Nightmare Fuel: Bradley to be Traded for Carlos Silva

This hasn't been confirmed yet, but Larry Stone of the Seattle Times is reporting that Carlos Silva will be traded to the Cubs for Milton Bradley. Earlier in the morning, "Monsters of the Midway" (I believe that's Mike North and Dan Jiggetts) said a trade of Bradley to the Mariners was going to happen as well. I also heard Larry Stone on XM radio on my drive in and he said the same thing and that the deal should be announced today or tomorrow.

Seattle always made sense as a possible destination for Bradley, low key media market, opportunity to DH, need some OBP help and they had a terrible contract they wanted to unload. The question was would they take on the Bradley headache and would Hendry be desperate enough to take on Carlos Silva. And apparently he is...

Silva is owed $11.5M in 2010 and $11.5M in 2011 with a 2012 mutual option of $12M with a $2M buyout...that's $25M total compared to $21M owed Bradley, so I would assume they would split the difference or at least get the Mariners to pay the buyout. According to Cot's, Bradley is owed $9M this year and $12M next season, which means if it's a straight up deal, the Cubs added $2.5M to their 2010 payroll. We don't know the full details yet though, so I'm hoping Hendry worked it somehow that it wouldn't further hamper the Cubs 2010 efforts.

There's nothing good to say about Carlos Silva. He's absolutely terrible. When the Mariners signed him two years ago, all of us stat nerds thought it was one of the dumbest things on the planet and that's exactly what it turned out to be. Silva - playing in the very pitcher friendly Safeco - has had ERA's of 6.46 and 8.60 his two seasons there. He did miss most of 2009 with shoulder issues, and althought he avoided surgery, he missed from early May to late September and then made just two bullpen appearances, giving up runs in both games. His career numbers are 60-64 with a 4.72 ERA, a 1.41 WHIP and a laughable 3.8 K/9 rate. He tops that off with a 11.0 H/9 rate (yes, more than a hit an inning and over 12 H/9 the last 2 years). If you thought Jason Marquis was a problem, wait till you see Carlos Silva.

I really don't see why the Cubs just didn't release Bradley rather than wasting roster space and time on Silva. I think the odds are close to 75% that they just end up releasing Carlos Silva in 2010. For the time being, if he isn't on the DL, I assume Silva will compete for a rotation spot in spring training and eventually be the most expensive bullpen arm of the Cubs.

UPDATE: Well everyone is confirming this is happening now...Muskat, Heyman, Tim Brown, Kapman...Merry Effin Christmas Cubs Fans.

UPDATE #2: The Cubs are getting $9M from the Mariners according to Sullivan, so they have that going from them. I would assume it's coming in installments over the next few years rather than one bulk sum in 2010, but we'll wait and see. If by some minor miracle it's all coming in 2010, then the Cubs would be paying just $2.5M for Silva in 2010 and Hendry just found himself $9M under the sofa cushions to throw at Marlon Byrd and Matt Capps or Kelvim Escobar. I'm not sure that's any better.

UPDATE #3: Cubs and Seattle Mariners trade history has been updated.

UPDATE #4: Hendry speaks and takes responsibility for the signing not working out. Cubs play at Seattle in the middle of June next season during my birthday...just in case you wanted to get something for your favorite Cubs blogger.

UPDATE #5: Bradley was apparently owed $22M, not $21M, so the Cubs are saving $6M as has been reported. $25M they owe Silva-$9M they're getting from Mariners = $16M. $22M - $16M = $6M in savings.

UPDATE #6: Cubs will get $3M each year over the next 3 seasons, net savings in 2010 will be $0.5M.

UPDATE #7: Wittenmyer says the Cubs are getting the $9M over two seasons with $5.5M coming for 2010.


Kapman and Heyman verify that this is happening...

Musket twittered about it, I put the link in the previous post.

Perhaps Silva needs more surgery and we can at least get the insurance money for him...

depends on the insurance, but assuming he passes his physical magically and then goes under the knife for the same injury, I imagine the insurance might deny that claim...

fuck FUck FUCK

I take it all back, Manny. Every word of it. Hendry should have been fired YEARS ago. are paying more for a terrible pitcher, to get rid of Bradley....AND we still need a CF or RF??

Hendry is hilarious....hahahahaha.....

I can't wait to order my Silva Cubs jersey.


"#48 Re: Cubs Rumor Round-Up; Pineiro, Cameron, Sheets & More
Submitted by Ahone Ahtwo Ahthree on Tue, 12/15/2009 - 4:50pm.
I'm definitely not for dumping Bradley for a team's overpaid total stiff (like Silva), but there was something to the notion of bad juju in the clubhouse last year. I believe that stuff like bad juju can affect winning and losing, but Milton's poor attitude was one of many factors that snowballed into a crap season last year. If only dumping MB would guarantee 95 wins again!"


It's ok Andrew. Sometimes it takes some people a little longer to come around.


Good to see you!!

I'm too wanting Hendry fired now.

Not me, I'll go the "blame Lou" route. Maybe start a "bring back Dusty" campaign. :) Kidding, manny.

Thanks for joining the campaign!

Thanks. *sheepish grin*

Let's be honest though. It was Dusty that ruined Hendry in the first place.

This falls into the "does not compute" category. Carlos Silva, really? Why not just cut Bradley, or offer to eat his entire salary in exchange for a marginal prospect?

Hopefully there's more to this than is being reported right now, like the M's eating a big chunk of his salary or sending an actual prospect along in the deal.

Maybe he can play center field.

He doesn't have the arm for it.

I wonder if the Cubs have some sort of disability insurance that kicks in if Silva spends the next two years on the DL?


The deal will be made official once Major League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig approves the transaction because of the money involved.

Commissioner approval means at least $1MM changing hands, right? Better be a lot more than $1MM.

update to post, $9m on its way from Mariners...

Let's hope it's all in 2011 and Hendry will never see it.


Wonder what Byrd will sign with us for now? We should make a TCR contest to see who gets the closest.

I'll start..... 3 Years 33 Million

year one 7 Million, then 13 million per year 2 and 3

3/24M was his asking price, doesn't seem like that's out there...

2/12M with some incentives is my guess

and yeah I know you were sort of kidding...

Milton's asking price last offseason was 3/24

Hendry negotiated it into 3/30

Milton's asking price last offseason was 3/24

sarcasm? or you have a link?

Just frustrated.

I can't think of a time where a team willingly tore apart a 97 game winner, in an effort to tinker with it?

I hope Ricketts flushes these clowns out of the Organization and brings in somebody with some vision.

We switched closers, 2b and traded Emdonds for Bradley. I wouldn't quite call that "tore apart". Unless, of course, you mean the big Cedeno and Pie trades.

CLE would be more than willing to get rid of wood's contract.

I do agree with what you're saying, however when that 2B covers your ass almost all over the diamond, the closer is the longest-tenured member of your team (and arguably one of the most-loved by fans, and home-grown to boot), and both are touted as "Clubhouse Leaders", it does make a hell of a difference, even if it's just in our minds (or hearts)


Do you see Hendry getting Byrd for anything less than Full asking price?

well since the only full asking price I've heard of is 3/24 for Byrd, then yes...

Maybe they can use the $9 million to pay for Matt Holliday or Jason Bay through June with an option for July through September.

Wed, 20 May 2009 09:21:02 -0700

The Seattle Times' Geoff Baker reports Seattle Mariners SP Carlos Silva (shoulder) had an MRI reveal an impingement in his right shoulder and fraying of the labrum and rotator cuff.

The SeaTimes also said that Silva was overweight in 2008, changed his diet and exercise and lost 30 lbs prior to last season. Except for his arm, he's in great shape. Perhaps he can mentor Carlos Zambrano. They're both Venezuelan.

Carlos Silva??? Great, maybe we could trade some prospects for Dontrelle Willis or go sign Jason Schmidt. Odds are very high that Lou hits him in the head with a bat when he can't throw strikes.

Well since it looks like were getting 9 million back, I guess this gets downgraded to a dumb move from fully retarded move.

Nope, it's still fully retarded.

Before we hang Hendry in effigy, isn't it true that

*We were in the worst possible negotiating position; we had to get rid of a player we didn't want, and everyone knew it
*We weren't going to like whatever deal was made with Bradley. They would ALL stink.
*An outright release? Dumb. I will say Hendry just topped that; even if he cuts Silva tommorow, we would come out $6.5 mil over an outright release on Bradley. ($9 mil minus the $2.5 mil difference in contracts)

This doesn't excuse Hendry's decision to sign Bradley, but at the time, I didn't think it was a bad signing. I was wrong too.

Silva sucks pretty hard, so difficult to get excited about him, but let's give him a shot, see if he gets healthy and contributes as a fifth starter

... but let's give him a shot, see if he gets healthy and contributes as a fifth starter

you must be new here...

Isn't it true that Hendry put us in this position to begin with by signing Bradley to a 3 year, $30 mil deal when true star players were being forced to take 1 year, $5 mil offers.

It is, and I will be honest and say I wasn't 100% oppossed to that deal; I thought 3 years was too long, but I thought Bradley could really contribute. I was wrong. Any decision is easy in hindsight.

At least Hendry isn't Bill Bavasi, Carlos Silva was just ONE of his MANY trainwreck contracts.

Aaron Miles, Scott Eyre, Bob Howry, Todd Hundley, Juan Pierre, Jack Jones, Alfonso Soriano, LaTroy Hawkins, Mike Remlinger, and Jeromey Burnitz all respectfully disagree.

you named one trainwreck contract...

Hendry wasn't GM when they signed Hundley.

More from #Cubs SS Theriot on the deal: "There's no pins and needles lying around the clubhouse anymore. We'll be able to focus now."

I have this feeling Bradley made fun of Theriot naked in the shower, knocked his bats out of his hand walking down the hallway and may have even hung him up from the flagpole by his underwear at some point in 2009.

It seems that Lou's leadership by example is paying dividends.

Hopefully now that Theriot is going to be focusing on baseball he'll have the range of a real shorstop.

Lou's already got his 2010 excuse in not getting Cameron. I wonder who the players are going to use.

TRN -- I don't understand your constant defense of Milton Bradley while you insist on dogging anyone that mentions anything negative about him.

Bradley made a mess of his one year in a Cubs uniform, but you jump on anyone that dares criticize him for it. Theriot was asked a question and answered it as diplomatically as he could while still being truthful, but you immediately find fault with it.

And what exactly did you want Piniella to do to change the situation with Bradley? It's not like he's the first manager to butt heads with Bradley.

Well, I'm not TRN, but I'll give your queries a go.

First, don't sign Bradley in the first place if you've got a manager like LouPa that's not going to go out of his way to baby him. It's clear that's that Bradley needed/needs some serious ego-stroking, so why even bring him to town if your manager isn't going to do that?

Second, if he is brought to town and you're the manager, why not put forth a little effort in making the guy feel welcomed, etc. From all reports, Lou treated him like everyone else or worse. That might be ideal, you say, but we're talking about the biggest headcase in baseball.

Finally, the point about Theriot is he should be focused on baseball no matter what's happening off the field. Moreover, even if Theriot concentrates 200% this year, he'll still fucking suck.

First, to your point that Hendry should not have signed Bradley. That wasn't part of the previous conversation and it in no way addresses my contention that Neal defends Bradley at every turn, but whatever. It's a fair point.

Second, please explain exactly what you wanted Pineilla to do to keep Bradley in line. According to published reports, Piniella attempted to build a relationship with Bradley early in the year, but Bradley's behavior let him know that Bradley just wanted to be left alone. Others that were in the locker room described Bradley as a "loner" and a "recluse" who wasn't interested in meshing with the team.

I might place more blame on Piniella if he was the first manager to have trouble with Bradley. But since Piniella is just the latest in a long line of managers who have had run-ins with MB, I have to believe that the majority of the fault lies with Bradley.

Finally, your response that Theriot should be completely focused on baseball and shouldn't be impacted by anything going on around him is laughable. Like Neal, you simply bashed the guy that talked about Bradley's impact on the 2009 Cubs rather than holding Bradley responsible for his own behavior.

Lou's the manager. He should know Bradley's history and not give up on making a connection with the guy after a couple attempts. To do so is to start down the same path that every other manager has gone with Bradley, minus Washington. Furthermore, he should be utilizing all his key guys to reach out to Bradley and keep at it until he responds. The guy wants love, plain and simple. I seriously doubt Lou, with his well-fuck-me attitude, did his best to give it to him.

Of course, I'm not trying to excuse Bradley. He's clearly half the problem or more and, believe me, I'm glad he's no longer a Cub (though not at all glad how that came about). But as you said, Bradley's been unpopular everywhere he's gone. Why would we have expected any different in Chicago? Clearly, Lou & Hendry & maybe even clubhouse leaders like DLee and Z did expect differently or else they wouldn't have signed him. The fact that they didn't put the work in -- and yes, it takes work on their part -- to see it through is worth plenty of blame, in my eyes.

Finally, about Theriot, I was somewhat joking about how Theriot shouldn't be affected by what's going on around him. But, at the same time, isn't it a bit of a cop-out for him and the team to imply that ALL of 2009 was b/c of Bradley? The point about Theriot was that, regardless of anything Bradley does, he's going to be a bad baseball player.

I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but here's what I'm hearing you say: Lou should have been more loving, DLee should have reached out more, Z should have tried harder. What I don't hear is that Bradley should have tried harder, or reached out, or been more of an adult.

As for Lou, he's not a cuddly type of guy. To expect him to change his basic personality is probably expecting too much, especially for a guy like Bradley who has refused to change or conform his behavior to anyone else's expectations.

My understanding is that the players did try to reach out to Bradley, but were rebuffed time and time again. Plus, I think it's unreasonable to expect 24 guys to go too far out of their way to accomodate one guy who made it clear that he didn't want to be part of the clubhouse culture.

Considering that Theriot was one of the bright spots for the 2009 Cubs,. I don't think he's blaming his performance on Bradley. In fact, although it's a favorite mantra of the pro-Bradley crowd, I don't recall anyone ever blaming ALL of the Cubs problems in 2009 on Bradley.

Considering that Theriot was one of the bright spots for the 2009 Cubs

take it back, take it back right now

"As for Lou, he's not a cuddly type of guy. To expect him to change his basic personality is probably expecting too much"

then don't welcome milton into the fold if you're not willing to put the time in.

or do...then get rid of him like many players before because of lockerroom crap or "i just don't wanna use him."

carlos silva...rad.

Lou should have been more loving, DLee should have reached out more, Z should have tried harder. What I don't hear is that Bradley should have tried harder, or reached out, or been more of an adult.

Pretty much. Because all of those things might be reasonably expected or hoped for from those guys. Bradley should never be expected to act like an adult. He's a petulant, ego-bruised child who happens to be a talented ballplayer.

I couldn't disagree more, but at least we understand each other.

and we pay 3-4m for superstar managers to manage these guys to the best of their ability...not to sit in their office, scream how they're a piece of shit mid-season...and "leave him alone" the rest of the time.

we could have kept mike wuertz, a guy lou didn't have a use for, and spend less money on a manager who might have the time to keep milton in check.

hell, at least we didn't have to trade Z when he was forcing barrett out.

All of Andrews comments are close enough to my own to not bother rehashing, but did Pinhead not sign off on Bradley? I am 1000% certain that he and Hendry had a conversation and Lou said he could handle him. So Lou didn't do his job. He didn't live up to what was asked of him and what he said he could do. That's called failure. When has he admitted to that - show me the link.

Then Lou continues to make excuses "I wanted a left handed bat to drive in runs, like those other guys". Now his year "I want Cameron, I can't win with Byrd."

Is it any surprise that Theriot and others look to him as an example and say blame their own poor performance on others? He's created a culture of excuse making, similiar to the 2006 Cubs.

I've never said that Bradley was a barrel of monkeys to be around, but think for a second. Where are all the complaints from his other former teammates? Where are their excuses for having poor seasons all caused by the fear that Milton might throw his helmet after striking out? Oh, that's right, they didn't make them.

If Bradley was the guy he's always been and the Cubs couldn't handle him, then they're a bunch of sissies who need to get some mental toughness. If Bradley was exponentially worse in 2009 than he has been, do the teammates and manager deserve none of the blame?

At the end of the day the Cubs just became 20% less likely to make the playoffs than they were with Bradley. That's what I care about.

"am 1000% certain that he and Hendry had a conversation and Lou said he could handle him. So Lou didn't do his job."

This is true.

Theriot was also on radio today, said he was locker mates with Bradley and he tried to explain their relationship and basically sighed and said he could never get to know him.

Now is the Cub clubhouse the most contusive place for players? I don't know, because they are in close proximity maybe some guys don't like being on top of each other.

The other Sullivan tidbit was that (old news) Cub players applauded and hooted when they found out Bradley was suspended.

It's over, let's move on.

Thanks to Z, the Cubs' clubhouse was contusive to Michael Barrett.

Sorry, couldn't resist

"Cub players applauded and hooted when they found out Bradley was suspended."

yeah, you don't call out your team's fans after your teammates keep telling you to chill out on doing that...especially after fighting a loved coach.

things were so damn toxic by that point.

Riiight...because an often injured powder keg of a player can't be replaced by a decent OF who could hit .270/.350/.450 with 20 HR and 80 RBI?

I have not seen one player come out and say "I had a poor season because of Milton Bradley."

You're hilarious. Move on to your next craptastic player to defend.

Instead I am going to try to convince others that your posts make sense.

But again, I'm not saying things like.."I can't believe you'd want Huff to play Right Field why not get Delgado or McGriff." ...who have never played the position..

Whatever Neal...keep shouting about your hero Milton Bradley.

Carlos Silva ??????

I listend to the whole interview with Theriot on WMVP in Chicago, and while Theriot tried really hard to be diplomatic, he made it abundently clear that Bradley was a huge distraaction for the team and that it's a big relief to have him gone.

He commented that Bradley had broken one of the basic rules of being a professional athlete (as taught to him by Kerry Wood): Be consistent in your attitude and behavior on a daily basis regardless of how things are going on the field.

He tried to speak positively about Silva, but made it sound like this was a classic case of additon by subtraction regardless of Silva's contribution.

right about now or very soon, if anyone is listening, please fill in the good parts...

You sure? Waddle and Silvy are on in the mornings. was in another tweet from the one that the Theriot quote above came from

actually it says Hendry would be on in a half hour (that was 20 minutes ago), didn't specify what show or station. Theriot was on Waddle & Silvy, got them mixed up.

Sorry to refer everyone to the dark side, but it's hilarious reading Al take on his readers single-handedly over the Silva trade. Guess which side he takes.

God, I can't believe I ever read that blog.

he wasn't good in Minnesota either except for one lucky year...

Kaplan was on WGN radio talking about how Silva is a sinkerballer and he'll fit in nicely at Wrigley. Let's see, his era that last two seasons combined was about 7.50, and he gave up 38 hr's in one season a few years ago. Going to a smaller park should be just awesome.

I just hope that if he stinks that bad here, Lou moves him to the bullpen. This is just another reason Hendry should be fired. His overpaying/overextending for Bradley now will hurt our pitching staff for two seasons. This garbage never ends.

Next up, we'll replace Bradley with the fat Marlon Byrd on a similar contract, then be shocked when he falls to earth after his career year, and his defense is shaky.

I feel sorry for whoever the new GM is in a year.

Ding dong the witch is dead.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

And since Z is supposedly our "Ace", maybe JH thinks fat South American pitchers are the way to go.

Like I said the other day, Larry trying to do his best Dave Duncan is better in my mind than Rudy having to play Sigmund Freud.

And if the M's are really sending $9-f'in-million?

I say Hendry made the best of a bad situation. (granted, one which he ENTIRELY caused on himself, but still...)

I will say that if the $9M is all coming this year, Hendry did an amicable job on the trade. With some $$$ off the books next year, they can absorb Silva's contract a little easier in 2011.

Using AZ Phi's sidebar info, the Cubs are at around $134M right now counting auto-renewals and arbitration estimates. Add $2.5M for Silva, but subtract the $9M they'd they'd be getting, you're at around $127.5M...$13.5M or so in wiggle room.

Byrd and a reliever should cost about $10M total I'm guessing/hoping...

hell they could make a run at Valverde possibly if they can get Byrd cheaper.

The $9 million, is most likely not all coming in 2010, though. It's probably the difference in this year's salaries this year and then ($2.5 right), then the rest next year.

Here's hoping the timing gives Hendry a chance to jump in on Coco B Crisp.

The only thing that's funny in this whole episode is that both the Cubs and Mariners front offices are probably patting themselves on the back today, saying "we finally got rid of that POS, I can't believe it!" without realizing what they got in return.

Paul, that IS funny. Thanks for the laugh.

The witch isn't dead until Hendry gets canned.

Kidding aside, nice to see you on here manny.

The thing that's killing me about all this--so many people are going nuts and damn Hendry--

Look. RELEASING Bradley was a serious enough option to get mentioned on this board and elsewhere, which means you still pay the fucker and get NOTHING.

After today, if you release Silva you net $6 million (or whatever the hell it comes out to). So ultimately the Mariners just paid us $6 million over two years for the rights to have Milton Bradley on their roster...



That picture sums up the whole relationship, imo. Is it just me or does a 50/50 split on blame not seem too far off the mark?

I would really like to hear some actual examples of off-field behavior that made the Cubs players underperform, or how they caused Soriano's or Ramirez's injury.

Zambrano savagely attacks a teammate, his best friend on the team and it's the impetus for a playoff run. Bradley attacks the same water cooler that others had a go at and he's Adolph Hitler in the last days of the fall.

You can take the picture of Milton Bradley off your headboard now.

The personal attacks when you cannot refute the logic I use are sad and telling, Dusty.

I refute your "logic" every day TRN.

Me: The sky is blue
TRN: The sky isn't blue, it's only blue because Lou Piniella failed to do his job, it's not because the sky has always been blue!
Me: got me there?

If the Cubs get better seasons from Soriano, Soto, Zambrano, and a full season of A-Ram, they will be a good team, regardless of the RF. I just can't understand how Bradley is everyone else's problem....except Bradley's.

He stunk in 2009. Period. Was he the worst player on the Cubs? No. Did he combine stinking with clashing with fans and complaining about racists? You know he did. Were rascists making him wave at pitches on the inside part of the plate like an aging bullfighter waving his cape? His great seaon at home was balanced out by a horrible season on the road, to make it a thoroughly below average season.

He's gone, move on to your next hero.

Still the personal attacks, without actually contradicting the logic in the post. How long can you go on?

"He stunk in 2009. Period."

Correct, well done. Now, I am concerned with 2010, why don't you start doing that instead of trying to change history?

Today we moved farther from being a good team in 2010.

Let's talk about your heroes. Carlos Silva and Marlon Byrd. That's what we got for Bradley. WS here we come!

Silva will be a long man in 2010. Maybe.

Byrd? Can he play any worse than Bradley in 2009? We'll see.

Well Neal...Since it wasn't Bradley's fault that some players struggled, then it will be just as much not his fault when they rebound.

How was I trying to change history by saying that Bradley stunk in 2009?

"Byrd? Can he play any worse than Bradley in 2009? We'll see."

2009 was Byrd's "career year" and Bradley's worst.

In 2009 Byrd had an EQA of .272. Bradley's? .276

And Byrd isn't a center fielder. It may be that the defense is slightly better, being that Fukudome's will be better than Bradleys and Byrds roughly the same as Fukudomes. But the worst hitting that Bradley can do equals the best hitting that Byrd can do.

That's why you're living in the past. In 2010, which is what I care about, Bradley's a better player. He makes his teams win more ballgames.

We still need someone to platoon with Fukudome, by the way.

Byrd 2009 best: .283/.329/.479, 43 doubles, 20 HR, 89 RBI
Bradley 2009 worst: .257/.378/.397, 17 doubles, 12 HR, 40 RBI

Those seasons are not equal.

In 2010, if they sign Byrd, he will at least be on the field consistently, has shown he can hit a little, but doesn't walk enough for my taste.
If he could play like he has for the last 3 seasons in Texas, I'd take that.

Bradley would be a better ballplayer if he was the Bradley from 2008 every season. He isn't that player though.

I wasn't going to bother but I can't take it any more, Neal.

I don't care if Bradley hits 100 fucking home runs in Seattle next year.

The 2010 Chicago Cubs are not worse without him. If you thought Bradley and the press etc. were a distraction last spring, what exactly the fuck would EVERYONE have been talking about in '10?

That's right.

And was that going to make Bradley (I think even you've acknowledged his instability and basis of self-worth on others' opinions) better, worse or roughly the same in 2010?

Right again.

So if Silva is so fucking horrible and overpaid, cut his ass, I don't care. Bradley's gone and we got a partial refund of his 09 contract (which never should have been signed in the first place) to go along with another shitty year, and we find ourselves roughly where we started last year (looking for an outfielder) with less money (because Hendry backloads everything).


Trust me, if Bradley was in the ASG in 2010 for the 1st place Cubs, all this stuff would blow over. Pinhead making excuses, players whining like six year olds, borderline retards making signs belittling him, him picking on reporters for asking stupid questions, it would all stop.

Not sure which game you're watching there Tony, but in American sports, that's how it works.

Yeah, but...for that to happen, Bradley would have had to have ignored the media circus going on around him, changed his attitude, befriended the men (his teammates) he alienated last year, apologize to his manager, etc. THEN maybe he could have played well. Don't pretend he could have blocked this all out and focused on baseball, you know that's bullshit. How likely was this, Neal? Not very. The other option: get rid of Bradley. I'll take Option B every time.

Yes, he's a better baseball player than Carlos Silva. But no, he wasn't likely to help the Cubs more than Silva (and the $9M doesn't hurt either).

I would like an example of anyone who blamed Bradley for Soriano's or Ramirez' injuries. It's a red herring argument and I think you know that.

Bradley should be blamed for his behavior and for whatever impact that behavior had on the team. Several Cubs players have commented that Bradley's behavior did have an impact on the team, but I can't say to what extent it affected their performance.

But can you say to what extent it should have impacted their performance? I can... it's 0.

after all...they are grown men.


bradley needs attention and work and pats on the head...give it to him or don't sign him.

To to be clear:

Bradley stunk in 2009
He did not cause others to have a bad season.

Ok. Great. Did his bullshit help the team any?

Honestly, I don't know what impact Bradley had on the on-field performance of the other players. But just like an employee with behavior issues can effect the performance of other employees in an office, it wouldn't surprise me if the negative environment Bradley created carried over on to the field. However, I can't say with any certainty that it did.

Again, you're applying a double standard to Bradley and the rest of the team. You claim that 24 of the players on the Cubs should not be impacted at all by having a prick for a teammate who makes the clubhouse miserable. But Bradley is impacted competely because a handful of rowdy fans held up negative signs and boo'd him.

What I am saying is that the Cubs and the fans blamed Bradley for all their woes in 2009. It's a double standard for Theriot, who season in and season out makes many stupid plays and doesn't get booed mercilessly all season long to wonder why Milton doesn't like Chicago. It's a double standard for Bradley to be benched while trying to play through an injury and have other players allowed to limp around, and then get yelled at later in the season for not trying to play through an injury...or is that a triple standard? The organization and the Cubs following is rife with double standards, and it starts with the "leadership" of Pinhead. I can lose my temper and call you disgusting things to your face, but you're not allowed to yell at an umpire for blowing a call.

The 2009 Cubs were a were a rudderless ship. Bradley being moody and sullen was one of the symptoms, not the cause.

Bradley stunk. He blamed everyone but himself. He did not play well in the field, or at the plate.
Getting rid of him is a good thing. Theriot at least will not throw the ball into the stands with 2 out...or kick a popup halfway to the infield, then pop off about how the fans are racist.

Your defense of Bradley is laughable. The 2009 Cubs disappointed us all. Soriano, Bradley, Soto, Zambrano, Gregg, Fontenot...and yes, Piniella. He's gone, it's a new chapter.

Did you watch any Cubs games? Theriot tries to throw the balls into the stand once a week, while the guy who got an infield hit is handing his batting gloves to the first base coach. It takes superhuman effort from Lee to keep his errors under 20. He also runs into stupid outs four to six times a season.

Milton Bradly is the 2009 version of Sosa's boom box. 2010 = 2005. The only difference is that our manager is going to ask to be allowed to retire in July instead of sticking it out the next two seasons.

I know Theriot is limited defensively. His lack of range and arm strength is glaring at SS.

His season was still better that Bradley's, in that he was cheaper, played hard all the time, and played in 154 games.
He's better suited for 2B, and has little power, but for the price, and for the tremendously better attitude, I take Theriot over Bradley every time.

Pointing at Theriot while trying to defend Bradley?

"What I am saying is that the Cubs and the fans blamed Bradley for all their woes in 2009."

Not a single Cub has said this, or implied it. They said he was a distraction, whicn is true.

No one on TCR has said Bradley caused all of the Cubs' problems. That seems to be the reading of it by you and maybe a few others.


'"What I am saying is that the Cubs and the fans blamed Bradley for all their woes in 2009."'

"Not a single Cub has said this, or implied it. They said he was a distraction, whicn is true."

Feel free to split hairs but many if not most Cubs fans incorrectly blame Bradley in large part for the Cubs' failures in 2009. For example.

'I think too many people underestimate what an effect a disgruntled person can have on the rest of the players. One bad apple can really influence the whole lot. I don't know any details of his club house behavior but one thing is pretty clear. The Cubs players didn't really enjoy trotting out onto the field everyday.'

Blaming for their failures, or for not enjoying Miltypalooza last season?

As I said feel free to split hairs.

Well if that's how you feel, run with it. Most of the Cub fans I know might have voted Bradley or Zambrano most annoying and hard to deal with, but not as the reason for failure last season.

But hey, I don't want to split any hairs.

That's not splitting hairs. It's talking about the truth. No Cub or poster on TCR said Bradley being a complete and utter douchebag was the reason the season went down the toilet. It's a fact that he was a distraction and that his performance on the field was a large part of why the team didn't succeed. It's also a fact that Soriano sucked, Soto sucked, there were a lot of injuries, etc. Everything added up. But the point of fact remains: No one has blamed Bradley for all of the team's woes.

Well...Zambrano was 18-13 that season. Bradley sucked.


Next we release Soto, Soriano and Ramirez, right? Or we trade them for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th worst pitchers in baseball.

Soto makes how much? Hmm...he's how old? I see....and he alienated fans and teammates right? was someone else.

Why in the bloody blue hell bring up Ramirez here?
He dislocated a shoulder, came back and played well when he was on the field.

Soriano isn't going anywhere. You know it, and I know it. It's an albatross of a contract. But if Soriano plays even like he did in 2008: .280/.344/.532 he is better than Bradley.
Bradley's career OPS+ of 115 is slightly better than Soriano's 113, but Soriano is out there a heck of a lot more than Bradley is.

Seems about right, all things considered. Z will have someone to talk to about Hugo Chavez.

Good job getting some cash out of the deal. I honestly didn't expect that.

the reports seem to be saying Cubs are saving $6M total, but I get...

Silva owed $25M
Bradley owed $21M

That's $4M the Cubs are in the negative, but they're getting $9M from the Mariners...isn't that $5M in savings?

or $25M they owe Silva - $9M they're getting = $16M they owe him compared to $21M they owed Bradley...$5M again.

I think the reports are suffering from imprecision when they total the numbers in these contracts.

Cot's says Bradley is owed 10.33 and 13.33 for $23.7MM total.

Silva is owed 12.75, 12.75 and 2.00 for $27.5MM total.

The difference is $3.8MM, so if the Cubs get $9MM they save $5.2MM.

I see $9M and $12M on Cot's...

AZ Phil said bradley was owed $2M of his signing bonus this year which would make it $23M total (11+12)

The seattle times link below says $22M owed and that would make the $6M in savings make sense that others have reported.

Pro-rated bonus I believe is used for luxury tax, not actual salary figures.

also signing bonuses are generally that, given mostly up front when a player is signed (I believe there is some sort of tax advantage to this), although there are many instances where it's spread out over multiple years, but almost rarely in even amounts of the entire length of the contract.

Also, Cot's is awesome and all, but it's not like they work in the MLB offices or the agents. Their info can definitely be subject to errors and misses.

There was a big push last season by a lot of agents to get signing bonuses up front for their players in 2008 to avoid expected income tax increases.

Not sure if Bradley was one of those beneficiaries, but I expect so (Dempster as well).

My understanding, there are up-front bonuses paid at signing and pro-rated bonuses, usually paid per game.

The Cubs covet former Texas Rangers center fielder Marlon Byrd

I really dread it whenever the Cubs "covet" a player.

Covetting doesn't bother me. It's when they covet a free agent who isn't very good when I get alarmed.

Hendry's just playing his own game called "Try to acquire as many of the worst contracts in baseball as possible".

He's winning.

I'm guessing the $ 9 million will go to feed Silva.

Meh, I have already written off 2010.

Sullivan was just on the Score, happy to see Bradley go just for interview purposes.

Also mentioned Dye for Cubs.

For what, spare parts?

Well Mr Ricketts, you're supposedly a savvy businessman since you're a billionaire and all. If you were watching the CEO of your company running it into the shithole, how long would you sit on the sidelines until you fired his sorry ass? I'm willing to bet not long.

Jim Hendry is a failure at his job and needs to be fired before he does further damage. Period. Unfortunately for you and for us, he has hamstrung the budget so bad with so many underperforming players, it will be 3-4 years before the team can start rebuilding. Do us a favor and lower the ticket prices some in the interim, because it's gonna be hard to maintain enthusiasm with a team this shitty.

Fire Hendry. Yesterday.

Well Mr Ricketts, you're supposedly a savvy businessman since you're a billionaire and long would you sit on the sidelines until you fired his sorry ass? I'm willing to bet not long.

Or, not give him any more money than what he's already been given and wait for his contract to run out...

I tend to be a "glass-is-half-full" kind of guy, so I'm not completely disgusted by this deal. Considering the circumstances, I think Hendry did a good job of moving Bradley and getting some payroll relief. It would have been nice if he could have improved the team at the same time, but that obviously wasn't going to happen.

If we'd cut Silva now, I could agree with this.

However since Silva is on the hook for 25 Million. Rest assured he will be given EVERY POSSIBLE CHANCE to contribute to the Cubs and save face for the GM.

You're saying that it would be better for the Cubs to release Silva and eat $25 million than it would be to give him a chance to perform?

In all likelihood yes.

Give him ST to show he belongs.

I don't want Silva taking the spot of someone who can actually perform at the MLB level and contribute to the Cubs.

Agreed. Most of the guys in the Triple A rotation would be better.

Wonder if any of the extra $6 mil could be used to get Smoltzy.

Giving him a chance makes sense, I guess. Say he goes 8-12 with a 4.90 ERA this next year... was this trade then a success? Maybe... it's a big grey area.

The Cubs have spent most of the winter trying to extract some value from Milton Bradley. Today, they gave up on that pursuit, and traded him for Carlos Silva instead.


"The money remaining on both contracts is similar. Bradley has $22 million left on his contract (not $21 million as earlier reported) -- $9 million in 2010, $13 million in 2011. Silva has $25 million remaining -- $11.5 million in '10 and '11, with a $2 million buyout on a 2012 option. The Chicago Tribune reported that the Mariners will send $9 million to the Cubs -- that accounts for the $3 million difference in salary, plus another $5 million."


3 + 5 = 9?

Bad at math much, Larry Stone? If Bradley is only earning 21 million, however, then the difference in salary is 4 million and 9 - 4 actually does equal 5.

Bradley seems to be owed $22M, so the savings would be $6M, I think he just messed up the $5M

I never heckled him in Chicago, but since I plan to be in Seattle in June, I feel obligated.

Go Cubs.

Glad to see many of you are seriously coming over to the dark side and seeing Hendry for the piece of shit he is. Unfortunately he has run the organization into the ground, but let's hope the Rickettes family sees him for what he is and cut ties ASAP.

They rose my ticket prices 7.05% this year. When I send my check in on the memo line I am going to write "take price increase to eat Hendry's contract".

Isn't 7+ year enough of this shit? UGH!!!!!!

He did make us more lefthanded

Good to see that the taregetting of the re-sellers is working, though, isn't it?

I don't think so, as many people I know who go to the games all the time got increases too. It just depends on where your seats were.

Across the board it was about 10% increase according to the article Navigator found the other day. The people who got hardest hit were the ones with the most expensive season tickets, as I recall.

the report was that Cubs targeted the higher end tickets that make up the bulk of the resale market...

Or just because they could afford it and wouldn't be willing to give up their seats as easily. Also they have 700 new lower level season tickets (old trib seats) to sell and I am sure they wanted to sell them at a higher level too. I would doubt they were targeting resellers.

Crane Kenny said "We are targetting resellers".

Isn't 7+ year enough of this shit? UGH!!!!!!

Division championships in 3 of 7 years as GM. .500+ records in 5 of 7 years. Best single season for the team since 1945. Complete change in organizational attitude. Payroll nearly doubled since 2002. Yes, please, let our long seven year nightmare come to an end.

And ZERO playoff wins in 6+ years. Not acceptable to me, maybe you though. With the payroll Hendry has consistently been handed the results are just no where good enough, IMO.

Yes, the Hendry regime has been better than most Cubs regimes over the past many decades, but that does not mean he hasn't failed. The Cubs have not won a playoff game in over 2,000 days and have failed to win a pennant and/or a World Series under Hendry.

He has been given more than enough time to produce a a World Series winner or at least a NL Pennant winning team. It is long past time to move on.

Just out of curiousity, going into the 2007 playoffs did you think that we had a team that had the best chance to win the pennant?


I wouldn't say that I'm very happy with Hendry right now, but he can't predict injuries or perform for players once the postseason starts. All he can do is get them in a position to make the playoffs and see what happens. It's obvious he fucked up with Bradley, but we won 83 games last season with horrible chemistry in the dugout, a manager who stuck Sean Marshall in left field last season, and major time lost to injuries for our top 4 starters and our best clutch hitter. He has now dumped Miles, Heilmann, Gregg and Bradley, who were barely "helping" the team. Assuming we don't have terrible luck in the injury department, why would we not expect to improve on 83 wins?

Oh wait a minute, we have Carlos Silva! WAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!

I think Tom Ricketts believes--and he may be right--that Hendry just needed adult supervision, which he wasn't getting from Kenney and McDonough.

I love the Cubs farm right now, and I don't know who to give credit to besides Hendry.

I guess at this point it's too obvious to say that this is, or will be soon, all Michael Barrett's fault.

Barrett's a free agent. Bring him back just to spark Z.

Without Cedeno on our team we are lacking brain dead players.

Soriano says "Hi"



hmmm. yeah.

Maybe Rudy can teach him to hit...

2010 is going to suck.

But the clubhouse is going to be wonderful, so who cares?

I hope they can all get along despite posting 78 wins

At least TCR will be more pleasant.

Ooh, I made myself lol on that one. Carry on.

byrd a cub yet or what? the inevitable is taking forever.

trade bradley...take on byrd + silva + more money once it's done.


Not quite Bradley talk.

But wasn't there talk early in the offseason of the Cubs having an interest in Rajai Davis of the A's? And the A's being willing to move him because of arbitration.

Better option than paying big bucks to Marlon Byrd?

if byrd gets more than 5-7m a year...ugg.

i'm assuming it will be at least a 2 year deal...

Maybe someone can elaborate for me on the difference between Byrd and Reed Johnson.

power and slight speed advantage...and height, probably.

Dollar value and length of next contract.

FWIW, this guy says "I'm hearing that Marlon Byrd is close to getting a deal done with the Cubs"

Better than Hendry signing Podsednik, if that makes you feel any better...:)

doesn't completely hate Bradley

This is like a thread from vintage TCR. All the usual players. Plenty of name-calling and mud-slinging. The normal objects of abuse.

Ah memories.

I got a bladder full of piss and I'm making a bee-line for everyone's sandbox.

Again, this blog seems to bring out the pessimist in me.

But at this point, I have little hope for next season. We still have what I would consider 2 legitimate power hitters, then a bunch of question marks up and down the lineup. Same with the pitching, a couple reliable guys then not much.

Obviously I'd love to be surprised and see this team come together and throw 93 wins together and a division championship, it's just not there for me.

So at this point I hope that we are in 4th place at the trading deadline but Lee and Lilly are having monster years and want to go to a contender. Having a finally stocked farm system with close to 30 million coming off the books with a new GM will be the closest thing to a clean start that we're gonna get, in my opinion.

i dunno what power hitter you don't like, but dlee/aram/soriano you can pretty much lump into a power hitting crew.

the strange/shitty/what-the-hell thing is for some stupid ass reason lou sees soriano as a 6 hitter rather than a 5 hitter. if he plans on placing byrd and his 30+ doubles, 15+ HR, and low ob% self in front of soriano that makes even less sense...not that it's a really huge deal, though.

This sums up the trade pretty well.

"The Mariners, at little or no additional financial expense, have traded a player who might be quite useful for a player who almost certainly will not be useful."

yeah, the cubs get no upside from this, imo...except saving money to sign a lesser-talent player while wasting a roster spot on silva.

Style +1

I think our playoff hopes rest on how many DUI's the Cardinals get this season. They're already off to a quick start with David Freese.

"I'm a Seattle Mariner. Chicago's is a thing of the past. I'm not interested in rehashing old news."

Next season we will have a new blurb from Milton:

"I'm a ____________. Seattle is a thing of the past. I'm not interested in rehashing old news."

Like a Mad Lib - you can fill in the blank with his next team!!

World Series Champion

Douchebag actually comes to mind

Ha! Yes!!

Submitted by Rob G. on Fri, 12/18/2009 - 2:55pm.
Pro-rated bonus I believe is used for luxury tax, not actual salary figures.

also signing bonuses are generally that, given mostly up front when a player is signed (I believe there is some sort of tax advantage to this), although there are many instances where it's spread out over multiple years, but almost rarely in even amounts of the entire length of the contract.


ROB G: You are correct, sir.

Signing bonuses are usually paid in a lump sum when the player signs a contract, which is of course why it's called a "signing bonus." The player then buys a new house or two, a Ferrari, and some bling for his woman (or women, as the case may be).

Occasionally a signing bonus is paid in installments, but that is the exception rather than the rule.

Milton Bradley supposedly received a $4M signing bonus which was to be paid in two equal installments, half of it ($2M) paid when he signed his contract a year ago, and the other $2M to be paid during the 2009-10 off-season (actual due date not reported). So the Cubs might or might not be on the hook for the remaining $2M.

Carlos Silva received a $5M signing bonus that was apparently paid in a lump sum payment when he signed
his contract in December 2007.

What's confusing is that for the purposes of MLB revenue sharing and luxury tax calclations, signing bonuses are pro-rated over the length of the player's contract, even if the bonus isn't actually paid that way.

So by those terms, MLB will show Silva making an extra $1M beyond his salary every year 2008-12 (his $5M signing bonus spead equally over five seasons), and Bradley making an extra $1.33M every year ($4M spread equally over the length of his contract). But the bonuses aren't actualy paid that way.

If the Cubs are getting $9M from the Mariners, it probably is in the form of two equal $4.5M payments that will reduce Silva's salary down from $11.5M to $7M per year in both 2010 and 2011, with the Cubs on the hook for Silva's $2M club option buy-out in 2012, and the Mariners on the hook for Bradley's $2M bonus payment #2 to be paid sometime this off-season. Or the Cubs may have already paid it.

In one of the links, a writer stated something to effect that the Cubs, "...have been monitoring Silva in the VWL..."

Has anyone pulled any stats on said "monitoring"?

It's on the previous post, I think Navigator looked it up. I would suggest for peace of mind that you don't look. The guy is toast.

- sigh -


just search for "silva"

Wait...9IP and 16 hits?

IS that accurate?

yeah...pretty awesome, huh?

it is very much a hitter's league...still...

Wait...9IP and 16 hits?

That's not bad...Oh wait, he was the pitcher?

Told you not to look... I bet you pick off your scabs too.

The most important story of the day is that Mike North broke the trade. That piece of work genuinely cancels out like two shows from your long, wretched broadcasting history. Keep up the good work.

Now Hendry and Silva can start working on that contract extension. I suspect dinner will be involved.

$3M a year coming from Mariners over 3 years..

Shite. So if we want all of the money, we have to keep Silva for the rest of the contract? If we release him, we get nothing, correct?

releasing him wouldn't matter, the Cubs will get the $3M each year from the Mariners regardless...

Because they have to pay Silva's contract regardless...

Recent comments

Subscribe to Recent comments
The first 600 characters of the last 16 comments, click "View" to see rest of comment.
  • J-Hey not finishing with an offensive onslaught.

    If Geoff Blum could be a Playoff hero, there is hope still...

    The E-Man 2 hours 46 min ago view
  • Giants scare me. I think you're wrong about Bumgarner, he would pitch on short rest for Game 2 and then full rest for Game 5. Cueto would go Game 1, then short rest in game 4. Add in some really tough outs in that lineup and I want nothing to do with them. With that rotation they can easily steal a series.

    Cards are a tough matchup. The rivalry evens out their comparable lack of talent. And like someone said, they love HRs, which is how to beat the Cubs. The upside is that I would feel really good about Lester twice against STL.

    John Beasley 3 hours 32 min ago view
  • j.buchanan with a nice start...5ip 2h 1bb 3k, 0r/er

    zobrist with 2HR and a double through 8

    heyward 0-4 :(

    crunch 15 hours 32 min ago view
  • Mark Gonzales @MDGonzales

    Soler likely to return Sunday, Maddon says

    crunch 18 hours 10 min ago view
  • Right now, I'd like to see the Mets first, Giants 2nd.

    I believe that since most of the team from last years' NLCS is on the squad this year, they will really amp their game up even more to kick their ass in payback for 2015.

    The Giants just do not have the depth in years past, and I think all things equal - and at Wrigley - they could handle them.

    I do not want to see the Cards, period. Or their fans, media, or Joe Buck.

    The E-Man 18 hours 29 min ago view
  • I don't want to play Braves in the first round. Any friggin team in the league can win 3 of 5..I hate the first round. Furthermore, I wanted to play the Marlins in 2003 and the Mets over Dodgers last year.

    With that said in reverse order:
    3. Cardinals: It will be devastating to lose in the first round, but even worse to their main rival. It is increased incentive for the Cardinals, especially after last year. Cards would have nothing to lose, Cubs have everything to lose.

    2. Giants: Rotation in the playoffs scare me a bit, but what a lousy team.

    blockhead25 19 hours 12 min ago view
  • 1. Mets--because of the losses in the rotation
    2. Giants--because they're not the team they were BUT they maybe have bullshit even-year magic?
    3. Cardinals--because rivalry and not making the playoffs hurts them more than losing in the NLDS plus getting eliminated by them in the playoffs would make for horrible sports commentary next throughout next season.

    Charlie 20 hours 56 min ago view
  • Who's asking?

    jacos 20 hours 58 min ago view
  • #TeamEntropy

    CLE/DET rained out last night already, possible rain-outs in New York (vs. Baltimore), Boston(vs. Toronto) and Philly(vs. Mets) this weekend too.

    Not only games involving playoff spots that would need to be played, but any that involve home field advantage.

    Rob G. 21 hours 6 min ago view
  • I got the first one! Second one I'm not even sure what even/odd betting is.

    johann 21 hours 53 min ago view
  • any opponent preference for NLDS?

    Mets are down to 1 great pitcher instead of 4. Syndegaard may pitch Sunday which means if Mets win the WC game, he'd be set up for Game 1. There's a chance they clinch a spot by Sunday so he'd pitch the WC and then we'd probably get Colon for Game 1. They've certainly had the hottest bats over the last week and month out of the WC options.

    Rob G. 22 hours 15 min ago view
  • Rob Richardson 1 day 3 hours ago view
  • Can't teach height and thinness

    jacos 1 day 5 hours ago view
  • Hopefully Pirates don't call up A. Lincoln.

    jacos 1 day 14 hours ago view
  • j.buchanan going friday...should something like it.

    crunch 1 day 14 hours ago view
  • Wow. I didn't know they could do that.

    Nice for Willson, not so much for Addy.

    billybucks 1 day 15 hours ago view