Vinnie Pasquantino's response to Royals' stadium changes included one brutal warning

Of all the things that made last week a busy week for not only the Kansas City Royals but for the baseball world in general was the arbitration deadline.

The Royals agreed to several contracts with arb-eligible names to avoid going to hearings with them down the road, but they didn't execute a clean sweep. Two key names remain under team control but without a contract at the moment for 2026, including star first baseman Vinnie Pasquantino.

Now, since that deadline came and went, the Royals faithful have had no shortage of storylines to fixate on, the most recent being the news that a majority of the walls at Kauffman Stadium will be moved in by 10-feet in 2026.

And as the Royals' sphere reacts to this major stadium news, among them was Pasquantino, stealing headlines again for the second straight week.

While he ended his statement staying that he felt the Royals making such changes were "cool", he did be sure to voice his questions around the decision of what it will mean for things like extra base hits beyond homers, as well as the effect it will have on pitchers now that long flyballs could turn into cheap homers.

But putting all the stadium talk aside, amid his remarks was an unsettling nugget surrounding the arbitration hearing he's about to go into and the mindset he could be going into it with. And for Royals fans, there's definitely a degree of concern they should feel here.

Vinnie Pasquantino gets brutally honest about upcoming arbitration hearing with the Royals

When I say "amid his stadium conversation", Pasquantino truly mixed this in in the most discrete way possible.

When prefacing that he was approaching his stadium change opinions from a data perspective, in parentheses he touched on the potentially ugly situation that could take place at his arbitration hearing.

"And honestly mostly from a data perspective (this hits close to home because I’m about to go into a room and hear how awful I am)," Pasquantino wrote on X.

The Pasquatch's statement served as a real eye opener to what arbitration actually is. A lot of the time, it's easier to overlook this process, as the player is, after all, under team control still after the hearing ends and will be unless their respective organization makes a move otherwise.

But the whole point of big league arbitration is for each side of the contract dispute to state their case why their proposed salary makes the most sense.

For the player, it's hard to really come off as malicious, as the whole point is for them to hype themselves up to the third-party arbiter to justify why they feel they should earn the higher amount of the two offers on the table.

However, on the team's side, this is where feelings can get hurt. As Pasquantino so bluntly boiled it down to in a vacuum, the team is essentially finding reasons to prove the player they entrust in their major league lineup on a day-in and day-out basis shouldn't earn what they feel they deserve.

Sometimes this doesn't have to be the end of a relationship, but I'd be remissed if I didn't point out thats sometimes this can simply be the beginning of the end, similar to how the Brewers and Corbin Burnes arbitration hearing went back in 2023. After saying the relationship was "definitely hurt" after the hearing took place, it took only until the next winter for the Brewers to ship him off to Baltimore.

In all actuality, I'm sure the Royals would love to have their fan favorite first baseman in their future for the long-term. That being said, a lack of general conversation around an extension and now an arbitration hearing isn't getting the next three seasons of control off to a great start.