How about this Solution to the Bradley Mess?

[SouthSideRyan]

[Hawpe is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE on D. No no no.

 

Hawpe is no worse defensively then the lot the Cubs have trotted out there recently. Sosa (the latter years), Hollandsworth, Grieve, Burnitz, Bradley, etc, etc, etc. The only remotely close to good defensively RF the Cubs have had is now playing CF.

 

Hawpe is pretty clearly worse than all of those guys except maybe Grieve who played roughly 4 innings in RF for us.

[Rob]

[Hawpe is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE on D. No no no.

 

Hawpe is no worse defensively then the lot the Cubs have trotted out there recently. Sosa (the latter years), Hollandsworth, Grieve, Burnitz, Bradley, etc, etc, etc. The only remotely close to good defensively RF the Cubs have had is now playing CF.

 

Hawpe's UZR/150 the last 3 years: -27.2, -46.6(!!!), -20.0

 

Bradley's UZR/150 this year: -4.1

 

I'd show Bradley's numbers in previous seasons (which all rank as slightly above average), but there's a sample size issue. Regardless, Bradley floats right around average defensively... whereas Hawpe has put up some of the most disgusting outfield seasons in recent history. Factoring in their defense this year, Bradley's production was worth $5.4 million. Hawpe was worth $5.6 million, having juuuust pulled ahead in recent days. Let's break this down.

 

Bradley has been injured, vastly underperformed expectations, and was suspended for the last month of the season. And yet his value is nearly indistinguishable from a man who played in 143 games and hit for an OPS of .898.

 

What possible reason is there to give up valuable trade chips for a player who will give us the exact same production we got in a down year from a guy we already have under contract for two years?

[inari]

[Hawpe is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE on D. No no no.

 

Hawpe is no worse defensively then the lot the Cubs have trotted out there recently. Sosa (the latter years), Hollandsworth, Grieve, Burnitz, Bradley, etc, etc, etc. The only remotely close to good defensively RF the Cubs have had is now playing CF.

 

Hawpe is pretty clearly worse than all of those guys except maybe Grieve who played roughly 4 innings in RF for us.

 

You guys obviously didn't see that awesome play Grieve made where he was bleeding.

[RedFlash]

[Hawpe is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE on D. No no no.

 

Hawpe is no worse defensively then the lot the Cubs have trotted out there recently. Sosa (the latter years), Hollandsworth, Grieve, Burnitz, Bradley, etc, etc, etc. The only remotely close to good defensively RF the Cubs have had is now playing CF.

 

Hawpe is pretty clearly worse than all of those guys except maybe Grieve who played roughly 4 innings in RF for us.

 

Perhaps, but consider where he has had to play defensively? In his career he has had to play in some of the games biggest OFers. Not saying it's an excuse, but perhaps playing at a smaller OF can help hide his defensive inability.

[Sammy Sofa]

In his career he has had to play in some of the games biggest OFers.

 

Hmmm, so he's a chubby-chaser.

 

Play on, player.

[Rob]

[Hawpe is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE on D. No no no.

 

Hawpe is no worse defensively then the lot the Cubs have trotted out there recently. Sosa (the latter years), Hollandsworth, Grieve, Burnitz, Bradley, etc, etc, etc. The only remotely close to good defensively RF the Cubs have had is now playing CF.

 

Hawpe is pretty clearly worse than all of those guys except maybe Grieve who played roughly 4 innings in RF for us.

 

Perhaps, but consider where he has had to play defensively? In his career he has had to play in some of the games biggest OFers. Not saying it's an excuse, but perhaps playing at a smaller OF can help hide his defensive inability.

 

It's possible it could do him some good. But UZR is already park adjusted.

 

Hawpe is simply far too terrible a defender to justify looking at. In all likelihood, we would be considerably better off having Fuld play every day... if Hawpe isn't a viable alternative to Fuld, I'd have a hard time believing we should move Bradley to make room for him. Let's move on, shall we?

[RedFlash]

Hawpe is simply far too terrible a defender to justify looking at. In all likelihood, we would be considerably better off having Fuld play every day... if Hawpe isn't a viable alternative to Fuld, I'd have a hard time believing we should move Bradley to make room for him. Let's move on, shall we?

 

If that the case then it sounds like Hawpe is like a more talented version of Micah Hoffpauir, a first basemen playing the OF. So what if we had to settle with Hawpe at RF for 2010, and then move him to 1b after Lee leaves?

[inari]

Hawpe is simply far too terrible a defender to justify looking at. In all likelihood, we would be considerably better off having Fuld play every day... if Hawpe isn't a viable alternative to Fuld, I'd have a hard time believing we should move Bradley to make room for him. Let's move on, shall we?

 

If that the case then it sounds like Hawpe is like a more talented version of Micah Hoffpauir, a first basemen playing the OF. So what if we had to settle with Hawpe at RF for 2010, and then move him to 1b after Lee leaves?

 

I think it's pretty clear at this point he's not worth the effort it takes to get him.

[Backtobanks]

[Hawpe is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE on D. No no no.

 

Hawpe is no worse defensively then the lot the Cubs have trotted out there recently. Sosa (the latter years), Hollandsworth, Grieve, Burnitz, Bradley, etc, etc, etc. The only remotely close to good defensively RF the Cubs have had is now playing CF.

 

Hawpe's UZR/150 the last 3 years: -27.2, -46.6(!!!), -20.0

 

Bradley's UZR/150 this year: -4.1

 

I'd show Bradley's numbers in previous seasons (which all rank as slightly above average), but there's a sample size issue. Regardless, Bradley floats right around average defensively... whereas Hawpe has put up some of the most disgusting outfield seasons in recent history. Factoring in their defense this year, Bradley's production was worth $5.4 million. Hawpe was worth $5.6 million, having juuuust pulled ahead in recent days. Let's break this down.

 

Bradley has been injured, vastly underperformed expectations, and was suspended for the last month of the season. And yet his value is nearly indistinguishable from a man who played in 143 games and hit for an OPS of .898.

 

What possible reason is there to give up valuable trade chips for a player who will give us the exact same production we got in a down year from a guy we already have under contract for two years?

 

 

I understand not wanting to trade for Hawpe, but don't use the Guy we already have under contract as a reason. We both know that Bradley is gone.

[RedFlash]

I think it's pretty clear at this point he's not worth the effort it takes to get him.

 

Personally, I don't think it will take uch effort to acquire Hawpe. Brad is already 30 yrs old, and the Rockies have plenty of depth to cover if they should trade him. They don't have to, but it wouldn't surprise me if they do.

[Halman]

Hawpe is simply far too terrible a defender to justify looking at. In all likelihood, we would be considerably better off having Fuld play every day... if Hawpe isn't a viable alternative to Fuld, I'd have a hard time believing we should move Bradley to make room for him. Let's move on, shall we?

 

If that the case then it sounds like Hawpe is like a more talented version of Micah Hoffpauir, a first basemen playing the OF. So what if we had to settle with Hawpe at RF for 2010, and then move him to 1b after Lee leaves?

 

Then what do you do with Aramis in two years or so when he becomes troy glaus redux. And you have possibly vitters ready?

[Clem Fandango]

[Hawpe is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE on D. No no no.

 

Hawpe is no worse defensively then the lot the Cubs have trotted out there recently. Sosa (the latter years), Hollandsworth, Grieve, Burnitz, Bradley, etc, etc, etc. The only remotely close to good defensively RF the Cubs have had is now playing CF.

 

Hawpe is pretty clearly worse than all of those guys except maybe Grieve who played roughly 4 innings in RF for us.

 

Perhaps, but consider where he has had to play defensively? In his career he has had to play in some of the games biggest OFers. Not saying it's an excuse, but perhaps playing at a smaller OF can help hide his defensive inability.

 

It's possible it could do him some good. But UZR is already park adjusted.

 

Hawpe is simply far too terrible a defender to justify looking at. In all likelihood, we would be considerably better off having Fuld play every day... if Hawpe isn't a viable alternative to Fuld, I'd have a hard time believing we should move Bradley to make room for him. Let's move on, shall we?

 

I actually spent quite a while trying to come up with stats to justify trading for Hawpe after you told me how bad he was defensively, and even formulated a big response to play Devil's Advocate... but I couldn't do it. His defensive numbers are that bad. I thought "Oh, let's see how they compare to THIS guy!" and Hawpe was way worse. Then I thought "Let's check out VORP!", but VORP doesn't take defense into account. FWIW though, Hawpe would have the 2nd highest position player VORP on the team this year if he were a Cub. He's also be in the Top 3 of 19 other teams in the majors, and ranks 7th in the majors for right fielders in VORP (4th in the NL)... but that doesn't matter because his defense really, and truly is, terrible. I had no idea, but it's bad on a biblical level. I'm ashamed for advocating a trade for Hawpe in the past it's so bad. He belongs in the AL

[Rob]

 

I understand not wanting to trade for Hawpe, but don't use the Guy we already have under contract as a reason. We both know that Bradley is gone.

 

If so, it's likely a significant mistake on the part of our front office. And I see no reason not to continually remind everybody of that.

 

Our #1 best option right now is to keep Milton Bradley. There's no way around it.

[Backtobanks]

 

I understand not wanting to trade for Hawpe, but don't use the Guy we already have under contract as a reason. We both know that Bradley is gone.

 

If so, it's likely a significant mistake on the part of our front office. And I see no reason not to continually remind everybody of that.

 

Our #1 best option right now is to keep Milton Bradley. There's no way around it.

 

Using production as a standard, Milton Bradley is the best of all the ugly options. From a public relations perspective, keeping Bradley is the worst option. I can't imagine a new owner, that just invested nearly a billion dollars, wants a nutcase who "goes off" about the city, the fans, the front office, his teammates, umpires, etc. on a daily basis. I think we all agree that it was a mistake for Hendry to sign Bradley in the first place, but the only option appears to be making the best out of a bad situation by trading him.

[Rob]

 

I understand not wanting to trade for Hawpe, but don't use the Guy we already have under contract as a reason. We both know that Bradley is gone.

 

If so, it's likely a significant mistake on the part of our front office. And I see no reason not to continually remind everybody of that.

 

Our #1 best option right now is to keep Milton Bradley. There's no way around it.

 

Using production as a standard, Milton Bradley is the best of all the ugly options. From a public relations perspective, keeping Bradley is the worst option. I can't imagine a new owner, that just invested nearly a billion dollars, wants a nutcase who "goes off" about the city, the fans, the front office, his teammates, umpires, etc. on a daily basis. I think we all agree that it was a mistake for Hendry to sign Bradley in the first place, but the only option appears to be making the best out of a bad situation by trading him.

 

From a public relations perspective, any new owner is going to want a winning ballclub. Guess what the best way to get that is. I'm getting sick and tired of people arguing that there is a good business reason to get rid of Bradley. Given our payroll constraints, there really isn't one that stands up against the all-trumping "he helps us win."

 

Oh, and I absolutely don't agree that it was a mistake to sign Bradley. Am I disappointed with the way it's turned out? Sure. But we can only judge the decision based on the information available at the time. And at that time, of the available options, he was the best bet going forward... You could make an argument for Abreu if you somehow knew he was only gonna get $5 mil, but absolutely nobody knew that.

[Backtobanks]

 

I understand not wanting to trade for Hawpe, but don't use the Guy we already have under contract as a reason. We both know that Bradley is gone.

 

If so, it's likely a significant mistake on the part of our front office. And I see no reason not to continually remind everybody of that.

 

Our #1 best option right now is to keep Milton Bradley. There's no way around it.

 

Using production as a standard, Milton Bradley is the best of all the ugly options. From a public relations perspective, keeping Bradley is the worst option. I can't imagine a new owner, that just invested nearly a billion dollars, wants a nutcase who "goes off" about the city, the fans, the front office, his teammates, umpires, etc. on a daily basis. I think we all agree that it was a mistake for Hendry to sign Bradley in the first place, but the only option appears to be making the best out of a bad situation by trading him.

 

From a public relations perspective, any new owner is going to want a winning ballclub. Guess what the best way to get that is. I'm getting sick and tired of people arguing that there is a good business reason to get rid of Bradley. Given our payroll constraints, there really isn't one that stands up against the all-trumping "he helps us win."

 

Oh, and I absolutely don't agree that it was a mistake to sign Bradley. Am I disappointed with the way it's turned out? Sure. But we can only judge the decision based on the information available at the time. And at that time, of the available options, he was the best bet going forward... You could make an argument for Abreu if you somehow knew he was only gonna get $5 mil, but absolutely nobody knew that.

 

I guess we'll have to disagree about the public relations situation. Since the season was unsuccessful, something has to change (besides firing Joshua). Since Bradley is public enemy #1, he's the obvious choice to go. I still maintain a healthy year by Soriano, Ramirez, Soto, etc. will go a long way to solving the Cubs' woes, but coming back with the same lineup isn't going to excite the fans. I don't think Hendry realized the negative impact that Bradley would have on everyone concerned. Also, I guess there's no way to statistically prove it, but I do think all of the anger and negativity by Bradley will balance out a lot of whatever production he adds on the field.

[Rob]

 

I understand not wanting to trade for Hawpe, but don't use the Guy we already have under contract as a reason. We both know that Bradley is gone.

 

If so, it's likely a significant mistake on the part of our front office. And I see no reason not to continually remind everybody of that.

 

Our #1 best option right now is to keep Milton Bradley. There's no way around it.

 

Using production as a standard, Milton Bradley is the best of all the ugly options. From a public relations perspective, keeping Bradley is the worst option. I can't imagine a new owner, that just invested nearly a billion dollars, wants a nutcase who "goes off" about the city, the fans, the front office, his teammates, umpires, etc. on a daily basis. I think we all agree that it was a mistake for Hendry to sign Bradley in the first place, but the only option appears to be making the best out of a bad situation by trading him.

 

From a public relations perspective, any new owner is going to want a winning ballclub. Guess what the best way to get that is. I'm getting sick and tired of people arguing that there is a good business reason to get rid of Bradley. Given our payroll constraints, there really isn't one that stands up against the all-trumping "he helps us win."

 

Oh, and I absolutely don't agree that it was a mistake to sign Bradley. Am I disappointed with the way it's turned out? Sure. But we can only judge the decision based on the information available at the time. And at that time, of the available options, he was the best bet going forward... You could make an argument for Abreu if you somehow knew he was only gonna get $5 mil, but absolutely nobody knew that.

 

I guess we'll have to disagree about the public relations situation. Since the season was unsuccessful, something has to change (besides firing Joshua). Since Bradley is public enemy #1, he's the obvious choice to go. I still maintain a healthy year by Soriano, Ramirez, Soto, etc. will go a long way to solving the Cubs' woes, but coming back with the same lineup isn't going to excite the fans. I don't think Hendry realized the negative impact that Bradley would have on everyone concerned. Also, I guess there's no way to statistically prove it, but I do think all of the anger and negativity by Bradley will balance out a lot of whatever production he adds on the field.

 

 

I don't think Hendry realized the positive impact that Bradley would have on everyone concerned. I do think all of the anger and negativity by Bradley added a lot of value in addition to whatever production he added on the field.

 

's advocate>

 

Both your opinion and the one above have exactly the same amount of validity. Exactly. The. Same.

 

There is nothing, absolutely jack diddly to even suggest that happy ballplayers produce better than pissed off ones.

[Guest]

It's common sense that if you're crying when up to bat that you're not going to pick up the ball as well.

[Rob]

It's common sense that if you're crying when up to bat that you're not going to pick up the ball as well.

 

I guess I also forgot about the time Aramis tried to kill himself by landing on his shoulder awkwardly.

[Moises a loo]

 

There is nothing, absolutely jack diddly to even suggest that happy ballplayers produce better than pissed off ones.

 

I know we're all supposed to pretend that when people have to work with a total a-hole, it doesn't have any effect on them. I'd argue that most people find it quite disruptive, whether they're working at McDonald's, in a classroom, or in an MLB ballpark. Bradley is a talented guy who apparently never learned how to take responsibility for his actions. We've all dealt with people like that and they really can make it difficult for others to get things done. There's a reason he hasn't stuck anywhere he's played and he's not going to stick here. He never was.

 

In conclusion, ADAM DUNN ADAM DUNN ADAM DUNN.

[Rob]

Adam Dunn cost the Nats over 35 runs on defense this year (a feat he managed playing mostly LF and 1B) and his net contribution to the team was worth $5.4 million dollars.

 

For anybody who doesn't remember, that's exactly how much Bradley was worth this season.

[treebird]

Adam Dunn cost the Nats over 35 runs on defense this year (a feat he managed playing mostly LF and 1B) and his net contribution to the team was worth $5.4 million dollars.

 

For anybody who doesn't remember, that's exactly how much Bradley was worth this season.

 

does that feel right to you? 35 runs? he played 84 games in the of and 67 at first base.

 

just because we have easy access to uzr doesn't mean we should just accept it as gospel.

[Moises a loo]

Adam Dunn cost the Nats over 35 runs on defense this year (a feat he managed playing mostly LF and 1B) and his net contribution to the team was worth $5.4 million dollars.

 

For anybody who doesn't remember, that's exactly how much Bradley was worth this season.

 

I know Dunn is horrible on defense, and I don't care. His laid-back approach is exactly what the Cubs need more of to take the pressure off. Also, he rakes at Wrigley. And he's the only guy who was available who absolutely, positively would have been the legitimate lefty power bat they were obsessing over. I understand and admire the desire to be a good defensive ballclub. But Bradley? This nightmare was easily predictable. It never ends well with Bradley; the sooner they undo this mistake the better.

[Backtobanks]

Adam Dunn cost the Nats over 35 runs on defense this year (a feat he managed playing mostly LF and 1B) and his net contribution to the team was worth $5.4 million dollars.

 

For anybody who doesn't remember, that's exactly how much Bradley was worth this season.

 

I know Dunn is horrible on defense, and I don't care. His laid-back approach is exactly what the Cubs need more of to take the pressure off. Also, he rakes at Wrigley. And he's the only guy who was available who absolutely, positively would have been the legitimate lefty power bat they were obsessing over. I understand and admire the desire to be a good defensive ballclub. But Bradley? This nightmare was easily predictable. It never ends well with Bradley; the sooner they undo this mistake the better.

 

AMEN!

[SouthSideRyan]

Adam Dunn cost the Nats over 35 runs on defense this year (a feat he managed playing mostly LF and 1B) and his net contribution to the team was worth $5.4 million dollars.

 

For anybody who doesn't remember, that's exactly how much Bradley was worth this season.

 

His laid-back approach is exactly what the Cubs need more of to take the pressure off.

 

Until the Cubs lose again. Then he's lazy and doesn't care.