“Ibanez had nearly 500 ABs for the Royals in 2002, with 24 HRs, 103 RBIs, and a .883 OPS.”

…..and Beltran was still with us through the end of June 2004 before they blew it up.

No matter as nothing will sway your opinion here. I suppose you’re right it all just comes down to talent and all of the talk from new managers/coaches when they take the helm of changing the culture and instilling a winning attitude is just a bunch of bs.

Isn’t the “Our Time” campaign and Hosmer thumping his chest on Twitter this spring evidence that some folks think it starts with a change in attitude? I support both of them wholeheartedly regardless of the atrocious outcome.

As far as examples of teams believing and catching lightning in a bottle….it’s too easy.

1993 Phillies, 2008 Rays, 2012 O’s if it holds. Other sports are easier with a shorter season….2006 Saints, Rams under Vermeil….Virginia Commonwealth/George Mason!? Are the Kings and the Devils really the 2 most talented teams in the NHL?

If it all just comes down to talent, what the hell are we doing here? We’ve been sucking and accumulating “talent” for 25 years, and we won’t be able to hold it for long if/when success does come.

What’s the point then?

Because maybe….just maybe one of these years, our Royals will be the team that catches lightning in a bottle and changes the culture and direction of the franchise.

Great win tonight by the way. Let’s see Good Bruce tomorrow afternoon then come home and get right.

Go Royals.

None of these numbers show any inkling of a good pitcher. He is bad.

Ibanez had nearly 500 ABs for the Royals in 2002, with 24 HRs, 103 RBIs, and a .883 OPS.

Adn we’ve seen teams show up expecting to win and they don’t.

“Recent sports history is littered with teams that played well beyond their talent because they belived they could. ”

Such as…?

“Were the 2003 Royals that much different than 2002 or 2004? I’d say no, but Pena was able to get them to buy into something, even if only for a brief time.”

Yes, they were different. Those teams were very different during that period. 2003 had ibanez and beltran, 2002 had only beltran and 2004 had neither. as one example.

We’ve seen teams (unfortunately not ours) go on hot streaks where they show up to the ballpark every day expecting to win, and they do.

Is it all about that?….of course not. Talent has a huge role in the whole picture and a huge role in coming to the ballpark with that belief, but confidence, even the misplaced variety is huge.

Recent sports history is littered with teams that played well beyond their talent because they belived they could.

Were the 2003 Royals that much different than 2002 or 2004? I’d say no, but Pena was able to get them to buy into something, even if only for a brief time.

Even if this is true, does it matter? Does it impact the score of the game?

Luke is at 41% for his career. Even in the last calendar year, with his good run, he is at 34%, and he is at 40% this year while averaging less than 5.1 innings per start. He is not good. If he was not a first pick, he would have spent a good portion of his career in the minors, or be on his third team.

The three true outcomes are a fine scouting tool. They netted us Paulino last year. But they are useless when evaluating a pitcher with 106 career starts. He is compared to Davies because they are the same age, and (as a Royal) Luke has a higher starter ERA (5.41-5.34) and a lower ERA+ (78-81), and 41% of his starts are bad ones.

Talent is nice, it is what people scout. But in the big leagues, performance is what matters, and Luke does not perform. It might be a mental toughness or work ethic issue, I don’t know. But there are tons of talented players in baseball that never become good. There are a bunch of guys with limited talent who were never supposed to make it that put together pretty nice careers. Sometimes, after 5 years, you have to accept that a players performance level is never going to be on the same level as his talent potential.

or maybe something like gamescore? For example hoch and chen had identical numbers of games in 2011 with a 50+ gamescore.

“Sadly, these numbers would support the common perception of Hochevar and not your argument.”

Can you show your work? Have you done this analysis? I’d love to see it.