Dec 8, 2009, 9:38 AM EDT
Heyman on why it’s extremely unlikely that Curtis Granderson is going to the Yankees in that much-discussed multi-team deal:
[Yankees] would have had to give up 4 prospects for granderson in 3-way deal: austin jackson, coke, kennedy and dunn. theyre saying no.
Good for the Yankees. I think some people are wearing Winter Meetings goggles. Sure, a Granderson deal looks like an awesome blockbuster within the context of an event where Brian Bruney can be the day’s biggest story, but he’s still a good, not great outfielder who is in no way worth that level of a prospect outlay.
We can talk about it all we want, but I’ve heard nothing and read nothing that suggests that the Tigers are any more serious about dealing Granderson today than they were a week or two ago when they were in “sure, if you totally bowl us over” mode.
- World Series, Game 4: Royals vs. Giants lineups 1
- Report: Rays owner Stuart Sternberg has discussed moving the team to Montreal 42
- Dave Dombrowski on Miguel Cabrera: “It’s worse than what we ever would have anticipated” 24
- World Series Reset: Can the Giants even things up? 4
- Behind strong bullpen, Royals edge Giants 3-2 to take a 2-1 World Series lead 35
- Paul Konerko, Jimmy Rollins named co-winners of the Roberto Clemente Award 4
- The greatest trick this Royals bullpen ever pulled … 3
- Adam Wainwright underwent elbow surgery to “trim” cartilage 13
- Shocker! Joe Maddon to opt out of his contract and leave the Rays (143)
- Erroneous Narrative Alert: no, the Giants are not a “gritty,” anti-stats organization (122)
- Pedro Martinez has some opinions about who the new “face of baseball” is (112)
- PANTY RAID! Homeland Security agents confiscate unlicensed Kansas City Royals underwear (109)
- The World Series ratings are low. So what? (101)