If Grienke were really available, you give them what they want, including Chapman, and you don't give it a seconds glance.
If Grienke were really available, you give them what they want, including Chapman, and you don't give it a seconds glance.
For two years of Greinke? No way.If Grienke were really available, you give them what they want, including Chapman, and you don't give it a seconds glance.
The Royals wouldn't want Chapman anyway, too much money.
That was my thinking as well.Originally Posted by reds44
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
How good would it feel (just while we're speculating here) to see the Cards' Oswalt and raise them a Greinke?!
IMO almost no prospect can be off-limits for a Greinke deal. I agree that a package headed by Alonso and Wood could attract KC's attention.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
I think it would be awesome to hang a Greinke on the Cards' Oswalt.
KC does not need Alonso. They've got big LH bats coming (Hosmer plays 1B, as does Billy Butler). My guess is they'd want pitching, a CF and a catcher.
Well, you go ahead and plan on staying in the Grienke business after two years. It's what grown-up teams do.
And, again, as the last time we had this conversation, as much as I am intrigued by Chapman, he remains an open question in terms of control and what he actually will be in the major leagues. Grienke, we know. Cy Young candidate and all that...
If you mean they should do their best to extend him, of course. But you don't write KC a blank check on your young talent without knowing you're getting more than two years at a high price tag. Makes no sense, IMO.Well, you go ahead and plan on staying in the Grienke business after two years. It's what grown-up teams do.
Two years of Grienke for the uncertainty of Chapman et al? THAT I would do. I wouldn't have done that for a rental, but I would for a few years of a Cy Young candidate and the chance to extend him longer.
While I am asking the Royals about Greinke, I'd also see what it would take to get them to throw in Gordon. I'd love to have him as the 3B of the future, learning behind Rolen. He could play third on Rolen's rest/injury days, and I believe he has played some LF this year in the minors.
Grienke/Gordon for Wood/Heisey/Francisco?
That would be an ideal two-fer, but it's gonna take giving prospects until it hurts to get them interested.
For those two you would the above three and probably throw in Mesoraco and maybe Chapman too.
Disagree. The "et al" is where things get out of hand -- you've been advocating "giving them what they want" plus Chapman. IMO, that's WAY overpaying.Two years of Grienke for the uncertainty of Chapman et al? THAT I would do. I wouldn't have done that for a rental, but I would for a few years of a Cy Young candidate and the chance to extend him longer.
And "a few years" equals exactly two. There's no option on a 3rd year. He's gone after 2012.
We have a fundamental disagreement on the value of Zack Grienke at this point.
Maybe sub Chapman for Wood, and throw in Mesoraco and a B-level prospect? I'd still do it.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote