Admittedly, I am in the minority on this issue.  Given the circumstances, I think Jim Hendry did an excellent job of trading the troubled Bradley without having to pay a significant amount of money to do it.  In fact, he even got Seattle to throw in some money on the deal. 

Most of the criticism of the deal centers around the fact that Carlos Silva is not very good.  It’s a difficult point to argue.  In 2008, he posted a 4-15 record and a 6.46 ERA.  In 2009, Silva had a 1-3 record and an 8.60 ERA in eight starts before injuring his shoulder and missing most of the remainder of the season.

His contract doesn’t help the situation.  Silva is owed $11.5 million in 2010, another $11.5 million in 2011, and a team option for 2012 worth $12 million with a $2 million buyout.  That’s a lot of money for a guy who apparently isn’t very good.

If I had to defend Silva (which I don’t, but I will), I’d point out that his last two years have been the worst of his career and now that his shoulder is repaired, there’s reason to hope that he’ll rebound to his previous form.  To give you an idea of what Carlos Silva is capable of, his career ERA is 4.72 even after his two disastrous years in 2008-09.

I’d also point out that four times in his eight year career, Silva has pitched 180 or more innings in a season.  So dispite his injury last year, Silva appears to be a workhorse.

Finally, I’d point out that, while Silva stunk up the joint in 2008, he did it for a team that lost 101 games.  Silva may not have helped the cause much, but the Mariners were the worst team in the AL that year, so his record and ERA may be at least partially a result of the team he pitched for.

I’m not sure what critics of the trade expected the Cubs to get in return for Bradley.  At one time early in the off season, I held out hope that Bradley could be included in a package that could possibly net Roy Halladay from the Blue Jays or Brian Roberts and Luke Scott from the Orioles.  That was foolish.  It was nothing more than wishful thinking.

Then I predicted the Cubs would trade Bradley to San Francisco for Aaron Rowand.  In some respects, I think that deal had possibilities, but only if the Giants were willing to risk adding Bradley to their clubhouse.  They wisely were not willing to take that risk.

I threw out a couple of other scenarios that were probably just as unrealistic as those I listed above.  It was during the Winter Meetings that I finally realized that there really was no market for Bradley.  Despite being one of the better hitters OBP-wise in the game, the vast majority of teams simply didn’t want to invite his abrasive personality into their clubhouse.  Texas was only willing to bring Bradley back if the Cubs would pay them $16 million to do it.  Tampa Bay had a potential interest, but only if the Cubs took Pat Burrell off their hands (a player the Cubs could not use) and paid several million dollars for the privilege.

During the Winter Meetings, I finally understood just how little leverage Jim Hendry and the Cubs had.  They had painted themselves into a corner and had made it clear to anyone paying attention that they fully intended on trading Bradley, no matter the cost.  No other team had reason to negotiate too hard.  They knew they had the upper hand.  Hendry and the Cubs were negotiating from a distinct position of weakness.

That’s why my opinion is that Hendry did an excellent job of trading Bradley.  Was it a perfect trade?  Absolutely not.   Will Carlos Silva help the 2010 Cubs?  It’s too early to tell.  But given the circumstances, Jim Hendry made the best of a very bad situation.  Of course, it’s important to remember that the “very bad situation” was of Hendry’s own doing, but in the end, he got the best deal he could reasonably get.

Tampa Bay remains the Cubs most likely trade partner.  But even the Rays are no sure thing.  They are willing to deal Pat Burrell to the Cubs for Bradley, but only if the Cubs are willing to pick up most or all of Bradley’s $12 million salary in 2011.  The Cubs have reportedly offered to pay $5 million of Bradey’s 2011 salary, but that’s not cutting it for the Rays at the moment.

Rays manager Joe Maddon has been quoted as saying that he would welcome Milton Bradley to the team.  He bases his opinion on a lunch he had with Bradley last off season.  Sound familiar?  Didn’t Bradley sell his bill of goods to Jim Hendry at a lunch last off season as well.  Bradley may make a nice lunch companion, but I pity any team that brings him into their locker room.

Even if a deal can be struck, it remains to be seen what the Cubs will do with Pat Burrell.  He has no place on the Cubs (other than perhaps as a very expensive bench bat), and the Cubs are taking a risk trading for him before they have another trade in place to move him.  The Mets were once linked as a possible team that could step in to make this a three-way trade, but that rumor has died down over recent days.

The Texas Ranger are another possible trade partner for the Cubs.  The Rangers are rumored to be offering pitcher Kevin Millwood and his $10 million 2010 salary, but only if the Cubs pick up a substantial portion ($16 million or more) of Bradley’s salary for 2010 and 2011. 

I’m not sure that a trade with Texas is very likely.  Not only are the Cubs loathe to pay another team $16 million or more to take Bradley, but, as Carrie Muskat of MLB.com tweets, Texas isn’t sure they want to take on “that headache” again.  Of course, “that headache’ is Bradley.

The Cubs feel confident (at least in public) that they can move Bradley.  Gordon Wittenmyer of the Sun-Times wrotes that there are two team interested “for sure” (Rays and Rangers), “with at least one more team in the picture.”  Muskat said the same thing a few days ago, but didn’t bother to name the third team.  Now Wittenmyer is doing the same thing.

Wittenmyer goes on to discuss the urgency of the situation.  The Cubs need to move Bradley quickly so they can turn their attention to filling the team’s other needs.

“But whatever they do, they need to move quickly if they want to get the most out of the available trade and free-agent market, specifically, free-agent center fielder Mike Cameron, who is high on their wish list and also drawing interest from other teams.”

I have to admit, I had much higher hopes for a Bradley trade early on that what it looks like the Cubs are going to have to settle for.  I had envisioned a trade with the Orioles where the Cubs would package Bradley a 2-3 prospects for Brian Roberts and Luke Scott.  In hindsight, that was obviously naive.  I thought that teams would be more willing to take on Bradley.  I should have known then that the promise of Bradley’s OBP can not overshadow the near certainty that he is going to misbehave and disrupt his team’s locker room.  Of course, I can be forgiven.  Jim Hendry suffered under this same illusion during last off season.

At this point, the Cubs need to get what they can for Bradley and then move on.  He already played his part in sidetracking the Cubs in 2009.  The Cubs can’t allow him to do the same thing to the 2010 team.

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…

Bruce Miles of the Daily Herald says that Jim Hendry is focused on hiring Jaramillo, who is technically under contract until the end of October.  In fact, Miles opines that Hendry will go after Jaramillo with “laser beam-like” focus.  Carrie Muskat of MLB.com says on her blog that the Cubs have already contacted the Ranger to request perrmission to talk to Jaramillo.

I had no idea that hitting coaches get paid so much, but Jaramillo was earning $600,000 a year with the Rangers, according to Jon Heyman at Sports Illustrated.com.  Heyman goes on to say that the Cubs may increase his annual pay to $750,000/year.

Considering their poor offensive showing in 2009 (with the exception of Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez), the Cubs can only go up in 2010.  Whoever ends up being the hitting coach will probably look pretty good if the Cubs hitters just get back to their career average levels.

**********

There has been a lot of speculation in the press about where Milton Bradley may end up.  In one sense, I’m surprised more isn’t going on with Bradley.  My guess is that a lot is happening behind the scenes, but not being reported because of MLB’s “ban” on any news that distracts from the playoffs.  I suspect that something concerning Bradley’s future will be announced shortly after the World Series.

Up until now, the speculation has been that Bradley will be traded to San Francisco in exchange for Aaron Rowand or to Tampa Bay for Pat Burrell.  If these are the only two options, I say go for Rowand.  He can fill the spot in center field and will allow Kosuke Fukudome to move back to right.  Even so, I think there are better options.

I think my favorite “proposal” is to trade a package of players (including Bradley) to Baltimore for Brian Roberts and Luke Scott.  Another possibility is to trade Bradley to Texas for Michael Young.  Admittedly, it’s not a good deal for Texas, but they desperately need some payroll relief because of owner Tom Hicks’ financial problems.  Young is the highest paid player on the Rangers, so the move could make financial sense even if it doesn’t make baseball sense.   

I’m less crazy about trading a package of players (including Bradley) to Toronto for Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells.  Having Halladay would be great, but taking on Wells contract could turn into a huge mistake.  From a baseball standpoint, I think you can justfy this trade.  But from a financial standpoint, it could be a disaster.

What other potential trades for Bradley are lurking out there?  It should be an interesting few weeks.

**********

Does anyone own more ugly suits than Craig Sager of TBS?  There should be a law…

San Diego GM Kevin Towers has stepped forward and said the Padres may have an interest in Bradley for next year.

“I haven’t had any calls from Jim (Hendry) about him,” Towers told ESPN.com. “But I think people kind of know what players we target. We have to take chances sometimes. We took a chance on Milton the first time we had him, and he actually played pretty well [before his knee injury]. We could be in the market for an outfielder. I’m not saying it’s necessarily Milton. But our experience with him was rather a positive one. It wasn’t really a negative one.”

That seems like a borderline tampering statement to me, but in any case, what does it mean?  To me, it means that the cheapskate Padres would be willing to provide a safe landing spot for Bradley provided the Cubs pay his contract.  Decent of them, don’t you think?  And what will the Cubs get in return?  Likely a couple of guys who have been minor league lineup filler for the Padres and who will never see the light of day at Wrigley Field without first purchasing a ticket.

Thanks, Kevin (May I call you Kevin?), but I’ve got to believe there are other options out there.  The Trib’s Paul Sullivan suggests the Royals as a potential trading partner.  According to Sullivan, the Royals consider Bradley to be a talented hitter who could potentially thrive in a low-key environment like Kansas City. 

Would the Royals be willing to pick up much, if any, of Bradley’s salary?  Who do they have to trade to the Cubs in exchange for Bradley?  Again, if all the Cubs want to do is a salary dump, then Kansas City might make a good trade partner.  However, I don’t think they are going to pick up much of Bradley’s salary or trade anyone worthwhile to the Cubs.

When it comes to trading Milton Bradley, here’s my philosophy:  The Cubs can either dump Bradley and pick up the majority of his salary, in which case there may be several potential takers out there, or they can trade him to a team that has some bad contracts of their own and just swap bad contracts.  In either case, it is going to cost the Cubs some money to move Bradley.  I prefer the second option to the first because the Cubs get something worthwhile in return.

Two examples of this second option are suggestions I’ve made in the past.  The first possibility is for the Cubs to trade Bradley to Texas for Michael Young.  Texas owner Tom Hicks is in financial trouble and MLB is pressuring him to sell the team and/or cut payroll in order to get his baseball finances in order. 

Young is the highest paid player on the Rangers and is owed $64 milion over the next four years.  Trading a four-year $64 million contract for a two-year $21 million contract makes financial sense for Texas. 

Plus, Bradley gets along well with Rangers manager Ron Washington and the front office seems to like him.  Of course, if Hicks sells the Rangers or otherwise gets a cash infusion, acquiring Bradley for Young may not seem like such a good idea.

My other suggestion is to have the Cubs trade Bradley and a pitcher (Zambrano?  Dempster?  Lilly?) to Toronto for Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells.  Wells has the worst contract in all of MLB and it may end up being the Blue Jays’ only chance to move it. 

This proposed trade would get Bradley to Toronto, where he could potentially do well out of the limelight (and out of the country), and would provide the Blue Jays with a front-of-the-rotation pitcher to fill in the void left by Halladay.  Now that I think about it, Sean Marshall might be a better candidate than the other pitchers listed.   He’s younger and less expensive, both important considerations for a Toronto team the needs to rebuild.

In his article, Sullivan also lists the Giants as a poytential trade partner.  In his scenario, the Cubs would trade Bradley’s bad contract for Aaron Rowand’s bad contract.  Rowand is owed $36 million over the next three years.  I don’t like this idea for a couple of reasons.  First, it costs the Cubs money (about $15 million), but it doesn’t make them better.  Rowand has struggled the past two years in San Francisco and it would appear that his best years are behind him.

Second, the Cubs already have too many Aarons on the team.  I would prefer that they get rid of their Aarons rather than add more.

Another possibility was brought up by a commenter over at The Cub Reporter.  How about a Bradley, Marshall, and Jake Fox trade to Baltimore in exchange for Brian Roberts and Luke Scott? 

I know what you’re thinking, “Not more Brain Roberts rumors.”  But think about it.  The Cubs top two needs going into the off-season will be to 1) add a run producing bat (preferably left-handed) to the middle of the order, and 2) add a speed guy who can get on base to the top of the order.  This trade could fill both needs in one fell swoop.

Roberts is signed through 2013 and is owed $40 million.  He has a full no-trade clause, but would surely waive it to come to Chicago.  Luke Scott is signed through this season and is arbitration eligible.  He made $2.4 million in 2009 and is likely due for a raise after a season that currently stands at .255/.340/.488 with 24 homeruns and 73 RBI.  And (get this), he bats from the left side of the plate.  Is this good or what?

Of course, the Orioles would have to agree to such a deal, which makes these moves more difficult than they have to be.  Baltimore is a tough team to understand.  They are in last place in the tough AL East, 37.5 games behind the Yankees.  They have a record of 60-93.  Even so, they often act like they just need to tweak their roster a bit to be a playoff contender.

This is not a team that is on the verge of contending.  They are not just one or two players away from contending.  Their $67.1 million payroll is $17 million less than it was in 2000 (and about $25 million less than it was just two years ago).  This is not a team that is willing and/or able to compete with the Yankees or Red Sox when it comes to payroll.  The only way the Orioles are going to be able to contend is to go with young talented players.  And the only way they are going to have enough young, talented players is to trade away their more expensive, older players for prospects.

Of course, this raises several questions, chief among them, “How does Milton Bradley fit into this picture?”  Fair enough.  The only way he fits in is 1) if the Orioles believe he can still be an OBP machine, 2) if the Orioles can be made to believe that Baltimore is laid back enough so Bradley will behave himself, and 3) if the Cubs pick up a good portion of his salary.  Remember, Bradley is only 28-years old, so he can still figure into a team’s plans, even if they are rebuilding (and especially if someone else is paying for him).

As for the other two, Marshall could fit into Baltimore’s rotation immediately and Fox could find a home as Scott’s replacement at DH.  There you go.  A nice tidy package (at least in my mind).

Obviously, I don’t know where Bradley will end up.  At this point, my main concern is that the Cubs don’t just dump him and move on.  Bradley has been a distraction and a bitter disappointment, but he still has value.  Take this bad situation and make it into a good situation (I’m suddenly a motivational speaker).  Use the mistake that was made by signing Bradley and turn it into a better team in 2010. 

If Jim Hendry is still the GM after this season (and it appears he will be), this will be perhaps the biggest challenge he has faced in his career.  It’s a one chance, do-or-die situation.  If he can’t trade away Bradley AND make the 2010 Cubs better than they were this year, he will surely be looking for a new job.  But if he can pull this off, he will be able to name his price at his next contract negotiation.