From deep down in Jayson Stark's column (don't bother looking to see if the Dodgers are noted as one of the five teams that could have a pitching-paved path to 2011 success, because we ain't there), some thoughts about Zack Greinke coming from Kansas City to the Dodgers:
Zack exchange:
Are the Royals serious about trading Zack Greinke? Well, they're serious about listening. But according to clubs that have spoken with them, they're telling bidders up front that (A) they would need to "win" the deal, (B) they would have to get the kind of four-for-one haul the Rangers got for Mark Teixeira to pull the trigger, (C) they need a bunch of "front-line, winning, quality players" in return, and (D) at least one of those players has to be a pitcher capable of turning into the next Zack Greinke in a couple of years. So unless a team like Texas were to lose Cliff Lee and decide it needs to trade for Greinke at all costs, we're betting this doesn't happen -- not this winter, anyway.
More Greinke: Clubs that checked in on Greinke have also come away with the impression he wouldn't approve a deal to ANY major-market East Coast team (Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, Mets). But an official of one team says Greinke "would at least think about the L.A. clubs" if the Dodgers or Angels were to wade into this mix.
Yeah, considering we probably wouldn't do (B), (C), or (D), we're probably not in the running for Zackster. Which means we'll go after Cliff Lee, right?
4 comments:
I get bored with the "multiple potential superstar prospects" demand.
The Royals want a bowl of green m&ms, a case of bottled water, and nachos in their dressing room, too.
Sax: I'm guessing that means they're expecting Broxton in the deal
It may be a Longshot, but it would give us good Mojo.
Post a Comment