'We're in it'

Posted by: AWHawk204

'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:33 AM

Ned Yost's response when asked about the pennant race.

http://kansascity.royals.mlb.com/news/ar...jsp&c_id=kc

Mathematically I agree with him, but realistically I'm not so sure. We do seem to be winning more recently, winning 8 of our last 11, and Grienke is on the bump vs some scrub for Seattle tonight. I'm just saying a little momentum going into the all-star break wouldn't hurt.

It wouldn't be the most incredible comeback in sports history, but being a royals fan for the last 15 year, it would definitely seem like it.
Posted by: alexoobers

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:36 AM

I saw that in The Star today. Even though its unrealistic, I still like his mentality and enthusiasm. That kind of thing can carry over to a team's success.
Posted by: jayhawk1996

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:48 AM

They're 12.5 games back in both the division and the wild card. Reel off 8 to 10 wins in a row and they're in it.
Posted by: alexoobers

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:51 AM

Royals are only 8 back in the division.
Posted by: jayhawk1996

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:52 AM

Oops -- read the wrong column on mlb.com. You're right.
Posted by: Ryan2845

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:53 AM

We can win our 4th series in a row tonight, gotta like that.
Posted by: alexoobers

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:55 AM

Inter-league play helps
Posted by: jnewell

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:55 AM

They are behind three teams, so the "games back" means virtually nothing.

If K.C. is serious about contending, it needs to get to .500 first, then see how many games it's back.

Right now, the Royals aren't sniffing .500, so they're not in the race.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:56 AM

"We're in it" had damn well better be code for "DeJesus is gonna cost a lot."
Posted by: Ryan2845

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 10:59 AM

Interestingly enough, Royals were 8 games back on this date last year too The central standings were almost a mirror image of this year lol. So yah...doesn't mean much

http://espn.go.com/mlb/standings/_/date/20090706

One more win than last year, guess that's improvement right? I guess we'll see if Yost is really an improvement or not, were on completely level ground with last year at this point forward
Posted by: jnewell

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 11:01 AM

Quote:

"We're in it" had damn well better be code for "DeJesus is gonna cost a lot."




Like Ivan DeJesus?
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 11:03 AM

Ha! Then David went and had a career year at an unusual age.
Posted by: AWHawk204

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 11:10 AM

Quote:

Interestingly enough, Royals were 8 games back on this date last year too The central standings were almost a mirror image of this year lol. So yah...doesn't mean much

http://espn.go.com/mlb/standings/_/date/20090706

One more win than last year, guess that's improvement right? I guess we'll see if Yost is really an improvement or not, were on completely level ground with last year at this point forward




On may 6 last year we were 2 games up in the division, so last years numbers are a little flawed since we got off to such a hot start.

Fact is we've gained ground with Yost as manager. I watched all of last nights game, and there seems to be a new (winning) attitude with this team.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 11:12 AM

Funny how the new winning "attitude" coincides with playing bad players less.
Posted by: jnewell

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 11:16 AM

Quote:

Funny how the new winning "attitude" coincides with playing bad players less.




And bunting in the first inning less.
Posted by: rhino

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 11:39 AM

If they can win tonight and then take 2/3 from Chicago going into the break they've pulled something off. Sustained success coming off of their first real bout of adversity with Yost at the helm.

They've gotta win the ChiSox series to keep up some momentum.
Posted by: rhino

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 11:45 AM

This could be its own thread, but I'm going to keep it here. How do you all see the trade deadline going?

I'm hoping we accomplish the following:

*Deal Jose G., eat the dough...call up KK and give him every possible at bat at DH.

*Flip Farnsworth and some salary...I'd be happy to get a guy that projects as a 4/5 starter. Credit to Farnsworth as he is throwing great. In the short term we fill the void by sending one of LaRue/Chen to the pen. Probably LaRue.

*Only trade DeJesus for the kings ransom it should take to get him. If we trade him throw Gordon in left for the remainder of the season and see what you have.

I haven't scanned the board, so apologies in advance if this discussion is already going.
Posted by: jamboslice

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 12:35 PM

All of those ideas are probably best for us. I heard the Red Sox had interest in Dejesus but that backup outfielder for them just hit two homeruns last night and will be given more time out there. I haven't scanned the Red Sox prospect list so I don't know what we'd get back anyway.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 01:34 PM

Red Sox are pretty flush. But Epstein's too smart. I'd rather go after an easier mark...the Giants' Brian Sabean maybe?
Posted by: Topcitykid10

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 01:40 PM

I just hope that if and win the Royals deal some guys they get a decent catcher prospect back. Does anyone know who is the royals top catcher prospect in the minors or do they really have one?
Posted by: crzykufan987

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 02:08 PM

Wil Myers is basically our top catching prospect... http://royalrevival.blogspot.com/2010/03/top-prospects-4-wil-myers.html
Posted by: rhino

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 02:11 PM

Wil Myers is a legit prospect. 1st round talent that slid due to signability concerns.

Fish may know more about his recent comings and goings...He is currently in High A.

http://royalsblog.kansascity.com/?q=node/581
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 02:15 PM

Myers is a very, very good prospect. In just over 400 professional plate appearances, he's sitting on a pretty nifty .316/.415/.542 line...awesome for a guy at 18 and 19. Many close watchers, however, doubt he'll stay at catcher. That's the bad news. The good news is he might hit well enough to play anywhere.
Posted by: AWHawk204

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/06/10 04:33 PM

Brayan Pena showed signs of a solid hitter last year when we called him up, however this year he's been pretty bad. Myers is probably our best choice if Pena doesn't work out
Posted by: tyler

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/07/10 04:33 PM

I realize we are still 8 games below .500 right now, but gosh it feels good to see a couple breaks go right and for this team to be winning games I have grown up accustomed to them losing. Boy it'd be nice to have a reason to go to a KU football game and have them update the crowd in between each quarter on the score of the Royal's game. Hmmm wishful thinking I suppose..
Posted by: AWHawk204

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/07/10 07:26 PM

Quote:

I realize we are still 8 games below .500 right now, but gosh it feels good to see a couple breaks go right and for this team to be winning games I have grown up accustomed to them losing. Boy it'd be nice to have a reason to go to a KU football game and have them update the crowd in between each quarter on the score of the Royal's game. Hmmm wishful thinking I suppose..




I would love an occasional "Offical Royals Gameday Thread".. even more wishful thinking
Posted by: pwhittemore

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:16 AM

6 game losing streak. Still in it?
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:18 AM

Better not be. Time to sell.
Posted by: jayhwk01

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:24 AM

Oh we are in it alright. In the shitter again. Hopefully soon some of this talent gets here, produces, and makes the last twenty five years nothing but a painful memory rather than a yearly reality.
Posted by: oreadical

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:25 AM

Quote:

Better not be. Time to sell.



See ya, Guillen.
Posted by: jayhwk01

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:26 AM

Guillen being gone can't happen soon enough for me. I just hope DM finds a way to squeeze some young talent out of somebody by trading him.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:41 AM

The big fish is DeJesus.
Posted by: oreadical

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:45 AM

I wouldn't move Dejesus without getting something in return of value. As far as Guillen, I wish we'd just release him if nobody's willing to play ball.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:46 AM

Well, with DeJesus, it's pretty simple: get something better than a first-round pick and a sandwich pick. Or don't trade him.
Posted by: oreadical

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:48 AM

At least we have some leverage with him. I hope Farnsworth's gone sooner than later.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 10:50 AM

He'll net a lottery ticket. Every now and then those hit.
Posted by: jayhwk01

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 11:01 AM

The more I look at DD's numbers among OF he is awfully underrated. Sans the HR's he is really good and relatively young with good years left. IF we would trade him we really need to be sure and get something.
Posted by: jamboslice

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 12:18 PM

Are the Giants still interested in Dejesus? Lot of good pitching has come out of that organization lately.
Posted by: jayhwk01

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 12:46 PM

Cain for DeJesus. Done. LOL.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 12:50 PM

Giants would be a great trade partner. Sabean hasn't figured it out at all.
Posted by: jammahawk

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/19/10 01:00 PM

Guillen will probably go on waivers after the deadline.
DeJesus will be delt only if someone is desperate to give the Royals way more in return. Royals are in a great posotion with DDJ.
Posednik may be a better option to trade, won't get the same return that DDJ will, but a team like San Diego who is offensive starved may be a willing trade partner. Posednik is the perfect player for the stadium San Diego plays in.
Posted by: oreadical

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/20/10 09:46 AM

Sure was cursing Farnsworth last night, even though he ended up getting the W.
Posted by: larryb2

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/30/10 06:26 AM

"We're in it"?

In what? The toilet? Last place? Yep, you're "in it".

18 under and 15.5 back - Not "in it" any more. Right?

I know, I know, the Cubs suck too. The haven't won a World Series in over 100 years. Very good. Very good.

Well, hopefully in a few years the Royals can have a Marlins or Rays type of "youth movement" resurgence. Time will tell.

Fire away kiddies!
Posted by: jammahawk

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/30/10 06:32 AM

Little late to the party Gutter. Yost made the statement about three weeks ago when we only had one foot in the drain, now I'm sure he wouldn't issue such a statement.
BTW, surprised Lee hasn't been dealt yet?
Posted by: larryb2

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/30/10 08:44 AM

Just me being me. 3 weeks ago when I read Yost's statement I admired his optimism. See what can happen in 3 weeks? When the Pale Hose (White Sox) were down 9 games the Sox pitching coach said ot that, "We saw death, and I don't think we fear it anymore".

As far as Lee - he vetoed a trade to the Angels. I thought it might be a good move for him. He has a no trade clause. It's a shame he is such a nice guy or Cubs fans might turn him in to the next Todd Hundley* which I wouldn't mind seeing. Sure Lee has done a lot and is a great guy but he must lead the majors in hitting in to double plays over the past 3 seasons. He's one of those guys who hits well when there is no pressure. Otherwise, he blows nuts.

*Todd Hundley, Chicago Cubs: A constant target of boos at Wrigley, Hundley once flipped off the fans during a home run trot, likely figuring he wouldn't get to run around the bases many more times. It's not easy to cheese off a fan base that loves your dad, but Hundley pulled it off.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: 'We're in it' - 07/30/10 10:31 AM

Lee has some powerful reasons to stay in Chicago.