January, Chicago's Hottest Month of the Year
I love baseball newsy days in January. I love roster moves. You can see that I don't even mind listening to a baseball guru or two.
Fox's Baseball analyst, Ken Rosenthal was on WGN Radio's "Sports Central" show hosted by David Kaplan tonight. For those not able to listen, here's a summary of his take on all things recently swirling in Cubsville. He takes on Milton Bradley vs Lou Piniella (a dangerous mix). Could these two ever be as lovable as Adam Sandler and Jack Nicholson in the 2003 film, Anger Management? Somehow, I just can't see LouPa getting Bradley to sing, "I Feel Pretty".
Plus a bit more on the shrinking odds to acquire some guy named Jake.
On to the details, after the jump...
David Kaplan: You're thoughts on Milton Bradley.
Ken Rosenthal: I love Milton Bradley, but wonder if Bradley can stay healthy playing RF. They've got to keep him on the field which is going to be the challenge. He is a guy who plays really hard and that's one reason he gets hurt a lot. Fans will like his fire and they are going to like a guy who led the AL in OPS, but they'll only like him if he's on the field producing.
Kaplan: Is Bradley a good teammate? People I respect around the game that I've called say he's an excellent team mate, just leave him alone and let him do his job.
Rosenthal: It may be a challenge for Lou Piniella to leave him alone. Bradley's primary goal is to win. Bradley had no problems with Ron Washington in Texas and Washington did really well with him. Lou can't rip him in public like he's done Fukudome. It's potentially a dangerous mix as Lou is volatile too. You can say the same things about Lou (his temperment) that you can say about Milton Bradley. Some thought he should go to Tampa with the DH, but you saw Tampa extended themselves financially to get Burrell $16M, so you can see why Bradley wanted to come to the Cubs as he almost got twice that much from the Cubs. Plus there is an appeal to every player to play with the Cubs. If they win you're a made man.
Kaplan: Handicap the Cubs today vs the end of the 2008 season.
Rosenthal: He likes where the Cubs are but he understands the criticism. Not a cop out, merely an acknowledgment of the value of DeRosa to the team. The reasons for the DeRosa trade were to
1) get more left handed (Miles, Fontenot, Bradley), they are much more of a balanced lineup then thay have been in the past. Even though they lead the NL in runs scored last year, they felt all season that their imbalance was not a good thing.
2) $ savings
3) DeRosa's is a free agent after this season and they wouldn't have DeRosa forever. The value they got back seemingly wasn't great but they won't know that for several years. They've reconfigured themselves to be a more of a balanced offense. If he stays on the field, Bradley is a dynamic offensive player and he's also what Cubs fans are looking for as far as on base skills. The key is keeping him going and if they do that Jim Hendry is going to look good.
Kaplan: Do you think a Peavy deal will occur?
Rosenthal: Now that the Padres ownership is going to change it's much less likely. New owner Jeff Moorad's first move is not likely to trade Peavy their best and most popular player. Can it still happen, Sure. Any owner who is logical about things can trade any player at any time if the value is proper. Given the PR damage the team has suffered all off-season it seems hard to believe the team is going to make this deal when they haven't made it under duress. He said his guess is that the odds of a trade happening have dropped to about a 10% chance.
Kaplan: When the Marquis and Bradley deals are finalized, do you believe the Cubs are done or will they get themselves another starting pitcher?
Rosenthal: I have a hard time believing they are going to pay big money for another starting pitcher, say Derek Lowe. The Dempster deal was a top of the market deal. The Bradley deal was sticker price. These are not bargain deals. If the (Cubs) ownership change happens and the new owners say get one more pitcher, then they might be in on Lowe.
Kaplan: Why give up Josh Vitters who they say is the jewel of the system or other prospects when you could keep those guys who cost you nothing and just sign Lowe, for less years and less money, a sinkerballer who would fit in at Wrigley?
Rosenthal: The answers are simple. Peavy is in the prime of his career. Lowe is 9 years older than Peavy. Peavy would probably be under contract for 4-5 years, you'd have to give him another year in a deal. Peavy is a young ace type pitcher. Lowe might be on the decline although he hasn't shown it yet.
I'd prefer it not happen too.
it's a hell of a blockbuster, but it's for a guy who pitches 1/3rd of a season at an extreme premium considering the guy being traded and if the early extension $$$ rumors are true.
it's one of those things that is bringing a guy at the top his game, but something is nagging me that this trade piece could have been put to better use.
a huge part of me is all "hell yeah, top of the line producer"...another part of me is "hmm, that for that?"
Still don't want. Kinda hope they can't work out the extension.
obviously not, and I'm sure they did their homework...just hope they have some better answers than the Yankees
Chapman 12+ Career WAR. Currently 4.7:1 k-BB. With Rondon/Chapman/Strop/Nathan/Montgomery/Wood...Its the best pen I can recall other than Sutter or Lee Smith handling things themselves.
Its gonna suck if he gets injured, and it appears he's not the greatest of characters.
But, he'll have another Cuban to hang out with on the team.
I agree with the names you mention but there are lots of names being tossed around still and there's that small matter of Chapman agreeing to the extension.
Heyman, Wiatt, and Sharma are definitely reliable sources. Wiatt and Sharma have a ton of connections with the FO, and Heyman is one of the national guys who usually breaks stories first along with Rosenthal and Passan.
Twitter is even more nonsensical with names and rumors than usual right now. I'd wait for a real confirmation from someone reputable at this point before getting too worked up.
a'ite then. i mean, at least they're getting one of the best at a young/durable age even if there's a heavy price to pay for it.
i pretty much assumed this would be one of the last kinds of things they'd do...give up a top prospect (probably the best in the system) to get 1/2(ish) year of a reliever followed by multiple years locked in at his market value.
i wonder if there's other players going back/forth, too.
i mean, it's not like it's a horrible thing...this is just something that seems out of profile.
Suspend him for the rest of the year and get him ready for the Schwarber era?
Sadahev Sharma says the names are done. Torres and other parts for Chapman only.
i liked it better when Cubs were really good and likeable.
will be very curious how and if they address the DV incident.
We are coming into the realm of, ""this ain't the old Cubbies...", with the printing money machine coming online. They'll be able to handle it.
15m a year for 65-70 innings...phew.
i mean, technically he's worth it, but wow...the cubs? a'ite.
Heyman is reporting Trees + for Chapman is almost done. Rian Wiatt at BP Wrigleyville reports that the agreement is waiting on Chapman to agree to a 4-year, $60 million extension that is contingent on the trade.