PDA

View Full Version : Rumor: Milton Bradley To The Cubs



RedLegSuperStar
01-01-2009, 11:28 AM
MLBTradeRumors.com

Reports say the deal is a "done deal.". Bradley is seeking a 3 year 30 million dollar deal. The Cubs just freed up 9 million with the moves of DeRosa and Marquis.

mth123
01-01-2009, 11:32 AM
Another bat off the list and another opening off the board. Here is hoping that there is still a decent option left when the music stops and the Reds are the only chair left.

It appears that will be the Reds method of acquiring some one.

Tommyjohn25
01-01-2009, 11:35 AM
Ugh...the rich get richer.

mth123
01-01-2009, 11:48 AM
Ugh...the rich get richer.

From the looks of what the Cubs got for DeRosa, the Reds would have been able to acquire him and improve themselves from this move. Robert Manual, Sean Watson and Phil Valiquette would have been a better package of bullpen arms for the Cubs and one that the Reds should have been willing to pay for DeRosa.

DeRosa at 3B with EdE in LF would have made a nice affordable stopgap for the Reds without surrendering anything that would deplete the system. The improved defense at 3B would have been helpful to the young arms as well.

edabbs44
01-01-2009, 12:02 PM
From the looks of what the Cubs got for DeRosa, the Reds would have been able to acquire him and improve themselves from this move. Robert Manual, Sean Watson and Phil Valiquette would have been a better package of bullpen arms for the Cubs and one that the Reds should have been willing to pay for DeRosa.

DeRosa at 3B with EdE in LF would have made a nice affordable stopgap for the Reds without surrendering anything that would deplete the system. The improved defense at 3B would have been helpful to the young arms as well.

Would the Cubs have dealt him to Cincy?

mth123
01-01-2009, 12:06 PM
Would the Cubs have dealt him to Cincy?

Maybe not, but it sure seems like decent RH bats are obtainable without mortgaging the future.

Of course seemingly any name brought up here immediately invokes Cueto, Bruce or Votto as the necessary trade return from the Reds' side.

pahster
01-01-2009, 12:42 PM
What's the over/under on the number of games Bradley is able to play next year?

camisadelgolf
01-01-2009, 12:43 PM
I understand being discouraged by this, but I think people are underestimating the number of quality hitters who are still available through free agency.

Falls City Beer
01-01-2009, 12:48 PM
I understand being discouraged by this, but I think people are underestimating the number of quality hitters who are still available through free agency.

I'm no more discouraged by this than learning that the avalanche that buried me had a billion tons of snow instead of 700 million tons.

Will M
01-01-2009, 12:53 PM
MLBTradeRumors.com

Reports say the deal is a "done deal.". Bradley is seeking a 3 year 30 million dollar deal. The Cubs just freed up 9 million with the moves of DeRosa and Marquis.

Terrible deal for the Cubs. Attitude problems & injuries.(Plus he is a poor defender). I suspect he won't put up numbers close to 2008 over the next three years.

GADawg
01-01-2009, 12:58 PM
What's the over/under on the number of games Bradley is able to play next year?

frankly I'm glad the cubbies took the bait...I'm wondering who will push Lou over the edge first...Milton or Fukodome?

Joseph
01-01-2009, 01:09 PM
Terrible deal for the Cubs. Attitude problems & injuries.(Plus he is a poor defender). I suspect he won't put up numbers close to 2008 over the next three years.

I feel more like that than having any 'fear' of him.

I find it amusing that so many are complimenting the Cubs on this but were the tables turned the same ones would likely be complaining if the Reds had done it.

Reds1
01-01-2009, 01:12 PM
From the looks of what the Cubs got for DeRosa, the Reds would have been able to acquire him and improve themselves from this move. Robert Manual, Sean Watson and Phil Valiquette would have been a better package of bullpen arms for the Cubs and one that the Reds should have been willing to pay for DeRosa.

DeRosa at 3B with EdE in LF would have made a nice affordable stopgap for the Reds without surrendering anything that would deplete the system. The improved defense at 3B would have been helpful to the young arms as well.


Who thinks EE can play LF? I'd rather have Dickerson there at this point I think!

missionhockey21
01-01-2009, 01:56 PM
Wow. I knew signing Taveras would make us the envy of our division, but I have no idea it would force teams to pathetic measures such as signing a 8.97 RC/27 player. Who would have ever thought the Cubs would even attempt to outfox the genius signing of Taveras? Then again, they are not the cleverest bunch.

(FYI, Bradley has twice the RC/27 than Taveras does, plus 1.)

edabbs44
01-01-2009, 02:00 PM
Wow. I knew signing Taveras would make us the envy of our division, but I have no idea it would force teams to pathetic measures such as signing a 8.97 RC/27 player. Who would have ever thought the Cubs would even attempt to outfox the genius signing of Taveras? Then again, they are not the cleverest bunch.

(FYI, Bradley has twice the RC/27 than Taveras does, plus 1.)

Bradley has four times the risk, both in injury and reputational form. He is nowhere worth that risk.

Maybe I would contemplate if Cincy was very close and a Bradley like bat were to put them over the top. But this team is not in that situation.

missionhockey21
01-01-2009, 02:28 PM
Bradley has four times the risk, both in injury and reputational form. He is nowhere worth that risk.

Maybe I would contemplate if Cincy was very close and a Bradley like bat were to put them over the top. But this team is not in that situation.

Never said he was worth the risk or someone Cincinnati should pursue. However, bats of that caliber (risk aside, he has talent) is something we should be pursuing a bit more than stating absurd things like considering Hopper as one of the options for LF. Us paying Taveras 6.5 million dollars would have been money better saved to invest in further Latin America scouting and signing or for high dollar draft players who slip beyond the first round... or in signing a true impact OF bat.

camisadelgolf
01-01-2009, 02:34 PM
Bradley has four times the risk, both in injury and reputational form. He is nowhere worth that risk.

Maybe I would contemplate if Cincy was very close and a Bradley like bat were to put them over the top. But this team is not in that situation.

How is he not worth the risk? Milton Bradley might play only 90 games per season, but he performs very, very well during those 90 games. If you ask me, 90 games of a great player is better than 130 games of an average player. Three years, $30 million is a lot of money, but it wouldn't completely hamstring the organization. The Reds are in need of a stopgap until their prospects come along, and Bradley would be a perfect fit for that role.

edabbs44
01-01-2009, 02:52 PM
How is he not worth the risk? Milton Bradley might play only 90 games per season, but he performs very, very well during those 90 games. If you ask me, 90 games of a great player is better than 130 games of an average player. Three years, $30 million is a lot of money, but it wouldn't completely hamstring the organization. The Reds are in need of a stopgap until their prospects come along, and Bradley would be a perfect fit for that role.

$30MM for a stopgap is poor business.

edabbs44
01-01-2009, 02:52 PM
Never said he was worth the risk or someone Cincinnati should pursue. However, bats of that caliber (risk aside, he has talent) is something we should be pursuing a bit more than stating absurd things like considering Hopper as one of the options for LF. Us paying Taveras 6.5 million dollars would have been money better saved to invest in further Latin America scouting and signing or for high dollar draft players who slip beyond the first round... or in signing a true impact OF bat.

Agreed.

camisadelgolf
01-01-2009, 03:14 PM
$30MM for a stopgap is poor business.

. . . not if the stopgap puts the team in playoff contention, which a 2008 version of Milton Bradley could do.

Falls City Beer
01-01-2009, 03:21 PM
The Cubs not winning the Central has about as much chance as the Titanic did of sinking the iceberg.

Will M
01-01-2009, 03:30 PM
How is he not worth the risk? Milton Bradley might play only 90 games per season, but he performs very, very well during those 90 games. If you ask me, 90 games of a great player is better than 130 games of an average player. Three years, $30 million is a lot of money, but it wouldn't completely hamstring the organization. The Reds are in need of a stopgap until their prospects come along, and Bradley would be a perfect fit for that role.

people howled when Eric Davis was paid $3M and could only play 120 games. they would march on Jocketty with pitchforks if he paid Bradley $10M to play 90 games.

camisadelgolf
01-01-2009, 04:06 PM
people howled when Eric Davis was paid $3M and could only play 120 games. they would march on Jocketty with pitchforks if he paid Bradley $10M to play 90 games.

That was 17 years ago. Players are paid quite a bit more nowadays. Actually, the average salary has almost quadrupled from $851,492 to $2,925,679 since then. Davis was paid $3.6 million, which is less than a third of the $10 million Bradley would be paid. If Davis had played those 90 games with his 1989 numbers, people wouldn't have been complaining so much, but the fact is that Davis had had the worst year of his career up to that point is a large reason why people had such a problem with his salary.

As far as free agents go, I think there are better options than Bradley but very, very few. Fwiw, I'm not saying that the Reds should have offered the same contract. I just think that over-paying is okay as long as the player is actually good, which Milton Bradley would be, even if it's in limited playing time.

mth123
01-01-2009, 04:15 PM
Who thinks EE can play LF? I'd rather have Dickerson there at this point I think!

EE has a hope at having the bat for it. That should be the primary motivation for that spot. I'm a big Dickerson supporter, but he'll never be the offensive player that EdE is even if EdE (who is younger) doesn't improve any more than what he is now. Dickerson would be a plus in CF and has the glove for it (where it matters). EdE should be able to learn LF. If he can't, then DeRosa could play there (and also has the bat for a corner), but the defense is better with DeRosa at 3B and EdE in LF even if EdE proves to be a butcher there.

LF is the spot for offense. If you don't get it there, then you end up compromising at more important defensive positions in order to try to add some runs (I give you Jeff Keppinger and his horrible defense over Paul Janish at SS as exhibit A).

edabbs44
01-01-2009, 05:06 PM
. . . not if the stopgap puts the team in playoff contention, which a 2008 version of Milton Bradley could do.

Then he wouldn't be a stopgap.

But he wouldn't come anywhere near putting up last year's numbers for the Reds and would most likely miss in the neighborhood of 70 games.

No thank you.

Highlifeman21
01-01-2009, 11:22 PM
I feel more like that than having any 'fear' of him.

I find it amusing that so many are complimenting the Cubs on this but were the tables turned the same ones would likely be complaining if the Reds had done it.

You think adding Milton Bradley to the Reds would have been a bad thing?

Will M
01-01-2009, 11:25 PM
You think adding Milton Bradley to the Reds would have been a bad thing?

absolutely 100% yes

he is a jerk who is usually injured and can't field worth crap.

Highlifeman21
01-01-2009, 11:29 PM
absolutely 100% yes

he is a jerk who is usually injured and can't field worth crap.

Barry Bonds is/was a jerk, but dude could rake. Ty Cobb was one of the biggest SOB around, dude could rake. There have been plenty of guys who aren't model citizens, but they could rake.

As long as Bradley can put up his career numbers for at least 90 Games a season, he's helping your ballclub.

And as for his fielding, he'd play LF, and LF D should be the least of our concerns for this roster.

SS D, that's a problem to address. C D, that's a problem to address. 3B D, that's a problem to address. LF D, you add a big bat out there, and the lack of D takes care of itself...

Topcat
01-02-2009, 03:47 AM
Would the Cubs have dealt him to Cincy?

Now see that is a totally rational view would they ? My guess is no.

Topcat
01-02-2009, 04:21 AM
$30MM for a stopgap is poor business.

Dead on with that edabbs and I seldom think that of your opinions:D

westofyou
01-03-2009, 12:10 PM
This of course has not happened, shouldn't the title reflect the reality of the situation?

Falls City Beer
05-20-2009, 10:58 PM
Milton Bradley has been a great signing for the Cubs. rofflecopter.