I was going to say "I wouldn't have guaranteed him $30 mil", then I read this...............
TUESDAY, 9:46am: Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun-Times says the deal could be announced Thursday. He adds:
His new contract is believed to contain language that protects the team on the back end of the deal if Bradley misses significant playing time on the front end.
What a stupid deal. Bradley has a hell of a bat and I have always made hay with him as WW fantasy guy, but if there ever someone who screamed AL DH, it is Bradley. He would have enough trouble staying healthy just DHing, but asking him to play the field every day is ludicrous. Contract language to insulate against missed time is nice for future years, but counting on Bradley for 2009 is really rolling the dice.
stumpak wrote:What a stupid deal. Bradley has a hell of a bat and I have always made hay with him as WW fantasy guy, but if there ever someone who screamed AL DH, it is Bradley. He would have enough trouble staying healthy just DHing, but asking him to play the field every day is ludicrous. Contract language to insulate against missed time is nice for future years, but counting on Bradley for 2009 is really rolling the dice.
Who is next for the Cubs, Baldelli?
The issue at hand is the need to win over the next few years and the lack of other good options currently available to help get that done. Abreu and Dunn don't fill the Cubs' needs in RF and if they can get some protection in the deal it becomes their only serious logical choice absent a trade.
If tehre's protection for the Cubs, it's a solid deal given the circumstances.
stumpak wrote:What a stupid deal. Bradley has a hell of a bat and I have always made hay with him as WW fantasy guy, but if there ever someone who screamed AL DH, it is Bradley. He would have enough trouble staying healthy just DHing, but asking him to play the field every day is ludicrous. Contract language to insulate against missed time is nice for future years, but counting on Bradley for 2009 is really rolling the dice.
Who is next for the Cubs, Baldelli?
The issue at hand is the need to win over the next few years and the lack of other good options currently available to help get that done. Abreu and Dunn don't fill the Cubs' needs in RF and if they can get some protection in the deal it becomes their only serious logical choice absent a trade.
If tehre's protection for the Cubs, it's a solid deal given the circumstances.
How is Bradley better than Abreu or Dunn? To me it is a slam dunk for either of these guys over Bradley. Abreu will show up for 150 games, hit 20 HRs and bat at least .280. Sure Bradley will be a bit more productive on offense than Abreu when healthy, but he's never healthy. As for Dunn, he has a .900 career OPS vs. .827 for Bradley.
The real question is whether Dunn or Abreu is better than a composite of 60% Bradley/40% Crummy 4th OF, and Dunn or Abreu is probably better. Bradley has played in more than 101 games exactly once, and his career high is 141. He played only 160 innings in the OF last year, and still managed only 126 games. He is a tailor made DH. Abreu has NEVER played in less than 150 games and Dunn has only missed 150 once.
You also ignore Burrell, who apparently could have been had for less.
stumpak wrote: The real question is whether Dunn or Abreu is better than a composite of 60% Bradley/40% Crummy 4th OF, and Dunn or Abreu is probably better. Bradley has played in more than 101 games exactly once, and his career high is 141. He played only 160 innings in the OF last year, and still managed only 126 games. He is a tailor made DH. Abreu has NEVER played in less than 150 games and Dunn has only missed 150 once.
.
Check the defensive metrics thread. This exact topic has been discussed so much that my head almost exploded.
I would rather of had Dunn. He had great power that would transfer to Wrigley Field and I read that he really wanted to be on the Cubs. That means that he would likely have no disputes with the club/other players (which is supported by his quiet past) and that means he would likely sign cheaper in Chicago than his actual market value. Plus, you cannot argue his consistency like you can with Bradley.
I am not a huge fan of the deal. I like the prospected output that he can provide, and him being a switch-hitter, but the risk bums me a bit. When he does play, he will provide exactly what the Cubs need, and they should become more potent. It is the time when he isn't playing that worries me. If he is healthy come playoff time, we should be all right though.
I surely hope the Cubs make at least one more major move this offseason, if not two. The moving of Marquis gives me some hope.
stumpak wrote: The real question is whether Dunn or Abreu is better than a composite of 60% Bradley/40% Crummy 4th OF, and Dunn or Abreu is probably better. Bradley has played in more than 101 games exactly once, and his career high is 141. He played only 160 innings in the OF last year, and still managed only 126 games. He is a tailor made DH. Abreu has NEVER played in less than 150 games and Dunn has only missed 150 once.
.
Check the defensive metrics thread. This exact topic has been discussed so much that my head almost exploded.
This is what I had in mind as well. Dunn cannot be put in RF and Abreu isn't good either and doesn't provide the kind of bat the Cubs need. We have enough guys who have 20 HR potential. We have plenty of guys who beat up on the 3/4/5 pitchers of the NL enough to win the division. We don't have guys that can hit 1/2 SPs consistently. We can't progess in the playoffs without that and Bradley can do it. Dunn may be able to, but the defensive hit is bad. If this was LF we were talking about I might take Dunn.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by BALCO All-Stars » Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:53 pm 
(Or maybe he can just share with knapplc) 
