I know we're all eager to throw Capt Jack an election campaign, and I think he's great too. If we could take a breath for a second, though, and look at it calmly, this looks like a very intelligent, and favorable, trade for the Cubbies.
You can view the trade from this angle: money-wise, it is as though both teams continued to pay their own players, but the M's paid the Cubs $4.5m to loan Bradley to them over the next two years, while they loan Silva to the Cubs the next two years.
That is hair-fine in its equity, and suits the Cubs very well:
..............
Remember that the Cubs HAD to get Bradley out of Chicago, because of the feuding with the media etc. If they hadn't been able to trade Bradley, they'd have had to DFA him.
Instead of DFA'ing the oft-injured, persona non grata Bradley, the Cubs received back $4.5m of his sunk 2010-11 salary, and also received the prospect of Carlos Silva pitching well in the NL.
That is a pretty nice move for them, considering how deeply the cost was sunk. They salvaged $4,500,000 to $5,400,000 (counting the minimum salary), and Carlos Silva's groundball pitching in Wrigley Field.
It's quite possible that, relative to the Bradley writeoff, Silva will give them a "free" #4 starter throwing, in effect, for the league minimum. Plus the five mills. With the year off for his arm, and going to the NL, I won't be shocked at all if Silva wins 14 games.
The Cubs need Silva a lot more than the M's do. It's not so much that Carlos Silva isn't capable of mediocre innings eating. It's that Capt Jack has stocked the shelves with 9,000 pitchers better than Silva.
=== Dollar Balance ===
According to Jayson Stark, the $9m that the M's include will be paid out thusly:
The last two figures are guesses; Stark said "part this year and part next year."
So, figure about +$3m to the M's payroll in 2010 for this move.
To the M's, this is $4.5m (2010-11) very well spent. Silva was also a sunk cost to them, and Bradley gets a re-boot in Seattle. The Cubbies did well, but from the M's point-of-view they bought two years of Milton Bradley for $4.5m. It was WIN-win, with the M's getting the capital letters.
Sometimes there really is a trade that makes both teams better. Here's a great example.
Cheers,
Jeff
that both of these organizations were operating under, this really is a good deal for both sides. The M's certainly get the better player, which in the end is usually the best gauge of who 'won' the deal, but ultimately both sides come out stronger than they were.
Milton Bradley can be your #3 hitter, though. I don't really care if it's only for 80 games. Injury-prone players fit well into Stars & Scrubs, Doc?
Is that with heavy value locked into your top 5-6 slots, and tons of money saved in the bottom half of the roster, you've got several spots to play with, to take opportunities like this.
STARS
================
Opportunity & analysis spot fire
=================
SCRUBS paid very cheaply
The M's, in essence, gambled $4.5m on one of baseball's biggest rolls of the dice. Exactly the way my BABVA team would have played it -- we will go after *more than one* medium-risk, high-reward gamble in the Bradley, Harden, Sheets, Bedard, Griffey, Branyan category...
In this case, you're loading the dice, because Bradley sounds ready to have some peace and quiet, and he's got Junior-Wok-Hecht(?) with him...
and their relative likelihood to impose themselves in Seattle.
Achilles (which I think is the perfect name for him, well-done if that was your own labeling) last experienced sustained peace and success in Oakland and Texas. Those two teams are significantly different from Chicago in that they are decidedly NOT possessing of a rabid media market like the Windy City (whose nickname was earned due to the blow-hard politicians and media entities of the day comparing it favorably to the bigger cities like New York, leading to the somewhat derisive nickname). Chicago sportswriters really do operate differently, in a fundamental way, from most sportswriters. They believe they are a significant, or even essential component of the experience, and boy do they like their power.
Seattle, Texas and Oakland don't have that type of mentality. The times we get upset to see the local writers dogging a guy, the writers in NY, Boston or Chicago would laugh at us in the vein of "boy, you ain't never SEEN a writer get into a player's business if you're offended by THAT."
That, combined with the factors you mentioned, should make for a great launching pad for MB to impose his will on the league.
When I construct rosters on OOTP, MLB: The Show, or the few times I've dabbled in online leagues, I follow a similar strategy to you. Load the top with the best you can possibly fit, scatter the bottom with versatile and cheap guys, but I always roll the dice a couple of times on a Harden/Sheets/Bedard/MB type project. It's probably part of why I don't win as much as I might otherwise, but when it pays off it does so in a big, big way.
50% chance of 450 AB's of .900 OPS from MB, for the cost of a mediocre reliever? Thank you very much, do you have another?
The media doesn't mess with you as long as you're not a French Canadian farmer :P
And we shouldn't underestimate the blog-o-sphere's influence on this one. Guys like Larry Stone took their cues from the blogs' rooting against Bedard, and others took their cues from that.
Erikkkk has never been pals with the press, but it didn't need to be this way. Kevin Brown helped Florida to a World Series. Nobody tried to run Steve Carlton out of town; people knew what he could do for their ballclub.
Seemed to love Carl Everett, FWIW. Bradley will probably be liked by them as well... more important apparently that you say something dumb than say nothing at all. : )
I think the best way to look at the deal is that the Mariners improved both their talent level and their flexibility significantly in the deal. They replaced an asset with high cost and zero upside, with one with a slightly higher cost and a very high upside. They replaced a highly immobile asset with one that is IMO more mobile if he's playing well.
It also gets you a solid crack at a Bay- type offensive performance while giving up nothing in terms of draft picks or minor league prospects.
Every move Z has made, they all have hedges to ensure success. FA signings are either short term, low-cost adds, or in the case of Figgins have a low liklihood of completely imploding. (Figgins' defensive & OBP skills are not likely to erode, and even if they do, he will be useful as a utility bench guy). All of the trades had talent coming in that added depth or addressed positions of need; and traded away players that were addition by subtraction (Betancourt), redundant, and/or had reached a high point on their production (Putz, Wash).
Gone is the mindset of gambling on players. Z makes moves that improve the club or the minors. He signs players that are going to help one way or another, and he makes sure he has plan B & C in the minors or on the team in case something goes haywire.
The more surprising because of the PC/anti-PC clash that was potentially there. So that's a good point amigo. Maybe MB will get some space from the media, especially as the ballclub sweet-talks them a bit.
Gone is the mindset of gambling on players. Z makes moves that improve the club or the minors.
Also, the emphasis on talent.
Ian Snell has nasty stuff. Brandon Morrow was immediately slammed into the rotation. Cliff Lee is not a value purchase; he is a dominating ML starter. Russell Branyan was a 430-foot home run threat. David Aardsma was racked into the closer role because of stuff. Milton Bradley is a dominating hitter when he's right.
Stars & Scrubs is one paradigm; dominating, special talent is a corollary.
I would argue that Zduriencik is interested in the most-gifted players, as opposed to dollar frugality for its own sake.
Z said his primary goal was to improve and increase the talent level in the organization. None of us realized how serious and focused he would be about this.
I suppose if you are really serious about that, that talent trumps all, then some of the coaching and personnel choices make more sense. You need a field general who can manage the personalities and egos that come with truly elite talent. Wakamatsu fits that mold, in sort of Joe Torre-style: Very even-handed, calm, cool & collected. Smart and fearless.
Pull in Hecht to help keep the talent's heads screwed on right, and to monitor the pulse of the psyche of the team as a whole. Bring in a couple personalities (Griffey, Sweeney) that have the power to help keep a clubhouse loose and focused, that have a sense of perspective, that command respect from other players, and that keep the clubhouse from spiraling out of control if something goes wrong.
The thing I love is it seems Z is not satisfied at all with landing a few talented players. I get the feeling he will be relentless about ratcheting up the talent level continuously.
...what it says about a GM when he goes for talent rather than doing what most GMs (like Bavasi) do...which is go for guys who have shown they can produce results...is that (a) he is supremely confident in his ability to spot and deploy talent and (b) he thinks he can pick coaches who can turn talented pumpkins into chariots and rags into a gown. His talent grabs are (with the exception of Lee who was a rare opportunity to grab a marquee player for practically nothing) not necessarily the safe play. Trading Putz and bringing in Aardsma - the unproven untamed wild man with a career 1.50 WHIP...going for the unproven defensively brilliant center fielder in the Putz trade...handing the first base job to a big hoss who never had more than 300 AB in a season...turning your rotation over to Morrow and Fister and RRS without any time to prove themsleves...acquiring the fiery hot-headed outfielder with the golden stick...everything he's done has the capacity to backfire.
You gotta love his confidence in his scouts, couaches, manager, and personal eye for talent. Especially since it seems to be working.
Of the risks in a lot of his moves. Also on the difference between looking at results vs. talent/ability.
I think Z realizes how volatile talent is, so all you can do is get as many really talented guys as possible and see which ones pan out. At least with the risky moves. Lee, not so risky, you know pretty much what you're likely to get.
That's why all his moves are hedged. If Branyan had been horrible, he had Sweeney for 1B, and Carp in the minors, and Griffey from the left side...
...aside from focusing on front line talent rather than bankable results I mean...and that is acquire lots of extra players that seem not to have a purpose. He seems to like to fill the minor leagues with quality marginal MLB cuppa type guys (Owens, Bladergroen, Patterson, Diaz, Shelton, Wilson etc) to try to limit his stoploss if his riskier moves don't work.
To limit stoploss, as fodder for trades, in case one of them develops a wicked cutter and turns in to a Cy Young pitcher...
It just seems to me that he works a lot harder on his AAA club than Bavasi did...Bavasi geared his rosters around ensuring that everyone was happy with the playing time they were getting and had a comfort zone.
like with Carl Everett that the ultra PC NW media will actually help a situation. Bedard was an easy target because he was a (in the media's eyes) spoiled rich white kid who refused to play nice. Where as Carl and Milton are both under privileged African Americans who pulled themselves out of the hood from their boot straps, and struggle with their humanity and the scars that big bad White America has left on them. If anything MB will be lauded as a hero by the Seattle press, especially if he gives them a juicy sound byte or two :)
Further after reading many of the accounts of Milton's bad behavior it tends to be him reacting to something some one else did or said to him. Unfortunately this makes him an easy target for smack talk and the like from, well... everyone (fans, press, opponents, umps), but I would much rather have to soothe a person who cares TOO much than try to motivate someone who just doesn't care. Personally I have a feeling that Bradley will do just swimmingly here in Seattle. The positive clubhouse, coupled with the ultra pc media, added to the motivation by being on strike ... uh ... 5 with the league. If Milton can't succeed here, then it might be time to find another day job, or a doctor with a better prescription pad.
That reminds me, I was wondering what type of counseling and meds do ball players usually get, or is that not macho, or against league rules or anything?
I don't quite agree with the perception noted above regarding B vs. Z in talent/results. But, I think it's one of subtlety.
Bavasi's reign was dominated by BIG MONEY acquisition of players with a track record of production. These players largely had talent *AND* results. It was the exception that had ONLY results, (Silva, HoRam).
But Matt's in the endzone with the note on attention to AAA. What I see as the defining difference (so far) between Bavasi and Z is that Captain Jack is balancing the needs of the present WITH the needs of the future. With Bavasi, it was "what can I get to help TODAY?" with callous disregard for the future. We need some sluggers for an ancient offense. Gee, there's a 1b and 3b on the market - let's sink lots of money and years into them -- it'll help immediately. "We need an ace to take the pressure off Felix, so we'll trade every piece that isn't immediately critical to get him."
The Bavasi era was punctuated with move after move that had NO backup plan. What if Vidro flops? What if Batista folds? What if HoRam doesn't make the transition to the AL? There was *NEVER* any evidence of a stoploss of any kind. It seemed Bavasi was shocked whenever a player he acquired had a poor performance. Which is why the club had Feierabend and Baek starting 20 games during a pennant chase.
Captain Jack selects players he has confidence in -- sometimes with past results, (Lee, Bradley, Sweeney), sometimes with talent (Aardsma, Guttierez). But, at nearly every turn, he's making moves to handle the possibility of problems. Players slump. Players get hurt. Players get suspended. It happens. A GM who isn't planning for these inevitabilities isn't doing his whole job.
Even when his stop-loss fails, (Cedeno behind YuBet), he works quickly to find an "improvement". No fixation on trying to get "names" or "all stars". The simple phrase that I think best applies is: "How can we get BETTER -- today *AND* Tomorrow? And if you accomplish that enough times, eventually you WILL become the best. It gets harder, of course. But, when his picks don't work out, (Cedeno, French, Olson), he heads back to the drawing board -- and soon we have Wilson/Wilson, Snell and are bringing up Fister.
The fact Redman and Shelton never came up is a good thing. The fact that they were there in AAA was a VERY good thing. But, when push came to shove, Z didn't "settle" for his first stop-loss. He goes out and gets a Langerhans and a Hannahan basically free of charge. In the Bavasi era, it would've been Mike Morse (again).
The "how" is incredibly complex, but the foundation directive is dirt simple -- "This is what we've got. How can we get better today AND tomorrow?"
I don't like this deal for the Cubs end one bit. Worse case scenario they could have hired a hitman to break Bradley's legs so that his '11 year becomes a club option. Then they would have saved more money than they did in this deal.
Gorzelanny is a potential TOR starter thats going to get blocked by Silva. Imagine if the scenario were reversed and we had already signed Jarrod Washburn as a #4? Would you really be happy about this? Silva would block Morrow from the rotation (and also Fister, French, Vargas or anyone else). You've traded for a very low upside commodity where you already HAD a talented younger, and you traded a high upside commodity to do so.
I will eat crow if Silva pitches well, but this looks like a really poor deal on Chicago's side from my perspective if they are gambling on Silva pitching well. If I were a Chicago fan, I'd be pissed right now. Silva would probably not even get a $1mil, 1 year deal if he were on the FA market.
Did anybody call this one?
Silva decided to finally stop throwing so many fastballs, and boom, TOR starter.
Gorzelanny did end up breaking out and is now back in the rotation that is headed by Carlos Silva.
I bashed this for the Cubs, but what do you know, baseball is sometimes hilariously unpredictable.