Jump to content

Debate: Swap Linebrink for Bradley?


prochisox
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 09:48 AM)
Apparently Bradley loved playing in Texas and saw Washington as a father figure and what not.

 

Then he took the big money and signed in Chicago. It at least goes to show there is a fit for him....somewhere.

 

Will Ozzie coddle him? No. But Ozzie seemed to give Carl Everett all the space he needed as well. And Everett was incident free in Texas too, albeit with a different mgr

 

Actually now I'm starting to worry that the nearest parallel is not Everett, but rather a ...less benign.. Frank Thomas. I only say that because of the apparent hypersensitivity.

 

Ozzie and Frank clashed-- and if i'm honest with myself--i would fear a larger version of that clash repeating. When Ozzie does clash with someone, it doesnt get mended.

 

What team was Bradley on when he tried to run up to the press box to go after the Royals announcer? I believe that was Texas, so he wasnt exactly incident free like Everett was

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 277
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am sure it was mentioned before but why would any of us want Bradley? Outside of it meant he was dealt for Linebrink in this scenario, the guy isn't worth the money and isn't worth the hassle. He averages like a whole 90 games played a season, puts the blame on anything but himself, and just should have 0 reason to be in a discussion. Especially considering he is still getting 20 mil or whatever the next 2 years. No thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Pumpkin Escobar @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:20 AM)
I am sure it was mentioned before but why would any of us want Bradley? Outside of it meant he was dealt for Linebrink in this scenario, the guy isn't worth the money and isn't worth the hassle. He averages like a whole 90 games played a season, puts the blame on anything but himself, and just should have 0 reason to be in a discussion. Especially considering he is still getting 20 mil or whatever the next 2 years. No thanks.

 

I guess it's a reminder that this planet hasn't run out of stupid fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:54 AM)
I think he was with KC actually.

 

 

Bradley has never played with KC. It was Texas vs KC last year, and the announcer made mention that Bradley wasnt a role model or something like that, and Bradley proved him 100% correct

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3438827

Edited by KyYlE23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Padres would take chance on BradleyComment Email Print Share By Jerry Crasnick

ESPN.com

Archive

When Chicago Cubs general manager Jim Hendry begins aggressively shopping troubled outfielder Milton Bradley this winter, don't be surprised if one of his first phone calls is to San Diego. Padres GM Kevin Towers said Friday that he would be open-minded about discussing Bradley, who played 42 games with San Diego in 2007 before his blowing out his knee in an on-field altercation.

 

"I haven't had any calls from Jim 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 the 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."

 

Bradley's tenure in Chicago is almost certainly over after a whirlwind series of events last week. The Cubs sent Bradley home last Sunday after he gave a newspaper interview criticizing the team for its lack of a "positive environment" and saying, "You understand why they haven't won in 100 years here."

 

Amid reports of a possible Players Association grievance, the Cubs worked out an agreement with agents Seth and Sam Levinson. The Cubs agreed to pay Bradley the $400,000 owed him for the rest of the season, even though he remains suspended, and Bradley issued an apology. In return, no grievance was filed.

 

"I chose Chicago as a free agent because I wanted to be part of finally bringing a championship to Cubs fans," Bradley said in a written statement. "I expected to have a great season and I am deeply disappointed by my performance and the team's struggles." After signing a three-year, $30 million deal with Chicago last winter, Bradley quickly fell out of favor with Cubs fans because of his lack of production. He hit .257 with 12 homers and 40 RBIs, and became the focus of vigorous booing at Wrigley Field.

 

Hendry will find it a challenge to move Bradley for two reasons: The Cubs still owe Bradley $21 million over the next two seasons, and Bradley has developed a reputation for volatility in his seven previous stops in the majors. It's likely that any club with an interest in acquiring Bradley would want Chicago to pick up a significant portion of his salary. Towers declined to talk about Bradley in depth, in light of baseball's tampering rules, but said the Padres believe they can take risks on certain players because of the low-key environment in San Diego and the relative lack of media attention.

 

"San Diego is different than Chicago," he said.

 

The Padres acquired Bradley from Oakland in a trade for pitcher Andrew Brown on June 29, 2007. Bradley hit .313 with a 1.004 OPS in 144 at-bats as a Padre, but his season ended prematurely because of a knee injury. Bradley tore his right ACL while being restrained by Padres manager Bud Black during an argument with umpire Mike Winters, and underwent surgery to repair the tear. Bradley signed with Texas in December 2007, led the American League with a .999 OPS in 2008 and was the American League's starting designated hitter in the All-Star Game.

 

Towers has acknowledged the Padres' need to upgrade the offense in 2010. The Padres have a 33-21 record and a .611 winning percentage since July 28, but they're tied for 27th among the 30 major league teams in runs scored.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4504355

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 09:48 AM)
Apparently Bradley loved playing in Texas and saw Washington as a father figure and what not.

 

Then he took the big money and signed in Chicago. It at least goes to show there is a fit for him....somewhere.

 

Will Ozzie coddle him? No. But Ozzie seemed to give Carl Everett all the space he needed as well. And Everett was incident free in Texas too, albeit with a different mgr

 

Actually now I'm starting to worry that the nearest parallel is not Everett, but rather a ...less benign.. Frank Thomas. I only say that because of the apparent hypersensitivity.

 

Ozzie and Frank clashed-- and if i'm honest with myself--i would fear a larger version of that clash repeating. When Ozzie does clash with someone, it doesnt get mended.

Texas wants no part of Bradley even if the Cubs pay the freight. Apparently he admitted to taking some games off last year with minor injuries for fear of hurting his stats. That didn't go over very will with Texas' management and players. So yet another Bradley bridge burned. The Cubs are going to get rid of him and SD appears to be the only team admitting at this time any interest. Its laid back atmosphere and low pressure environment is probably the only place where Bradley can last more than a season. I suspect he winds up there, but why they would trade for him, I have no idea. If I'm Towers, I'm making the Cubs pay all but the minimum and give them a garbage prospect or I'm waiting for the eventual release. Its only a matter of time when the trouble in SD will start. He's a guy with a ton of talent, but has let being one of the game's all-time biggest jackasses, and that's saying something because there have been some huge strokes that have been MLB players, ruin his career. We should have a thread someday just listing the games biggest douchebags.

 

As for the proposed trade to start this thread, there is a million times more of a chance Linebrink regains his form than Bradley becoming a decent person and/or teammate.

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 05:28 PM)
Texas wants no part of Bradley even if the Cubs pay the freight. Apparently he admitted to taking some games off last year with minor injuries for fear of hurting his stats. That didn't go over very will with Texas' management and players. So yet another Bradley bridge burned. The Cubs are going to get rid of him and SD appears to be the only team admitting at this time any interest. Its laid back atmosphere and low pressure environment is probably the only place where Bradley can last more than a season. I suspect he winds up there, but why they would trade for him, I have no idea. If I'm Towers, I'm making the Cubs pay all but the minimum and give them a garbage prospect or I'm waiting for the eventual release. Its only a matter of time when the trouble in SD will start. He's a guy with a ton of talent, but has let being one of the game's all-time biggest jackasses, and that's saying something because there have been some huge strokes that have been MLB players, ruin his career. We should have a thread someday just listing the games biggest douchebags.

 

As for the proposed trade to start this thread, there is a million times more of a chance Linebrink regains his form than Bradley becoming a decent person and/or teammate.

as someone else mentioned that linebrink post all star numbers are bad and have been getting worse. If he could pitch well the first half trade him for anything before the all star break. Then let him go downhill somewhere else. But our luck he'll suck in the first half or if we do trade him just before the all star break. Hell put up great numbers on some other team. :lolhitting :lolhitting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I thought I'd bump this since the Score 670 has been bringing up a few times this week that the market is completely dead for any Bradley trade. And that the Cubs are desperate. As Bernstein has put it, it could have gotten to the point where they'd actually throw in sweeteners (which is obviously not commonplace in MLB)

 

Would anyone here now do Bradley for Linebrink if the Cubs were willing to throw in some decent spects?

 

This one move could solve LH bat, DH and maybe a decent reliever to boot. You dont add too much payroll and yet you solve a few problem spots at once.

Edited by Princess Dye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 16, 2009 -> 02:13 PM)
I'm unsure the Cubs even have the prospects worth doing such a deal? One sneaky thing would be to try to get Jake Fox for DH duties.

 

I suppose under that scenario Fox would be our 2010 Kotsay type (righthanded), cheaper

 

The obvious downside to my situation is that Pods or Bradley is in the field most the year.

 

That and the unrestrained anger problems.

Edited by Princess Dye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Oct 16, 2009 -> 02:10 PM)
I thought I'd bump this since the Score 670 has been bringing up a few times this week that the market is completely dead for any Bradley trade. And that the Cubs are desperate. As Bernstein has put it, it could have gotten to the point where they'd actually throw in sweeteners (which is obviously not commonplace in MLB)

 

Would anyone here now do Bradley for Linebrink if the Cubs were willing to throw in some decent spects?

 

This one move could solve LH bat, DH and maybe a decent reliever to boot. You dont add too much payroll and yet you solve a few problem spots at once.

 

The only way I would want Bradley is if the Cubs paid his entire salary, that way we could release him without any payroll smack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep seeing this:

 

This one move could solve LH bat, DH and maybe a decent reliever to boot. You dont add too much payroll and yet you solve a few problem spots at once.

 

and thinking that you dont solve problems, you create problems with this move

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bradley gets $9M in 2010 and $12M in 2011

Linebrink gets $5M in 2010 and $5.5M in 2011

 

Taking Bradley for Linebrink straight up, even with "sweeteners" involved, would be very dumb. The difference in salary between the two players is $10.5M over two years. Think of all the great prospects we'd be able to buy with $10.5M dollars, or think of all the players we'd be able to afford in free agency with $10.5M dollars. That is a hell of a difference to make up and it will not be made up unless the Cubs throw in at least Marmol and Vitters. That is a lot of money to just flush down the toilet with Bradley.

 

If the Cubs ate $4M+ of Bradley's deal in 2010 and $6.5M+ of Bradley's deal in 2011 PLUS threw in some good talent that I would view more helpful than 2 good half seasons of Linebrink, then I'd make that deal because Linebrink at this point is a sunk cost. But I'd first explore every possible avenue of moving Linebrink and getting a team to take on at least half of his salary before I gave up and made a Bradley deal.

 

And if a Bradley deal happened, I'd immediately try to eat some more of his salary, plus send the Cubs payments, and try to get a taker on him for $1-2M per. If that didn't work then I'd want to see a meeting take place where Kenny, Reinsdorf, Ozzie, and the entire coaching sit down with Bradley and give Bradley the job of convincing them all why they should even invite him to Spring Training in 2010. If even one member of that group is not convinced then I release Bradley outright and eat what would amount to Linebrink's salary. If, however, all of those people came out of that meeting convinced that Bradley deserved another chance, then I'd let him go to ST to compete for a roster spot - but I'd make no guarantees and I would have the DH spot already filled before that time. The first sign of trouble and he'd be DFA'd. If he behaves well and produces, then I again start shopping him to see if I can get another team to take on some more of his salary. But the whole idea would basically be about getting value out of a sunk cost in Linebrink while taking on no additional monetarial commitments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 16, 2009 -> 02:49 PM)
I'd take him. Only because I think Ozzie can handle him and because I think he would be motivated by sticking it to the Cubs and their fans. I think he would behave here with our fans, especially if he just continued to s*** on the Cubs org.

That would be new. You think he'd suddenly stop being mentally unstable because his manager would also be mentally unstable? Seems more like a recipe for disaster than a solution to me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Oct 16, 2009 -> 03:00 PM)
I would love to have Bradley in a Sox uniform. Forget all of the naysayers... I believe that the guy would be motivated and could possibly return to his 2007 form. I hope Kenny goes and gets him...

Every team that has signed him has thought this. They all thought it would be different. Seven teams later, it isn't. Its incredibly unlikely that somehow this time, in the same town where he already failed, would be the magic key.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 16, 2009 -> 03:01 PM)
Every team that has signed him has thought this. They all thought it would be different. Seven teams later, it isn't. Its incredibly unlikely that somehow this time, in the same town where he already failed, would be the magic key.

 

 

Eh... I would take him anyway if he didn't cost that much...

 

It would be worth it to get rid if Rick White ERRR.. Scott Linebrink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...