Milton Bradley Traded To Mariners For Carlos Silva

[davearm2]

If I have the choice of paying a starter, a starter that has the capability of shutting down opposing teams completely for 6 or 7 innings at a time, a one year contract for 10m or another in a long line of relievers, who you may or may not even remember by the end of his contract, a two year deal for 7m, I'll take the starter.

If I have the choice between a Porsche Panamera, which can out-accelerate a 911 Turbo, seats 4 adults comfortably, and is as opulent inside as a Bentley, and a dime-a-dozen 7 year old Subaru WRX, I'll take the Porsche. Yet somehow it's the WRX that's in my garage every morning.

 

Point being, not everything you would prefer, can you afford. Life sucks huh?

 

Horrible analogy. Teams have a budget. Fact. Each team has someone appointed to spend the amount available in that budget. If that budget is 100m, I guess you could go out and pay your 8 relievers 90m and use the rest of it to pay for the other 13 players on the team.

 

Or, you could go a little cheaper in the bullpen and then have enough money left over to spend on an impact player.

 

It really has nothing to do with Porsche's and Subaru's.

 

Hendry doesn't allocate his resources in a way that he gets the best bang for his buck. And then there's also stating the obvious. When you stick your hand in a pot of boiling water, you will get burned. That's pretty obvious. Therefore, you probably shouldn't do it again. And then there is giving out multi-year contracts to middle relievers. As I've mentioned previously, it hasn't been a good idea as has been proven the multiple times Hendry has already done it. So he probably shouldn't do it.

 

I'm trying to think of an actual middle reliever who is good year after year after year and I'm coming up with blanks. I can't think of a single one.

 

But, you're probably right. Grabow is going to be that one exception to the rule that all middle relievers will eventually be crap.

Not sure how that would make me right. I haven't stood up for the Grabow signing.

 

All I've said is that a simple budgeting exercise makes it readily apparent why Hendry can't/won't offer arb to Harden. It's the same reason I don't have that Porsche.

[E.J.]

You really wonder if some writers just do pull things out of the blue completely...

 

Of course. You never see a writer being called out for the crap they write, and they end up bringing traffic to their websites.

[jersey cubs fan]

All I've said is that a simple budgeting exercise makes it readily apparent why Hendry can't/won't offer arb to Harden. It's the same reason I don't have that Porsche.

 

It's not the same reason. Hendry can afford Harden, he's just choosing not to as he emphasizes doing stupid things like putting air conditioning in his scooter and paying somebody else to drive his Toyota.

[NCCubFan]

I think what Jersey is trying to say is there comes a point where a GM can no longer be defended for the steady stream of extremely poor decisions. The Cubs have the payroll to be a dominant team every year, rather than a meddling barely above .500 team.

Agreed. There's more than enough payroll to be a consistent contender. It's Hendry's job to use the payroll wisely, and if he doesn't it's Ricketts' job to fire Hendry and replace him with a GM who will spend it wisely.

[Guest]

You really wonder if some writers just do pull things out of the blue completely...

 

Of course. You never see a writer being called out for the crap they write, and they end up bringing traffic to their websites.

:-k

 

Perhaps I should take a new approach to the front page.

[davearm2]

All I've said is that a simple budgeting exercise makes it readily apparent why Hendry can't/won't offer arb to Harden. It's the same reason I don't have that Porsche.

 

It's not the same reason. Hendry can afford Harden, he's just choosing not to as he emphasizes doing stupid things like putting air conditioning in his scooter and paying somebody else to drive his Toyota.

Both Hendry and I have prioritized (i.e., bought) other (presumably more important) things, and now there's not enough money left for Hardens or Porsches.

 

Hey like I said earlier, call Hendry's signings stupid all day long, and his budget allocations foolish for all I care. He's responsible and accountable for those decisions, no doubt about it. But the situations are analogous nevertheless.

[BCVM22]

There has been talk of a three-way trade involving the Cubs, Mets and Rangers, the Chicago Tribune reports.

 

In the proposed trade, the Cubs would send outfielder Milton Bradley and cash to the Rangers, the Rangers would send righthander Kevin Millwood to the Mets, and the Mets would send second baseman Luis Castillo to the Cubs.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=tsn-cubscouldmovebradley&prov=tsn&type=lgns

[17 Seconds]

who's ready for castillo in the 2 hole all year?

[BCVM22]

Paying a 34-year-old middle infielder with bad knees $6 mil each of the next two seasons isn't ideal, but they could do and have done a lot worse than a career .369 OBP (no season OBP lower than .358 since 2001; IsoD of .061, 0.11, .085 the last three seasons) in the 2-hole for a year or two.

[SouthSideRyan]

I really enjoy that the Cubs are giving up (easily) the best player in the trade, and are paying money to go with him.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Regarding a potential Milton Bradley to Tampa trade, Olney says the Rays "absolutely will not do it unless it's on their terms, which is that the Cubs might absorb enough money in the swap of Bradley and (Pat) Burrell to make it worthwhile for the Rays."

 

The more I think about it, the more I feel that this trade happens, we flip Burrell to the AL for God knows what, and we end up with the 2009 version of Jeromy Burnitz in right field, so everyone be sure to pre order your Garrett Anderson jersey.

[Backtobanks]

How about expanding the Bradley-to-the-Mets deal:

 

Mets get: Bradley, Fontenot, Berg/Stevens, Fuld

Cuts get: Pagan, Castillo, Maine

 

Cubs use Pagan as 4th OF, Castillo platoons with Baker, Maine vies for 5th starter.

 

Mets get starting OF, use Fontenot as 2B (or platoon), Fuld becomes 4th OF, Berg/Stevens are young, cheap options to start or relieve.

[Backtobanks]

From MLBTR:

 

GM Mark Shapiro is looking to add a right-handed hitting first baseman. Hoynes wonders if Robb Quinlan (.651 OPS vs. LHP last year) and Kevin Millar (.723 OPS vs. LHP last year) might fit. Either player would presumably be cheap compared to other options on the market.

 

I know the Indians aren't mentioned as one of the teams interested in Bradley and they've been wanting to get rid of Wood's contract, but I wonder if they would go for this kind of deal:

 

Bradley + Fox + Berg/Stevens for Kerry Wood

 

They would get there cheap RH bat to play 1B plus a young starter/reliever in addition to Bradley who could play OF and substitute DH. Wood is totally overpaid at this point, but could serve a role as a set-up man to Marmol. I don't think Wood's option for 2011 kicked in yet (55 games finished in 2009 or 2010), so we might have to toss in some money for Bradley in 2011. Obviously, if Wood is used mostly in set-up, his option wouldn't kick in next year. The added benefit is bringing Wood to the clubhouse and removing Bradley. My preference has always been to acquire someone who can play a role in 2010 rather than dumping Bradley for next-to-nothing or DHs like Burrell or Guillen.

[Guest]

Why would he look to add a right handed hitting first baseman when he's got LaPorta?

[Backtobanks]

Why would he look to add a right handed hitting first baseman when he's got LaPorta?

 

I didn't understand it myself, but I saw the quote on 2 sites. I think rotoworld said something along the lines of being able to play LaPorta in the OF against LHP. They also said that they wanted someone cheap because he would be on the bench most of the time.

[Derwood]

LaPorta likely won't be ready until May

[gflore34]

The more I think about it the Cubs could do worse than keeping Bradley. There's nothing of consequence that'll result from a trade of Bradley, the Cubs have made it known they've got to trade him and teams going to screw the Cubs over. Edited November 30, 2009 by gflore34

[erik316wttn]

The more I think about it the Cubs could do worse than keeping Bradley. There's nothing of consequence that'll result from a trade of Bradley, the Cubs have made it known they've got to trade him and they're going to screw the Cubs over.

 

I think the best thing they could do is to decide to keep Bradley, then immediately get the PR wheels turning and try to mend fences between Bradley and the fans.

[Sosa21MVP]

Yeah I'd just as soon keep Bradley right now because none of the trade options are going to be promising.

[Shilzzz]

has any player who ops'd .892 at home in wrigley been more maligned?

[Little Slide Rooter]

The more I think about it the Cubs could do worse than keeping Bradley. There's nothing of consequence that'll result from a trade of Bradley, the Cubs have made it known they've got to trade him and they're going to screw the Cubs over.

 

I think the best thing they could do is to decide to keep Bradley, then immediately get the PR wheels turning and try to mend fences between Bradley and the fans.

 

Correct. I think the rest of these guys are geting paid enough that they can get over it.

[Wilmo]

The more I think about it the Cubs could do worse than keeping Bradley. There's nothing of consequence that'll result from a trade of Bradley, the Cubs have made it known they've got to trade him and they're going to screw the Cubs over.

 

I think the best thing they could do is to decide to keep Bradley, then immediately get the PR wheels turning and try to mend fences between Bradley and the fans.

 

Really! That clown hates us (Cubs fans) and the city of Chicago. Screw him! I have a disdain for him like no other. In fact, I have never hated another player more in my time of watching professional sports.

 

The time he hit a home run and then mocked the cheering fans, as to say, "keeping talking" makes my blood boil. I would take another hundred years of losing just to see this clown not wearing a Cubs uniform ever again. (ok, maybe that's a bit extreme) But none the less, Bradley is a clueless, joke of a human being that needs to be removed from this team at ANY cost! Point blank! I don't care if he puts up 01' Barry Bonds like numbers, this team won't win with him. Thankfully the people that don't mind keeping him, aren't the people making decisions for the Cubs this year. He will be gone!

[BCVM22]

But none the less, Bradley is a clueless, joke of a human being that needs to be removed from this team at ANY cost! Point blank! I don't care if he puts up 01' Barry Bonds like numbers, this team won't win with him. Thankfully the people that don't mind keeping him, aren't the people making decisions for the Cubs this year. He will be gone!

 

:-s

[Sammy Sofa]

Boy, that was sensible.

 

And Bradley did the "keep talking" thing to one guy next to the Cubs dugout who kept loudly talking [expletive] about Bradley every time he came out of the dugout. It was badass.

[imb]

if you added 01 barry bonds to our team last year we would have won 100 games