitter that "we're not sellin' jeans here" when I first saw that tweet, so yeah, I get your point there. A player isn't good just by looking the part. I guess I took it less seriously as a judgment of Alex Gordon's attributes as a player and more of Kevin being a bit wry about Gordon's path so far and where he stands with the club now. I guess I don't see the issues in the language that you do, though. Perhaps you're meaning semantics? It's not clear to me if I should defend Kevin's word choice and usage, or if you're meaning a "here" to be the Royals blogosphere and not this particular article. Anyway, there are times when Alex Gordon has looked like a very good baseball player, both in performance and in the mechanics of the game. I don't know what Francoeur's ever led as a big leaguer though, despite his reputation. He's a personable guy and I'm sure he's good to have around the clubhouse to keep an upbeat attitude in the face of failure, but he keeps getting that "leader" label without really "leading". I agree – with qualifications.

I don’t see the batting order as the biggest deal in the world and there has been research that supports the futility of a batting order. Where I agree is that sabermetrics should definitely have a role in constructing a team – but when a team consistently bats a player who’s among the worst in the game offensively second for half a season, it’s going to have an effect on your team’s production.

And, I dunno, reading the tweet that Kevin referenced, I don’t think something facetious like that isn’t saying “Gordon looks like a ballplayer, thus he should be good.” More like, “Dammit, Gordon, you look the part, now go hit some homers (and stay healthy, and don’t get sent down, and etc. etc.)”

I replied on Twitter that “we’re not sellin’ jeans here” when I first saw that tweet, so yeah, I get your point there. A player isn’t good just by looking the part. I guess I took it less seriously as a judgment of Alex Gordon’s attributes as a player and more of Kevin being a bit wry about Gordon’s path so far and where he stands with the club now.

I guess I don’t see the issues in the language that you do, though. Perhaps you’re meaning semantics? It’s not clear to me if I should defend Kevin’s word choice and usage, or if you’re meaning a “here” to be the Royals blogosphere and not this particular article.

Anyway, there are times when Alex Gordon has looked like a very good baseball player, both in performance and in the mechanics of the game. I don’t know what Francoeur’s ever led as a big leaguer though, despite his reputation. He’s a personable guy and I’m sure he’s good to have around the clubhouse to keep an upbeat attitude in the face of failure, but he keeps getting that “leader” label without really “leading”.

]]> By: J http://kingsofkauffman.com/2011/03/28/a-day-in-surprise-without-any/#comment-4588 J Tue, 29 Mar 2011 04:16:21 +0000 http://kingsofkauffman.com/?p=7655#comment-4588 I find it strange that the royal's blogosphere is decidedly in favor of sabermetrics, yet criticism of the team's lineup is also a common topic despite the fact that the order doesn't really make a difference. Also, if we want to criticize Dayton Moore for his continued use of nonsense phrases when describing a player intangible attributes (ex- clubhouse guy, knows how to win, a baseball man), then we should we should restrict our use of phrases like "looks the part of a good major leaguer." All in all, there is a lot of sloppy language here and I think we can and should do better. I find it strange that the royal’s blogosphere is decidedly in favor of sabermetrics, yet criticism of the team’s lineup is also a common topic despite the fact that the order doesn’t really make a difference.

Also, if we want to criticize Dayton Moore for his continued use of nonsense phrases when describing a player intangible attributes (ex- clubhouse guy, knows how to win, a baseball man), then we should we should restrict our use of phrases like “looks the part of a good major leaguer.”

All in all, there is a lot of sloppy language here and I think we can and should do better.

]]>