Author Topic: The Royals  (Read 4721130 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39203
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9275 on: April 14, 2014, 09:06:48 AM »
first power rankings of the year

1. Milwaukee .967
2. Oakland .849
3. Atlanta .808
4. LA Dodgers .787
5. Seattle .762
6. San Francisco .744
7. Washington .743
8. LA Angels .721
9. Detroit .700
10. Chicago White Sox .690
11. Toronto .690
12. Tampa Bay .683
13. St Louis .678
14. Pittsburgh .669
15. Colorado .666
16. New York Yankees .662
17. Minnesota .660
18. Philadelphia .643
19. Miami .631
20. Cleveland .631
21. Cincinnati .627
22. Texas .608
23. Boston .593
24. San Diego .584
25. Baltimore .576
26. Chicago Cubs .564
27. New York Mets .541
28. Kansas City .541
29. Houston .510
30. Arizona .486


Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39203
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9276 on: April 14, 2014, 09:08:40 AM »
Kansas related: Osage City native Blake Treinen made his first career appearance for the Nationals on Saturday. Pitched 2 innings and recorded his first strikeout. I met him once and he is a very good looking/smelling and nice person.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/player/_/id/32185/blake-treinen

Offline joda

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3758
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9277 on: April 14, 2014, 11:46:41 AM »
What can we get for Shields? I know there's no way we can get a Wil Myers type back, but got to think he's worth at least as much as Garza.

Offline ksupamplemousse

  • Elevate
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4527
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9278 on: April 14, 2014, 11:47:52 AM »
No sporting organization needs a #bid like the Royals

It's hard to be too excited about #bid for the Royals. We have a shitty TV contract that is going to limit the amount of money available to whoever we bring in to be the next general manager. Obviously the right guy could succeed regardless, but I don't have much faith that the Glass family can find that guy.

There is a cockload of money in MLB and the Royals are not at all hurting.  They could spend easily but the Glass family simply doesn't care about winning, doesn't care about be embarrassed and doesn't care about anything but making money.

Forbes says he's operating at a loss  :dunno:
This is who I am...I have no problem crying. - Jerome Tang

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37133
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9279 on: April 14, 2014, 11:52:12 AM »
No sporting organization needs a #bid like the Royals

It's hard to be too excited about #bid for the Royals. We have a shitty TV contract that is going to limit the amount of money available to whoever we bring in to be the next general manager. Obviously the right guy could succeed regardless, but I don't have much faith that the Glass family can find that guy.

There is a cockload of money in MLB and the Royals are not at all hurting.  They could spend easily but the Glass family simply doesn't care about winning, doesn't care about be embarrassed and doesn't care about anything but making money.

Forbes says he's operating at a loss  :dunno:

That's probably similar to how every farmer I know operates at a loss.

Offline EMAWforever

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 284
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9280 on: April 14, 2014, 12:38:32 PM »
No sporting organization needs a #bid like the Royals

It's hard to be too excited about #bid for the Royals. We have a shitty TV contract that is going to limit the amount of money available to whoever we bring in to be the next general manager. Obviously the right guy could succeed regardless, but I don't have much faith that the Glass family can find that guy.

There is a cockload of money in MLB and the Royals are not at all hurting.  They could spend easily but the Glass family simply doesn't care about winning, doesn't care about be embarrassed and doesn't care about anything but making money.

Forbes says he's operating at a loss  :dunno:

That's probably similar to how every farmer I know operates at a loss.
When you pay a Billy Butler to not hit homeruns, you should be operating at a loss.

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51595
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9281 on: April 14, 2014, 01:39:28 PM »
What can we get for Shields? I know there's no way we can get a Wil Myers type back, but got to think he's worth at least as much as Garza.

You understand the entire league knows Dayton is not very good at trades and is insanely desperate right now?  That is not at all good for maximizing trade value.

I could see Dayton getting Will Middlebrooks for Shields in a a month or 2.

Offline joda

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3758
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9282 on: April 14, 2014, 02:05:45 PM »
What can we get for Shields? I know there's no way we can get a Wil Myers type back, but got to think he's worth at least as much as Garza.

You understand the entire league knows Dayton is not very good at trades and is insanely desperate right now?  That is not at all good for maximizing trade value.

I could see Dayton getting Will Middlebrooks for Shields in a a month or 2.

Yea, I worded that wrong. I absolutely assume Dayton will eff it up, more wondering what everyone thinks we should get, not what we will get.

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9283 on: April 14, 2014, 02:22:09 PM »
No sporting organization needs a #bid like the Royals

It's hard to be too excited about #bid for the Royals. We have a shitty TV contract that is going to limit the amount of money available to whoever we bring in to be the next general manager. Obviously the right guy could succeed regardless, but I don't have much faith that the Glass family can find that guy.

Kinda different situations but I believe the Dallas Cowboys have proven that a bad owner can taint everything.   I don't know the Royals sitch well,  is it a bad owner who won't spend or a bad owner that won't spend and tries to run the team?

It's an owner who won't spend the necessary money and appoints family members with no baseball experience (his son) to run the show.

crap.   At least Jones throw money around.

And it hasn't worked for Jones because true football people aren't making the critical decisions.

Wasn't arguing that.  Also, why the word filter?

Word filter?

For curse words.   Yours appears to be on.   I didn't say crap, I said crap.   No big deal anyway, I was just curious.

Damn, it was on. Don't know why. Definitely not a word filter/censor type.

Offline Jackstack99EMAW

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1355
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9284 on: April 14, 2014, 02:56:42 PM »
What can we get for Shields? I know there's no way we can get a Wil Myers type back, but got to think he's worth at least as much as Garza.

You understand the entire league knows Dayton is not very good at trades and is insanely desperate right now?  That is not at all good for maximizing trade value.

I could see Dayton getting Will Middlebrooks for Shields in a a month or 2.

Yea, I worded that wrong. I absolutely assume Dayton will eff it up, more wondering what everyone thinks we should get, not what we will get.
Dayton won't trade him anyway, he will want to sell the illusion that we are right up there in contention and next year is the real year he was aiming for even without Shields.

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9285 on: April 14, 2014, 02:59:18 PM »
What can we get for Shields? I know there's no way we can get a Wil Myers type back, but got to think he's worth at least as much as Garza.

You understand the entire league knows Dayton is not very good at trades and is insanely desperate right now?  That is not at all good for maximizing trade value.

I could see Dayton getting Will Middlebrooks for Shields in a a month or 2.

Yea, I worded that wrong. I absolutely assume Dayton will eff it up, more wondering what everyone thinks we should get, not what we will get.
Dayton won't trade him anyway, he will want to sell the illusion that we are right up there in contention and next year is the real year he was aiming for even without Shields.

Probably an accurate take, 'stack. That's our Dayton.

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51595
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9286 on: April 14, 2014, 03:18:57 PM »
Dayton is done.  He has staked his rep on too many failures, blown way too many drafts and tolerated such crazy ineptitude at most levels that the Glass family will send him packing.

I mean, watch the end of the Twins game on Sunday.  Both Davis and Moose commit mistakes that either lazy or intensely stupid.  Yet they will not miss an AB/inning over it

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9287 on: April 14, 2014, 03:47:37 PM »
Dayton is done.  He has staked his rep on too many failures, blown way too many drafts and tolerated such crazy ineptitude at most levels that the Glass family will send him packing.

I mean, watch the end of the Twins game on Sunday.  Both Davis and Moose commit mistakes that either lazy or intensely stupid.  Yet they will not miss an AB/inning over it

I think Davis won't be seen in a close game for a while.   Moose is interesting...  Dude has potential but rarely shows it during actual MLB games.   You hate to give up but sending his ass to the minors is probably warranted at this point.   Sad thing is, he'll probably rake down there and get called back up.   Him and Gio are terribly frustrating.

Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39203
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9288 on: April 14, 2014, 03:57:51 PM »
 :frown:

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64165
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9289 on: April 14, 2014, 03:58:38 PM »
this blog is more fun (usually) with the word filter on
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9290 on: April 14, 2014, 04:03:40 PM »
this blog is more fun (usually) with the word filter on

About the only thing the "mods" do right is their work with word substitution.

Offline raquetcat

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Katpak'r
  • *******
  • Posts: 1957
  • ^ I let us down
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9291 on: April 14, 2014, 04:06:51 PM »
I bought my first royals shirt this year, thinking it would be "the year", I wore it once, do you think I can still return it?
I'm purple down

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9292 on: April 14, 2014, 04:40:26 PM »
I bought my first royals shirt this year, thinking it would be "the year", I wore it once, do you think I can still return it?
Wait for it to be vintage once they get sold and shipped off to somewhere else and then sell it. #profit

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37133
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9293 on: April 14, 2014, 04:43:49 PM »
Just be thankful that you didn't get a 2014 World Champions tattoo.

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16762
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9294 on: April 14, 2014, 08:02:10 PM »
tj carpenter can be a douche, and this is no doubt a dead horse, but this is the only thing to talk about at this point with this franchise

https://soundcloud.com/tj-carpenter/sports-night-the-royals-have-a-serious-culture-problem-on-their-hands

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13587
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9295 on: April 14, 2014, 08:15:21 PM »
first power rankings of the year

1. Milwaukee .967
2. Oakland .849
3. Atlanta .808
4. LA Dodgers .787
5. Seattle .762
6. San Francisco .744
7. Washington .743
8. LA Angels .721
9. Detroit .700
10. Chicago White Sox .690
11. Toronto .690
12. Tampa Bay .683
13. St Louis .678
14. Pittsburgh .669
15. Colorado .666
16. New York Yankees .662
17. Minnesota .660
18. Philadelphia .643
19. Miami .631
20. Cleveland .631
21. Cincinnati .627
22. Texas .608
23. Boston .593
24. San Diego .584
25. Baltimore .576
26. Chicago Cubs .564
27. New York Mets .541
28. Kansas City .541
29. Houston .510
30. Arizona .486

so the padres suck too  :frown:

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64165
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9296 on: April 14, 2014, 10:45:21 PM »
you're only like 60 minutes away from the angels tho, and like 1.5 - 8 hours (depending on traffic) from the dodgers
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13587
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9297 on: April 14, 2014, 10:47:27 PM »
you're only like 60 minutes away from the angels tho, and like 1.5 - 8 hours (depending on traffic) from the dodgers

as a diehard pads fan i hate the dodgers

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64165
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9298 on: April 14, 2014, 10:56:27 PM »
hmm, not sure what to tell you then mr carnes, except i bet the pad's are good before kc is good
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: The Royals
« Reply #9299 on: April 14, 2014, 11:01:22 PM »
first power rankings of the year

1. Milwaukee .967
2. Oakland .849
3. Atlanta .808
4. LA Dodgers .787
5. Seattle .762
6. San Francisco .744
7. Washington .743
8. LA Angels .721
9. Detroit .700
10. Chicago White Sox .690
11. Toronto .690
12. Tampa Bay .683
13. St Louis .678
14. Pittsburgh .669
15. Colorado .666
16. New York Yankees .662
17. Minnesota .660
18. Philadelphia .643
19. Miami .631
20. Cleveland .631
21. Cincinnati .627
22. Texas .608
23. Boston .593
24. San Diego .584
25. Baltimore .576
26. Chicago Cubs .564
27. New York Mets .541
28. Kansas City .541
29. Houston .510
30. Arizona .486

So, I see Houston is rated worse than us. Does that mean we lose two of three there this week, or do we get swept?