Deep breath, and...

Damn New York Yankees. Or, I could call them by their nickname...

Damn Yankees.

That "damn" can have two interpretations: 1) damn them and all they stand for (but only a sports damn, not a real one, of course), and 2) as in...damn, it's the Yankees.

The Royals are about to have their schedule balanced out some. One thing that can quickly temper enthusiasm about the Royals competitive start to the 2011 season is noticing they have played 23 home games, most in the majors. One might go on to notice that they sport the 2nd best winning percentage in the majors.

The team with the best home winning percentage thus far? The damn Yankees.

Who are the Royals going to play first on this 6-game road trip? The damn Yankees.

This is why we can't have nice things.

It isn't just about thinking the Royals are outclassed by the damn Yankees (even though currently, they are), but there are two facts that are likely to prove problematic for the Royals in this series: the Royals pitching staff gives up a lot of home runs, and the damn Yankees have hit the most home runs...by far.

One thing interesting to note, though, is that while offhand I would also groan at this game being played in the new damn Yankee Stadium, so far this season it hasn't been a haven for home run hitters -- it's playing pretty even in comparison to the league as far as home runs hit there, and actually is 20th in the league in terms of runs scored there.

Of course, the makeup of that is telling: the damn Yankees are outhomering their opponents 31-14 in the new damn Yankees Stadium.

One wouldn't expect that the opponents' bad luck to hold up, given that it played as a pretty extreme hitters park just last season, but the Royals aren't a team geared to change that -- they'll likely have to find a different way to beat the damn Yankees other than winning a home run derby.

Interesting loss

Just quickly on last night's game:

• Eric Hosmer looked good in walking twice, and even in striking out...he wasn't overeager, and instantly displayed the good batting eye and selectivity so many have bragged about...and that his minor league stats confirmed. His steal of 2nd was very eye-opening...good instincts in getting as nice of a jump as he did.
• The Royals are now 5-2 on this homestand, both losses by a single run. In last night's game, the Royals were really the victims of bad luck. The Oakland A's only left a single runner stranded, because they had the good fortune of bunching together most of their hits in the same inning, and twice avoiding double plays that would have limited the runs they did score in the 5th inning to two instead of three. The Royals, on the other hand, stranded six. I think in most scenarios the Royals would win a game like this.
• Melky Cabrera has held his own to this point, although he's maddeningly somewhat feast-or-famine from game-to-game. But rather than him having a decent chance to kill rallies before they start with his well-developed out-making abilities, he should be moved to the bottom of the order, where he would then turn into a dangerous bottom-of-the-order hitter. Should he feel he can handle it, Ned Yost could put Hosmer there -- if not, then Alex Gordon should be able to thrive in that spot and Hosmer can get things established around 5th or 6th in the order. Remember, Yost, you hit your better hitters higher in the lineup so they can get more plate appearances...
• Mike Aviles is approaching a .300 isoP -- wow. He just seems like an extra-base hit waiting to happen right now.
• Royals ace, Sean O'Sullivan! What...where are you guys going? Come back!
• I badly want to attend a Royals game for the specific purpose of sabotaging the bullpen phone, so Yost's incessant calls for Tim Collins might go unanswered for a game or two. Yost, give the kid a break, please, he's walking almost a batter per inning.

For the game today, the Royals approach may have to change a bit. Whereas Gio Gonzalez is bound to issue a walk or three (or more) during a start as he tries to control his stuff, Brandon McCarthy is walking very few hitters so far this year.

Let the arguments begin!

Dayton Moore has called up Eric Hosmer, replacing Kila Ka'aihue.

Alright, here we go...I think the move is premature.

**braces for the hit**

HOWEVER, I can see it being done in a few more weeks if Hosmer had continued to destroy opposing pitching at Omaha.

**braces for the hit**

Let's look at the different points of contention:

• Too early for Hosmer: This is something I generally agree with, and why I think the move is premature. Hosmer's had just north of 300 plate appearances at the AA and AAA levels. That's half a season, and that's not a lot. That being said, running an 1.100 OPS is a good way to prove that perhaps he's ready now. Still, I don't see what the harm would've been in waiting another 3-4 weeks, and seeing if Kila could do enough to bring back something in a trade, or slightly enhance a trade package over the Summer.
• Too soon to give up on Kila: Yes, it is...but that's not to say that Kila just might not be very good. But this is the problem...Kila is going back to Omaha, where Clint Robinson is tearing it up. Let's say Kila does what he's done enough of before, and tears it up down there, too. Great...now you have two 1B/DH quasi-prospects who haven't shown anything at the major league level, and thus aren't worth much of anything in a trade. Not saying it's the wrong move for this current Royals team, but it is the wrong move from an organizational standpoint.
• Bring up Hosmer, the Royals are contending and he can help: This goes back to the first bullet point -- we don't know squat about what Hosmer will do at the major league level, and of course, we should be skeptical of the Royals chances to contend this year. So if this is the thinking behind bringing up Hosmer, it's faulted.
• Argh, Hosmer's service clock is starting early: To me, this thinking is generally correct, in line with my prior point. But while this is an important point, focusing on it isn't something I'm going to do. I'll get into more detail on why this shouldn't be the main focus of not bringing Hosmer up in a second.

Alright, so...while again, I think the move was premature, and starting Hosmer's service clock early wasn't really necessary, I'm not worried about it.

2018 is very far from now -- which is the extra year the Royals would have Hosmer under their control if they could only wait until next year to bring him up. Again, it's very far away. There will be so many questions about that year...when it arrives...that I think worrying about it too much a silly thing to do.

1. Will Hosmer be good in the majors, as well? We just don't know. Should he prove a bust, of course, 2018 means absolutely nothing.
2. If Hosmer is indeed good, then they'll have to sign him earlier, meaning he'll eat up a chunk of their 2018 money. To this, I ask...2018 money spent on what? Do we know the Royals are going to be good that year? Do we know if Hosmer, who is a Scott Boras client, will even be able to be signed by this organization? Do we know what the other bevy of prospects the Royals have will do, and what kinds of contracts they'll need and how much money of the 2018 Royals payroll they'll take up? Do we know what the Royals team needs will be in 2018, and what the free agent market will look like? Are you dizzy yet? Are you tired of me asking you questions that you can't answer? Shouldn't I be tired of asking them by now? When will it stop?
3. Well, if they can't sign him, at least they would get 2018 for free, then: If he's that good? No they won't, because if he's that good and they can't sign him (likely...again, Scott Boras), then they'll want to trade him earlier than 2018 anyway to get max value in return. And part of that max return value they can look for could be...wait for it...a 1B prospect to replace Hosmer.

Now, to answer to all of point #2's questions...well, the ones prior to me going off on a tangent, anyway...are no, we do not know. So in that vein, we simply cannot be too concerned with the disposition of one player for one particular year -- a year that is 6 1/2 years from now.

If Hosmer's service time/contract status seriously impairs this organization's ability to contend in 2018, then so be it. But with the literal ton of variables between now and then, I don't think it's a stretch to think that it won't.

Let's remind ourselves of two things -- the Royals now have quite a number of prospects, and I would hope by then that Dayton Moore can stumble his way onto another 1B/DH prospect by then. Prospects as highly touted as Hosmer do not grow on trees, but that being said, 1B/DH hitting prospects are among the easiest ones to find. In six years, I would hope Moore can reload at that spot.

So, in summary, I would not have brought Hosmer up were I in the shoes of Dayton Moore. Of course, if I were in his shoes, I'd probably be thinking, "These aren't my shoes" or something along those lines...but I digress.

I would not have brought Hosmer up, but I'm not Dayton Moore, and the Royals are not my team. Since Moore has indeed made this move, I may as well stuff my reservations into a bag, and get excited about seeing this guy play!

GO BLUE!

Battle for the Crown

I'm a big Royals fan. I also like the The Game of Thrones, both the series of books and, so far, the HBO series.

There's just no way that's a coincidence. Based on those two facts, I must surmise the Royals will contend all season in the AL Central.

You should believe me. After all, I'm levitating as I type this.

Reality is a bitch, but one that gives you good advice -- even if you'd rather ignore it. So far, the Royals are 4-0 on this 9-game stretch I've referred to a couple of times; a stretch that can tell us something about the Royals, but isn't necessarily a test.

The Minnesota Twins are hurting, although of course no-hitters tend to help things.

The Baltimore Orioles has been competitive to this point, but probably aren't very good.

The Oakland A's do have good pitching, so let's call this one a semi-test.

But right after that stretch of games, there really isn't a break the rest of the month. The Royals do play the Orioles again, but that will be outside the friendly confines of the K. There will be:

• 3 games vs. the New York Yankees in New York...the Bronx Bombers vs. a starting rotation that loves to supply the ammo
• 5 games vs. the Texas Rangers, 3 of which are back in Arlington...and we know what happened there last time
• 3 games vs. the St. Louis Cardinals...and Albert Pujols, Matt Holliday, and the suddenly-rejuvenated Lance Berkman, who have hit 20 HR between them
• 2 more games vs. the Cleveland Indians
• 3 games vs. the Detroit Tigers on the road
• 2 games vs. the LA Angels to finish the month

Now, it isn't as if I'm looking at those 18 games and predicting an 0-18 performance. The Tigers have been helter skelter, the Royals have already proven they can beat the Angels, the Rangers aren't playing as well lately...

However, what I am saying is this 9-game stretch is a most opportune time to maybe beat up on a few teams during this home stand, because wins will likely be much harder to come by for the rest of May.

Other things:

• The whole musical position chairs thing Ned Yost is doing between Mike Aviles, Chris Getz, and Wilson Betemit is starting to become silly. After sitting at .391/.462/.435 after the game on April 8th, Getz has went 12-for-68 in putting up a .176/.272/.235 line. Sit Getz, get Kila Ka'aihue back in the lineup, install Aviles at 2nd, and let Betemit, the guy who's only went hitless in 2 of the 21 games he's played, bungle around at 3rd if it means keeping that bat in the lineup.
• Not sure what kind of longer-term future Betemit or Jeff Francoeur, have with the Royals, but I will tell you this much -- they will be great trading chips if they keep putting up slashlines like they currently have.
• I keep waiting for Alcides Escobar to have a superlative day at the plate. You know, have a couple of extra-base hits in the same game, go 3-for-4...something. Right now, though, his plate appearances are an exercise in bleugh.
• I no longer cringe at the thought of Melky Cabrera patrolling centerfield. I wouldn't say confident...but it no longer causes me extraneous consternation.

Speaking of consternation...Kyle Davies will toe the rubber today. I'll go out on a limb and predict that after getting ambushed vs. the Indians in his last start, he will again get us to throw up our hands in confusion by pitching a good game.

The Prediction: 7IP, 7K, 2BB, 2ER*

Wow. I didn't even know that. Wow. **YAWN**

From the MLB website on Billy Butler:

Billy Butler, with a homer and a double, extended his string of consecutive series in which he's hit safely to 112, second most in the Majors.

Let me just preface what I'm about to say with one little fact -- sometimes, I'm an asshole. The vast majority of the time I'm really nice, but you know, every once in a while...

I'm sorry, the tracking of this is starting to annoy me (it's also mentioned by Ryan Lefebvre on the television broadcast...not sure if Denny is doing the same on radio). Whenever some type of streak is tracked and mentioned at every opportunity, I tend to think it should be one for which at least 1-in-10 baseball fans know the record.

Can anybody, off the top of their head, name the record for most-consecutive-series-hit-in-safely? Perhaps Ryan has mentioned it at some point and a few of you have remembered it, but if that's the case, it just proves my point...you wouldn't have known the record unless you heard about it first.

Can anybody, off the top of their head, name the player with a longer active streak than Billy? Same thing -- we wouldn't know unless Ryan or Denny mentioned it, and that's because it's probably not very important.

I love Billy Butler, and I'm a huge Royals fan (in case that had slipped by you), but I don't give a box of stale Cracker Jacks worth of care about this streak. When I want to remind myself that Billy's a good hitter, I'll just take a gander at his slashline.

I'm pretty sure I know why it's being tracked -- the Royals have been poor offensively and without an All-Star caliber hitter for several years, now, so I'm sure there's sort of a drive to find something the fans can talk about, and I suppose one can use it to commend Butler's consistency. But really, this particular streak is almost pure luck...if there had been some two-game series along the way in which Billy went hitless, I'm going to doubt my opinion of him as a hitter would be any different.

And that concludes my needlessly sarcastic viewpoint for the day.

"Mr. Smith, your sarcasm is currently at a here: [..............................], and we're gonna need it at a here: [...]."

You goin' solo, bro?

Royals pitchers, the home runs they've given up, and how many have been solo home runs (through May 1st):

Bruce Chen: 7 HR given up, 7 solo shots

Kyle Davies: 5 HR given up, 5 solo shots

Luke Hochevar: 10 HR given up, 8 solo shots.

Sean O'Sullivan: 1 HR given up, 0 solo shots.

Jeff Francis: 4 HR given up, 3 solo shots.

The bullpen: 8 HR given up, 4 solo shots.

So in total (if my math isn't jacked up and I haven't missed anything), the Royals have given up 35 home runs, 24 of which have been solo shots for a solo home run rate of 68%. If I remember correctly, the average % for solo home runs vs. multi-run home runs in MLB usually is between 55-59% on average (I haven't looked it up in quite a while, though).

But the Royals starters have given up 27 of those 35 home runs, and 23 of the 27 have been solo shots for an 85% solo home run rate.

Basically, the Royals starters have been a bit lucky to this point to not give up more runs than they already have, but at this point in the season, that's only about 6-7 home runs off of the mean. I can't remember what the average runs per home run in MLB is anymore, but I think it's safe to say the Royals could have given up another 8-10 runs than they have to this point.

Again, meaningless at this early juncture, but interesting...er, at least to me.

On the flipside, it looks like Royals hitters have had about even luck in this category -- they've hit solo home runs 62.5% of the time they've hit a home run (15 of 24 total...I could be off by one, here, but I'm not going to through those box scores a 2nd time).

That worked out well

I'm no where close to calling the Royals a good team. Not even within shouting distance. I am prepared to go out on the most slender of limbs to say they're definitely not horrible, however.

Yes, you heard it here first (or 27th). The Kansas City Royals are not horrible. What can I say? Fortune favors the bold, and I'm just a guy calling it like I see it...while also not wanting to overstate things and look stupid two weeks from now.

I figured, like probably we all did, that the 6-game losing streak was a deathknell. Basement-dwelling couldn't be too far behind, right? Then I paid attention to the schedule and realized...okay, there were some winnable games coming up. The Minnesota Twins were hurting -- any team playing them right now should feel confident, and sure enough, the Royals beat up on them for a three-game sweep.

The Baltimore Orioles are a little different animal. No, they're not good, either. But when you look at their wins & losses, you realize the losses are concentrated against three teams: the New York Yankees, the Texas Rangers, and the Cleveland Indians...or, the 3 teams with the best records in the AL. The Royals also had trouble with the Rangers and Indians, although they have yet to play the Yankees.

Another similarity -- the Orioles started hot (6-1), hit a rough patch (lost 11 of 13, only beating the Twins during that stretch), and then managed a sweep of a struggling team: the Chicago White Sox. The Royals also started hot (12-7), hit a rough patch (lost 6 in a row), then managed a sweep of a struggling team in the Twins.

So what does all that mean? Absolutely nothing. Aren't you glad you read all that?

But from a fluff standpoint, it means they're both teams wondering about themselves a bit -- yes, so far they've beat either bad teams or teams playing badly at the time, but have struggled against good teams or...whatever the Indians are (although it's hard to think they're a fluke...they're not exactly winning a bunch of 1-run games, here).

In essence, no, this isn't an "important" series -- at least, not any more important than any of the others ones to this point -- but it is an interesting series between two teams that are trying to prove to themselves and their fans that they're something more than "not horrible".

The standings were weird to look at after the game, by the way:

It isn't about the standings of the teams, per se -- sure, it's almost the opposite of what the vast majority were predicting for this division, but I'm talking more about the losing streaks of the bottom three teams: 6 in a row for the Twins and Detroit Tigers, 5 in a row for the White Sox. And remember, the Royals just came out of a 6-game losing streak. At this juncture, the Indians longest losing streak is 3 games.