CUBZ99

Exactly.

Ive always been a fan of Polanco and his oddly shaped cranium, but 3/18mil? Even if he wasnt 34 years old, that would sound like a lot for him. I guess Ibanez worked out for them so who knows. All I know is if This were the Cubs, there would be people with torches and pitchforks outside Hednrys door. That sure seems like a good deal for Polanco.

Jaramillo will sprinkle his magic pixie dust on Ankiel and Ankiel will OPS .900+ this year.

There has to be something there. If Hendry signed Harden for say $9MM knowing that he had arm troubles that would likely result in him missing a significant portion of the season, everyone would be pointing out that he never learned his lesson from the whole Wood and Prior fiasco and that he relies too heavily on players with a history of injuries. Offering Arb to Harden was a risky proposition, knowing that his arb award would likely be the best offer on the market for him.

This is assuming the Cubs don't sign him. (which is probably a pretty safe assumption). Also, Bruce seemed to imply or suggest that maybe there is more damage to the right shoulder than the average fan knows about. If the Cubs medical staff is encouraging Hendry not to offer arbitration because they believe his arm will need surgery soon or won't hold up half a season, I would give Hendry a pass.

I agree with a lot of this. The part that I get hung up on, is the fact that Bradley basically has no trade value at all at this point. You can argue that it was probably wrong to sign him in the first place. But, it isn't necessarily going to make it right to just give him to some other team while taking back some of their dead weight. I just don't think the psyche of Milton's teammates are really as damaged as people are describing. I guess, as a teammate, I might have supported an end of season suspension for Milton in response to his act getting old. But, I don't see throwing 2010 out the window (where everyone suffers) in order to further illustrate the point that Milton's act was old in 2009. Michael Vick is quarterbacking occasionally for the Eagles, and they are winning games. This guy killed puppies, for cryin' out loud. There may not be a way to fix Milton. You may be right about that. But, I also don't believe that placing him in solitary confinement for the rest of his Cub days resolves anything either. They liked him enough to give him a 3 year contract less than 365 days ago. It's up to both sides to honor the contract. CCP makes some very valid points. I would much rather see Bradley in RF next year, rather than trading him for someone else's garbage and paying the remainder of his contract. As much as we tend to bash Bradley, his upside is much greater than his value on the trade market. However, I think you would have to be on crack to believe that things could miraculously get better between himself and the players/organization if he stays.

You show me a player that said this and I will agree with you.

It's actually not common sense at all. It's an assumption made with nothing to support it. It doesnt' make any sense at all to assume one player will play worse, and have worse stats, because Milton Bradley is on his team. It's a really stupid idea actually, with no support. Gooney is right about one thing, until someone does a specific study directly related to baseball chemistry and productivity, some people won't believe in it, regardless of subjective data/comments from players, coaches or others involved in the game. Of course, their security blanket is the fact that there are too many variables to consider and such a study will likely never occur or be good enough for the one's who disagree. Its a great fall back to have, because he can be fairly certain that you will ever be able to prove without a doubt that team chemistry is a factor. So without a study, you are left between the Gooneys who think it is a "stupid idea" to think one player would play worse because of bad chemistry, or the actual players, coaches, team management and broadcasters/reporters (who actually observe day to day activities and human behavior).

Last year, didn't they have a segment of the GM meeting where the GMs each in turn said what they were looking for this offseason? Maybe they did that this year and that led Hendry to believe that someone like Adduci would be in demand. Am I imagining this? Otherwise, Hendry has made some weird decisions in protecting players. Cedeno for instance was a head scratcher at the time. I'm guessing that you are right, and that Hendry was certain that some team would draft Adduci next month. Maybe he is simply trying to get something out of his wealth of backup OF prospects. I suppose if the Cubs have the room on the 40 man, why not?

I would love for the Cubs to get Halladay and even consider trading Castro for him, but I think Hendry has hamstrung the Cubs with his overspending in past years.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/1893386,John-Grabow-Cubs-contract-19.article Well it is official now. :banghead:

I fail to understand why Hendry believes that a left handed reliever is an immediate priority. Why not let the offseason play out?

Nothing Kaplan says is worth much and I have no idea who wrote this, but Bradley and Miles for Milwood would be nice. Where did you get this quote from?

Wow, I could live with this trade. Make it happen Hendry.

Did he get his velocity back? It was my understanding that he wasn't throwing as hard as he had before the surgery.

I think both lists so far are pretty solid. Thanks to all of the posters and mods that put together an informative and well thought out top ten. It is a good feeling to be excited about the Cubs minor league players again, and to see some potential difference makers in the pipe line. Selfishly, I am hoping that J. Jackson, Cashner, Carpenter and Castro play in Iowa this year. As far as the respective lists: NSBB - I have to disagree with the inclusion of Rhee at the expense of either Watkins and Lemahieu(sp?). I hope that Rhee proves me wrong next year. BA -- How can Burke not be a top 10 at this point? As has already been pointed out, it was odd that they projected him as a starter for the Cubs in a few years, but yet didn't think he deserved top ten respect?

I can top that with a little nugget I found over on a Tiger's board. Talking about Edwin Jackson: "Regarding Jackson, although he's no Roy Halladay, you have to remember the team that would get him would control him for at least the next two seasons. Although Jackson is not left-handed, the Tigers should at least expect to get what the Orioles got for Erik Bedard (which included Adam Jones, George Sherill and Chris Tillman). Their histories (great, inconsistent stuff) and contract situations are similar, although Jackson doesn't have the injury history of Bedard" Talking about Josh Vitters "This guy is the Cubs version of Gordon Beckham. I'm liking doing a deal with Cubs more and more. Especially if you consider that Hendry is going to offer up 5 of the Cubs top 10 prospects." I want some of the stuff that they are taking.

Good thing neither of them play defense, not to mention Granderson had some strange home/road splits last year. If Lou was smart enough to platoon him, we'd be getting a relatively cheap, .900 OPS CF who by all accounts plays pretty good defense I would rather have Bradley, Castro, and Marmol over Granderson and paying some team $10MM or so to take Bradley Sure Granderson's defense is better, but I don't think it is that much better to justify the expense.

Granderson had a .780 OPS last year, compared to Bradley's .775. A year ago Badley's OPS was in the .900's. I would prefer the Cubs keep Bradley and and save the prospects.

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

I could live with that.

Good to see that Harden wants to stay, but he is going to need to give the Cubs a discount in order for them to be able to sign him. Maybe an incentive laden deal?

Any particular reasons? Mainly because I was expecting the Cubs to eat most of Bradley's contract in order to just unload him. Castillo is not a terrific return, but his contract would allow the Cubs to save about $9MM over two years. Plus, we all have read by now that Hendry is in the market for a speedy leadoff hitter. I can think of many worse option than Castillo.

This trade would be a best case scenario. If the Cubs could get Castillo without eating any of Bradley's salary, I would do it in an instant.

Hopefully some team signs Gregg immediately after he becomes a free agent.