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?

If the Cubs are actually interested in Granderson (I think they are), they are not going to be alone.  According to Ken Davidoff of Newsday, both the Yankees and Angels have an eye on the Detroit center fielder.  Presumably, the Yankees would move Melky Cabrera to left to accommodate Granderson in center.  The move would also lessen the need/likelihood of the Yankees bringing back Johnny Damon, Hideki Matsui, or both.

The Angels are interested in using Granderson as a left fielder (since they already have Torii Hunter in center).  A Granderson trade by the Angels would force Juan Rivera over to right field, or off the field completely and into the DH role.

Regardless of the competition for Granderson, Jim Callis of Baseball America (via MLBTradeRumors.com) thinks the Cubs are in the best position to make a trade with Detroit.  At the moment, the Cubs have a plethora of young middle infield talent that may interest Dombrowski and the Tigers. 

In an article from a couple of days ago, Phil Rogers of Chicago Breaking Sports.com opined that the Cubs should offer up Carlos Marmol and Starlin Castro for Granderson.  I disagreed with Rogers as far as Castro goes, but I agreed that the Cubs should aggresively pursue Granderson.  Today, in his latest article, Rogers throws Josh Vitters and Andrew Cashner into the mix. 

One guy that I really trust on matters involving the Cubs, especially the minor leagues, is Arizona Phil at The Cub Reporter.com.  Somewhat surprisingly, Arizona Phil says that he too would trade Starlin Castro for Curtis Granderson.  In comment #15, Arizona Phil admits that Castro is the Cubs best shortstop prospect, but also says that the Cubs have other good prospects at short as well.

In comment #13, Arizona Phil says:

“Curtis Granderson is exactly the type of speed/power combo player Jim Hendry and Gary Hughes love. If he is available, I believe Hendry will go after him, even if it costs the Cubs Starlin Castro, Andrew Cashner or Jay Jackson, and a third pre-arb auto-renewal guy (like maybe U. of Michigan alum Jake Fox?).”

I would be hesitant including Castro in a trade for Granderson.  However, generally speaking, I think you are almost always better off trading an unproven minor leaguer for a proven major leaguer.  Starlin Castro looks like he has the makings of a big league star, but how many players have looked exactly the same way in the past and have fizzled once they reached the big leagues?  Too many to count. 

I don’t want to gut the Cubs farm system for Granderson, but one of the purposes of developing prospects is to use them as trade bait for proven big league players.  Too often, I think we as fans fall in love with the Cubs prospects and we want to make then untouchable.  However, very few guys ever make it to the big leagues with the team that drafted them.  More often than not, they make it to the big leagues with their second or third team (if they make it at all). 

 I can live with including Castro in a package for Granderson.  It would annoy me a bit, but I could live with it.

**********

As you may recall, in a report on ESPN Chicago radio a few days ago, Bruce Levine said that he expected the Cubs to announce a trade involving Milton Bradley.  The announcement hasn’t come yet, but I have heard an interesting rumor that actually makes some sense.

The oft quoted (at least in this post) Arizona Phil of The Cub Reporter threw out the possibility of the Cubs trading Bradley to Tampa Bay in exchange for Pat Burrell.  Phil believes the two teams will split Bradley’s 2011 salary.

Once they obtain Burrell, the Cubs will turn around and trade him to the Mets for Luis Castillo.  The Mets badly want to trade Castillo and the move will open up a spot at second base for free agent Orlando Hudson.

From the Cubs perspective, they’ll get rid of Bradley and the trade will allow them to add Castillo at second.  Castillo will turn 35 during the 2010 season.  He hit .302/.369/.354 in 2009 for the Mets with 1 homerun and 40 RBI. Castillo is signed through 2011 and is set to earn $6 million per year.  In 2009, Castillo had the worst fielding year of his career according to Fangraphs, with a UZR/150 rating of -12.0.

The Cubs are desperate to get rid of Bradley, and the fact that they may end up  with Luis Castillo shows just how desperate they are.  To be fair, it appears that most teams interested in trading for Bradley are teams that will only make a trade if the Cubs pay all/most of Bradley’s salary.  So although Castillo is not the ideal second baseman, Jim Hendry would probably be lucky to get him, if it means not having to pay too much of the $21 million still owed to Bradley.  I guess I can’t be too critical if the move helps the Cubs dump Bradley and add a piece (albeit a not very good piece) that they need (i.e. a second baseman).

This three-way trade is by no means perfect, but it may just be the best that the Cubs can do.  And when it comes to getting rid of Milton Bradley, that may be enough.

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…

In an article by Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune, Jim Hendry is quoted as saying Joshua didn’t do anything wrong.  He said Joshua was brought in from the minors to replace Gerald Perry in June and was told it was a temporary assignment.  Hendry also told Joshua at the time that he could have his old job back if things didn’t work out.

Later in the article, Derrek Lee is quoted as saying, “I hate to say it, but a hitting coach is overrated.”  He also said that neither Perry nor Joshua were to blame.  If a player doesn’t hit, it’s the player’s fault, not the hitting coach’s.

In addition to looking for a middle-of-the-order bat and a leadoff hitter in the offseason, Hendry will now also be looking for a hitting coach.  What promises to be a busy offseason just got a little busier.

**********

The season isn’t quite over yet.  Both the Tigers and Twins won yesterday, so they will play a one game playoff today at the Metrodome in Minnesota.  This is the second year in a row the Twins will be playing in a one game playoff.  They lost to the White Sox last year.

-edit- The one game playoff will be held on Tuesday (10/6), not Monday (10/5).

The other teams going to the post season in the AL will be the Yankees, Angels and Red Sox.  The Yankees will await the outcome of today’s game between the Twins and Tigers and will then host the winner.  The Angels will host the Wildcard winning Red Sox to start their best-of-five series.

In the NL, the Rockies will travel to Philadelphia to take on the Phillies beginnning Wednesday afternoon.  The Dodgers will host the Cardinals at Chavez Ravine beginning Wednesday night.

I’m picking the Yankees and Red Sox to survive in the AL, while the Phillies and Cardinals will play for the pennant in the NL.  All Division Series games will be broadcast on TBS

**********

Alex Rodriguez entered the sixth inning of yesterday’s game against the Rays needing seven RBI to hit 100 for the season.  Time was running out and it didn’t look like he would make it.  What happened next is a new AL record.

 Rodriguez came up with two on and belted a three run homer off Rays pitcher Wade Davis.  The homerun brought him closer to the century mark in RBIs, and Rodriguez thought he might get one more at-bat in the game.  But as the Yankees continued to batter Rays pitching, that at-bat came sooner than ARod thought it might. 

The Yankees half of the sixth inning continued and Rodriguez found himself in the on deck circle when the Rays intentionally walked Mark Teixeira to load the bases.  Rodriguez then delivered his second homerun of the inning, this one a grand slam, giving him seven RBIs in the inning and a new AL record.  His second homerun of the inning was also his 30th homerun of the season, giving him seven consecutive years of 30 or more homeruns.

**********

I’ve advocated for a salary cap in the past on these pages.  I’m less concerned with a cap controlling a team’s spending as I am in forcing teams like the Pirates and Marlins to spend a minimum amount.  As it is, these teams are spending less on player payroll than they receive in revenue sharing.

Another concern I have with the disparity in spending is that  lower spending teams have trouble competing.  Of course, those who disagree with me point to teams like the Twins who have been at least in the hunt for the plaoffs most of the past decade.  The Marlins are another example.  Not only have they made the playoffs, but they won the World Series, beating the high spending Yankees.

As I’ve said in the past, the low spending teams making the playoffs is the exception that proves the rule.  Murray Chass disagrees with me.  In a recent article, Chass makes the assertion that there is no problem with the system as is and that it should be left alone.  To prove his point, Chass offers the following:

These are the teams, according to their rank in the salary standings, that have made the playoffs the last 10 years. This year’s lineup includes the Tigers and the Rockies, who had not clinched their spots when this was posted. (number in parentheses is the number of teams in the top 8 that were in the playoffs):

• 2009 (6): 1-4-5-6-7-8-12-17
• 2008 (4): 2-5-6-7-9-10-15-28
• 2007 (5): 1-2-5-7-8-22-23-26
• 2006 (3): 1-5-6-12-14-17-19-21
• 2005 (4): 1-2-5-6-10-12-14-16
• 2004 (5): 1-2-3-7-8-11-12-19
• 2003 (3): 1-4-6-10-11-17-23-26
• 2002 (3): 1-4-7-10-13-16-27-28
• 2001 (4): 3-5-6-8-9-12-17-26
• 2000 (3): 1-3-5-12-15-18-25-27

Chass’ point is that in almost every year, there are lower payroll teams in the playoffs.  Here’s my point: In seven of the past ten years, at least four of the top eight highest payroll teams made the playoffs.  And in every one of those 10 years, four of the top twelve spending teams qualified for the post season.  So what you have is the top spending teams claiming four playoff spots every year and the remaining 18-22 teams fighting over the remaining four spots.

I’ll be the first to admit that spending a lot of money doesn’t guarantee a team a spot in the playoffs.  Just look at the 2009 version of the Cubs.  But when money is wisely spent, the team that spends the most usually wins.

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.

In Sunday’s game, the Cubs offense exploded for eleven runs to beat the Nationals 11-3.  Micah Hoffpauir, Jake Fox and Mike Fontenot all had three hits in five at-bats.  Fox and Alfonso Soriano hit homeruns for the Cubs, and Kosuke Fukudome went 2-4 in the leadoff spot.  It was the third day in a row that Fukudome led off and was 2-4.

The win moves the Cubs into second place in the NL Central, just two games back of the Cardinals.  Milwaukee and Houston are three and four games back respectively.

The Cubs now travel to Philadelphia to take on the Phillies.  Ted Lilly will start for the Cubs against the Phillies’ Rodrigo Lopez.

**********

Speaking of the Phillies, they remain the most likely destination for Roy Halladay should the Blue Jays trade him.  However, Tim Kurkjian commented yesterday on ESPN Radio that he doesn’t believe that the Phillies have the pieces necessary to trade for Halladay.  He said that the Blue Jays are looking for two MLB-ready players (one a pitcher), and two top prospects. 

According to Danny Knobler of CBSsports.com (via MLBTradeRumors.com), the Brewers are in the hunt for Halladay.  Knobler writes:

“Rival teams say the Brewers have enough prospects to make a Halladay deal, even though they’ve suggested they won’t trade Alcides Escobar or Mat Gamel. One intriguing possibility: A team that talked to the Brewers was told that shortstop J.J. Hardy could be available “in the right deal.” “

I hate to hear that.  Facing the Brewers with Doc Halladay on the mound wouldn’t be much fun for the Cubs.

**********

Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports says that the Cubs are one of the teams showing interest in Baltimore closer George Sherrill.  Other teams thought to be interested according to Rosenthal are the Marlins, Dodgers, Brewers, and Angels. 

Orioles GM Andy McPhail has taken the position that Baltimore doesn’t need to trade Sherrill, but the truth of the matter is that Sherrill is probably the best closer available right now and his trade value may never be higher.  Plus, Sherrill’s contract is up at the end of the year.  If Baltimore has any plans to move Sherrill, now may be the time.

In 2008, Sherrill had 31 saves in 37 opportunities.  So far in 2009 he has coverted 20 of 23 save opportunities.  In 38.1 innings, Sherrill has given up 30 hits, struck out 35 and walked 12.  In comparison, Kevin Gregg has converted 18 of 21 save opportunities this year.  He’s pitched a total of 44.1 innings giving up 37 hits, striking out 43, and walking 18.

Comparing their contracts, Sherrill is on a one-year contract worth $2.75 million.  He’ll be a free agent at the end of the 2009 season.  Gregg is also on a one year contract and he too will be a free agent at the end of the season.  Gregg earns $4.2 million per year.  Gregg is 31-years old while Sherrill is 32.

I’m not convinced the Cubs have much interest in Sherrill, but if they do, my guess is that they would use him in the 7th or 8th inning to get to Gregg rather to replace him.  Sherrill is not much of an upgrade over Gregg, if in fact he is an upgrade at all.

The easy answer is that they need a new owner in place before July 31 who is willing to take on payroll.  That answer’s not much fun since it is highly unlikely that the Cubs new owner will be in place before the trade deadline.  So for the moment, let’s assume that Jim Hendry will be given permission to add Halladay to the roster if he can make a deal.  Otherwise, this will be a very short post.

According to reports, the Phillies, Yankees, and Dodgers are the three most likely landing spots for Halladay if he is traded.  In my opinion, the Yankees are an extreme longshot since they play in the same division as Toronto.  I can’t imagine the J.P. Ricciardi would be willing to trade his ace inside the division. 

Another way to look at this is that the entire purpose of trading Halladay is to acquire prospects that can help the team win in the future (as well as budget relief).  So why would Toronto trade Halladay, arguably the best pitcher in baseball, to one of the teams they will be competing against in the division?  To me, it just doesn’t make sense.

However, Anthony Reber of Newsday.com has an idea that could potentially make sense to Toronto.  What if the Yankees were willing to take on the contracts of Halladay and CF Vernon Wells in exchange for 3-4 prospects?  Wells is owed $110 million over the next 4 1/2 years, a contract that Toronto would certainly like to jettison.  If the Blue Jays could rid themselves of two very big contracts, they would be able to redirect their payroll in ways that could make the team more competitive more quickly.

It’s an interesting argument.  With so much payroll flexibility and 3-4 of the Yankees top prospects, the Blue Jays could build a potential contender.  However, my argument holds.  I just don’t see Toronto trading Halladay in the AL East.

What about the Dodgers?  Any trade for Halladay would likely include Clayton Kershaw going to Toronto and Ned Colletti of the Dodgers has basically made him untouchable.  The Dodgers love their prospects and with one glaring exception, they normally shy away from commiting too much of the payroll to one player.  Halladay will cost them (or anyone else that trades for him) about $7 million for the rest of this season and $15.75 million in 2010.  With the exception of Manny Ramirez, the Dodgers don’t have anyone on their roster commanding that share of the payroll budget.  I consider the Dodgers to be a longshot to land Halladay.

That leaves Philadephia.  They just signed Pedro Martinez for the remainder of this year, but they insist his signing will not prevent them from pursuing other players.

Philadelphia has a definite interest and need for Halladay.  They also have the prospects that would be needed to make the trade; or at least they did until yesterday.  According to Ken Rosenthal at Fox Sports, Jason Knapp, one of the Phillies top pitching prospects, went on the DL yesterday with shoulder fatigue.  That could throw a monkey wrench into the works.

In recent days, the Angels and Cardinals have emerged as potential trade candidates for Halladay.  Rosenthal dispels the possibility that the Angels could land Halladay.  Sure, they have interest, but they don’t have the trade chips necessary to make the deal.

The Cardinals also have interest and they have top prospect Brett Wallace who the Blue Jays once coveted.  To make the deal even more appealing, Halladay and Cards ace Chris Carpenter are close friends.  The one sticking point for the Cardinals is that they don’t have the MLB-ready starter that the Blue Jays say they want as part of any package.  The Cards already have to send a pitching prospect to Cleveland to complete the Mark DeRosa deal, so they’re currently a bit thin on pitching prospects.

That’s where the Cubs come in.  Not only would it be great to add Halladay to the rotation, but it would also be important to keep him out of St. Louis.

The Cubs have the MLB-ready pitching that Toronto wants.  Any deal could include Sean Marshall or Randy Wells.  A deal would also likely include the Cubs top prospect, 3B Josh Vitters.  I know Cubs fans would hate to see him go, but trading a prospect (someone with the potential to be good someday) for the best pitcher in baseball seems like a good move to me.  Plus, the Cubs don’t have the greatest track record when it comes to developing prospects.  Consider that before Vitters took the title, the Cubs top prospects were Felix Pie (2006-07), Brian Dopriak (2005), Angel Guzman (2004), Hee Seop Choi (2003), Mark Prior (2002), and Corey Patterson (1999-2001).

Adding Halladay will obviously cost the Cubs money and prospects, but he’s the type of pitcher that can instantly turn around or solidify a rotation.  And unlike CC Sabathia was last year for the Brewers, Halladay is just a few month rental.  He’ll be around for at least a year-and-as-half and the Cubs will have first shot at signing him to his next contract.  A rotation in 2010 of Halladay, Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly, and either Marshall or Wells would be mighty nice.

As long as we’re dreaming, let’s dream big.  What if the Cubs were to pull the same type of stunt that Anthony Reber suggested the Yankees pull, namel trading for both Halladay and Vernon Wells.  The Cubs could send Marshall or Randy Wells to Toronto along with Vitters and Milton Bradley (one bad contract for another).  Sure, Vernon Wells is overpaid and signed through 2014, but he is a better CF than anyone the Cubs currently have, he’s hitting better than Bradley (even though he isn’t hitting that great), and he isn’t the distraction that Bradley is.  There’s a lot to like about this deal!

Okay, while this has been fun, let’s be honest.  The likelihood that the Cubs will be involved in the Roy Halladay sweepstakes, let alone land him, is remote.  My best guess is that if Toronto trades Halladay, he’ll end up in Philadelphia.  Unfortunately, I think the Cardinals are next in line should Philadelphia falter.  That could hurt. 

Hendry has pulled off some impressive trades in the past.  Can he somehow, some way work something out for Halladay?  Doubtful, but you never know.

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.

**********

Today, I want to talk about a colum that Jason Stark has on ESPN.com.  In it, he has a few things to say about the Cubs.  First he talks about the Cubs offensive woes.  Here’s what he has to say:

Who bat-napped the Cubs’ offense?

 

Was it really only last year that the Cubs led the National League in runs (5.31 per game), slugging (.443) and on-base percentage (.354)? Yep, sure was. You can look that up.

So is there a logical explanation for why almost an identical lineup — substituting Milton Bradley for Mark DeRosa — should rank 26th in the big leagues in runs scored (4.24 per game), 21st in slugging (.397) and 20th (.325) in on-base percentage?

Well, there are explanations. You can decide for yourself how logical they are.

Aramis Ramirez has been out since May 9 with a dislocated left shoulder. And that’s a gigantic factor. “He’s got such a presence,” one scout said. “You fear that guy.”

And no one has done more than Geovany Soto to perpetuate the idea that the sophomore slump is no myth. He’s hitting .228 (down from .285), slugging .372 (down from .504) and has gotten shockingly pull-conscious. “He didn’t get off to the same kind of start,” GM Jim Hendry said. “And he’s really tried to overdo it.”

Then there’s Bradley, who couldn’t possibly have gotten off to a rockier start — going 3 for his first 31, spouting umpire-conspiracy theories and turning himself into a local boo magnet. “He’s a good player,” one scout said. “It just seems like there’s always a tension that follows him.”

And finally, you have Alfonso Soriano (hitting .167, with two homers and a .231 OBP, since May 19) and Derrek Lee (finally picking it up after spending the first six weeks under the Mendoza Line).

But if you’re looking for one pivotal number, it’s 29. That’s the number of points this team’s on-base percentage is down from last year, an enormous plummet.

“What that tells me,” Hendry said, “is that we’ve got a lot of real high-character guys who care, and they got off to slow starts and now they’re trying to do too much, chasing bad pitches and trying to be the guy who gets us going. And it snowballs.”

But maybe not for long. Ramirez should be back in a couple of weeks. Bradley has hit .341 the last two weeks. Lee has a 21-game hitting streak. And Soriano is 41 points below the lowest batting average of his career, and 105 points below the .531 slugging percentage he put up from 2002 to 2008. So “hopefully,” Hendry said, “in the second half, we can play more like we did last year.”

I thought Hendry’s explanation was weak, but if you’re in his shoes, what are you going to say?

**********

Jason also talked about the possibility of the Cubs re-aquiring Mark DeRosa (a move I heartily endorse).  Here’s what he said:

Reunion time?: And now for another potential Cleveland deal to watch: For all the weird talk in Chicago last week about some kind of fictional rift between Mark DeRosa and Lou Piniella, we’ve been hearing that the Cubs have kicked the tires on a deal that could bring DeRosa back to Wrigleyville.

For one thing, the reason the Cubs traded DeRosa in the first place had nothing to do with any “rifts.” It was because they’d have had to play almost an entire right-handed-hitting lineup if they’d kept him, and because they needed to move salaries to fill other needs.

But by late July, DeRosa would have only about $2 million left on his $5.5 million salary. So we’re guessing the Cubs might be allowed to take on that kind of money. That’s still unclear, though, given their ownership issues.

Finally, we know the Cubs have been doing some preliminary poking around for a bat. But because they aren’t sure where they’d play that bat, they’ve been asking about what one exec they talked to described as a “DeRosa-type player,” with enough versatility to be moved around as needed. But nobody fits that description, obviously, better than DeRosa himself.

Extremely well said.  The Cubs need a DeRosa-type of guy and no one is more like DeRosa than DeRosa himself.

I’ll only add that Crane Kenney has already said that the Cubs can add a smaller contract at the trade deadline and he used Mark DeRosa’s contract as an example.  It would be hard for him (or anyone else) to say the Cubs can’t afford DeRosa considering that Kenney has already said they could.

**********

The Cubs starting pitching is getting it done this year.  Unfortunately, the bullpen has not been good and the offense at times has been non-existent.

Jason Stark provides a list of the best and worst teams when it comes to having the starters complete 6 1/3 innings or more in their starts.  The Cubs are tied for second place with 33 (the Reds and Angels also have 33).  The Blue Jays lead the majors with 36.  The Brewers are 26th with only 19 games of 6 1/3 or more innings pitched by their starters.  I would think that would bode well for the rest of the season (although it hasn’t panned out so far).

**********

The Daily Herald reported that Geovany Soto tested positive for marijuana during the World Baseball Classic in March.  Soto addressed the issue by saying, “I don’t want this to be a distraction for me or my teammates. I’d appreciate if this is the last time we talk about it. It’s embarrassing, and I want to move forward. I’m man enough to do stuff; I’m man enough to face it. I just want to apologize to the Cubs’ organization, my family and the fans.”

Without being overly judgemental, this was a stupid thing to do by Soto.  At the time of the test, he was representing Puerto Rico in the WBC.  After the WBC, he had Spring Training with the Cubs.  Is being high really the best way to approach these responsibilities.

Soto claims that it was an isolated incident, but people will still question whether or not it is pot smoking that has led to Soto’s dismal offensive performance this year.  And if it’s not his pot smoking, is dealing with the aftermath of a failed drug test weighing too heavily on Soto’s mind?  Is that why he’s not hitting?  It was just a stupid thing to do no matter how you look at it.