Bradley Signs with Cubs 3/$30 million (p. 33)

[dew1679666265]

Is it really that bad a deal when you consider that MD was going to be moved, no matter what? That 2nd base was one of the only opportunities to slot in a lefty starter? That in the cubbies midset a middling lefty (any lefty) is > than the possibility of a productive MD? And based on our playoff performance, you can kinda see their logic?

 

I like the deal, but I don't claim to be able to see into the future....

 

It's still a bad deal because it's faulty logic. We won't improve the team by getting a worse player who hits with his left hand. Is it the best Hendry could have done since his mind was made up? I guess, but who really cares? If the trade didn't improve the team (which without Peavy it didn't) then it's a bad deal.

 

If Hendry was forced into it due to money, that's a different issue. But a bad move is not made good because you have the crazy idea that you're going to make a move no matter what.

[17 Seconds]

Your man Churchill seems to be under the assumption we're going three years.

 

Mike says, off the record, that he's 90% sure they land Milton Bradley, and bases that on conversations he had with some Tampa people. Doesn't sound like the Rays want to guarantee two years, let alone three.

 

The bolded makes it sound like the Rays would have to go three years guaranteed to match the Cubs offer. I could be reading it wrong and he may be implying incorrectly, but that's what I'm seeing.

 

I didn't catch that before. Hmm. Well hopefully if he's getting 3 guaranteed years then it will be less than 10 a year. Mayube 3/25 of somethingl ike that... hwich wouldn't be that awufl

 

Been celebrating the new year again? :wink:

 

I do hope we give him less than 10 a year, but somehow I doubt it.

 

 

wow that was like the worst typo ever

[dew1679666265]

Your man Churchill seems to be under the assumption we're going three years.

 

Mike says, off the record, that he's 90% sure they land Milton Bradley, and bases that on conversations he had with some Tampa people. Doesn't sound like the Rays want to guarantee two years, let alone three.

 

The bolded makes it sound like the Rays would have to go three years guaranteed to match the Cubs offer. I could be reading it wrong and he may be implying incorrectly, but that's what I'm seeing.

 

I didn't catch that before. Hmm. Well hopefully if he's getting 3 guaranteed years then it will be less than 10 a year. Mayube 3/25 of somethingl ike that... hwich wouldn't be that awufl

 

Been celebrating the new year again? :wink:

 

I do hope we give him less than 10 a year, but somehow I doubt it.

 

 

wow that was like the worst typo ever

 

Sorry, I just couldn't let it pass. :D

[17 Seconds]

Is it really that bad a deal when you consider that MD was going to be moved, no matter what? That 2nd base was one of the only opportunities to slot in a lefty starter? That in the cubbies midset a middling lefty (any lefty) is > than the possibility of a productive MD? And based on our playoff performance, you can kinda see their logic?

 

I like the deal, but I don't claim to be able to see into the future....

 

except you're missing the most significant factor: milton bradley. he's pretty much a lock to miss significant time. when he goes down, it would have been derosa moving to right and Fontenot getting significant playing time in place of Bradley. now, instead of more at-bats, a bradley injury means more at-bats for much less attractive options

[rawaction]

Is it really that bad a deal when you consider that MD was going to be moved, no matter what? That 2nd base was one of the only opportunities to slot in a lefty starter? That in the cubbies midset a middling lefty (any lefty) is > than the possibility of a productive MD? And based on our playoff performance, you can kinda see their logic?

 

I like the deal, but I don't claim to be able to see into the future....

 

That's shortsighted as hell, though. The Cubs scored the most runs in the NL by far, and faced a ton of RH pitching with a RH heavy lineup. The playoffs didn't expose some big weakness the Cubs hid all year. They just picked the 3 most visible times to go into the tank offensively. I don't know about you or Hendry, but I take more from 161 regular season games than I do from 3.

 

And Derosa didn't have to be moved, no matter what. Nobody ever has to be moved. The only reason to move a player should be to make your team better. The Derosa move did not make the Cubs better. I have a hard time believing that the Cubs couldn't go after a cheap RF (again Scott, Hermida, DeJesus, Teahan) if they were so financially strapped. If that's the case, why get another long term contract? Whether you think Derosa is better than Bradley or not, the Cubs would have saved more money by keeping Derosa and getting a cheap OF, and MAYBE be marginally worse offensively than with Bradley and not Derosa.

[Illini Iceman]

Is it really that bad a deal when you consider that MD was going to be moved, no matter what? That 2nd base was one of the only opportunities to slot in a lefty starter? That in the cubbies midset a middling lefty (any lefty) is > than the possibility of a productive MD? And based on our playoff performance, you can kinda see their logic?

 

I like the deal, but I don't claim to be able to see into the future....

 

except you're missing the most significant factor: milton bradley. he's pretty much a lock to miss significant time. when he goes down, it would have been derosa moving to right and Fontenot getting significant playing time in place of Bradley. now, instead of more at-bats, a bradley injury means more at-bats for much less attractive options

 

Hendy needs Hoff and Pie to produce. Between those two and Fontenot he is counting on his farm system big time to come through.

[Monco]

Is it really that bad a deal when you consider that MD was going to be moved, no matter what? That 2nd base was one of the only opportunities to slot in a lefty starter? That in the cubbies midset a middling lefty (any lefty) is > than the possibility of a productive MD? And based on our playoff performance, you can kinda see their logic?

 

I like the deal, but I don't claim to be able to see into the future....

 

except you're missing the most significant factor: milton bradley. he's pretty much a lock to miss significant time. when he goes down, it would have been derosa moving to right and Fontenot getting significant playing time in place of Bradley. now, instead of more at-bats, a bradley injury means more at-bats for much less attractive options

 

Hendy needs Hoff and Pie to produce. Between those two and Fontenot he is counting on his farm system big time to come through.

 

It looks like they've given up on Pie by signing Gathright.

[CubinNY]

Is it really that bad a deal when you consider that MD was going to be moved, no matter what? That 2nd base was one of the only opportunities to slot in a lefty starter? That in the cubbies midset a middling lefty (any lefty) is > than the possibility of a productive MD? And based on our playoff performance, you can kinda see their logic?

 

I like the deal, but I don't claim to be able to see into the future....

 

except you're missing the most significant factor: milton bradley. he's pretty much a lock to miss significant time. when he goes down, it would have been derosa moving to right and Fontenot getting significant playing time in place of Bradley. now, instead of more at-bats, a bradley injury means more at-bats for much less attractive options

 

Hendy needs Hoff and Pie to produce. Between those two and Fontenot he is counting on his farm system big time to come through.

 

It looks like they've given up on Pie by signing Gathright.

Pie's days were numbered when he got on the wrong side of Lou in ST. They'll get pennies on the dollar for him when they trade him.

 

However I will say this, after watching him play several games this year with Iowa he certainly hasn't progressed much with the bat or on the basepaths.

[waffle]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Replacing Pie with Gathright is a lot more annoying with Bradley in the fold and DeRosa traded. Gathright's a good defender, but Pie is better and offers the potential to be an offensive asset if he needs to play every day(or at least in a platoon) if an injury happens.

[dew1679666265]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

That they decided to arbitrarily trade him doesn't make the trade good. It made the team worse overall, so it was bad.

[Illini Iceman]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

That they decided to arbitrarily trade him doesn't make the trade good. It made the team worse overall, so it was bad.

 

You keep repeating this over and over as if the fact that Bradley and whoever the fifth starter will be (Gaudin/Marshall) will automatically be worse than DeRosa and Marquis. Personally I would rather have Bradley in RF and Gaudin in the rotation if it comes to that than have DeRosa in RF and Marquis in the rotation. The fact that the move potentially opens the door for the Cubs to get Peavy if everything works just right with the Padres makes me more willing to do it since without moving DeRosa and Marquis we know there definitely is not enough salary room for Bradley and Peavy. If they can't close the deal with the Padres then Hendry should have some wiggle room come the trading deadline to make a move to improve the team.

 

There are injury risks with Bradley but when he is healthy he puts up all star caliber offensive numbers. With DeRosa there are significant regression risks considering his age and the fact he is coming off a career year but his upside is not as great. I think Hoff showed enough last year for me to think that if Lou picks his spots well he will combine with Bradley to give the Cubs a very good offensive RF.

 

Marquis has been flamed here for 2 seasons and now that he is going to be gone it is amazing to me that suddenly people act like it is going to be a significant loss. I think the Cubs got the best they could hope from him the last two seasons and are smart to get rid of him now while there is still some value.

[17 Seconds]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

That they decided to arbitrarily trade him doesn't make the trade good. It made the team worse overall, so it was bad.

 

You keep repeating this over and over as if the fact that Bradley and whoever the fifth starter will be (Gaudin/Marshall) will automatically be worse than DeRosa and Marquis. Personally I would rather have Bradley in RF and Gaudin in the rotation if it comes to that than have DeRosa in RF and Marquis in the rotation. The fact that the move potentially opens the door for the Cubs to get Peavy if everything works just right with the Padres makes me more willing to do it since without moving DeRosa and Marquis we know there definitely is not enough salary room for Bradley and Peavy. If they can't close the deal with the Padres then Hendry should have some wiggle room come the trading deadline to make a move to improve the team.

 

There are injury risks with Bradley but when he is healthy he puts up all star caliber offensive numbers. With DeRosa there are significant regression risks considering his age and the fact he is coming off a career year but his upside is not as great. I think Hoff showed enough last year for me to think that if Lou picks his spots well he will combine with Bradley to give the Cubs a very good offensive RF.

 

Marquis has been flamed here for 2 seasons and now that he is going to be gone it is amazing to me that suddenly people act like it is going to be a significant loss. I think the Cubs got the best they could hope from him the last two seasons and are smart to get rid of him now while there is still some value.

 

If anything I'd say the DeRosa trade makes Peavy less likely since now we can't flip him for prospects they want later on.

[Monco]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

Its nice he sold high,but looking at what they got,it doesn't look like they got much.

Edited January 2, 2009 by Monco

[Illini Iceman]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

That they decided to arbitrarily trade him doesn't make the trade good. It made the team worse overall, so it was bad.

 

You keep repeating this over and over as if the fact that Bradley and whoever the fifth starter will be (Gaudin/Marshall) will automatically be worse than DeRosa and Marquis. Personally I would rather have Bradley in RF and Gaudin in the rotation if it comes to that than have DeRosa in RF and Marquis in the rotation. The fact that the move potentially opens the door for the Cubs to get Peavy if everything works just right with the Padres makes me more willing to do it since without moving DeRosa and Marquis we know there definitely is not enough salary room for Bradley and Peavy. If they can't close the deal with the Padres then Hendry should have some wiggle room come the trading deadline to make a move to improve the team.

 

There are injury risks with Bradley but when he is healthy he puts up all star caliber offensive numbers. With DeRosa there are significant regression risks considering his age and the fact he is coming off a career year but his upside is not as great. I think Hoff showed enough last year for me to think that if Lou picks his spots well he will combine with Bradley to give the Cubs a very good offensive RF.

 

Marquis has been flamed here for 2 seasons and now that he is going to be gone it is amazing to me that suddenly people act like it is going to be a significant loss. I think the Cubs got the best they could hope from him the last two seasons and are smart to get rid of him now while there is still some value.

 

If anything I'd say the DeRosa trade makes Peavy less likely since now we can't flip him for prospects they want later on.

 

Hendry obviously knows better than anyone what prospects they want so if he thinks there is any chance of making the Peavy deal he must still feel that he can meet the Padres' demands with what he got from the Indians and/or what he has in house. He sends Pie to the Orioles for Olsen then sends Olsen, Vitters, Marshall, Hart, Cedeno, etc to the Padres for Peavy. Based on what has already happened we can safely assume that Towers wanted more than Hendry was willing to give so Hendry now is most likely waiting him out to see if he will cave as the season (and reality of having to pay Peavy) gets closer. But since to some degree the ball is in the Padres' court he can't wait around and not sign Bradley or he risks coming out of the offseason with neither. Therefore, he makes the move on DeRosa to make sure he has cleared enough salary then waits and sees what the Padres decide with Peavy and figures he will try to get approval from the new ownership at that time so he can pull the trigger if the Padres are willing.

 

Clearly he thinks having Bradley makes the Cubs a better team than having DeRosa and at this moment with ownership in flux he can not get approval to have both under his salary constraints so he makes the move.

[CUBZ99]

If anything I'd say the DeRosa trade makes Peavy less likely since now we can't flip him for prospects they want later on.

 

Unless, the Cubs already have the pieces to complete the trade with the Padres and the prospects Hendry got for DeRo were for selected for the purpose of restocking the farm.

[17 Seconds]

If anything I'd say the DeRosa trade makes Peavy less likely since now we can't flip him for prospects they want later on.

 

Unless, the Cubs already have the pieces to complete the trade with the Padres and the prospects Hendry got for DeRo were for selected for the purpose of restocking the farm.

 

But we already know it will be at least a 3 team trade and probably 4. Towers ahs already said this repeatedly.

[waffle]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

That they decided to arbitrarily trade him doesn't make the trade good. It made the team worse overall, so it was bad.

 

A) we cannot yet value those pitching prospects. Afterall, the cubs have shown a pretty good track record with identifying/developing pitchers.

B) not if this is the Part A of a multiple step transaction.

 

Wait till all the dominoes have fallen I would say, or till the first pitch is thrown.

[dew1679666265]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

That they decided to arbitrarily trade him doesn't make the trade good. It made the team worse overall, so it was bad.

 

You keep repeating this over and over as if the fact that Bradley and whoever the fifth starter will be (Gaudin/Marshall) will automatically be worse than DeRosa and Marquis. Personally I would rather have Bradley in RF and Gaudin in the rotation if it comes to that than have DeRosa in RF and Marquis in the rotation. The fact that the move potentially opens the door for the Cubs to get Peavy if everything works just right with the Padres makes me more willing to do it since without moving DeRosa and Marquis we know there definitely is not enough salary room for Bradley and Peavy. If they can't close the deal with the Padres then Hendry should have some wiggle room come the trading deadline to make a move to improve the team.

 

There are injury risks with Bradley but when he is healthy he puts up all star caliber offensive numbers. With DeRosa there are significant regression risks considering his age and the fact he is coming off a career year but his upside is not as great. I think Hoff showed enough last year for me to think that if Lou picks his spots well he will combine with Bradley to give the Cubs a very good offensive RF.

 

Marquis has been flamed here for 2 seasons and now that he is going to be gone it is amazing to me that suddenly people act like it is going to be a significant loss. I think the Cubs got the best they could hope from him the last two seasons and are smart to get rid of him now while there is still some value.

 

On Bradley/DeRosa: If Bradley were likely to be healthy for a majority of the season, I'd be cool with all of this. But the huge likelihood is that we'll have 85-90 games of Bradley and 72-77 games of Hoff/Reed/Gathright. I'm not optimistic that the latter trio will be better than keeping DeRosa and going after a cheaper RF option such as Scott, Hermida, etc.

 

On Marquis: I was not one of those who "flamed" Marquis for two years. I argued that he was, in fact, a decent enough starter who had value unless we found somebody better to replace him. I was never, and still am not, in favor of dumping him without replacing him with someone better.

 

And, as I've been saying, if we acquire Peavy or sign Sheets/Lowe/etc, I'll be a lot happier with the trades of DeRosa and Marquis. Otherwise, I don't expect this team to be as good.

[dew1679666265]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

That they decided to arbitrarily trade him doesn't make the trade good. It made the team worse overall, so it was bad.

 

A) we cannot yet value those pitching prospects. Afterall, the cubs have shown a pretty good track record with identifying/developing pitchers.

B) not if this is the Part A of a multiple step transaction.

 

Wait till all the dominoes have fallen I would say, or till the first pitch is thrown.

 

A) The prospects may become good, but they appear to be very high risk, high reward players. They'll almost certainly not help us this year or next, as it appears. So I don't understand how the DeRosa trade helps us now, unless . . .

 

B) It might be a multi-step transaction. I've said a few times (not sure if you've seen it, though) that if this chain of events nets us Peavy, I'm pretty happy with it all. Most of the reports I've seen, though, say the DeRosa trade is not connected in any way with Peavy. That troubles me.

[Monco]

Mostly I agree with the criticism.

 

I guess my point is that MD was a goner. Both Hendry and Lou want some left handed starters. I do think we are selling high. Yes it may have financial aspects that we have yet to see the outcome of (peavy/Bradley, etc.). In my mind I was already counting him out... and was pleased that we got some talent for him that may prove useful either in the future or as future pieces in a trade.

 

Maybe I am just giving him the benefit of the doubt (again) but I still like this deal.

 

That they decided to arbitrarily trade him doesn't make the trade good. It made the team worse overall, so it was bad.

 

You keep repeating this over and over as if the fact that Bradley and whoever the fifth starter will be (Gaudin/Marshall) will automatically be worse than DeRosa and Marquis. Personally I would rather have Bradley in RF and Gaudin in the rotation if it comes to that than have DeRosa in RF and Marquis in the rotation. The fact that the move potentially opens the door for the Cubs to get Peavy if everything works just right with the Padres makes me more willing to do it since without moving DeRosa and Marquis we know there definitely is not enough salary room for Bradley and Peavy. If they can't close the deal with the Padres then Hendry should have some wiggle room come the trading deadline to make a move to improve the team.

 

There are injury risks with Bradley but when he is healthy he puts up all star caliber offensive numbers. With DeRosa there are significant regression risks considering his age and the fact he is coming off a career year but his upside is not as great. I think Hoff showed enough last year for me to think that if Lou picks his spots well he will combine with Bradley to give the Cubs a very good offensive RF.

 

Marquis has been flamed here for 2 seasons and now that he is going to be gone it is amazing to me that suddenly people act like it is going to be a significant loss. I think the Cubs got the best they could hope from him the last two seasons and are smart to get rid of him now while there is still some value.

 

On Bradley/DeRosa: If Bradley were likely to be healthy for a majority of the season, I'd be cool with all of this. But the huge likelihood is that we'll have 85-90 games of Bradley and 72-77 games of Hoff/Reed/Gathright. I'm not optimistic that the latter trio will be better than keeping DeRosa and going after a cheaper RF option such as Scott, Hermida, etc.

 

On Marquis: I was not one of those who "flamed" Marquis for two years. I argued that he was, in fact, a decent enough starter who had value unless we found somebody better to replace him. I was never, and still am not, in favor of dumping him without replacing him with someone better.

 

And, as I've been saying, if we acquire Peavy or sign Sheets/Lowe/etc, I'll be a lot happier with the trades of DeRosa and Marquis. Otherwise, I don't expect this team to be as good.

 

I'd rather trade for Hermida than sign Bradley.

 

If they sign Bradley ,I'd prefer trading for Brian Roberts than Peavy. I believe its the last year of Roberts contract. The price would be lower than last year. We should be able to do it without giving up Josh Vitters. I doubt they would be able to get Hermida and Roberts without giving up Vitters.

[dew1679666265]

I'd rather trade for Hermida than sign Bradley.

 

If they sign Bradley ,I'd prefer trading for Brian Roberts than Peavy. I believe its the last year of Roberts contract. The price would be lower than last year. We should be able to do it without giving up Josh Vitters. I doubt they would be able to get Hermida and Roberts without giving up Vitters.

 

My fear would be the huge demands of Andy MacPhail/Peter Angelos. They are not rational men.

[Wheelimus]

I'm pretty excited, all things considered. We're getting Milton Bradley. For once we have a new Outfield component who just might not be less than we expect. All bets will be with health, of course, but he has the potential to be huge.

 

DeRosa was in his walk year. We'd heard zero talk about any contract talk. We just saw how right we were with draft picks for Woddy, ugh. Sometimes you sell high. Getting rid of the contract gets us Milton Bradley. Jason Marquis will be gone. These seem like exciting times.

 

I'm excited to see what Little Mike Fontenot can do.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm pretty excited, all things considered. We're getting Milton Bradley. For once we have a new Outfield component who just might not be less than we expect. All bets will be with health, of course, but he has the potential to be huge.

 

DeRosa was in his walk year. We'd heard zero talk about any contract talk. We just saw how right we were with draft picks for Woddy, ugh. Sometimes you sell high. Getting rid of the contract gets us Milton Bradley. Jason Marquis will be gone. These seem like exciting times.

 

I'm excited to see what Little Mike Fontenot can do.

 

Exciting? They haven't done anything but get worse so far. What's so exciting about taking steps back?

[Illini Iceman]

I'm pretty excited, all things considered. We're getting Milton Bradley. For once we have a new Outfield component who just might not be less than we expect. All bets will be with health, of course, but he has the potential to be huge.

 

DeRosa was in his walk year. We'd heard zero talk about any contract talk. We just saw how right we were with draft picks for Woddy, ugh. Sometimes you sell high. Getting rid of the contract gets us Milton Bradley. Jason Marquis will be gone. These seem like exciting times.

 

I'm excited to see what Little Mike Fontenot can do.

 

Exciting? They haven't done anything but get worse so far. What's so exciting about taking steps back?

 

Maybe because he likes Fontenot / Bradley better than Fontenot / DeRosa. I don't consider that worse.