Unlike a lot of folks, I’m actually pretty OK with the Zack Greinke trade from the Royals’ perspective. No, you don’t always “win” a trade when you give up the best player in the deal — indeed, you rarely do — but “Zack Greinke: Kansas City Royal” was just not a viable possibility going forward and the Zack Greinke we see in Milwaukee next year is probably not the same pitcher we would have seen if he stayed. He was not happy with the Royals. The Royals did get some useful pieces. It’s not an awful deal.
Which makes me wonder about this description of the trade from a Royals’ spokesman (which came in the same marketing article I linked a while ago):
“It’s not just us trying to spin this the best way we can. There are lots of baseball experts (executives and scouts) telling us this was not only the right thing to do, but probably the best-case scenario under the circumstances of trading Zack.”
Cook said the team hopes this trade works out similarly to when the Minnesota Twins traded two-time Cy Young Award winner Johan Santana to the New York Mets for four of their best prospects.
I’m going to be charitable here and assume that Mr. Cook — the team spokeman — meant that it would be similar to the Santana deal in the “our team will be able to go on and win a bunch of ballgames and a couple of AL Central titles despite trading away our ace” sense. Not similar in the “wow, we may have just made the worst trade on a talent-for-talent basis in modern memory” sense. Because that is a pretty fair way to describe the Santana trade.