Trade Candidates

Melky Cabrera — After trading for Curtis Granderson, the Yankees suddenly have a surplus of good, young outfielders.  They may be interested in trading either Cabrera or Brett Gardner.  If the Cubs could snag Cabrera, they would be getting a guy that hit .274/.336/.416 for the Yankees in 2009 with 13 homeruns and 68 RBI.   The switch hitting Cabrera is just 25-years old and earned $1.4 million in 2009.  As a fielder, UZR/150 says he’s just slightly above average, posting a rating of 2.3.  UPDATE: Cabrera has been traded to the Braves, so he’s now off the board.

Shin-Soo Choo — Choo is a 27-year old outfielder from Korea.  Last year with the Indians, Choo hit .300/.394/.489 with 20 homeruns and 86 RBI.  He also had 21 stolen bases and was caught just twice.  It was the best year of his major league career.  He is currently listed as the Indians starting right fielder, but Matt LaPorte is breathing down his neck and Cleveland may be interested in trading him.  Choo has only played a handful of games in center field, but he’s been an above-average left fielder in his career and an average right fielder, so I’m assuming he can handle center field.  Choo earned $420,300 in 2009 and is likely due for a raise.

Rajai Davis — The Oakland A’s are stock full of outfielders, potentially making Rajai Davis available.  Davis hit .305/.360/.423 with  3 homeruns and 48 RBI in 390 ABs.  he also had 41 stolen bases and was caught stealing 12 times.  UZR/150 likes Davis, giving him a 17.8 rating in center field in 2009.  The 29-year old davis (he’s not a kid) earned $410,000 in 2009 and will likely be in line for an increase in 2010.  Jim Hendry and Billy Beane have worked well together on deals in the past.  Might the get together this off season on Davis? 

Jacoby Ellsbury — Ellsbury could be the odd man out in Boston now that the Red Sox have signed center fielder Mike Cameron.  It’s unclear where Ellsbury will end up playing or even if he’ll be starting.  In 2009, Ellsbury hit .301/.355/.415 with 8 homeruns and 60 RBI.  He also stole an impressive 70 bases while getting caught just 12 times.  He’d look good at the top of the Cubs batting order.  Ellsbury gets gigged for his 2009 UZR/150 rating of  -18.3, but I’m not buying it.  Chris Moore at BaseballAnalysts.com took a look at Ellsbury’s defense and concluded that UZR/150 probably missed the boat.  Ellsbury is just 26-years old and could fill center field for the Cubs for years to come.  And at just $449,500 per year (his 2009 salary), he’s a bargain.

Dexter Fowler — Fowler is a good looking young ballplayer (I sound like Harry Caray) who hit .266/.363/.406 with 4 homeruns and 34 RBI in 2009 for Colorado.  He’s just 23-years old and is coming off his rookie season with a lot of promise.  UZR/150 didn’t like his fielding much, giving him just a -20.3 rating.  Fowler is currently blocked in center field in Colorado by Carlos Gonzalez, another promising youngster.  There’s no guarantee that Fowler is going to follow up his rookie campaign by continuing to develop, but I think it would be a fairly safe risk for the Cubs, especially considering that he is so inexpensive (he earned just $401,000 2009).

Brett Gardner — Who would you take from the Yankees, Melky Cabrera or Brett Gardner?  In 2009, Gardner hit .270/.345/.379 with 3 homeruns, 23 RBI and 26 stolen bases in 248 ABs.  He’s a terrific center fielder with a career UZR/150 rating of 27.6.  In a crowded Yankees line-up, it’s tough to say who will be the odd-man out, but it appears to be either Cabrera or Gardner.  Could Gardner be the Cubs center fielder of 2010 and beyond?

Gary Matthews, Jr — The Angels badly want to trade Matthews.  Here’s what the Cubs should consider:  He’s not much of a hitter anymore, he’s not a very good fielder anymore, and he’s very expensive.  Need I say more?

Nyjer Morgan — Washington acquired Morgan last year from Pittsburgh.  He put together a good year between the two teams, posting a hitting line of .307/.369/.388 with 3 homeruns and 39 RBI.  He also stole 42 bases in 2009.  Unfortunately for Morgan, he was stealing third base on August 28 against the Cubs when he broke his hand and missed the remainder of the season.  In 2009, Morgan posted an impressive 40.5 UZR/150 rating.  Not only could he handle center field at Wrigley, but he could also be the lead-off hitter that the Cubs sorely need.  But why would Washington trade him?  Good question.  Unfortunately, at this moment, I don’t have a good answer.  At 29-years old, Morgan is a bit of a late bloomer.  He made just $411,500 in 2009 and is going to be affordable for some time to come.

Cody Ross — Ross is not a kid like a lot of the people on this list.  He’s 29-years old (that’s not that old) and is a bit more of a known quantity than some of the other trade candidates.  What we know is that he hit .270/.321/.484 with 24 homeruns and 90 RBI in 2009 for Florida.  We also know that 2009 was the best year of Ross’ career.  But to be fair, Ross has been coming on strong since 2007.  He primarily plays center field, although he also spent time in right field and is currently listed as the Marlins starting right fielder.  In center field, Ross had a UZR/150 rating of -9.5 in 2009.  Ross earned $2.225 million in 2009 and accepted arbitration for 2010.

Aaron Rowand — San Francisco would like to move Rowand’s contract.  In 2009, the 32-year old center fielder hit .261/.319/.419 with 15 homeruns and 64 RBI.  He had a 1.5 UZR/150 rating and he earned $8 million on a contract that runs through 2012.  He is still owed $36 million.  The Cubs don’t need to bring in an aging outfielder who is on the down-side of his career and making a lot of money.  Although I like Aaron Rowand, I don’t think he is the answer in center field.

Grady Sizemore — To be honest, I don’t think the Indians have any interest in trading Sizemore, but I saw him on another list, so I thought I’d include him.  In 2009, Sizemore hit .248/.338/.445 with 18 homeruns and 64 RBI in what by Sizemore standards was a down year.  Sizemore is signed through 2011 and is owed $13.1 million.  His contract also includes an $8.5 million option in 2012 with a $500,000 buyout.  Sizemore had a -4.0 UZR/150 rating in 2009, but he has a career UZR/150 of 5.4.  I don’t think it matters.  He’s not going anywhere.

Denard Span — Would Minnesota be willing to trade Denard Span?  If so, the Cubs need to get to the front of the line.  In 2009,  the 25-year old Span hit .311/.392/.432 with 8 homeruns and 68 RBI.  And he did it for a cheap $435,000.  UZR/150 gave him a fielding rating of -7.4, but from everything I’ve read, he does a fine job in center field.  He has emerged as one of the top lead-off hitters in baseball and would be a good long-term investment for the Cubs.

Willy Taveras — I’m pretty sure that the Cubs could convince the Reds to trade Taveras for a couple of prospects.  Cincinnati badly needs to cut payroll and the weak hitting Taveras is owed $4 million in 2010.  Trading for Taveras would not be a good move.

Vernon Wells — Okay, I don’t think the Cubs should trade for him and his monster contract either, but I thought he should be listed anyway because he’s available.  I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Wells makes a lot of money.

Chris Young — Young is a 26-year old center fielder for Arizona.  He hit .212/.311/.400 in 2009 with 15 homeruns and 42 RBI.  His UZR/150 rating for 2009 was -9.8.  I’m not as high on Young as some people are.  I do think he has potential, but I’m not convinced he’s ever going to realize that potential.  He’s signed through 2013 and is owed $26.25 million over the next four years.  The contract also includes a club option for 2014 for $11 million with a $1.5 million buyout.  Although I included him in this list, my hope is that the Cubs don’t pursue him.

Eric Young, Jr. – The 24-year old Young is an interesting player for the Cubs.  He plays both second base and center field (just like his dad).  As it turns out, the Cubs need to fill both positions.  At the moment, Young is a reserve for Colorado, but he appears to be ready for prime time.  He only played in 30 games in 2009, and is eligible for Rookie of the Year in 2010.   Trading for Young would be a bit of a risk.  Does he have what it takes to be an all-star caliber big leaguer?

A Look At The Offseason (Part 1 – Infield)

Today, I want to turn my attention to the outfield.  The general concensus has been that Milton Bradley will be traded in the offseason, so the Cubs will either need to replace him in right field or they”ll instead move Kosuke Fukudome back to right and then go shopping for a center fielder.  We’ll look at both possibilities.  But first, let’s take a look at the potential market for Bradley to get a feel for what a trade may bring in return.

In a previous post, I stated that the only way the Cubs are realistically going to be able to trade Bradley is to take back another teams’ bad contract or package Bradley with some other valuable players.  I’ve also thrown out some possible trade scenarios.  Let’s run them down in no particular order here:

Milton Bradley to San Francisco for Aaron Rowand — Bradley is owed $21 million over the next two seasons and Rowand is owed $36 million over the next three years.  San Francisco would like to jettison some payroll in order to make some moves, but at the moment they are hamstrung.  By taking on Bradley, the Giants could reduce payroll a bit and could add a typically high-OBP bat to their lineup.  From the Cubs perspective, Rowand will be 32 years old during the 2010 season.  He is coming off one of the worst seasons in his career, having hit .261/.319/.419 with 15 homeruns and 64 RBI.  Rowand could fill the potential void left in center field, but his defense has taken a hit over the years and the Cubs would be commiting to having him on the team for three years.  Not a perfect trade for the Cubs, but what is?

Milton Bradley to Texas Rangers for Michael Young — In a nutshell, the Texas Rangers are in bad financial trouble.  The team is for sale, but the process is moving slowly.  If owner Tom Hicks can’t unload the team soon, he instead is going to have to unload some payroll just to keep the team afloat.  The Rangers’ highest paid player is Michael Young.  He is owed $64 million over the next four years.  Trading Young for Bradley may not make baseball sense for the Rangers, but it would make financial sense.  From the Cubs perspective, they could take advantage of Texas’ financial woes by unloading Bradley and bringing in the middle-of-the-order run producer they covet.  In 2009, after spending some time on the DL, Young hit .322/.374/.518 with 22 homeruns and 68 RBI.  He currently plays third base, but the Cubs would have to move back to shortstop, which is his preferred position.  This would also force Theriot to second.  The move would also reunite Young with hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo to whom he gives much credit for his hitting ability.

Milton Bradley to Los Angeles Angels for Gary Matthews, Jr. — At one time not too long ago, Gary Matthews, Jr. was considered a hot commodity.  In 2007 he was signed by the Angels to a 5 year, $50 million contract.  But just one year later, the Angels signed Torii Hunter to play center field and Matthews became the highest paid 4th outfielder in baseball.  At the moment, Matthews is still owed $23 million over the next two years.  In limited action in 2009, Matthews hit .250/.336/.361 with four homeruns and 50 RBI.  My guess is that the Cubs would jump at this trade.  The contracts are basically a wash and Matthews could fill a need in center field.  He may not be the power threat that Michael Young is, but I think it is fair to say that his power numbers will increase if he is getting regular playing time, which could make him the middle-of-the-0rder run producer the Cubs are looking for.  Plus, he’d be reunited with Rudy Jaramillo who was his hitting coach in 2006 when he had the best offensive year of his career.  The real question is, would the Angels take on Bradley?  The Angels and Mike Scioscia  have a history of not putting up with player misbehavior.  But they are under some pressure to trade Matthews, both because he has asked for a trade and because they pay him a lot of money to be a 4th outfielder.  There’s a chance Vlad Guerrero could be leaving the Angels, so Bradley could step in as a DH.  If I had to guess, I would guess that the Angels would not go for this trade.

Milton Bradley to Tampa Bay Rays forPat Burrell — According to Bruce Levine with ESPN Chicago, the Cubs are still talking to Tampa about a Bradley for Burrell trade.  Just typing that makes my head hurt.  Burrell is a DH.  Don’t the Cubs realize that there is no DH in the NL?  When he does play in the field, he plays left field.  We have one of those already.  This trade make no sense to me, but it looks like it’s a possibility.

Milton Bradley (and others) to Toronto Blue Jays for Vernon Wells and Roy Halladay — Toronto is in a world of hurt.  They need to rebuild their team in order to compete in the AL East, but they are saddled with such big contracts that they can’t make any moves.  Vernon Wells is owed $98.5 million over the next five years, plus another $8.5 million in 2010 that is the third installment of his signing bonus.  Halladay is owed $15.75 million in 2010 and then he becomes a free agent.  Together, that’s a ton of money.  Is there any scenario where this would make sense for the Cubs?  Maybe.  The only way I see it working out is if the Cubs are given the opportunity to work out an extension with Halladay before the deal is made.  Even if this happened, it still might not be enough for the trade make sense for the Cubs.  Vernon Wells contract is just too crazy.

Milton Bradley to Detroit Tigers for Curtis Granderson or Magglio Ordonez — I have to admit, I don’t completely understand this rumor.  I don’t see why Detroit would trade either Granderson or Ordonez for Bradley.  Even so, the rumors have been persistent.  Granderson is signed through 2012 and is owed a total of $14.75 million.  Considering his production, he has a rather reasonable contract.  He also has a club option for 2013 for $13 million and a $2 million buyout.  In 2009, Granderson hit .249/.327/.453 with 30 homeruns and 70 RBI.  He also stole 20 bases on a team that generally does not steal many bases.  Ordonez is owed $18 million for 2010.  There is also a vesting option for 2011 for $15 million.  Ordonez struggled at the plate for a good part of 2009, and still managed to put up a hitting line of .310/.376/.428 with 9 homeruns and 50 RBI.  Granderson will be  29 years old in 2010 and Ordonez will be 36.  Honestly, I don’t know why the Tigers would trade either guy for Bradley, but if they’ll do it, the Cubs should jump at the chance.

Milton Bradley (and others) to Baltimore Orioles for Brian Roberts and Luke Scott — If Baltimore would go for this trade, it could fill the Cubs two biggest offseason needs all at once.  Roberts would be the lead-off man they have lacked for years and Scott is the middle-of-the-order run producer they are looking for.  But would Baltimore really go for it?  My opinion is that they should.  Let’s face it, the Orioles are not in a position to compete in the AL East.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the only way the Orioles win the East is if they decide to rank the teams alphabetically next year.  Since that’s the case, why would the Orioles hang on to two guys that are a) expensive, and b) not going to be around in a few years when the Orioles will be in a better position to compete.  Roberts is owed $40 million over the next four years and Scott’s 2010 salary will be set via arbitration, but it’s safe to say that he’ll be getting a raise from the $2.4 million he made in 2009.  If I was in Baltimore’s shoes, I would look to jettison payroll now and bring in young players who they can put around Matt Weiters and can help them compete in a few years.  Of course, Andy MacPhail hasn’t asked for my advice.

**********

We can be sure that Alfonso Soriano will be in left next year for the Cubs and Kosuke Fukudome will either be in center or right.  That leaves one starting position and two back up positions open in the outfield.  I’ve layed out the possible players the Cubs can acquire through a trade of Milton Bradley.  Let’s look at possible free agent targets.

The three most intriguing free agent center fielders to me are Marlon Byrd, Mike Cameron, and Rick Ankiel.  Byrd is expected to sign a two or three year deal for $5+ million.  There’s also been quite a bit of speculation that the Rangers would like to resign him.  Byrd hit .283/.329/.479 with 20 homeruns and 80 RBI.  He’ll turn 33 during the 2010 season.

Mike Cameron will be 37 in 2010, but he has been very steady throughout his career.  In 2009 he hit .250/.342/.452, which is remarkably close to his career averages.  He made $10 million in 2009, but is probably looking at signing a one-year contract for less money.

Rick Ankiel should be a low cost, high upside player.  However, his agent is Scott Boras, so who knows what kind of money he might be looking for.  He hit .231/.285/.387 with 11 homeruns and 38 RBI in 2009 in limited action.  He’d be a risk, but at the right price, could be a good investment.  The problem is, I don’t think his price is going to be right.

Right fielder free agent targets include Bobby Abreu and Jermaine Dye.  I’m fairly certain that Abreau is going to be looking for a multi-year contract (two or three years) for somewhere around $10 million per year.  He’s already turned down a two-year, $16 million contract extension from the Angels.  I like Abreu, but I’m afraid he has priced himself out of the Cubs’ budget.

Jermaine Dye made $11.5 million in 2009 and hit .250/340/.453 with 27 homeruns and 81 RBI.  Even so, Dye may end up walking the same road that Abreau walked last offseason.  I can foresee Dye signing a one year deal for $4 million – $6 million.  Dye has always performed and has not really gotten the credit he deserves.  Signing Dye for one year at $5 million could be a good investment for the Cubs.

The 4th and 5th outfielders are probably with the club already.  They will come from a list of Micah Hoffpauir, Jake Fox, and Sam Fuld.  There’s also the possibility that the Cubs will re-sign Reed Johnson, although my personal opinion is that Johnson would cost too much.  I don’t foresee the Cubs going after a free agent to fill one of the reserve outfielder positions.

**********

Next up is a look at the Cubs pitching staff for 2010.  Are they set or will they go shopping for pitching this offseason.  Stay tuned…

A lot of hitters who have worked with Jaramillo disagree with Lee’s assessment.  Former Cub Mark DeRosa gives a great deal of credit to Jaramillo.  “I can’t give him enough credit for the way I’ve been able to make adjustments,” DeRosa said in an article written by Jorge Ortiz in USA Today back in 2006.  DeRosa continued, “Had I not met him, I wouldn’t have made this adjustment and who knows what would have happened. It’s not just me. I’ve watched him do it with Gary Matthews Jr., Dave Dellucci, even Michael Young, who has become one of the best hitters in the game.”

Yankees first baseman Mark Teixeira also has high praise for Jaramillo. ”He doesn’t cookie-cut anyone’s swing or anyone’s approach. Every player’s different.  He realizes that.  He makes you the best hitter you can be.”

Both Alfonso Soriano and Milton Bradley worked and thrived under Jaramillo’s tutelage while they were in Texas. “I liked working with Rudy because he spoke Spanish and we could really communicate,” says Soriano.

The Cubs signed Jaramillo to a 3-year,$2.4 million contract yesterday, making him the highest paid coach in MLB.  If he can duplicate the success in Wrigley that he had in Texas, it will be money well spent.

**********

Want to know more about Rudy Jaramillo’s hitting philosophy.  Check out his website.  You can even buy a DVD detailing Jaramillo’s hitting approach or have him analyze your swing.  Interesting stuff…

**********

We previously talked about the possibility that Rudy Jaramillo being brought in by the Cubs was a sign that Milton Bradley would be sticking around.  Jim Hendry addressed this concern in an article written by Carrie Muskat of MLB.com:

“Hendry said Jaramillo’s success with Bradley had nothing to do with the Cubs’ decision to hire him. Bradley led the American League in on-base percentage and batted .321 in 2008 in Texas, but struggled to hit .257 this season in Chicago and was suspended for the final 15 games because of detrimental conduct.

“Hendry has talked to teams in an attempt to trade the outfielder and the $21 million still owed on his contract.

“We play the cards that we have,” Hendry said. “Milton’s on the Cubs’ roster [now]. That’s how we go about it until somebody’s not on the Cubs’ roster. [Jaramillo's relationship with Bradley] didn’t have any connection. We could’ve had 20 different guys on our roster and Rudy would still be sitting here today as our No. 1 guy.”

So Jaramillo joining the Cubs doesn’t mean that Bradley will be with the team in 2010.  But Tim Dierkes from MLBTradeRumors.com thinks he should be.  Tim writes:

“The Cubs seem dead-set on moving Bradley and finding someone else to play right or center field.  A player they loved a year ago, they hate now.  Bradley had a slow start and finish, showed little power, and had issues with the fans, media, and manager.  Still, he posted a .378 OBP in the off-year and certainly could improve upon that in 2010.  My advice: work it out, rather than eating $15MM+ or taking on a different bad contract.  Bradley is not the reason the Cubs received over 2,000 plate appearances of subpar hitting from Soriano, Fontenot, Soto, Hill, Hoffpauir, and Miles, nor is he the reason Ramirez was limited to 342 PAs due to a shoulder injury.”

As much as I like Tim and admire the job he is doing at MLBTR, I completely disagree with him.  True, Milton Bradley’s bad behavior is not to blame for the poor season that Alfonso Soriano, Mike Fontenot, Geovany Soto, et al had in 2009.  He’s also not the reason that Soriano, Aramis Ramirez, Carlos Zambrano, et al spent time on the DL.  But that’s not really the point, is it? 

Forget for the moment that the Cubs had any other issues to contend with in 2009.  Just focus on Bradley.  Judge Bradley strictly on the merits of his performance and his behavior.  There’s no doubt that his on field performance was sub-par in 2009, but when you couple it with his unstable, even paranoid behavior and the negative impact it had in the clubhouse, bringing Bradley back for another year is just untenable.  A line has been crossed that can not be uncrossed.  The bridges have been burned.  Jim Hendry must find another home for Bradley and the Cubs must turn the page.

Even if you accept Tim’s contention that Bradley “certainly could improve upon” his 2009 performance, does it really matter when you factor in Bradley’s behavior?  If Bradley didn’t have the history of odd, unstable, inappropriate behavior he has exhibited over the course of his career, then maybe I would agree with Tim.  But no matter his on field performance, the Cubs can not afford the negative impact Bradley’s behavior has on the rest of the team.  Bradley is a talented player and he certaily has the potential to put up some respectable numbers.  Unfortunately, the negative impact of his personality and behavior always outweighs whatever positive impact he provides on the field.

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.

Rich Harden earned the victory on Sunday by pitching 6.0 innings of one hit baseball.  The only hit he gave up was a first inning solo homerun to Joey Votto.  In his 6.0 inning stint, Harden struck out eight and didn’t allow any walks.

Ryan Theriot, Aramis Ramirez, Milton Bradley, Alfonso Soriano and Koyie Hill all had two hits on the afternoon.  In fact, Milton Bradley was 2-for-2 with two singles and two walks.  I know it was just two hits and two walks, but the fact that he was on-base each of his plate appearances makes Sunday’s performasnce perhaps his best as a Cub. (Game video and interviews here)

The Astros visit Wrigley starting today for a four game set.  Carlos Zambrano (7-4) takes on Cubs killer Wandy Rodriguez (10-6) in the first match-up of the series.

**********

There are only five days left (including today) before we run up against the trade deadline.  It’s looking more and more like Roy Halladay will remain with Toronto.  Philadelphia made a push over the weekend, but they were rebuffed by the Blue Jays.  Toronto wants Kyle Drabek and JA Happ – Philadelphia’s two top pitching prospects – but Philly doesn’t want to part with them, at least not both.  It looks like Philly may be turning their attention to the less expensive Cliff Lee.

Both the Rangers and Angels remain interested in Halladay.  However, the Angels likely don’t have the prospects Toronto wants.  The Rangers have the prospects and the willingness to trade them, but it looks like they don’t have the payroll flexibility to take on Halladay’s contract.

**********

The Cardinals obtained Matt Holliday from the A’s in exchange for top prospect Brett Wallace and two other minor league prospects.  They previously obtained Mark DeRosa from Cleveland for pitching prospect Chris Perez and a PTBNL.  The PTBNL was named yesterday and it was Jess Todd.  According to MLB Trade Rumors, Todd was highly thought of in the Cardinals organization and Baseball America had him listed as the Cardinals #4 prospect.

The Cardinals are obviously going all in to win the NL Central this year.  They’re mortgaging their future and draining their farm system for a shot at the brass ring right now.  However, I’m not sure that they have the horses to get it done this year, and trading away so many of their top prospects is going to make it more difficult to win in years to come.

Milwaukee has been involved in the Roy Halladay sweepstakes, but they are on the outside looking in.  Instead, they have turned their attention to Jerrod Washburn of the Seattle Mariners.  According to Tom Hardicourt of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Seattle is looking for a shortstop and the Brewers have two good ones in JJ Hardy and Alcides Escobar.  Trading away either one for a few months of Washburn would be a high price to pay, but the Brewers may think they have a leg up on re-signing him when he becomes a free agent at the end of the year since Washburn is a Wisconsin native.

Washburn could probably help the Brewers, but he’s no CC Sabathia.  If they are looking to catch that lightning in a bottle again, they’re probably in for disappointment.  Sabathia put the Brewers on his back last year after he was acquired from Cleveland, and he led them into the playoffs.  It’s doubtful that Washburn can do the same.

Houston, who is just 2.0 games behind the Cubs in third place, is unlikely to make any moves at the trade deadline.  In an interview with Brian McTaggart of MLB.com (and reported by MLB Trade Rumors), Houston GM Ed Wade said:

“We’re having conversations with clubs, but I don’t expect us to be doing much of anything,” Wade said. “The key components aren’t going to change, and that’s the economics and the talent in the system. Those things aren’t going to change overnight. If something makes sense we’ll pursue it, but there’s nothing going on now.”

That leaves the Cubs.  What are they going to do at the deadline?  Considering the ownership situation, don’t expect any blockbuster trades.  However, acquiring something less that Roy Halladay may be a possibility.

Jim Hendry is looking for a left-handed bullpen arm and George Sherrill of Baltimore is the most likely target.  He is a closer for the Orioles right now, but would probably be used as a LOOGY by the Cubs.  That would allow the Cubs to move Sean Marshall back into the rotation to sub for Ted Lilly while he’s on the DL.

Hendry may also be looking for a starting pitcher, especially since Lilly jumped on the DL.  Possibilities include Zach Duke and Tom Gorzelanny of the Pirates.

Speaking of the Pirates, might Freddie Sanchez be Chicago bound?  It’s a longshot, but the Mike Fontenot experiement at second base hasn’t gone so well and I’m sure Lou Piniella would feel more comfortable trotting Sanchez out to second every day instead of Fontenot (or Aaron Miles or Andres Blanco).

Is there any possibility of moving Bradley at the deadline?  I suppose anything is possible, but it’s unlikely.  I wouldn’t mind swapping bad contracts with the Angels for Gary Matthews, Jr. or Toronto for Vernon Wells.  I spoke about this previously here.

I understand that both Matthews and Wells are overpaid.  I also understand that they would cost the Cubs more than the Cubs are currently paying Bradley.  However, I see Bradley as a clubhouse cancer that is going to eat away at the team for the remainder of his contract.  Paying  to get rid of the cancer is a good idea and it just might bring back something useful.  For instance, either Matthews or Wells are better CF options than the Cubs currently have.  Putting either one in CF would allow Piniella to move Kosuke Fukudome back to his natural position in RF.

Having said all of this, it’s probably not going to happen.  Even if the Angels or Blue Jays were interested, the Cubs probably can’t take on the additional payroll at the moment.  But that doesn’t mean we can’t dream.

But the big news of the day came in the sixth inning.  After flying out to go 0-3 for the game, Milton Bradley came back to the dugout, threw his helmet, and then attacked a water cooler.  There were some reports that the victim was the oft-abused Gatorade cooler, but the Gatorade cooler was apparently spared to the deteriment of the water cooler.

After the tantrum, an angry Lou Pineilla told Bradley to get dressed and go home.  Sending a player to the showers is a somewhat routine occurence, but sending one home in the middle of a game is extremely rare.  The exchange between Piniella and Bradley then escalated, with Piniella reportedly following Bradley into the clubhouse and calling him a “piece of shit.”

According to several published reports, the tension between Bradley and Piniella has been building for some time.  In fact, the tension is apparently between Bradley and the rest of the team, not just Piniella.  Several people have expressed both publically and privately that Bradley’s “me first” attitude has worn thin in less than a half-a-season with the club.

According to Bruce Miles with the Daily Herald, “Apparently, the Cubs feel that Bradley is acting selfishly. GM Jim Hendry talked with us in the runway after the game and said he wanted players to be ‘all in.’  I pressed him on that, and he said that ‘all in’ means all for the team. Some of Bradley’s teammates also are beginning to wonder.”

In case you have forgotten the details of Bradley’s season this far, Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun-Times reminds us:

“Bradley has been a recurring issue for Piniella almost since Day 1 of his three-year deal — from the nagging groin injury in April that dragged beyond day-to-day status without a move to the disabled list, to the ejection and subsequent suspension in his first Wrigley Field at-bat, to complaining publicly and to staff that umpires were conspiring against him because of his past run-ins.

“All the while, he has struggled to avoid minor injuries, limiting him to just 45 starts while struggling to hit when he has been in the lineup. Touted as the big left-handed bat the Cubs sought in the offseason, the switch-hitting Bradley is hitting just .200 from the left side.”

Bradley’s act has apparently worn thin on several of his teammates.  According to Chris DeLuca of the Chicago Sun-Times, Alfonso Soriano was one of them:

“Privately, the players in the Cubs’ dugout wanted to give Piniella a standing ovation. Veteran Alfonso Soriano, who doesn’t get the credit he deserves for being a true team leader, said he had never seen anything like it during his nine-year career. And then Soriano — always one of the first Cubs in the clubhouse — put the onus on Bradley to shape up or ship out.

”’That’s my first time to see a manager fighting with a player; get mad with a player,” Soriano said. ”Sometimes you can get mad, but not like that. It’s something new for me every day.

”’We are 25 players, and we have to be on the same page. If he is not 100 percent to help the team win, we don’t need him. If he’s 100 percent and he wants to play, he’s more than welcome.”’

Granted, it’s a little odd to hear Soriano publicly bash Bradley, considering that he is in a rather severe slump of his own.  Even so, it is telling that Soriano said anything at all.  He normally doesn’t say anything critical of other players.  That hasn’t been his MO.  So if Soriano is talking, chances are that the rest of the team is tired of Bradley’s act as well.

I have to admit that I’m a little concerned about double standards here.  After all, Piniella didn’t have much of a reaction when eaith Carlos Zambrano or Ryan Dempster threw tantrums earlier this year, destroying a Gatorade cooler.  He also didn’t react this harshly when Zambrano and Michael Barrett got into a physical fight last year.  The fact that the whole organization, from Jim Hendry to Lou Piniella to the players, has reacted against Bradley leads me to believe that there is more going on than has been reported.

From Wittenmyer:

“From the front office to the clubhouse, Cubs personnel sympathize with Bradley’s frustration, and nobody blames him for struggling. But an apparent preoccupation with his individual issues over the team’s efforts to shake a first-half malaise has worn on teammates, even down to things as simple as working close pitches for walks with runners on base when putting the ball in play with less than two outs might score a rare and needed run.”

So what happens now?  Lou Piniella said that nothing more will happen and that he’ll be putting Bradley in the lineup today.  But Jim Hendry wasn’t so quick to just put this episode in the past. 

”’We’ve potentially got a lot of good things still going on here,” Hendry said. ‘We feel like we are going to get back and contend and be in the race. And you certainly don’t want actions that aren’t conducive to somebody being all-in every day.’

“Hendry has said the Cubs did their homework on Bradley before signing him to the three-year, $30 million contract, but it’s no secret the talented outfielder has had his troubles elsewhere.

“Does this come with the territory when dealing with Milton Bradley?

”’What comes with the territory is being appreciative of a great place to play and a team that won 97 ballgames,” Hendry said. ”If you’re going to play here, you have to be all-in.”’

So does that mean that Hendry is looking into trading Bradley?  And if so, who would take him?  Actually, there’s two questions contained in that one question: 1) who would want him, and 2) who could afford him? 

The only way the Cubs could trade Bradley is if they could ship him to another team for another player with a bad contract.  Two such teams and players that come to mind are the Angels with Gary Matthews, Jr. and the Royals with Jose Guillen.  Here’s how they compare:

Milton Bradley
31 years old    56 Games/169 AB    .237/.355/.379    5 HR    16 RBI

Gary Matthews, Jr.
35 years old    44 Games/139 AB    .223/.276/.324    2 HR    18 RBI

Jose Guillen
33 years old    58 Games/210 AB    .257/.339/.410    8 HR    33 RBI

According to Cot’s Baseball Contracts:

• Milton Bradley is signed through 2010 ($5 million in 2009, $9 million in 2010) with a vesting option for 2011 ($12 million) if he plays in 75 or more games in 2009.
• Gary Matthews, Jr. is signed through 2011 ($10 million in 2009, $11 million in 2010, $12 million in 2011).  He has a full no-trade clause in 2009 and partial no-trade clause in 2010 and 2011.
• Jose Guillen is signed through 2010 ($12 million in 2009, $12 million in 2010).  He also has some minor incentives for receiving league awards and he receives a suite for road games.

There are several points to consider here.  First, neither Matthews nor Guillen are exactly hitting well either, but that’s not really the point.  I’m fairly certain that the Cubs would gladly trade Bradley’s production for the exact same production minus the headaches.

From what I know of the situation, the Angels would happily trade Matthews just to get rid of his contract.  He is a 4th (or 5th) outfielder for them and he has one of the worst contracts in baseball.  I’m also fairly certain the Matthews would waive his no-trade clause to go almost anywhere where he would see more playing time.  But what would the Angels do with Bradley?  On an AL team, Bradley would predominately be a DH.  The Angels have Vlad Guerro DHing right now, but his contract is up at the end of the year and rumor has it that the Angels will not invite him back.

Then the question becomes, what would the Cubs do with Matthews?  First, he’s a right fielder (who can play CF in a pinch), so he could step right in for Bradley.  He’s also a switch hitter just like Bradley.  Finally, he’s not as volatile or as selfish as Bradley.  True, Matthews is a little more expensive ($5 million more in 2009, $2 million more in 2010), but the Cubs have to face the fact that it is going to cost them money to move Bradley.

Trading for Jose Guillen is more of a longshot, although the Royals are reportedly willing to part with their everyday right fielder.  So why would the Royals trade for Bradley?  First, he is more affordale than Guillen.  In 2009 he’s $7 million cheaper and he’s $3 million cheaper in 2010.  By trading for Bradley, the Royals could give some of their young outfielders a chance to play.  In addition, Mike Jacobs is the Royals current DH and he isn’t hitting any better than Bradley.  Plus, Jacobs’ contract is up at the end of 2009, so the Royals would have a DH already in house (albeit a more expensive DH).

Why would the Cubs want Guillen?  He would be significantly more expensive in 2009 and 2010, but after 2010 they would be done with him.  Even so, taking on that much additional payroll in 2009 and 2010 might be difficult to do considering the Cubs current ownership situation.  And I hate to even mention it, but Guillen is cursed by hitting from the right side.  Of course at this point, the Cubs might not be so enamored with left-handed hitters.

So, if the Cubs traded for Guillen they would spend more money, but they could plug Guillen into right field right away.  They would also add a guy to their lineup that is hitting better and with more power.

In order to make any deal, the Cubs will probably have to give up a prospect or two.  I hate that, but the unfortunate truth is that Bradley has become a distraction to this team and sacrifices are going to have to be made to move the distraction. 

Whether you love him or hate him, it seems clear that Milton Bradley does not have the personality needed to succeed in the Cubs spotlight.  In a place like Texas last year, he could do his job without being the center of attention.  The same could be true in Kansas City and perhaps LA (bigger city than Chicago, but less attention is paid to the Angels than the Cubs).  The move could be good for Bradley and would almost assuredly be better for the Cubs.