Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

40 players are on the MLB RESERVE LIST (roster is full), plus one player is on the 60-DAY IL 

26 players on MLB RESERVE LIST are ACTIVE, twelve players are on OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT to minors, one player is on the 15-DAY IL, and one player is on the 10-DAY IL

Last updated 3-28-2024
 
* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 13
Yency Almonte
Adbert Alzolay 
Javier Assad
Jose Cuas
Kyle Hendricks
* Shota Imanaga
Mark Leiter Jr
* Luke Little
Julian Merryweather
Hector Neris 
* Drew Smyly
* Justin Steele
* Jordan Wicks

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

INFIELDERS: 7
* Michael Busch 
Garrett Cooper
Nico Hoerner
Nick Madrigal
* Miles Mastrobuoni
Christopher Morel
Dansby Swanson

OUTFIELDERS: 4
* Cody Bellinger 
# Ian Happ
Seiya Suzuki
* Mike Tauchman 

OPTIONED: 12 
Kevin Alcantara, OF 
Michael Arias, P 
Ben Brown, P 
Alexander Canario, OF 
Pete Crow-Armstrong, OF 
Brennen Davis, OF 
Porter Hodge, P 
* Matt Mervis, 1B 
Daniel Palencia, P 
Keegan Thompson, P 
Luis Vazquez, INF 
Hayden Wesneski, P 

10-DAY IL: 1 
Patrick Wisdom, INF 

15-DAY IL: 1 
Jameson Taillon, P 

60-DAY IL: 1 
Caleb Kilian, P 

 



 

Minor League Rosters
Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

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.

Comments

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.

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.

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

[ ]

In reply to by Sweet Lou

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.

[ ]

In reply to by Andrew

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.

[ ]

In reply to by Sweet Lou

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.

[ ]

In reply to by Andrew

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.

[ ]

In reply to by Sweet Lou

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.

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

[ ]

In reply to by Andrew

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...)

[ ]

In reply to by mannytrillo

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... THANK YOU SEATTLE!!!!!!!!!

[ ]

In reply to by Andrew

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.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

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

[ ]

In reply to by Dusty Baylor

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

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

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: Um...you 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.

[ ]

In reply to by Dusty Baylor

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!

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

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). Again, THANK YOU SEATTLE.

[ ]

In reply to by Tony S.

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.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

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).

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

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.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

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?

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

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.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

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.

[ ]

In reply to by Sweet Lou

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.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Soto makes how much? Hmm...he's how old? I see....and he alienated fans and teammates right? Oh..no..that 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.

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.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

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.

[ ]

In reply to by Andrew

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

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.

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.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

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.

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!!!!!!

[ ]

In reply to by mannytrillo

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

[ ]

In reply to by mannytrillo

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.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

No.

[ ]

In reply to by mannytrillo

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!!!

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?

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.

[ ]

In reply to by kmokeefe

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.

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.

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.

Recent comments

  • crunch (view)

    steele MRI on friday.  counsell expects an IL stint.

    no current plans for his rotation replacement.

  • hellfrozeover (view)

    I would say also in the bright side column is Busch looked pretty good overall at the plate. Alzolay…man, that hurts but most of the time he’s not giving up a homer to that guy. To me the worst was almonte hanging that pitch to Garcia. He hung another one to the next hitter too and got away with it on an 0-1. 

  • crunch (view)

    amaya blocked like 6-8 of smyly's pitches in the dirt very cleanly...not even an exaggeration, smyly threw a ton of pitches bouncing in tonight.

    neris looking like his old self was a relief (no pun), too.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    In looking for bright spots the defense was outstanding tonight. The “stars” are going to need to shine quite a bit brighter than they did tonight offensively though for this to be a successful season.

  • Eric S (view)

    Good baseball game. Hopefully Steele is pitching again in April (but I’m not counting on it). 

  • crunch (view)

    boo.

  • crunch (view)

    smyly to face the 2/3/4 hitters with a man on 2nd in extras.

    this doesn't seem like a 8 million dollar managerial decision.

  • crunch (view)

    i 100% agree with you, but i dunno how jed wants to run things.  the default is delay.  i would choose brown.

    like hellfrozeover says, could be smyly since he's technically fresh and stretched.

    anyway, on a pure talent basis....brown is the best option.

  • Childersb3 (view)

    Use pitchers when you believe they're good. Don't plan their clock.

    I'm sorry. I'm simply anti-clock/contract management. Play guys when they show real MLB potential talent.

    If Brown hadn't been hurt with the Lat Strain he would've gotten the call, and not Wick.

    Give him a chance. 

    But Wesneski probably gets it

  • crunch (view)

    alzolay...bro...