Thursday, April 14, 2011

Let me go on the record

Kyle Davies will pitch a gem next time out.

He's shown a great proclivity throughout his time with the Royals to uncork a gem of a start somewhere around the same time that Royals fans were beginning to dig his baseball grave en masse.

Also, he is not this bad of a pitcher. Not the whole 9.00 ERA and 2.21 WHIP thing.

So, I cite the Law of Averages as well as the lingering sense that Davies is due, knows his spot in the rotation is probably tenuous at this point (even with the alternatives being as bad as they are), and also as I was walking into work, no less than five people reacted when I yelled, "DAVIES!!!" at the top of my lungs in the parking lot.

They wouldn't have reacted if they, too, didn't sense it coming, right?

THE PREDICTION: 7IP, 1ER, 1BB, 8SO

And it looks like this will come against the currently-in-1st-place Cleveland Indians, too. Are the planets aligned or what? Where's Miss Cleo!?!?

2 comments:

  1. I don't know. I don't disagree with your sentiment, but I kind of think he is just getting worse every time out.

    Maybe it is just me hoping that we see Montgomery sooner rather than later, but I am ready for him to be DFA'd.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Truth be told, I have no real confidence, either, but I do stand by him not being *that* bad...he has enough history to tell us that much.

    As far as replacements, it'd be nice to see any of the kids in place of Davies, but not at the expense of the plan they had in place -- and believe it or not, it actually makes sense to wait until June and see what they have. The only factor that could change that (even though it really shouldn't) is the Royals' surprising start.

    But here's the deal...if the Royals continue to surprise and do well, then they should wait anyway...they're winning with Davies being horrible now, so why rush it? And if they crash back to Earth, then that brings it back to the plan of looking to contend again in 2012/2013, and Davies serving purely as a bridge to Lamb, Duffy, Montgomery, et al.

    ReplyDelete