Tim Dierkes' Cubs' Offseason Plan: Keep Milton

Two quotes to sum up:
"My advice: work it out, rather than eating $15MM+ or taking on a different bad contract. Bradley is not the reason the Cubs received over 2,000 plate appearances of subpar hitting from Soriano, Fontenot, Soto, Hill, Hoffpauir, and Miles, nor is he the reason Ramirez was limited to 342 PAs due to a shoulder injury."
and
"The Cubs are a pricey team with room for little more than tinkering. GM Jim Hendry will need to push the right buttons this winter after a 2008-09 offseason filled with miscalculations."

He also suggests Billy Wagner might be a good pickup if $$$ allowed.

over 2 years ago DGU 38 comments 1 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Tim is a Cubs fan.

But he’s wrong here. There’s no chance Bradley returns.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Oct 22, 2009 9:20 AM CDT reply actions

I tend to agree with you.

Although, if you think about it from a distant perspective, trading Fukudome and keeping Bradley in RF makes the most economical sense. You should get more for Dome and Bradley should be a better player in 2010.

But the bridges weren’t just burned, they were blown up.

Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.

by DGU on Oct 22, 2009 9:31 AM CDT up reply actions

I think as the off-season takes full effect...

…and the wounds from Bradley’s tenure as a Cub start to heal over, it’s going to be harder and harder to ignore the potential productivity Milton could bring to a major league lineup. Maybe this will help Hendry get something of value for Bradley or at least mitigate his effect on the payroll.

Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.

by daver on Oct 22, 2009 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions

That all sounds very nice...

however, given that Bradley’s suspension — and the resulting fallout — was the culmination of his off-field actions, I’m afraid those comments suggest that the writer doesn’t fully understand the subject matter.

by Damen Jackson on Oct 22, 2009 9:48 AM CDT reply actions

Well, in Dierkes' defense...

..he does write:

In all likelihood the Cubs will replace Bradley, but it is the holdovers who need to improve.

And he’s right about that.

The Billy Wagner idea is interesting. Could the Cubs offer up Marmol in a package for an outfielder and then sign Wagner as closer?

Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.

by daver on Oct 22, 2009 10:08 AM CDT reply actions

I'm all for trading Marmol to get what we can't get on the free agent market

and then signing whoever looks healthiest out of Wagner, Lyon, Soriano, Gonzalez, etc.

Marmol is awesome to watch pitch, but he’s no sure thing.

Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.

by DGU on Oct 22, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions

Marmol for BJ Upton would be a trade I would look into.

by Seattle Cubs Fan on Oct 22, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions

Maybe...

I see real potential for the Rays and Cubs to line up on a deal this off-season, maybe even a mega one. Just not that Burrell for Bradley package. That idea is still making me ill.

by Damen Jackson on Oct 22, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions

The only way I make that deal...

… is if Burrell is flipped to an AL team where he can DH full time.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Oct 22, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions

Wagner

hasn’t proven that he has the stamina to go back to back days, or even 3 days in a row, as is sometimes required for the job. Boston had the luxury of using him sparingly, which might have made him more effective. Just my opinion.

Scott Bora$ is satan.

by Canadian Cubs Fan on Oct 22, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions

Well, he's got an entire off-season to build up his arm strength.

Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.

by daver on Oct 22, 2009 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions

he wasnt really given the chance though

"hey

by jesus christos on Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions

This would be...

…a collosal mistake to bring back Bradley, even if it meant you had to eat his entire contract to keep him away.

The issue here is the message that keeping him would deliver to your club. The suspension was the equivalent of a death sentance, and you would lose all credibility with your players if you subjected them to a 180 with Bradley.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 10:11 AM CDT reply actions 3 recs

I agree with that.

Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.

by DGU on Oct 22, 2009 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions

Thirded.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Oct 22, 2009 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions

4

I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT

Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson

by Shanghai Badger on Oct 22, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't know about losing "all credibility"

But I agree with the rest.

by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Splitting hairs?

I mean it may not result in outright mutany by the rest of the players. But given the comments some of them made regarding Bradley, it probably wouldn’t boost morale or confidence in the direction management is moving.

Just sayin’

"Ask Dad. He'll know. And on the off chance he doesn't, he'll make something up"

by StevenABQ on Oct 22, 2009 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions

fair enough

by elgato on Oct 23, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions

He mentions Ramirez needs to stay healthy..

What is the status with his shoulder? I thought he needed surgery this offseason at some point? Did he have it? Is he going to have it?

by JimboJet on Oct 22, 2009 11:24 AM CDT reply actions

I believe Aramis did not need surgery.

He’s just going to rest and rehab the shoulder – IIRC, he’s actually suffered the injury in question before.

Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.

by daver on Oct 22, 2009 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions

From what I understand...

… Ramirez is not having surgery; rest may be the only thing he needs.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Oct 22, 2009 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions

I hope so...

…loose shoulders are very very touchy, and have a tendency to be repetitive problems without the surgical procedure that tightens up the ligaments.

This one really worries me.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions

Agreed.

Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.

by DGU on Oct 22, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions

Dierkes understands the issues

He’s saying the Cubs probably won’t get a great return on a Milton trade, and he’s right. He also says a trade is pretty much inevitable, and it is.

I’ll be interested in seeing whether Hendry can get something of close to equal value. If not, I think the decision to suspend Bradley will look like an emotional overreaction that hurt the franchise.

by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 2:03 PM CDT reply actions

It can hurt you...

…only if you bring him back, or if the money you have to eat keeps you from getting the one player that could have put you over the top.

Once Hendry suspended him, there was no turning back, his value was cratered. Every team knows now the Cubs have no choice but to trade him, and that ain’t good for bargaining power.

I’m not saying Hendry shouldn’t have suspended him, because he probably needed to at that point to show his club he wouldn’t stand for Bradley’s shit. Even though it will cost the club money, there is some value in making a decision that was probably best for the rest of the guys on the team.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions

Hendry's decision to suspend him ...

can only be judged, IMO, by what the Cubs get back in return when they trade him. Otherwise, they could have just benched him for the final two weeks and sent a similar, if somewhat muted, message.

by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm not sure...

…benching him for two weeks would have been interpreted much differently by other clubs.

We’ll just have to see how this whole thing goes down.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions

If Rosenthal is correct...

… and many teams have called expressing interest, it may not be as difficult as you think.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Oct 22, 2009 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions

That would be nice.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 11:04 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm awaiting the ending of this saga......

I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes. I could see something like JH’s right hand man calling up Rosenthal and saying if you put the interest level is high story out there we will let you be the 1st to report some of our signings this winter etc.

I may be wrong and hopefully I am but if this turns out descent for us it will surprise me like nothing ever has. I still say were get gonna get a headache in return, pay a large portion of his remaining salary or take back a horrible contract.

The players I can forsee us taking back are Burrell, Rowand, Zito,Willis, Magglio, or Vernon Wells etc. None of which I want but Rowand.

My dream scenario has us shipping him off for a face saving prospect and paying none of his salary but it will be a cold day in Hell before that happens IMO.

I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT

by cubsluver22 on Oct 22, 2009 4:31 PM CDT reply actions

Zito threw very well in the second half of last year.

I don’t think the Giants will deal him.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Oct 22, 2009 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions

Seriously?

I think the Giants would love to get their payroll flexibility back, regardless of how well he’s doing. Zito is still paid like a mega ace, and had to step up his performance just to be an adequate back of the rotation guy.

by Damen Jackson on Oct 22, 2009 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions

+1

I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT

by cubsluver22 on Oct 22, 2009 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions

The Wells for Bradley deal

Just keeps being a thought on my mind. Wells is a Jim Hendry kinda guy. 5 tool, oft-injured, and overpaid. I can really see this deal happening! Not that I would agree with it, but I could see it happening!

I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT

by cubsluver22 on Oct 22, 2009 5:58 PM CDT up reply actions

5 tools?

.245 batting average, a negative 17.7 UZR last season, and a WAR of -0.1 which means he owed the Jays 200K this year.

Keep him and his contract away from the Cubs, it is the single worst contract in baseball and even Hendry can laugh at it.

Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.

by nji232 on Oct 22, 2009 6:13 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't want him!!

I just don’t see any scenario where were gonna get rid of a headcase, team wrecker and not pay the piper in return. No way of knowing whether interest is real or not. I could see teams garage sale shopping in this case though!

I can’t wait to see how this plays out!!

I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT

by cubsluver22 on Oct 22, 2009 6:39 PM CDT up reply actions