Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, January 05, 2009

Sources: Cubs, Bradley agree to deal

This has been rumored for a while now, but it sounds almost official:

The Chicago Cubs have agreed to a three-year, $30 million contract with free-agent outfielder Milton Bradley, sources told ESPN on Monday.

The deal is pending a physical.

Seems decent enough, although I wonder if the Burrell signing makes this a bit of an overpay.

Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 05, 2009 at 10:42 PM | 65 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: cubs

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:38 PM (#3043888)
Since I've submitted this, I've softened a little on that stance. I don't think the 2 deals are that comparable. Bradley's a much better player and more valuable, but also much more injury prone and with a worse off the field history. He's only 30, but the Cubs are his 7th team. When healthy, he improves the Cubs lineup.
   2. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:43 PM (#3043894)
If the Cubs are looking for the outfielder with an eye to the world series then Bradley makes sense.

EDIT: in that Bradley has the greatest potential

Couldn't Chicago have deferred some of this money to keep DeRosa around for another season?
   3. Crispix Attacks Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:52 PM (#3043902)
Team #7 for Bradley! And he's only 30!
   4. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:52 PM (#3043903)
Is there any wiggle room left with an eye to Peavy left?
   5. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:54 PM (#3043906)
Agreed, Pops. Assuming he's healthy when it's cold out. If they could have deferred them, they may have tried. I'm still not that worked up over the loss of DeRosa (the versatility has been incredibly overplayed, IMO), but am waiting for the other shoe to drop. If that never happens, then I'll be pissed.

Of course, they could have just not signed Aaron Miles.
   6. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:55 PM (#3043908)
The sale of the team is supposed to go down this month. At which point the payroll could conceivably expand.

I believe Kevin Towers went on the record after the Marquis and DeRosa trades as doubting anything would happen with Peavy and the Cubs.
   7. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:55 PM (#3043909)
I mean this team should be able to take on Peavy's salary, but with this ########### of the sale of the team going on I think they are dealing with odd and artificial restraints (for the Cubs) in player acquisitions.
   8. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:56 PM (#3043910)
Is there any wiggle room left with an eye to Peavy left?

I don't think anyone knows. I think the bigger obstacle to that happening now is that Moorad has agreed to sell the team. That kinda flew under the radar, but if it goes through, I could see the new owner holding on to Peavy (considering the only reason he was on the block in the first place, supposedly, was because Moorad's divorce).
   9. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:56 PM (#3043913)
The Cubs could have also told Towers they don't want to make the deal through the press this time.
   10. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:56 PM (#3043914)
Aaron Miles is already my least favorite Cub.
   11. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:59 PM (#3043917)
I don't think anyone knows. I think the bigger obstacle to that happening now is that Moorad has agreed to sell the team. That kinda flew under the radar, but if it goes through, I could see the new owner holding on to Peavy (considering the only reason he was on the block in the first place, supposedly, was because Moorad's divorce).

Zell had as much reason as any owner ever to sell the Cubs rapidly and it's dragged on for this long. How could the Padres be done before opening day? I don't think this changes things from San Diego's perspective.

The legal troubles of Brian Giles, however, make him a lot harder to trade. San Diego's need to move Peavy's salary has increased if anything.

The Cubs could have also told Towers they don't want to make the deal through the press this time.

True, that.
   12. Crispix Attacks Posted: January 05, 2009 at 11:59 PM (#3043919)
Moores is selling the team? To Moorad? Who are the buyers?
   13. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:02 AM (#3043923)
The only party who has been discussed is Moorad because he had to resign his position in Arizona.
   14. King Kaufman Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:04 AM (#3043925)
How many teams has Bradley been on now? And isn't he, like, 30?
   15. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:04 AM (#3043926)
I think the guy in this that is going to look like an idiot is Sam Zell, and I'm pissed that this jackassery is closing an already tight window with which the Cubs have to win a title with this team.
   16. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:05 AM (#3043928)
Zell had as much reason as any owner ever to sell the Cubs rapidly and it's dragged on for this long. How could the Padres be done before opening day? I don't think this changes things from San Diego's perspective.

Well, the new owner has already been indentified, which is much further along than the Cubs sale. The new owner could always say he wants Peavy included on the team. My two cents speculation, that's all.

Sorry, I keep getting Moores and Moorad's names mixed up.
   17. bfan Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:05 AM (#3043930)
"The sale of the team is supposed to go down this month."

The sale of this f***ing team will go down when I say it will f***ing go down.

Signed, your esteemed governor.
   18. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:06 AM (#3043931)
Aaron Miles is already my least favorite Cub.

No more Howry or Marquis to kick around. (or McGahee, in SSR's case.)


I think the guy in this that is going to look like an idiot is Sam Zell, and I'm pissed that this jackassery is closing an already tight window with which the Cubs have to win a title with this team.

He already does. I'm sure he's cost himself millions of dollars not getting this deal done before the economy completely nosedived.
   19. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:09 AM (#3043937)
Well, the new owner has already been indentified

Have they been identified as the new owners? I know Moorad's statement was that he was leaving to pursue an opportunity but I guess that's pretty ambiguous.


Sorry, I keep getting Moores and Moorad's names mixed up.


You are forgiven so long as Dudley Moore and Sir Thomas More stay out of the discussion.
   20. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:11 AM (#3043941)
Have they been identified as the new owners? I know Moorad's statement was that he was leaving to pursue an opportunity but I guess that's pretty ambiguous.


Yes:

Jeff Moorad has resigned as Arizona Diamondbacks chief executive officer and says he has reached an agreement in principle to buy the San Diego Padres.

Moorad said Friday he heads a "small but significant" group of investors that has an exclusive right to complete the specifics of negotiations with Padres owner John Moores. Moorad said he hopes the transaction can be completed in the next three months.


snip

San Diego owner John Moores confirmed in an e-mail to The Associated Press that Moorad had exclusive negotiating rights to buy the team. Jesse Jacobs from Goldman Sachs didn't immediately return a call or e-mail seeking comment.

Moorad said he would be the majority owner if the deal goes through. He would have to sell his share of ownership in the Diamondbacks if the Padres deal is finalized.
   21. greenback Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:13 AM (#3043942)
Aaron Miles is already my least favorite Cub.

Wait till you see him at shortstop.
   22. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:13 AM (#3043943)
exclusive negotiating rights to buy the team

Wow. That's surprising.

Is San Diego the team with the weird requirement that they cannot be sold at a profit?
   23. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:17 AM (#3043946)
I haven't heard that before.
   24. Harold Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:19 AM (#3043947)
Is San Diego the team with the weird requirement that they cannot be sold at a profit?

I don't know what requirement you're talking about, but I've never heard of anything like that involving the Padres.
   25. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:21 AM (#3043948)
I thought it had something to do with the previous attempt to sell the team to the city, by Joan Krok IIRC. But if you don't know anything about it then I must assume I'm confused on the subject.
   26. Harold Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:22 AM (#3043949)
Since 2003, Bradley has averaged playing in 100 games/season with a 132 OPS+ (which is just a hair below Edmonds and Josh Hamilton for the lead among CF).
   27. NTNgod Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:24 AM (#3043950)

Is San Diego the team with the weird requirement that they cannot be sold at a profit?

Royals.
   28. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:26 AM (#3043951)
Since I haven't seen you in any other thread, NTNGod, are you sad to have lost the Bears/Packers Cubs/Brewers division standing streak this year? Or will you use the wildcard berth as a loophole?
   29. Moses Taylor lost his pants to a pair of nines Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:26 AM (#3043952)
As for the Royals thing, that's incredibly odd. What's the reasoning behind it?
   30. RJ in TO Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:27 AM (#3043953)
I thought the Royals requirement was that it had to be to local ownership.
   31. NTNgod Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:28 AM (#3043954)
Since I haven't seen you in any other thread, NTNGod, are you sad to have lost the Bears/Packers Cubs/Brewers division standing streak this year? Or will you use the wildcard berth as a loophole?


Yeah, the Cubs and Brewers both making the playoffs screwed that up.
   32. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:30 AM (#3043958)
Speaking of the Royals, and I assume this has been covered, but I was busy at the time. Kyle Farnsworth? They covetted Kyle Farnsworth? That was one odd, random decision.
   33. NTNgod Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:31 AM (#3043962)
I thought the Royals requirement was that it had to be to local ownership.

And any profits from the sale have to be donated to charity.

It was Ewing Kauffman's idea.
   34. GEB4000 Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:35 AM (#3043963)
The over/under on games played during the life of this contract?
   35. Harold Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:37 AM (#3043965)
Speaking of the Royals, and I assume this has been covered, but I was busy at the time. Kyle Farnsworth? They covetted Kyle Farnsworth? That was one odd, random decision.

JV, the one justification I've heard is that the Royals have so much trouble attracting players, and they don't have enough money to ridiculously overpay, so they get FAs that nobody wants, like Farnsworth or Jose Guillen. I don't know whether it's true, but it would at least explain those signings.

I don't know that it'd excuse them, though. They have only themselves to blame if they're such a sorry destination for FAs.
   36. Golfing Great Mitch Cumstein Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:38 AM (#3043966)
The sale of the team is supposed to go down this month. At which point the payroll could conceivably expand.

I have read on this site that the total amount of contracts for a baseball team can be depreciated over five years after the purchase of the franchise. Is this true? And wouldn't that tax rule favor building up the payroll before a sale?
   37. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 06, 2009 at 12:57 AM (#3043989)
Mitch,

It is my understanding that the depreciation rule still applies but I have heard some grumblings over the last few years about changing that. It may have changed and I might have missed it, but my current understanding is that its still there.
   38. VoodooR Posted: January 06, 2009 at 01:05 AM (#3043994)
The over/under on games played during the life of this contract?


300
   39. Harold Posted: January 06, 2009 at 01:14 AM (#3044002)
I have read on this site that the total amount of contracts for a baseball team can be depreciated over five years after the purchase of the franchise. Is this true? And wouldn't that tax rule favor building up the payroll before a sale?

The rule was that half the purchase price of the team could be counted as buying the player assets, and that could be depreciated. Actual payroll/contract commitments weren't considered.
   40. Billy B Posted: January 06, 2009 at 01:51 AM (#3044039)
Since 2003, Bradley has averaged playing in 100 games/season with a 132 OPS+ (which is just a hair below Edmonds and Josh Hamilton for the lead among CF).


And since the start of 2008 has played exactly 20 games in the field with none in CF.
   41. Darren Posted: January 06, 2009 at 01:54 AM (#3044041)
Which is more than Hamilton should have played in CF.
   42. Andere Richtingen Posted: January 06, 2009 at 02:52 AM (#3044089)
On paper I think this is a good signing, but I see it going poorly. It's been awhile since the Cubs have had a true scapegoat on the roster, and Bradley's a pretty good candidate. And when a Cub gets the scapegoat treatment, it can get pretty ugly.

Granted, the scapegoat thing seems to be less of a problem with Piniella at the helm.
   43. McCoy Posted: January 06, 2009 at 03:13 AM (#3044099)
I think Zell taking forever to sell the team has more to do with the economy and the Tribune's tax problem then Zell being a dick.

I believe most of the hold up has been over the structure of the deals which were not favorable to the Trib or to their tax problems.
   44. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 06, 2009 at 03:41 AM (#3044114)
On paper I think this is a good signing, but I see it going poorly. It's been awhile since the Cubs have had a true scapegoat on the roster, and Bradley's a pretty good candidate. And when a Cub gets the scapegoat treatment, it can get pretty ugly.

Granted, the scapegoat thing seems to be less of a problem with Piniella at the helm.


I think Lou, Z, and Milton Bradley will be an amazing reality television show. Didn't Reed Johnson have some malcontent baggage too?
   45. RJ in TO Posted: January 06, 2009 at 03:47 AM (#3044119)
Didn't Reed Johnson have some malcontent baggage too?


From where? He was very highly thought of in Toronto. The organization didn't cut him because of any personality issues - they cut him because they didn't think he was healthy after his back surgery. He was actually a fan favorite, and the Jays went out of their way to wish him well, and hope that things worked out for him.
   46. Cabbage Posted: January 06, 2009 at 03:49 AM (#3044120)
Does this just scream 'Moises Alou' to anyone else?

I'm ok with it, but I want it on the record that I anticipate it to mirror the Alou experience.

Key Steps to An "Alou-Experience"

1. Successful but injury-prone veteran signs a deal
2. Unexpectedly, the player's best year with the Cubs is the third year of the deal, and the worst year is the first year.
3. In 2011, it is revealed that Milton Bradley's knees have not acted up since coming off the DL in Aug, 2009 because Moises Alou is peeing on them twice a week.
   47. FBI Regional Bureau Chief GORDON COLE!!! Posted: January 06, 2009 at 03:52 AM (#3044123)
Kyle Farnsworth? They covetted Kyle Farnsworth?

Dayton Moore's getting in touch with his inner Lincoln Park Trixie.
   48. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 06, 2009 at 04:04 AM (#3044129)
From where? He was very highly thought of in Toronto.

Ryan, I honestly didn't know. I thought there issues surrounding him, but my booze addled memory sometimes has lapses. I've been very happy with the Reed Johnson experience.
   49. Bunny Vincennes Posted: January 06, 2009 at 04:08 AM (#3044132)
From what I've seen, Bradley has an understanding of where the bases on the ball diamond are located, and what it means to stand near or slide past them. Moises in his brain dead career had never figured it out. WORST BASERUNNER EVER.
   50. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: January 06, 2009 at 04:45 AM (#3044151)
Lou Piniella and Milton Bradley together in the same clubhouse? I look forward to seeing a sequel to this
   51. Crispix Attacks Posted: January 06, 2009 at 04:59 AM (#3044155)
They need to add the world's nicest guy and greatest teammate, Juan Pierre, to the mix.

Or some other candidate for that title, I don't know much about reputed personalities.
   52. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: January 06, 2009 at 05:16 AM (#3044164)
How bad is Bradley's defense? Or is it?
   53. akrasian Posted: January 06, 2009 at 05:20 AM (#3044166)
Bradley at least used to be a good fielder. The question is more whether he can stay healthy if he plays at the intensity he needs to continue being a good fielder.
   54. RJ in TO Posted: January 06, 2009 at 05:34 AM (#3044178)
I thought there issues surrounding him, but my booze addled memory sometimes has lapses. I've been very happy with the Reed Johnson experience.


As were most Toronto fans. It's possible that you may have blurred Reed Johnson in with some of the slightly less friendly departures from Toronto over the last couple seasons - Hillenbrand, Thomas, Royce Clayton, Greg Zaun, and assorted others (not all of whom are at fault for the nasty departures) - as well as JP's fine work in public relations in wooing such potential free agents as Gil Meche and Adam Dunn.
   55. Weeks T. Olive Posted: January 06, 2009 at 05:46 AM (#3044187)
WORST BASERUNNER EVER.

It's pretty close between him and Jacque Jones.
   56. McCoy Posted: January 06, 2009 at 05:51 AM (#3044192)
I think Frank Thomas and Manny Ramirez have done enough to merit consideration and then there is Ozzie Guillen who got victimized by the old hidden ball trick not once but twice.
   57. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 06, 2009 at 05:54 AM (#3044198)
The title should rightfully belong to a Cub. I saw Ryan Theriot trying to fill that void in 2008 and he's back next year - relieving Milton of the need to pick up the slack.

EDIT: I believe Ozzie Guillen was the perpetrator and not the victim of the hidden ball trick twice in one series.
   58. McCoy Posted: January 06, 2009 at 06:06 AM (#3044205)
No Ozzie was the victim, and it happened 3 times to him.
   59. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 06, 2009 at 06:10 AM (#3044208)
Perhaps we are talking about different events. In the NBJHBA he [Bill James] states "Ozzie once made the hidden ball trick work twice in two days, against the same team."
   60. Crispix Attacks Posted: January 06, 2009 at 06:12 AM (#3044210)
I find it plausible that one player could both perpetrate the hidden ball trick twice and be the victim of the hidden ball trick three times, if we're talking about the deadball era.
   61. Harold Posted: January 06, 2009 at 06:26 AM (#3044221)
And since the start of 2008 has played exactly 20 games in the field with none in CF.

Sure. The part of my post comparing him to other CFs was just an aside.

I guess I'm just thinking of when the A's acquired Bradley, so the discussion was fueled a lot by feelings on Beane. Anyway, a lot of people talked about Bradley's unimpressive career numbers; I just felt like pointing out that, when you look at his prime as opposed to his early years, he's really been very productive.

I know about the injury questions, obviously, which impact both his expected playing time, and his ability to play CF (and some interaction thereof, as playing in the OF full-time may cost him PT vs. DHing).
   62. FBI Regional Bureau Chief GORDON COLE!!! Posted: January 06, 2009 at 03:15 PM (#3044313)
"Ozzie once made the hidden ball trick work twice in two days, against the same team."

Maybe James was choosing his words carefully. A hidden ball trick doesn't "work" without someone getting picked off, so perhaps getting picked off was Ozzie's contribution to "making it work" on those two occasions.
   63. FBI Regional Bureau Chief GORDON COLE!!! Posted: January 06, 2009 at 03:18 PM (#3044317)
I'm not worried about Bradley being able to play CF, since the Cubs won't ask him to do that. Doesn't diminish my concerns about his staying healthy enough to play RF.
   64. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader Posted: January 06, 2009 at 03:50 PM (#3044343)
I think Cub fans will like Bradley just fine. He plays with real fire, which I think fans appreciate. I'm still bummed things didn't work out in Oakland.
   65. Walt Davis Posted: January 06, 2009 at 08:19 PM (#3044658)
Ozzie once made the hidden ball trick work twice in two days, against the same team.

Also, I swear, every time somebody stole 2nd base, Ozzie would fake that the throw went into CF. Every time. I don't think it ever worked.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogHP: Baseball is leaving the human factor behind
(58 - 4:30am, May 26)
Last: baudib

NewsblogBud Selig -- No need for more MLB replay for now - ESPN
(87 - 3:55am, May 26)
Last: Athletic Supporter leads the nation in drifters

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread, May 2012
(1834 - 3:06am, May 26)
Last: Spivey

NewsblogHimrich’s Top Ten Target Field Foods
(8 - 2:43am, May 26)
Last: Long John McCaine Mutiny on the Bounty (scott)

NewsblogBoston.com: Curt Schilling’s 38 Studios lays off all staff
(119 - 1:28am, May 26)
Last: Swedish Chef

NewsblogT.R. Sullivan: Of Frank Robinson, Milt Pappas and Jim Palmer
(8 - 12:40am, May 26)
Last: The Gurus DO NOT BourbonSamurai

NewsblogWilmoth: Nate McLouth Designated For Assignment
(12 - 12:25am, May 26)
Last: Tripon

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1973 Discussion
(15 - 12:13am, May 26)
Last: DanG

NewsblogThe Hall of Very Good: Former Cards Slugger Critical of "LaRussa's Regime"
(4 - 11:26pm, May 25)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogCSN to host ‘Phillies at the Beach’ on Memorial Day
(18 - 11:25pm, May 25)
Last: Fielder's the first baseman, Felder is the fielder

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1972 Ballot
(28 - 11:25pm, May 25)
Last: lieiam

Sox TherapyA Winning Ballclub?
(20 - 11:24pm, May 25)
Last: Dan

NewsblogMatschulat: Did I Miss The "Paul Konerko Is So Overrated OMG" Bandwagon?
(27 - 11:16pm, May 25)
Last: baudib

NewsblogTBO: Nerdy Rays head north
(17 - 10:07pm, May 25)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogDodgers want to host NHL's Winter Classic
(22 - 9:38pm, May 25)
Last: Cris E

Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets.

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets.

Page rendered in 0.4004 seconds
54 querie(s) executed