Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Let's dump Bradley at his lowest value and get junk in return. Yes, it makes perfect sense to get rid of his remaining 20 million so we can spend that money on a better right fielder. It's not about getting anything in return. the return is getting back 20 million dollars of your poor investment. Look at it this way. Let's say Bradley was a free agent this offseason. You have the choice of either giving him 2/20, or signing somebody else. That's what we're basically talking about right now. You'd give him 2/20? I wouldn't. Those cost-cutting moves sure worked wonders for us this past offseason. Hate him all you want, but he's going to rebound next year. I just hope he's still with us when that happens. What is this based on? He's now been this low .800's OPS for 3 of the last 5 seasons. The odds are more in favor of him being that than being the great hitter he was for like 600 at-bats spread out over 07 and 08. And I don't get the comparison to the cost cutting moves that have been made. Mark DeRosa was GOOD last year. Kerry Wood was GOOD last year. They were both worth what they were making. Bradley, despite the high OBP, has not been worth what he's making. If somebody offered to take Soriano off our hands, would you say "no, he's at his lowest possible value right now!". No, of course you wouldn't. You'd be happy to get rid of the contract. I'd be happy to get rid of Bradley's contract. Oh well, I guess I'm ridiculous for wanting a right fielder who can actually slug higher than .450