Rangers Would Consider Dealing For Bradley

The rangers could do this, but how do they figure evening out the trade? Do the rangers just take Milton from the Cubs for all the money, kind of like what happened with Alex Rios?

I hope Marlyon Byrd goes to the Giants because he is cheap and you can get him for say 2 year 12 million? he will hit .280 and hit about 25 hr hopefully it ould be a nice pickup and with Nick Johnson this will be great

I'm pretty sure that no team wants Bradley. All these rumors are made up by the Cubs' writers.

Why would anyone want this guy? Did anyone even see what he did on and off the field last year?

@Ethanator99
Thats the problem the Cubs are in, unless they just dump him and expect nothing in return, they are better off taking him back hoping he has a good first half and dealing him at the deadline.

Milton to the Jays never made a lick of sense anyways I don't even know why that rumor was floated. I think it could of happened but you don't give a guy cancer and expect him to thank you for it, you need to include other stuff. I don't know why the deal couldn't have worked if both the Cubs and Mets gave the Jays something else for when Milton inevitably became malignant again.

"Brandon McCarthy+(Teagarden,Davis) for Milton Bradley +$9-12M of the 21M remaining on Bradley's contract."

and

"Ok, what about Bradley+$ for McCarthy?"

Why ? Bradley won't give you value for your dollar and you don't have anything to show for it when he implodes. Why do people think Bradley has positive trade value ? especially after the year he had last year hitting in an inferior league ?

gocubbies ...

As absurd as this sounds I don't think the Rangers view the Young contract as a problem. Until he really tanks they will happily pay him $16m. Personally, I think it is an awful contract and it will only get worse with more time.

gocubbies,

wow thats a horrible deal you should really proof these ideas before posting or at least say to yourself, "Would i trade my 3.9 win player for a 1 win player? I would save some money, but with that money i would have to try and make up the difference of what i have traded away."

Now lets reverse your example and make this more concrete. You are saying that if the Cubs needed some money they could trade Aramis Ramirez (2.9) win player for say Jack Cust (another 1 win player) and you would call that a great deal.

Well thats not a great deal, thats a horrible deal, unless you are the A's, or in your example, the Mets.

Teams don't need to overpay for DH's; the FA market is filled with them and they will sign cheap.

Michael Young is a great value and is consistently very good as well as playing at a valuable defensive position. Him or Ramirez are not the types of guys you trade for the Milton Bradley/Jack Cust's of the world. The former get big contracts, while the later get non-tendered.

"I'm pretty sure that no team wants Bradley. All these rumors are made up by the Cubs' writers.

Why would anyone want this guy? Did anyone even see what he did on and off the field last year?

Posted by: Ethanator99 | November 10, 2009 at 08:57 AM"

It may have to do with the fact he just had what was essentially a career year last year. The only difference between what happened with J.J. Hardy and what happened with Bradley is the attitude. Both had 2 good seasons followed by an abomination of one. Hardy still netted a good, young CF.

So, take off value for being a jerk of a player, and Bradley still has decent value. Then consider that he just played for the Rangers in '08 and was really good there.

cubs223425,

all the more reason to keep Bradley for now. Take a 1/2 season to show people he's trying to turn things around: call a truce with the media, apologize to his teammates, show up to camp early, do and say the right things, maybe give back a chunk of his salary by donating it to charity...whatever it takes to rebuild his tattered image. At that point the Cubs should look to trade him and get some value, without having to pay a large portion of his salary. At this point, none of the deals I've seen make any sense from either a baseball standpoint or a financial standpoint for the Cubs.

"So, take off value for being a jerk of a player, and Bradley still has decent value. Then consider that he just played for the Rangers in '08 and was really good there."

Three gigantic differences.

Hardy makes about 5-6 in arbitration. Bradley is on the hook for 21 over 2.

Hardy plays an in-demand position. Bradley can barley play one at all with any consistency and/or skill. When he is on the field, he claims his body is falling apart (hamstring, calf, oblique, etc) and removes himself from the lineup randomly.

And the "being a jerk" thing is a little more then that. This article says that he has teammates that wont even speak to him. He has been run out of Oakland for attacking his GM (amoung other things). He was run out of Cleveland for ignoring and fighting with his manager before claiming him racist (among other things). He was run out of LA because he disobeyed the organization and continued to make a small internal argument with a teammate into national media where he was claiming racism (among other things). He was run out of Montreal because of issues with multiple people in the organization. And now he is being run out of Chicago for incidents with the Manager, coaches, Media and Fans plus whatever went on behind closed doors. Being a "jerk" can be handled. Being disruptive and destructive is another thing, and lowers value quite a bit. TB said they would want him if they could release him at anytime without having a financial hit - ie, Cubs need to eat almost all the money. That isnt trade value - thats people willing to take him only if it suits and benefits them completely.

i was thinking the same thing holycow.

as much as I dont think the Rangers would do it Id rather have Young than Castilo

Getting Michael Young for Milton Bradley would be the best swindle by Trader Jim since Hee Seop Choi for Derek Lee.