*** Official 2016 Royals Offseason Repository ***

[duncan_idaho]

Well, folks, it has happened. The Royals stand triumphant, atop the heap of MLB.

In this thread, we'll track the action as Dayton Moore continues The Process and attempts to defend the long-awaited title.

Before we get to the meet of it, let's take a minute to reflect ... and say "I'm Sorry" to Dayton Moore.

We gave you hell. Many of us called for your head. But you were right. You got it done. Congratulations. Mea culpa.

Now, let's talk about the offseason:

LINK TO 2016-18 PAYROLL INFO COURTESY OF ROYALS REVIEW

The Royals will have a few priorities: Corner OF (x2) and 1 SP, IMO. The rest of the core is solid and will need little tweaking. Looking at the increase in ticket sales, merchandising, concessions, parking, etc., I think it's fair to assume the Royals GROSSED $100 million more this season, or close to it. That gives Glass and Dayton Moore much more flexibility on payroll for 2016 (hopefully).

First order of business will be gauging the Alex Gordon market. If he can be resigned for 4-5 years at around $75-80 million total, it would be hard for KC to pass on that. He's still an above-average corner OF bat, and the Royals will need to bring in at least one proven guy to play in a corner if Gordon walks... and the whole market looks a lot like Alex - guys in their early 30s looking for huge, final contracts.

Second order of business: Make a decision on Zobrist. It sounds like KC will pursue him aggressively. At 34, he's at risk of declining in a big way after a few years. If they could find someone to take on Omar Infante for eating 1/2 of his deal, that would be a great start to things.

If they decide not to spend on Zobrist, KC will need to cobble together some sort of plan for 2B/RF that involves some cheaper options like Orlando, Colon, Dyson, etc.

I could see them deciding his ability to provide great insurance at either 2B or in RF is worth the risk.

Third order of business: Add depth to the rotation with a FA SP. Duffy, Ventura, Volquez and Medlen are locks for 4 spots, it seems. Kyle Zimmer may finally be ready to make a MLB impact, but his innings will be limited. That means KC needs insurance. Will it kill two birds with one stone (and insure against Duffy/Ventura regression) by signing a more top-tier guy? Or does Moore look to Chris Young/someone like him for this depth?

Personally, I think Mike Leake would be a great fit with KC's defense and park, and I know Moore has long coveted him. He's still young - just 28 - and has succeeded in bandbox Cincinnati for years.

Ian Kennedy, Mat Latos, Marco Estrada, and Justin Masterson are some other names that may pique interest (a little further down the list).

Other than that, I don't think KC makes any major moves. Greg Holland will be interesting to observe, as they have one more year of control of him, and he will obviously miss all of that season. I wouldn't be surprised to see a pre-arbitration deal that pays him something like $15 million over the next two seasons, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him turned loose, period.

The bullpen will rest upon Wade Davis/Herrera/Hochevar, filling in pieces around them. Bringing Madson back wouldn't be a surprise, but he could get a big deal from another team that is willing to pay him as their top setup guy or even their closer.

I think the biggest prospects to watch in Spring Training will be:

1) Kyle Zimmer. The hype has built, died down, built again, etc. If he's healthy, he's filthy and a potential ToR arm. But what does he look like in ST, and how many innings can you reasonably expect from him if he does earn a rotation spot? It seems like 120-130 innings would be his limit unless they really stretch (or unless he has a lot of hidden innings from simulated games/extended spring training, which might push him to 150-160).

Having another cheap, home-grown pitcher would be a significant boon for this team as it tries to extend the competitive window (and potentially give KC a strong 1-2 to build its rotation around in Zimmer and Ventura)

2) Bubba Starling. I'm trying to remain skeptical, but I like what I hear about Bubba from this season, and the performance has picked up. If KC does not sign someone to fill the RF slot, I think that's a strong indication KC's front office believes Starling will be ready to contribute in 2016.

Dayton Moore has long said that when Starling's light flips on, it will happen quickly and burn brightly. Time will tell.

After his STRONG Arizona Fall League Performance, he shot up my prospect chart.

3) Miguel Almonte. His late-season stint out of the KC bullpen went poorly, but Almonte has a plus-plus changeup, a good fastball, and a decent curve ball. He may be the dark horse in the rotation competition, and unlike Zimmer, he's set up to pitch a full 180 inning season.

4) RA Mondesi. The only player to debut in the MLB World Series has incredible tools. He still needs to refine his game, but again... he may be KC's best cheap, plus alternative at a key position (2B). His defense would be a boon from Day 1, but he needs seasoning with the bat before he's asked to hold down 2B full time.

And, as always, here are the Prospects:

Duncan’s Top 20 for 2016:

Spoiler!

1. Raul Adalberto Mondesi, SS, BOTH: Tools, tools, tools. RA has tools galore. At his best, he’s an All-Star SS who plays elite D, hits 15-20 HR, swipes 40 bags, and is an ideal 1, 2 or 3 hitter. At his worst, I think he looks a lot like Alcides Escobar. Plate discipline is his biggest challenge at this point, but evaluators are confident that will come with time. Clear No. 1
2. Kyle Zimmer, RHP: He’s pitching again and staying healthy, which is nice. He’s pitcing out of the bullpen to build back his arm strength, which is less nice. But still has that high upside, just a lower floor now. Ideally, the team will use him as a bullpen weapon in September (because he has earned it) and then give him a chance to transition back to starting for 2016.
3. Bubba Starling, CF, RH: Starling has been up and down this year but put himself back on the map by greatly improving his K rate while also improving across the slash line as a hitter. His defense and baserunning are MLB ready; if Starling can work himself into a league average hitter, he can be a solid MLB regular who plays great D in CF while hitting 15 HR and swiping 20 bags.
4. Miguel Almonte, RHP: Still love the body, FB/CH combo. Results aren’t eye popping, but he’s still low enough and early enough in the development to prize those things over performance. Still a solid No. 3 starter upside, and just a year and some change away from potentially being ready to contribute at the MLB level.
5. Jorge Bonifacio, RF, RH: Emilio’s little brother got off to a horrible start in 2015 but has heated up as the season went on. He also is translating BP power to game power for the first time, with 15 HR just past the mid-way point of his season. Despite his disappointing 2014, he has a chance to build his way back into legit prospect status – and still is only 22. Next challenge for him should be Omaha, but that may wait for the start of the 2014 season.
6. Scott Blewett, RHP: Blewett has a nice two –pitch mix already and is off to a strong start. With his size (6-6) and a good fastball/curveball combo, Blewett could eventually turn into a good No. 3 starter, with a MLB-average changeup.
7. Nolan Watson, RHP: The Royals’ 2015 sandwich pick is a polished prep arm who is adding velocity and explosiveness to a good, polished base. Likely to move quickly.
8. Ashe Russell, RHP: The 2015 top pick probably needs more work than Watson, but the upside is really nice. Again, advanced two-pitch mix that will depend on him adding a changeup. Could be a very good NO. 2 if it all adds up.
9. Balbino Fuenmayor, 1B/DH, RH: The Balbino came out of basically nowhere in 2015 to earn a Futures Game spot. Big power and an improved two-strike approach have turned the late bloomer into a legit prospect. He’s blocked at the MLB level currently by Eric Hosmer and Kendrys Morales, but Fuenmayor’s combination of power hitting and good average/strike zone control makes him intriguing.
10. Cheslor Cuthbert, 3B, RH: Cheslor probably is not going to be the star KC was hoping for when signing him out of Nicaragua, but he does look like he can be a solid reserve for an MLB club. Good defense at 3B paired with a solid plate approach and some gap power plays fine off the bench. He becomes a lot more interesting if they think he can stick as a 2B, which they have experimented with.

Spoiler!

11. Chase Vallot, C/DH/1B: I really like Vallot’s power and plate discipline combo. His bat will probably force him from behind the plate, but he’s held his own despite being extremely young for every level he has faced.
12. Alfredo Escalera-Maldonado, OF, RH: Escalera-Maldonado earned a promotion to Wilmington at age 20, which is pretty advanced movement for that age. He’s an athletic outfielder who has shown some plate discipline at an early age, which is encouraging. Doesn’t sound like he can stick in CF long term for KC, but his bat has become one to watch.
13. Pedro Fernandez, RHP: I haven’t seen much of him, but like the reports I’ve heard on his fastball and general makeup. Could become the next Almonte/Mondesi, though he’s more likely to land in the pen than either of them.
14. Elier Hernandez, OF, RH: Elier Hernanez teamed with Escalera-Maldonado in breaking out at Low-A and earning a promotion to Wilmington. It’s still early for this guy – he is just 20 years old – but he doesn’t take walks and hasn’t developed the prodigious power many thought he had the potential for. Still worth watching.
15. Hunter Dozier, 3B, RH: Dozier is reworking his swing mid-season, which generally will cause production to do what his has done: Nose dive. The changes he made entering the season (seemingly geared towards increasing his power production) were a disaster, and now he’s trying to get back to what he used to be. Still looks great and checks most of the scouting boxes, but the performance hasn’t matched, and it almost knocked him out of the list.
16. Christian Binford, RHP: After a breakthrough 2014, Binford struggled mightily at AAA and suffered a demotion. His upside remains similar – a back-end starter who can eat innings – but Binford’s lack of velocity and reliance on command have caught up to him so far.
17. Marten Gasparini, OF, SH: Gasparini is intriguing because of his speed and athleticism. He’s a LOOOOONG ways from the majors and young for his level, but reports on his bat speed, swing, and speed remain positive enough to keep him on the bubble.
18. Eric Skoglund, LHP: Skoglund had a nice year at Wilmington. I'm skeptical because his K rate is lower than I like to see for a guy at A+ - just 7/9, and usually guys lose a strikeout or two/9 as they move up the chain from there - but he has excellent control, walking 1.17 batters/9. 6-7 lefties with great control who get lots of ground balls - like Skoglund - have a chance to overcome bad K rates.
19. Ryan O'Hearn, 1B/LF: A lefty stick with power, O'Hearn was a savings signing as an 8th round pick, but a change in his approach increased his power - while increasing his K rate. After Vallot, probably the best pure power prospect in the Royals system.
20. Josh Staumont, RHP: I was terrified of this guy's control problems, and he walked nearly a batter an inning in his pro debut (32 BB in 40 1/3 IP). Staumont's nasty, nasty stuff (plus-plus fastball, plus slider) could make him a very good late-inning reliever who strikes out more than a batter an inning, if he can develop average or slightly below-average control. If he really masters the control, you're talking about a potential Greg Holland type, but that's a TALL task.

[alnorth]

woops.

https://twitter.com/williamnyy23/sta...32975725395970

Technology is hard. Seems like the folks who run the HOF web site spoiled the results due to incompetence. Looks like its only Griffey and Piazza this year.

edit: there's now a Tim Raines page. So, maybe they hadn't finished his yet. Still nothing for Bagwell.

[Prison Bitch]

If comp picks are valued at 10M and we paid Gordon 72M, our actual cost is 82M. Because we gave up the comp pick someone else was going to pay us.

[cmh6476]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

If comp picks are valued at 10M and we paid Gordon 72M, our actual cost is 82M. Because we gave up the comp pick someone else was going to pay us.

are you the Go Chiefs version of the royals?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by cmh6476

are you the Go Chiefs version of the royals?

He's right.

The market consensus right now is that a 1st round pick has a value of about $8-10 million. When you look at the outlay on a contract, that cost or opportunity cost has to be factored in.

If I'm the Royals, I give that up without blinking because ultimately the familiarity makes it worth surrendering the pick. That being said, the pick they would have had (probably in the 33/34 range) has a value and by re-signing Gordon, they lost that value. It's fair to include it in the conversation.

You can bet your ass that Moore did.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

He's right.

The market consensus right now is that a 1st round pick has a value of about $8-10 million. When you look at the outlay on a contract, that cost or opportunity cost has to be factored in.

If I'm the Royals, I give that up without blinking because ultimately the familiarity makes it worth surrendering the pick. That being said, the pick they would have had (probably in the 33/34 range) has a value and by re-signing Gordon, they lost that value. It's fair to include it in the conversation.

You can bet your ass that Moore did.

What are your thoughts on comp picks? I don't follow the draft one bit, but it sure seems like that avg value is so driven by the few big hits, watering down any real "mean value". Sure seems like KC has gotten a bunch of Mike Montgomery/Sam Selman types and nothing good. I'm not sure I believe 8-10M.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

What are your thoughts on comp picks? I don't follow the draft one bit, but it sure seems like that avg value is so driven by the few big hits, watering down any real "mean value". Sure seems like KC has gotten a bunch of Mike Montgomery/Sam Selman types and nothing good. I'm not sure I believe 8-10M.

Comp picks are like any other pick... They carry extreme risk of failure.

Manaea, and Montgomery are comp picks who added value through their trade worth. They haven't really nailed one, but a lot of talent gets taken at those spots.

Mike Stanton was drafted right around where the Royals pick would have been had Gordon walked, to give you one example.

[big nasty kcnut]

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

What are your thoughts on comp picks? I don't follow the draft one bit, but it sure seems like that avg value is so driven by the few big hits, watering down any real "mean value". Sure seems like KC has gotten a bunch of Mike Montgomery/Sam Selman types and nothing good. I'm not sure I believe 8-10M.

You're absolutely right.

But realize, if you nail one, the value of that one hit could easily exceed $100 million.

Stephen Piscotty was a Cardinals comp pick for losing Albert Pujols and the Cardinals seem content with letting him play RF for the foreseeable future. If he's a solid regular over the next 6 years, he'll probably be worth about 15-18 WAR up and through his prime seasons. That kind of player on the market will cost you in excess of $100 million over that period of time as a FA. With cost control he's unlikely to clear $25 million over that span. Hell, if nothing else, he was already instrumental in the Cardinals even making the playoffs last year. Without him they probably end up in the wild card game and would've gone one and done (maybe not even at Busch; he was that good for us). At that point you're talking about 2 games of lost gate if nothing else - that alone has a marginal value of a couple million given that it's 'free' gate.

The point being that the benefits are so enormous that you don't have to hit on many of them to make a huge impact. The Cardinals have had 10 comp picks over the last 10 years and while most of those have washed out, 3 of them have been Lance Lynn, Michael Wacha and now Stephen Piscotty; guys that will yield massive surplus value to the Cardinals.

Rob Kaminsky was another and he was traded for Moss (a bad trade, but an asset nonetheless). Clay Mortenson was one and he was the #2 piece in the trade for Matt Holliday. Chris Perez was another and he was sent in the deal for DeRosa. DeRosa was a bust but at the time the Indians also liked Jason Motte. So while DeRosa wasn't worthwhile, the ability to include Perez instead of Motte was important in keeping an asset in-house that was eventually ENORMOUS in the 2011 WS run.

If nothing else it makes your draft pool larger so you can be a lot more aggressive with a few other draft picks. Sure, maybe you don't use your comp pick on a player that makes a direct impact, but it maybe you used it on an easy to sign college senior, saved yourself $800K in bonus money and then used that to lure a HS kid out of a college commitment who you took with your 4th rounder and THAT guy turns out to be a big time hit for you.

The draft picks matter. I think it depends largely on where you are in the competitive cycle, but I also don't feel like $10 million is a bad guesstimate. In the end, I would never give up my pick for a player that I don't feel will be a legitimate asset for 3 years or more. So I wouldn't give it up for a short term signing (nor would I re-sign my own guy w/ a QO for a short term deal) nor would I have given it up for someone like Zobrist that I think only has 2 good years left in him.

[Saul Good]

$10,000,000 seems way too high between the bust rate and the amount of time it takes to realize the benefit of the pick. Even if you hit, there's a 3 year wait until you start to see a return. 3 years in baseball is an eternity.

[Prison Bitch]

So maybe we should use the median here. Let's suppose it's 2-3M. Seems like a much better application to this.

[DJ's left nut]

To clarify, if you don't follow the draft you probably don't get that last point I made.

MLB draft rules give you a 'slot' amount for each pick you have. So getting an additional pick gives you that much more in total 'slot' money to put towards draft picks. College seniors have no eligibility left so they're often taken earlier and signed to pittance deals well below the 'slot' for that draft pick, so that money then becomes surplus that can be put towards tougher signs; draft eligible juniors and high school players being the most common.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

So maybe we should use the median here. Let's suppose it's 2-3M. Seems like a much better application to this.

No dice because we have at least one real world example of how teams value draft picks.

Touiki Toussaint was the 16th overall pick for Arizona in the 2014 draft. In 2015 the Braves gave up nothing to acquire him and Bronson Arroyo. Arroyo was rehabbing from TJ surgery at the time and the Braves had no expectation of pitching him.

Instead they took on the remaining $10 million contractual obligation owed to Arroyo by the D-Backs in order to get Toussaint. And the industry savaged the D-Backs for it, BTW. It was largely seen as a steal, even though some were openly questioning if Toussaint had shown the ability to develop a 3rd pitch.

The Braves essentially traded $10 million for a first rounder when they assumed Arroyo's deal to get Toussaint.

I think $8-10 million is spot on.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

$10,000,000 seems way too high between the bust rate and the amount of time it takes to realize the benefit of the pick. Even if you hit, there's a 3 year wait until you start to see a return. 3 years in baseball is an eternity.

That's why I said it depends on where you are in the competitive cycle.

Honestly, 3 years in baseball is a relative blink of an eye. Hell, you get the guys essentially free of charge for 3+ seasons when you call them up. And a mediocre reliever can have an 8-10 yr career pretty easily.

Even an average turnaround job takes 5 years.

3 years is an eternity in football; it's nothing in baseball. But again, if you're in the middle of an up cycle, then you give up the pick and worry about the repercussions later. Just don't pass those picks off as not having substantial value.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

That's why I said it depends on where you are in the competitive cycle.

Honestly, 3 years in baseball is a relative blink of an eye. Hell, you get the guys essentially free of charge for 3+ seasons when you call them up. And a mediocre reliever can have an 8-10 yr career pretty easily.

Even an average turnaround job takes 5 years.

3 years is an eternity in football; it's nothing in baseball. But again, if you're in the middle of an up cycle, then you give up the pick and worry about the repercussions later. Just don't pass those picks off as not having substantial value.

The context of my "eternity" comment was more about salaries.

[C3HIEF3S]

|20|10|5|4| ?