Transmogrified Tiger

The deferred money makes it a better deal for the Cards, but it doesn't make much of a difference practically. 2 million a year isn't going to do much to change the decision making of a franchise with their payroll. Maybe it allows them to have a better utility infielder or something down the line, but they weren't dumb enough to tell Albert Pujols to buzz off because we're X short of our payroll threshold and he wants X+2 million.

We also have superior resources and a superior farm system. Same thing was said at the start of the last decade. Except they had a garbage MLB roster and didn't have a resource advantage. Seriously, say something positive about the Cubs. It's almost fun to like your favorite team.

We also have superior resources and a superior farm system.

This is the important thing. Even before Holliday, they were definitely a stars and scrubs team. Now they're committing a huge portion of their payroll to Pujols, Holliday, Carpenter, and Lohse. Only for 2010 and 2011. And the team is in good position to win the division those two years. Not really an issue. In 2012 they'll probably be paying 60 million for Pujols, Holliday, Lohse, and Wainwright. 75 million if they keep Carpenter.

Total BCS wins Boise State 2 Utah 2 ACC 2

Barring anything bizarrely unforeseen like the Cardinals trading Nick Stavinoha for Alex Gordon and Juan Cruz, smart money is that the Cubs are at least on par with the Cards, probably better.

So paying $9M for 1 year is smarter than paying $4.9M for 2 years. Fascinating. wtf are you actively try to be obtuse with every post you make now? i mean, seriously. assuming you're a rational person, there's no way you can make a post like that and not understand how pointless/irrelevent it is in regards to the post i made before it. but to answer your question, yeah. paying 9 mil to an above average player is better than giving 2/5 to a crappy player. (not that any of this has anything whatsoever to do with my original point.... which was all about contract length and risks). Hey you're the one that drew the comparison to Aaron Miles. I just pointed out the unintended hilarity in your "logic": <$5M spread over two years is apparently a bigger risk than $9M spread over one. Just stop and let that resonate for a moment, and maybe you'll crack up too. No one compared Beltre to Miles. The point was that 1 year deals made with surplus money are smart because there's little lost. If you signed a 2 year deal with what you have left over, you can still be burned by the second year. That's what happened with Miles. The team had much tighter budget restrictions in year two of his contract, and since he didn't meet expectations they were forced to eat money just to get him off the team.

This is the important thing. Even before Holliday, they were definitely a stars and scrubs team. Now they're committing a huge portion of their payroll to Pujols, Holliday, Carpenter, and Lohse. Considering their farm system is horrible, there's a lot of room for things to go very wrong for them if they get bit by injuries or ineffectiveness to a star or two. It's not a bad contract for the Cardinals, but considering the composition of their team, they might have been better off spreading out the value they got for that 17 mil(especially since they didn't get a steal on Holliday). This is nowhere close to true.

Byrd has been about a 3 WAR player the last 3 years, and Bradley provided 1 WAR in RF last year. UZR has Fukudome as about 3 wins better defensively in RF v. CF. Regress both of those to 2 WAR and consider they're replacing Bradley, and the move still makes them 3 wins better for 5 million a year. That's an extremely efficient use of resources, even if Byrd disappoints or Fukudome's 2008 defense was fluky. Marlon Byrd is more than just his last three years and Milton Bradley is more than just his 2009. So you're upset about how they went about getting the improvement? Bradley was likely to improve, but probably not beyond Byrd's level and definitely not to compensate the large difference in Kosuke's defense.

Byrd has been about a 3 WAR player the last 3 years, and Bradley provided 1 WAR in RF last year. UZR has Fukudome as about 3 wins better defensively in RF v. CF. Regress both of those to 2 WAR and consider they're replacing Bradley, and the move still makes them 3 wins better for 5 million a year. That's an extremely efficient use of resources, even if Byrd disappoints or Fukudome's 2008 defense was fluky.

I would love to see that. I think Bolt would win, but CJ could give him a fight. I doubt that will be close unless it's done in pads, or they give Johnson a head start.

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/599558660/Picture_11.png

I feel much the same way. Fortunately, 3 of the top 4 South teams are home games this year, and I think there's 9 wins out there for us if they play like they have since the Oral Roberts game.

Marlon Byrd hits right handed.

Yeah, there's just way too much regression pulling the Cubs up and the Cards down at this point, even with Holliday. They aren't going to get 16 WAR out of their top 3 starters this year. In fact, I'll predict right now that one of Carpenter or Wainwright, if not both, don't make it to 150 IP.

With the Big 12 season about to be underway, here's how kenpom.com predicts the standings based on the season so far. Texas 14-2 Kansas 14-2 Mizzou 11-5 K-State 10-6 aTm 8-8 Baylor 8-8 Oklahoma St. 7-9 Iowa State 6-10 Texas Tech 6-10 Nebraska 5-11 Oklahoma 4-12 Colorado 3-13 Another evenly balanced year between the North and South. I bet OU does better than that with all their youth getting more time though. If this holds true, tadowdaddy loses his bet. And since they haven't started either, here's the SEC. East Kentucky 12-4 Tennessee 11-5 Vandy 10-6 Florida 9-7 South Carolina 6-10 Georgia 4-12 West Mississippi St. 13-3 Ole Miss 11-5 Bama 8-8 Auburn 5-11 LSU 4-12 Arkansas 3-13 Definitely East-heavy here. Swap UK with MSU and UK might run the table.

Kosuke Byrd/Baker Lee Ramirez Soto Soriano Theriot/Byrd Fontenot/Theriot Wow, we're going to give LHP nightmares this year.

Because the last 4 years he's averaged an .800 OPS to go with 50 steals at 80+% and elite defense. Again, this is a corner outfielder we're talking about. Sure, he's better than Fukudome, but not nearly as great as he's been made out to be. We should expect more than an .800 OPS from a corner outfielder. The stolen bases and the defense make him extremely valuable. He was a 5 win player last year, that's about top 5 for all outfielders.

Because the last 4 years he's averaged an .800 OPS to go with 50 steals at 80+% and elite defense.

The production they get from that money spent(or that roster spot) has a monetary value, and the probable difference in production between Silva and Bradley far exceeds the money saved from the trade.

The Cubs got both a few bucks and an (allegedly) near-worthless player. The huge money over the next two years is a sunk cost. It's not a sunk cost when we didn't have to pay it to a horrendous player before the trade. I don't think you comprehend the concept of a sunk cost. In this case the monies committed to Bradley cannot be recovered. That $21M absolutely WILL be paid. Replace "ticket" with "contract", and "movie" with "Bradley circus", and you've got the present situation described to a T, except here the Cubs got a little something for their "ticket" instead of just throwing it away -- a marginal player and $5M savings. Yes, I absolutely understand what a sunk cost is, and it's a simplistic idea that doesn't consider the realities of a MLB trade. Of course the 21 million will be paid, but as we can see it is not for certain to be paid by the Cubs, and the value received from that 21 million varies significantly depending on who is "playing for that 21 million" so to speak. That would be an applicable analogy if we had paid all but "a couple bucks" of his salary and got something like a minor leaguer in return. Instead, what actually happened is that we now have Carlos Silva and his contract. To sum up: Before: Bradley and his contract providing X value After: Silva and his contract providing X - a billion value, plus a few million dollars To use that ticket analogy, if Bradley is the ticket, then Silva is someone hitting you in the back of the knee with a crowbar.

You have a strange interpretation of great.

Except for the key points that are completely wrong, like Milton not owning up to when he performed poorly or not being able to play with the pressure of what was going on. He may have been playing better but he was certainly losing it. There is just no way that Milton Bradley can make it thru a season at wrigley, even if he was putting up sosa-like numbers. Some people are just drawn toward chaos. I'm glad we got a few bucks in return for him. We did not "get a few bucks in return for him." We got a near-worthless player whom we still have to pay huge money to over the next two years. The Cubs got both a few bucks and an (allegedly) near-worthless player. The huge money over the next two years is a sunk cost. It's not a sunk cost when we didn't have to pay it to a horrendous player before the trade.

That is a lot more than I thought Crisp would get.

You would think some teams would be willing to kick in 6m over two years to get Bradley. But I'm really starting to believe teams wouldn't even kick in that much. From everything we heard about the Rays, they weren't willing to kick in any money or very little money for the second year. So any money we would have saved in that deal would have been trading Burrell again and eating most of his contract. Sadly I really do think this was the best deal the Cubs could get when it comes to getting money back in return. The only reason why the Mariners were willing to kick in that much was to get Silva off there hands. Hendry knows Silva is a long shot to do anything productive and is basically talking about him like he's a guy he just signed to a minor league deal. I really believe Bradley value dropped to basically nothing. A few teams were willing to try him out basically for free or for very little money. But nobody was willing to invest more then 3m per season for Bradley. The Mariners were willing to pay Bradley 2/29 to get rid of Silva. I think there'd be a touch of interest in him at 2/6.