Winter Meetings 2009 Day Four

8:27 AM

Cubs select RHP Mike Parisi from the St. Louis Cardinals in the first round of the Rule 5 draft.

Looks like all the major league teams passed on Round 2 and no Cubs were taken in the major league phase.

The rumor news should be pretty light today as teams head back home.

- Wittenmyer wrote last night - apparently before the Lowell/Ramirez trade that isn't quite official went down - about Boston's possible interest. He then goes through the usual suspects.

The Tampa Bay Rays are still there for a deal that would include moving heavy-salaried Pat Burrell and the Cubs sending cash. The Los Angeles Angels have had exploratory discussions but would need a lot of cash in the deal or for the Cubs to find a way to rid the Angels of their $23.5 million commitment to Gary Matthews Jr. And the New York Mets, according to a team official, might be willing to step back into the fray as part of a three- or four-team deal that could send Luis Castillo ($12 million next two years) to the Cubs.

Wittenmyer then goes through all the teams that have zero interest including the Twins (Bradley called the organization racist back when he was in high school), A's and Indians (not looking for a reunion), plus some mystery GM of a team that had to assure one of his players that Bradley wasn't going to be joining the club.

So that's going well...

- Rosenthal tweets once again, that the talks between Rays and Bradley are at an impasse.

- Tim Brown joins Rosenthal in saying Rangers are probably out as potential trade partner for Bradley.

- Rule 5 draft is today, Cubs are always good for losing a player or two. For a brief and poorly organized history, visit Wiklifield (I will clean that up sometime in the near future, unless someone cares to do it).

Tags: 
Cubs rumors
Rule 5 draft
Winter Meetings
Submitted by Rob G. on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 7:01am
Return to Homepage

Comments

Submitted by John Beasley
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 7:33am

The jury is still out on Veal, but the Cubs have been relatively good in the Hendry era at not losing future major-league players, though Wells certainly could have gone the other way in Toronto. I remember thinking how idiotic it was to leave Sisco unprotected ... one shouldn't project too much onto prospects, I suppose.

Submitted by thedirtbag
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 8:19am

The Milton saga has taken on a life of its own. It is becoming exhausting. I think Hendry really hurt his position here. Eventually Bradley will be moved, but not on the Cubs terms. Ricketts may have to okay Hendry to add a little more payroll. I am wondering if the Cubs can convince a team to swallow more of Milton's contract if they throw in another player to sweeten the deal. I do not have any suggestions and Hendry probably does not want to compound his mistake, so the chances are probably unlikeley.

Submitted by Ryno
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 8:38am

I think Hendry really hurt his position here.

Ya think so? You mean the Milton Bradley contract didn't work out as expected?

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 8:51am

He means, I guess, by pubically suspending Bradley rather than just quietly benching him.

Submitted by thedirtbag
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 9:39am

"Ya think so? You mean the Milton Bradley contract didn't work out as expected?"

Ryno, specifically the last few days. I was refering to openly talking about Bradley being moved, not willing to eat money, approximately how much they are willing to eat, Crane Kenny opening his mouth yesterday, and the fact that he was suspended at the end of the year. He tried and failed to create a market for this guy. I am not saying a deal would have been made that would work out favorably for the Cubs, but all the hoopla the last few days did nothing positive toward making a deal. Hence the reason I said, "Hendry really hurt his position here".

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 9:52am

m.bradley probably had to be suspended at the point he was suspended. fighting von j. isn't a quick trip to being loved by anyone in upper management.

sure, Z has done a LOT of the stuff m.bradley has done, but there's a major difference between the 2 guys...getting into bradley's head is a team sport for fans and it works.

what's not being brought up a lot is how some teams don't want bradley not because of lockerroom chemistry, but because their own fans would/could turn bradley into...well, we've seen it. bradley shows up at wrigley, hits like a man on a mission at home, and gets crap thrown at him like it's part of the price of admission. this is NOT new to the cubs (it's happened to him on other teams) and bradley falls for it EVERY season.

without the handholding, babying, and constant reassurance bradley is at the fan's mercy.

manny being manny might fly in boston because his ego will let him shrug off any fan criticism...boston would eat milton bradley alive.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 9:57am

It still seems like Bradley could be flipped for a guy like Derek Lowe.

That is the direction that Hendry really needs to go.

Chances are that the Braves aren't willing to do that as of today. However if the Braves can't move Lowe by Feb, then I'd bet they would listen.

Hendry needs to sign Aubrey Huff now. Then worry about trading Bradley later.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:09am

Did he actually fight Joshua? I thought it was just a shouting match.

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:54am

it was another "had to be restrained" incident...at least as far as i know.

Submitted by thedirtbag
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 9:43am

George Costanza would emphasize that Hendry has "no hand".

Submitted by John Beasley
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 8:22am

So the Cubs need to move Milton Bradley to even be players in the Mike Cameron sweepstakes. Obviously not a lot of spare cash floating around this winter.

But what about next year? Here's a few impact guys who are scheduled to be free agents next offseason:
Roy Halladay
Cliff Lee
Joe Mauer
Carl Crawford
Josh Beckett
Victor Martinez
Derek Jeter
Brandon Webb

Plus, these guys' teams have options:
Albert Pujols ($16M team option, no way he gets loose, obviously)
Lance Berkman (at $15M, depends how bad Houston is in 2010)
Jose Reyes
Jimmy Rollins (option is only $8M so I'm sure the Phils will pick it up unless he's hooked on smack or something else)
Aramis Ramirez (it's his player option for $14.6M)

The Cubs have their own free agents, namely Derrek Lee and Ted Lilly. But even with those two coming off the books, can this team really afford to be in on any of these guys? Also, with how this team's offense is likely to look in 2010, unless Derrek regresses badly, will the team really be able to afford to let him walk, even if it's to get in on a younger guy like Crawford or Mauer?

I don't really have a point, I just wonder if Hendry will be in last-minute dump mode on guys like Dempster and Fukudome trying to clear payroll to re-sign Lee and Ramirez and if the best free agent corps in some time will slip past him.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 8:56am

I doubt half those guys make it to free agency, but if Mauer does, I sure hope the Ricketts are smart enough to grab him.

Submitted by jacos
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 9:31am

As long as he plays first base.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:07am

Well my idea would be to let him catch for a few years then move him to first base after we get rid of Ramirez or Soriano.

Submitted by John Beasley
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 8:48am

Is this guy coming back from an injury? How the hell do you drop from MLB to Rookie ball in one offseason?

Submitted by John Beasley
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 8:53am

Headline from a subscription-only story at Scout.com:

Mike Parisi fared well in the AFL while three other (Cardinals) pitching prospects struggled on the mound.

Maybe one of you AFL followers have more info on this guy?

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 9:19am

I don't believe in the AFL I guess I am agnostic towards the fall baseball gods.

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 9:30am

low 90s fastball, cruddy sinker that doesn't sink...showed up to AFL sporting a new cutter everyone is surprised he has control over.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:10am

lazy copy and paste of his AFL league stats.

Team League W L ERA G GS CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB SO GO/AO AVG
SUR AFL 3 2 4.44 7 6 0 0 0 26.1 26 14 13 1 6 15 2.05 .257

Still not striking out a lot, but a 2:1 GO/FO ratio - wonder if that is the result of the cutter, or his crappy sinker.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 8:54am

"He had Tommy John surgery in August of '08." according to mlbtraderumors.com

Submitted by navigator
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:06am

First it was Ibanez and now it's Granderson. Lou seems annoyed that, for whatever reasons, Hendry isn't getting him the players he really wanted.

Today:

INDIANAPOLIS - Lou Piniella, who has gotten used to losing out on free agents to the Yankees, is lamenting the fact his Chicago Cubs did not have either the chips or the financial resources to acquire Curtis Granderson, but predicts the All-Star center fielder will improve his on-base percentage now that he's no longer surrounded by all the free swingers in the Detroit Tigers lineup.

"Our primary need is an outfielder who can hit fifth, and Granderson was our No. 1 choice," Piniella said Wednesday. "There was just no way we could get him, and once again the Yankees swooped in and got their man....

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/20...

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:23am

Lou has the strangest ideas about team construction.

Primary need is a lefty hitting Outfielder who can hit 5th?

Submitted by thedirtbag
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:32am

If I am not mistaken, wasn't the primary need last offseason too? How did that go? Oh yeah, we still have that primary need and it has become a primary burden.

Submitted by John Beasley
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:25am

Shut up and deal with it.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:31am

Lou is really turning into the king excuse maker.

I almost wonder if it is because he thinks he can bully Hendry and Crane Kenney around?

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:29pm

He is bullying them around, isn't he?

For the privilege of keeping Lou around, we've so far donated $1 million to the A's and we're expected to donate another $5 million to another team.

Submitted by Dusty Baylor
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:34pm

Yeah...Lou's won 1784 games as manager, and back to back division titles in 2007-2008.

We donated that to the A's because Aaron Miles stinks, and shoudn't have been signed, let alone to a 2 year deal. Paying $1 million is better than paying $2.7 million for that sack of worthless.

We're expected to donate $5 million to another team because Milton Bradley was mistakenly expected to play well, and live up to a mistake of a 3 year contract.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:37pm

So the idea is that when the team plays well it's Lou's good managing, but when they don't play well it's Hendry's fault?

Submitted by Dusty Baylor
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:43pm

Ok.

Lou was certainly asleep at the switch last season at times it seemed. But was it his managing that caused:
Soriano's injuries
Soto's injury
Ramirez' injury
Bradley's poor performance
Gregg's poor performance

I was pointing out that, while last season was an off season, that "putting up" with Lou...is not like putting up with Bruce Kimm or Jim Essian.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 1:03pm

The job of a manager is to get the best out of the players.

Lee and Wells, maybe Marshall and Ramirez when he was healthy. So out of 30 something guys, Lou did his job with four of them.

He did things that were puzzling in the way he handled Bradley. Miles hasn't been known to be discountent, but he "had to go". Lou didn't like Pie, but he wanted speed so we swapped in Gathright.

Despite what Lou says to the press - Jim discussed all of these moves with Lou prior to making them. He said to Lou "Do you think you can handle Bradley" and Lou sais "Yes." But when Bradley turned into a disaster, where is Lou manning up and saying "wow, that guy is too much for me to handle"? What does Lou say? "I wanted Granderson and Ibanez."

I am not sure what his problem is, but he utterly failed at the most important part of his job in 2009.

Submitted by Dusty Baylor
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 1:38pm

You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit TRN.

The Cubs could have had Bobby Cox, Billy Martin, or Leo Durocher managing this team, and they still would have struggled.

Bradley should have been an upgrade, but failed miserably. Where has he gone that he has not had issues? Texas? They are welcome to him...but they didn't want to sign him long term after 2008.

I'd point to Piniella's handling of the Ramirez injury, failing to move Soriano down in the lineup sooner, or his handling of the bullpen as major issues from last season, ahead of massaging poor Milton's ego.

Soto was hurt, got out of shape at the WBC
Lee had a good season
Fontenot stunk, not ready/able to be the full time 2B
Theriot was respectable, but still lacking range at SS
Ramirez was hurt, played well when there
Soriano shouldn't have been playing on his injured knee. It should not be his responsibility alone...he hurt the team too often last season.
Fukudome was better than 2008, but still faded sown the stretch
Bradley? We've covered him...extensively.

Big Z..so Lou made him a head case?
Lilly had a solid season
Dempster was better than I thought he'd be, just not 2008 good
Wells was a pleasant surprise
Harden gave up a lot more flyballs than usual it seemed. Lou's fault?
Kevin Gregg is an average at best closer. He was again in 2008.
Marmol need to find the strike zone.

And so on. Lou was certainly not at his best last season, but there aren't many miracle workers managing these days.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:57pm

My point is that Lou sucked, Bradley sucked, Miles sucked (along with others). Why does Lou not take any repsonsibility for it? Besides throwing his players under the bus, he's now doing the same to his GM, building excuses for 2010 two months before spring training.

They both need to go, but at least when Hendry screws up he acts like a man about it.

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:38pm

barrett, eyre, wuertz, etc...

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:41pm

Rich Hill, Jason Marquis, Matt Murton, Eric Patterson

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:46pm

is this about lou? i thought we were talking about something else here.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:59pm

I was talking about guys Lou ran out of town.

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 3:02pm

ah, you lost me on r.hill and e.pat.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 3:03pm

Lou didn't have Rich Hill banished?

Eric Patterson didn't get demoted all the way to AA for a clubhouse infraction?

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 3:11pm

oh, i dunno...i just didn't have those names register with me connecting to lou. i dunno much about their relationships.

Submitted by Doug Dascenzo
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 10:31am

Lou needs to realize he can't pigeon-hole players and demand really specific things like that. Saying, "our primary need is an outfielder who can hit fifth" is ridiculous. It's like saying your first baseman absolutely has to hit for power. Well, if you can trade for a guy like A-Rod to play SS then suddenly you don't need a first baseman with power.

How about focusing on acquiring really good players regardless of where you think they can hit in the order, rather than these stupid notions like, we need a left-handed centerfielder who can hit between 20-30 HRs, and is a Scorpio.

Submitted by Pell Mell
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:34pm

/pollyanna Maybe this is all gamesmanship on Lou's part, like make everybody think the Cubs really wanted Grandy and now they won't get anybody but ha HA, it's a head fake and the Cubs are gonna swoop in and trade for... /pollyanna

...oh, I can't do it.

Submitted by Rob Richardson
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 11:24am

"The Boston Red Sox have reached a preliminary agreement to trade third baseman Mike Lowell to the Texas Rangers for catcher Max Ramirez, sources told ESPN."

[]

'However, on Thursday morning, Rangers GM John Daniels said the deal is not yet done.

"Reports of the deal were somewhat overstated," Daniels said.'

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4...

Submitted by navigator
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 11:23am

Meetings over, Sullivan says Hendry came up empty.

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2009/12/...

Submitted by The E-Man
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 11:43am

I debunked all those Yahoos on Monday night.

I knew that Bradley was not going to get traded, and it is sad that no GM wants to take a financial risk on on a player whose antics were made even more public via one of baseball's most viewed teams.

Excuse my language, but what the fuck was Jim Hendry thinking when he signed Milton Bradley? If he does not get shown the door after this year, then I just think this Ricketts Group is going to be the same as all the others.

I would think it would piss me off as a new owner to no end realizing that my main personnel guy is going to stick me with a $20MM hit right after I just bought the team.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:18pm

The worst part was that EVERYONE knew this was a real possibility last offseason when Milton was signed.

No excuse for it. Especially when there were so many other options on the market.

We overbid both years and money for him. No other credible suitors were even bidding for Milton. We could have likely gotten him on a 1 year deal.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:30pm

The Rays offered him two years, so Hendry went to three to get him.

Submitted by Dusty Baylor
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:36pm

And how did that work out?

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 1:05pm

To be determined.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 12:39pm

Didn't the Rays sign Burrell before the Cubs signed Bradley?

I think the revisionist TB offer is a CYA by Hendry

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 1:04pm

Not sure on the timing, but you may recall that Bradley was off the market for at least a week before the signing was made.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 1:45pm

Burrell signed 1-5-2009

Bradley signed the next day

So that confirms that Hendry bid against himself.

Dunn and Abreu both signed on 2-11

Submitted by Andrew
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:23pm

Not necessarily. If the Rays got word that Bradley was going to go to Chicago or was leaning that way, then they might have pulled the trigger on Burrell before Bradley actually signed.

But I agree with your main point. Even if there was a little competition, Hendry was basically bidding against himself. Man I wish we'd gone with Abreu.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:31pm

Cubs had a deal with Bradley long before the day they signed him. They didn't make it official until they could move some contracts though (Marquis & DeRosa).

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:39pm

Deal shouldn't have mattered once TB went in another direction. There were several options still on the market at that point.

Hendry screwed up and bid against himself. So way to spin it otherwise.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 2:54pm

That's just not how it works.

Seriously, you want the GM to agree in principle to a deal, then renig on the deal later because a team competing with the Cubs for Bradley filled their spot after Bradley was off the market?

1. Bradley wouldn't have signed with the Cubs
2. No agent would deal with Hendry after that.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 3:01pm

UMMMM, YESSSSS

How do negotiations normally go?

Submitted by Rob Richardson
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 3:52pm

If the Cubs agreed on a deal with Bradley and were just waiting for the documents to be signed, they can't back out if Tampa signs another player once they find out that Bradley is off the market.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/detrimental-...

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 3:58pm

There would be plenty of ways the Cubs could get out of a deal like that. (failed physical?)

Hendry plain sucks as a GM. Not sure of any way that can be said otherwise. Bradley is just another glaring example.

Submitted by vorare
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 4:25pm

Ah, yes. Fraud. Every good GM's negotiating strategy. Stupid Hendry and his stupid basic business ethics.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 4:42pm

So we are just assuming that there was some secret written contract between the Cubs and Bradley?

Submitted by JoePepitone
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 4:43pm

There would be plenty of ways the Cubs could get out of a deal like that. (failed physical?)

Sorry, Dr. aaron. Not only is it a breach of contract to do so but such behavior would truly be douchebaggery of a degree that would surpass the Himes/Stanton Cook treatment of Greg Maddux when they pulled an offer off the table and refused to allow Maddux to accept it 1 day later, thus leading to Maddux leaving the Cubs as a Free Agent. Himes/Cook was douchey (and stupid) but legal. I really don't want that level of jerkiness being associated with a team that I cheer for again.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 4:55pm

So the consensus is that the Cubs had a signed deal with Milton Bradley. Only they had to clear payroll to sign him?

So to recap the Bradley signing from last offseason.....

The Cubs secured the services of Milton Bradley,at a discount no less. After a fierce bidding war between several unnamed MLB teams. As an act of Bradley's goodwill he didn't demand a 4th year player option or a No-Trade clause.

Submitted by Charlie
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 4:58pm

Even if there was not a signed contract, if the Cubs and Bradley had agreed on the terms verbally and thus Bradley stopped talking with any other potential suitors, changing the terms or pulling out of the deal after Burell signed with TB would be a pretty asshole move. I don't know what legal repercussions it would have, but I don't Hendry would want to give the team the reputation of screwing over players in that way. If you want to wait and see what other people get, you don't tell Bradley that you've agreed on the contract and are just waiting to free up money. Whether Hendry ever said that, I don't know, but that seems to be the hypothetical we're discussing.

Submitted by The Real Neal
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 5:03pm

You can look in the archives here at TCR...

http://www.thecubreporter.com/archive/all/200...

December 30th.

But if you really want to know what happened. Ibanez was the 2nd choice for the Cubs and the first for the Phils, who had a spot open in left. The Phils signed him before the Cubs did, but that didn't matter to Hendry because...Bradley was the first choice of the Rays and the Cubs and received very similiar offers from both. His agent got that turned into a 3-year offer (with the injury clauses) from the Cubs and he signed. The Rays then went with their 2nd guy - Burrell and the Nats said 'OK, we'll take Dunn for $20 and 10 years, thanks guys." And finally Abreu got a job from the Angels when he and Garrett Anderson were the only "names" left to fill left field spots, and the Angels didn't want Anderson back.

So it could have been worse, we could have had Burrel or Anderson, but it would have been better, at least offensively if we got one of the three other guys. Hendry wasn't the only GM who preferred someone over Abreu.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 12/10/2009 - 5:03pm

I think the recap is Cubs wanted a left-handed right fielder that could bat in the middle of the order, that meant Bradley, Abreu, Ibanez or Dunn (was there anyone else?). They decided, rightfully in my opinion, that Bradley is the only one that can actually play right field. They made an offer that was better than the 2 yr offer that the Rays made, on par with what Ibanez received and then made it official once they moved DeRosa and Marquis.

Then Bradley slugged 50 pts below his career averages and was an insufferable douche while Lou and Hendry acted surprised by his behavior.

Submitted by Ahone Ahtwo Ahthree
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 12:00am

Well summarized! Don't forget to mention that around the same time, we had Hendry acquiring who he thought were the right trading chips to get a Jake Peavy deal done. To me, it felt like JH had spent so much time and energy working to get Jake Peavy that he didn't spend enough time on the OF need for last season. The big mistake was giving Milton Bradley a 3-year contract. Once Tampa Bay stepped up with a 2-year offer, given Milton's history of 1 year with a team and out the door, we needed to step away and look at other options. Hindsight is always 20/20 though.

Hendry has made a mess of this, no doubt, but I'm not ready to run him out of town for it. We won 83 games last season with our top 4 starters all spending significant time on the DL, huge underperformances by Soriano, Soto and Fontenot, and a major injury to Aramis, arguably our best clutch hitter. Assuming we don't have the same degree of bad luck again this season, we should no doubt improve on 83 wins. Hendry knows he fucked up with Bradley and Miles, and he is working hard to correct these mistakes. I applaud him for not jumping at the crap offers (Carlos Silva??) I'm sure he received at the meeting. Let's see how it all plays out, shall we?

X
You may login with either your assigned username or your e-mail address.
The password field is case sensitive.
Loading