Milton Bradley Traded To Mariners For Carlos Silva

[mul21]

Bill James' projection has Milwood's '10 season with a 4.13 FIP, a 1.40 WHIP, and low homerun numbers. Love the GB/FB rates, and Texas is as tough a hitters park as any... He's almost an inverted Marquis. I can't imagine us getting anything better than this, sans including prospects. With Milwood in our back pocket, we could explore what kind of returns Randy Wells could net.

 

Would that be a good idea? Millwood for 1 year, Lilly with 1 year left on his deal, and escalating contracts continuing to pile up would lead me to think that relying on Wells to provide cheap production form the 3-4-5 spot in the rotation is going to be pretty important going forward. Unless you think last season was a total fluke and you want to get what you can while the getting's good.

[davell]

Even if it's Millwood, the question still is how much cash we have to send as well? And then, the question becomes "how do the Cubs figure whatever cash they send into the 2010 payroll or if it counts towards 2011 or whatever other way they can account for it......

[CUBZ99]

Roto

 

Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune reports that the Cubs are trying hard to trade Milton Bradley within the next 36 hours.

Rogers finds it hard to believe that anybody will take him, but according to several reports, the Rangers have emerged as a potential landing spot for the troubled outfielder. Rogers also notes the Rays, who have been linked in discussions for Bradley since he was made available.

Source: Phil Rogers on Twitter

 

I hate to see reports like this. Letting people know you are desperate, is generally not a good negotiating tactic.

[Shilzzz]

Unless you think last season was a total fluke and you want to get what you can while the getting's good.

 

Yup.

[erik316wttn]

Roto

 

Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune reports that the Cubs are trying hard to trade Milton Bradley within the next 36 hours.

Rogers finds it hard to believe that anybody will take him, but according to several reports, the Rangers have emerged as a potential landing spot for the troubled outfielder. Rogers also notes the Rays, who have been linked in discussions for Bradley since he was made available.

Source: Phil Rogers on Twitter

 

I hate to see reports like this. Letting people know you are desperate, is generally not a good negotiating tactic.

 

It's really not the huge deal that a lot of people think it is if Bradley isn't traded. I'm sure if he put his mind to it, if Hendry put his tiny mind to it and tried like hell to mend fences, Bradley would be fine in RF next year. But I'm not liking the "OMG WE'RE DESPERATE WE'LL TAKE ANYTHING PLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASETAKEHIM!!" approach.

[Outshined_One]

Roto

 

Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune reports that the Cubs are trying hard to trade Milton Bradley within the next 36 hours.

Rogers finds it hard to believe that anybody will take him, but according to several reports, the Rangers have emerged as a potential landing spot for the troubled outfielder. Rogers also notes the Rays, who have been linked in discussions for Bradley since he was made available.

Source: Phil Rogers on Twitter

 

I hate to see reports like this. Letting people know you are desperate, is generally not a good negotiating tactic.

 

Phil Rogers is the source of this rumor. I wouldn't take it at face value.

[sweetpeteman]

Roto

 

Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune reports that the Cubs are trying hard to trade Milton Bradley within the next 36 hours.

Rogers finds it hard to believe that anybody will take him, but according to several reports, the Rangers have emerged as a potential landing spot for the troubled outfielder. Rogers also notes the Rays, who have been linked in discussions for Bradley since he was made available.

Source: Phil Rogers on Twitter

 

I hate to see reports like this. Letting people know you are desperate, is generally not a good negotiating tactic.

 

It's really not the huge deal that a lot of people think it is if Bradley isn't traded. I'm sure if he put his mind to it, if Hendry put his tiny mind to it and tried like hell to mend fences, Bradley would be fine in RF next year. But I'm not liking the "OMG WE'RE DESPERATE WE'LL TAKE ANYTHING PLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASETAKEHIM!!" approach.

 

 

That's the normal Hendry approach to getting rid of people he doesn't want, destroy all value.

[davell]

Sabean basically came out and said he's not interested in Bradley. So, Rowand or Zito can be crossed off the bad contract list of what could Milton get us back......

 

Bruce and a few others have mentioned Marlon Byrd as someone we're likely to go after, once Bradley is dealt. He's one of Jaramillo's favorites, from what I've read.

[Backtobanks]

Levine mentioned earlier today we're talking to the Rangers. Millwood could be a possibility as a return.

 

The reports that I've read say the Rangers want Bradley only if the Cubs pay a big portion of his contract. I know the Rangers have money issues and I understand trying to make the best deal possible, but I don't understand all of this poor-mouthing. Their payroll for 2010 is $39 million (a drop of $37 million) without including Millwood as part of a deal. Including Millwood would put their payroll at $27 million (a decrease of $49 million from 2009). Today's Tribune wonders if they would send a couple of middle-level prospects for Bradley if the Cubs pay $9 - $10 million of the $21 million owed.

[jersey cubs fan]

Levine mentioned earlier today we're talking to the Rangers. Millwood could be a possibility as a return.

 

The reports that I've read say the Rangers want Bradley only if the Cubs pay a big portion of his contract. I know the Rangers have money issues and I understand trying to make the best deal possible, but I don't understand all of this poor-mouthing. Their payroll for 2010 is $39 million (a drop of $37 million) without including Millwood as part of a deal. Including Millwood would put their payroll at $27 million (a decrease of $49 million from 2009). Today's Tribune wonders if they would send a couple of middle-level prospects for Bradley if the Cubs pay $9 - $10 million of the $21 million owed.

 

Isn't their owner in dire financial straits?

[biittner77]

Levine mentioned earlier today we're talking to the Rangers. Millwood could be a possibility as a return.

 

The reports that I've read say the Rangers want Bradley only if the Cubs pay a big portion of his contract. I know the Rangers have money issues and I understand trying to make the best deal possible, but I don't understand all of this poor-mouthing. Their payroll for 2010 is $39 million (a drop of $37 million) without including Millwood as part of a deal. Including Millwood would put their payroll at $27 million (a decrease of $49 million from 2009). Today's Tribune wonders if they would send a couple of middle-level prospects for Bradley if the Cubs pay $9 - $10 million of the $21 million owed.

 

Isn't their owner in dire financial straits?

 

So they are paying their entire team what the Cubs are paying Soriano, Lee and Zambrano combined and they are in financial trouble? Wow

[jersey cubs fan]

Levine mentioned earlier today we're talking to the Rangers. Millwood could be a possibility as a return.

 

The reports that I've read say the Rangers want Bradley only if the Cubs pay a big portion of his contract. I know the Rangers have money issues and I understand trying to make the best deal possible, but I don't understand all of this poor-mouthing. Their payroll for 2010 is $39 million (a drop of $37 million) without including Millwood as part of a deal. Including Millwood would put their payroll at $27 million (a decrease of $49 million from 2009). Today's Tribune wonders if they would send a couple of middle-level prospects for Bradley if the Cubs pay $9 - $10 million of the $21 million owed.

 

Isn't their owner in dire financial straits?

 

So they are paying their entire team what the Cubs are paying Soriano, Lee and Zambrano combined and they are in financial trouble? Wow

 

Actually, I believe that figure only takes into account what they are paying about 3-4 guys in 2010. They still have to field a 25 man roster. And their owner has fefaulted on some debt, I believe.

[Backtobanks]

Levine mentioned earlier today we're talking to the Rangers. Millwood could be a possibility as a return.

 

The reports that I've read say the Rangers want Bradley only if the Cubs pay a big portion of his contract. I know the Rangers have money issues and I understand trying to make the best deal possible, but I don't understand all of this poor-mouthing. Their payroll for 2010 is $39 million (a drop of $37 million) without including Millwood as part of a deal. Including Millwood would put their payroll at $27 million (a decrease of $49 million from 2009). Today's Tribune wonders if they would send a couple of middle-level prospects for Bradley if the Cubs pay $9 - $10 million of the $21 million owed.

 

Isn't their owner in dire financial straits?

 

So they are paying their entire team what the Cubs are paying Soriano, Lee and Zambrano combined and they are in financial trouble? Wow

 

Actually, I believe that figure only takes into account what they are paying about 3-4 guys in 2010. They still have to field a 25 man roster. And their owner has fefaulted on some debt, I believe.

 

You're right about what their payroll covering 3-4 players, but if they traded Millwood to the Cubs their 2010 payroll would be $33 million for Young, Bradley, Kinsler, Catalanotto (former player), and Padilla (former player). That leaves 22 spots that were filled this year by 2 guys making between $1-$2 million and 20 guys making less than $1 million. Giving all of those players 50% raises still leaves them about $20 million better off than this year. Keeping Millwood and giving the others the 50% raises still comes out about $5 million ahead.

[Backtobanks]

Levine mentioned earlier today we're talking to the Rangers. Millwood could be a possibility as a return.

 

The reports that I've read say the Rangers want Bradley only if the Cubs pay a big portion of his contract. I know the Rangers have money issues and I understand trying to make the best deal possible, but I don't understand all of this poor-mouthing. Their payroll for 2010 is $39 million (a drop of $37 million) without including Millwood as part of a deal. Including Millwood would put their payroll at $27 million (a decrease of $49 million from 2009). Today's Tribune wonders if they would send a couple of middle-level prospects for Bradley if the Cubs pay $9 - $10 million of the $21 million owed.

 

Isn't their owner in dire financial straits?

 

So they are paying their entire team what the Cubs are paying Soriano, Lee and Zambrano combined and they are in financial trouble? Wow

 

Actually, I believe that figure only takes into account what they are paying about 3-4 guys in 2010. They still have to field a 25 man roster. And their owner has fefaulted on some debt, I believe.

 

You're right about what their payroll covering 3-4 players, but if they traded Millwood to the Cubs their 2010 payroll would be $33 million for Young, Bradley, Kinsler, Catalanotto (former player), and Padilla (former player). That leaves 22 spots that were filled this year by 2 guys making between $1-$2 million and 20 guys making less than $1 million. Giving all of those players 50% raises still leaves them about $20 million better off than this year. Keeping Millwood and giving the others the 50% raises still comes out about $5 million ahead.

[Soul]

I get the sense Bradley will hang over our heads for most of the offseason.

[davell]

I get the sense Bradley will hang over our heads for most of the offseason.

 

 

For some reason, I don't. I figure Hendry will blow him out to the highest bidder within 2 weeks or so. I doubt we'll be pleased at all with the return or the amount of cash we're sending back, but I do think he'll be gone soon.

[Sammy Sofa]

I figure Hendry will blow him out to the highest bidder within 2 weeks or so.

 

"Blow him out?"

 

I get what you're saying, but what a weird way to say it.

[davell]

I figure Hendry will blow him out to the highest bidder within 2 weeks or so.

 

"Blow him out?"

 

I get what you're saying, but what a weird way to say it.

 

I'm in sales man, what can I say....... :D

[Backtobanks]

As of 9:30 p.m. last night according to FoxSports:

 

The Cubs and Rays continue to discuss a Milton Bradley-for-Pat Burrell trade, but money remains a major obstacle.

 

Burrell will earn $9 million next season, while Bradley is owed $21 million over the next two years.

 

The Rays want the Cubs to pay the vast majority of the difference. The teams are a mere $2 million to $3 million apart over the two years, one source said.

 

The source described the negotiations as "worse than Chinese water torture."

 

Another said, "I wish cattle prods were legal."

 

So the way that I figure, the Cubs will probably pay $6 million to make Bradley go away and then another $5-6 million to flip Burrell to an AL team. I'm sure Ricketts will take pleasure in the fact that they didn't have to pay $12 million of Bradley's contract in a fuzzy-accounting PR move.

[davell]

If we actually only have 2 options, being Tampa and Texas, and we HAVE to trade Bradley, I'm pulling for Millwood over Burrell. I'd also take Castillo over Burrell, assuming that it's even an option(which I doubt honestly). It just seems to me that we'll wind up dealing Burrell back to an AL team and eating all of his salary too. Millwood and Castillo could at least serve a function on the Cubs anyway.

[Backtobanks]

If we actually only have 2 options, being Tampa and Texas, and we HAVE to trade Bradley, I'm pulling for Millwood over Burrell. I'd also take Castillo over Burrell, assuming that it's even an option(which I doubt honestly). It just seems to me that we'll wind up dealing Burrell back to an AL team and eating all of his salary too. Millwood and Castillo could at least serve a function on the Cubs anyway.

 

That has been the point that I have made in all of my posts about Bradley. Let's get a role player for the 2010 Cubs rather than a minor leaguer (or 2) who will never reach the ML and we still have to pay most of Bradley's contract. That's one reason I brought up Rowand as an option quite a while ago. Burrell and Guillen are just a waste of time and energy because neither one has a place (or a role) on the 2010 Cubs. Millwood, by far, would be the best option of those rumored.

[EhDubya]

Cattle prods are legal, aren't they?

[Soul]

LOL, worse than chinese water torture.

 

 

Maybe the fact that the negotations are unbearable will serve as motivation to just get something done.

[Backtobanks]

Cattle prods are legal, aren't they?

 

I found this response interesting considering your user name. Are you friends with Dick Cheney?

[hardcorecubfan]

Castillo is going to be 34 if we are going to upgrade let's get someone that will be there for a few years