Which Team Says No

[Backtobanks]

Reds or Cubs:

 

Cordero for Bradley.

 

Reds save $3 million over 2 years and add offense. Maybe Dusty can deal with Bradley.

 

Cubs get a useful piece while dumping Bradley, but add another expensive contract.

 

Unless Hendry plans to keep Bradley, I would prefer this kind of deal rather than paying 80% - 90% of Bradley's contract to play somewhere else while we receive a low A-ball player.

[E.J.]

The Cubs had better be the [expletive] team that says No in that scenario.

[Tarver]

$12 mil for a closer? Hendry had better be the one to say no.

[Garwilly]

Should the Cubs weaken their team and add payroll?

 

Interesting question you pose....

[rocket]

trick question, because neither team bothers to propose this trade

[illiniguy]

So we get way worse and Milton stays in division to kick our butts for a couple years? Where do I sign up?

[RedFlash]

Bradley for Cordero? What's next Ramirez for Homer Bailey? Fukudome for Chris Dickerson? No thank you on Cordero.

[Backtobanks]

$12 mil for a closer? Hendry had better be the one to say no.

You wouldn't be paying $12 million for Cordero, you would be paying the difference between Cordero and Bradley.

 

Should the Cubs weaken their team and add payroll?

 

Interesting question you pose....

If the "experts" are right, the Cubs will weaken their team (dump Bradley) and most likely add payroll (paying Bradley plus a replacement). The question is should we receive something useful in return.

 

First let me explain that my original post was based on the absolute declarations by the "experts" (writers and broadcasters) that Bradley has to be removed from this team and that Hendry is going to have to eat a huge chunk (80% ?) of his remaining contract. Rather than paying $7 million next year and $10 million in 2011 for Bradley to play somewhere else while we receive nothing (low A-ball player) in return, I suggested taking Cordero. I totally agree that Bradley (at his salary) is more valuable than Cordero (at his salary), even considering Bradley's baggage.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I really hope they dont feel the need to railroad Bradley out of town because he ruffled some feathers. If they want to win next year, I sugest they dont do any salary dumping. Money will be coming off the books in 2011, and there will be a very nice free agent class that year.

[Tarver]

$12 mil for a closer? Hendry had better be the one to say no.

You wouldn't be paying $12 million for Cordero, you would be paying the difference between Cordero and Bradley.

 

Should the Cubs weaken their team and add payroll?

 

Interesting question you pose....

If the "experts" are right, the Cubs will weaken their team (dump Bradley) and most likely add payroll (paying Bradley plus a replacement). The question is should we receive something useful in return.

 

First let me explain that my original post was based on the absolute declarations by the "experts" (writers and broadcasters) that Bradley has to be removed from this team and that Hendry is going to have to eat a huge chunk (80% ?) of his remaining contract. Rather than paying $7 million next year and $10 million in 2011 for Bradley to play somewhere else while we receive nothing (low A-ball player) in return, I suggested taking Cordero. I totally agree that Bradley (at his salary) is more valuable than Cordero (at his salary), even considering Bradley's baggage.

 

Yeah, but it's still paying $12 mil for a closer.

[NCCubFan]

$12 mil for a closer? Hendry had better be the one to say no.

You wouldn't be paying $12 million for Cordero, you would be paying the difference between Cordero and Bradley.

 

Should the Cubs weaken their team and add payroll?

 

Interesting question you pose....

If the "experts" are right, the Cubs will weaken their team (dump Bradley) and most likely add payroll (paying Bradley plus a replacement). The question is should we receive something useful in return.

 

First let me explain that my original post was based on the absolute declarations by the "experts" (writers and broadcasters) that Bradley has to be removed from this team and that Hendry is going to have to eat a huge chunk (80% ?) of his remaining contract. Rather than paying $7 million next year and $10 million in 2011 for Bradley to play somewhere else while we receive nothing (low A-ball player) in return, I suggested taking Cordero. I totally agree that Bradley (at his salary) is more valuable than Cordero (at his salary), even considering Bradley's baggage.

 

Yeah, but it's still paying $12 mil for a closer.

And one who's good, but not great, at that. If he can rediscover the strike zone by next year I think Marmol would be a better closer than Cordero.

[Magnetic Curses]

i think we should colonize mars so we can send people who want bradley off the team for garbage or nothing there to live out their lives in relative peace.

[Tryptamine]

i think we should colonize mars so we can send people who want bradley off the team for garbage or nothing there to live out their lives in relative peace.

 

Agreed, it's really starting to get old. After watching him get booed following getting on base 8 consecutive plate apperances I became really disgusted with our fan base.

[Magnetic Curses]

bradley's ops is at .818.

[Moises a loo]

$12 mil for a closer? Hendry had better be the one to say no.

You wouldn't be paying $12 million for Cordero, you would be paying the difference between Cordero and Bradley.

 

Should the Cubs weaken their team and add payroll?

 

Interesting question you pose....

If the "experts" are right, the Cubs will weaken their team (dump Bradley) and most likely add payroll (paying Bradley plus a replacement). The question is should we receive something useful in return.

 

First let me explain that my original post was based on the absolute declarations by the "experts" (writers and broadcasters) that Bradley has to be removed from this team and that Hendry is going to have to eat a huge chunk (80% ?) of his remaining contract. Rather than paying $7 million next year and $10 million in 2011 for Bradley to play somewhere else while we receive nothing (low A-ball player) in return, I suggested taking Cordero. I totally agree that Bradley (at his salary) is more valuable than Cordero (at his salary), even considering Bradley's baggage.

 

I understand what you're saying. Bradley was a horrible fit here; he'd be a much better fit in Cincy. Cordero is a luxury the Reds can't afford & the Cubs can. Ideally, Bradley continues to hit and provide decent value for the next couple years. BUT if the team has decided he's "killing their chemistry" or something and has to go, I think swapping bad contracts for a guy we can actually use may be a better idea than paying Bradley to play for someone else. You make a valid point and don't deserve to be ridiculed by the geniuses around here. That said, I doubt either team would do it, not because it doesn't make sense but because no GM wants to admit he screwed up. But you never know.

[Magnetic Curses]

quite a convincing argument you got there.

[erik316wttn]

Should the Cubs weaken their team and add payroll?

 

Interesting question you pose....

 

Paging Jim Hendry. Paging Mr. Jim Hendry.....

[Ding Dong Johnson]

yikes

[Backtobanks]

$12 mil for a closer? Hendry had better be the one to say no.

You wouldn't be paying $12 million for Cordero, you would be paying the difference between Cordero and Bradley.

 

Should the Cubs weaken their team and add payroll?

 

Interesting question you pose....

If the "experts" are right, the Cubs will weaken their team (dump Bradley) and most likely add payroll (paying Bradley plus a replacement). The question is should we receive something useful in return.

 

First let me explain that my original post was based on the absolute declarations by the "experts" (writers and broadcasters) that Bradley has to be removed from this team and that Hendry is going to have to eat a huge chunk (80% ?) of his remaining contract. Rather than paying $7 million next year and $10 million in 2011 for Bradley to play somewhere else while we receive nothing (low A-ball player) in return, I suggested taking Cordero. I totally agree that Bradley (at his salary) is more valuable than Cordero (at his salary), even considering Bradley's baggage.

 

Yeah, but it's still paying $12 mil for a closer.

 

My point is that while $12 million for a closer is ridiculous, is it worse than paying $21 million over 2 years to some other team's RF?

[Tarver]

If Hendry has to eat salary, then Milton shouldn't be traded.

 

He shouldn't be traded in any case, but if he absolutely must, at least free up the payroll to add someone with more value than Cordero. That move makes the team much, much worse.

[Backtobanks]

If Hendry has to eat salary, then Milton shouldn't be traded.

 

He shouldn't be traded in any case, but if he absolutely must, at least free up the payroll to add someone with more value than Cordero. That move makes the team much, much worse.

 

I agree that he shouldn't be traded, but everything I've heard and read sounds like the Cubs want to get rid of him. Unfortunately, there's no way to "free up the payroll" because the only options the Cubs will have is to eat most of his contract or take a bad contract in return.

[Tarver]

If Hendry has to eat salary, then Milton shouldn't be traded.

 

He shouldn't be traded in any case, but if he absolutely must, at least free up the payroll to add someone with more value than Cordero. That move makes the team much, much worse.

 

I agree that he shouldn't be traded, but everything I've heard and read sounds like the Cubs want to get rid of him. Unfortunately, there's no way to "free up the payroll" because the only options the Cubs will have is to eat most of his contract or take a bad contract in return.

 

I don't see why. A team like the Reds would be absolutely perfect for Bradley, and they certainly need offense and have room in the corners. Jocketty's moves have been downright dreadful since the Mulder trade, so I'm not assuming Hendry would have to contribute any salary.

 

edit: I was unclear. No reason to take on Cordero considering how much the Reds need offense.

[Cubbie Swagger]

I'm in no hurry to move Bradley. The guy's numbers aren't even all that bad anymore. I know he's a nutcase but he can play... and I think he'll be better next year.

[Backtobanks]

If Hendry has to eat salary, then Milton shouldn't be traded.

 

He shouldn't be traded in any case, but if he absolutely must, at least free up the payroll to add someone with more value than Cordero. That move makes the team much, much worse.

 

I agree that he shouldn't be traded, but everything I've heard and read sounds like the Cubs want to get rid of him. Unfortunately, there's no way to "free up the payroll" because the only options the Cubs will have is to eat most of his contract or take a bad contract in return.

 

I don't see why. A team like the Reds would be absolutely perfect for Bradley, and they certainly need offense and have room in the corners. Jocketty's moves have been downright dreadful since the Mulder trade, so I'm not assuming Hendry would have to contribute any salary.

 

edit: I was unclear. No reason to take on Cordero considering how much the Reds need offense.

 

I hope you're right, but I seriously doubt it. I can't see any team taking on Bradley with all of his baggage and a hefty contract on top of it unless the Cubs eat salary or take a bad contract.

[Moises a loo]

If Hendry has to eat salary, then Milton shouldn't be traded.

 

He shouldn't be traded in any case, but if he absolutely must, at least free up the payroll to add someone with more value than Cordero. That move makes the team much, much worse.

 

I agree that he shouldn't be traded, but everything I've heard and read sounds like the Cubs want to get rid of him. Unfortunately, there's no way to "free up the payroll" because the only options the Cubs will have is to eat most of his contract or take a bad contract in return.

 

I don't see why. A team like the Reds would be absolutely perfect for Bradley, and they certainly need offense and have room in the corners. Jocketty's moves have been downright dreadful since the Mulder trade, so I'm not assuming Hendry would have to contribute any salary.

 

edit: I was unclear. No reason to take on Cordero considering how much the Reds need offense.

 

The Reds don't have any money to spend; Cordero is the one big contract they'd really like to move, but they can't take on more without freeing it up somewhere.