Now that you've all had a day to express disgust, outrage, "FIREHENDRYNOW", etc. over the trade of Milton Bradley to the Mariners for Carlos Silva, let's examine how this really will affect the 2010 Cubs on the field.
We don't have to rehash the reasons that Bradley had to be moved, but it was clear after he was sent home in September that he would be, no matter what. And when that happened, it was also clear that what the Cubs would get back wasn't going to be much -- likely someone else's bad contract. And that is precisely what we got.
All of you here know that I was against the signing from the beginning -- but I'm not going to say "told you so" here, because even I never imagined that Milton would melt down in the way he would. Let's just say he was never a good fit for the high-profile team that is the Chicago Cubs, and Jim Hendry should have known that. Hendry took responsibility for the entire debacle, and you can bet that Tom Ricketts will have him on a pretty short leash for the rest of this offseason and 2010. If the Cubs don't return to the playoffs in 2010, I'd expect Hendry to be fired, and that firing would be justified. Until then, I do think Hendry deserves a chance to clean up the mess that he made.
So what, really, do we now have here? There has been some dispute over exactly how much financial relief the Cubs got in this deal, but according to this cubs.com article, it's $6 million. This article has the same number. So until I hear different, that's the assumption I'm going on for this post.
Let's not pretend this deal is something it isn't. In December 2009, in a vacuum, there is no way any team deals for or signs Carlos Silva, based on his performance the last two years. He's been horrific. And that might be an insult to horrific players. I'll cut Silva some slack for 2009, as he was hurt most of the year. Could be, that contributed to his poor performance in 2008 also; maybe he was hurt then and didn't tell anyone.
Silva has had, since 2004 when he became a rotation starter for the Twins, at least three seasons where his performance would have made him a capable fifth starter for most teams. In 2005, in 27 starts, he put up an ERA+ of 126 and a 1.17 WHIP. In 2007, the year that got him the four-year deal from the Mariners in free agency, he had a 102 ERA+ and 1.31 WHIP; those numbers, along with a 4.19 ERA, aren't too different from what the Cubs got from Jason Marquis in 2007 and 2008.
Can Silva do this again? The answer is, we simply do not know until we see him pitch. The Cubs claim they have good reports on him from Venezuela:
The Cubs have had scouts watching Silva in Venezuela. He has appeared in four games, striking out two and walking three over nine innings. The club will send its strength and conditioning staff down there to get Silva on a program. The right-hander did report to camp this year 30 pounds lighter.
"We'll do everything we can to get him as close to back where he was a few years ago," Hendry said.
There's no doubt that he needs to lose weight -- just look at the photo at the top of this post, which was taken April 14, 2009. Get the guy in shape, bring him to camp, and see what he can do. There were some here who thought the Cubs should just release Milton Bradley and eat the $21 million on his deal. If Silva really can't pitch any more, he could be released -- but the Cubs would only eat $15 million. Even trading for Pat Burrell would have made the Cubs eat $13 million (because the Rays weren't likely going to take any of Bradley's 2011 salary), and Burrell would have been a very expensive pinch-hitter.
At his best, Silva was a decent ground-ball pitcher who didn't walk anyone. There have been pitchers like him who have come from the AL to the NL and had success -- Bronson Arroyo, for one, or even Glendon Rusch, who had one decent year for the Cubs (2004) as a long reliever/spot starter. There were some links passed around here yesterday -- helpfully combined by Harry Pavlidis -- that indicate that Silva is a very intense player who has on occasion called out his teammates in public for not performing. Clearly, this isn't a good thing, and the only thing I can hope for is that the Cubs clear the air on this right away.
Again, this is obviously not a player you would have chosen to add to your team in a perfect world. The Milton Bradley situation was about as far from "perfect world" as you could get. The $6 million in salary relief, we hope, will allow Jim Hendry to add some help in CF (hey, how about a Ryan Church/Reed Johnson platoon?), or another starting pitcher (paging Joel Pineiro!), or a reliever like Matt Capps.
About Bradley, this portion of Paul Sullivan's article sums him up:
Bradley referred to himself as a "quiet" guy, and said people who criticize him or athletes in general are trying to make names for themselves.
"Pretty much for me, anybody deep down on the inside, looking out or looking in, you understand how PR works and media works, and how people are promoted, and how you have a bad guy and you can have a good guy," he said. "And that's just the way it is. And so I'm portrayed as however I am. It just adds to the mystique, I guess."
Yep, Milton, sure. It's always everyone's fault but yours. Bruce Miles calls you "unrepentant" and I am 100% agreed. For me, this statement by Ryan Dempster sums up the Bradley "era" in Chicago:
"It's unfortunate," Cubs pitcher Ryan Dempster said in September after Bradley was suspended. "At the end of the day, he was provided a great opportunity to come over here and be a part of a really great organization with a lot of really good guys, and it just didn't seem to make him happy, anything."
Somehow, I doubt he'll be happy in Seattle, either, but for now, I'm going to put the pitchforks down and reserve judgment till I see what else Hendry does this offseason. Let's the rest of us try to do that, too. Finally, don't forget to vote in the poll I posted on the right sidebar, if you haven't already, about this deal.
3 recs | 495 comments
Even if Silva turns into a serviceable #5 starter
many on BCB will chastise him. Throughout Marquis time on the Cubs, many on BCB demanded the consistency of a #1 starter. It seems many at BCB expect the Cubs to roll out 5, #1 starters daily. This is a tough (and unrealistic) crowd to please.
LAcarl519 - December 19, 2009
Great post.
Rec’d.
cubswynn - December 19, 2009
Agree pretty much
but part of the backlash against Marquis was that Hendry didn’t exactly pay him like a #5 starter.
paulucla - December 19, 2009
Right.
The difference here is that the Cubs had little choice in taking Silva. He, too, will make much more than a #5 starter should. However, if he can even pitch at his 2007 level, it will be worth the deal.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Oh absolutely
If Silva is a competent (but overpaid) #5 starter this is a hugely positive move by Hendry that limits the damage of the disastrous Bradley signing. The chances of that are slim, however, and I worry a lot about Hendry/Lou stubbornly sticking with a clearly washed up Silva too long while other capable #5s like Marshall languish in an underused bullpen role.
paulucla - December 19, 2009
That's a risk, true.
All we can do is hope Silva gets in shape and can be at least competent.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Yes, and if he doesn't
we still saved $6 million over just releasing Bradley, right?
paulucla - December 19, 2009
Correct!
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
So no reason to get worked up
over Silva unless we feel he gets mishandled. Everyone should just pretend that we somehow released Bradley for $6m less then he was owed and that Silva was invited to training camp for free to see if he has anything in the tank.
paulucla - December 19, 2009
LOL
I looked through Silva’s game logs for 2009. He made six starts in April & May before going on the DL. One start was good, two were mediocre, three were bad (including the last two, after which he went on the DL). He made two relief appearances in September, neither one was good.
I think we can write off Silva’s 2009 season to injury. He may also have been hurt in 2008 — there was talk of back problems then, which may have led to his injury in 2009.
He needs to lose weight and get in shape. If that happens, I believe he can pitch at his 2007 level, maybe even a little better, switching leagues.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Maybe, maybe not
but the bottom line is that there is no downside for the Cubs given they saved $6m over releasing Bradley outright.
paulucla - December 19, 2009
Correct!
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
I think Hendry's days are numbered regardless
The Rickett’s appear to be quiet, clinical and smart business leaders who seek out and put in place highly competent managers. Hendry coming out and admitting error and responsibility put himself on the proverbial plank and even if the Cubs win the WS long term there are questions. Now if Hendry was ordered to sign Bradley by higher ups (unlikely) he still is on the hook. Now he is in a reclamation effort, if Silva wins the Cy Young (slim and none) he might be celebrated, but if Silva is reclaimed as a competent 5th starter type (see Marquis’s record) regardless of cost, he has time, if he gets a $6M man who is the second coming in CF, he gets more time, but my guess is that Rickett’s will be making substantive changes.
Ivy Walls - December 19, 2009
Let's say you and Al are right - I don't claim any insight into Ricketts' plans and desires - but assuming you're both right
the big problem is that the replacement GM is not likely to be as good as Hendry on the whole. Teams have taken people out of smart organizations – KC from Atlanta, AZ from Boston, and those GMs aren’t looking very good. The opportunity to get a certainly better GM left when Jocketty went to Cinci.
DGU - December 19, 2009
i think
there’s just as much assumption that we couldn’t do better than there is that we could do better
hendry’s middle of the road as a GM, assuming we could or couldn’t get anyone better is a crapshoot
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
Correct.
I think Hendry’s future is much more dependent on whether the Cubs get back to the playoffs. If they do, he’ll be there at least through the rest of his contract (2012).
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Agreed
2010 is make or break for JH. If the Cubs make the playoffs, he’ll be back. If they don’t, he’ll be gone.
That puts the Hendry haters in a box. Do they hope the Cubs tank in 2010, just so he departs? If so, that’s a pretty stupid notion.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
I again agree with you
I hope they win. BUT, if they start slow I hope they pull the plug and let someone else handle the mid season moves. If he isn’t going to be there next year, let the new guy start.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
What 'new guy'
are you going to get midseason who’s worth a dang, TJ? Probably nobody.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
A New GM
If a new GM is coming anyways, let him start as early as possible.
A better thing would be the Cubs in 1st place and it is a moot point.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
Of course
but all you’re going to get at midseason, most likely, is an interim fill-in until the season is over.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
I guess if they knew who was going to be the next GM for the long term it would work.
Just like the manager. If it comes down to Lou quiting or getting fired. Would you go with an interim or go straight to Sandberg, If that is the direction they are going anyway.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
Go straight to Sandberg
and I’m going straight out the door.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
It seems to be what they are working up to.
Just wondering,,,why the concern for Sandberg??? I have my own doubts, but hope he will come through.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
Seen him manage for two years down here
and he showed me very little. He did get thrown out of games a lot, so maybe he’s got “fire.” A lot of Chicago fans (not just Cubs fans) think fire equates with victory, but I disagree.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
What is it that you hoped he would "show" you?
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
An ability to do something
other than get tossed from games … :)
Not Bruce Froemming - December 20, 2009
How do you know he didn't?
Evaluating a minor league manager is different from evaluating a major league manager, since the purpose of manging minor league teams is not necessarily just winning and losing.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
Very true, Al
Maybe Ryno has a skill set that’s good for the minors but not for the majors. Either way, if the Cubs’ mission is to win a World Series ASAP, I’m not sure Ryno is the guy who can get it done.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 20, 2009
You could have said that about Joe Girardi a year ago, too.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
Not really
Girardi had a passel of rings in his career. He also showed with the Marlins that he had the potential.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 20, 2009
Getting a ring as a player...
… doesn’t necessarily make you a good manager.
Plus, Girardi did a crappy job with the Marlins.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
crappy enough to win Manager of the Year
Ok, so he finished 4th, and granted, this was the writers doing the voting and perhaps they’re not always the best judge of what makes a good manager.
But still – he obviously did well enough to be recognized as being the best in the NL in 2006.
ballhawk - December 20, 2009
He did?
As ballhawk notes below, it was pretty widely acknowledged Girardi did a good job with the Marlins. He and Loria, obviously, didn’t see eye to eye.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 20, 2009
Girardi was held responsible...
… for Josh Johnson’s injury after he put him back in a game following a long rain delay.
Al Yellon - December 21, 2009
if that's the reason Loria used for firing him...
…ok, fine. Owner’s prerogative.
But to judge Girardi’s whole body of work on one incident seems a bit extreme to me.
ballhawk - December 21, 2009
Thank You!!!!!!!
I am sick and tired of people equating fire and winning.
A good manager can be quiet and reserved. It is the Mike Ditka mentality. It gets very old…….
timeforachange2009 - December 20, 2009
That's why some of the petty criticisms of Lou
last season, like he looks asleep on the bench, drove me crazy. Tom Kelly and Cito Gaston on the bench looked like they were auditioning for the lead role in “Weekend At Bernie’s,” but they got the job done.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 20, 2009
The weird part is...
… that the “asleep on the bench” Lou we saw in 2009, was far different from the Lou we saw in 2007 and 2008.
We need the earlier guy back.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
Throwing around bases and arguing with umps
doesn’t do much for me, Al.
Like I said above, Chicago fans often equate “fire” with success. Not true.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 20, 2009
That's not why I thought Lou did a good job.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
C'mon NBF
Anybody would be better than Hendry!
DGU - December 19, 2009
anyone who would root for the Cubs to fail in 2010
…so Hendry gets fired, isnt a Cubs fan.
JB 23 - December 19, 2009
But that doesn't mean they don't post at BCB
It’s fairly clear where some people stand.
DGU - December 19, 2009
Gooooooo000000OOOOO.....
Royals!
Oh….Wait. :)
CubsWin!Oregon - December 19, 2009
Rec'd +1000
No one should want that. – TL
timlacy - December 20, 2009
that's asinine
look, i’m pessimistic on the immediate outlook of the Cubs, but i’m making that as what i believe is an objective analysis of where we are
every game the cubs play i root for them with all my heart. I would guess most critical Cubs fans feel the same way. They’d rather be wrong and have the Cubs be good than be right.
This doesn’t mean we can’t be objective in assessing the state of the team and subjective in rooting for it
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
Of the many
newly minted GMs, I can only think of one who is doing better than middle of the road and several who are very poor. Basically, your argument is that good GMs are out there and it’s a 50/50 proposition that we manage to pull one out of the pool, basically assuming that experience doesn’t have a part to play.
DGU - December 19, 2009
the majority of new gms
you’re reference took very difficult jobs
the Cubs job would be an extremely appealing one and not only one you could get the best available candidates to compete for but you might get GM candidates who aren’t considered available interested
huge payroll, new owner, fan base that would worship you if you brought a championship, improving farm system with Tim Wilken at the helm of drafts
it might be the most coveted position in all of baseball if open
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
And yet all of that
might not stop our new GM from trading a cost-controlled setup man for Mike Jacobs. Fire Hendry now, so we can get this new blood – straight out smart organization, Atlanta!
DGU - December 19, 2009
anecdotal evidence
is your friend apparently, you lean on it very heavily and often ignore the message directly above
do you disagree the Cubs might be a more coveted job than the Royals? And we might be able to get current good GM’s even to be interested?
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
LOL
The Cubs job just might be the hardest GM job in the league. All the insane fans who want results instantaneously or a month earlier. The crushing weight of history of failure up until the Hendry era. The only job that comes even close to the ginormous pressure Hendry has would be the Yankees’ job.
BTW, almost as many people here want to toss out Wilken along with Hendry. And any new GM will most likely bring his own man anyways.
WayneCampbell08 - December 22, 2009
Thats
not been the room sentiment on the scouting director in the last four months but it could be a new Gm’S thought.
Slamdog - December 22, 2009
people are down on Wilken?
huh… i didn’t realize that
i thought he’s stocked the system pretty well in limited time
DartmouthCubsFan - December 22, 2009
here's where i disagree
once this core falls and falls hard, it will be a recognized rebuilding process to eliminate big contract commitments and make your own statements with the big salaries coming off the books
i think a GM would want that opportunity with most of the slate wiped clean, which is what i think happens after 2010
DartmouthCubsFan - December 22, 2009
That'd be the...
…Mariners guy, I suppose.
timlacy - December 20, 2009
The downside Al.....
is that we are throwing away 15-17 MILLION DOLLARS!!!!!
This team has holes! What would that money buy them?
This situation is indefensible.
I know you are trying to remain positive BUT even you have to admit this is a colossal fuck up on Hendry’s part.
I believe the Cubs will compete for the title this year. The world is not coming to an end. As a fan of this club I want to win. IMHO the Bradley trade has not brought us closer to that goal. I hope Hendry proves me wrong. I will not hold my breath…….
timeforachange2009 - December 19, 2009
That's the downside of the original Bradley deal, not the Silva deal
We weren’t going to be able to fill those holes with any deal involving Bradley.
Arbusto - December 19, 2009
That is the point I was trying to make.........
Why anyone is happy/ ok with this is beyond me.
IMHO, I would have rather kept Bradley on the roster.
He is (likely) a much more valuable piece than anything Hendry will pick up via FA.
Yes we got rid of a “problem”. We also just got weaker.
timeforachange2009 - December 19, 2009
There is SOME downside
It’s just not in the move that happened yesterday.
elgato - December 19, 2009
The problem......
is that this should never have happened.
Hendry blew the signing (too many years) by bidding against himself.
Think about what type of a player could have been had by Hendry? It is sad.
Yes we “saved” 4 or 6 million dollars. Yay! Give him a cookie.
I believe Hendry should be fired. I do not trust him to clean up this mess.
timeforachange2009 - December 19, 2009
Well...
the Marquis contract really ended up being within line of other contracts like Suppan’s, Silva’s, etc. – guys whose value was supposed to be in the innings they ate more than the way they ate them. I think people tend to underrate what you have to pay to get mediocrity from free agents (something that’s about to be relevant, I think, when we get a new CF). Marquis was better than most of the crop of free agents with similar deals, but he wasn’t as good as what our farm had developed at the end of his contract, because at those prices, you really prefer to get the same production from youth with more upside.
DGU - December 19, 2009
the whole point is
you shouldn’t pay for mediocrity in FA, its a losing battle because you’re basically hoping to break even from a cost-value standpoint
the whole point is we’ve been trying to do this for years and its a big part of the reason we haven’t won a world series. FA should only be used to pay the best players who are in their prime and occasionally bargain-shopping for depth
it shouldn’t be relied upon, that’s the failed logic the Cubs have used and the Cubs fans seem to crave
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
No one craves
a Marquis-Byrd-Jones signing, but when you have $$$ you can do this as Boston has done with the SS position, as the Phillies have done at 3B, as the Yankees have done in their rotation…
DGU - December 19, 2009
and which of those signings made
by the yankees, phils, red sox have been positive?
very few of them
those teams have won in spite of those signings because they have incredible young talent at key positions not making 15-18+ million a year (or they’re the yankees and have no real limit in payroll), guys like Pedroia, Lester, Hamels, Utley, Victorino, etc
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
Your thinking is too atomistic.
Should the Red Sox have gone with their equivelan of Andres Blanco? Should the Yankees have just pushed Joba to fill those innings? When you have the big stack at the poker table, the smart overall strategy takes risks that aren’t as “smart” from an individual hand streategy to lean on the short stacks.
DGU - December 19, 2009
don't disagree
you’re asking us to take risks of a big stack when we’re a middling stack
just to use your analogy
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
So
How much should you pay a #5 starter? A couple thousand dollars and a year supply of dental floss? Do you even know how much they paid him?
WayneCampbell08 - December 22, 2009
No....if he posts an 8.06 ERA like last year, sure he deserves to be chastised
And I’m pretty sure only reasonable and logical fans realized how servicable Marquis was to this team. I’d take Marquis over Silva any day, though..
Chanman25 - December 19, 2009
does anybody else wonder ...
how Silva got a $12 million a year contract after going 13-14?
elgato - December 19, 2009
just like Marquis got one after that not so great year
quality starting pitching is always needed and there will be some team that offers a bloated contract to get it
Chanman25 - December 19, 2009
True.
Marquis posted an ERA over 6 the year before the Cubs signed him.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
I still think Marquis is much better than Silva though..
Chanman25 - December 19, 2009
Oh, obviously!
And he was making far less money. Hence my point.
elgato - December 19, 2009
Yes, he is.
But at his best, Silva could produce like Marquis — again, I refer you to his 2007 season.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
I still think Marshall would be a better starter though
Chanman25 - December 19, 2009
Gorzo will be a much better starter than Marshall
elgato - December 19, 2009
Marshall might be.
But the Cubs seem intent on making him a reliever. I’ll point you to the Cubs’ depth chart, which doesn’t have Sean among the team’s top 7 starters.
To me, Marshall was similar to Harden, in the sense that he failed to go deep into games, taxing the bullpen too much.
Bill Potter - December 19, 2009
Yeah, you are right
He had quality starts in something like 35-40 % of his starts. I would say that he never made it deep. Do some research before you start bashing people. The problem with Marshall was he gave up a run or two early, but almost always settled down.
He did have some bad (very few) starts though.
Don't Fear the Reaper - December 19, 2009
I big part of that though is he never got fully stretched out as a starter
since he was juggled between roles so often.
Poloplaya14 - December 19, 2009
Question
How the hell was he bashing Marshall? 35 QS% is nothing to be proud of. Do you even know what the average QS% is? Trey never said that he “never made it deep”. Read a post before you start bashing people for statements they never made.
WayneCampbell08 - December 22, 2009
I'd very much...
…like to see Marshall make 30 starts this season.
timlacy - December 20, 2009
But $!2 million?
I can see why Bill Bavasi got canned.
elgato - December 19, 2009
If only Silva was the only reason....
Fortunately, Bill Bavasi will be available to interview when we next look for a GM…
DGU - December 19, 2009
He got that contract
Because Bill Bavasi is even worse at this than Hendry. The Mariners have spent a lot of time and money trying to clean up his mess since he was given the boot.
shifafaontheside - December 19, 2009
That
would be called a Bavasi! Worse contracts like the one that was given to Vernon Wells would be called a Ricciardi, similar to hitting under 200 would be called a Mendoza.
Slamdog - December 20, 2009
We have been waiting over 100 years.
Yes, we’re getting impatient.
10 14 23 26 - December 19, 2009
YOU personally?
Wow. Congratulations on still being able to type.
Seeing as how I doubt you’re anywhere close to 100 years old, I don’t see how the 100 year thing has any relevance to you, me or anyone else here. This current version of the Cubs can only be held accountable since Hendry’s been in charge, and in and of itself, Hendry’s delivered more post seasons than anyone else, certainly in your lifetime as well as mine (I’m 51).
BeerCub - December 19, 2009
I make this point often
Unless you’ve been here to see all 100 years, you can’t use that as an excuse. You’re no different than, say, a Rangers fan.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
Astros
would have worked or Seattle or Montreal/Puerto Rico/Washington.
Slamdog - December 20, 2009
very very very very very true
one very for each starter. I was in Marquis corner as he did exatly what was expected, and being over paid was not his fault.
Cubbie-Tim - December 19, 2009
I had my moments with Marquis
but he turned out much better than I expected. Certainly better than, say, Shawn Estes.
And I don’t care what Marquis was paid.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
Marquis got what he could as a free agent. That Hendry was willing to give him that much is the issue.
I would have taken the offer as well.
Marquis was really above average as a back of the rotation starter.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
you can take anything and make it a negative on JH
and it is getting old fast, can you try something new?
Cubbie-Tim - December 19, 2009
JH bid vs himself there just like with Bradley.
Is what I am saying. I don’t blame Marquis for taking the money and thought he did a decent job.
He sure was a much better pitcher than Vizcaino this year. Didn’t they trade him to help pay for the loser Bradley? I guess in your little world that was a good move by JH. Nice try…
I like you following my posts around. You always crack me up!
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
There were other teams that were interested in Bradley.
The Rays for instance. It’s possible that the Cubs were clear frontrunners, but there seems to be a meme forming that the Cubs could’ve given Bradley whatever they wanted without fear of competition. And that simply isn’t true.
CubsWin!Oregon - December 19, 2009
But...
… I don’t think anyone else was offering three years.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
yeah, that could be true.
Obviously I wasn’t privy to the negotiating details (or if anyone outside the negotations was? I don’t remember what the reported offers were). But it’s possible that there were offers for 2 years, and the Cubs added a third as a further enticement. I just remember reading that several teams were interested, and that the Rays had more than passing interest.
All in all, I guess my point is that I don’t believe it’s accurate to say that with regard to Bradley we were just bidding against ourselves. (I’m not saying I would’ve offered Bradley the contract the Cubs did; just that it seems likely to me that there were reasons for why it was offered as it was beyond simply that Hendry had an irrational man-crush and thinks he swims in money like Scrooge McDuck)
CubsWin!Oregon - December 19, 2009
This idea that JH is bidding against himself is just absurd anyway
- even when you’re bidding against yourself, you don’t always know it. Agents aren’t incompetent – at least not all of them are. If there’s a player you think fits perfectly and you have a big payroll, it makes sense to bid aggressively.
DGU - December 19, 2009
exactly
for example, Boras said the Granderson trade made Johnny Damon more important for NYY to resign.
Cubbie-Tim - December 20, 2009
Not sure how accurate this is
Nationals
Villeslgr - December 22, 2009
Marquis was not a bad signing. He was not an ace
nor was he paid to be one.
You seem to know all about every move of JH and can tell us how he botched them all. Do you have insight that we are not aware of? Do you have some obsession with JH and his moves that is on the verge of “single white female” coming to life?
I am replying to your posts, because they are on a board which I post on. I am not searching out your posts, they just are so outlandish and easy to point out the inaccuracies of your “fiction world” that I post with truths in response to you, instead of allow the flooding of incorrect information to continue.
Cubbie-Tim - December 20, 2009
Marquis was never supposed to be a #5
Not at 3 yr and $21 million.
Itchy - December 20, 2009
Nice
Revisionist history dude.
WayneCampbell08 - December 22, 2009
I still can't believe...
That Hendry couldn’t have signed Bradley for a 1-year, incentive-laden deal with an option for a 2nd year. He bid against himself, there was no other team out there willing to go 3 years on him.
In the end, I don’t care about Carlos Silva. If he helps the team and is a serviceable 5th starter, that’s fine. If he sucks, then release him and move on with the additional few million we saved. Let’s focus on the real issues with the 2010 team: getting Soriano and Soto back on track, keeping Aramis healthy, getting Lilly healthy, making sure Marmol can close and not walk the world, and figuring out CF.
CubsBullsBears - December 19, 2009
I thik for sure we could have gotten with a two year deal
which would have made trading him this winter infinitely easier
DC Cubbie - December 19, 2009
I've talked about this before
Hendry’s bidding against himself could probably be his undoing.
elgato - December 19, 2009
Bradley wouldn't be the first time either...
Soriano, Marquis, MILES!
CubsBullsBears - December 19, 2009
Soriano had other offers.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
The major offer was reportedly from the Phillies...
But only 6 years max IIRC.
CubsBullsBears - December 19, 2009
I believe that's correct, although...
… ISTR the Angels were offering seven.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
its the little stuff at contracts hendry is really bad at as well
people don’t understand the two worst things about Hendry’s deals
1) he gives out an inordinate amount of NTC’s
2) he gives PLAYER OPTIONS and easily met incentive options that gives the player more value in the contract than the organization
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
He gives out NTCs
because, frequently, those players take LESS money to play for the Cubs (Ramirez foremost among them) than they could have had elsewhere.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
Ramirez's NTC was a good idea
Shark’s is indefensible
Nunyabidness - December 19, 2009
I'll agree on that
Shark has done nothing to deserve an NTC. But I guess since football always was an option for him, maybe that made some sense.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
We have no idea what it cost to woo him away
from not just football period, but also trying to be a two-sport athlete – and if Samardzija had tried to be a two-sport athlete, we know he’d be a bust and in football – he’s needed all this time to develop extra pitches. It’s funny that we have people crying over contracts to ML relievers, wishing we’d pour every available dollar into farm players, then complaining that we took a 10 M risk on a prospect in Jeff Samardzija who could have become a high ceiling pitcher. When you pour money into high ceiling prospects, be ready for busts.
DGU - December 19, 2009
Yeah, Deion Sanders redux
His on-field effort so far has not been worthy of an NTC, but if that’s what it took to keep him away from the NFL, so be it.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
i think the funny thing
is how often people on this board take two sentiments made by different groups of people and then apply them to one group as if the group is making diametrically opposed comments
i’ve never complained about the Samardzija contract, not once.
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
You
really can count the Shark out, well at least for the 2010 season and maybe a bit beyond.
Slamdog - December 20, 2009
Shark had the leverage at the time....
…He would have been a 1st round pick in the NFL. He wanted to be a Cub and stay a Cub so he would have been foolish not to ask for a NTC
JB 23 - December 19, 2009
ahem
Soriano?
Zambrano?
Fukudome?
Lilly??
3 of those guys were pure FA’s who took market money not below market money and Zambrano was a re-sign who took a market contract 5-90
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
Isn't Z a 10-5 guy this year anyway?
Lilly’s clause is limited.
Dome took a lesser amount of $$$.
DGU - December 19, 2009
I'm ready to move on...
2009 is almost over and spring training is around the corner. Let’s hope for a good 2010.
brook - December 19, 2009 via mobile
+1
Well said.
chilango2 - December 19, 2009
I for one...........
Choose to be encouraged by his stats vs. NL teams over the course of his career. Bradley is gone. We can choose to support Silva and root for him to have a positive impact on the staff, or, talk about how terrible of a trade this is for the Cubs.
jballgame - December 19, 2009
I can recognize that this is a trade with VERY low upside for the Cubs and still hope that somehow, Silva turns out to be barely competent.
drewishdrewid - December 19, 2009
+1
Cubbie-Tim - December 20, 2009
FWIW
I honestly think he’ll have a monster year with Seattle, or close to a monster year anyway. He’s now two years removed from surgery, he’s in a lower profile market, there won’t be as much pressure on him with the M’s because expectations aren’t as high as they would be for the Cubs, he could play in the outfield or as a DH, and he has a lot of people to shut up. There are a ton of motivating factors for him, and if he can use that to boost his talent up a notch, I think he’ll help the M’s challenge the Angels.
And, if he just does nothing, he may be the biggest baby and laziest player of the modern era.
Craig in South Bend - December 19, 2009
I look forward to the inevitable "A statistical breakdown of where this team would be if we had MB's production" fanposts come say, late July.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
This may be me being incredibly naive
but I don’t think anyone is going to do that considering the difference in the markets, IF MB does actually perform well.
Craig in South Bend - December 19, 2009
I think and hope you're right
I don’t think anyone would say that any success MB has in Seattle would have been replicated, or close, in Chicago.
elgato - December 19, 2009
it will happen sadly
Cubbie-Tim - December 19, 2009
Silva isn't nothing.
And we should look at this as the Cubs limiting the damage of the Bradley contract…
Bradley was not going to play for the Cubs…and had $21 left on his contract. Now that mistake will only cost the Cubs $16 ($11.5 million * 2 years + $2 million buy out – $9 million from Seattle) for a player the will probably not play for them.
I can’t see how this is not an improvement. Bradley was never going to play for the Cubs again…especially after he public ripped on the organization in September.
Putting Pat Burrell on this team would have meant that the Cubs would have had to send money to TB and the Cubs would be stuck with 2 right fielders and still need a center fielder. That would have been financially much worse unless they were somehow able to unload Fukudome as well. ($13 million for Fukudome + $9 for Burrell + $5 to $7 million of Bradley’s contract…all for right field before we even had a center fielder!)
The Cubs are better off right now.
doc_blume - December 19, 2009
"...and had $21 left on his contract"
Geez, the Cubs were so cheap, they weren’t willing to pay the $21 to get rid of Bradley. =P
But yeah, after all the commotion yesterday, I do believe this might benefit the Cubs one way or another. Worst case scenario, he sucks, and we just release him. And we still save money. So, yeah.
Hopefully we use this money for a good CF…if not, I’d really like Joel Piniero. :D
Azul Cachorro - December 19, 2009
Pineiro sounds like a good idea right now
IIRC he has a great groundball to flyball ratio that would fit well in Wrigley.
Obviously CF help is needed as well. Perhaps there’s wiggle room for Piniero and Reed Johnson to sign on. Cubs fan’s don’t seem happy with this trade but signing a fan favorite like Johnson can help change the mood a little.
However going back to pitching, I think we need one more guy. Lilly will be out in April and if I believe he always has slow starts to the season (2009 might have been good I don’t remember).
ak123 - December 19, 2009
won't happen
The Cubs, even before Silva, have a lot of options for the back end of the rotation. I’m a big Gorzo fan and think he could come up huge for us next year.
Beyond that, the Cubs need to spend the money they have on things other than the rotation.
elgato - December 19, 2009
Which is why it's good that they got $6 million in salary relief in the deal.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Perhaps it's not going to be used right now
6 Million in flexibility can go a long way during the trade deadline to take on a contract…
ak123 - December 19, 2009
Also true.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Which I'd prefer
There are probably a few health question marks for Lilly and even Zambrano. If an ace calibre pitcher is on the market and Cubs will eat a lot of his salary, it’s probably a better investment.
Or an actual replacement when Soriano gets injured this year for LF.
ak123 - December 19, 2009
I would much rather have the flexibility
then to just spend money now because we have it
Villeslgr - December 19, 2009
Agree.
I would almost rather the Cubs take the PR “hit” of just re-signing Reed to platoon with Fuld and otherwise standing pat. See what that roster can do and then use some of that payroll flexibility to make changes where needed.
fsuapollo - December 19, 2009
It isn't a PR hit
Reed, well above average in left, is well below average in center. And Fuld hits lefties as well as he hits righties (minors and majors). A wash on offense and a hit on defense would be what happens with Reed going out there instead of Fuld against southpaws. And Johnson will take up a good chunk of that Seattle money, for a part timer? Pass.
Harry Pavlidis - December 20, 2009
Depends on how much Johnson wants.
At the right price, I’d still take him back.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
As a PR "hit"
I meant that Cubs fans seem a little restless. So if the off-season changes only amount to spare parts in return for Fox/Miles & Heilman, re-signing Reed (I would do only a 1 year $1.75M deal or more incentive laden deal), and getting Silva for MB… that might not sit well. I wouldn’t have an issue with it.
fsuapollo - December 20, 2009
it's not six mill
all at once. It’s two million now, and the other 4 million spread over the next two years, I think.
drewishdrewid - December 19, 2009
agreed
That’s what makes the deal tolerable. But Hendry won’t use the money on Pineiro.
elgato - December 19, 2009
Based on the rumors of what Pineiro is seeking (3-4 years)
I’d pass.
Bill Potter - December 19, 2009
I'd pass on a deal that long for him, too.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
I think I'd rather see the money being used to fix CF
Whether that’s Marlon Byrd (on a 2-year deal) or setting up a platoon with Reed Johnson.
With Zambrano, Dempster, Gorzelanny, Wells, Samardzija, Lilly (when healthy) and Silva, the Cubs have 7 guys they can run out to start (before any other scrap heap pickups or Spring Training surprises).
Bill Potter - December 19, 2009
thoughts from a far away Cubs Fan
Well this morning about 6 in Morning, My LT comes in the tent and says hey they traded Bradley, he is a Phillies fan(His off season has been a little more exciting than mine to this point). So I wake up to find out that Bradley is traded for Silva and some cash. Well I was one of the many that wanted Bradley gone and believed that he was just a bad fit for this club. Sure Silva isn’t going to replace Harden and might have some trouble getting on the roster, but we got some money and we are pretty much back to the roster before the 2008-09 off season started. Got rid of MIles and Bradley. Sure we don’t have Dero(Baker seeming to take his spot as a super-sub) Harden will be hard to replace, but it should take less of a toll on the bullpen with him gone. The off season isn’t really been the best, but they still pay the games and it doesn’t matter what is on the paper. or the so called best team with the best players. It is still a team game. On a side note for someone who is deployed you all are pretty funny. thanks for the laughs, and few of us maybe need a break. 107 days to opening day, hope to be home by the end of May. Happy Holidays for a remote location in Iraq.
deployedcubfan - December 19, 2009
thanks for your service!
…Happy Holidays to you deployedcubfan and all of our Americans serving
JB 23 - December 19, 2009
turn it green to thank deployedcubfan!
digitalbenjamin - December 19, 2009
green is a good color
Cubbie-Tim - December 19, 2009
Damn right!
GO GREEN! GO WHITE!
Zeke - December 19, 2009
not that green lol
Cubbie-Tim - December 20, 2009
We were green before it was fashionable! ;)
Zeke - December 20, 2009
Thank you for serving!
My cousin is stationed at Al Udeid in Qatar… a few days ago he sent us a photo of a spider he found next to his boot one morning. The spider was literally longer than his size 11. Effing incredible some of the things you guys see and deal with over there.
Be safe, deployedcubfan.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
Thank you for the support
I am pretty lucky considering where I am. I have a pretty good access to the internet so about Dinner time I get to read Al’s new post of the day. Which as of late has been some pretty good Dinner Theater.
deployedcubfan - December 19, 2009
My cousin is pretty happy as well, all things considered.
I guess its like 120 degrees on base… he is only allowed to spend 20 minutes outside (he works on the electronic systems in fighter jets) before he’s required to come back in for something like 40 minutes. That allows a LOT of downtime for him as well. He says he’s better in touch with his friends and family now that he’s on the other side of the world, simply due to having 2/3rds of his time dedicated to required cooling and rest!
He’s a Rangers fan, though, so he doesn’t have the wonder that is BCB to kill time with.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
I am thankful
For the this site and all the people on it. It helps to pass the time.
The usual suspects you know who you are, a special thanks goes out to you.
deployedcubfan - December 19, 2009
Thanks for serving our country.
Safe and happy holidays to you.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Thank you Al
You sure help make the days go by a little faster.
deployedcubfan - December 19, 2009
Just joking, thanks for your service and Happy Holidays!
Villeslgr - December 19, 2009
Well I have to say that alot of you are here to amuse everyone here.
and I thank you for that.
deployedcubfan - December 19, 2009
Be careful out there.
Come back safe and here’s hoping for a good 2010 in Wrigley.
MN exile - December 19, 2009
I sure hope so.
Went to one game last year. Late in the season against the Padres at PETCO. I think that we were going through a bad stretch at the time, but we won the game and it was my Wife’s first game(not a big sports fan) and my son’s first game. I good memory for my family. I hope to be able to make the trip to Wrigley this year. Family is in Des Moines.
deployedcubfan - December 19, 2009
Thank you for your service
Happy Holidays and come home safe
Shanghai Badger - December 19, 2009
And with people like you on our team, we all win! Thanks for putting so much on the line for us, deployedcubsfan. Stay safe, and you’re in our prayers.
Goodie1969 - December 19, 2009
What he said...
BigJohnAZ - December 19, 2009
Thank you for your service.
Keep safe and have a safe journey home in May. Happy Holidays!
sue369 - December 19, 2009
Thank you as well!
KNow you are appreciated for what you do and like others have said, come home safe! Merry Christmas!
airweino - December 19, 2009
Hope you guys and gals have a good Holidayand stay safe over there....
…thanks for all you do. and keep “your thoughts from that far away” place coming….Go Cubs
cooliogirl47 - December 19, 2009
I have my doubts that Silva pitches much
beyond Ted Lilly’s return. Maybe occasionally from the pen, but knowing Lou, he won’t figure out how to use him, he’ll enter the doghouse, and will be released.
The quote from Hendry doesn’t sound really confident, either:
Alas, there is no magic time machine. I believe it was hidden inside the Gatorade dispenser, and was destroyed by accident. Count your cash saved and move on.
Goodie1969 - December 19, 2009
I don't read Hendry's quote that way.
I read it as “We’re going to try to make this guy better.”
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
No doubt.
Privately, the Cubs may expect that Silva will either be a highly overpaid reliever or someone they cut completely, but until spring training is over, they may as well do all they can to get the most out of Silva. If he’s lost 30 lbs then he’s motivated, and motivation to improve the situation is something we didn’t have with MB.
DGU - December 19, 2009
That's how...
…I read it too. Rothschild may not be Dave Duncan, but he plays a character like him on the Cubs.
timlacy - December 20, 2009
High Risk-High Reward
Has MB been better in the AL? Yep. Is Seattle comparable to market size as the Rangers? Yep. Does Safeco field play to MB’s ability? Yep. So do I think that, for MB, the trade worked out? Yep. MB is a smaller market, less emphasis will be placed on him there. He will be able to work as the DH there, of course this will result in unhappy Marnier fans since this will displace Griffey. For MB, he can talk all the crap he wants but the Cubs did him a favor by trading him to Seattle.
As for Silva, let’s hope it truly was an injury that resulted in his performance in Seattle. Worst case, we have a long relief guy that sits on the end of the bench (ala David Patton) with $6M in salary relief. Best case, we have a #5 pitcher that can eat innings and keep his ERA under 5 with $6M in salary relief. Let’s plan on the worst and hope for the best.
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
Isn't Safeco more of a pitcher's park than either Arlington or Wrigley?
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
You are correct...
But since MB’s game isn’t power but getting on Base, he should be able find more gaps and that should increase his OBP.
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
I've wondered about that
Are there any stats that might back up the theory?
elgato - December 19, 2009
Bradley's lifetime numbers in Safeco Field
.258/.391/.506 in 110 plate appearances; 7 doubles, 5 HR, 17 RBI.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
somewhat similar to his season numbers last year
elgato - December 19, 2009
So...
Real Question then:
Do I have it wrong?
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
Good question.
We won’t know until he plays for them.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Well since I live up in Washington State.
I’ll get to see him often, I’m actually quite interested in how he fairs up here.
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
The Cubs probably did MB a favor
They sent him to the most remote part of the Lower 48. Most of the country has no idea what the Mariners’ score from the previous day was.
If you want to toil in relative obscurity vis-a-vis the rest of the country, Seattle is the perfect place. (Not an insult, because I think it’s a great city.)
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
I'd be curious to know how true that perspective is.
Given where I’m from, Seattle is a pretty central aspect of my sports worldview (even if I loathe most of their teams). As such, I’m not in a good position to judge how much the rest of the nation follows the Northwest. I guess it wouldn’t totally surprise me if the rest of the nation didn’t really follow it all, but I’ve never really thought about it.
And you’re right Seattle (and Portland) are absolutely fantastic cities. :)
CubsWin!Oregon - December 19, 2009
an IM with a friend of mine in Sea
I guess he and other Mariner fans are not exactly excited for Mb’s entrance into Seattle
Cubbie-Tim - December 20, 2009
nope...
you got it right. If he keeps his head on straight, the fans will cheer for them like they did for Jose Guillen. They also don’t dump on you just because you have a bad week or strike out a couple times. If he’s a jerk, they’ll call him on it, but that’s what he’ll have to do. As long as he gets on base, they’ll be happy. Their fans are a lot smarter than Cubs fans… and their organization actually has a plan.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
I would quibble...
with how smart Mariners fans are. I don’t think Cubs fans are particularly erudite either, but Mariner fans have an unusually large number of monumentally homerish fans who seem incapable of objectively understanding baseball. Or at least that’s been my lifetime experience.
And lots of fans are more focused on the (exceptional) garlic fries and Ichi(rolls) than on the actual game.
(I realize of course that this applies to probably every team to an extent. Though some are better than others. Giants fans, for example, always seemed superior to me).
CubsWin!Oregon - December 19, 2009
Yes, the casual Mariner fan base infamously lacks
fire and knows little about the game.
redwolf75 - December 19, 2009
as they should be...
but don’t consider those people the real Mariners fans. Most of them are there on some kind of business or outing or whatever anyway. Mariners fan or not (and i’m sure not one of them) they have a beautiful park that has great food… and i would go there even if there was no baseball going on.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
but take a trip around their blog sites and newspaper blogs, etc… they make us seem really silly by comparison. BCB looks like the stone age after going on Lookout Landing and U.S.S. Mariner. We’re neanderthals… ok… last bad analogy. I’m sure you get it. The garlic fry lovers don’t care who’s at thirdbase or in left field anyway. As long as they have Griffey, they’re good. There’s sure enough of them who know the value of Adrian Beltre and Milton Bradley and Carlos Silva. They know how much they just screwed over the Cubs… again. I’ll be there next year in my Sandberg jersey… but I know I’ll be swamped by M’s fans thanking me for taking Heilman and Silva off their hands.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
Sadly the fans you see on USSMariner/LL are
in the vast minority among the fanbase as a whole.
redwolf75 - December 19, 2009
but a higher percentage than most fan bases.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
I've been lurking over at LL
and it seems most people over there are thrilled to get rid of Silva, not be because he is a bad guy but a bad pitcher. It’s like a mirror here, we are glad to get rid of Bradley, not because he is a bad player but a bad person.
They are calling the trade a salary dump for them! Is their salary less today than it was last week? Sure, but in the long run they spent more money (MB’s $21M + $6M>Silva’s $25M).
There is hope over at LL that MB will be a great hitter and how the clubhouse will control him, mmmm that sounds like something that might have been said here at BCB about this time last year. There is a few posters that are questioning the trade and how long before MB’s becomes destructive.
The interesting thing I found over there is that there seems to be a void as to who is the new bad guy of team. The put a question asking who the new “whipping boy” of the team is. They didn’t put MB as a possible answer, which bodes well for him, but the first time MB goes cold or becomes snarky with the media I have a feeling that MB will get evalate to the position by the fan, let’s hope for MB’s sake that he starts out good and keeps his mouth shut.
Not much angry toward Silva now that he is gone, just glad he is gone.
gaclaudy - December 20, 2009
Bavasi
They’re more angry they had him in the first place… but they’re grateful to have a GM who can fix the previous GMs blunders. We’re going to need that soon.
jameslcrockett - December 20, 2009
yes...
but it’s better for lefties than righties, so Milton will benefit much from that. And since most of Milton’s value is OBP, if he just does that, the team needs that desperately with the collection of hackers they have. Their organization is smart, unlike the Cubs… they value OBP and know what to do with it. Milton also won’t embarass himself in leftfield when he has to play out there twice a week so they can get Griffey in the lineup. This trade is win-win for the Mariners.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
My biggest worry
is that Silva won’t be given a chance. Ironically, it will be by the same people who whined that Bradley wasn’t given a fair chance.
Worf - December 19, 2009
Legit worry.
I’m sure the criticism of those Silva haters will go something like this: “You hate silva because he replaced your boy Bradley!”
I suspect that will be incorrect, in most cases.
The reality will have more to do with the supporters of Bradley being OK with his personality flaws as long as he produced. There is little chance Silva will produce. Those who don’t give him a chance will do so not out of Bradley love, but productive player love.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
That's not irony
That’s the fact that around here the people who liked Bradley the most are the ones who appreciate statistics, and much like his Mariner teammates, statistics are not Carlos Silva’s friends.
Wreckard - December 19, 2009
What's not to like about statistics?
They always get along with their teammates, do not worry about fans and never are insubordinate to their managers.
Real people, on the other hand…
Worf - December 19, 2009
If he keeps his ERA under 5 and doesn't throw his team mates under the bus...
or the fans, He get’s my vote.
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
We shall see on an ERA under 5
Doggie Stalker - December 19, 2009
I think he'll get opportunities in Spring Training
Lou has been fair about evaluating everyone in the Spring. It’s if he has a disasterous start or 7th inning meltdown that we’ll see him get fewer chances.
ak123 - December 19, 2009
Correct.
Note that last spring, Aaron Heilman even got chances to start.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
I don't expect anything from Silva.
If he has anything left it would be nice, but he can be stashed on the DL or Patton deep in the bullpen.
I agree with what Al said above. Hendry should have seen what most saw coming. I was glad to see him admit this yesterday.
Bradley was his usual fun self in his interview. What an ass…..
He may succeed in Seattle where there is less pressure and not so much media. It seems like another San Francisco type area where players like Bradley and Bonds are left alone. You would think he would have the mindset to stick it to the Cubs and have a great year to show them how wrong they were. But I wonder if Bradley has it in him to do this. What will it take this year to set him off? An umpire’s bad call? An idiot saying something really bad in the stands? This will happen on the road all the time. He has burnt alot of bridges along the way. Maybe a pitch coming to close to him will set him off. Who knows with him? What if any media asks him the wrong question?
I will not miss any of this crap and I am guessing most of his teamates and manager will not either.
Goodbye Milton. You were just about everything Cubs fans feared you would be and more.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
It rains 75 percent of the year
Bradley is going to snap and kill a hiker before the season is over.
Worf - December 19, 2009
It only rains 60% of the year here!!!
He may only kill the wildlife before the season is over. :P
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
Because he percieved the racism from some moose.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
It rains more in NYC than Seattle.
redwolf75 - December 19, 2009
And Seattle gets less rain than a lot of others too.
Especially during the baseball season timeframe, I know that Portland receives less rain than 13 cities that currently have MLB teams from April to October. And I believe that Seattle is in a similar position, if I’m not mis-remembering.
Northwest summers are nicer than those in almost any other part of the country.
CubsWin!Oregon - December 19, 2009
I think the issue is that winters are overcast every single ****ing day, along with
much of late fall and early spring.
NW summers though are the best anywhere, I must agree. Every single day is clear, sunny, no humidity, and 65-85 degrees. Mmmm.
redwolf75 - December 19, 2009
The only time I've been in Seattle...
… was in July. It was, as you say, gorgeous. Sunny and about 75 degrees. Nice weather for a retractable roof stadium. Haven’t been there but would love to.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
Washington State in general is one of the most beatiful state...
for about 2.5 months. It only gets hot here for about 2 weeks a year (90-100). It is normally 75-85 degrees in the summer and sunny.
And then….
for 9.5 months you have overcast skies and a constant drizzle. It isn’t a down pour, like you would get in Chicago, but everyday just drizzle.
In the winter time the summer comes up around 7:30 in the morning and sets around 4:30 PM. So you go to work in the dark and come home from work in the dark.
The state it self is nice, alot to do outside and the people are friendly (even though no here can drive a freaking lick) but it so damn laid back here.
I think Bradley laid in the safest place that Major League could put him.
gaclaudy - December 20, 2009
Silva is going to suck.
I just can’t see any way where he comes in and pitches well. It’s like Sean Estes all over again.
As for Bradley, I don’t wish him well. A guy like that, he’s had enough success in his life. He doesn’t deserve success. I hope he flames out and gets cut from the roster.
kanderber - December 19, 2009
I'm pretty sure that when Bradley bitched about negitive cubs fans...
… it was people like you who he had in mind.
Why? Because he didn’t hit 40 home runs? We’ve got a lot of guys with that problem. Because he didn’t get along with Sullivan? How does that affect you?
What a petty thing to say.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
Ironically
Some of those who are extremely critical of Bradley do so to the point to where I wonder if put in his shoes if they too would be little Bradleys.
Villeslgr - December 19, 2009
No...
because he’s a piece of shit, basically. The guy is just a bitter, grumpy a-hole. For a guy who came in here and wore the Cubs uniform, only to wind up trashing the fans, his teammates, his bosses, etc. why would you wish him well? Because it’s the PC thing to do? Sorry, I just don’t think that he deserves any more riches.
kanderber - December 19, 2009
There's a difference between not liking a guy and wishing him ill will
I always tell the kids I work with to make sure they never go down to another person’s level if that person exhibiting bad behavior. Seems some here could use that lesson as well.
Villeslgr - December 19, 2009
* person is exhibiting
Villeslgr - December 19, 2009
I'm not wishing death on him...
By the time his current contract is up, he will have made over 40 million dollars. If he flames out and never plays again, it’s not like he’s going to wind up homeless. I would never wish completely extreme ill will upon someone.
But for a guy who’s paid millions of dollars to play a game? That acts like he does? Yeah, F him. I absolutely don’t wish him well in his future baseball endeavors; why would I?
kanderber - December 19, 2009
Cool.
Sink down to the level of a guy you call a “piece of shit”. Play his game. Get down in the mud and sludge and prove him right! That’ll show him!
There was a dude in the thread yesterday talking about going to seattle to heckle MB. I think he backed down and was instead hoping to get tickets to a Sox game to do it, but none the less… really? This is what you’ve got to do with your time? This is how some of you guys derive enjoyment? You wouldn’t rather invest that time in money in an afternoon at Wrigley instead?
MB is an emotionally unbalanced guy with some demons he should really work out. You might have similar issues, or you might just be a jerk, but either way, spiteful statements like this make you and others like you no better than he is.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
I'm with you here...
… despite our disagreements, I think you & I view this the same way. MB is gone. He’s a Mariner. Let’s move on.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
I don't understand some the people blaming the fans for him being gone.
He dug his own grave.
I am so glad he is gone.
Hendry is a fool for doing the deal in the first place, but considering what the market was, he did a decent job of getting rid of him.
He also got rid of other mistakes like Miles and Heilman. Though the miles one cost us Fox.
On the other hand getting Heilman got us rid of Cedeno……..
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
I'm not sure what this even means
Cedeno’s contract wasn’t guaranteed, so he could have gotten rid of him for free.
Wreckard - December 19, 2009
Ronny
The Mariners were able to turn Ronny Cedeno into some useful players… because they have a competent GM.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
We'll See
WayneCampbell08 - December 22, 2009
hmmm...
we’ll see, what?
jameslcrockett - December 23, 2009
Al...
until we’re not paying Carlos Silva anymore… we’re going to be continually reminded of how sorry we are he ever was a Cub. That’s just reality. I’ll move on when I am a fan of an organization that can make something out of their mistakes. Right now, I’m not.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
They did, at least, save some money on the mistake.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Al...
i could care less about saving a billionaire a couple million. They’ve eroded any confidence they can take that money and do something about it. They said the same thing about going from DeRosa to Miles and Wood to Gregg… how did that work out?
And if Silva takes the mound and sucks, he could eat up some of that money… according to on-field value. No, that wasn’t a fat joke.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
Well, let's see what they do next...
… before saying this was an utter disaster.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Al...
you’re more than welcome to say and do whatever you want. You won’t get that from me. I’m on record saying this was a bad move. Just like I was on record saying Miles and Gregg and Marquis were bad moves last year based off letting them plead poverty to us while padding their wallets off us all the same.
I hope I’m wrong… but I have no reason to believe I am… and you aren’t coming up with anything better than sit on your hands and smile. Being a fan for me has never meant turn my brain off and hope.
One of will be wrong later… and I’ll take odds it’s you.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
I know Silva has been really bad the last two years.
However, he has had at least three major league seasons in which he has been a serviceable #5 starter.
If healthy, I see no reason that he can’t do that again.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
"serviceable #5 starter"
with the lackluster and inconsistent offense and defense (and poor track record with pitcher health)… the Cubs need better than a 50% chance their #5 starter will be serviceable. I’ll go with Marshall or Gorzelanny before I leave it to those odds. At least they’re young and have upside. The upside to Carlos Silva is serviceable and way overpaid. I’ll pass.
The downside is dramatic. I see plenty of reasons why he could be even worse than he was in Seattle.
He’s a horrible fit for Wrigley Field. He’s a pitch-to-contact right hander who can’t get lefties out if his job depended on it. The Cubs are too poor of a defensive team to make use of Carlos Silva, even in a limited situation. Reports say he’s down in Venezuela getting smacked around.
Cut him tomorrow and I’m happy… it will be the first thing they’ve done this winter to improve the team. $6 million is a sure thing and I’ll take it over the small chance he could provide even neutral value in either of the next two years.
The wait and see and hope and pray approach doesn’t work for me.
jameslcrockett - December 20, 2009
We'll See
WayneCampbell08 - December 22, 2009
If that means that Silva will come through
with a complete game shutout in September that helps the Cubs reach the playoffs, I guess it’d be worth it.
Bill Potter - December 19, 2009
In related news, Jim Hendry is mentally ill and a danger to society and himself.
Evidence? Here: “…[N]o one could have predicted how it turned out.”
Some people believe climate change is a lie. Others believe ghosts walk among us. There are still those who believe the Earth is flat.
And Hungry Jim Hendry believes no one could have guessed that the Milton Bradley experience would turn out badly.
Please, please please, Tom Ricketts — fire Jim Hendry!
copingwiththecubs - December 19, 2009
Well, he's right, in a way
Nobody would have thought it was going to be THIS bad.
Not Bruce Froemming - December 19, 2009
Nobody would have thought he would do exactly what he has done his entire career?
This is what I don’t get about some of you. What he said about the fans, and his teammates? He’s done similar things every stop he’s been at. Its why there was a large contingent of us saying “this is a bad move, the guy is a cancer”
We weren’t just judging that based on stuff coming out of thin air. The guy threw a water bottle at a fan. He hurt his knee SCREAMING at an umpire. In some regards that’s worse than what he did here.
Nunyabidness - December 19, 2009
Let's clarify the injury with the Padres.
Bradley was hurt when manager Bud Black threw him aside during an argument with the 1B umpire. Saying "Bradley hurt himself while arguing’ just isn’t correct.
Black was trying to save Bradley from possible ejection, or worse. Had Black not taken the action he did — perhaps Bradley would have bumped the umpire, leading to a possible suspension. I doubt if Bradley would have ‘hurt’ his knee in an animated discussion with an umpire if the manager doesn’t come racing in to grab him like a WWE participant. Players argue with umps all the time. This injury is Black’s fault — he overreacted, and his actions led to an awkward fall by Bradley.
Perhaps it sounds as if I’m splitting hairs here, and I’m no fan of Bradley, but that’s a shot at Bradley which is not accurate.
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - December 19, 2009
I've talked myself in to this.
Granted, it took about 6 strong Seven and Sevens last night, and i’m far higher now than i’d care to admit, but here’s how i talked myself in to this:
On one side, there was the “trade bradley at any cost, cut him, whatever it takes” crew. On the other, the “keep him” guys. I was somewhere in the middle, wishing him gone, but for a healthy return. No handicapping the team financially, no crappy useless players in return for a guy who is, personality deficiency aside, fairly decent at baseball.
I do not believe this trade made the team better. I do not believe the team this morning has a better chance of reaching the playoffs than it did yesterday morning. This was not addition by subtraction, and Silva is not a player that is likely to snap back to being something that he’s rarely shown himself to be – a good pitcher… at least not any more likely than it is that Bradley would snap back to being something he’s rarely show himself to be – a reasonable dude.
All that being said, i got half of what i wanted. We got that crappy player i feared, to the point that many are suggesting simply cutting him. BUT, the team is financially better off. It may be slight ($6 million doesn’t buy what it used to on the FA market), but at least Hendry didn’t take on a Miguel Cabrera contract, right?
Anyways, at first i was skeptical. We don’t need Silva, and the $6 million probably isn’t enough to replace the production of the guy we got rid of. As i said, the team got worse. But then, epiphany! Sure, Hendry didn’t manage to meet both my criteria for a good solution to the Bradley situation… but he half met it! He got that crappy player, but the team’s financial situation actually slightly improved! He’s batting .500! Most of the previously rumored trades wouldn’t have allowed for that! Burell? Please. He’d have been sitting on the bench where Silva will be this season, but he wouldn’t have come with them dolla bills!
Again, i’m really high, so it isn’t impossible that i’ll go back to lamenting the fact that the rotation has lost Harden and added Silva, and the fact that offense has quite significantly fallen off in terms of talent unless Hendry pulls some sort of trade miracle for a CF, but in light of the “batting .500” revelation, i’m willing to withhold judgment and criticism until we see how this plays out.
So far this off season, we’ve ditched:
Miles (a good thing)
Fox (a wash, Grinch’s objections aside)
Bradley (open to interpretation)
And gained:
Silva (crap)
Rule 5’er (eh…)
$6 million (sweet)
The team is worse, but in a better position, now, to make some moves. I can wait and see.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
The team may be worse
But who knows how Bradley’s presence affected everyone last year.
Dempster, Johnson and Theriot haven’t had complimentary words for him. If Bradley were on the Cubs this year I would have totally expected to read that he and Theriot got into a huge brawl off the field.
I feel if Bradley had toned down his attitude in half then he would still be with the Cubs.
ak123 - December 19, 2009
We can't know how Bradley's bad attitude affected everyone...
… but i know it was nothing like this:
He was a loner. He didn’t like to be bugged by the press or the fans. But he wasn’t running around punching dudes. While the trade worked out better than i’d expected, i still fear misinformed fans believing crap like this (as well as the power hitting fallacy) might have been what eventually pressured the Cubs in to trading him for such little return at all.
I suppose the team only has themselves to blame for these wild opinions of MB though, considering how they handled him.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
Right.
I don’t think fighting with his teammates was the issue — it was rejecting any overture to be “one of the guys” and contributing to a gloomy atmosphere in the clubhouse.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Reading between lines (and in some of the actual lines, too)
it seemed like Bradley was apathetic to the teammates – it was with the coaches where the real hostility appeared.
DGU - December 19, 2009
That was in response to Theriot's comments on the radio
He was not complimentary at all. Really, if you heard what he said you’d understand where this came from.
ak123 - December 19, 2009
Better position to make moves, sure...
But what’s out there? Marlon Byrd? Scott Podsednik? Rick Ankiel? This offseason is just a disaster all around.
kanderber - December 19, 2009
How about Joel Pineiro?
Would that make you happy?
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Wouldn't be opposed to it...
on a one year deal, if the price were right. Last year just screams contract year though.
kanderber - December 19, 2009
he'll get a multiyear deal
someplace else.
elgato - December 19, 2009
He hasn’t yet… they said the same thing about Jeff Weaver coming off being a WS hero… and all he could get was a one-year deal from Seattle. Teams don’t trust pitchers leaving Atlanta or St. Louis. One year might do it, and I wouldn’t be against it. More than one year… I’m not sure about.
jameslcrockett - December 20, 2009
Oh c'mon
Jeff Weaver was a free agent after a season wtih a 5+ ERA and a couple of good starts. Pineiro pitched 220 innings, with a 3.5 ERA. There is no way he doesn’t get a multi-year deal.
vivaelpujols - December 20, 2009
You never know
I doubt anyone in 1984 thought Bob Denier was going to be a key piece in moving the Cubs from a last place team to a division winner, but he was.
BucknerKongCardenal - December 19, 2009
Right.
And how many here thought Jim Edmonds would do anything for the Cubs? (I sure didn’t.)
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
how true
CUBFANINAZ - December 19, 2009
Grey
might be Gray… who we got in the A’s deal… might be a worthwhile acquisition.
And the Cubs got some money in the Miles deal too.
If the Cubs compound their problems with signing Marlon Byrd to a multi-year deal, I’ll become a Mariners fan.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
don't under-estimate the benefit
of getting rid of the paper weight named Aaron Miles. It is hard to think that anyone else in that 25th spot will hit below the Mendoza Line. This team IS better than v2009. I assume there are one or two moves left in Hendry.
So a better bench and a healthy Fonzi, Soto and ARam. I’m looking forward to opening day.
LAcarl519 - December 19, 2009
A good analogy for Bradley
I don’t know what most people do here for work but I for one am a manager of a department at my job. I have five people who work with me that I oversee. One of them is lazy, gives an attitude and makes my job harder.
Every day I have to focus a lot of my energy specifically on this one guy to make sure that he finishes his job so I can finish my job. It’s also affected the performance of everyone around him as they get lazier and have more of an attitude and morale goes down. And trust me, I’ve tried everything. Finally he was moved to another area of the company and giving the same headaches to someone else. Productivity has improved for our area and everyone’s attitude has improved with motivation.
A lot of ways I think of Lou and Bradley in the same spot. Perhaps Bradley’s presence really affected Lou’s management of games and how the other players performed. Just not having him around them could make a difference between day and night.
It’s really not that far fetched….
ak123 - December 19, 2009
We've seen these metaphors.
Dozens of version of this very one, in fact.
There are two problems with it. First, assuming a baseball clubhouse operates anything like your department is something of a stretch. Second, by most accounts, Bradley wasn’t a clubhouse cancer, he was a clubhouse loner. His problems with fans and the press far outweighed his problems with his teammates. They didn’t seem to like him much, sure, but i suspect you are over estimating his affect on those around him.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
I don't personally know what the dynamic in a major league clubhouse is.
But from comments I’ve read from several Cubs, it appears that Bradley DID have such an effect on them.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
And comments from other guys made him sound great and fine.
I wouldn’t put too much stock in to the words of players who are simply supporting their teams moves to suspend and / or trade a guy. Fox was traded and said nice things about MB. I wouldn’t put too much weight in that either.
I’m not trying to claim he wasn’t a dick, and i’m not trying to claim that the clubhouse won’t be more pleasant without him. I just don’t get the celebration over the now improved chemistry.
Its not something that we can quantify, and being that baseball is the most individually based sport of the major “team” sports we enjoy, its hard to believe this change alone will account for the X number of wins we need over last year in order to make the playoffs.
I just don’t put the same weight on this stuff as everyone else i guess. All other things even, i’d obviously prefer the nice guy on the team… but all other things aren’t even here. Its a good thing we got that $6 million, because chemistry’s dubious effect on the team aside, the Cubs got worse yesterday.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
My point is...
… you almost never hear comments like the ones made by Cubs players about Bradley after he left. Usually they say nothing. That was about as close as I have ever heard a major league player come to saying that a teammate was a bad guy.
Also, Bruce Miles reported that players broke into applause after Hendry announced MB was being sent home.
I agree with you that the $6 million will be useful.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Usually it isn't such a big deal.
With the season effectively over at that point, the center of all north side baseball talk was Bradley. Every question the players were getting was about Bradley. What were they supposed to say, “he’s a great guy and my team shouldn’t have suspended him”?
Other players, both with the cubs and with other teams, have also come to his defense. The fact is, nobody here directly knows what he was like in the clubhouse, nobody here knows what effect his attitude actually had with respect to on field success, and nobody knows how anybody on the team ACTUALLY felt about him. The average quote from an athlete includes about 90% fluff and cliche, and about 10% semi-useful information. I have no doubt that Lou is relieved and that the clubhouse will be looser. I just don’t believe that’s what’ll get the team back to the playoffs.
The ‘addition by subtraction’ folks are placing a lot of hope in something that can’t be measured, explained, or counted upon to affect wins and losses. All the speculation here about how the improved clubhouse chemistry is going to be the redemption of this team in 2010 is likely to leave a lot of folks disappointed.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
There's no doubt that...
… improved performance from Soriano, Soto, etc. and a full healthy year from Ramirez will mean much more to this team’s playoff chances than some unmeasured “clubhouse chemistry”.
Nevertheless, a better atmosphere can’t hurt.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
I hope (and think) that Soriano, Soto, et al...
will have a better season next year.
As one of the people who didn’t believe that our only option was to dump Bradley, I suspect it’s going to become tiresome how many folks will claim vindication that the reason for their return to success is because Bradley is no longer on the team, despite the fact that there’s probably little correlation, let alone causation.
(The only silver lining is that if I’m faced with that sort of annoying commentary, it’ll at least mean that Soriano, Soto, et al are indeed having better years).
CubsWin!Oregon - December 19, 2009
Perhaps
But I was really thinking about the whole “Cubs have to get rid of him” attitude and that’s where the analogy came from. While I’ll never be in a ball-players shoes my job is in the high-pressured TV industry. And when you have someone working with you that holds up getting a show on live TV being finished, it’s hard.
ak123 - December 19, 2009
It's all about the money
As I have said from the start to deal Bradley ( and I thought keeping was a better option but I realized it was not going to happen) the Cubs should simply find out who would offer to pick up as much of the contract as possible ( which I actually guessed at 5 million so close). Silva is a warm body , albeit a big one. Is there a remote chance he could be useful, I suppose but I would put that at the level of inviting Rusch or Mike Hampton ( Ok minus the fact Hampton is again out for 2010) to Spring Training. He had one and half good seasons a few years ago and has been the single worst pitcher in the MLB since then and is doing poorly in winter ball. He is window dressing for Hendry but I don’t have a problem with that. Again let’s not pretend that Silva is likely to be any good at all but accept that 6 million in savings was about as good as the Cubs could get.
Doggie Stalker - December 19, 2009
Line of the day.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
twss
Villeslgr - December 19, 2009
Cub Fans are Demanding
Do you have to go out hit .330, hit 50 HRs and drive in 150 runs? No. Cub fans demand that you make an effort. Unless your numbers are incredibly horrendous, e.g., Aaron Miles, Cubs fans will stay by you to an extent.
There are some who try to interject race into the argument. I would suggest that most Cubs fans are color blind. As with any team in any sport, there are some fans who don’t like players for any variety of reasons. It’s a free country. Every team has its village idiot and we are no different.
I look at MB and Todd Hundley. If there was ever a player who coming in had the chance to be adored by the fans, it was Todd Hundley. Father was and is a fan favorite. He put up good numbers in NY. It was on a silver platter. In the end, people were just as happy to get rid of Todd Hundley as they were MB. Why? Because they didn’t feel he gave forth a full effort. In these two cases, there is only one person who knows the truth, the players involved.
MB didn’t do himself any favors by attacking Cubs fans. As a general rule, we have to be the most loyal fans. 101 years and counting, it’s cold and snowy out and we’re talking about Cubs baseball, what does that say about loyalty? But, if you lose the fans, you are in trouble.
I don’t wish ill will of anybody. MB is going to someplace where maybe he can thrive. Ken Griffey, Jr. is out there and it is his team. That have made some free agent dealings, and could be a competitive team. Time will tell.
Silva? We already have one Venezuelan pitcher. Who knows? Maybe they can work together. I read that Zambrano has already lost some weight. Maybe they can drop some pounds together.
If there is one piece of advice I would give Silva, it is make a good faith effort. If you don’t you might not like Chicago anymore than MB.
cubfred - December 19, 2009
"Are the #Cubs really worse off with Carlos Silva?"
Yes.
thejoshbaker - December 19, 2009
You don't know that yet.
Come back and tell me that after some actual games have been played.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Al...
How about we say we actually think and then admit we’re wrong later, if we have to? I choose not to let fate decide my thinking for me.
The Cubs would be better off cutting Silva and thanking the Mariners for the extra $6 million they can waste on their next free agent boondoggle.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
Me, I'd rather see if the man can still pitch first.
On December 19, we have no way of knowing that.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Al...
I don’t think he ever could. I railed against the signing when the Mariners did it based off a good year following a bad year. He’s had as many atrocious seasons as he has had solid or mediocre. He certainly is a horrible fit for the Cubs and Wrigley Field.
I’m no longer giving away my optimism for nothing… they have to earn it. Acquiring Silva and pleading poverty to me ain’t going to cut it.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
Well feeding and housing him in Spring Training won't cost THAT much
so let him come there but othewise look forward to having 6 million to spend next year.
Doggie Stalker - December 19, 2009
here's the problem with this argument Al
we have no way of knowing if Milton might have held a team meeting in which he apologized to everyone, made some friends and had a fantastic season.
History says none of that would have happened. Much like history shows Carlos Silva will AT MOST not be horrendous.
going out and defending Silva with a “lets wait and see what happens” approach seems a bit silly considering your stance on Bradley.
And I’m with you on Bradley, he needed to go, but I’m willing to admit that if Silva is anything but a back of the bullpen arm, we’re most likely in a lot of trouble.
Nunyabidness - December 19, 2009
but if this were before the trade and that question were "Are the #Cubs really worse off with Milton Bradley?"
you would say “yes”, wouldn’t you?
And let’s say someone had said to you “You don’t know that yet. Come back and tell me that after some actual games have been played.” What would your response be to that?
ballhawk - December 19, 2009
He is David Patton at worst.
What’s wrong with sticking him on the end of the Bench?
At worst we are no better, with $6M extra. At best, we got a #5 pitcher with $6M extra.
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
What's wrong with that
is that takes up a valuable roster spot that could be given to a useful player.
mykalmorgan - December 19, 2009
Well since he hasn't thrown one pitch in the 2010 season
let’s keep the “he is worthless” comments down. If he is in the rotation with a ERA north of 6, and burns up our pen every time he pitchs, or gives up a win every time if he pitchs, then I’ll agree. Till then I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
I wasn't saying he's worthless
I was responding to your suggestion of sticking him on the end of the bench making him, in effect, less than worthless.
mykalmorgan - December 19, 2009
I'm still hopeful for next season not sucking.
mykalmorgan - December 19, 2009
Listening to Talking Baseball on ESPN1000
Bruce Levine is saying Hendry made the best of a bad situation. And for like the 10th time, he’s thrown Ankiel’s name into the mix for the Cubs. Not sure if he’s speculating or what …
elgato - December 19, 2009
Who knows?
But I agree with Levine that this was about the best Hendry could have done — save $6 million. I imagine that likely pleased Hendry’s boss, if nothing else.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
I hope the Cubs, at least ...
look hard at Ankiel. He’s left handed, could hit fifth or sixth and has some upside. OTOH, I know that he’s coming off an injury, not wonderful in center AND represented by Scott Boras.
elgato - December 19, 2009
What about Brett Gardner?
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Is he a middle-order bat?
Also, are the Yankees actually shopping him, or are we just guessing that they will because they got Granderson?
elgato - December 19, 2009
Don't need middle of the order
I think our 3-4-5 hitters are covered. We need a table setter. We need a lead-off hitter.
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
disagree completely
Ideally, we get an Adam Dunn-type player who can hit between Ramirez and Soriano. That allows Fukudome to lead off in a lineup like this
Kosuke
Theriot
Lee
Ramirez
Dunn like player
Soriano
Soto
Baker/Fontenot
elgato - December 19, 2009
frankly ...
I think that’s what the Cubs would have done with Granderson.
elgato - December 19, 2009
I guess you are right...
I would prefer to see Kosuke in #2 with Theriot hitting like #7 or #8. I would much rather have a prototypical lead-off hitter. But that’s just my thoughts
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
So ... Podsednik?
elgato - December 19, 2009
Please no.
PLEASE NO.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
seriously ...
what about a Podsednik/Johnson platoon, depending on the money? Fuld would be the fifth outfielder …
elgato - December 19, 2009
Actually...
I won’t be adverse to that in CF.
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
It's an interesting idea
It sends Kosuke back to fifth or sixth, though …
elgato - December 19, 2009
Put Kosuke in five
Then you get:
Pod/Johnson
Theriot
Lee
A-Ram
Kosuke
Sori
Soto
Fotenot/Baker
I could actually live with that line-up
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
Kosuke
There’s no justification for batting him behind Lee and A-Ram… he bats third in this scenario. Batting him fifth will not work unless Soriano and Soto are on top of their game… and if that’s the case, you can really pick this lineup of a hat and it won’t matter
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
If you're going to platoon with Johnson...
… Podsednik is not the best choice. Gardner might be.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
there's nothing but speculation that says Gardner's available
The Cubs showed interest in Melky.
elgato - December 19, 2009
I guess i could get down...
… with a one year contract. Last season was, by most measurements, his second best season ever. The two before that were atrocious.
That doesn’t happen to 33 year old dudes. I’d be fine with a year, hoping he could play an Edmonds like role. Anything beyond that, no way. We don’t want this guy when he’s 35 or 36.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
Pods wants a three-year deal
… according to this, http://chicagocubsonline.com/archives/2009/12/cubsrumors12199.php. Byrd only wants two years, it says. Hmmmm.
elgato - December 19, 2009
Pods wants three years?
What planet is he living on?
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
good question
elgato - December 19, 2009
Doesn't he know he's not that good anymore?
mykalmorgan - December 19, 2009
he was good last year
elgato - December 19, 2009
He had a 98 OPS+
… and a 69% success rate stealing. He was a little below league average. No thanks on Scotty Pods.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
yeah, I'm not a big fan
But if he WERE cheap ,,,
elgato - December 19, 2009
Good enough to get a contract: probably
Good enough to get a contract that’s three guaranteed years: DEFINITELY NOT
mykalmorgan - December 19, 2009
oh, agreed
I’m just saying he had a decent year. Good was probably too strong.
elgato - December 19, 2009
You see his BABIP?
He was very, very “lucky” at the plate.
CubsBullsBears - December 19, 2009
One where he's traded for Carlos Lee
and it’s considered a good deal?
DGU - December 19, 2009
pure lunacy.....Pods is lucky to be a ML baseball player
….a weak one dimensional player at best.
DO NOT WANT under any circumstance
JB 23 - December 19, 2009
+1
chilango2 - December 19, 2009
I would puke/cry/scream/punch something...
If we signed Pods. He sucks. Can’t field, can’t throw, can’t hit (can slap at the ball), and is a terrible baserunner. I’d much rather have Fuld/Johnson, even though that isn’t an ideal situation either.
CubsBullsBears - December 19, 2009
"Dunn-like" players
don’t really exist, except for in the form of one man on the Nationals roster. He’s a very unusual type.
Besides the fact that there is only one Dunn, the Cubs don’t need more defensive liabilities.
mykalmorgan - December 19, 2009
The Cubs, ideally, would get
a left handed RBI guy to hit fifth. Hence “Dunn-like”. I wasn’t talking defense.
elgato - December 19, 2009
We tried that for two years in a row now.
Neither turned out the way we wanted. Can we go one offseason without getting more Lefthanded?
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
the stratgy wasn't wrong ...
the implementation was.
elgato - December 19, 2009
What is sad is Dunn was available......instead we got bradley.....
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
OK
next time, say that. It makes your point more clear and more reasonable.
mykalmorgan - December 19, 2009
you're the only one who found it unreasonable
Nunyabidness - December 19, 2009
The Yankees have Cabrera, Granderson and Gardner.
One of the Cabrera-Gardner duo seems destined to go.
Bill Potter - December 19, 2009
do we know they're shopping them?
elgato - December 19, 2009
Rumors of Gardner a while back
I’ve heard from many Yankee fans two different stories about him:
1) He’s not given a chance to shine as he has a great future.
2) He’s a bum who should be in AAA
ak123 - December 19, 2009
Sounds like Cubs fans with every prospect too :-)
rlpete - December 19, 2009
Rumors started in the Winter Meetings once Granderson was acquired.
I think the Yankees would rather move Swisher first, but the Cubs might be able to get Gardner. He’s an upgrade over Fuld, IMO, though I don’t know if he’s an everyday player.
Bill Potter - December 19, 2009
Why would the Yankees trade Gardner over Swisher?
Gardner is under salary control. Sorry, this sounds like speculation on the part of fans and media.
elgato - December 19, 2009
Swisher can hit for power, for one.
Gardner may be no better than a 4th outfielder to the Yankees (he’s currently third on the their CF depth chart and not listed on a corner), and if they can flip him for something, they would be better off.
Swisher is a corner OF who is expendable if the Yankees resign Damon, more than likely, with Cabrera moving to RF.
Bill Potter - December 19, 2009
A Gardner/Johnson platoon might work.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Al
Gardner is Sam Fuld. I like him but we’ve already got him.
leothelip - December 19, 2009
Gardner is a better player than Fuld.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
not by enough to trade for him
unless we basically give up nothing useful
Nunyabidness - December 19, 2009
What about Johnny Damon?
His value is now dropping, quickly. It’s possible he may sign with anybody to make sure he has a gig.
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - December 19, 2009
I could see an Ankiel/Johnson platoon.
Wouldn’t necessarily love it, but I could see it happening.
Bill Potter - December 19, 2009
exactly....if you think about it
…there is only upside for the Cubs with Silva. You had to make the move (we have to assume this was one of Hendrys only options) and got cash back for a CF. The expectations for his performance are extremly low. If he loses the weight, gets in to shape and pitches decently this could work out much better than it appears on paper today.
JB 23 - December 19, 2009
With Reed We Succeed
…just ask Ted Lilly! I really don’t see the harm in letting Reed have the everyday CF job. We’ve seen his solid (sometimes spectacular) defense and he can handle the bat. But I guess we’d still need a lead-off guy, huh?
dogbone - December 19, 2009
No, no, no, no
Reed Johnson is not the starting centerfielder for a playoff team.
elgato - December 19, 2009
Why not?
dogbone - December 19, 2009
well ...
it’s not impossible that the Cubs make the playoffs with Reed in center. But the following would ALSO have to happen:
1) Reed would have to stay healthy, something he hasn’t done in two years in Chicago.
2) We would have to find a middle order bat (preferably left handed) who can hit fifth or sixth to play second. I don’t want Reed hitting 3-4-5-6.
3) Soriano AND Soto would have to bounce back to 2008 levels.
elgato - December 19, 2009
I agree
but he should be fairly inexpensive and could be platooned, perhaps with the likes of Sam Fuld. I know this isn’t ideal, but it might help save a buck or two so we can find a top shelf setup guy/closer. Reed could hit 1, 2, 7, 8.
dogbone - December 19, 2009
I think Reed wants a multiyear deal
Unless my memory is off.
elgato - December 19, 2009
I think you're right
but what’s wrong with 2 years at 2 million per?
dogbone - December 19, 2009
he wouldn't take it, for one thing
Nunyabidness - December 19, 2009
Also...
… Johnson can’t hit righthanders.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Assuming the money coming along with Silva is $6 million
then the savings is only $2 million not the $6 million that people are mentioning. People seem to be missing the extra $2 million owed Silva to buyout 2012.
rlpete - December 19, 2009
Everything I've read...
… says the Mariners are giving the Cubs $9 million.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
OK, the latest (non-Muskat) article is reporting the new gain of $6 million for the Cubs
rlpete - December 19, 2009
All those in favor of an easy to like 2010 team that gets along, say AYE!
digitalbenjamin - December 19, 2009
AYE
dogbone - December 19, 2009
All those in favor of a winning team in 2010 over one that's easy to like, say AYE!
elgato - December 19, 2009
OK, AYE to that too!
dogbone - December 19, 2009
How about...
… a winning team AND one that’s easy to like?
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
odds are winning will lead to likability
elgato - December 19, 2009
True.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
other way around
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
argh
cut myself off
“is what other people would lead you to believe” was supposed to be the text
DartmouthCubsFan - December 19, 2009
2008 Cubs...
I miss them.
CubsBullsBears - December 19, 2009
+18
Emelie - December 19, 2009
'09 Cubs were...
Unlikeable and bad, so something’s gotta give.
CubsBullsBears - December 19, 2009
What about Damon :D
He can lead off and play CF
Chanman25 - December 19, 2009
Let's just leave it as
“He can lead off”
rlpete - December 19, 2009
I'd take him over Pods
Chanman25 - December 19, 2009
you'll have to pay a bunch more
just sayin’.
elgato - December 19, 2009
yes
but besides his defense, what really isn’t there to like?
He can lead off and has some power
He has post season experience with both the Sox and Yanks
he could regrow that awesome beard and make it marketable here
Chanman25 - December 19, 2009
he's too expensive
elgato - December 19, 2009
Anything to add to our OBP.
That’d be Onfield Beard Percentage, friends. And i believe its 30x more important than any “chemistry” we hope to achieve.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
$ is the first and most prominent reason...
But his power is also questionable. His splits show he hit 17 of his 24 HR were at the little league field the Yankees call home. Home OPS: .915. Road OPS: .795.
And that is all with All-Stars hitting in front of and behind him. Also behind him: the ability to play CF daily.
If Damon would take a 2 year deal at $6M per, I could live with his bad defense. Anything more is an overpayment.
I am down with the beard, though.
fsuapollo - December 19, 2009
fixed
jesus christos - December 19, 2009
I was wondering about Damon also...
Anyone think he’s got enough left in the tank for another run in center?
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
No.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
In depth response there Al
The insightful explantion is very enlightening :P
Simple and easy. The best answer I would so
gaclaudy - December 19, 2009
LOL
Well, you asked if anyone thought Damon had anything left. My answer is “no”. Others may disagree.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
You think not?
In a smaller outfield at Wrigley? He wanted 26 mil for 2. The Yanks said no. He said 20 mil. They said no. 2 years, 12 mil — I think he could provide enough output to cancel out defensive problems.
If his price continues to plummet, I’d really consider him as a viable option.
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - December 19, 2009
damon can barely play LF
jesus christos - December 19, 2009
No.
See my post above, though that has more to do with his bat and contract demands.
2006 is the last year he was a regular in CF… so no, I don’t think he has enough left in the tank. Particularly at the price he wants.
fsuapollo - December 19, 2009
Terrible defensive CF'er.
CubsBullsBears - December 19, 2009
Help a brutha understand the contract math on Silva/Bradley please
In reading the Cubs.com article, Silva is owed $25M and Bradley $21M. They gave us $6M. Isn’t our net only $2M? Why do we all keep saying we gained $6M? Is it because of Silva’s Buyout option? I’m stumped.
cubfever7 - December 19, 2009
The net is $6 million
They’re covering the difference and giving $3 million each year on top of that.
mykalmorgan - December 19, 2009
Thanks --you're right
Mid article it states that after taking both contracts into account, $6M was added. Thank you!
cubfever7 - December 19, 2009
Matt Capps on radio ...
“I want to be in a winning environment.” Guess the Nats are out. But, “Just as good a chance of me being a Cub as anywhere else.”
elgato - December 19, 2009
I read the Rockies are also interested in Capps.
But he wouldn’t be the closer there, either.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
Capps' wife wants to come to Chicago
Matt says.
elgato - December 19, 2009
That could give the 2010 Cub pitching staff...
… three members of the 2009 Pirates staff.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
sounds worse when you say it like that
:)
elgato - December 19, 2009
Well, look at it this way.
Maybe we got all the good ones.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
If we are picking players based on their wives...
… than i’d like to fully throw my support behind Podsednik after all.
HELLLLOOOOOOO!
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
Can we Bring back DeRosa then
His wife is hot .
Doggie Stalker - December 19, 2009
Peppermint Patty, is that you>
Crikey.
BLou - December 19, 2009
The $ amount
that is getting tossed about is a bit off. The Cubs got 9 million 3 million of which doesn’t apply to our payroll because it cancelled out the difference in the contracts. So that gave us 6 million in payroll space split between two years. On top of that there is a 11 or so option for 2012 that I cannot imagine the Cubs ever triggering. So instead they will have to pay Silva a 2 million dollar buyout. So in total the Cubs saved 4 million spread between two years. Not quite as great as I thought yesterday but I guess that was as good as Hendry could do.
CalCalender - December 19, 2009
Hendry's biggest mistake
aside from signing Bradley in the first place, was suspending him for the final 15 games. This effectively killed any leverage he might have had in a trade. Every other GM knew that the Cubs painted themselves into a corner. That is why Tampa refused to absorb much of the 2011 season, and why the Cubs inevitably had to take Silva back.
What could Hendry have done? Put MB on the DL for the rest of the season. The guy had pulled himself out of a game not long before, and his history of injuries wouldn’t have raised even one eye brow had the DL move.
I used to defend and support Hendry, especially after some really good moves in 2003 and 2004.
However, I can’t support him anymore, and I agree Ricketts has him on a very short leash.
Canadian Cubs Fan - December 19, 2009
You are about to recieve...
… an onslaught of “the rest of the league already knew we hated him, so it didn’t matter!!!” comments.
You could try to convince those people that the suspension was an unnecessary move (we paid the guy anyways, as what MB “did” wasn’t a suspend-able offense, so really it wasn’t as much a suspension as a time out) that only further signaled our desperation to get rid of him, but they won’t listen. You could try to compare it to what the team did to Sammy’s value in his last days, but it will fall on deaf ears.
Some people are of the belief that MB was SUCH a bad dude that getting him out of Wrigley was worth tanking his value, even though at the point that he was suspended, there was literally no chance the team was going anywhere anyways. There was no season to save, no final playoff push to make. It was a pointless move that could have been done differently any number of ways (and in doing so, may have gotten us, say, $8 million instead of $6), but it is what it is. The PR points the team scored justified it all to the guys in charge, i suppose, and a good number of fans seem to agree.
Oh well.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
No need for an onslaught
The league already knew it was a disaster.
And no the Cubs couldn’t stash him on the DL. Putting a player on the DL in September would have raised flags. With the expanded rosters, DL moves in September are rare.
rlpete - December 19, 2009
Alfonso Soriano went on the DL last September.
Bradley had known knee issues. They could have done it.
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
But much like the issue with Sori
The player has some say in whether they go on the DL.
So the Cubs couldn’t just “stash” MB on the DL. If they tried, you can GUARANTEE MB would have come out and said something to the effect of: “uh… I can play… they don’t want me around. Oh, and you all hate me!”
If the player feels like they are healthy, the union could file a grievance.
So, for MB, the DL was not an option, IMO.
(PS: some/much of this is response to the general topic rather than just Al in particular.)
fsuapollo - December 19, 2009
There are shades of gray.
This isn’t a “everything is great” or “its literally impossible” and you can only choose one sort of situation. Each step, each issue, each story piled on a little more. That suspension only made what was already bad, worse. It was unnecessary.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
Silva Bells
The great thing about Silva is no one has ANY real expectations for him to contribute much of anything, so anything we get from him will…what, make it seem better than it is?
More than I fault Hendry for signing Bradley at that contract, I think some blame can be place in Hendry shedding two popular players in Wood and DeRosa and one effective player in Marquis, and then putting ALL the onus of taking us to the next level on the shoulders of MB. There was no other significant signing to take the pressure off of Bradley, unlike how the Mariners have acquired him.
BucknerKongCardenal - December 19, 2009
+1
Bradley won’t be the focus in Seattle, he’ll share it with Cliff Lee and other newcomers.
cubsforever - December 19, 2009
Like Corey Patterson?
Al Yellon - December 19, 2009
True
Bradley can’t be the focus. He does not have mental capacity to handle this. He is NOT a leader.
Say what you want about losing Wood and DeRosa, but those two were always taking the heat and questions from the press. Not many did that last year. So Bradley got added attention.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
Has anyone actually looked at
Marlon Byrd’s stats beyond his 20 bombs last year?
His walk rate dropped from 10.2% to 5.5%, killing his OBP in the process 50 some points.
Despite a decent smattering of bombs and doubles, he posted his lowest OPS since 2006. His serviciable OPS’s between .808 and .842 all were in the bandbox that is The Ballpark in Arlignton. In fact, his slugging all but disappeared on the road last year (.538 at home, .419 on the road). He hit 14 of his 20 bombs at home.
His K rate went up, though its around his career average. Contact rate dropped.
Oh, and he’s turned 33 next August.
KillaAK - December 19, 2009
I'm fine with the notion of withholding ultimate judgement on the deal....
until we see the entirety of the Cubs offseason moves.
But the whole conversation would be much more palatable if we could at least dispense with this wishful nonsense where we can’t admit that all signs point to Silva sucking horribly. Could he be next year’s NL Cy Young? Sure, I suppose it’s theoretically possible. But we have a large amount of statistical evidence from which we can infer that Silva is not a good pitcher. Consoling ourselves in an argument that maybe Silva is a diamond under all that coal is frustratingly silly and flies in the face of actual evidence. We don’t need to play all the games next year to evaluate what his Silva’s past performance suggests.
Obviously if Silva does pitch for us, I hope he finds some magic spark. But I’m not going to use that hope as some sort of argument for why this deal has or has not worked out well for the Cubs. Evaluate it on its actual terms.
CubsWin!Oregon - December 19, 2009
Ankiel, Pods, Byrd
None give the Cubs anymore wins
Fuld starts in 2010
jballgame - December 19, 2009
too funny
Ha…you say lets get the guy in shape…but if he doesnt have the pride or work ethic to do it…How are you going to make him..i mean the guy gets paid 30 million to pitch ,and now your telling me we need to send coaches down there because hes to F n lazy to stay in shape..I dont want to hear about this guys craptastic numbers when he was with the twins either…because last time i checked we were not going to be playing to 2005 season this year…talking about this dude coming back getting into form…what a joke.I just dont get it..hendry ive stuck by you,when a lot of people have trashed you,but this move makes no sense!! This guy sucked last year hes going to suck this year i dontr need to wait to see how this plays out because it wont..he dont even make the roster.bet money on that…Anyway im done and as a cubs fan im not happy…stupid ass moves and bad contracts all the time,,, You are not getting any of money this year. so have fun paying this F n train wreck but im not. FUCK!
LightsOutVegas - December 19, 2009
Byrd, Ankiel, Pods
“F” all of these guys. Use the extra 5 mil we picked up to offer Holiday more than the Cards. Move Sori to RF ( I know he will suck there but he also is terrible in LF. At least he has the arm to play RF.) Sign Reed J. for a year to platoon with Fukudome in CF. Keep Fuld as a 5th OF’er and late inning defensive replacement. I know this won’t happen but wouldn’t it be nice to see Ricketts step up to the plate?
BarryLB - December 19, 2009
eric hanna
is that you?
jesus christos - December 19, 2009
It seems that Sori can't handle change very well.
He needs 24 hours notice to play, remember.
Move him out of the leadoff spot and he bitched. Moved from 2B, he threatend to quit the Mats.
Move to CF by the Cubs, hit .200 until he got his way.
That said, I completely agree with what you said. He has the arm, but will suck the same in RF as he does in LF. He makes me wish for the DH in the NL. It would be nice to get a slugger in the OF because Dome is not one. I like him as a CF bat better.
At the end of games under your plan, we could still have Fuld, RJ, and Dome in the OF. That is of Sori is ok with that.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
you forget that wrigley’s RF is harder to defend than LF
jesus christos - December 19, 2009
Then he will be worse in RF, which is saying something....
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
I know of only one guy on here who thinks he is a good LF.
I cringe everytime a ball is hit to LF.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
$140 million isn't stepping up?
I love all these people who somehow think the Cubs should have an unlimited salary.
rlpete - December 19, 2009
They have spent the money, especially compared to how it used to be.
It is just a matter of how well they spend the money. Hendry has issues with this sometimes.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
first time MB has a monster game and Silva has a bad one
BCB will be flooded with people complaining about the trade, just watch,.,
Cubbie-Tim - December 19, 2009
There are maybe 5 people here who would do that.
The same ones who wanted him to stay in the first place.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
not true
either you are trying to take a jab at a few of us here, or you have not read enough of some of the posters here.
Cubbie-Tim - December 19, 2009
Both, i'd guess.
AndrewJStone - December 19, 2009
So you think more than 5 would be crying for Bradley back?
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
wanting Bradley back (or not)...
…will have more to do with how Byrd/Pods/Damon/Reed/Fuld/Bret/Melky/Sosa do than with how Silva does.
ballhawk - December 19, 2009
I don't care if he hits .400
I would never want him back. If some of the people who wanted him gone change their mind only to rip Hendry, that is stupid.
Posters should know right now that Silva sucks. It was the price to pay to get rid of the jerk. At least we got some financial relief from it.
You should be pretty happy with the deal. We didn’t release him and made some money back in the deal rather than pay him to play elsewhere.
Do you not believe that some, maybe not you Andrew, but others like Drew or Tim will be letting us know that Bradley is having a great year? I hope he does, I hope he gets his life straight. But do it in Seattle, nice and far away from Chicago.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
actually you continue to be wrong
I was a supporter of a Cub who was known for his offense, and I knew not to expect him to be a gold glover. Why you continue to make blatant ignorant and incorrect posts about how i love MB i do not understand.
My love for MB does not equal your love to hate JH. I have told you this many times, and each time i do, you pull a BLou and ignore the facts.
Cubbie-Tim - December 19, 2009
I do not hate JH. Just do not think he is right guy for the job.
MB was a known asshole from the get go. If you did not see this coming you are as bad as Hendry.
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
Why would anybody NOT want to know updates on how Bradley does in Seattle?
His success or failure there does, in a small way, reflect on Hendry.
Yes, i’m sure we’ll get updates. I look forward to them.
I don’t see your point.
AndrewJStone - December 20, 2009
How long will you continue to misrepresent others' viewpoints?
I haven’t seen anyone who simply wanted Bradley to stay. I for one didn’t want to trade Bradley for garbage if there was any chance at reconcilliation between him the team and his teammates.
Villeslgr - December 22, 2009
We won't
have to wait long for Silva to have a bad game. He seems to have just about cornered the market on bad outings…
BarryLB - December 19, 2009
He sucks bad, he will blow a game quick
Still not worth Bradley…..
Even if Bradley has a great year, does anyone truly see him doing the same thing for the Cubs?
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
Reed
in left, Fuld in CF and Fukdome is RF is a pretty damn good OF.
BarryLB - December 19, 2009
Defensively, maybe.
Though we don’t really have enough data to figure out where fuld is defensively.
Offensively? That’s a terrible outfield.
KillaAK - December 19, 2009
not to mention
with a brick wall, i would be worried for Reed/Fuld who never give up on a ball. I like them both as platoon/bench role players not for a starter all season long.
Cubbie-Tim - December 19, 2009
Getting rid of Milton meant eating a shit sandwich
And the form of that shit sandwich is Carlos Silva, who is a very bad and awful and wretched and terrible pitcher of many times magnitude.
What will happen is this….the Cubs will bury Silva on the disabled list with some trumped up injury in 2010.
BLou - December 19, 2009
Agreed
TJ11 - December 19, 2009
Again with the predicitons. Do you feel some sort of obligation to always tell us "what's going to happen"?
Because your track record with predicting what happens is really really bad.
santoswoodenlegs - December 19, 2009
he is Nostrwrongamus
Cubbie-Tim - December 20, 2009
Sandy Alerson FTW
kanderber - December 20, 2009
If it were me...
…then I’d see about swinging a deal for Brent Gardner in New York. The Yankees are in the market for bullpen arms. Not sure therefore what we could do, but Gardner would be a good reasonable addition. He can play good defense, runs well and has some upside potential with the bat. Not a star in the making by any stretch, but VASTLY superior to any of these other brain-dead options being proposed.
BLou - December 19, 2009
Let's be honest
Carlos Silva is bad. No, Carlos Silva is horrific as a major league pitcher. He’s give-up-well-over-a-hit-per-inning bad. In fact, when the best thing you can really say about his ability at this stage of his career is that he doesn’t walk many guys, that’s not exactly a ringing endorsement for him helping this club.
Let’s not fool ourselves here. Chances are beyond good that Silva doesn’t pitch more than 50 non-mopup innings for the Cubs in 2010. Not effective innings mind you, just more than 50 innings where he’s not thrown out there to do anything but get you to the ninth-inning of a blowout. I don’t think there is any reason to even remotely consider that he’ll do more. He’s really that bad.
krummy12 - December 19, 2009
And if that’s what he’s going to do, they’re better off cutting him and letting Parisi do it. There’s a chance he’ll give you some value in the future.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
Bad contract
Bradley is past tense for the Cubs. Silva is the reality for now. There is nothing to do except hope that Silva contributes. They should give him a chance because there is currently a position open in the rotation.
A pessimistic outlook is about having a roster spot taken by somebody who both can’t pitch in the majors and gets $15 million of Cub money over 2 years. Patton was a blocker but didn’t make that much.
This is still a team relying on players, who underperformed last year, to perform better this coming season.
I don’t think we will ever know how much responsibility Hendry should take for misfires. Ricketts and company should do what they think is necessary to avoid more misfires.
AboutTheCubs - December 19, 2009
Why all this stressing over Silva?
The deal wasn’t for him. It was for $6 million to spend on somebody who will help us.
If we release Silva tomorrow, we’re still ahead.
Clark Addison - December 19, 2009
…because with every bad inning he pitches, the Cubs have to make up that value somewhere… and that eats into the $6 million in savings from the deal. If they release him tomorrow, they’re doing the right thing. If they spend that money on a multi-year deal for Marlon Byrd, then it’s a wash, if we’re lucky. I want Jim Hendry to cut Silva today and save our next competent and intelligent GM the hassle of doing it… and not commit any of those “savings” past this year.
If he wants to keep his job (1. higher someone smarter to help him understand when a smarter GM is screwing him and 2. stop doing deals with the Mariners.), he’ll take Silva and the $9 million, add in whatever value he needs to (some extra cash or players) and turn him into something valuable. So, he can then turn around and say, “look what I got for Bradley.” Tough luck doing that since even horrendous GMs won’t think Silva is worth $15 million for 2 years. But if he could pull it off, then I’d be impressed by Mr. Hendry. And it’s been a long time since I could say that.
jameslcrockett - December 19, 2009
(it's not 6 million)
(its 5 million)
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
nope...
it’s $6 million.
jameslcrockett - December 20, 2009
nope.
Go to Cott’s and look up the numbers yourself.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
Also, you're mistaken about Silva's contract.
Silva is owed 11.5 million for 2010 and 2011. That is 23 million. He has an option for 2012, which is 2 million. That money is guaranteed. The total is 25 million.
The mariners are sending over 9 million. 25 minus 9 equals 16. Therefore, silva isn’t getting paid 15 over 2 years by the cubs. He’s getting 16 million.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
Believe whatever you want.
It’s $6 million. I prefer to believe the reporters who have all reported this amount, rather than you.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
Please look at Cott's Contract website
Or Heyman’s article. Both list that Bradley was set to make 21 mil.
The 6 million figure is wrong. Instead of brushing off what I’m telling you, look into the facts themselves.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
Great.
So I should believe you instead of multiple published reports?
Tell me another funny story.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
No, you should believe facts
and realize that errors can be made. You’ve chosen to ignore that Heyman in his article said that Bradley was owed 21 m. Look it up yourself. I’m not making up these numbers. Look at their contracts. I’m not making this up. This is easily verifiable. Bradley makes 21 mil. Silva makes 23 mil plus a 2 mil buyout. That equals 25 million dollars.
You don’t need to be rude to me for pointing out a mistake.
Here’s a published report from seattle that verifies its 5 Mil.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
Speaking of math, the math in that article is wrong.
Note, it says Bradley is due $22m. Silva is due $25m. Cubs are getting $9m, and there’s $3m difference in salary.
Voila, $6 million. I will try to get independent confirmation of this.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
Stone
is a very good writer… but wouldn’t be the first time he’s made a typo. Yet another reason why you should use multiple sources before you come online and tell someone they’re wrong.
jameslcrockett - December 20, 2009
Just going solely off your quote block there...
I’m confused:
5+3 is not 9.
Was that your point? Or am I being obtuse?
CubsWin!Oregon - December 20, 2009
That was my point, actually.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
Btw...
How did Bradley end up with $22 million next year? I was pretty positive that it was a $4mil signing bonus, $5 mil for the first year, $9mil for the second, and $12mil for the third (with 4+5+9+12=$30mil).
How’s that extra million get in there? (I’m not disagreeing with your numbers, I’m just wondering how it ended up having an extra million. Was there an incentive that I missed?)
CubsWin!Oregon - December 20, 2009
I remember hearing about some discrepancy between numbers reported by various sources.
However, the $22m figure appears to be correct.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
Do you know the source on it?
ClarkFan - December 20, 2009
Thanks.
I’m sure it’ll all make sense to me once we get further along.
I know that Carrie Muskat’s article over at Cubs.com lists Bradley’s salary as $21million as well, which only added to my confusion (seemed like no one would make up their mind about it. :)). And the official press release didn’t specify the monetary details.
CubsWin!Oregon - December 20, 2009
I am more focused on CF
whatever we get from silva is a bonus. Hendry got some payroll flexibility here so make more moves. dont forget the heilman and miles trade also freed up some money. now i know Church has been discussed alot here, but is there anything out there to back up Cub interest in him? i think he’d be a nice addition to the outfield. I would also prefer Ankiel, but really all I have heard is Byrd. Anything else out there? please?
MDavis - December 19, 2009
I just wish we really had Felix Pie right now
He would fit so perfectly in CF. That trade for Olsen then swap for Heilman today just makes me feel sick..
Chanman25 - December 19, 2009
Am I bad at Math?
I keep seeing well, they got 6 million from the Mariners. If Bradley’s contract is worth 21 million and Silva contract was worth 25 million, and the cubs get an extra 6 million does that not mean that cubs affectively have 2 million in additional revenue vice the 6 million I keep hearing about. I guess they could choose to gamble all of the 6 million this year knowing that Lee and Lilly are coming off the books next year.
TheRiot Police - December 19, 2009
they got 9 mill
but part of that is used to offset the salaries
jesus christos - December 19, 2009
What I read on Cubs.com
is that they got Silva and 6 million. I have yet to see an article that states they got Silva and 9 million.
TheRiot Police - December 19, 2009
yes, 6 mill after the salaries are offset
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-19-cubs-milton-bradley-dec19,0,3185137.story
jesus christos - December 20, 2009
Hey guys, first post from Mike Fontenot and Ryan Theriot country........
been following the Cubs for over 30 years and I think one thing is being missed in all this discussion………..even if SIlva absolutely sucks and is as bad a clubhouse cancer as that other idiot is (I don’t even want to say his name) we only have to deal with him on the field every 5 or 6 days MAX. That in itself makes the deal worthwhile to me, although I was screaming like a banshee last year for a one year deal for Adam Dunn….his stick woulda looked damn good crushing balls out onto Sheffield.
On the CF situation, Hendry needs to get someone there who’s a legitimate threat on the basepaths. Pods would have been a good choice a few years ago but I think anything more than a one year incentive laden deal is foolish. Better option would be to trade for someone up and coming like Nyjer Morgan or it he really wants to make a splash try to put something together with Cleveland for Grady Sizemore. Guy has 3 years left on his deal and makes 4.6 million in 2009, $5.6 million in 1010 and $7.5 million in 2011. You’d have to give up a decent amount of players and prospects but IMO it would be well worth it. Of course there are some other young guys out there as well who are very good base stealers, not sure what Boston would ask for Jacoby Elsbury but he would be a great fit too.
bob-eaux - December 20, 2009
do you seriously think
Cleveland is going to trade Grady Sizemore?
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
I've seen alot of guys who I thought would never be traded get traded........
Their team is in disarray and they have a history of being a Hendry trading partner.
Anything is possible in these days and times………………probable, no but maybe.
Collin Cowherd said it best, “what prospect ever won the World Series?”.
The window is closing on this group of Cubs, either they need to try to add the pieces needed to get over the hump or tear it down and start over again.
You don’t seriously think we got any closer in this offseason to the Phillies (or Yankees or Red Sox for that matter) do you?
You either playing for a championship or playing as an also ran…………..FACT.
bob-eaux - December 20, 2009
Silva the closer
I mentioned this in an earlier post but the more I think of it the more I like it. Who are closers anyway? Once effective starters, injured starters for the most part. Silva has the intimidation factor, the pace and the control. Where else could you build this guys value more than in the closer roll. I would start here and only here. Beyond this, I am not too freightened by the rest of the staff. Middle relef looks pretty good. Marmol needs to prove he is a team player IMHO. Last year he pitched pretty bad stomping his feet all the way until he was able to close. Not cool. Guzman needs to learn to respect the manager, which I hope he does because these two are a great 7th and 8th inning duo. Throw in Caridad and Grabow…we look pretty good late in the game. Random.. Hope Marshal will start. Expect Wells to continue his quality starts and sign Tejada moving theRiot to second. We need POP. I will say it again. We need POP. If last year is any indication this offense can go flat so quickly and for so long. Screw D. At this point in the progression of this roster the D gets filled by callups late in the game. Sorry for the long post and probably wacky thought process.
truelinkfence - December 20, 2009
Silva has the intimidation factor?
lol.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
i believe he can turn into fat bastard at will, i call that intimidating
jesus christos - December 20, 2009
im sure
this bradley thing did not impress the new boss but i still like hendry. he seems at his best when he has money to spend. who would,nt. i agree though that his ass is in the fire if the cubs dont do postseason. i think the cubs would just move him into another position rather than fire him.
NOMAR - December 20, 2009
Why is everyone on this site bad at math?
silva was owed 23 million plus a 2 million buyout on his option. for 2012. The buyout is guaranteed. This means silva is owed 25 million dollars.
Bradley is owed 21 million. The difference between their salaries is 4 million dollars.
The mariners are sending 9 million dollars. 9 – 4 = 5 million dollars. The cubs are getting five million dollars net. Not six.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
Bradley is owed $22 million, not $21 million.
Every reporter who has reported this has cited those numbers, as well as the $6 million figure. It’s $6 million, no matter how bad we are at math.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
The reporters aren't doing the math correctly, then.
Bradly was signed for 3 years/$30M (2009-11)
He was given a 4 million signing bonus.
He was paid 5 million salary in 09. He’s owed 9 million in 2010 and 12 million in 2011. 4 Mil signing bonus, plus 5 mil in 09, 9 mil in 2010, and 12 million in 2011 = 30 million dollars. This information is available at Cott’s baseball contracts if you’d like to see it yourself.
9 + 12 = 21 million dollars.
Silva is owed 11.5 million is 2010, 11.5 million in 2011, and has a 2 million buyout for 2012. The buyout is guaranteed. This equals 25 million dollars.
25 owed to Silva minus 21 owed to Bradley is a difference in 4 million dollars.
The Mariners are sending 9 million, 5.5 million in 2010. 9 million minus 4 equals 5 million dollars.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
See above.
Every reporter has reported $6 million. I prefer to believe those people, who have actually got the figure from Cubs management.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
It's incorrect.
Please do the research and look it up yourself. A simple google search will bring up the contract information. Go here: Look at it yourself.This is the definitive source for contract information and used by almost every other baseball blog on the internet. You may prefer to believe an inaccurate report because it looks better for the cubs, but it’s wrong.
I think there was some confusion in calculating how much Silva is owed (with the buyout) and also keep in mind that none of Bradley’s incentives (except for the vested option) have kicked in, and most likely will not kick it. Therefore, they should not be added to the value of Bradley’s contract for our discussion purposes, as it is not worth that much yet.
Bradley is owed 21 million. Silva is owed 25 million. The mariners are sending over 9 million. These are facts.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
I repeat.
I should believe you instead of multiple published reports? Nope.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
here's a "published report"
Laying out the the differences in the contract
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
See above.
The math in that article is incorrect.
Apologies for being rude, but I knew I was right.
Al Yellon - December 20, 2009
I wouldn't trust a baseball reporter to be good at arithmetic
If they could do math, there are better paying, more secure careers than journalism. Most sports reporters aren’t even much at reporting and they get paid for that.
ClarkFan - December 20, 2009
Also, Heyman says 21 mil
so, every reporter hasn’t reported the erroneous figures.
KillaAK - December 20, 2009
Does the $1.0 million disparity matter that much?
redwolf75 - December 21, 2009
No, it doesn't, I suppose.
However, I have received confirmation from a reliable source that the net gain for the Cubs is, in fact, $6 million.
Al Yellon - December 21, 2009
was that from "Deep Pockets"? ;-)
ballhawk - December 21, 2009
LOL
Good nickname.
Al Yellon - December 21, 2009
Based on the circumstance,
Hendry did as well as he could cleaning up his mess. I can’t believe that he got anyone to eat any of that contract with the way things ended here. As Al pointed out, we can cut Silva if it isn’t working and the Cubs will essentially lose $15 million instead of $21 on MB.
Besides that, not much to get excited about with the Cubs this off season because Hendry has spent all his time trying to get rid of his mistake. I guess we can just hope for a lot of Cubs to bounce back…
slocs55 - December 21, 2009
That is the bottom line - the well was so poisoned on Bradley that a $6M cost reduction was probably the best possible outcome
I do hope that no one on the team get fixed on Silva because he is still being paid a lot of money. My guess is that the best possible 2010 scenarion for Silva is 25-26 starts, 150-160 innings, and an ERA of 4.50-5.00. If Gorzo or Marshall are better, they should be the #5 starter, with Silva buried in the bullpen, waived, or given a last chance to redeem himself in Des Moines.
ClarkFan - December 21, 2009
Agreed,
just happy to get past the MB mess and start enjoying Cubs baseball again. I’ll be honest, I found it hard to root for him. By the end of the year, the chirping hand gesture drove me nuts.
slocs55 - December 21, 2009
cutting Silva
what i don’t understand is if the Cubs weren’t willing to cut Bradley, why would they be willing to cut Silva?
DartmouthCubsFan - December 21, 2009
because cutting bradley would have gotten the cubs nothing in return
jesus christos - December 21, 2009
what am i missing here...
cutting silva would get us nothing in return
DartmouthCubsFan - December 22, 2009
we'd still have the 6 mill seattle sent
jesus christos - December 22, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bleed Cubbie Blue to post a comment.