Hearne: Scribe Says, Royals Are Done — Wait Til Next Year

wil-myersGo ahead and uncross those fingers and toes, the party’s over…

It’s time for this year’s Kansas City Royals team to start making plans for next year – like they usually do, says sportaholic Craig Glazer of Stanford’s.

“The Royals are over,” Glazer says. “It’s going to be over this weekend. I said that on The Mix this morning. It’s over – they have no chance – none. By this Sunday they’re out. I mean, there’s nothing these guys can do now. You can’t win without talent.”

Now a little, “I told you so.”

mlb_a_hosmer_gb1_576“They absolutely should have kept Wil Myers,” Glazer says. “I understand what Royals general manager Dayton Moore did. He gambled the future for this season. I don’t blame him for doing what he did on the hope and the prayer that Eric Hosmer and some of those young hitters would step up. But they didn’t and at the end of the day, they all disappeared. “

http://www.mb-kc.com/
This entry was posted in Hearne_Christopher. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Hearne: Scribe Says, Royals Are Done — Wait Til Next Year

  1. Guy Who Says What Others Think says:

    The Royals cooked their goose back in May.

  2. Gerald Bostock says:

    Glazer may be a sportsaholic compared with you and your trust fund contemporaries, but Sen. Lloyd Bentsen wants you to know that he has worked with sportsaholics and has been friends with sportsaholics, and Glazer is no sportsaholic. Hanging out and drinking with local athletes does not make you a sportsaholic–it’s makes you an alcoholic.

  3. david says:

    boo-yah! Duffy beats Verlander!

  4. PB says:

    Classic Glazer. Just two days and two less losses ago, “The Scribe’s” headline was that he was bullish on the Royals. He flip flops more than the stretched-out labia of one of his worn-out bimbos.

  5. “…that Eric Hosmer and some of those young hitters would step up. But they didn’t and at the end of the day, they all disappeared.”

    Perfectly illustrates how little you’ve actually been paying attention, Craig. Hosmer hasn’t been the problem at all.

    • CG says:

      I have been paying attention old bud. The Royals are one of baseball’s poorest hitting teams. Hosmer has come to life like today, two homers and won both games nobody else hit, nobody. The pitching is fantastic, but no hitting, none. Won’t work in the end. Eric is the one Royal who might get to a level. But he is the only one. As a hitter. Not enough.

  6. Herbert Deane says:

    Offered without reasoned explanations, then this means no more to me than if you liked strawberries.

  7. rkcal says:

    Where’s the “Chiefs Are Done-Wait for Next Year” post? Don’t let us down.

  8. Rick Nichols says:

    And just when many are ready to bury them, the Boys in Blue up and win a doubleheader in Detroit. Go figure. At any rate, they still need to win at least one more in the Motor City to remain very much a part of the wild-card race. But two would be oh so nice!

  9. CG says:

    AS you saw, the Royals are a brave team, but no real match for Detroit. Other than a hot Eric Hosmer, we have no hitters. NONE. The rest of our hitting line up is average or below. Pitching was great again, but its not enough with one baseballs poorest offense ballclubs. An average attack might have them in the wild card race.

    I am watching game 5, and their slugger just jacked what will likely end the this series a home run. Yes we won 2 of 5, but the two games we lost to Miami really did us in…again nice run…nobody noticed but us cause of LA,Atlanta, Detroit and 50 other teams with higher profiles were also winning at a high rate…it went unseen, sadly.

    The Royals do have the makings of a real baseball team, as I wrote before. I never said they were a play off team as someone said here, just have some good young players who are not yet developed like Hosmer, Moose, Perez, Cain…Butler can go anytime we find a hitter. Gordon is solid but not better than good, never will be great…Eric might be…

    Pitching was our strength this year, with solid D, great baserunning…but no offense, none, killed us….next year better offense and likely will lose Santana and Chen…yikes…still uphill. Chiefs are a clown show again, they will not win the 8 games, even with a soft sched….I’ve seen enough, no receivers, no backs, no offense and hit and miss D….if not for our terrible division with two of leagues worst, Oakland and the horrible Chargers, both on track to win 4 or 5 games only…the Chumps would be not much better than last year…but with weak opponents we might win 6. We have nothing, zip, nothing…Alex is a good short yard passer, but will have no help…Charles likely will go down and that’s that….game six…CHASE DANIELS is your starter, Smith will go down to with horrible O line, it stinks…really stinks. Fisher looks like a wounded duck, Hudson the center has been run over and Smith already runs for his life back there…fun stuff. I give Andy an F so far. Make that an F- with the crappy draft.

  10. MD in KC says:

    First, Glazer praises the Royals — and they lose three straight. Two days later, he says the Royals are done; they’re cooked — and they sweep a doubleheader at Detroit.

    Now he says they have the makings of a real baseball team. That’s the type of analysis you expect from someone who has only a passing interest in the Royals. Hell, Stevie Wonder could make that kind of observation. Awesome job, Craig. Got any good stock tips?

    • CG says:

      Well based on my football picks, which are by far best by anyone in the media, a plus 70% win record for three years and posted…plus my own bets..I’d say I’m pretty damn good. One I did praise the Royals, doesn’t mean they go to the playoffs. Two they did end their run, Detroit won 3 of 5, they lost 2 of three to Miami and they have fallen back to Earth at 21-10 since the break…very good, but its starting to look more like ‘can they finish over .500, then win a playoff spot.’ I see them at 84 to 86 wins, nice jump, no postseason.

      My Chiefs breakdown is even better. WE ARE GONNA WIN 8 OR 9 OR 10…really WHO WILL BE SCORING THOSE TOUCHDOWNS? CHARLES AND WHO else? I see nothing so far…they look like the same old clown show, so far. I’ve seen enough to say 5 or 6 wins is likely. If that makes you fans happy, wow. OK.

      P.S. don’t try and match ‘whats gonna happen’ with these teams..with me son. You will lose. Just like these two horrible franchises. Both have shown nothing for decades…I hope that changes…likely not in the short term though.

      • MD in KC says:

        Couple of points, Craig. First, I’m not your son. If I was, the first thing I’d do is drive down to City Hall to have my last name changed. If the judge denied my request, the next thing I’d do is move someplace where people haven’t heard of you. Given your circle of influence, I’d probably be safe by the time my car’s headlights came upon the exit for Excelsior Springs.

        Second, I’ll just go ahead and call B.S. on the claim that you hit on more than 70% of your football picks. If that’s true, you should have quit the comedy club business a long time ago. (You probably should have quit that business a long time ago anyway, but that’s beside the point.) A skilled sports handicapper will hit on 55% to 60% of picks that involve the point spread (http://www.casinocenter.com/the-6-big-myths-of-sports-betting/). Note that I said the word “skilled.” We’re talking about you, though, so that term does not apply.

        Even if the point spread is not involved, your claim really isn’t all that impressive. In the NFL, the home team wins between 57% and 58% of the time. If you go the safe route and pick the home team in every game each week, you’re already at 58%. In a full week of games, you’d only need to correctly pick an average of three road teams per week over the course of the season to get to 70%; in some bye weeks, you’d only need to pick two road teams. So, correctly picking two or three road teams, with no point spread, and with the sheer number of teams that don’t have a quality quarterback, and the rules designed to favor the offense … it’s not as hard to pick wins and losses from that perspective. It’s certainly not as hard as some people make it sound.

        Now, if you don’t mind, I have to go grab my copy of The King of Sting. I’m not reading it, mind you; I just need something to use as a doorstop. It’s the best 37 cents I ever spent on Amazon.

        • CG says:

          Well mot too bright boy, my picks were posted here on this site and everyone could see them each week, I usually picked 5-7 games a week, a couple college games as well included.

          So everyone knows it was over 70% this year and last year…so yeah it was outstanding. Outstanding. Thanks for the compliment.

          As far as easy, after you said 60% was great, odd. You must use the spread you can’t just pick home winners due to the odds and vig. Sometimes mismatches are more than a 10% add on…you wouldn’t know you don’t bet at that level in Vegas. I understand.

          As far as ‘son’ that was a figure of speech. Meaning you are not too worldly yet. As far as well known, I suppose I’m as known as most any person in the mix in KC over the last 30 years…better than most….but hey most people don’t know who the vice president is, so maybe you are right on that one.

        • Hot Carl says:

          MD in KC says:
          “I have to go grab my copy of The King of Sting. It’s the best 37 cents I ever spent on Amazon.”

          You spent 36 cents too much.

  11. MD in KC says:

    Yes, Craig. I know the vig. It’s the term my grandfather used back when Nixon was president. Many of us call it the juice or the take.

    If you really are hitting on 70% percent or more of your bets, might I suggest you use your winnings on something other than hair dye, black Adidas track suits and steroid injections? Maybe breath mints, or anger management classes, or man-boob reduction surgery … or this type of food called a “salad.”

Comments are closed.