Mellinger Minutes: how Chiefs might exploit the Texans, a bit about the Royals & more
The Baltimore Ravens remain the consensus favorite, both for the AFC championship and Super Bowl. The Chiefs are their biggest threat, certainly in the AFC and possibly in the entire league.
We can debate whether a loss in the AFC Championship Game would be a failure for these Chiefs, but we know their season can’t be considered a success without at least reaching the Super Bowl, so the temptation is to start considering the Chiefs-Ravens potential matchup for the Lamar Hunt trophy already.
That’s silly for lots of reasons, but two more than any others:
1. Any playoff football is too fun to overlook.
2. Deshaun Watson.
This is not a case built around the fact that the Texans already won at Arrowhead Stadium this season, and it’s not a case built around the abstract counterpoint that it’s hard to beat a good team twice because both teams are fundamentally different than in Week 6.
The Chiefs played that game without Chris Jones, Eric Fisher, Sammy Watkins, Anthony Hitchens and Andrew Wylie. Tyreek Hill only played half the Chiefs’ offensive snaps on his way back from an injury. Frank Clark played with what we now know was a pinched nerve in his neck, bad enough that he wasn’t sure he’d finish the season. Patrick Mahomes reinjured his ankle. Kendall Fuller left with a broken thumb.
All of those players are now fully healthy, and the Chiefs have added important defensive pieces like Mike Pennel and Terrell Suggs.
The Texans are different, too. They played that game without receiver Kenny Stills and Johnathan Joseph. Bradley Roby, the excellent Houston cornerback, and starting tackle Tytus Howard also left with injuries.
By the end of the game, the Chiefs were fully exploiting the absence of the Texans’ top two corners. They also could not generate much of a pass rush, and with a makeshift offensive line could not do much against the Texans’ pass rush.
We have not even mentioned how different the Chiefs’ defense is since then — they gave up 24 points per game through Week 6, and have given up just 16.4 per game since.
I just don’t know how anything real can be taken from that game and applied to this one.
The Chiefs opened as 8-point favorites against the Texans Saturday night and that line was immediately bet higher. I’m guessing this is because Mahomes has made the Chiefs a name-brand national team, the defense has improved and the Texans could’ve lost to the Bills a dozen different ways.
You might know that I’m a numbers guy, and the analytics are clear here. Football Outsiders’ DVOA, for instance, has the Chiefs as the league’s second-best team and the Texans 19th — by far the worst remaining playoff team.
But the Texans are dangerous. Deshaun Watson is one of the AFC’s three elite quarterbacks and capable of turning any successful pass rush into a first-down scramble or touchdown throw. J.J. Watt may or may not be 100 percent, but he’s still one of the best players in the sport and supported by strong teammates at every level.
The Texans’ offense runs differently with Stills and Will Fuller on the field supporting DeAndre Hopkins, particularly when Watson’s legs and the combination of Duke Johnson and Carlos Hyde require defenses to play honestly up front.
It’s a challenge worthy of the divisional round. The Chiefs have lost to worse teams, many times, at this stage of the postseason.
We’ll get (a lot) more into the matchup below, but I write all this here because a lot of you asked about the Ravens. I just don’t think we’re there yet.
This week’s eating recommendation is the pastrami at Milwaukee Deli and the reading recommendation is Rich Cimini on the 20 year anniversary of Bill Belichick’s retirement as HC of the NYJ.
Please give me a follow on Twitter and Facebook, and as always thanks for your help and thanks for reading.
At the risk of continuing the Minutes’ tendency to go too deep with questions, please allow me to answer your question with a question:
Who’s to say anxiously dreading another letdown isn’t part of the fun?
Isn’t that part of what binds sports fans?
Wearing the same underwear, throwing stuff at the TV, locking ourselves in the basement so we can scream in peace, holding on tight to the pendulum between SPORTS ARE SO STUPID WHO WOULD DO THIS TO THEMSELVES and MY TEAM IS THE GREATEST AND THIS IS ALL THAT MATTERS IN LIFE, the whole thing, the swings, they can be part of the fun, too.
You’ve heard me say way too often that nobody can tell you how to be a fan, but this specific situation is much of what I mean.
If your way of cheering your team is a sort of self-survival ritual in which you prepare for the worst but hold on for the best, good for you — go for it.
If your way of cheering your team is a blind but vulnerable optimism in which you assume all the good things in life will happen to your team and nobody else but your team, then great, that’s your way.
This is the best of sports, on both sides, because if we knew the outcome the joy would be diminished.
I do feel pretty strongly about one thing here, though. Chiefs fans have been kicked in the teeth as often and as hard as any fan base in football. With rare exceptions, their team has shown itself completely incapable of losing a playoff game in a normal way.
They can’t just lose without giving up a touchdown on a fumble that hit a helmet, or a boomerang touchdown pass, or a weird offsides, or ... sorry, I’ll respect your feelings and stop here.
But as rough as all of that is, I do think it’ll make the payoff a little sweeter. Comparisons across sports are flawed for a million reasons, but if the Royals had been good or even competent for the three decades between 1985 and 2015, that parade would not have been nearly as important.
Same thing with the Chiefs: if they had not lost so many times in so many brutally creative ways, then the moment they reach the Super Bowl or even win it wouldn’t be nearly as exciting as it will be in our current reality.
This is the part where I say without pain there is no joy, and that’s as true in sports as it is in life.
Embrace the awful feelings and fear, is what I’m saying. Don’t try to shut them out, if that’s what you’re feeling. It’s part of the ride. For better, for worse, and if your team happens to employ a 24-year-old MVP at quarterback you have to believe it’ll be for better soon enough.
Never would’ve considered this without Tucker, and it’s inherently subjective, but we can at least try to answer this with numbers.
The Chiefs finished seventh in points against, their best mark since 2016, when they lost a home playoff game to the Steelers despite giving up zero touchdowns. The 2019 Chiefs finished 17th in yards, compared to 24th in 2016, and the late surge means you’d give the tiebreaker to the current group.
People don’t remember this, but Andy Reid’s first teams here won on Bob Sutton’s defense — fifth, second, third and seventh in points the first four years. In 2015 they finished sixth in Football Outsiders’ DVOA, though that team played on the road twice in the playoffs — steamrolling Brian Hoyer in Houston, then milking clock when down two scores in the fourth quarter in New England.
Before that, their last home playoff game was after the 2010 season, but that team was a product of a soft schedule, weak division and Matt Cassel setting the unofficial all-time single-season record for dropped interceptions thrown.
Before that, the last home playoff game was after the 2003 season, so we can just quickly move past that. And now is when we get to 1997 — Derrick Thomas, James Hasty, Donnie Edwards, Dan Williams and Gunther Cunningham on the 1s and 2s*.
* The kids no longer say that, I know.
So, in review: holy crap I think Tucker is right.
Also: the Chiefs have had some very mediocre defenses, and far fewer home playoff games than a franchise that continually presents itself as one of the league’s best should have.
This answer is going to be long. It will include video. It will include statistics. Just a fair warning if you’re only here for the nonsense.
Like we said above, I’m not sure there’s a lot we can take from Week 6 and honestly apply it to this weekend. But I do think it can be instructive to look at the Texans’ overtime win over the Bills.
The Texans have missed 157 tackles this season, which is (by far) the most of any remaining AFC team and more than anyone in the NFC, too, according to Pro Football Focus.
They miss at every level: the leaderboard is linebacker Zach Cunningham (23), cornerback Bradley Roby (15), cornerback Johnathan Joseph (12) and edge rusher Whitney Mercilus (12).
Here’s an example in the secondary:
And here’s an example closer to the line of scrimmage:
You can see how this might work. The Chiefs have two running backs who can force missed tackles, and three if they decide to use LeSean McCoy. One of Andy Reid’s superpowers is giving his guys a half-step of an edge, which can only help in setting them up for success here.
The bigger plays are to be had in the secondary. Travis Kelce has pantsed many defensive backs with jukes, particularly with change-of-direction plays immediately after the catch. Tyreek Hill is one of the most difficult tackles in the league. Sammy Watkins is strong, Mecole Hardman fast, you can see how this might become a big deal.
The other part that sticks out when looking at the Texans is on offense, where they gave up more sacks than 25 other teams and a higher sack rate than 26*.
* I get more emails about the Chiefs’ bad pass protection than perhaps any other issue and I just want to mention here that the Chiefs ranked third in fewest sacks and fourth in lowest sack percentage. I just don’t know where this idea comes from that the Chiefs’ line can’t protect.
Now, I do think it’s worth mentioning that Pro Football Focus gives the Texans the seventh-best pass-blocking grade. That’s a big gap between traditional statistics and a more advanced metric, and if you watch the Texans on film you can see where PFF is coming from.
Because a lot of those sacks are on Watson. He trusts his own athleticism and apparently is incapable of caring about protecting himself — it really is a great strength and weakness — so he’ll hold onto the ball a little longer than he should.
This clip might not be the best example, but it’s the one I saved. Watson avoids the initial pressure but then declines a chance to throw it away before the sack.
The problem with sacks is bigger than Watson’s tendencies. The Houston line just whiffs on protection too often, and I’m picking this clip for effect — the Texans put an extra offensive lineman and a tight end on the left side and still can’t give Watson a chance.
Now, it wouldn’t be fair not to point out that Watson holding onto the ball too long isn’t just an opportunity for the defense.
It’s also when he’s his most dangerous.
Comparisons are never perfect, but they were in the same draft class and we’re familiar with Mahomes so we can probably shorthand it. Watson is a step less dangerous with his arm after breaking the pocket, and a step (at least) more dangerous with his legs.
Here’s a third and 9 when he had no business not getting sacked and converting the first down, but that’s what he did anyway.
And here’s a run that a quarterback with Watson’s arm and brains should not capable of, if the NFL cared about fairness.
All of that and we haven’t shown one of the most incredible plays a quarterback is capable of:
The Chiefs have a better roster. They have the better head coach. And even with Watson’s powers I would argue the Chiefs have the better quarterback.
The Texans are flawed. They were actually outscored this season and don’t rank highly in many measurements both traditional and analytical. This is a game the Chiefs should win. That’s what I expect to happen.
But Watson is good enough to flip all of that, and end the Chiefs’ season.
Congratulations on your enjoyment of foods. I do not mean to be the yeah but guy here, but I have to mention that I took a stab at re-creating the Peanut’s wings and blue cheese at home and feel like I got dangerously close. I’m not sure it’s worth the trouble, and part of me did feel bad for bypassing the king, but I’ve wanted to try it forever and I feel like the mission was a success.
Out of respect I won’t tell you what I did, except don’t be shy with the butter.
Anyway, you asked a question there so I’ll answer here: not really.
I thought the Saints would win. That’s the result that surprised me. Carson Wentz’s injury changed the other NFC game, but the Seahawks were better anyway.
With the AFC’s games I would’ve expected the Texans to be able to win without overtime, and Josh Allen freaked out in the moment more than I could’ve expected, but in the 30,000-foot view the better teams won.
I still believe the Ravens are the deserved favorite overall, but think the Titans are dangerous enough to have a chance. Derrick Henry is running like a boss and Ryan Tannehill is playing better than people want to believe Ryan Tannehill is capable of playing. Their defense is tough, with some playmakers on the back end.
The Ravens should win that game, please don’t misunderstand. But the Titans have a chance.
I guess the biggest takeaway isn’t really a change of mind but rather a reinforcement. If the Chiefs play well enough to beat the Texans on Sunday, a worthy opponent* awaits.
* And, more importantly for your local sports columnist, a worthy week of columns to write either way.
Depending on what it looks like this weekend the Chiefs would probably be around a 5- or 6-point underdog at Baltimore, and about the same level of favorite against the Titans.
The Henry-induced freakout would be much warranted, and a matchup against the Ravens would allow the Chiefs to use the tried, tired and true cry of nobody believing in them. But the truth is all of these games are closer to 50-50 than most of us want to believe.
One matchup exploited, or one weird call, or one slip at the wrong moment and the whole thing can flip.
The likeliest outcome for the Chiefs remains losing the AFC Championship Game in Baltimore, but if you took that and gave me the field I’d feel good about my investment.
We don’t know how defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo will play this, of course, but if the plan against the Texans is similar to the one against the Chargers (which was, basically, Watts as the plug-and-play replacement), it appears the Chiefs could be in worse shape.
I’ve hit my quota of film clips for the week, but I thought Watts played pretty well, particularly considering the circumstances.
There were no obvious instances of miscommunication on the back end, which is always among the biggest concerns in those situations. He looked to be well prepared and confident, supported by willing teammates. That’s what should happen with good teams.
My guess is that Spagnuolo won’t play it the same way, though. There appeared to be moments Watts either took a suboptimal angle or made his move a half-step too late, and if you give a team a week to aim at a still target they’re probably going to hit a few times.
Thornhill had a terrific rookie season. He’s a primary reason Brett Veach’s draft class has to be considered a success. He’s smart, focused, hard-working and a natural blend of athleticism and ball skills.
So this is a real thing, even if the Chiefs are relatively well positioned to absorb the loss. Kendall Fuller had been transitioning to more snaps at safety even before Thornhill’s injury. Charvarius Ward and Bashaud Breeland are each playing well as boundary corners. And Tyrann Mathieu is a certified alpha in the defensive backfield, both in terms of his play and leadership.
But this is a bad matchup for a defense breaking in a new free safety.
Hopkins might be the best receiver in the league, and when Stills and Fuller are on the field with him the Texans can force defenses into bad choices.
Watson has completed 34 of 76 passes deep for 1,152 yards, 11 touchdowns and five interceptions, according to Pro Football Focus. That’s 15.2 yards per attempt and a 103.6 passer rating.
Hit a few of those and the Texans are dangerous.
Thornhill developed into a reliable defensive shield against those deep passes, essentially freeing those plays from anyone else’s list of responsibilities on many snaps. It’s hard to say exactly where that impact begins and ends, but it makes logical sense that the Chiefs will have to defend differently with someone — whether it’s Watts, Fuller, or anyone else — that they don’t have the same history with.
Well, I can’t. I’m not convinced this is the Chiefs’ year. The Ravens are better and the NFC teams have a less difficult path to the Super Bowl.
But I can tell you how it might happen, if things break the right way.
The first thing to consider is that I’m not sure the Chiefs don’t have the best coach left in the playoffs. There’s a great case to be made for John Harbaugh. Pete Carroll has won a Super Bowl. Kyle Shanahan is doing great things.
But the Chiefs won’t be at a coaching disadvantage in any game, which nobody could say when Bill Belichick was still around.
More than all that, the Chiefs have (finally) been getting some lucky breaks this year, which hasn’t always been the case. Maybe that’s the setup for some bizarre play where Laremy Tunsil scores the game-winning touchdown on a deflected pass or something, but it’s a thing worth considering.
The Chiefs are better than the Texans. They should be able to break some big plays on offense, and they should be able to pressure Deshaun Watson, and no disrespect to Hopkins’ immense talent but the Chiefs have been pretty good against the best receivers they faced this year:
- T.Y. Hilton had four catches for 37 yards and no touchdowns.
- Hopkins had nine catches for 55 yards and no touchdowns.
- Stefon Diggs had one catch for four yards and no touchdowns.
- Allen Robinson had six catches for 53 yards and no touchdowns.
- Keenan Allen had 17 catches for 153 yards and two touchdowns in two games, really the only top receiver to hurt the Chiefs, but even those numbers aren’t terrible for someone of Allen’s talent.
Then, at least for argument’s sake, lets say the Ravens are next. The Chiefs have beaten Lamar Jackson and the Ravens in each of the last two seasons, and we can all see that the Ravens are vastly different now than September, but the Chiefs have a path here.
They can stretch the Ravens’ defense deep and to each sideline, and if Damien Williams remains fresh and strong they should be able to run the ball enough to prevent steady dime packages.
On defense, the Ravens’ strength on the ground is a nightmare matchup for the Chiefs’ inconsistencies against the run, but the Chiefs have kept five of their last 10 opponents to fewer than 100 yards rushing and four others between 101 and 118.
The Chiefs gave up 4.45 yards per rush from the 11th game on, which isn’t awesome but does rank 14th in the league. Maybe they can’t shut the Ravens down, but with Terrell Suggs and Mike Pennel it is a different run defense than the Ravens saw in September.
If Suggs and Frank Clark can set edges on each side and keep Jackson from turning the game into his own highlight reel, Pennel and Derrick Nnadi and others can work in the middle.
Mahomes and the Chiefs have shown they can move the ball consistently against the Ravens, who will know they have to keep pace.
Get by that and the Chiefs will have an NFC opponent that will be worthy but also not as strong as the Ravens. There will be much discussion nationally about Reid’s postseason failures, but by that point he will have had a breakthrough and we also know his success with an extra week to prepare.
It’s all there, is the point. The Chiefs can win the Super Bowl without anyone having the right to be shocked. They have more than a puncher’s chance.
They have the franchise’s most complete team since the 1990s.
Here’s one more storyline that’s just waiting to explode. Jackson has (deservedly) become this year’s version of 2018 Patrick Mahomes, (presumably) winning the MVP for a season in which he played quarterback differently than virtually anything we’ve seen before.
Mahomes has struggled with injuries to both himself and his playmakers and gone through a funk where he couldn’t beat man coverage and another in which he couldn’t trust his health or protection.
He still had a great year — he cut down on mistakes, continued a mind-meld with Andy Reid and according to both QBR and Football Outsiders was the second-best quarterback in the league — but was widely overshadowed for the next hot thing.
Well, it doesn’t take much imagination to see him strengthened by the challenges, improved technically from the struggles and with a fully healthy set of playmakers unleashed to rip through the postseason and remind everyone what he’s capable of.
Then again ...
They are 100 percent capable of losing this weekend, and doing it in some awful fashion, like watching the running back they cut go for 120 yards or the other star quarterback pull of some magic trick and then having the football world swoon over an AFC Championship Game that would be promoted as the league’s future at the position.
The Chiefs’ playoff losses have come with amazing creativity, and I can’t pretend to predict the next dark comedy, but the most obvious and painful loss probably goes something like this:
They destroy the Texans this weekend, with a pass rush that beats up Watson and an offense that overwhelms.
That sets up a week of talking heads going on and on about the quarterbacks and coaches and how this specific matchup is the next decade’s Manning vs. Brady, only to watch John Harbaugh’s cold and calculating ways give his side an edge that Jackson’s speed bursts through with something like 19 of 25 for 245 yards passing with 14 carries for 126 yards and three rushing touchdowns (one of which leaves a lineman grabbing air and a defensive back on the ground, spun to shame on some juke).
Mahomes has a chance to win it late, but on first and 15 (after a false start) he adjusts his risk-reward calculus and his cross-field, no-look pass is intercepted by Earl Thomas, which leaves the shows going back to old tropes about Mahomes being too wild with his decisions and unreliable in the biggest moments.
Chiefs fans will know those things are hogwash, but they’ll also know their guy is 0-2 in AFC Championship Games, the two losses coming to the king of the last decade and the guy who by then would be anointed as the king of the next.
At this point, half of you are glassy eyed and nodding along, and the other half have cussed at your screens and perhaps clicked away.
I understand each side.
Well, before we get into this, I’m not sure 42 percent is far from the league average. A quick Google search returned lots of results involving roster turnover but none that I saw that gave a point of comparison here.
There are a lot of ways to measure roster turnover, and some might be more telling than bodies: snap counts, quality snaps, production, etc.
My hunch is the Chiefs had more general turnover than most teams, but particularly with the relative stability on offense would not be an outlier.
But, anyway, lets move on. We agree they’ve had a fair amount of turnover. But instead of a worry or a strength can we see it as a necessity?
Think about the guys who are part of the 58 percent: Mahomes, Tyreek Hill, Travis Kelce, the entire offensive line, Damien Williams, Charvarius Ward, Chris Jones, both kickers and others*.
* I know nobody really cares about long-snappers, but just a small little protest here about you including Winchester on guys who haven’t contributed. They had the screwup in Nashville, but Winchester has been reliable and steady for five years now and also Terez and McCullough might be the only ones to laugh at this but #ballwatchers.
The 42 percent was mostly either with upgrades on offense (I’m thinking mostly about Mecole Hardman here) and filling holes on defense.
That’s been widely productive, most obviously with Tyrann Mathieu and Frank Clark, but also with Breeland and Pennel and Suggs and others.
If it was a worry it would be a worry because they haven’t been together long. But to me, those are the warts that showed up early in the season.
By now they’re together, they know what the coaches are looking for, they know each other’s tendencies and the coaches have a better idea of how to proceed.
Thornhill’s injury presents an unknown, and the Chiefs still miss Alex Okafor and Emmanuel Ogbah in some subtle ways, but no football team has the right to perfect health.
The Chiefs can’t complain about a lot here.
Thank you for saying *if* because I’m not much of a bettor. But, hell, lets do it. I’ll use the consensus numbers found on VegasInsider.com at the time of this writing*:
* This is the first I’ve looked at the lines and I have to say the numbers look pretty good to me. I don’t feel great about a single one of these.
1. Seahawks +4. I get that this game is at Green Bay, and the Packers had a bye, but I believe the Seahawks are the better team so I’ll take the points.
2. Chiefs +9 1/2. I mentioned this before but I’m a numbers guy and the analytics are pretty clear on this one. When in doubt, go with the analytics, I guess.
3. 49ers -6 1/2. Have to be honest. I’m just sort of taking a stab here, but the 49ers are top four in both total offense and defense. I really like Shanahan as a coach and a defense that ranked sixth in turnovers.
4. Ravens +9. I’m just taking the better coach and quarterback here, but that’s a big number against a team that ranks ninth in DVOA. If nothing else, you can see how the Titans might be able to grind enough to prevent a blowout.
I cannot stress this enough: please don’t lay money based on these picks.
Look, I’m with you on all of this, basically.
Sneaks are effective, and Mahomes’ injury was a freak thing. I’ve seen no evidence that suggests a sneak is statistically more dangerous to a quarterback than any traditional dropback.
Also: it would be impossible for the Chiefs to be too cautious with Mahomes’ health.
He is far too important, his skills far too irreplaceable. With him healthy, the Chiefs are among the league’s leading Super Bowl favorites, not just this year but for the foreseeable future.
Without him, they are 9-7.
So even as I agree with you, and even as I believe that sneaks are efficient and relatively safe, I cannot blame Andy Reid if he never calls another one as long as he lives.
No, but what I’d like to put an end to is the annual retrofitting of college football’s playoff system based on that year’s results.
This season was a little different in that there were three teams widely considered “elite,” or better than the rest of the field. But sometimes there’s one great team, then four more who are close. Sometimes there’s two great teams and three others with an argument for a playoff spot.
Sometimes there are seven teams that can soundly and respectfully make their case.
The truth is that the future of the playoff format will be dictated far more by what TV networks think will maximize revenue than it will by how many teams are worthy in any given year.
Whatever it’s worth, I still haven’t seen a better proposal than the one proposed by Dan Wetzel: automatic bids for all 11 conference champions and five remaining at-large bids, with the first three rounds played at the higher seed’s home stadium and the championship at a neutral site.
We’re a long way from this, obviously, and there are some legitimate player safety concerns that would have be addressed. Even if you scrapped conference championship games (and that money would have to be made up somehow) you’re adding at least one game for young men who are not being paid with American currency.
But that’s the one that makes the most sense to me, particularly the part about games on campuses.
If the purpose is to drive excitement, what’s better than the most important games being played at the loudest and most famous stadiums?
If the purpose is to reward and protect the regular season, what better way than giving Big 10 and other non-SEC schools a chance to host games instead of playing in the South?
But, again, we’re a long way from that discussion.
This is referencing a Q&A that Royals GM Dayton Moore did with The Athletic and, well, yeah. Here’s the quote:
“We have to constantly be realistic with where we are and what we can do financially. We’re not in a position to keep pace financially with Chicago or Minnesota, but we’re not going to make excuses for what we don’t have.”
Moore’s answer isn’t fundamentally different than answers he’s given in the past. The Royals play in baseball’s second-smallest market and even after a new TV deal is finalized they’ll be in the bottom five in revenue.
If I had even 50 cents for every time I’ve heard Moore say he’s not going to make an excuse for his market, I would already have that boat my wife says is stupid to buy because we don’t live on or particularly near a lake nor do we have any place to put it on the 359 or so days a year we wouldn’t be using it*.
* Wives and their facts. They’re the worst.
Anyway, I haven’t talked with Moore to better understand what he meant, but I can make some educated guesses.
He might be referring to where the Twins and White Sox are in their rebuilds. Each of those clubs is a few steps ahead, and the White Sox have been fairly big spenders this season.
In 2015, the Royals ranked 13th in payroll.
In 2016, they ranked 14th.
In 2017, they ranked 13th.
Those aren’t big numbers, obviously, but they do far outpace the club’s revenues. Also, even last year, the Royals had a higher payroll than both the Twins and White Sox.
So I don’t think Moore is just crying poverty here.
More likely, he’s saying that the Twins and White Sox are in the stage where their homegrown guys are productive enough to compete and cheap enough to allow room to spend. The Royals have been in that spot, too, and added free agents who fit a specific need.
The other thing I think Moore might be hinting at is that a new ownership group is not going to turn the Royals into the Yankees. This could be as much about expectation management as anything else. Moore has a long track record of underselling the club’s spending potential publicly while fighting for more spending privately.
If I’m right here, Moore is basically saying the Royals’ homegrown players aren’t yet to the point that it makes either baseball or business sense to spend big, and he’s trying to protect his new boss by not promising new payroll.
Sherman has said the club will have more flexibility going forward, simply because of the new TV contract. I don’t think anyone with the club is saying they’re the Midwest’s version of the Marlins.
I wish there was one answer for this. Maybe there is, and I just don’t know it.
The basic answer is that I just try to be myself. I think we’re talking about one-on-one here, not group interviews, because those are rotten places to get authentic responses.
But if you talk with someone one-on-one, you at least have a chance. I don’t know if you can call it an “approach,” but I just try to be myself. When I was younger and getting started I’d always heard people say that, and I always heard it as “you should be like me.” That led to all sorts of problems, where I went back and forth between too formal and too casual and too know-it-all and too breezy and everything in between.
I think, like with anything, you probably have to screw up a few times to find the right groove.
Over time, I learned that those people telling me they approached interviews by being themselves weren’t telling me I should be like them. They were telling me I should be like me, as much as possible, and once I learned that I also realized how unquestionably stupid I was for hearing the advice any other way.
But it’s probably true that I didn’t really know who I was in my 20s, and needed to figure that out.
Whatever, the point is that people — and I think athletes are better at this than the average person — are usually pretty good at detecting b.s. They have a feel for who’s being real and who’s playing pretend. If you come fake, you have no chance, and deservedly so.
For me, “being myself” means more casual than formal, but also aware that I’m not 24 years old and I don’t speak the same language or live the same life as these guys. It means being comfortable in that.
It means having a general idea of what I want to know, with at least some understanding of the specifics of what we’re talking about, but also an unmovable acknowledgment that I am not the expert on whatever topic we’re discussing.
Sometimes, that means you’re just not going to click. You don’t like everybody you meet, I don’t like everybody I meet, and whoever I’m talking to professionally doesn’t like everybody they meet. That’s fine.
Sometimes, that means you click right away. That can lead to some positive relationships and better understanding on each side. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t feel like I genuinely liked most of my best sources. It doesn’t have to be that way, but I’m guessing that’s the case for most journalists. It just makes the whole process better.
Sometimes, it means you don’t click in the beginning but get a better understanding of each other later. I hope I’m not speaking out of turn here, but I think that’s what happened with Ned Yost and me. Those are some of the best relationships because you know there’s no fake on either side.
There are crutches I use sometimes, beyond the general. Depending on the subject, and the moment, if I sense that the other side is anxious and not saying much I might try to break through the wall: You seem nervous ... is there anything you want me to know? Anything you want to talk about, or not talk about?
Again, depending on who I’m talking to, I might offer that if they hear themselves say something they want back to just let me know. The person you’re talking to has to know you’re after understanding, and not out to get them.
Of course, the truth with all of that is you can’t actually be out to get them. That’s where reputation comes in. If you screw over the left tackle, you can’t expect the left guard to ever say much to you.
There is a time and place for hard questions and investigations. Usually those places are with those in power who aren’t performing to the job (coaches, executives, owners), or those who’ve earned it in other ways (a player who has made trouble with the law, for instance).
In those situations, you don’t worry about comfort. That’s already been eliminated. But you still have to be fair. If you are, people notice and will keep that in mind. If you’re not, people notice that, too.
So, anyway. Long way of saying: it’s not unlike any relationship. The context of major sports means you don’t often get a lot of time in one sitting to develop any real relationship, but that’s part of the job, and you make of it what you can.
This week, I’m particularly grateful for Spotify. This continues the old man theme of being amazed by technology (and in particular technology that may or may not be for the greater good) but dammit that algorithm understands me better than most of my friends.
This story was originally published January 7, 2020 at 5:00 AM.