How about this Solution to the Bradley Mess?

[dew1679666265]

I hope you (and Tim) are right, but I still think all of this "interest" in Bradley is based on the fact other GMs think they can get Bradley for a low prospect and Hendry will pay a big chunk of his contract the next two years. Contrary to what many of you think, I agree that Bradley is a good hitter and if a team has a spot for him, they would have to be interested if they thought they could get him for next-to-nothing.

 

I'm sure we'll have to pay a good portion of his salary, but there was good interest in him before this season. Teams like the potential for production from Bradley and as long as Hendry uses some negotiation (which I think he will), teams should be willing to take on at least some of his contract.

[Rob]

 

You do realize how silly you're making yourself look, right?

 

Why because you disagree with my opinion? As others have pointed out, putting in a sub for Bradley for 200+ AB certainly lowers the production from RF whereas Rowand's 500 AB covers most of the season. My original point was that Rowand was a better choice of bad contracts (Burrell, Perez, etc.) rather than paying Bradley's contract to play elsewhere.

 

As a hitter: Cameron>Bradley>Rowand

As a position player:Cameron>Rowand>>>>>Bradley

 

No, because you expect people to take you seriously when posting stuff like...

 

one player has spent the 10 years as an OF (Rowand) and the other has spent the 10 years as a part-time DH/part-time OF/part-time DL member/full-time jerk.

 

And for the record, Bradley is closer in defensive value to Rowand than Rowand is to Cameron.

[CUBZ99]

 

You do realize how silly you're making yourself look, right?

 

Why because you disagree with my opinion? As others have pointed out, putting in a sub for Bradley for 200+ AB certainly lowers the production from RF whereas Rowand's 500 AB covers most of the season. My original point was that Rowand was a better choice of bad contracts (Burrell, Perez, etc.) rather than paying Bradley's contract to play elsewhere.

 

As a hitter: Cameron>Bradley>Rowand

As a position player:Cameron>Rowand>>>>>Bradley

 

No, because you expect people to take you seriously when posting stuff like...

 

one player has spent the 10 years as an OF (Rowand) and the other has spent the 10 years as a part-time DH/part-time OF/part-time DL member/full-time jerk.

 

And for the record, Bradley is closer in defensive value to Rowand than Rowand is to Cameron.

 

Except that they play different positions.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

You do realize how silly you're making yourself look, right?

 

Why because you disagree with my opinion? As others have pointed out, putting in a sub for Bradley for 200+ AB certainly lowers the production from RF whereas Rowand's 500 AB covers most of the season. My original point was that Rowand was a better choice of bad contracts (Burrell, Perez, etc.) rather than paying Bradley's contract to play elsewhere.

 

As a hitter: Cameron>Bradley>Rowand

As a position player:Cameron>Rowand>>>>>Bradley

 

No, because you expect people to take you seriously when posting stuff like...

 

one player has spent the 10 years as an OF (Rowand) and the other has spent the 10 years as a part-time DH/part-time OF/part-time DL member/full-time jerk.

 

And for the record, Bradley is closer in defensive value to Rowand than Rowand is to Cameron.

 

Except that they play different positions.

 

Pretty sure he was taking position into account.

[Rob]

 

You do realize how silly you're making yourself look, right?

 

Why because you disagree with my opinion? As others have pointed out, putting in a sub for Bradley for 200+ AB certainly lowers the production from RF whereas Rowand's 500 AB covers most of the season. My original point was that Rowand was a better choice of bad contracts (Burrell, Perez, etc.) rather than paying Bradley's contract to play elsewhere.

 

As a hitter: Cameron>Bradley>Rowand

As a position player:Cameron>Rowand>>>>>Bradley

 

No, because you expect people to take you seriously when posting stuff like...

 

one player has spent the 10 years as an OF (Rowand) and the other has spent the 10 years as a part-time DH/part-time OF/part-time DL member/full-time jerk.

 

And for the record, Bradley is closer in defensive value to Rowand than Rowand is to Cameron.

 

Except that they play different positions.

 

Pretty sure he was taking position into account.

 

I absolutely was.

[biittner77]

Rowand isn't a good fit for the Cubs lineup. He doesn't get on base enough for the top of the order (or really any part of the order) and he doesn't hit for the kind of power Piniella and Hendry are looking for in the 5th spot.

 

Bradley would be OK batting 5th if the guys batting behind him- Soto and Soriano- are hitting. That maximizes his value as an OBP guy similar to what Fukudome did the 1st 2 months last year. The same is probably true of Cameron with the added value of better defense.

 

To save time, whether or not batting order makes a difference is irrelevent since Piniella and Hendry very much believe that it does and they have the only votes that count.

[Backtobanks]

 

No, because you expect people to take you seriously when posting stuff like...

 

one player has spent the 10 years as an OF (Rowand) and the other has spent the 10 years as a part-time DH/part-time OF/part-time DL member/full-time jerk.

 

And for the record, Bradley is closer in defensive value to Rowand than Rowand is to Cameron.

 

I don't see anything innaccurate in my post: Rowand has played OF regularly for 10 years and Bradley has averaged about 95 games many of which he was a DH. The 60 games per year he missed were mostly because of DL stints and more than his share of suspensions ("full time jerk). While I agree he is a good hitter, the reason the number of teams interested is limited (even with Hendry probably eating much of his contract) is because of his injury history and his mental health issues. Also, I'm sure many GMs consider him a DH.

[biittner77]

Before last year, Bradley was not a full time DH. In fact he didn't DH more than 10 games per year in any of his AL seasons. If GMs consider him a DH based on what he did in 2008 then they should also consider that he put up a .900+ OPS in that capacity. I don't see how that would count against him.

[Backtobanks]

Before last year, Bradley was not a full time DH. In fact he didn't DH more than 10 games per year in any of his AL seasons. If GMs consider him a DH based on what he did in 2008 then they should also consider that he put up a .900+ OPS in that capacity. I don't see how that would count against him.

 

Well it wouldn't count against him if you're an AL GM, but a DH doesn't help much if you're a NL GM.

[inari]

Before last year, Bradley was not a full time DH. In fact he didn't DH more than 10 games per year in any of his AL seasons. If GMs consider him a DH based on what he did in 2008 then they should also consider that he put up a .900+ OPS in that capacity. I don't see how that would count against him.

 

Well it wouldn't count against him if you're an AL GM, but a DH doesn't help much if you're a NL GM.

 

The fact that he's only once been a fulltime DH shouldn't really count against him. He was healthy in the field this year.

[hossdriver]

Before last year, Bradley was not a full time DH. In fact he didn't DH more than 10 games per year in any of his AL seasons. If GMs consider him a DH based on what he did in 2008 then they should also consider that he put up a .900+ OPS in that capacity. I don't see how that would count against him.

 

Well it wouldn't count against him if you're an AL GM, but a DH doesn't help much if you're a NL GM.

 

The fact that he's only once been a fulltime DH shouldn't really count against him. He was healthy in the field this year.

 

 

Except that his VERY BEST offensive season, that netted him the bloated contract he's currently in, was primarily as a DH. The guy's a part-time player. You pay MB 2/3 of what you pay Rowand, because on average he plays about 2/3 of the games.

 

You guys continue to compare rate stats like its apples and apples. If I travel 55 mph for 10 hours, and you travel 70 mph for 7 hours, I'm still gonna go farther even though I'm traveling slower...

 

And yet nobody brings up the damage he's caused in the clubhouse and media with his BS.

[Rob]

Before last year, Bradley was not a full time DH. In fact he didn't DH more than 10 games per year in any of his AL seasons. If GMs consider him a DH based on what he did in 2008 then they should also consider that he put up a .900+ OPS in that capacity. I don't see how that would count against him.

 

Well it wouldn't count against him if you're an AL GM, but a DH doesn't help much if you're a NL GM.

 

The fact that he's only once been a fulltime DH shouldn't really count against him. He was healthy in the field this year.

 

 

Except that his VERY BEST offensive season, that netted him the bloated contract he's currently in, was primarily as a DH. The guy's a part-time player. You pay MB 2/3 of what you pay Rowand, because on average he plays about 2/3 of the games.

 

You guys continue to compare rate stats like its apples and apples. If I travel 55 mph for 10 hours, and you travel 70 mph for 7 hours, I'm still gonna go farther even though I'm traveling slower...

 

And yet nobody brings up the damage he's caused in the clubhouse and media with his BS.

 

You keep acting like if Bradley isn't playing, we don't have somebody else out there.

[hossdriver]

Before last year, Bradley was not a full time DH. In fact he didn't DH more than 10 games per year in any of his AL seasons. If GMs consider him a DH based on what he did in 2008 then they should also consider that he put up a .900+ OPS in that capacity. I don't see how that would count against him.

 

Well it wouldn't count against him if you're an AL GM, but a DH doesn't help much if you're a NL GM.

 

The fact that he's only once been a fulltime DH shouldn't really count against him. He was healthy in the field this year.

 

 

Except that his VERY BEST offensive season, that netted him the bloated contract he's currently in, was primarily as a DH. The guy's a part-time player. You pay MB 2/3 of what you pay Rowand, because on average he plays about 2/3 of the games.

 

You guys continue to compare rate stats like its apples and apples. If I travel 55 mph for 10 hours, and you travel 70 mph for 7 hours, I'm still gonna go farther even though I'm traveling slower...

 

And yet nobody brings up the damage he's caused in the clubhouse and media with his BS.

 

You keep acting like if Bradley isn't playing, we don't have somebody else out there.

 

 

No, there's someone out there. A part-time player that shuffles Fukudome around between CF and RF. Reed Johnson and Sam Fuld don't have the numbers to keep pace. When Bradley is out, it weakens the lineup, which in turn weakens the bench.

 

I'm merely defending the point that Rowand would fit better for the Cubs. He naturally plays CF. He defends above average. He's CAPABLE of +.800 OPS (actually very good for a CFer unless you're KGJ, Edmonds, or Beltran). He's pretty durable until he gets brave with the outfield wall.

 

Don't misinterpret my arguments for condoning a trade. Just looking at it objectively.

 

But Juan Pierre had a career year, maybe he can come back and leadoff and play CF...

[dew1679666265]

I'm merely defending the point that Rowand would fit better for the Cubs. He naturally plays CF. He defends above average. He's CAPABLE of +.800 OPS (actually very good for a CFer unless you're KGJ, Edmonds, or Beltran). He's pretty durable until he gets brave with the outfield wall.

 

Rowand has had 3 seasons with an OPS at or above .800 in his 9 total seasons. He's done it once in the past 5 seasons. Apart from 2007 he hasn't OPSd above .749 since 2004.

 

He'll occasionally reach an .800 OPS, but he's not likely to reach it.

[hossdriver]

I'm merely defending the point that Rowand would fit better for the Cubs. He naturally plays CF. He defends above average. He's CAPABLE of +.800 OPS (actually very good for a CFer unless you're KGJ, Edmonds, or Beltran). He's pretty durable until he gets brave with the outfield wall.

 

Rowand has had 3 seasons with an OPS at or above .800 in his 9 total seasons. He's done it once in the past 5 seasons. Apart from 2007 he hasn't OPSd above .749 since 2004.

 

He'll occasionally reach an .800 OPS, but he's not likely to reach it.

 

 

And yet you can count the number of CFer's with .800+ OPS in all of baseball on one hand... One of them is Fukudome. Kemp, Hunter, Victorino, and Byrd are the others. It isn't a necessary stat for CFers.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Rowand is 21st of 25 qualified CFs in OPS and wOBA.

[hossdriver]

Rowand is 21st of 25 qualified CFs in OPS and wOBA.

 

There's also speculation of playing hurt (219/.266/.371 since the break). Its a down year for him, no doubt.

 

Hey, Soriano has Garrett Anderson to thank for not being dead last in LF. He's played injured too.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Rowand is 21st of 25 qualified CFs in OPS and wOBA.

 

There's also speculation of playing hurt (219/.266/.371 since the break). Its a down year for him, no doubt.

 

His first and second half splits are almost identical the last two years. Was he hurt last year?

[hossdriver]

Rowand is 21st of 25 qualified CFs in OPS and wOBA.

 

There's also speculation of playing hurt (219/.266/.371 since the break). Its a down year for him, no doubt.

 

His first and second half splits are almost identical the last two years. Was he hurt last year?

 

 

He has two bad months to blame for his second half woes this year. He OPS'd in the .500+ in July and September. And he OPS'd over .800 in every other month except .767 in August. He might be a streaky player. They might have seen better pitching or had a tougher schedule those months. It might be AT&T bringing his numbers down. He hasn't been the same since he went to SF. I don't know.

 

He did miss time in July, and has now tweaked his back again this past Saturday. He's still outplayed Milton Bradley to date in 2009, and that's the issue.

[hossdriver]

For whatever reason, his numbers at home, and versus LH pitching took a serious hit in 2009. That had to bring his numbers down quite a bit.

[Rob]

Rowand is sitting right around his 40th percentile projection according to PECOTA. He's not under performing expectations by much at all.

[dew1679666265]

Rowand is 21st of 25 qualified CFs in OPS and wOBA.

 

There's also speculation of playing hurt (219/.266/.371 since the break). Its a down year for him, no doubt.

 

His first and second half splits are almost identical the last two years. Was he hurt last year?

 

 

He has two bad months to blame for his second half woes this year. He OPS'd in the .500+ in July and September. And he OPS'd over .800 in every other month except .767 in August. He might be a streaky player. They might have seen better pitching or had a tougher schedule those months. It might be AT&T bringing his numbers down. He hasn't been the same since he went to SF. I don't know.

 

He did miss time in July, and has now tweaked his back again this past Saturday. He's still outplayed Milton Bradley to date in 2009, and that's the issue.

 

He's nearly the same this year as he was last year, though. He had a .749 OPS last year and he has a .744 OPS this year. If this is a down year, then he's had two in a row. I'm thinking a mid-.700s is Aaron Rowand.

 

As for the counting stats being superior to rate stats, think about this:

 

Last year, Rowand had 611 PAs. In those appearances, he hit 13 HRs, 70 RBI, 37 2Bs and 0 3Bs.

 

This year, in roughly the same number of plate appearances as Rowand had last year, Bradley and Reed have combined for 16 HRs, 60 RBI, 26 2Bs and 2 3Bs. And this was a significant down year for Bradley.

 

Combine those counting stats with the huge advantage Bradley has over Rowand in rate stats (significantly better OBP primarily) and you have much better production in right field than Rowand. If you put Fox in place of Reed, the advantage gets even bigger.

 

Counting stats just aren't a good way to evaluate a player.

[Ivy.n.Denver]

Okay, let's leave the realm of reality.

 

How about DLee MB and Miles for Helton and Hawpe.

 

Sure would solve that balanced line-up "problem" the cubs have.

 

Of course this would add about $20M to the cubs payroll over the next 2 years.

 

 

Fukudome

Helton

Ramirez

Hawpe

Soriano

Soto

Fontenot/Baker

Theriot

[inari]

Okay, let's leave the realm of reality.

 

How about DLee MB and Miles for Helton and Hawpe.

 

Sure would solve that balanced line-up "problem" the cubs have.

 

Of course this would add about $20M to the cubs payroll over the next 2 years.

 

 

Fukudome

Helton

Ramirez

Hawpe

Soriano

Soto

Fontenot/Baker

Theriot

 

Downgrading at two positions and getting more expensive? Where do I sign?

[Clem Fandango]

Okay, let's leave the realm of reality.

 

How about DLee MB and Miles for Helton and Hawpe.

 

Sure would solve that balanced line-up "problem" the cubs have.

 

Of course this would add about $20M to the cubs payroll over the next 2 years.

 

 

Fukudome

Helton

Ramirez

Hawpe

Soriano

Soto

Fontenot/Baker

Theriot

 

Downgrading at two positions and getting more expensive? Where do I sign?

 

Brad Hawpe is a downgrade over MB? Hawpe is great. He's actually hit more HR away from Coors this season, and his home/road splits for his career are virtually identical. He'd be a great addition to the Cubs, and far greater than Milton Bradley. We downgrade at 1B on a purely production #'s standpoint. Helton's power is zapped, but he is still a guy who will get on base at a .400+ OBP. He'd be a good #2 guy in the lineup. But we'd lose a big bat in Lee, and Helton costs way too much, even if he does get on base at a good clip.