Kansas City Royals: A Look At The 2016 Offseason

As I mentioned, the allure of playing closer to home may have been the difference for Madson.

Yes, the Kansas City Royals plucked him from the scrap-heap, and thrust him back into the spotlight, but there’s little sense of loyalty in Major League Baseball. I can’t blame a guy for wanting to play closer to home.

The A’s are also likely to give Madson a more prominent role in the bullpen, whereas the Royals would have kept him in the seventh inning role. Soria now becomes that seventh inning guy for the Royals, and keeps intact a juggernaut Royals bullpen.

What’s up with all that money though? Was that an overpay for Soria? It probably is an overpay. That’s a lot of money for a guy who isn’t even your set-up man.

In short, I think the Soria signing was good. It is a lot of money, but the Royals are sticking with their formula of decent starting pitching and a lock-down bullpen. I think we can all agree that plan has paid off.

The Royals have figured out that it’s much smarter to overpay for a reliever than it is a starting pitcher (Hold your horses on the Ian Kennedy contract. I’ll get there.).

Let’s use a guy like Mike Leake as an example. I consider him a good, not great, starting pitcher. He signed a five year/$80 million contract with the Cardinals. That’s the going rate for a solid starting pitcher.

If Soria underperforms, the Royals are forced to eat several million dollars, and even that is a tough pill to swallow for a budget-minded team like the Royals. But if someone like Leake were to sign here, for that contract, and under-perform, the Royals would be forced to eat TENS of millions of dollars. That would be crippling.

In short, I think the Soria signing was good. It is a lot of money, but the Royals are sticking with their formula of decent starting pitching and a lock-down bullpen. I think we can all agree that plan has paid off.

Next: Kennedy