Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Purdue wins Paradise Jam Tournament 73-72

Zack Greinke... Trade?

Steven St. John  & Nate Bukaty (sp) just interviewed Buster Olney on 810 AM in KC.

At the end of the interview, Buster talked about how there is 'growing talk' that the Royals will probably trade Greinke this off-season.  That he is too good of a chip, that could return 2 or 3 'really good young players' back to a team that really needs a lot of pieces.

He said the talk has been that the Royals in the past have had really high demands on anyone that asked about Greinke, and given his season this year, he doesn't see any reason why KC will have to lower their asking price after the season he put up in '08, and since he is seemingly past his mental issues.

  His thoughts are whichever team loses out on Sabathia will be stuck with a mediocre FA class, and will be there for KC to deal with.  Of course, he mentioned the usual suspects, NYY & BOS.  His personal thoughts are Boston, just b/c of Allard whispering in Epstein's ear...

Take it for what it's worth...

0 recs  |  Comment 116 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

This would be the most important trade of the GMDM regime

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Sep 18, 2008 10:10 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The only way I could see KC trading Greinke

is for a deal like Dan Haren or Johan Santana where you get AT LEAST 3-4 major league ready players. One of those players would have to be a pitcher who could step into the rotation or a major corner OF type who could start in LF. Don’t see the Yankees with that type of system depth. Their upper levels are like KC’s – not much there. Red Sox might have the depth but I don’t see it. It would take top 50 talent from their system.

by daveyork on Sep 18, 2008 10:45 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Start with Lowrie and either Bucholez or Masterson... (and keep going)

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I would demand Lars Anderson

He would have to be the centerpiece to a Boston deal. I know we have Hosmer, but Hosmer is capable of playing OF if both manage to make the big leagues.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 18, 2008 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I was wondering about that

But I can’t decide if “Lars” is a cool name because it sounds like another Viking (Lars and Erik!), or if it sucks because it’s like Lars Ulrich.

Would you rather have him that Lowrie and/or Buchholz/Masterson? Or just in addition? I was thinking a third player would be good, too.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Prolly

Andersen + Lowrie + Buchholz/Masterson/Bowden (Bowden being my favorite). Which is probably way more than Boston would want to give up.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 18, 2008 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Based on similar deals

any team dealing for Greinke is unlikely to give up more than one impact player who is (or near) major league ready. Any other impact prospects would come from farther down the minors. The rest of the deal would be filled out with major league ready or near ready players with lower ceilings and/or interesting prospects who are still at least a couple years away. While teams are willing to give up some of their best prospects to get players like Greinke, they have a strong incentive not to entirely gut one level of their system in order to do so.

by Gopherballs on Sep 18, 2008 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I thought Andersen was in A-ball most of this year.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Anderson will move quickly and is near major league ready

He hit 316/438/526 in 150+ PA as a 20 year old in AA Eastern League. At that age, his MLE is 314/448/584, .347 EqA. Scouts love him, and as a 1B, defense will not hold him back when his bat is ready. In Boston, he probably still starts the year in AA next year, but he would be line for a major league callup sometime during 2009 and possibly up for good next September. In KC, Anderson probably would have a more than nominal chance of breaking camp as the everyday 1B.

by Gopherballs on Sep 18, 2008 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If you're saying we could only get one of Lowrie/Andersen/Buckholz

I disagree. Given that there will be multiple teams making significant offers on Greinke, I think the Royals could get two of them plus one or two non-impact players.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I am not sure Lowrie belongs with the other two

But in any event, look at the other recent comparable deals — Haren, Bedard, Santana — including what other teams offered. In each, the two main pieces were one ready or near major league player(Gonzalez, Jones, Gomez) and one top prospect from the lower minors (Anderson, Tillman, Guerra). And after the Santana deal, it came out that Boston’s best offer was something like Ellsbury or Lester, but not both.

by Gopherballs on Sep 18, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No offense

But Santana isn’t a comperable deal. Greinke hasn’t had 1/2 the career that Santana had in his first 5 or 6 years. No 200K season, No 20 Win season, no Cy Young, Never played for a winner…

by GoBabies!! on Sep 18, 2008 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The Santana deal was the worst of the three

because he only had one year left under club control. Greinke has two.

by Gopherballs on Sep 18, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Do you think he doesn't know this?

There are a lot of differences. Obviously Santana has a much better track record; he’s the best pitcher in baseball. Santana also had only one year to go until free agency and the trade included a window to negotiate a long-term deal. And pretty much everyone recognized that the Twins made a poor trade.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

wow

In addition to Gopher and NY’s comments, the Twins were pretty much FORCED to trade him. DM is under absolutely no pressure to deal Zack.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Sep 18, 2008 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No pressure?

If DMGM fails to resign Zack and then fails to trade him, there will be LOTS OF ANGRY POSTS here at Royals Review! That should be incentive enough.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Which is really the way it should be

If DM moves to get multiple major-league ready players in return, we’re likely to be worse off than trying for 1 ML ready and a couple of lower studs.

After all, that’s one of the primary complaints about the Beltran deal — demanding ML ready talent instead of best available.

by Top Ramen on Sep 18, 2008 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

to compete with the Yanks if the Yanks sign Sabathia?

they’ll do ANYTHING.

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 18, 2008 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wow. What a gamble that would be

But you know, I’m a gambler at heart. Which is why I always walk away from casinos broke.

Here’s one way of looking at it. After Vermeil left the Chiefs and Roaf retired and then Shields retired and then Kenny got old, not to mention Trent Greene, we were left with exactly two players on our roster that were just head and shoulders above everyone else, talent-wise. Larry Johnson and Tony G. Let’s be real, neither one of those two had any real chance to succeed on what was an otherwise crappy team, and trading them away for talent or draft picks or whatever may have been difficult on the one hand because we would have watched our only two fun players depart, but would have greatly helped the rebuild.

Now, Greinke’s career is going to be long, and he’s likely going to be good well into the future, long enough to still be around for whatever new team we field in 2011 or even 2012 assuming we lock him up soon. The problem is, the Royals just aren’t loaded with talent in the high minors right now. Let’s assume Moustakas comes up in 2010 at age 21 (not a whole ton of players succeed in the big leagues at age 21 by the way) and Hosmer comes up in 2011 at age 21, and, well, you’re looking at something like 2013 before those guys start to mature, so let’s not factor them into the equation at all for now. Let’s just pretend they don’t exist.

So what we’re left with, in all of AA and AAA, in terms of offensive prospects is Kila Ka’aihue. And maybe Brayan Pena? So that means that for the foreseeable future, we’re fielding the same team we have now + a free agent or two + Kila. Oh yeah, and Shealy (I just don’t know what to make of this Shealy thing. Why am I so reluctant to buy in?). Joe Posnanski talks about “CCG’s”, or “Championship Caliber Guys,” guys who would play a significant role on a contending team. So, by my count, our offensive CCG’s might be Gordon (no sure thing), Butler, Dejesus (if he can stay healthy), and MAYBE Aviles. MAYBE Ka’aihue? Shealy? We’re dealing with a lot of question marks here. Gordon and Butler are even question marks.

Pitching CCG’s, of course, are Soria, Meche, Greinke. It’s not unreasonable to think that those three guys could wind up pitching well for a non-contending team until all of their contracts are up. Sort of like the idea of Larry Johnson performing well until the Chiefs rebuild starts to come to fruition.

On the other hand, we do have two pitchers in the high minors who may be ready to contribute as early as next season, in Carlos Rosa and Dan Cortes. Now, suppose you two or three very exciting, impact position players for Greinke. That would leave you with Meche and Soria at the major league level, with Rosa and Cortes not far behind.

Suddenly your offensive CCG’s could be: Gordon, Butler, Dejesus, position player X (i.e., Matt Laporta-level player), position player y (Jed Lowrie or Yunel Escobar-level player), and possibly Ka’aihue or Shealy. Add a free agent pitcher, add a free agent position player, and, you know what, it’s starting to look like a more balanced team.

I follow the Tao of Steve (Balboni)

by jackie ballgame on Sep 18, 2008 10:57 AM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Just throwing out trade rumors

But MLBTraderumors speculated that Brian Bannister for Jeff Franceour made a fair amount of sense. I tend to agree.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 18, 2008 11:17 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

As long as the Royals don't go any higher than that.

Butler for Frenchy would piss me off. And I can imagine it happening, too.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Crasnick on Franceour
Francoeur still has the tools, competitiveness and drive to be a good player, but an .800 OPS might be his ceiling because of his inability to draw walks. He’s had precious little breathing room as a former Atlanta high school hero playing for the local team, so a change of scenery might be the best thing for his career…. A year ago, it would have been unthinkable for the Braves to entertain trade proposals for Francoeur. Now you have to believe general manager Frank Wren will at least listen this winter. But do the Braves have the stomach to move Francoeur when his value is at an ebb, and risk having him pull a Carlos Quentin somewhere else?

From his “”http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=3592846&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab2pos2" target="new">Starting Nine." I like Crasnick (he actually uses BABIP elsewhere to talk about Cano. A guy on ESPN using BABIP who isn’t Keith Law! Progress, perhaps?) But, um, Jerry, Carlos Quentin was a bit above .800 OPS this year…

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree that .800 OPS is probably his peak

And any thinking he can turn into Carlos Quentin is a bit absurd. I think Banny could flourish in the NL as a #3/#4 type pitcher, but I don’t know if the Braves would be willing to deal a 25 HR guy for that.

Guillen/Bannister and $3-6 million for Franceour + B/C type prospect.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 18, 2008 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sometimes I think Banny could be the Royals #4 hitter, too

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

D'oh

I thought you made a typo, and was trying to tease you for it. I actually wasn’t trying to make anotoher dumb joke about the Royals singles train. Although Banny way up on JoGui in offensive VORP for a good stretech of the season.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I imagine

that Boston would first put Youklis, the crappy shortstop who signed a long term deal-whose name I can’t remember and a prospect. Of course DM would turn that down looking for more of a prospect laden package right?

by gordonrules on Sep 18, 2008 12:32 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Lugo? Ugh.

I don’t think they’d even bother offering that player and contract to the Royals.

(Insert line about “only someone stupid enough to give Jose Guillen 3/36…”)

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Banny

I would love for us to move Banny if we could acquire Francouer…..both just need a change of scenery. Banny will be better suited in the NL with his stuff and we could then maybe move Teahen now that we have Francouer. We have the prospects coming up that losing Banny is not that big of a deal. Just me though.

by powder blues on Sep 18, 2008 12:38 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

sounds like trade.

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 18, 2008 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think we need to move Grienke.

I was just shocked and floored by the idea initially. Then I thought about it and realized HOW FAR we are away from competing consistently. If will fill three holes from ZG, it’ll be worth it. But they have to be MLB ready players. I’ve decided nothing less than 4 players will be enough.

We also need to open up some OF positions because we’ll be seeking an OF in the ZG deal. And a pitcher and a SS I’m sure. Possibly a C.

So if we fill our need at C, SP, OF, and SS, it’ll be the best thing that could have ever happened to us.

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 18, 2008 12:40 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Yea but

I don’t think we can afford to look at this ‘by position’ like Allard looked at so many trades.

If Team X comes in & offers us 3 or 4 of their top tier prospects, and they are NOT positions of need, I think we have to take THAT deal, over the team that has the positions that match up, but they aren’t as glossy of prospects…

by GoBabies!! on Sep 18, 2008 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

But then again

What, exactly is NOT a position of need at this point.

sigh

by GoBabies!! on Sep 18, 2008 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with you on both of your posts. That's why I went with four positions because those seem to be our BIGGEST needs in a sea of many.

However…. I’ll take better talent regardless of position.

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 18, 2008 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

So, if Greinke is moved then...

…does Soria go to the rotation? Hmm… – TL

by timlacy on Sep 18, 2008 12:55 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Earlier this season I...

…would’ve agreed with you. Now that I’ve had time to appreciate our very excellent set up men (when healthy), I’m less opposed for next season. One of the Ramirez boys can handle the closer’s role. … Yes, I’ve changed my mind on this. – TL

by timlacy on Sep 18, 2008 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I still haven't

If it aint broke, don’t fix it. Lest Royals fans forget the days of Botallico with more blown saves from our ’pen than saves. Moving him to the rotation (IMO) is looking a big fat gift horse in the mouth…

by GoBabies!! on Sep 18, 2008 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The rotation could use a free, in-house upgrade

The bullpen “ain’t broke.” The rotation could use some “fixin’”

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why does everyone assume

GMDM will try to get the same replacement closers that Allard did? He obviously has a good idea of what a pitcher’s ability is (Meche, Soria, all our minor league talent). I would love to see Soria in the rotation, and have faith that Moore would adequately replace him as closer.

by BrRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

And the Royals currently have adequate closer replacements on the 25-man roster

Ramirez, Nunez, Mahay.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

All three of those pitchers have had significant durability and/or injury concerns lately

RamRam missed part of 2007 with an elbow injury. Mahay’s time lost in August was the second time in the past four years or so that he has missed a fairly long string of games, and he isn’t getting any younger. And Nunez has missed huge stretches of both 2007 and 2008 with injuries. Maybe closer-by-committee could work with this trio, maybe not. But about the only one of the three I would be especially comfortable with handing the closer’s role to next year is RamRam.

by DarthYoshi on Sep 18, 2008 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If one of them goes down with an injury, one of the other two can replace him

I certainly don’t understand the argument that because each of them has ever been injured, then therefore none of them would make an adequate closer. Each of them has been dominant this season. Each of them would make a good closer. And because you have three of them, you have depth in case one underperforms or gets injured.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Plus, keep in mind

the two best pitchers in the bullpen were acquired in the Rule 5 draft and a waiver wire deal.

by Gopherballs on Sep 18, 2008 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Small corrections

Soria – rule 5
Ramirez – trade (he hadn’t been waived)
Nunez – trade
Mahay – FA

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, that's right

The Ramirez trade was roughly the equivalent of a waiver wire deal as he was out of options, did not make the Rockies 25-man roster, and would have had to go on waivers the next day if not for the trade. And he was traded for a guy who cleared waivers. Both Soria and Ramirez were (virtually) free talent pickups.

by Gopherballs on Sep 18, 2008 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I've gotta hand it to GMDM on this one

that’s one reason I feel comfortable if Soria isn’t in the ‘pen. I think he can turn Gathright, German, etc. into more Ramon Ramirez’s.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

yeah, all three of them have been great this year

That’s not my point, though.

I’m not a huge fan of the closer-by-committee approach in general, just because it has seemed with the Royals bullpen over the last couple of years that it performs better when the pitchers know their roles and generally stick to them.

My point is that counting on all of them to be healthy for all of 2009 is probably fantasy. RamRam probably will. Mahay might, but we may end up trading him anyways. But I have serious doubts about Nunez. Hence, why I would prefer starting with RamRam and building the bullpen with him as closer. I don’t think I would do that with either Mahay or Nunez.

by DarthYoshi on Sep 18, 2008 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not a huge fan of the closer-by-committee approach in general, just because it has seemed with the Royals bullpen over the last couple of years that it performs better when the pitchers know their roles and generally stick to them.

I’m not talking about a closer by committee. You name one closer. If he handles the job and stays healthy, then he stays. If not, he gets replaced. No committee. Just good depth that allows a closer to be replaced if need be.

My point is that counting on all of them to be healthy for all of 2009 is probably fantasy.

Thankfully you don’t need all of them to be healthy. And I’d go with Ramirez too. The whole point here is that the bullpen doesn’t need Soria. The rotation does. Or at least it would be greatly helped by having him there.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

it should be considered, but i don't know if it will be

Without ZG, our pitching will definitely take a huge hit in 2009—w/out Soria, and assuming no major FA signings, our opening day rotation would probably be Meche, Hoch, Banny, Davies, and Rosa. There are holes all over that rotation—Meche is solid, but he’s no ace, Hoch is barely a #3 starter as it is, Banny has been awful this year, everyone expects Davies’ good luck to rub off eventually, and Rosa is probably still a bit of an unknown.

Since Soria is a former starter, converting him back shouldn’t be too bad, but we would have to keep him to a pretty strict inning count in 2009 (he’s already had TJ surgery once, so there is a significant risk). Soria would not be a full time starter, and in stretching him out to a starter’s workload, our bullpen will have to pick up more innings. I think Soria would pitch well—he just wouldn’t be able to pitch often.

Basically, if we were to trade ZG and convert Soria to a starter, it would probably mean writing off 2009, at least from a pitching standpoint, and waiting until 2010 when our rotation will likely include Meche, Soria, Cortes, Rosa, and Hoch.

I think Soria should probably be tried out as a starter, but I really wish Hillman and Moore had decided to stretch out Soria’s outings this year to at least see how he holds up over 3 or so innings.

by DarthYoshi on Sep 18, 2008 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If they decide to...

…convert him, he’ll be fine healthwise. Case in point: Ryan Dempster. Dempster had TJ surgery and slowly worked his way back via the bullpen. Soria’s had two years in the pen, and I think Demp had three. But Dempster’s workload has been h-e-a-v-y this year——from closer to heavy. So I believe Soria can physically handle it if they make the move. I’m more worried about the mental aspects of being a starter (e.g. pacing, 3-4 rounds through teh line-up, deception, holding runners). – Tim

by timlacy on Sep 18, 2008 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

GMDM

has said that he has seen cause for concern in Soria’s mechanics as to whether he can hold up to the pitch counts necessary to be a SP.

by GoBabies!! on Sep 18, 2008 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The mechanics are something of a concern

But even Moore hasn’t said it is a major concern. I don’t think the mechanics alone are reason enough to not even try him in the rotation. He’d help the team so much more in the rotation.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I worry about his injury concern but obviously have no way of knowing

I just don’t undertand how you can say, “if they decide to convert him, he’ll be fine healthwise. Case in point: Ryan Dempster.”

What does that have to do with Soria? They are two different human beings. Because Dempster has come back from TJ surgery really has no merit on whether Soria can handle a full workload. It pretty much just depends on Soria. I’m not saying that he can’t be one, I just think you’re example was a little flawed.

by I need more Esteban on Sep 18, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

+1

TJ surgery has been a death knell to the careers of many young pitchers, and a few veterans as well. Soria has bounced back well, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t treat him with kid gloves because Dempster managed to handle it.

Plus, Soria’s inning count has stayed pretty much stagnant between 2007 and 2008—Dempster was eventually getting stretched out, Soria hasn’t been.

by DarthYoshi on Sep 18, 2008 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dempster was not...

…substantially “stretched out” last season. He put in all of his work for the Cubs rotation over the winter. He spent all of last year as the closer. – TL

by timlacy on Sep 18, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

you're right, i misread dempster's stat sheet

however, i will still maintain that arguing that soria can because dempster could is misguided.

by DarthYoshi on Sep 18, 2008 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

ON the other hand

You don’t want to fall into the trap that Yankees are with Chamberlain — ‘Oh, he got hurt once, now he can’t be a starter again!"

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

How long has it been

since KC had a trade with the Cardinals? They could certainly use Greinke. What about Rasmus, Anderson and Kozma for ZG?

by gordonrules on Sep 18, 2008 1:18 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Felix Jose for Greggggg Jefferies

Ugh

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 18, 2008 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ah, the spunky...

…Greg Jefferies. I’d forgotten about him.

As a general rule I’m opposed to any trade with the Cardinals that doesn’t involve Pujols or one of their power guys. – TL

by timlacy on Sep 18, 2008 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

deal.

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 22, 2008 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

As a Cards fan first...(Royals/whoever is playing the Cubs fan 2nd)

the offer I would start with for Zach Greinke if I were Cardinals management is this:

1) A near-ready or MLB ready starting pitcher – Brad Thompson (26), Mitch Boggs (24), Mike Parisi (25), Kelvin Jimenez (27), PJ Walters (23), Blake Hawksworth (25), or Clayton Mortenson (23). I don’t mention Jaime Garcia because he’s most likely going to miss next season due to TJ surgery.

2) Rick Ankiel – still only 28 years old – he is a power bat that is better suited for CF, but has the arm to gun people out from right on a regular basis. He would have to learn the position a little better, seeing as though he is more comfortable in CF.

and

3) Bryan Anderson (21) – he is a stud-hitting prospect at catcher that (from what I hear) has considerably improved his defense to the point where it might already be major league ready.

What about that deal? It would shore up the Catcher’s position, the #4 spot in the order and either RF or CF, and fills a rotation spot for next year.

by stlfan on Sep 24, 2008 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Let's add one more player and we might have a go.

Which pitcher would you least like to see the Cards trade out of that list?

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 24, 2008 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Order of pitchers

Let’s put it this way…I’d offer Jimenez first…so he won’t be traded.

Thompson is pretty similar to a Brian Bannister in that he is a AAAA starter, eyeing the back end of a good rotation. Thompson’s WHIP is a little bit higher, but he seems to keep runs off the board better than Banny and he finds ways to win it seems.

Boggs and Parisi have both seen time at the MLB level this year. Boggs is probably the best prospect out of the bunch, but Parisi seems to be nearly as ready to pitch in the majors. Jaime Garcia would be another great option, but as I said earlier he will be out all of next year, most likely.

Those 4 are all ready to step into Kansas City’s rotation. I would say that Kansas City would have their pick of one of those 4 (Thompson, Garcia, Boggs, and Parisi). Kansas City would then get their choice of Mortenson, Hawksworth, and Walters to round out the deal.

If the Cardinals have to give a 4th player, then I’d say they should have the right to a contract extension with Greinke before the trade is made.

by stlfan on Sep 24, 2008 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Is that legal in baseball?

I don’t think it is. I would have demanded that CC sign a one year deal then if I was the Brew crew.

Grienke and Meche are the top of the rotation. Then we have Hochevar and Davies. Banni is (in my opinion) the fifth starter. Could any of those guys step in and be the #3 over Hoch and Davies? That’s what we’re looking for. Davies is a servicable fifth. If he pitches next year like he’s finished this, he’ll be a solid 3. Maybe a 2 in the long run. But that’s an if.

What’s the deal with Ankiel? Isn’t he on the last year of his contract or something?

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Sep 24, 2008 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Response

I don’t think any could step in right now and be #3 by default. I think they would (any 2 that you pick) would be a #3 at the best for the next year or two. I’d say Boggs has potential for a #2-3 starter within 2-3 years.

Ankiel, I believe, has one year left of arbitration this year…then next year becomes a free agent, but I’m not sure. He might have two years of arby left.

Thirdly, I believe it is legal in baseball. I know the Cardinals made the Glaus for Rolen swap only after Glaus picked up his option for next year.

Gotta run.

by stlfan on Sep 24, 2008 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

So the trade includes a one-year rental of Ankiel?

That greatly limits Ankiel’s value, and he’s a key part of that trade. Ankiel has over 5 years of service time after this season, so this is his last arbitration year.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 24, 2008 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I understand

I think this hypothetical offer is decidedly light.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 24, 2008 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

fair enough.

like I said, that was a starting point. What would your counter offer be?

by stlfan on Sep 25, 2008 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Some 'other' teams that may be interested...

Not named Yankees or Sawx

Brewers? If they collapse this year, they’ll feel the need to scramble to replace CC & Sheets. I don’t know if their farm system could support another big trade though. However, they have players at the MLB level that are interesting (Fielder, Hart…)

Mets? There again, if they collapse (again) Minaya might mortgage more for ANOTHER front line starter.

Phillies? Brett Myers might be a change of scenery tyoe of guy that they’d consider dealing. They’ll also have a hole in their OF to fill w/ Burrell leaving (almost surely). Maybe we could package ZG & DDJ or Teabag for a blockbuster deal. How about Teabag, Guillen & ZG for Myers & Jason Werth? Not as much in return, but it frees up $25 million (probably not realistic)

Angels? They’re probably going to lose Garland & K-Rod. Greinke would be an upgrade over Garland. Not sure what their farm system is like these days, but it’s usually among the best…

by GoBabies!! on Sep 18, 2008 1:25 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Brewers and Angels

Seem to have the talent necessary to get a deal done. The Mets would have to give up Fernando Martinez, which they won’t do, and the Phillies are pretty thin in the minors after the Blanton deal.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 19, 2008 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Brewers

I know it sounds crazy, but Greinke’s VORP currenlty is about the same as Braun’s or J. J. Hardy. I’m guessing they wouldn’t give up Braun though, and, although they apparently they have someone the y like Alicides Escobar as a replacement for Hardy, I think Hardy may only have two more seasons until FA anyway…. so, maybe not. Does Gamel project well anywhere besides 3B?

As for the Angels… their prospects always seem a bit overrated. I’ve been down on Brandon Wood, but lately he’s been looking OK. Any chance he can hold down SS? I hear opposite reports all the time on his defense. Sometimes I wonder if its not the old “any SS that can hit in the minors automatically must have an anonymous scout report that he’s not sure if the prospect can stay at short” thing. I’d hope the Royals could get more than Wood (that’s what she said!), of course.

Brett Myers would fit right in.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 19, 2008 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The Brewers

SURELY would never trade Braun, but Hardy might be an option. I think they’d probably listen to offers for Hart, Hardy & Fielder (though GAAAAAAWDDDD I don’t want Fielder on this team, he is going to be a MAJOR headcase IMO)…Anybody that can’t reconcile with their own father has some major anger issues IMO…

The Phillies might be one of the best fits…

by GoBabies!! on Sep 19, 2008 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Who do the Phillies have?

Their system looks pretty crappy to me.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 19, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

does this deserve reconciliation?

Prince and Cecil Fielder’s relationship, strained for years (despite the fact Cecil Fielder negotiated his son’s first contract), was fractured even further earlier this year when Cecil reportedly said his son was drafted in the first round only because of his family tree.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2004-10-18-cecil-fielder-troubles_x.htm

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3036841

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2913723

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Sep 19, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If Zack was dealt to the Red SUX

I would be pissed. Couldn’t root for him anymore. And he’s by far my favorite player.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Sep 18, 2008 1:29 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, but Ducky is still waiting in the wings to console you

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

One interesting question

Would you rather trade Greinke or re-sign him? I know the answer to that question depends on what the Royals could get for him. But if it is Lowrie and Andersen plus another decent player/prospect for Greinke (or some package of that quality from another team), I’d probably rather trade him than extend him. It adds more overall talent to the team and organization and saves money which can be spent elsewhere to improve the team as well.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 2:33 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

True

But we know he isn’t going to come cheap. I guess I’m assuming a deal in line with the market for a player with his service time (basically Kazmir, discounted by Greinke’s more spotty track record and past “injury” issue).

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Very true

I’m all for trying to work out a long-term deal, and still fielding trade offers.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

+1

Either keeping him or trading him (under the right circumstances) could be good for the Royals. – TL

by timlacy on Sep 18, 2008 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Greinke definitely won't come cheap

DM has said he’s off the table in the past. The only way for him to be on the table is via a deal he can’t refuse.

I follow the Tao of Steve (Balboni)

by jackie ballgame on Sep 18, 2008 3:28 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

One caveat there

Moore knows that the Royals only have control of Greinke for two more years. I’m sure he’s going to be talking to Greinke and his agent about some kind of extension this offseason which will include at least one FA year (hopefully more). But if Greinke’s demands significantly exceed the market rate for a pitcher of his service time and track record, then I think Moore would definitely put Greinke “on the table.” Moore knows Greinke is very valuable, but if he’s not willing to sign a long-term deal, he’s more valuable in trade than in the Royals rotation for two more years. And if the Royals wait a year to shop him, he becomes a one-year rental, lowering his trade value.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's smart to say he's off the table for another reason

Teams are obviously lusting after him (I’m pretty sure “lust” is the term used to describe how the Texas FO, for example, looks at Zack. OK, this is getting kind of gross.). If GMDM is saying “he’s off the table,” teams are going to go about their inquires offering more than they might… puts the club in a better position, I would think.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Definitely

And we fans shouldn’t think that “off the table” necessarily means anything. He may think some players are genuinely off the table. He may also just be doing it to help his negotiating position and not look like a motivated seller.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 10:21 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Beane worked that really well with the Haren trade

I imagine he was thinking about moving him, but from what I read, he never shopped him — the D-backs came to him, which put the As in a good position.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's the good thing about possibly trading a really valuable commodity like Haren or Greinke

You don’t have to shop the player ever. You just have to sit back and field offers. Then you leak the offers to get teams to start bidding against each other and the price goes up.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 11:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Another idea

If we traded Zack and moved Soria to the rotation, I think we should try Robinson Tejada at closer and keep RamRam, Nunez, and Mahay in their spots. If Tejada works out (which I think he would, he has nasty stuff and the right attitude it looks like) then it would almst be like we lost nothing as long as Soria could put up number comparable to Zack. Ideally, if it worked that way, we would probably be adding 2 ML ready players (1 of them with a high ceiling) and maybe 1 or 2 B prospects without really losing anything.

In the Royals game of life, Neifi Perez is the rake.

by Matty486 on Sep 18, 2008 11:07 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I want Soria in the rotation

but I’m not sure I’m ready to say he’d be as good as Zack…

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, I think Soria would make a good #2 SP, while Greinke is a legitimate ace

But Soria does have ace potential.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think that's why it's so hard to think of trading him

Greinke could be (already is? Maybe ot over this whole year) the Royals first big-time ace since… Rosado? Appier? Saberhagen? Elarton?

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 18, 2008 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Any good trade is difficult to make

Giving up good talent to get get good talent always hurts. But if trading him can fill 2-3 holes with good playesr in possible contending years, you have to do it. It would be a harder call if the Royals were likely to be in contention in either of the last two years he was under team control. But that just isn’t the case. So either extend him or trade him, or both.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 19, 2008 1:04 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh, I agree

It’s just that he’s clearly (if you ask me) KC’s best player at the moment. He’s young and exciting.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 19, 2008 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I would definitely want to move the best remaining reliever into the closer role

And the three best non-Soria relivers this year have been R.Ramirez, Mahay and Nunez. There’s no way I’d move a worse reliever into the closer role. Right now, I see the back end of the bullpen as:

Closer – Soria
RH setup – Ramirez
LH setup – Mahay
Next best middle reliever (7th inn. guy) – Nunez

If Soria went to the rotation, this would be my back of the bullpen:

Closer – Ramirez
RH setup – Nunez
LH setup – Mahay
Next best middle reliever (7th inn. guy) – Tejeda (if he pitches well next year. If not, then any one of several other relievers including possibly a FA)

The only reason to move Tejeda up to closer is if you think the setup role is more important than the closer role.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 18, 2008 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

How much of not moving Soria

is not about how moving him would be more valuable, but that we have an all star closer? I think the Royals organization is not moving him because they really need a perennial alll star to show off to the leauge, and then get more recognition/all stars to entice players to sign with the Royals. Closer is a high profile position, the Royals really do need the prestige, and that is about the only real compelling argument I can think of for keeping Soria there.

Go Royals!

by BabyBlues on Sep 18, 2008 11:53 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I don't think they are that stupid

Then again, every time we say that about any sports figure, they disappoint, so maybe I should watch it…

I hope that if they aren’t making him a closer, it’s because of legitimate health concerns. If it’s because they think he’s more valuble to the team there or because they are worried about the PR fallout that might come from bucking “conventional wisdom,” that would be extremely frustrating — the Royals aren’t in a position to “play it sage” and give up 2-4 wins a season because they’re worried about looking stupid to Johnny Sixpack.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 19, 2008 12:13 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, even if Moore is stupid, he isn't THAT stupid

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 19, 2008 1:05 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sweeney's presence kept...

…a certain cohort interested in KC baseball. Because of this, he might have—-counterintuitively—-single-handedly kept baseball in KC during some lean times. – TL

by timlacy on Sep 19, 2008 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

How much will the renovations matter in this?

It may not seem like it will, but most teams like to make a big splash in their first year in a new stadium. The Royals will be trying to sell 2009 as a team in a new stadium. There has been some mild improvement this year, and if the Royals land a high money free agent, they could generate a lot of excitement for next year.

However, if they deal one of their most talented pitchers for prospects most fans have never heard of, that could negate a lot of good will spent on a free agent and hurt the perception that the Royals are trying to win, at least in the eyes of the casual fan.

I don’t think Dayton will make decisions based on stuff like this. But I think the Glass family will. And this may be the first test as to whether or not they will really be “hands off”

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 19, 2008 10:10 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

good point

But I think the we’re talking about trading for guys who are majors-ready — it’s not like trading for AA guys who will be ready in 2010, probably maybe.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 19, 2008 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think that would be unwise though

I would rather get one MLB ready guy, and one higher upside younger prospect.

But still, even if we got a “MLB ready guy”, most casual Royals fans have never heard of him and will think “this team doesn’t care about winning! They trade our best players for ‘prospects’” They’ll think its a rehash of the Beltran deal.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 19, 2008 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's why the Royals need to balance it out

by brining in proven veteran winners like Russ Ortiz.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 19, 2008 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

And Horacio Ramirez

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 19, 2008 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

And Nomo!

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 19, 2008 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

And Tejeda!

And Maroth and…

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 19, 2008 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If they keep alternating...

Maybe they can finally trade all these successful reclamation guys for Ryan Braun, not like the HoRam disaster. Stilll can’t believe Dayton didn’t get a MLB-ready slugger for him.

:(

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 19, 2008 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Excellent point

I’ve heard Moore say, just recently in a Dutton interview, that he won’t compromise his rebuilding plan, that he will stick to the plan even if it means taking longer to reach contention. I would think this means he’s willing to trade Greinke for prospects, new stadium notwithstanding.

But I can’t fathom the Glass family agrees on that particular point. I think the stadium is going to be a big factor in this year’s offseason.

I follow the Tao of Steve (Balboni)

by jackie ballgame on Sep 19, 2008 10:50 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.
Start posting about the Royals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Neutron_star_small
Daily guess at the 2010 Royals.
Royalsreview_small
Late Night Royals Links: Rethinking Gordon, New Chukars Manager, Powder Blue Hats etc.
Ignignokt_small
Guillen and the (not so) almighty RBI
Stadium-sellout-450w_small
Early projection on 2010 Royals roster
Small
Fixing the kansas city royals
_41153080_gallerysanta_small
Are you good enough?
Trust_small
Denny Matthews at Plaza Library
Royalsretro_small
Royals sign P Jorge Campillo
Stash1_small
Kansas City Fails To Pick Up Option On Royals
Royalsretro_small
Royals sign P Brad Thompson

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Royalsreview_small royalsreview