Revisiting the Milton Bradley Issue

What have you people been doing?  I leave for a few days only to come back to find out the Cubs lost two-out-of-three to the mighty Washington Nationals.  What gives?

There’ll be no game recap of any of these games.  You can read Carrie Muskat or any of the other beat reporters for that.  The Cubs are just going through the motions, so I’m not going to pretend that the games matter any more.  I’d rather focus on some of the off field stuff that’s going on.  With the Cubs so far out of the playoff picture, the on field stuff just bores me (at least right now).

**********

Milton Bradley has opened his mouth yet again and has once again made it clear that the Cubs have to get rid of him.  This time, he said some silly stuff about not liking extra inning games because he just wants to get away from the ballpark and get home to his family.  Nice thing to say after he signed a $30 million contract to play baseball.  If he wants to be at home with his family 24/7, he should have just retired.

Bradley also said some cryptic nonesense about being the victim of racism, although in all fairness, what he said was that there is no racism in America anymore.  I read that to be a sarcastic statement on Bradley’s part, but I suppose I could be wrong.  Of course, the odds of me being wrong are so infinitesimal, it’s not even worth considering.

When the Cubs signed Bradley to a 3-year/$30 million contract before the 2009 season, there was some real concern about his character.  It seemed that everywhere he went (seven teams in 10 years), there was always a problem.  He had run-ins with umpires, fans, and the media.  He couldn’t stay healthy anywhere he went.  But in 2008 in Texas, Bradley seemed to blossom.  He had a career year at the plate (as a DH) and he didn’t have any flare ups with anyone.  Based on one year of good behavior and on-field production, the Cubs signed Bradley.  Since then, things couldn’t have gone much worse.

During the course of the 2009 season, Bradley has bumped an ump and been suspended, complained numerous times about the umps having a personal vendetta against him, verbally sparred with the fans, got into a verbal altercation with his manager, gotten called out by his teammates (Alfonso Soriano most notably), and said too many stupid and/or controversial things to the media to keep up with.  To make matters worse, he has done all of this while also having a horrible year on the field. 

Phil Rogers from the Chicago Tribune believes the Cubs should just release Bradley.  He still has two years on his contract and is owed $20 million, but Rogers thinks the Cubs should just eat the money and move on. 

Rogers broaches the possibility of trading Bradley, but thinks the possibilities are so remote that releasing Bradley is the most likely option.  I don’t agree and I’d like to look at the trade possibilities a little closer.

In an article by Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun-Times, he concludes that the only two potential trade partners for a Bradley trade would be the Kansas City Royals and the Toronto Blue Jays.  He rules out every other team for various reasons.  He rules out the Texas Rangers simply because Bradley played there before, so they couldn’t possibly want him back.  Not so fast there, Gordo.  When Bradley left Texas, Manager Ron Washington said that he enjoyed working with Bradley and that he would like to have him back on the team.  Bradley enjoyed the best year of his career in Texas and was on his best behavior.  For these reasons, I’m throwing Texas back into the mix.

That’s three teams that the Cubs could potentially work a trade for Bradley.  In a previous post, I mentioned the Los Angeles Angels as a potential trade partner because they have the Gary Matthews, Jr. contract they would like to move.  However, I don’t think Mike Scioscia would put up with Bradley, so let’s cross them off the list.

Let’s start with Kansas City.  I don’t see the synergy here.  The Royals need some help.  They are one of the worst offensive teams in the AL.  In order to be a match, the Royals would have to believe that the 2008 Bradley, not the 2009 Bradley, is the real Bradley.  It’s possible, but I don’t see it happening.

It is my opinion that the only way the Cubs are going to move Bradley is if they are willing to take on another team’s bad contract.  No one is going to offer the Cubs anything for Bradley just so they can have Bradley on their team.  They are only going to take Bradley if the Cubs can relieve them of one of their problems.  This is one of the reasons I think Texas fits the bill so well.

Texas has two problems.  First, they signed Michael Young before the 2009 season to a five-year, $80 million contract.  There are still four-years and $64 million left on the contract.  But here’s the thing, even though Young is not worth $16 million per year, he is still a productive player who plays hard every day.  By all accounts, he’s a good teammate and a good “citizen.” 

I’m suggesting that it would be better to be on the hook for $64 million over the next four years with Young than it is to be on the hook for two years of Milton Bradley at $10 million per year.  Granted, at 32, Young is not the player he once was, but the Cubs would still be better off with him than Bradley.

So why would Texas make the trade?   That brings up point number two.  Texas owner Tom Hicks is in financial trouble.  MLB is loaning/giving him money to keep him afloat.  The Rangers are going to have to cut payroll one way or the other to help their owner balance his books.  Getting rid of a $64 million liability in exchange for a $20 million liability will look good, at least on paper.  Plus, remember what I said earlier.  They actually liked Bradley in Texas.  Granted, they didn’t step to the plate to sign him after his career year, but maybe that’s just because they didn’t want to outbid the Cubs.  A Michael Young for Milton Bradley trade makes sense for both teams.

I also like the possibility of a trade with Toronto.  In fact, I think Jim Hendry has some leverage he can use with Toronto.   Center fielder Vernon Wells is signed through 2014 and is still owed $107 million (including $8.5 million in 2010 which is the third installment on a signing bonus).  Many people feel this contract is by far the worst contract in all of MLB.

Wells is still a productive player, but the time and money difference between the Wells contract and the Bradley contract is just too great.  If the deal was straight up Wells for Bradley, I would say the Cubs would be better off just releasing Bradley (i.e., the Rogers Option). 

But what if the Blue Jays packaged Wells and Roy Halladay together for Bradley (and maybe a prospect or two)?  Toronto can’t compete in the AL East with Wells contract on their books.  They also have conceded that Halladay is going to be too expensive for them to resign him when his contract expires after the 2010 season.  The Blue Jays only hope of ever moving Wells contract is to package it with the best pitcher in the game.  But every day, Halladay’s value decreases as his contract runs it’s course.

If I were Jim Hendry, I would call my buddy JP Ricciardi and make the following offer:  I’ll give you Milton Bradley (and one or two middling prospects) for Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells, provided we can agree on a contract extension with Halladay.  The worst that Ricciardi can do is say “no,” but I’m thinking that he would at least have to consider it since it would free the Blue Jays of the onerous Wells contract.

If you’re paying attention, you should be asking, “Why wouldn’t another team do this same thing?”  It’s a good question, but the truth is that only a few teams could take on Wells contract.  The Yankees and Red Sox are two possibilities, but if I was Ricciardi, I would be loathe to trade Halladay within my own division.  That would just make it harder for the Blue Jays to compete.  The Dodgers are a possibility, but they already owe Manny Ramirez a lot of money and Dodgers owner Frank McCourt is not a fan of outrageous contracts.  The Angels are another possibility.  However, other than these teams, no other teams can afford Wells contract.  The Cubs are in a unique position.  Not to mention that such a trade would make a big splash for the Ricketts family as they take over the Cubs.

Milton Bradley must go.  It doesn’t make fiscal sense to just release him when there are other options.  Trading Bradley to Texas makes so much sense, I don’t see how it can’t happen.  Working a deal with Toronto would be a little trickier, but the Cubs offer the Blue Jays perhaps the only realistic opportunity they’ll ever have to move the Vernon Wells contract that is financially crushing their organization.  Get busy, Jim.  There’s work to do.

3 Trackbacks

  1. By Cubs Wild Card Hopes Stay Alive « Cubs Notebook on August 31, 2009 at 8:13 am

    [...] Cubs Notebook Just another WordPress weblog « Revisiting the Milton Bradley Issue [...]

  2. By What To Do With Milton Bradley? « Cubs Notebook on September 26, 2009 at 3:11 pm

    [...] examples of this second option are suggestions I’ve made in the past.  The first possibility is for the Cubs to trade Bradley to Texas for Michael Young.  Texas owner [...]

  3. By Ricketts Ready To Take Over Cubs | Cubs Notebook on October 30, 2009 at 9:36 am

    [...] send Bradley and Mike Fontenot to Toronto for Wells, RHP Jeremy Accardo, and OF Jose Bautista.  I talked about a potential trade scenario with Toronto previously, but I had Roy Halladay coming to the Cubs in order to make up for the huge and [...]

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*