*** Official Kansas City Royals @ Oakland Athletics Game Thread (6/28) ***

[alnorth]

Final	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	R	H	E
KC (44-28)	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	2	0	5	8	0
OAK (34-44)	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	1	0	3	11	2

Win, (6-5) Jeremy Guthrie 6IP 2R 2ER 1BB 7K
Hold, (4) Franklin Morales 1IP 0R 0ER 0BB 0K
Hold, (12) Kelvin Herrera 1IP 1R 1ER 0BB 1K
Save, (9) Wade Davis 1IP 0R 0ER 0BB 2K

VS.



Loss, (4-7) Jesse Chavez 5⅔IP 3R 3ER 2BB 4K
Fernando Rodriguez 1⅓IP 0R 0ER 0BB 0K
Edward Mujica 1IP 2R 2ER 0BB 1K 1HR
Fernando Abad 1IP 0R 0ER 0BB 2K

Home Runs

KC

Salvador Perez, (12) - Top 8th 2-run homer to left

OAK

none

AL Central

Final: CWS 4, DET 5
Final: MIN 3, MIL 5
Final (Game 1): CLE 0, BAL 4
Final (Game 2): CLE 0, BAL 8

Starting Lineups

KC

1. Alcides Escobar, SS
1. Christian Colon, SS
2. Mike Moustakas, 3B
3. Kendrys Morales, 1B
4. Eric Hosmer, DH
4. Lorenzo Cain, ph/DH
5. Salvador Perez, C
6. Alex Gordon, LF
7. Alex Rios, RF
8. Omar Infante, 2B
9. Jarrod Dyson, CF

OAK

1. Billy Burns, CF
2. Eric Sogard, SS
2. Marcus Semien, ph/SS
3. Stephen Vogt, C
4. Ben Zobrist, 2B
5. Josh Reddick, RF
6. Billy Butler, DH
7. Ike Davis, 1B
8. Max Muncy, 3B
9. Sam Fuld, LF

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED

Completely inconsistent this year. He'll give you a good outing every once in awhile with that defense behind him but I definitely don't think it'd be hard to find an upgrade to move him out of the rotation

Frankly, he good more often than not, and with our bullpen he really only needs to be good for 5-6 innings.

If it was that easy to replace him, he'd be replaced. If it was so easy to have a 5th starter with a 3.00 ERA, more teams would have them.

[POND_OF_RED]

Guthrie is a great option to have. He's a veteran who can get the job done, but if Vargas Duffy and Ventura are all healthy and we trade for a starting pitcher I don't think anyone will be too sad to see him pushed out.

[BWillie]

I dont see any reason to leave SPs in past yhe 2nd time theyve faced the order. It can be proven, each time a SP faces the order again they get less and less effective especially on the 3rd time around. I think if you plan for that, you can have more effective pitching overall by carrying more relievers and utilizing them more.

[Al Bundy]

Very nice 3 game sweep in Oakland.. let's 2 out of 3 in Houston.

[petegz28]

they said on 810 after the game that the Royals have a 76% chance of making the playoffs which is the highest chance in the AL. For whatever reason we only have a 9% chance of winning the WS which is the lowest of any team or something like that.

In the NL the Cards and Dodgers both have a 99% and 96% chance respectively of making the playoffs

[KChiefs1]

Cleveland lost their doubleheader today.

[Jerok]

Niiice... last year how many games down were we at the All Star break, 7.5? Remember we almost overtook Detriot.

But I've heard over the years that we are a 2nd half team... so if we're 16 games over in the first half, I can't WAIT for the second!

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by petegz28

they said on 810 after the game that the Royals have a 76% chance of making the playoffs which is the highest chance in the AL. For whatever reason we only have a 9% chance of winning the WS which is the lowest of any team or something like that.

In the NL the Cards and Dodgers both have a 99% and 96% chance respectively of making the playoffs

The 76% isn't surprising since we can play under .500 and still likely snag a WC spot.

Don't know how they come up with the 9%, unless the model just assumes the Cards are winning.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by petegz28

they said on 810 after the game that the Royals have a 76% chance of making the playoffs which is the highest chance in the AL. For whatever reason we only have a 9% chance of winning the WS which is the lowest of any team or something like that.

In the NL the Cards and Dodgers both have a 99% and 96% chance respectively of making the playoffs

Looks like they are referring to baseball prospectus. Their model does not like the Royals and think they "should" have been a .489 team with a losing record. However, the wins we have in the bank are non-refundable and we have a 5.5 game lead, so even if their model thinks we aren't really this good, we're so far ahead that we have a 76.6% chance of making the playoffs anyway. The fangraphs model also doesn't like us and begrudgingly gives us a 76.8% chance.

However, fangraphs has an alternate model (under "season to date") where there are no preconceived notions and it just looks at your 2015 stats and presumes you are every bit as good or bad as those stats say you are, with no weight given to preseason projections. THAT model says the Royals have a 86% chance of making the playoffs, a 19.6% chance of defending their AL championship, and a 9.3% chance of winning the world series.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Looks like they are referring to baseball prospectus. Their model does not like the Royals and think they "should" have been a .489 team with a losing record. However, the wins we have in the bank are non-refundable and we have a 5.5 game lead, so even if their model thinks we aren't really this good, we're so far ahead that we have a 76.6% chance of making the playoffs anyway. The fangraphs model also doesn't like us and begrudgingly gives us a 76.8% chance.

However, fangraphs has an alternate model (under "season to date") where there are no preconceived notions and it just looks at your 2015 stats and presumes you are every bit as good or bad as those stats say you are, with no weight given to preseason projections. THAT model says the Royals have a 86% chance of making the playoffs, a 19.6% chance of defending their AL championship, and a 9.3% chance of winning the world series.

Poor Fangraphs.

Basically everything the Royals are doing flies in the face of the Fangraphs models.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Poor Fangraphs.

Basically everything the Royals are doing flies in the face of the Fangraphs models.

Fangraphs is dead to me. I don't even use it for anything. Their models are clearly very broken.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

Fangraphs is dead to me. I don't even use it for anything. Their models are clearly very broken.

I do like their season to date stats model. Its very simple, it just assumes that your current season stats are real and simulates the rest of the season based on what the teams have done so far, not what they "should have done".

[mr. tegu]

Didn't mean to bump this.