…it really looks like Tampa Bay or bust for Bradley. I just haven’t read anything else that makes any sense. And I mean straight-up. The three-way deal with the Mets that Stark writes about doesn’t really ring true unless the Mets really like Burrell for some reason.

With a "hometown " discount. I doubt the 3/27 figure was ever real but agents have to start somewhere so when he signs for 2/10 the team gets to think it saved 17 million.

We know Hendry’s f.o. is quiet when it comes to trade rumors. They’ll talk about free agents they are interested in, but it seems like the rumors for whom the Cubs might trade come from the other clubs most of the time. So, my guess is that the TB f.o. keeps leaking that they aren’t budging and the one or two other teams interested aren’t talking. It makes no sense for them to talk. They don’t want to help Hendry build a market. So long as TB keeps saying they’re not budging on the cash, those other teams should be quiet about their interest and hope to step in just above TB’s offer. The other reason other clubs may not want to talk about this trade is that they may be offering players they may not expect to be able to move apart from a trade like this. It could upset that player if he was connected to a Bradley trade and the trade fell apart. Say, for example, the Rangers were talking to the Cubs about a Michael Young for Bradley trade. There’s no way they’d want to telegraph this until they were sure it could happen.

http://muskat.mlblogs.com/archives/2009/12/124_looking_ahead_to_indy.html