Joe Posnanski recently wrote an article for Sports Illustrated detailing his HOF ballot.  Although he once again makes the case that Andre Dawson does not belong in the Hall of Fame, the article is still worth reading.  He has a unique way of looking at baseball.  As I’ve said in the past, he’s a terrific writer, but I’m still trying to come to grips with his perspectives.

A couple of other articles I found interesting were Jayson Stark’s explanation of his Hall of Fame ballot and Tim Kurkjian’s defense of his vote for Andre Dawson. 

**********

The Cardinals signed Matt Holliday to a 7-year/$119 million contract yesterday.  The contract may also contain a no trade clause, but I haven’t seen that reported anywhere.  I just know that was a sticking point in previous contract negotiations.

Obviously, the Cards are better with Holliday than without him, but I just don’t see him having that kind of value.  In many ways, The Cards signing of Holliday mirrors the Cubs signing of Alfonso Soriano.  They apparently bid against themselves and paid so much for Holliday that in a few years, the contract is going to be untradeable and the Cards are going to be stuck with him.

The real question now is, what does Holliday’s signing mean for the Cardinals long-term plans for Albert Pujols.  Most reports this off season have suggested that the Cards needed to sign Holliday to show Pujols that they are serious about staying competitive.  But a few writers have suggested that the Cardinals decided to spend the money on Holliday now because they already know that they aren’t going to be able to keep Pujols long-term.  I don’t know which is true, but it makes for some interesting speculation.

**********

The Boston Red Sox announced that they will be moving Jacoby Ellsbury to left field to make room for Mike Cameron.  According to the report from ESPN Boston, Red Sox GM Theo Epstein said, “It’s more to do with Cameron’s experience, and Ellsbury’s ability to play a dynamic left field. This is not necessarily a permanent arrangement, or a long-term arrangement. But we think Cameron is still an elite center fielder … and that’s the best way to go for now.”

Ellsbury’s “ability to play a dynamic left field?”  What does that mean?  And is calling Mike Cameron an “elite center fielder” a little over the top.  He’s good, but I don’t think he’s ever been viewed as “elite”.  Plus, if he ever was elite, I don’t think he’s still elite at age 37.

For his part, Ellsbury was not particularly happy about the move.  Boston manager Terry Francona (who I like to call “Tito”) said, ”He (Ellsbury) was probably a little disappointed, which is what I expected, but with Cameron’s long strides and Jacoby’s quickness, we have a chance to have a real dynamic outfield here.”

There’s that “dynamic” word again.  At least we know that Theo and Tito are reading the same talking points.  It sounds like the entire press conference was put toogether by a PR firm rather than a baseball organization.

Anyway, the point of all of this is that chosing Cameron over Ellsbury for center field may mean that Boston is beginning the process of separating themselves from Ellsbury.  That’s just conjecture on my part, but I think it’s fair to say that by most standards, Ellsbury doesn’t hit enough to be an “elite” corner outfielder.  Now that he’s in left field, Boston may start looking for a player with a little more power.  If they do and Ellsbury becomes expendable, I hope the Cubs are waiting in the wings to scoop him up.

It stinks watching everyone else making deals while the Cubs sit on the sidelines.  The White Sox continued their off season shopping by trading a couple of prospects to the Dodgers for Juan Pierre.  The Dodgers were even good enough to throw in $10 million of the $18 million owed to Pierre over the next two years.

St. Louis made a five-year offer to Matt Holliday at a reported $16 – $18 million per year.  I think that’s crazy money, and in a way I hope Holliday accepts the offer because I think it will cripple the Cardinals financially for years to come, but it’s frustrating to see the Cubs division rival chasing one of the biggest free agents while the Cubs sit back and wait for something to happen.

For the Cubs, the story is the same as it was last week, and the week before that: they need to trade Milton Bradley before they can do anything else.  Actually, that’s not quite acurrate.  They have chosen to wait until Bradley is traded to make any moves. 

Quite honestly, I’m starting to blame Tom Ricketts for the Cubs hesitancy to do anything.  When Ricketts decided to hold the line on payroll (actually, I believe he allowed for a “slight” increase), he tied Jim Hendry’s hands from doing anything to improve the ball club. 

First, very few contracts came off the books at the end of 2009.  The only players to leave the Cubs because their contracts were up were Rich Harden, Kevin Gregg, and Reed Johnson.  After losing those players, and then accounting for increases via arbitration, the Cubs payroll is in the neighborhood of $135 million (It’s hard to know exactly where it is because it’s unclear right now what the arbitration-eligible players will receive, as well as those that will be tendered contracts).  That doesn’t leave much money to make any moves if the magic payroll number is $140-$145 million.

Then there’s Milton Bradley.  It’s unclear how much the Cubs are going to have to spend to get rid of Bradley.  The Dodgers spent $10 million to move Pierre and the Red Sox are rumored to be willing to eat $9 million (of a $12 million contract) to move Mike Lowell (the trade with Texas is currently on hold).  Both of those guys are decent players who are considered good clubhouse guys.  So if their respective teams are/will pay so much money to trade them, how much will it cost the Cubs to move a malcontent like Bradley coming of a sub-par year?

Assuming it’s going to cost the Cubs $10 million just to move Bradley (and that may be conservative), wouldn’t the Cubs be better off exchanging another team’s bad contract for Bradley?  It may cost them more dollars in the long run, but they may actually get a valuable piece back in return.

In a previous post, I argued the case for a Bradley-for-Derek-Lowe trade with Atlanta.  The Braves are looking for a corner outfielder and they need to trim payroll.  Lowe is their biggest contract and most expendable player.  Over the next three years, he’s going to cost $45 million.  It would cost the Cubs $24 million more to trade for Lowe than they are scheduled to pay Bradley, and Lowe will be around a year longer (two more years for Bradley vs. three years for Lowe), but isn’t that better than handing someone $10 million or more just to take Bradley off the Cubs’ hands?  It seems like a win-win to me.

Granted, whoever takes Bradley (assuming someone actually does) is going to have to find a way to integrate him into their team and control (or at least contain) his behavior.  But in exchange for that, if the deal is with Atlanta, they’ll save $24 million dollars and clear the other $21 million owed to Bradley off their books a year sooner than they would with Derek Lowe.  I know Milton Bradley is a pain in the butt, but couldn’t the Braves learn to live with him for $24 million?

**********

With Curtis Granderson now a Yankee and Mike Cameron signed by Boston, the Cubs now turn their attention to Marlon Byrd, Rick Ankiel, Coco Crisp, and Reed Johnson.  Carrie Muskat of MLB.com says that Byrd is the Cubs’ first choice, but honestly, is he the best answer for center field? 

Granderson would have been a terrific “get” for the Cubs.  He’s a power hitting, middle-of-the-order bat that they need, and his clubhouse presence would be a breath of fresh air after a year of Milton Bradley.  Of course, that’s a moot point now.

Of the free agent center fielders, Mike Cameron was the class of the field.  He’s not the offensive presence that Granderson is, but he’s sufficient and he plays a good center field.  But again, he’s gone, so no use crying over spilled milk.

Unfortunately, the quality falls off quite a bit from Cameron to the trio of Byrd/Ankiel/Crisp.  But here’s the thing: while any of that group will cost several million dollars, the Cubs can probably get the same or better production from any combination of Sam Fuld, Reed Johnson and recently released Ryan Church (can he still play center?).  Johnny Gomes is another interesting name hanging out there.  He’d probably have to play right field, but Fukudome could move back over to center as part of a platoon/position swap.

At this point, I can’t tell you what the answer is, at least as far as putting a name(s) to the problem, but I can tell you what the answer isn’t, and that’s signing Byrd, Ankiel, or Crisp.  They’re all different types of players, but none of them are the answer the Cubs are looking for.  They are either too expensive, a 4th outfielder, too weak offensively, or a combination of these things.

Jim Hendry waited too long to make a move, but now that he’s waited this long, he might as well wait longer to see if there are any free agent deals or trades available later in the off season.  The current options just don’t get the job done.

Billy Beane, GM of the A’s, left a little early and said that he couldn’t wait to get home because it was much easier to make deals away from the noise of the meetings.  I would have thought otherwise, but who am I to argue with Billy Beane?

Milton Bradley remained the hot topic for the Cubs on Day 4, but there was no movement.  Bob Nightengale of USA Today tweeted that a Bradley deal is close and that Tampa Bay is the likely trading partner.  Tim Brown from Yahoo Sports then tweeted that if a deal is close, it’s not with Tampa Bay.  On Day 3 of the meetings, Nation Post Sports tweeted that a deal was in the works and would be done by Friday.

So is a deal imminent?  It doesn’t appear so.  Bruce Miles of the Daily Herald spoke to Jim Hendry and then wrote:

“The Tampa Bay Rays remain the most likely landing spot for Bradley, but despite national reports that a deal was close to being done, the Cubs said Thursday evening that was not the case.”

So don’t hold your breath for a Milton Bradley deal to get done in the next day or  two.  Gordon Wittenmyer of the Sun-Times spoke to a “source close to Bradley” who suggested that a market might not form for Bradley until Jason Bay and Matt Holliday are signed.  Once they are off the board, then teams will start fighting over the scraps.

Call me naive, but I really thought Bradley would get traded at the Winter Meetings.  In hindsight, I had nothing to base that on other than wishful thinking, but I remain disappointed just the same.  If the Cubs wait for the perfect/best deal they can get for Bradley, they’ll likely be waiting a while and won’t be able to address their other needs.  If they make a quick move (really too late for that) and trade Bradley for the first offer they get, it will be expensive because they’ll probably have to send several million dollars to whichever team takes him, but then they can start filling the holes that the 2010 team currently has.  Pick your poison.

**********

The Cubs selected Mike Parisi in the MLB portion of the Rule 5 draft yesterday.  Parisi is a 26-year old right handed pitcher out of the Cardinals organization.  He was drafted by the Cards in the 9th round of the 2004 draft out of Manhatten College.  He looked promising moving up throught the Cardinals organization and was added to the 40-man roster in 2007. 

In 2008, Parisi had an 8-2 record with a 3.86 ERA at AAA  Memphis before he was promoted to St. Louis.  His performance for the Cardinals was uninspiring.  Parisi pitched a total of 23 innings for the Cards in 2008, compiling an 8.22 ERA before he was sent back to Memphis.  His time in Memphis was cut short when he went on the DL with an elbow injury and eventually had season-ending Tommy John surgery.

Parisi spent 2009 rehabbing in Florida before he was assigned to play in the Arizona Fall League.  He put together a record of 3-2 with a 4.44 ERA.  Most importantly, Paraisi made all of his starts and pitched five innings in every one, the most allowed by league rules.

Parisi has five pitches in his arsenal.  He throws a 91-93 mph fastball, a straight change, a curve, as well as a newly found cutter that he throws in the mid-80′s.  I’ve also read that he has a rather ineffective sinker.

According to the Gordon Wittenmyer article, Parisi will get a chance to make the Opening Day rotation.  With Ted Lilly out to start the season, the Cubs can use all of the legit arms they can get to start the year.

Last week, Chicago Tribune columnist Phil Rogers wrote on ChicagoBreakingSports.com that the Cubs were involved in discussions over a three way trade that would send Bradley to Texas, Kevin Millwood to the Mets and Luis Castillo to the Cubs.  I’m not sure who Rogers’ source was for this rumor (assuming he actually had a source), but officials with both the Cubs and Rangers immediately shot down the rumor.

Another rumor had the Blue Jays contacting the Cubs to drum up interest in Roy Halladay.  Carrie Muskat of MLB.com basically dismissed the possibility of Halladay joining the Cubs, saying:

“However, before Cubs fans start salivating at the prospect of the former Cy Young winner in the rotation with Ted Lilly, Carlos Zambrano, and Ryan Dempster, there’s a catch. He’s owed $15.75 million in 2010, and the Blue Jays want some of the Cubs’ top prospects. No. 1, the team can’t take on Halladay’s salary. The Blue Jays apparently have a wish list and Milton Bradley is not on it. A player like highly regarded shortstop Starlin Castro most likely is, and the Cubs don’t want to part with him, especially since they might only have Halladay for one year.”

I’m no hotshot reporter for MLB.com, but that seems like some pretty weak logic to me.  Muskat doesn’t have any idea how a potential trade would be structured, so she has no way of knowing if the Cubs would be adding the $15.75 million owed to Halladay to their current payroll.  What if the deal was Carlos Zambrano for Halladay with no money changing hands?  The Cubs would actually save money in that transaction.

As for not wanting to trade Starlin Castro to acquire Halladay, the Cubs would be foolish to make Castro untouchable in such a trade.  Castro looks very promising.  If everything works out, he’ll be the Cubs shortstop in the near future and perhaps for years to come.  Maybe.  We can’t be sure how Castro is going to develop.  What we do know is that Halladay is a legitimate staff ace.  He’s proven himself in arguably the toughest division in baseball.  Allowing Castro’s potential to stand in the way of acquiring the sure thing that is Roy Halladay just doesn’t make sense.

And the thing that really bothers mre about Muskat’s statement is that she is speaking for the Cubs.  How does she know that the Cubs don’t want to trade Castro?  Has she discussed it with Jim Hendry?  If so, did he say the Cubs don’t want to trade Castro?  Did he say Castro is untouchable?  Did he say any of this in relation to a potential trade for Roy Halladay?  I’ll bet the Cubs would not be willing to trade Castro to acquire Yuniesky Betancourt,  but a trade for Halladay is a completely different story.

Finally, Muskat says if the Cubs trade for Halladay, they might only have him for a year.  As things stand right now, that’s true.  However, my guess is that any team that trades for Halladay will want to first negotiate a contract extension with him.  That holds true for the Cubs as well.

I don’t mean to be too hard on Muskat.  Generally speaking she does a good (if uninspired) job reporting on all things Cubs related.  But this blurb about a possible trade for Roy Halladay just seemed to be defeatist in nature and tinged with the age-old idea that the Cubs can’t possibly acquire any of the best players in the game.

Moving on…Paul Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune writes that a trade for Curtis Granderson is still a possibility.  Detroit needs to reduce their payroll and is listening to offers for their center fielder (as well as other players).  Sullivan opines that the Cubs will not part with Carlos Marmol or Starlin Castro to obtain Granderson.  I assume he is saying this because his colleague, Phil Rogers, wrote an article saying the Cubs should offer Marmol and Castro for Granderson, but again, how does he know the Cubs will not trade either player?  Is this his opinion or did someone with the Cubs say it?

Sullivan also discusses rumors involving signing free agents such as Marlon Byrd, Mike Cameron, Mark DeRosa, and Matt Holliday.  Sullivan thinks that Byrd and Cameron are possibilities, but Holliday and DeRosa aren’t going to happen.  I agree with Sullivan.  Holliday is out of reach and not a good fit.  DeRosa’s time has passed.  Even though I felt strongly that trading him was the wrong thing to do at the time, bringing DeRosa back now will in no way right that wrong.

Let me throw out one caveat concerning DeRosa.  It would not upset me too much for the Cubs to sign him for reasonable money on a one-year contract.  I’m almost positive that he’ll get multi-year offers from other teams, but if the Cubs can re-sign him at the right price, then I think his flexibility and leadership would be a welcome addition to the Cubs.  But again, I don’t think it’s going to happen.

**********

Phil Rogers has some rumors in the Boston Herald and his Cubs rumor says:

“Many in the Cubs’ front office think they would be foolish to give up Starlin Castro to get Curtis Granderson, but there are a lot of other ways to do the deal. General manager Jim Hendry appreciates all Granderson brings to the table, even though he has had trouble hitting left-handers in two of the last three seasons. Perhaps Granderson would benefit from working with new Cubs hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo.”

Granderson would be a good fit for the Cubs, but it is going to be difficult for them to make any deals until they know what is going to happen with Milton Bradley.  Unfortunately, Bradley not only screwed up the team during the season, but he is getting in the way of improving it in the off season.  It wouldn’t surprise me if the Cubs miss out on players like Granderson because they can’t/won’t pull the trigger on a trade or signing a free agent until the Bradley situation is settled.

**********

Gordon Wiitenmyer of the Sun-Times has corrected the information he originally gave concerning the two-year contract the Cubs signed with lefty John Grabow.  Originally, Wiitenmyer wrote that the contract was for a total of $7 million.  However, he now says that Garbow signed for a total of $7.5 million.

Wiitenmyer doesn’t say how the money is split up, but I read elsewhere that the first year is for $3.25 million and the second year is $4.25 million.  Unfortunately, I can’t find the article where I read these numbers, so take it for what it’s worth.

Phil Rogers writes on ChicagoBreakingSports.com that a new three-way trade may be in the works.  According to Rogers, the trade would send Bradley to Texas, Kevin Millwood to the Mets, and Luis Castillo to the Cubs.  This is a variation on an earlier rumor that had Bradley going to Tampa Bay, Pat Burrell to the Mets, and Castillo to the Cubs.

Honestly, this new three-way trade rumor makes more sense than the rumor involving Tampa Bay and Burrell.  The Mets need pitching and Millwood can fill their void.  Plus, Burrell is a DH and the Mets don’t have a need for one.

I wrote about Luis Castillo previously.  He is not the perfect acquisition, but he could fill the Cubs need for a second baseman.  The Mets are almost as anxious to get rid of him as the Cubs are to move Bradley.  For the Cubs and Mets, the rumored three-way trade makes sense.  For Texas, not so much.  But the Rangers do have a bit of pitching depth, they need some additional offense, and they need some salary relief.  If they can get Bradley, have the Cubs and Mets pick up most of the $21 million still owed to him, and move the $12 million owed to Millwood in 2010, maybe the deal will make sense to them after all.

**********

The Cubs shook up their bullpen a bit when they traded Aaron Heilman to Arizona and then signed John Grabow to a two-year contract.

In exchange for Heilman, the Cubs received two minor leaguers; LHP Scott Maine and 1B (and Chicago native) Ryne White (Little Ryno).  Neither player is a “top prospect,” but Heilman did not figure into the Cubs 2010 plans, so they were lucky to get anything for him rather than simply non-tender him.

The Grabow contract is for a total of $7 million.  Although it seems a bit high to me, Grabow did have a good 2009 and can be a veteran presence in what is shaping up to be a very young bullpen.  Also, contrary to some reports, Grabow is more than just a LOOGY.  It wouldn’t surprise me if the Cubs use Grabow as their 8th inning set-up man.

**********

The Cubs want to trade Milton Bradley and Jim Hendry is doing his best to make it seem like they don’t have to get rid of him.  That makes sense.  It’s hard to deal from a position of strength when you are begging other teams to take a player off your hands.

With that in mind, it can’t be good for Hendry’s “leverage” that Joe Posnanski has named Milton Bradley as the NL’s Least Valuable Player.  Posnanski says:

“Anyway, put it all together, and including those all-important intangibles, the 2009 LVP is Milton Bradley. He was lousy on defense (minus-12 Dewan in right; minus-4.7 UZR) and not much on offense (99 OPS+ and missed 38 games with injuries). Plus, he was his usual pleasant self .. leaving Cubs GM Jim Hendry publicly babbling about how the team doesn’t HAVE to trade Bradley, they might WANT to keep Bradley, hey some of the best trades are the ones you DON’T make — while privately Hendry’s working the phones like Judy the Time Life Operator to get rid of this guy…

“But he (Bradley) turns 32 in April. And he’s Milton Bradley. A scout once told me that Bradley is the only high school player he ever scouted who hit a home run and did not have a single teammate come out to congratulate him. He’s only signed for two more years — he’s due $9 million and $12 million. Think about all you get for the money.”

Posnanski goes on to say that Alfonso Soriano should also be in the discussion, but he’s still going to go with Bradley.  It’s nice that the Cubs have two players competing for NL Least Valuable Player award.

**********

I almost didn’t include this bit of news, but Jon Heyman of Sports Illustrated is lumping the Cubs in with a group of teams that have an interest in Matt Holliday.  Seriously, Jon?  I suppose they have an interest in Holliday the same way they have an interest in John Lackey and Jason Bay.  Sure, they’d like to have all three players on their team, who wouldn’t.  But it’s not going to happen.

I don’t want to bash sportswriters.  God knows I spend more than my fair share reading them.  But how hard is it to just make up crap like this?  I usually like Jon Heyman, but I’m throwing the BS flag on this one.

The Cardinals tied the game in the 5th inning and it stayed that way until the bottom of the 9th.  I don’t know why, but Lou Piniella brought in Aaron Heilman to pitch the 9th inning.  I guess he has to pitch sometime, but I sure wouldn’t have trusted him in that situation.  Heilman must have been in a hurry to leave the ballpark because he gave up a homer to Matt Holliday, the first batter he faced.  Cards win 3-2.

Even though the Rockies lost last night, they remain 7.0 games ahead of the Cubs with 17 games remaining in the season.  Realistically (as opposed to mathemetically), the Cubs need to win out in order to have a shot at the post season.  And just to make things a little tougher, they get to face Chris Carpenter and Adam Wainwright, both Cy Young candidates, in the next two games.

**********

Josh Peter at Yahoo Sports has a really interesting article detailing where the Cubs make their money.  The conclusion of the artricle is that even though the Ricketts family just paid $845 million to buy the Cubs, it is somewhat of a bargain.  Who would have thunk?

I found it interesting that Comcast Sports Net pays the Cubs $350,000 for each game that it televises, but WGN only pays the team $200,000 per game.  Now I understand why the Rickettses felt that the Tribune Company had arranged a sweetheart deal  between the Cubs and WGN, both properties of the Trib. 

It will be interesting to see what happens in 2019 when the current television contracts with Comcast Sports Net and WGN end.  There has been speculation that the Rickettes would like to start their own sports network similar to the YES Network owned by the Yankees.  As Peter points out, a sports network owned by and featuring a team can be much more lucrative than the team itself.

**********

Speaking of money, the Wall Street Journal undertook an intensive review of the price of beer at ballparks and how the team’s winning percentage impacts the price of the beer.  What did they find?  The study found that teams with a .600 winning percentage charge $1.30 more for a 16-ounce beer than a team with a .400 winning percentage.

If you’re looking for the best value in ballpark beer look no further than PNC Park in Pittsburgh.  For just $4.75 (cheap by ballpark standards) you’ll be treated to a 21-ounce cold one.  Of course, you also have to watch the Pirates play their “special” brand of baseball.

In contrast, it will set you back $7.25 for just 12-ounces of the liquid gold at Fenway Park.  The Red Sox may be fun to watch, but that’s outrageous.

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.