Milton Bradley Traded To Mariners For Carlos Silva

[ThePenguin11]

There was never a point of no return. People weren't going to stop showing up because of Bradley. Players weren't going to stop playing because of Bradley. Those are the only way you have a "point of no return" with a player like that in terms of "personality issues" and even then it's still not something they HAVE to do.

 

He was a PR nightmare on the team that cares more about PR than almost any team in sports. You don't have to like it, but it doesn't make it untrue.

 

That still doesn't make it something that they have to do. How would this "PR nightmare" effect the team? The Cubs stunk last year because 2B turned into a black hole offensively for much of the season, Soto was fat, hurt and awful/had a ton of bad luck and Soriano was bad and playing hurt. Bradley definitely got off to an ice cold start offensively but ended up being a productive player. People aren't going to stop buying tickets and merchandise because of Milton Bradley. Milton Bradley can't make his teammates play worse. Never at any point has moving him beein something they had to do. Who gives a [expletive] if he doesn't like the fans?

 

BECAUSE HE WAS A DISTRACTION IN THE MEDIA, TO HIS MANAGER AND HIS TEAMMATES. NOBODY LIKED HIM AND NOBODY WANTED HIM AROUND. IT WAS A BUSINESS DECISION THAT HE HAD TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CUBS PERFECT, HAPPY, FUZZY, STUPID EXISTENCE. That's just how that [expletive] works.

 

I don't care about any of that despite the fact you typed it in all-caps. No smart person cares about it, either.

 

I'm not saying it's right, all I'm saying is that's how the Cubs work - as an organization. Get used to it. It's a [expletive] joke. Don't shoot the [expletive] messenger. I'm just dropping some [expletive] truth on you. Open your eyes and look at your team. It's the same [expletive] as it's ever been. All you can do is hope Hendry and Kenny get fired and that Tom Rickets and company actually have a [expletive] clue.

[SouthSideRyan]

when silva starts trashing the main people who help pay his salary (that would be the fans who show up to the ballyard, buy overpriced concessions and souvenirs), then i'll throw him under the bus.

 

So you admit you hate him cause he hurt your feelings. I'm glad somebody will.

 

but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that he will be a bust this year right now.

 

He's a fat piece of [expletive]. He should be shot into the sun.

[Backtobanks]

From Foxsports:

 

The Cubs will receive a total of $9 million from Seattle, according to a major-league source -- $3 million in the first year and $6 million spread out of over the two years. Bradley is owed $22 million over the next two seasons, while Silva is owed $25 million over the same time period.

[inari]

uote]

 

I'm not saying it's right, all I'm saying is that's how the Cubs work - as an organization. Get used to it. It's a [expletive] joke. Don't shoot the [expletive] messenger. I'm just dropping some [expletive] truth on you. Open your eyes and look at your team. It's the same [expletive] as it's ever been. All you can do is hope Hendry and Kenny get fired and that Tom Rickets and company actually have a [expletive] clue.

 

Ok, well, that's nice. If you want to protest against the point of a message board - discussion - you would be wise to stop posting on one.

[Guancous]

Those who think the Cubs should have brought Bradley back have to remember that he was past the point of no return. The Cubs and Bradley had irreconcilable differences and it was beyond repair. Bradley's behavior was too provocative to the fans and his teammates to ever be able to suit him up again. Whether you like it or not, it was both a business decision and a public relations decision. And with a team like the Cubs, those two departments work together very closely. Because Bradley was so out of control the cubs were forced into a situation where he had negative trade value. Which means, if you want to get something positive back from him in a deal - such as a $6MM savings - you have to take a bigger negative back in exchange. It's just basic math really. It's basically like this equation: 5 + -10 = -5 ($6MM cash savings + Silva = Bradley). To say we were better off with Bradley is basically a false statement because Bradley would still never play another game for the Cubs. That's while they call the differences, "irreconcilable". They got money back on a bad investment and took on a slightly worse player to do it. All we can hope for now is that Silva doesn't have a meaningful role and that the $6MM isn't wasted on bullcrap.

 

thank you. for all here that absolutely know for a fact of what silva will do, well what's your excuse for what you absolutely knew for a fact of what bradley would have done this year from past history, all of his past history on and off the field?

 

when silva starts trashing the main people who help pay his salary (that would be the fans who show up to the ballyard, buy overpriced concessions and souvenirs), then i'll throw him under the bus. until then silva may or may not do well this year. but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that he will be a bust this year right now.

 

Remember when the Mariners tried to have a mutiny against Ichiro? Who do you think orchestrated that? For $15 million, Silva better be making balloon animals in the clubhouse. Apparently he's just as bad, if not worse, than Bradley.

 

http://ussmariner.com/2009/03/27/ichiro-returns-to-fetid-odor-of-silva-suggestions/

Edited December 18, 2009 by Guancous

[The Voice of Reason]

They got money back on a bad investment and took on a slightly worse player to do it.

 

Nearly pissed my pants

 

I'm sorry, I should have said slightly less valuable.

I'm not sure you know what "slightly" means

 

Do you really think Milton Bradley had any trade value in MLB??? He hasn't had trade value since he went after the Royals announcer or had to get taken down by his Padres manager. Aside from one inflated year in Texas, he's a statistical joke with nothing but peripheral stats that are a pipe dream because they never amount to actual production over a 162 game season. Fact: Milton Bradley has had NEGATIVE trade value for several years. Because of this it was stupid for Hendry to sign him in the first place.

 

To this, even Hendry agrees with you.

 

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2009/12/cubs-hendry-takes-blame-for-bradley-fiasco.html

 

Cubs' Hendry takes blame for Bradley fiasco

 

Cubs general manager Jim Hendry took the blame for the Milton Bradley fiasco, but made the deal with Seattle today to spare the organization of further aggravation.

 

"In hindsight, it was an acquisition I'm responsible for that didn't work out," he said of Bradley's $30 million deal. "I bear the responsibility for that not working out."

[mhuber92211]

Question in all seriousness (and It will probably get lost amongst all of the angry posts)...

 

 

What will it take from Silva for this trade to turn into something similar to the Karros/Grudz for Hundley trade? While Karros and Grudz were both better players at the time of the trade, it was not a good looking deal at the time.

 

If Silva was able to muster 150 innings with a 4.25 era, 1.3 WHIP, 6K per 9, 3BB per 9 how would the trade look?

 

Also, are any of the predicitions sites out yet with their stuff?

[inari]

Those who think the Cubs should have brought Bradley back have to remember that he was past the point of no return. The Cubs and Bradley had irreconcilable differences and it was beyond repair. Bradley's behavior was too provocative to the fans and his teammates to ever be able to suit him up again. Whether you like it or not, it was both a business decision and a public relations decision. And with a team like the Cubs, those two departments work together very closely. Because Bradley was so out of control the cubs were forced into a situation where he had negative trade value. Which means, if you want to get something positive back from him in a deal - such as a $6MM savings - you have to take a bigger negative back in exchange. It's just basic math really. It's basically like this equation: 5 + -10 = -5 ($6MM cash savings + Silva = Bradley). To say we were better off with Bradley is basically a false statement because Bradley would still never play another game for the Cubs. That's while they call the differences, "irreconcilable". They got money back on a bad investment and took on a slightly worse player to do it. All we can hope for now is that Silva doesn't have a meaningful role and that the $6MM isn't wasted on bullcrap.

 

http://ussmariner.com/2009/03/27/ichiro-returns-to-fetid-odor-of-silva-suggestions/

 

Remember when the Mariners tried to have a mutiny against Ichiro? Who do you think orchestrated that?

 

thank you. for all here that absolutely know for a fact of what silva will do, well what's your excuse for what you absolutely knew for a fact of what bradley would have done this year from past history, all of his past history on and off the field?

 

when silva starts trashing the main people who help pay his salary (that would be the fans who show up to the ballyard, buy overpriced concessions and souvenirs), then i'll throw him under the bus. until then silva may or may not do well this year. but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that he will be a bust this year right now.

 

but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that MB is not a model citizen now sooooooooooooooo

[ThePenguin11]

There was never a point of no return. People weren't going to stop showing up because of Bradley. Players weren't going to stop playing because of Bradley. Those are the only way you have a "point of no return" with a player like that in terms of "personality issues" and even then it's still not something they HAVE to do.

 

He was a PR nightmare on the team that cares more about PR than almost any team in sports. You don't have to like it, but it doesn't make it untrue.

 

That still doesn't make it something that they have to do. How would this "PR nightmare" effect the team? The Cubs stunk last year because 2B turned into a black hole offensively for much of the season, Soto was fat, hurt and awful/had a ton of bad luck and Soriano was bad and playing hurt. Bradley definitely got off to an ice cold start offensively but ended up being a productive player. People aren't going to stop buying tickets and merchandise because of Milton Bradley. Milton Bradley can't make his teammates play worse. Never at any point has moving him beein something they had to do. Who gives a [expletive] if he doesn't like the fans?

 

BECAUSE HE WAS A DISTRACTION IN THE MEDIA, TO HIS MANAGER AND HIS TEAMMATES. NOBODY LIKED HIM AND NOBODY WANTED HIM AROUND. IT WAS A BUSINESS DECISION THAT HE HAD TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CUBS PERFECT, HAPPY, FUZZY, STUPID EXISTENCE. That's just how that [expletive] works.

 

My god, you're a [expletive] loon.

 

 

You don't get it. It's not my reasoning. I'm explaining why the Cubs did it. Does anyone else not see this when reading my posts???????????? I'm not saying what they should or should not have done. I'm saying it's the Cubs Way. This is how they do things. Public Relations first, Winning second. Again - NOT MY PHILOSOPHY - talking about the Cubs here. I know words are hard, but let's try to read this in context.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

objection. hearsay

[YearofDaCubs]

Those who think the Cubs should have brought Bradley back have to remember that he was past the point of no return. The Cubs and Bradley had irreconcilable differences and it was beyond repair. Bradley's behavior was too provocative to the fans and his teammates to ever be able to suit him up again. Whether you like it or not, it was both a business decision and a public relations decision. And with a team like the Cubs, those two departments work together very closely. Because Bradley was so out of control the cubs were forced into a situation where he had negative trade value. Which means, if you want to get something positive back from him in a deal - such as a $6MM savings - you have to take a bigger negative back in exchange. It's just basic math really. It's basically like this equation: 5 + -10 = -5 ($6MM cash savings + Silva = Bradley). To say we were better off with Bradley is basically a false statement because Bradley would still never play another game for the Cubs. That's while they call the differences, "irreconcilable". They got money back on a bad investment and took on a slightly worse player to do it. All we can hope for now is that Silva doesn't have a meaningful role and that the $6MM isn't wasted on bullcrap.

 

thank you. for all here that absolutely know for a fact of what silva will do, well what's your excuse for what you absolutely knew for a fact of what bradley would have done this year from past history, all of his past history on and off the field?

 

when silva starts trashing the main people who help pay his salary (that would be the fans who show up to the ballyard, buy overpriced concessions and souvenirs), then i'll throw him under the bus. until then silva may or may not do well this year. but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that he will be a bust this year right now.

 

Remember when the Mariners tried to have a mutiny against Ichiro? Who do you think orchestrated that? For $15 million, Silva better be making balloon animals in the clubhouse. Apparently he's just as bad, if not worse, than Bradley.

 

http://ussmariner.com/2009/03/27/ichiro-returns-to-fetid-odor-of-silva-suggestions/

LMFAO!! Only the Cubs would end up with someone worse than Bradley!

[Guancous]

Question in all seriousness (and It will probably get lost amongst all of the angry posts)...

 

 

What will it take from Silva for this trade to turn into something similar to the Karros/Grudz for Hundley trade? While Karros and Grudz were both better players at the time of the trade, it was not a good looking deal at the time.

 

If Silva was able to muster 150 innings with a 4.25 era, 1.3 WHIP, 6K per 9, 3BB per 9 how would the trade look?

 

Also, are any of the predicitions sites out yet with their stuff?

 

Here's the Fangraphs link that has Bill James' and fan predictions:

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=973&position=P

 

There's also an article up about the trade. It's not in the Cubs favor.

[inari]

objection. hearsay

 

Objection! Extremely racist!

[Keener98]

My God there is some ridiculous [expletive] being spewed in this thread. Seriously, people will defend Hendry no matter what. Silva SUCKS plain and simple, and the Cubs are a worse team today with him on it and Bradley off it than they were yesterday with Bradley on it, and Silva off it. Its not that hard to understand.

[Prizefight]

 

BECAUSE HE WAS A DISTRACTION IN THE MEDIA, TO HIS MANAGER AND HIS TEAMMATES. NOBODY LIKED HIM AND NOBODY WANTED HIM AROUND. IT WAS A BUSINESS DECISION THAT HE HAD TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CUBS PERFECT, HAPPY, FUZZY, STUPID EXISTENCE. That's just how that [expletive] works.

 

And why is any of this true? Because the people in management positions completely fubared the handling of the situation. Suspension, bad mouthing, and just general stupidity in dealing with the situation is what caused it. Get that through your head. If Theo Epstein had the same issue, you wouldn't hear a peep out of him about how difficult the player made the situation. He didn't bad mouth Manny when he had to get rid of him. He may have overpaid to get rid of him, but he got something decent in return. The way the Cubs allowed the situation to play out is the reason that there was a perception the "he couldn't come back". If they kept their mouths shut and dealt with it like adults instead of 10 year olds, Milton might be a Cub still and maybe provided some much needed production next year.

 

Well done. :clapping:

 

Even without taking everything into account, the way the Milton situation was handled should have cost multiple people their jobs. It should have been an internal decision and conversation to trade him. Jim literally embarrassed and trashed Milton to his teammates and the rest of the league and then tried to sell him to the league as something great. Big shocker that we had to take an awful deal and an awful player to fix a problem that never should have existed.

[ThePenguin11]

Those who think the Cubs should have brought Bradley back have to remember that he was past the point of no return. The Cubs and Bradley had irreconcilable differences and it was beyond repair. Bradley's behavior was too provocative to the fans and his teammates to ever be able to suit him up again. Whether you like it or not, it was both a business decision and a public relations decision. And with a team like the Cubs, those two departments work together very closely. Because Bradley was so out of control the cubs were forced into a situation where he had negative trade value. Which means, if you want to get something positive back from him in a deal - such as a $6MM savings - you have to take a bigger negative back in exchange. It's just basic math really. It's basically like this equation: 5 + -10 = -5 ($6MM cash savings + Silva = Bradley). To say we were better off with Bradley is basically a false statement because Bradley would still never play another game for the Cubs. That's while they call the differences, "irreconcilable". They got money back on a bad investment and took on a slightly worse player to do it. All we can hope for now is that Silva doesn't have a meaningful role and that the $6MM isn't wasted on bullcrap.

 

http://ussmariner.com/2009/03/27/ichiro-returns-to-fetid-odor-of-silva-suggestions/

 

Remember when the Mariners tried to have a mutiny against Ichiro? Who do you think orchestrated that?

 

thank you. for all here that absolutely know for a fact of what silva will do, well what's your excuse for what you absolutely knew for a fact of what bradley would have done this year from past history, all of his past history on and off the field?

 

when silva starts trashing the main people who help pay his salary (that would be the fans who show up to the ballyard, buy overpriced concessions and souvenirs), then i'll throw him under the bus. until then silva may or may not do well this year. but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that he will be a bust this year right now.

 

but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that MB is not a model citizen now sooooooooooooooo

 

Have I once expressed an opinion on what I think the Cubs should have done????? Have I expressed an opinion on why this is right or wrong??? All I did was give you the Cubs F-ed up reasoning behind making a deal like this. What makes you think I like trading for Carlos Silva? I think it's a terrible trade but the Cubs felt they were out of options. Here's the key: THEY felt THEY were out of options. Not me.

[Tim M]

Well, this thread has gone to hell. Predictable.

[Larry Horse]

I wonder if this is just cause for Hendry's firing? I would sure hope so.

[inari]

Those who think the Cubs should have brought Bradley back have to remember that he was past the point of no return. The Cubs and Bradley had irreconcilable differences and it was beyond repair. Bradley's behavior was too provocative to the fans and his teammates to ever be able to suit him up again. Whether you like it or not, it was both a business decision and a public relations decision. And with a team like the Cubs, those two departments work together very closely. Because Bradley was so out of control the cubs were forced into a situation where he had negative trade value. Which means, if you want to get something positive back from him in a deal - such as a $6MM savings - you have to take a bigger negative back in exchange. It's just basic math really. It's basically like this equation: 5 + -10 = -5 ($6MM cash savings + Silva = Bradley). To say we were better off with Bradley is basically a false statement because Bradley would still never play another game for the Cubs. That's while they call the differences, "irreconcilable". They got money back on a bad investment and took on a slightly worse player to do it. All we can hope for now is that Silva doesn't have a meaningful role and that the $6MM isn't wasted on bullcrap.

 

http://ussmariner.com/2009/03/27/ichiro-returns-to-fetid-odor-of-silva-suggestions/

 

Remember when the Mariners tried to have a mutiny against Ichiro? Who do you think orchestrated that?

 

thank you. for all here that absolutely know for a fact of what silva will do, well what's your excuse for what you absolutely knew for a fact of what bradley would have done this year from past history, all of his past history on and off the field?

 

when silva starts trashing the main people who help pay his salary (that would be the fans who show up to the ballyard, buy overpriced concessions and souvenirs), then i'll throw him under the bus. until then silva may or may not do well this year. but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that he will be a bust this year right now.

 

but none of us knows FOR 100% CERTAIN that MB is not a model citizen now sooooooooooooooo

 

Have I once expressed an opinion on what I think the Cubs should have done????? Have I expressed an opinion on why this is right or wrong??? All I did was give you the Cubs F-ed up reasoning behind making a deal like this. What makes you think I like trading for Carlos Silva? I think it's a terrible trade but the Cubs felt they were out of options. Here's the key: THEY felt THEY were out of options. Not me.

 

And we're criticizing their stupidity. What the hell are you on about?

[Guancous]

Well, this thread has gone to hell. Predictable.

 

One bad trade and everyone turns into Lee Elia. You got to admit, I can't remember a time when a team willfully took on a bad contract this expensive. (And didn't get Miguel Cabrera as well.)

[Bobson Dugnutt]

 

He was a PR nightmare on the team that cares more about PR than almost any team in sports. You don't have to like it, but it doesn't make it untrue.

 

That still doesn't make it something that they have to do. How would this "PR nightmare" effect the team? The Cubs stunk last year because 2B turned into a black hole offensively for much of the season, Soto was fat, hurt and awful/had a ton of bad luck and Soriano was bad and playing hurt. Bradley definitely got off to an ice cold start offensively but ended up being a productive player. People aren't going to stop buying tickets and merchandise because of Milton Bradley. Milton Bradley can't make his teammates play worse. Never at any point has moving him beein something they had to do. Who gives a [expletive] if he doesn't like the fans?

 

BECAUSE HE WAS A DISTRACTION IN THE MEDIA, TO HIS MANAGER AND HIS TEAMMATES. NOBODY LIKED HIM AND NOBODY WANTED HIM AROUND. IT WAS A BUSINESS DECISION THAT HE HAD TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CUBS PERFECT, HAPPY, FUZZY, STUPID EXISTENCE. That's just how that [expletive] works.

 

My god, you're a [expletive] loon.

 

 

You don't get it. It's not my reasoning. I'm explaining why the Cubs did it. Does anyone else not see this when reading my posts???????????? I'm not saying what they should or should not have done. I'm saying it's the Cubs Way. This is how they do things. Public Relations first, Winning second. Again - NOT MY PHILOSOPHY - talking about the Cubs here. I know words are hard, but let's try to read this in context.

 

I just don't understand how this is supposed to make things more acceptable.

[champaignchris]

The dude's hits/innings pitched over the last two years is 1.38. Not his WHIP, his HIP!!!

 

That's so bad, it's laughable. Dude doesn't miss too many bats.

 

Chronic phantom spring training injury, anyone? Sprained earlobe? Or does anyone expect this guy to actually step onto the mound for the Cubs next year?

[E.J.]

Well, this thread has gone to hell. Predictable.

 

What did you expect? Hendry just made our team worse.

[Larry Horse]

I hope all the Bradley haters are satisfied.

 

I'm happy they got rid of him, they had to get rid of him. Manager hated him as well as most of his teammates.

 

Instead of trying to make that problem less worse, they made increased the damage depending on how poorly Silva does or what that extra money brings in.

 

Silva is bad, but he won't be as bad as he was with Seattle in '08 even with the lack of MI range.

 

None of that is a reason to get rid of a player. Why not get rid of the manager if he's incapable of managing the guy (and hasn't exactly been doing a bangup job nor is he owed much in comparison).

 

I would have to say if a team applauds after a GM informs them of a suspension of a player, it's probably for the best he's not on the team.

[Sammy Sofa]

I have the random urge to punch Dave Kaplan in the throat right now.