Another Alex Gordon thread

[Madison]

BTW, using the pronoun "we" when refering to your favorite team or any team is not justified unless you are directly employed by the Royals. If you are I apologize, but I doubt that you are. A lot of people do it on here and it bothers me and rightly so.

Call me guilty there as well. I say "we" when discussing the Rangers even though I'm not any part of the organization other than being a fan.

One could argue that without the fans, the team folds up shop and moves to another location, so in fact using the term "we" is not really all that bad, since without fans there is no team.

Look at what the fans do. Take the Yankees or Boston and see how many tickets they sell, merchandise sales, etc. Always sold out as far as tickets go, and management spends money on players because the revenue is there. Take someone like Tampa Bay, or Florida, and see that management doesn't spend money on the team since fans are not in the stands (less revenue). Fans do have an effect on what happens with the team, so they really are a part of that.

Not worth arguing about, so I'll just say I'm guilty of referring to the Rangers as "we" sometimes, and I'm sure it's a habit that I probably won't bother trying to break. Sorry Havok.

[shortsavage]

BTW, using the pronoun "we" when refering to your favorite team or any team is not justified unless you are directly employed by the Royals. If you are I apologize, but I doubt that you are. A lot of people do it on here and it bothers me and rightly so.

Call me guilty there as well. I say "we" when discussing the Rangers even though I'm not any part of the organization other than being a fan.

One could argue that without the fans, the team folds up shop and moves to another location, so in fact using the term "we" is not really all that bad, since without fans there is no team.

Look at what the fans do. Take the Yankees or Boston and see how many tickets they sell, merchandise sales, etc. Always sold out as far as tickets go, and management spends money on players because the revenue is there. Take someone like Tampa Bay, or Florida, and see that management doesn't spend money on the team since fans are not in the stands (less revenue). Fans do have an effect on what happens with the team, so they really are a part of that.

Not worth arguing about, so I'll just say I'm guilty of referring to the Rangers as "we" sometimes, and I'm sure it's a habit that I probably won't bother trying to break. Sorry Havok.

Does this mean that Florida teams can't say we ?

[rmande09]

It's too bad my post was too expletive-laden because it was a darn good one explaining everyone's deep "love" for Havok.

Grudz is a great signing for the Royals. He's cheap, good, and the perfect clubhouse guy. He's a great guy on and off the field, works hard, plays the game the right way, he's a great role model for the young guys coming up through their system. Every clubhouse could use a veteran presence like Grudz, especially a team like the Royals. He's cheap and he performs well on the field - what's not to like?

The D'Rays should take some advice from the Royals and do the same - we all know they're going to need all the help they can get with guys like Upton and Young in their lineup.

[FantasyGURU802]

BTW, using the pronoun "we" when refering to your favorite team or any team is not justified unless you are directly employed by the Royals. If you are I apologize, but I doubt that you are. A lot of people do it on here and it bothers me and rightly so.

Call me guilty there as well. I say "we" when discussing the Rangers even though I'm not any part of the organization other than being a fan.

One could argue that without the fans, the team folds up shop and moves to another location, so in fact using the term "we" is not really all that bad, since without fans there is no team.

Look at what the fans do. Take the Yankees or Boston and see how many tickets they sell, merchandise sales, etc. Always sold out as far as tickets go, and management spends money on players because the revenue is there. Take someone like Tampa Bay, or Florida, and see that management doesn't spend money on the team since fans are not in the stands (less revenue). Fans do have an effect on what happens with the team, so they really are a part of that.

Not worth arguing about, so I'll just say I'm guilty of referring to the Rangers as "we" sometimes, and I'm sure it's a habit that I probably won't bother trying to break. Sorry Havok.

Does this mean that Florida teams can't say we ?

Haha, guess not...

[FantasyGURU802]

Why is this also in the Leftovers forum?

[raiders_umpire]

BTW, using the pronoun "we" when refering to your favorite team or any team is not justified unless you are directly employed by the Royals. If you are I apologize, but I doubt that you are. A lot of people do it on here and it bothers me and rightly so.

Call me guilty there as well. I say "we" when discussing the Rangers even though I'm not any part of the organization other than being a fan.

One could argue that without the fans, the team folds up shop and moves to another location, so in fact using the term "we" is not really all that bad, since without fans there is no team.

Look at what the fans do. Take the Yankees or Boston and see how many tickets they sell, merchandise sales, etc. Always sold out as far as tickets go, and management spends money on players because the revenue is there. Take someone like Tampa Bay, or Florida, and see that management doesn't spend money on the team since fans are not in the stands (less revenue). Fans do have an effect on what happens with the team, so they really are a part of that.

Not worth arguing about, so I'll just say I'm guilty of referring to the Rangers as "we" sometimes, and I'm sure it's a habit that I probably won't bother trying to break. Sorry Havok.

Does this mean that Florida teams can't say we ?

Yes we do. And I am pretty sure that I don't even have to tell you which MLB team that I root for.

[Havok1517]

BTW, using the pronoun "we" when refering to your favorite team or any team is not justified unless you are directly employed by the Royals. If you are I apologize, but I doubt that you are. A lot of people do it on here and it bothers me and rightly so.

Call me guilty there as well. I say "we" when discussing the Rangers even though I'm not any part of the organization other than being a fan.

One could argue that without the fans, the team folds up shop and moves to another location, so in fact using the term "we" is not really all that bad, since without fans there is no team.

Look at what the fans do. Take the Yankees or Boston and see how many tickets they sell, merchandise sales, etc. Always sold out as far as tickets go, and management spends money on players because the revenue is there. Take someone like Tampa Bay, or Florida, and see that management doesn't spend money on the team since fans are not in the stands (less revenue). Fans do have an effect on what happens with the team, so they really are a part of that.

Not worth arguing about, so I'll just say I'm guilty of referring to the Rangers as "we" sometimes, and I'm sure it's a habit that I probably won't bother trying to break. Sorry Havok.

Does this mean that Florida teams can't say we ?

Yes we do. And I am pretty sure that I don't even have to tell you which MLB team that I root for.

I just think some information should be kept somewhat impartial to limit the biases a poster may have.

[Havok1517]

Grudzielanek's AVG, OBP, SLG, OPS, RC/G, GPA, and LD% have all gone down in each of the last three seasons. So, yes, he has shown decline.

And in this day-and-age, sure $4 million doesn't look like much, but this is an organization that can do a heck of a lot more with that four million, like bring in a decent arm, while letting youngsters have their shot at other positions.

Heck, Mike Piazza is only making $1 million this season. The bottom line is, an organization as pinched as the Royals shouldn't be spending $4 million on a .717 OPS 36-year old second-baseman.

Nuff' said about Grundz. Now, back to the minor league guys.

[master453]

gordon is getting ridiculous at AA. absolutely killing the ball lately. .374/10hr in august. .350/20hr since the break.

i think its pretty clear he's mastered wichita. come on royals move him up to AAA already. though its not going to happen i'd like to see him added to the 40man and in kc in sept, but i dont get letting him sit at AA all year...

[The Loveable Losers]

gordon is getting ridiculous at AA. absolutely killing the ball lately. .374/10hr in august. .350/20hr since the break.

i think its pretty clear he's mastered wichita. come on royals move him up to AAA already. though its not going to happen i'd like to see him added to the 40man and in kc in sept, but i dont get letting him sit at AA all year...

While I don't mind them taking their time with him this is definitely true. The only reason I can think of to keep him at AA is because they want to keep Wichita's team competitive.