Robothal: "You would be shocked at the level of interest" in Milton Bradley
"Multiple teams are in contact the Cubs about outfielder Milton Bradley, with one source saying, "You would be shocked at the level of interest."
The Cubs remain confident that they can trade Bradley without assuming the vast majority of the $21 million remaining on his contract over the next two years.
New owner Tom Ricketts has set a limit for how much money the Cubs will include in a deal, one source says. The Cubs can take back a contract but pay only a fixed amount of cash."
Obviously this is great news, and it's good to see that Ricketts is smart enough to know that simply releasing Bradley for nothing is the absolute worst thing that could be done.
29 days ago
berselius
173 comments
4 recs |
Email
PrintComments
As long as there's at least one team that's interested, I'm happy.
Of course it only helps the Cubs’ possible return if multiple teams are indeed interested. Or is this all just spin to try to help get a deal done with anyone? Hard to say.
Harry Caray: Marshall is going back to LA to get cocaine for his injured foot.
Steve Stone: Harry, that’s Novocaine.
by Julio Zuleta's Voodoo on Oct 22, 2009 11:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This is coming from Rosenthal, not the Cubs
so I don’t think it’s spin.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking the spin would be coming from his source, not Rosenthal himself
So lets hope the source is from someone outside the Cubs organization who would have no reason to be less than honest about the interest in MB.
Harry Caray: Marshall is going back to LA to get cocaine for his injured foot.
Steve Stone: Harry, that’s Novocaine.
by Julio Zuleta's Voodoo on Oct 22, 2009 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
actually
rereading it, you’re right that it came from the Cubs. I think that Rosenthal would have asked around though
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a bit surprised by the interest in Bradley myself
If we can get rid of him for something, then the joke’s on them.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
by Ace Venom on Oct 22, 2009 11:30 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
This is your most metal comment ever.
Rec’d.
by chilango2 on Oct 22, 2009 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
...
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 22, 2009 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're surprised?
Baseball’s fraternity of owners/general managers is filled with arrogant, mouth breathers that believe that they can “turn players around”.
The talent is there. It’s only a two year commitment. For a team looking for a patient bat, Bradley is one of the better options out there and could be had (in trade) cheap.
Outside of Jason Bay and Matt Holliday, what other bats are really out there?
PHISH IS BACK!!!
HAMPTON, VA - MARCH 6, 7 and 8th!!!!
by TheBeerBaron on Oct 25, 2009 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, you're literally "talking to the hand."
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 26, 2009 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rec'd...
Maybe this will finally put to bed the “Bradley has no value” argument.
by Damen Jackson on Oct 22, 2009 11:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Bradley’s troubles are well known. However, there’s always a team out there that says, “We can fix that.” They’re never right, but they’ll say so.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How can you be so sure that there's always a team out there that will take him...
…but at the same time you’re also so sure that they won’t be able to fix him. Do you not see an inconsistency in your absolutes?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 22, 2009 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair, TO was/is a better receiver than Bradley ever was/is a baseball player.
You’re comparing a hall of fame football player to a solid baseball player.
Metal sharpens metal.
And this guy right here understands and knows what leadership is all about: The coach, the hall of famer......... Dick Butka! George Ryan
by dakoose on Oct 22, 2009 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
was, MAYBE
is, certainly not
T.O. is very over-rated.
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 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tank Johnson has a job
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Oct 22, 2009 6:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
By dropping more than he catches?
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 10:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's flawed
Because his entire worth can’t be judged by stats. He’s often doubled and tripled which allows an open man or 2! I’m a huge Cowboy fan and hated TO but I wouldn’t call him overrated one bit!
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 23, 2009 5:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everything can be...oh, nevermind.
"Enough foreplay- let's get crackin'"- Fred Garvin
by davidalanu on Oct 23, 2009 10:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lots of others would call him overrated
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 24, 2009 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hall of fame
TO will never be in the hall of fame. no way.
by Jamison1 on Oct 26, 2009 10:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It all depends on the $$
Just about any team would say “I can fix that” if they’re getting Bradley for free (or essentially for free). This is why Ricketts/Hendry said that there’s a limit on how much cash they would include in the deal, since it would probably would not be worth $21mm to skip taking a chance on fixing him
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I think the reason teams want him is that they know the Cubs will be basicaly giving him away for free
And likely will be paying a lot of his salary. There’s no doubt that by suspending him, Hendry diminished Bradley’s value significantly.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 22, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except that Rosenthal
is saying the Cubs won’t be giving him away for free – that the market is large enough for Hendry to regain leverage.
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 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Ricketts Limit.
The detail about Ricketts setting a limit on how much money the Cubs will kick in to move Milton is interesting. How do people feel about that? It seems wise in a financial sense, but what if it means the Cubs can’t move Bradley? Can we assume that, if there’s a limit on how much the team will pay out in a trade, Ricketts will not consider releasing Milton? After all, they would lose far more money in doing so. Could we reach an impasse where Hendry can’t trade Bradley but Ricketts won’t allow Jimbo to release Milton?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 22, 2009 12:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Given the reported level of interest...
… I doubt this will be a problem.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even with the difficult economy?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 22, 2009 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, because...
… the Cubs have (apparently) made it clear they will take on SOME of the contract.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I guess I still feel fairly confident that Milton will be traded.
But I can’t help envisioning a worst case scenario like this – and, as we’ve all seen, “worst case scenario” and “Milton Bradley” seem to go hand in hand.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 22, 2009 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see what you mean.
I don’t want Ricketts to start out his ownership this way. I hope he doesn’t either.
by chilango2 on Oct 22, 2009 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh I'm guessing this is nothing more than a smart way to give Hendry more leverage.
If it gets to the point where Jim can come back to Ricketts and say, I can dump the whole contract and get a Type C prospect from Seattle or can actually get someone who will help us if I take on so much money, why wouldn’t Ricketts budge? It’s possible there’s going to be a difficult salary cap for the Cubs. But it’s also possible that Ricketts is just helping Jim do his job.
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 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I may?...
I think the problem is literally the cash. The problem with trading Bradley in the winter is that you have to send back a large portion of the cash for next season in advance. No front office has much in the way of operating income at the moment, and likely won’t until later in the spring.
I don’t see this as the Ricketts being cheap, or leverage. I think it’s a cash-poor team being run by a cash-poor ownership group that doesn’t want to write a 10 million dollar check right now. And as far as Bradley being released, I think that is wildly out of the realm of possibility.
by Damen Jackson on Oct 22, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yabbut...
… why would you have to send any cash (literally) before the first paycheck is due to a player in the spring? Just as front offices don’t have operating income at the moment, I don’t think players get paychecks over the winter, either.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understood that cash....
is transferred at the time of acquisition, along with any other compensation, at least for the immediately following season. You might be able to confirm that better.
by Damen Jackson on Oct 22, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Any such deal, I would assume...
… could be made to accomodate both parties, i.e. if Bradley doesn’t have to be paid until March, the Cubs probably wouldn’t have to actually transfer the cash until then.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rec'd for an interesting point.
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 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is all about setting expectations....
…with any team that would be stupid enough to take on Bradley. Of course you want to get word out that there is a limit to what you will eat in any deal, that is called good posturing.
In the end, if the market is not there, that tune may have to change to accomodate reality. I will believe there is this kind of demand for Bradley when I actually see a deal go down that limits the Cub’s losses in how much dough they have to take on, or eat. This no different than putting a house on the market and getting a boatload of showings, but no offers close to what you want to get. I still say getting rid of Bradley will not be cheap for the Cubs.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a good point - I'm probably overreacting a bit.
It’ll be interesting to see how the whole thing pans out, to say the least.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 22, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
any guesses on the teams?
I’d say San Francisco and Toronto.
by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 1:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Also Seattle, NY, NY, Detroit, TB, AZ, Atlanta, Cinci
and I hear that St. Louis is going to be needing a LF eventually, although if we’re lucky Scott Boras will string negotiations out long enough that St. Louis won’t have a backup alternative by the time Holliday signs and MB will be long since traded.
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 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is pure conjecture on my part ...
but I’d rule out Atlanta, Cincinnati, St. Louis and both New York teams
Atlanta seems like too smart of an organization to bring in such a problem child, but maybe they would figure that Cox could control him.
As for the Reds and Cardinals, I don’t think Hendry would trade him in the division. Plus, Dusty met with Milton and wasn’t too impressed, IIRC. And, somehow, I’d be amazed if Hendry traded Milton to St. Louis — although it would be interesting to see Milton take his first at-bat at Wrigley wearing Cardinal red.
I really doubt Milton would do well in New York. If he didn’t like the attention here …
Arizona and Seattle are both interesting (as is TB).
by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Atlanta has brought in problem players in the past... Sheffield, for one.
Is Milton really going to do anything more distracting than A-Rod?
The Mets sound like a team reflecting on their lack of fire in exactly the same way the Cubs were last off-season when they thought Bradley’s attitude would be a good thing.
Cinci and St. Louis aren’t teams I’m also skeptical would be interested and/or a good match.
I think if we offered Bradley for Eric Byrnes the D’backs would do it without hesitation.
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 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not that
Milton would be more distracting than ARod, rather he would be more distracted in the largest market of all.
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
by DMCub on Oct 22, 2009 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
good point re: Sheffield
But I don’t think you can compare A-Rod — one of the top two or three players in the game — with Milton. And the controversy surrounding A-Rod in winter 2004, when the trade was made, was pretty minimal.
That said, I think Milton actually would be a better fit with the Yankees because he could fade into the background behind A-Rod, Jeter, Tex, et. al.
by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right, if Milton can fade into the background
then his controversy doesn’t drag the clubhouse down. And if all the controversy A-Rod has brought hasn’t dragged that clubhouse down enough to keep them from winning…
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 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just don't think the NY media
will let him ‘fade into the background’. His first hiccup would be blown up more than it was in Chicago….and if he thought it was bad there, he’d have another thing coming.
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
by DMCub on Oct 22, 2009 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not so much how the media will handle it
as how the clubhouse will handle it.
We know the media’s template for Milton Bradley. There’s nowhere in baseball where Milton can get away from that template. It’s how the players around Milton respond and how they help him respond.
Or, rather, it’s how the management of a club believe they can respond.
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 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed, but ...
I don’t know if Milton can do that with the Yankees. I just think he’s more likely to fade into the background with the Yankees than with the Mets.
by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know that Milton can do it anywhere.
But I can see the Yankees saying, “We lived through A-Roid; Milton Bradley’s not bringing anything worse than that to the table.”
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 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
For Milton’s sake, I hope he goes to a small market team, in a one-paper town where the baseball team ranks behind other professional and college teams as far as fan interest.
The town will preferably play on the West Coast, causing any Milton antics to only make the 1 a.m. EST SportsCenter. I’d also hope that he goes to an AL team (Seattle!) where he can DH and rarely play again at Wrigley.
by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
rereading my last post ...
It kinda looks like I’m suggesting that Milton go to a farm upstate …
by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sadly enough...
…" a one-paper town where the baseball team ranks behind other professional and college teams as far as fan interest" sounds like Texas. But he’s already been there – well, except for the Astros. But I don’t see a fit there. Not with Punter Hence permanently lodged in right field.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 22, 2009 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe Kansas City?
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
by DMCub on Oct 23, 2009 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe the Royals have been thrown out there as a possibility...
…but I’m not sure they have any contracts the Cubs could/would take in return.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 23, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You might be right.
But they seem about as good a fit as anyone for [name redacted].
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
by DMCub on Oct 23, 2009 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They could certainly use Milton's OBP.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 23, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To bad the Expos aren't still around...
… they would be the perfect fit. Plus, history shows they would have given up some young talent for him. Shame…
by TheHawkRules on Oct 24, 2009 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He already was an Expo.
Started with them, in fact.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 24, 2009 8:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And...
…it would have been the perfect team for him to finish his career with also….
by TheHawkRules on Oct 25, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blame Canada.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 26, 2009 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
With Milton...
…you have to pick your poisen.
He is either going to be a royal pain in the ass, go on the DL for lengthy periods or both.
I predict: Whoever takes on Milton won’t have a big problem with his attitude next year, but they will have a problem with him not being available because of injury.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A Rays blogger on Twitter mentioned the Mets are interested.
Given their injury problems this year, I find that hard to believe.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 22, 2009 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was reading somewhere, can't remember where
that they think Beltran doesn’t have much trade value. I can’t believe it. If Jim Hendry could pull of a Bradley-Beltran trade, even with us adding more into that, I’d be very happy.
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 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
strike the "even", replace "of course"
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 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that would make me very happy
"hey
by jesus christos on Oct 22, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Mets...
…have one of the worst GM’s in all of baseball so anything is possible. The only thing that may mess this up is he is probably going to be on a shorter leash and a bit more cautious.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gammons was suggesting
that Jeff Wilpon has been running that club overriding Omar, which would suggest that there will be no such thing as a shorter leash.
Needless to say, I want Jim Hendry to make a trade with Jeff Wilpon. I’m confident we’ll do well there.
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 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting...
…I guess Wilpon has grown tired of Omar burning his cash in the incinerator.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd be all over a Beltran for Bradley deal.
Even with Beltran being due more money — that’s ideal; you’d put Fukudome back in RF where he belongs and get a topnotch CF who can hit.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whoah
Do you realize just how freaking good Beltran is?
by vivaelpujols on Oct 23, 2009 1:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
That’s why I said I’d love to acquire him.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 7:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but there is no way that you would get him for Bradley
by vivaelpujols on Oct 23, 2009 8:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not straight up, no.
Depends on what else you’d be willing to include (Sean Marshall?), and how badly the Mets wanted to get out from the remainder of Beltran’s contract.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 8:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt they woud want to get out of his contract
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=589&position=OF#value
He’s been worth an average of 22 million the past 3 years statistically.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 23, 2009 8:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Regardless of what Fangraphs says...
… if the Mets want to save money, they might move him.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 9:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But as VEP points out
Beltran is so valuable that they could almost certain get for him more than the Cubs would ever be willing to offer.
He’s an elite center fielder, a position that we all know is very very hard to fill.
by Wreckard on Oct 23, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's true only if...
… you’re talking about player value. As I said, maybe the Mets want to dump Beltran’s contract. In that case, they might settle for less, including taking Bradley in return.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If someone was trading a player, what would matter more than player value?
All I’m saying is that Beltran’s contract isn’t bad, so not only wouldn’t they need to take a bad contract in return to get rid of him, they would probably be able to demand quality prospects.
by Wreckard on Oct 23, 2009 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What matters, on occasion...
… more than player value, is how much a team wants to get rid of a contract.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That doesn't make much sense
Player value drives that desire, it’s not the other way around. A player with no value (Vernon Wells) creates a desire to get rid of him in the team. But that equation doesn’t work the opposite direction – no matter how much the Mets want to get rid of Beltran, he will still have value.
Beltran’s contract, as VEP pointed out, has positive value. It really doesn’t matter that he’s owed a ton of money – teams would be lining up to take that commitment on.
Compare the situation to the Padres’ situation with Peavy. Peavy’s a good player with positive value owed an amount of money close to what he’s worth. To get rid of him, the Padres never had to take on a bad contract in return – in fact, they were able to demand – and received – quality prospects.
by Wreckard on Oct 23, 2009 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That makes sense, but...
… every player, every situation is different. Obviously, a Bradley-for-Beltran swap isn’t tenable, but perhaps if the Cubs also sent Sean Marshall and a couple of prospects, it looks a lot better from the Mets viewpoint.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess it is the Mets we're talking about
And I guess you should never put a bad trade past them, but I just don’t see Beltran netting anything less than a Castro or Vitters plus 1-2 other top 10 types.
If they’re really trying to save cash, I just don’t see why they’d take on $20M just to get rid of $40M, when they could simply get rid of the $40 without taking any big commitments back.
That kind of logic only works when you have a bad contract, and Beltran’s contract isn’t bad.
by Wreckard on Oct 23, 2009 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see this happening, either
But they are DESPERATE for starting pitching.
Maybe Bradley and Marshall is the conversation starter.
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 23, 2009 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is Marshall's value really all that high?
He’s already got 4 years of service time, and in those years has never been good enough to become a permanent fixture in the rotation. He’s a very solid swing man but he’s only got 2 years of club control left and is a question mark as a starter.
I imagine a conversation would start with Randy Wells and wouldn’t involve Bradley at all. If the Mets were dumping salary they’d want guys with low service time, not guys who will be free agents after 2011 such as Marshall and Bradley.
by Wreckard on Oct 23, 2009 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Marshall might do better in a park like Citi Field.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh he almost certainly would.
His home ERA for 2009 would drop from 4.50 to about 3.70, which in turn would drop his total ERA for the season from 4.32 to 3.82.
But that doesn’t really answer the question. Anyone would do better in Citi Field.
by Wreckard on Oct 23, 2009 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, it does, in part.
You’d think someone like Marshall would make a deal very attractive to the Mets, who could use starting pitching.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But he's not a starter
He’s a left-handed Aaron Heilman with a slightly better track record: starter potential that’s never been realized. He’s been pitching for 4 years without ever cracking the rotation, or even proving that he can go deeper than 5 innings consistently.
If you said Randy Wells, I could see them being interested. But Marshall only has 2 years of club control left, and is nothing more than a swing man at this point in his career. He’d be the icing in a deal like this, not the centerpiece.
by Wreckard on Oct 23, 2009 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are probably right
But I’d open at that and see where Minaya counters; I don’t think it’s so bad as to be insulting . . . but the Mets may disagree. Maybe they would do it if it meant the Cubs taking on the headache that is Perez, but Marshall probably doesn’t get it done.
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 23, 2009 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would the Mets want to dump his contract?
As it turns out, the Wilpons actually MADE money off of Madoff, so rumors of their finiancial demise have been greatly exaggerated
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 23, 2009 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just because the Wilpons made money off Madoff....
… doesn’t mean the Mets themselves aren’t in financial trouble.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley for Beltran
Shoot, I’d trade Bradley for Beltran and Oliver Perez and just dump Perez. It would still be worth it.
by Bradsbeard on Oct 23, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is my dream-hope for the off season
That somehow we turn Bradley and others into Beltran.
Taking Oliver Perez and his terrible contract off their hands could go a long way into making that happen, the Cubs would just have to be willing to potentially eat Perez’s contract (26 million more over 2 years I think) if he continues to refuse to throw strikes.
Another interesting player is Reyes, whose trade value is an an absolute low, something like 10-12 million due to him, the re-ocurring hamstring tear, and only one year left on his contract. Between Beltran-Perez-Reyes the Mets have something in the neighborhood of 70 million in contracts that may not be healthy enough of good enough to play over the next few years. Meaning either someone is going to fleece the Mets if they trade those players and they all bounce back, or the Mets are going to crush someone in ditching them.
Also remember that Hendry almost got Floyd from Minyata for Sosa, and Floyd had a pretty solid season that year.
"I'd rather hit home runs you don't have to run as hard." -- Dave Kingman
by BucknerKongCardenal on Oct 23, 2009 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus, Beltran is an ex-Lugnut! So he's got THAT going for him. Which is nice...
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
by Zeke on Oct 23, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Getting one of Beltran or Reyes would be fantastic.
We can hope and dream, thankfully, because as much as people have complained about Hendry, no one doubts that he could take Wilpon/Minaya easily.
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 23, 2009 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to throw cold water on our dreams
But I really only think its a dream. I know Minaya is stupid, but he’s not that stupid. He could certainly get much more for Beltran or Reyes than Milton Bradley if he wanted to. I don’t think the Mets sell any of those guys this offseason. I think they sign Bay or Holliday and Lackey, get healthy, and have a very competitive team next year. A much more realistic Mets trade would include Bradley for Castillo…
by Bradsbeard on Oct 23, 2009 6:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have never seen such "homer-riffic" comments.
Milton Bradley and Sean Marshall* for Carlos Beltran?
- - includes random throw in minor leaguers.
Come on! Carlos Beltran was the early front runner for NL MVP before he landed on the DL. He’s going to be 33 in April yes, but still has a couple good seasons in the tank.
Maybe if the trade was Carlos Zambrano, Milton Bradley, Starlin Castro and throw ins…..you could get Carlos Beltran and Oliver Perez.
PHISH IS BACK!!!
HAMPTON, VA - MARCH 6, 7 and 8th!!!!
by TheBeerBaron on Oct 25, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think everyone is saying that a Carlos Beltran trade is unlikely.
But we are given reason to hope when you go read the Mets’ own mailbag.
There we read things like:
The team needs more energy, more personality and some grit as well.
(from the beat writer)
If a Beltran trade could bring a decent young starting pitcher and a decent young power-hitting left fielder, it would help. And his departure would free up a lot of money that could be applied to free-agent acquisitions.
(from a fan)
Now obviously, fans and beat writers are often significantly out of the loop, which is why we’re all still unexpectant. But these comments also give us hope because 1) Jose Reyes or Carlos Beltran would fit our team’s needs perfectly; and 2) we have gritty, personality-players we’d love to see on a team we love to beat.
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 25, 2009 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Drew, is that you? ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 25, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is that another way of saying, "Rec'd"?
Anyway, Alex Speier is reporting Beltran will not be traded. I guess I’ll have to hold out hope for Jose Reyes for now.
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 26, 2009 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe.
It’s just that the chances of acquiring Beltran in any Bradley deal would take hope to levels not seen since Drew frequented here.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 26, 2009 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In defense of Drew
I think that his expectations were more realistic than you suggest, but he feels real pain when people are down on the team, the managers, etc. Personally, I am sorry that he left.
"When you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
by vonde6 on Oct 29, 2009 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It sounds like Gammons
thinks Wilpon ordered Omar to put his cash in the incinerator with the hopes that he could blame Omar later if it didn’t go well. You have to look at the Mets’ system over the past few years and marvel at the talent they’ve developed (and failed to develop) and the money they’ve thrown around and say, “Wow, this is a lot of wasted opportunities.” How does a team that starts with Wright and Reyes, as well as well touted pitching prospects, and other prospects they traded for some of their vets, and yet fail so consistently?
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 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Milton Bradley...
your 2010 right fielder for the Chicago Cubs.
by Kansas25 on Oct 22, 2009 1:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You should put some money down on this...
…because you could really clean up if you’re right.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 22, 2009 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I got 20...
That says he’s not!!
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 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reply to Daver and all others...
I’m pondering becoming more convicted about the situation. Right now, I think he’s probably gone. But I, and I am pretty much alone, think there is still a chance he returns.
We didn’t get Jaramillo for Bradley. But if Jaramillo talks to MB about the situation and thinks there is something to salvage…well, what would it take? Pretty simple really: a closed doors meeting with the other players along the lines of “Guys, I messed up, but I’m going to be completely committed going forward” and a media announcement along the same lines.
Now that wouldn’t automatically put him in the good graces of Cub fans (or fellow players for that matter), but combine it with a season EVERYONE knows he’s capable of…well, we’d sweep 09 under the rug.
The underlying issue is this: when/if we trade Bradley, we will most likely not be getting a more talented player. I hear the shouts already: “Who cares what he does on the field if he acts the way he did in 09; it’s not worth it!” And I agree. I lean towards stat-based arguments more often than not, but I will certainly concede that he has often been a detriment to his respective team. But barring a Upton/Granderson/Reyes/Payroll hike, we will not be replacing him with better talent on the field. Not to mention that other players will cost prospects, money, or both.
Unless interest is “really strong” as this article indicates, we will probably be getting 50 cents on the dollar for a player of Bradley’s caliber. Now I realize that most here believe that is still worth it, no matter the cost, but I simply do not.
So there’s my take. Feel free to disagree (as everyone does).
Then on the shore of the wide world I stand alone, and think till love and fame and BCB agreement to nothingness do sink.
by Kansas25 on Oct 22, 2009 11:31 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Actually, I think you make a lot of sense.
As Berselius mentions below, suspending Bradley was a pretty bad business move if Hendry knew then that he would have to trade Milton. Then again, as Al replies below, maybe Jimbo felt he had no choice but to take severe disciplinary action.
For what it’s worth, I do think there’s a very, very small chance Milton could be back next season. In fact, given the team’s financial situation, I would venture to guess that there could be a greater chance that he returns to the Cubs than gets released.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 23, 2009 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
FWIW
I don’t see how Bradley walks back into that locker room after the players lined up to tell us how glad they were he was gone. Stranger things have happened, I guess, but I don’t see this scenario. Bradley has played for seven teams in nine years so chances are he might have crossed paths with a coach or two again along the way.
http://blogs.dailyherald.com/node/2777#comment-13884
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 23, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, like Bruce says, "Stranger things have happened."
There’s a lot of dollars on the table here, plus a new owner in play and, quite frankly, Jim Hendry’s sullied reputation for signing Milton in the first place. Again, I’m not throwing all my cards into the “Milton will be back!” camp but, until a trade is confirmed, I will leave a very small percentage of a chance of it happening.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 23, 2009 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, in this case...
… if Bradley were a Cub next year, I would probably say, “Stranger things have NOT happened.”
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's a bit strong, don't you think?
Did the players really line up and tell us how glad they were he was gone? Yes, it was highly unusual in that so many of the players were willing to comment on the matter (pretty much goes against their unwritten code of conduct) but I don’t recall any player saying he was glad that Bradley was gone.
Now if you feel that by the mere fact so many players were willing to comment on the matter equates to huzzahs and hoorays that Bradley was gone, well, that’s your interpretation (actually Bruce’s) and that’s fine. But just remember, that’s not what was actually said.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 23, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Bruce says...
… the players lined up to tell reporters they were glad he was gone, I believe him.
It doesn’t mean that was written about so we could read about it. But I absolutely believe they told reporters that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder ...
how loose Bruce was being with words when he said the players “lined up”?
by elgato on Oct 23, 2009 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't be surprised if that were a literal description of what happened.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
seems pretty rough ...
even given all of Milton’s problems. The players literally lined up to say “We’re glad Milton’s gone” or whatever they said?
by elgato on Oct 23, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, maybe that's a little over the top.
I’m pretty sure Bruce meant that virtually everyone said the same thing when asked.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right ...
and that was my question. Was Bruce being loose with words?
I don’t think Bruce did anything wrong if that’s the case. But would somebody like, say, Bobby Scales or Jake Fox really go to a reporter and trash a 10-year vet (even if the vet is Milton Bradley)?
by elgato on Oct 23, 2009 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good question.
In this case, it seems as if the players were unanimous, or nearly so. If Bruce stops by here, I’d love him to clarify.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
my guess ...
is that the vocal veterans who normally deal with the media — Lee, Aramis, Theriot, Dempster, etc. — all said things about Milton’s struggles, and we saw the comments in the beat writers’ stories. Meanwhile, no one stood up to defend Milton — but a lot of players probably didn’t feel they had earned the right to say anything, good or bad.
by elgato on Oct 23, 2009 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is that Bruce was telling the truth.
“Lined up” might be metaphoric, but I’m guessing he got comments either on or off the record from just about everyone.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bruce fires off a few more reasons...
…Milton won’t be back here. Plus, the stories he tells in that ACB post (see berselius’ comment below) are pretty evocative. I think that small percentage I referred to above just got even smaller.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 23, 2009 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the small percentage is "zero".
Additional note from that link: Bobby Scales was outrighted to Iowa, setting the 40-man roster at 38.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I was just starting to get some emotional distance from the situation...
…when I read Bruce’s tales from the clubhouse and other remarks and now I’m back to seeing just how overwhelmingly unlikely it is that Milton could rejoin the team.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 23, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Milton Bradley Plan:
"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." ~Winston Churchill
by Goodie1969 on Oct 23, 2009 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sad, but true.
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
by Zeke on Oct 23, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I think it's greater than 0%
But it’s still pretty unlikely.
I get what daver’s saying — you never know — but this oretty close.
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 23, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
oretty?
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 23, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Malcolm O'Retty at your service, lad!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 23, 2009 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aye!
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 23, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We can all hope
Sadly it’s not going to happen.
Whether or not Hendry still wants to keep Bradley or not, he really should come out and say something that intimates that he wants to keep Bradley around. It would certainly increase his leverage in trading him to these other teams. Suspending him with 2 weeks left in the season and treating him like persona non grata is one of the stupidest things this org has done since letting Maddux go
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you're kidding, right?
Blue mountains high .. Blue valleys low
I don't know which way we will go ..
One summer dream .. one summer dream ..
coda
ELO, 1975
by cubnational on Oct 22, 2009 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I'm not
Even if Hendry was completely fed up with Bradley, suspending him sent the message to the entire league that the Cubs have absolutely no leverage whatsoever with anyone who wants him. It was an incredibly stupid business move. If he wanted to get something for him, he should have played his cards closer to the vest and just dealt him in the offseason, rather than just playing out the string for two weeks. It’s like setting your house on fire before trying to sell it
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It may have been simply untenable...
… to keep him around in the clubhouse after he threw the entire organization under the bus.
Bradley’s the one who set the house on fire, not Hendry.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's just responding to childishness with more childishness
I’m not denying that Bradley wasn’t throwing gasoline all over the place in this tortured analogy. But Hendry and the Cubs org should have acted like adults and told him (and his teammates) to get this in order without torpedoing the whole situtation. Cut off Bradley from the media. Get him anger management. Tell his teammates and the fans that his childishness was not the reason that half the team stopped hitting this year. Anything other than telegraphing to the entire league that he was done with the organization.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
How do you know that they didn't try?
And, here’s a theory for everyone who thinks Jaramillio means Milton will be back — at some point, the point needs to be made loud and clear. I don’t think Bradley has any chance of coming back, but if he did – he certainly should have received the message.
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 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know...
… it’s possible they tried all those things and failed. Hendry hinted that the comments to Bruce Miles were the last straw of a lot of things, many of which we probably never heard about.
I agree that what happened makes it somewhat more difficult to deal him because everyone knows Hendry HAS to do it, but given the level of interest, it may not be as tough as you think.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that is certainly the hope, Al
As I said in another thread, the return on a Milton trade will be the way to determine whether a suspension was a smart move for the team.
by elgato on Oct 22, 2009 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's possible
We don’t know though. It would be a very good PR move for the Cubs to announce these kinds of things though, rather than letting him dig his own grave and throwing their hands up.
By the way, ACB interviewed Bruce Miles the other day and asked him about the Bradley stuff. Short version – yes, Bradley was/is a jerk.
I came away from this wishing that he had just kept his ban on speaking to the media from the beginning of the season going. IIRC it was Hendry and the Cubs org that persuaded him to start talking to the media again. It’s not like there are rules in MLB about media access like there are in the NFL and NBA. The Cubs knew that Bradley was not media-friendly – why not just impose a blanket media ban when things were starting to boil over?
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It wasn't just him talking to the media that was the problem.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 4:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's what got him suspended though
If the other players were bothered enough by Bradley to affect their own jobs, they don’t belong in MLB
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 5:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have no way of knowing that unless you were in the clubhouse every day.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 22, 2009 6:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And you were?
I have a rock to sell you that keeps away tigers.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 22, 2009 6:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, so your post hoc, ergo propter hoc is valid
But Al’s responsse is ridiculous.
Got it.
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 10:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and yes, I realize that was in fact one of the reasons
But it was not THE reason. To think otherwise is naive. Why wasn’t Zambrano suspended in 2004 for complaining about the fans on Labor Day?
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 10:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone that insists the media ruined Bradley needs to read that linked article
It’s always seemed to me that players who learned to deal with the media would get a break, especially if they learned to say, "I screwed up," once in awhile. Media people are human beings like anybody else, so I’m sure how they’re treated affects some things in some ways.
Maybe someone should ask what’s wrong with this guy instead of wondering about what’s being asked or if he’s being "baited." Even Cubs people were shaking their heads over his responses to questions. Whether you like or don’t like Sully or Gordon, they’ve gone up to Milton, looked him in the eye and asked their questions. The responses were up to Milton, someone who has been in pro ball for a decade and should know how to handle the media.
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 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way
Not responding when he continued to alienate his teammates and speak highly critical of the organizations and fans – that would have been stupid.
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 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
*critcally, organization
argh
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 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Break out the graybar again.
You misspelled your correction. ;-)
"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." ~Winston Churchill
by Goodie1969 on Oct 22, 2009 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Look, what do you want me to do?"
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 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely!
Letting Bradley play after saying what he said, considering how little he did to help the team this year would have made a worse statement about the organization. I like that Hendry suspended him, shows that players can’t do whatever they want
"If I were playing third base and my mother were rounding third with the run that was going to beat us, I'd trip her. Oh, I'd pick her up and brush her off and say, 'Sorry, Mom,' but nobody beats me." ~ Leo Durocher
by Musicdude10 on Oct 22, 2009 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
because NO ONE would be the wiser if JH suddenly decided he wanted to keep MB around…
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
by DMCub on Oct 22, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry I'll believe it when it happens
If Hendry is able to trade Bradley without taking a bad contract back or throwing in a bunch of money then I will admit I was wrong. I just don’t think the interest is there.
by rlpete on Oct 22, 2009 10:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
So Ken Rosenthal...
… who does have inside baseball sources, says the interest is there, and you say it’s not?
Who should I believe?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 23, 2009 7:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And no reporter has ever reported false stories/rumors?
I’ll be the first to happily admit I was wrong when Hendry unloads Bradley relatively painlessly.
by rlpete on Oct 23, 2009 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thing is
that Miles in the article linked about says
Miles- All I’ve heard is that Hendry is talking with two or three teams, and I’m sure he’d like to create the perception of a market for Bradley so maybe he can get something decent in return or not have to eat all of the money. Some team is likely to take a chance on Bradley.
So Rosenthal might have his sources, but really are the motives of those sources? Also not saying that Miles is more correct than Rosenthal but two or three teams is not a schocking level of interest.
Obviously there is a level of uncertainty around the interest in Bradley, which would lead me to not believe everything someone with inside sources says.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
by Villeslgr on Oct 23, 2009 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
*about = above
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
by Villeslgr on Oct 23, 2009 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
once again
amazing that anyone wants this guy. if ricketts has put a limit on what they will pay in a deal and it does not get done,does this mean the a-hole will be back in rf ? just too much of a problem he has to go.
by NOMAR on Oct 24, 2009 7:30 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Bradley still has value...
…And proved it in 2008 in a small market where he played more than half his time as a DH. We can only hope to get a few pieces in return, plus hopefully 1/2 or more of his contract eaten.
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
by IowaCubs- on Oct 27, 2009 2:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Small market?
The Dallas-Forth Worth metro area is the 4th largest in the US, after New York, LA, and Chicago
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 27, 2009 11:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The size of the market isn't what's important here.
Yes, Dallas is that large. But in baseball terms, it really is small-market. The Rangers don’t draw or get the TV ratings that teams in those three larger cities do. They seem an afterthought to the Cowboys.
Even this year, when the Rangers had a good season and contended for a playoff spot, they finished 17th in major league attendance.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 28, 2009 7:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Regardless of Bradley's...
…past numbers, anyone who takes him on will have to be a GM with some positive equity build up because there is clear risk with him. There is a reasonable chance that Bradley is either on the shelf for extended periods, or is a significant disruption to your club (or both).
The phone may be ringing to inquire about him, but that is far different than a deal getting completed. I would think most GM’s would look at Bradley with signficant caution before pulling the trigger, and would want a deal on paper that makes them look relatively good to offset the potential risk.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Nov 2, 2009 11:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
