Milton Bradley: DFA
When I log onto AN, I always expect to see that one of our players is DOA, but not DFA. Milton Bradley, future-former-Athletic, gone someway somehow in the next 10 days. Here's my take:
First off, it is in transactions like this where I most trust Billy Beane. I am confident that this move was not made out of any subjective emotions or rash action, but rather out of good business sense, and I am confident that it is the right move--I'm not yet sure why, so I'm going to speculate, but I do not believe Beane would have made this move unless he knew it was the right move. For one thing, you don't DFA your #3 hitter without giving all your options a whole lot of thought.
What I have to think, first and foremost, is that Beane calculated that Milton Bradley was not going to play very much between tomorrow and the end of September. I think it's clear that when Bradley plays he helps the team win. He may have a temper, heck he may be a "malcontent," but he was not a "cancer" (on the contrary he was the best hitter's best friend) and his presence on the field made the A's a much better team. Whether Bradley reinjured himself--yet again--yesterday, or whether all signs just pointed towards a never-ending "seven days on, seven weeks off" pattern that has been Bradley's career, I have to believe that Billy Beane did not see Bradley playing much the rest of the season.
So Beane will probably try to trade him for a bucket of balls just to get Bradley's salary off the books. Meanwhile, the A's have their backup infielder up in Kevin Melillo. If there are no takers in the proposed Bradley-Bucket deal, Beane may be forced to eat Bradley's salary in exchange for opening up a spot on the 25 and 40 man rosters. Perhaps this is where Piazza and Cust can both fit in. Maybe we'll see Cust in LF after the All-Star Break--hopefully following daily 5-hour practice sessions between now and then.
All I know right now is that as with the Mulder-Hudson deals, I'm surprised now and expect to be appreciative later. The A's do know what they're doing--even if we don't know what they're doing.
0 recs |
195
comments
Read Related
Comments
My gut feeling...
...to be either confirmed or blown out of the water as details come forth... is that this has everything to do with Bradley's injuries and realistic playing time and nothing to do with Chavez or any other players.
by UncleLeo on Jun 21, 2007 10:31 AM PDT 0 recs
We may never know...
But I see no way they DFA'd him for injuries/playing time. I bet he flipped a lid at some point yesterday and said or did things that couldnt be fixed. Just my gut feel too of course, but I don't see it being plausible the other way.
by OaktownPower on
Jun 21, 2007 10:37 AM PDT
up
0 recs
agreed
injuries, lack of production or roster flexibility wasnt the reason. Milton must have misbehaved in the clubhouse or with Beane/A's management for this to happen.
Still its a loss for both Milton and the A's whichever way you look at it.
by oak1 on
Jun 21, 2007 10:58 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Yeah
I agree with Nico that Beane surely had some good reason for this. But the explanations that Nico proposes - lack of faith in Bradley's health, or clearing a roster spot for a backup infielder - are exactly the kinds of things that don't constitute a "good reason" for such a sudden move.
It just has to be something related to off-the-field issues.
by andeux on
Jun 21, 2007 11:04 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Sudden to us...
...possibly not "sudden" to the team, i.e. Beane, Geren, etc. It wouldn't surprise me if they've been discussing this privately for some time. Especially once they were satisfied that Buck was the real deal.
by UncleLeo on
Jun 21, 2007 11:16 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I guess my question, andeux,
I suspect no. But it sounds like you and OaktownPower suspect yes. Depends on what may have happened, I suppose.
by Nico on
Jun 21, 2007 11:43 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Hard to answer....
I think it all depends on the severity of any incidents. The timing of it all with his reported possible tantrum and just coming back off the DL. I have a hard time believing some off the field actions did not play a major part in this decision, especially considering his past incidents.
by OaktownPower on
Jun 21, 2007 11:46 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Hypothetically, if Swisher
by Nico on
Jun 21, 2007 11:49 AM PDT
up
0 recs
what does that have to do with the
price of tea in china?
by ak_A on
Jun 21, 2007 11:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Swish is Bradley's best friend on the team
and Swish is central to the team's future.
If Swish has reached a point where he's ready to see Bradley go, then that means it's time.
(Not that I have any information whatsoever about this hypothetical. I'm just explaining why it's relevant if Swish and Beane did have such a meeting.)
by iglew on
Jun 21, 2007 11:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
M-m-mmm...Yunnan Black <drool>
by Nico on
Jun 21, 2007 11:57 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Is that Bud's little brother? (joking!)
by Nick on
Jun 21, 2007 12:27 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Agree as well.
I can't believe he was dumped for performance reasons, nor because of injuries. It's not like Oakland is full of injury-proof players and he was the outlier. (Rich Harden anyone?) Bradley is too good not to play when healthy, and Oakland is smart enough to realize that. Sure, he gets hurt from time to time...that's what the DL is for, you put him on it and play someone else. You play him when he's healthy and get what you can out of him. And when healthy, Milton is a legit corner-OF hitter who can play respectable defense in CF. You simply DO NOT release players like that for any reason other than personal ones, injury-prone or not.
Milton did something that pissed someone off. It couldn't be more simple than that. Period.
I like Milton a lot. I've followed him since his days in LA, and will fully acknowledge that he's a bit, uh...surly, at times. But you know what? I'd much rather cheer for a guy who plays hard and gets upset when he loses, than cheer for a guy who is simply showing up to collect his paychecks. Plenty of people don't like him, and I'm not sure why. Last I checked, "playing hard" was a quality people tended to get behind.
by rageon on
Jun 21, 2007 11:49 AM PDT
up
0 recs
sure....but that's it
"too good not to play when healthy" and it looks like, with this year at least, the "when healthy" part was the deal buster.
by ak_A on
Jun 21, 2007 11:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs
"Playing hard" is an oxymoron when refering to
Milton (unless you're talking about something other than baseball).
by Bacon on
Jun 21, 2007 11:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Here to discuss the price of tea in China
is my pal Ying.
by iglew on
Jun 21, 2007 12:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Ying is a ripoff artist!
And if Bradley could stay off the damn DL for more than a couple of days at a time, he'd still be here!
by The Pilots Dared Me To Die on
Jun 22, 2007 3:49 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I don't think Milton Bradley plays hard
by Nico on
Jun 21, 2007 11:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs
... and I hate hard
< /Fred Astaire >
by monkeyball on
Jun 21, 2007 12:03 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I strongly disagree!
Milton played hard when he played, and I don't think anyone, except maybe the A's training staff(and who trusts them?), and Milton himself knew how much pain he was in and how well he could perform while injured. Chavy played with sore forearms and was absolutely worthless at the plate. Milton had leg injuries, which means he couldn't run, and that makes him worthless in the field AND at the plate, except for maybe an occasional pinch hit.
by McFood on
Jun 21, 2007 12:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Being worthless in the field and at that plate
=worthless as a ballplayer. Good riddance, Milty!!!
by Bacon on
Jun 21, 2007 12:14 PM PDT
up
0 recs
He played against Detroit in the playoffs
on one leg, essentially. I doubt he's been coming up with bogus injury excuses to avoid playing.
by Nick on
Jun 21, 2007 12:29 PM PDT
up
0 recs
non-playoff games = practice?
c'mon, we're talking about practice people. practice.
by jubjub on
Jun 21, 2007 12:31 PM PDT
up
0 recs
This just in . . .
Bradley has been traded for Allen Iverson.
by EddieVegas_NRAF on
Jun 21, 2007 5:54 PM PDT
up
0 recs
So long Uncle Milty
I'm wondering if his little tirade yesterday helped himself out the door?
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...
"A's outfielder Milton Bradley had a mini outburst after Tuesday's batting practice.
On his way from the field to the clubhouse, he emphatically proclaimed his injured calf completely healed and showed frustration that he still isn't playing."
by dboysick on Jun 21, 2007 10:33 AM PDT 0 recs
Yeah, my inference re Tuesday
But I don't believe that this "conflict" or his clubhouse outburst yesterday, was the driving force behind the DFA (it looks to me, anyway, as if Bradley threw the chairs in reaction to meeting with Beane, not before).
If the A's felt he was going to get 200 more ABs this year, they would, IMO, have kept him. They must not feel that way, and given his track record who can blame them?
by Nico on
Jun 21, 2007 10:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs
That was my feeling, also
Any meltdown was a reaction to something else, maybe being told what was going happen, or given an ultimatum of some sort, not the reason behind the DFA.
by UncleLeo on
Jun 21, 2007 11:05 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Bradley
Wow, my guess is that the A's indicated that he will not be a full time player. Too many guys not enough AB's to go around. That Bradley probably went off at being a part time player. (I think he had similar problems in the past)And gave the A's no choice but to cut him.
by ogallalabob on Jun 21, 2007 10:33 AM PDT 0 recs
That sounds like a good guess to me. n/t
by Nick on
Jun 21, 2007 12:30 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I'm just surprised that
a trade couldn't be consummated without the DFA.
by salb918 on Jun 21, 2007 10:36 AM PDT 0 recs
Can't say that I am surprised at all
Too bad....move on. Next.
by ak_A on Jun 21, 2007 10:42 AM PDT 0 recs
That's right.
Milton has not been a help this season...and the injury go round clogs up the rest of the team.
by IM4Oakgal on
Jun 21, 2007 10:47 AM PDT
up
0 recs
The injuries just meant
we had to put worse players out there. Now we are guaranteed to continue to put worse players out there.
by mikeA on
Jun 21, 2007 10:58 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Shannon's homerun
yesterday was the turning point.
by salb918 on
Jun 21, 2007 11:01 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Stewart
has a 5.000 OPS in his last AB. There's no way you can leave that kind of proven production out of the lineup.
by andeux on
Jun 21, 2007 11:06 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Shannon Stewart:
devastating counterexample to the Moneyball-is-racist theory.
by mikeA on
Jun 21, 2007 11:12 AM PDT
up
0 recs
i thougth shannon stewart was a devastating
by xbhaskarx on
Jun 21, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Beane was worried about the
moneyball-is-racist theory, so he kicked Forst and Zaidi out the room and signed Stewart.
by mikeA on
Jun 21, 2007 11:32 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You meant to say "Frank Thomas"
But really, if Moneyball undervalued a player due to race, it would contradict it's entire rational of seeking market inefficiencies, and evaluating players by clear eyed statistics rather than gut feelings.
If Beane is racist in application of 'Moneyball' he has failed his own test.
by MobiusKlein on
Jun 21, 2007 11:35 AM PDT
up
0 recs
geren was in th loop
knew there was something strange about geren quickly responding that swisher would not be spending more time at first base, now know why
by pieful35 on Jun 21, 2007 10:43 AM PDT 0 recs
Let's take a moment to appreciate
the human resources gal in the A's front office.
She has not had one break from the players' paperwork all season! I don't remember her name, she was on one of Robert Buan's preseason shows.
I hope she has a strong constitution, cause I'm sure her inbox will be overloaded in the next month or so. Not to mention the clubhouse manager Vusivich (sp?), his head must be spinning.
by prana160 on Jun 21, 2007 10:43 AM PDT 0 recs
Pam Pitts?
by Jennifer on
Jun 21, 2007 10:45 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Arm Pitts?
by Jennifer on
Jun 21, 2007 10:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
busy day in office?
by ak_A on
Jun 21, 2007 10:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
slowest day i have had in weeks
and naturally, no game thread to follow.
by ak_A on
Jun 21, 2007 10:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I hate off-days
this one in particular
by ArakSOT on
Jun 21, 2007 11:21 AM PDT
up
0 recs
william pitt the younger
by ak_A on
Jun 21, 2007 10:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Brad Pitts?
Shakespeare? The Bard Pitts?
by McFood on
Jun 21, 2007 11:30 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Lord PALMERSTON!!!
by iglew on
Jun 21, 2007 11:47 AM PDT
up
0 recs
and one of my personal favorites
Lord Curzon.
by ak_A on
Jun 21, 2007 11:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I actually agree with Boggs
Assuming the question is who was Britain's greatest prime minister, my vote really does go to Pitt the Elder.
by iglew on
Jun 21, 2007 11:58 AM PDT
up
0 recs
pitt the elder
by xbhaskarx on
Jun 21, 2007 6:07 PM PDT
up
0 recs
My Bradley Bobblehead joins my Tejada one
What will my bobblehead be worth now? It isn't that badly damaged and shakes it's head at least once a month.....
by Morada Mudshark on Jun 21, 2007 10:55 AM PDT 0 recs
I'd say a Milton Bradley bobblehead
by Nico on
Jun 21, 2007 11:04 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I'd like to see:
Jairo Garcia day at the Coliseum, where they fly up Jairo Garcia so he can throw out the ceremonial first pitch and he and Mr. Casilla can stand arm and arm on the mound in front of the people. That would be fun.
by The Pilots Dared Me To Die on
Jun 22, 2007 4:22 PM PDT
up
0 recs
i agree it was probably the right move
for whatever reason. just sucks we had to give up ethier to get him in the first place.
by blasefaire on Jun 21, 2007 11:02 AM PDT 0 recs
Yeah, but
We also got Anthony Perez for Ethier.
... that really doesn't make it better, does it?
by kirbyk on
Jun 21, 2007 11:11 AM PDT
up
0 recs
There's Gotta Be More....
Remember Mychael Urban's article from last season?
by richwol on Jun 21, 2007 11:11 AM PDT 0 recs
That's a shame
Like Nico, I trust Billy ... just really sad to see Bradley go -- I thought the team was considerably better with him in the lineup. I guess that's the thing though -- just couldn't stay in the lineup.
It'll be interesting to see what the "real reason" was.
by Vacafan on Jun 21, 2007 11:14 AM PDT 0 recs
I think more will come out
I think Bradley did something very "anti-team" beyond just throwing the chairs.
Beane had a "private" conversation with him. Then they DFA'ed him. Throwing chairs is what you do when you cannot help your situation.
Beane never reveals all. And won't, ten years later. Nonetheless, someone will talk a little. Then someone else, and a picture will emerge.
For right now, we just trust in Beane. After all, do we know the operator on the rollercoaster before we get in? No but his "track record" says we trust him anyway.
by One won lost won on Jun 21, 2007 11:14 AM PDT 0 recs
BB will speak
A's vice president and general manager Billy Beane were to discuss the Bradley move in a conference call with reporters at 1 p.m. PT.
by gotgreen on Jun 21, 2007 11:16 AM PDT 0 recs
i hope we get some real info
though, i'm expecting "we made a roster move to designate milton bradley for assignment. it was a decision we made collectively and we feel it was the best move for the team. thanks for coming.".
by Eric in Atlanta on
Jun 21, 2007 11:59 AM PDT
up
0 recs
maybe so
but I hope somebody that can hear/see this will take notes
by ArakSOT on
Jun 21, 2007 12:03 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I'd like to say I'm upset
It's a little surprising, but I can't say I disagree.
by sprtsnwyn on Jun 21, 2007 11:16 AM PDT 0 recs
There's always another shoe.
And when it drops, we'll better understand.
Intrigue abounds in this situation with pennant races sharpening toward the trading deadline, our suddenly over-crowded roster, the speedy development of several prospects, etc. I suspect that MB went-off in some unfortunate direction that precip'd this move, but I bet it was coming, anyway.
Time to sit back and chant the AN Motto as a mantra.
by The Dogfather on Jun 21, 2007 11:17 AM PDT 0 recs
on the positive side
we could see Piazza on the field next week with Cust playing more OF to get both bats in the lineup.
by oak1 on Jun 21, 2007 11:17 AM PDT 0 recs
Does this mean we get Ethier back?
Do overs would be nice but Bradley's intensity in the playoffs probably bought him time. His words about the "best clubhouse atmosphere he's ever played in" will not help his chances elsewhere. Too bad he squanders his talent b/c many have been willing to overlook his idiosyncracies.
by Gerard on Jun 21, 2007 11:18 AM PDT 0 recs
I don't get it
When he's healthy he's on of our best players. So you're eating his contract when he's hurt but if you can't trade him you're going to have to eat it without the 30 games he might have helped the A's during the remainder of the season.
by methodrampage on Jun 21, 2007 11:19 AM PDT 0 recs
30 games he might have helped,
while getting paid to play every game, and taking up a valuable roster spot in the process...
Bye bye, Miltie...
by The Pilots Dared Me To Die on
Jun 21, 2007 11:39 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Roster spot
by methodrampage on
Jun 21, 2007 3:24 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Are you so sure this wasn't a rash decision?
Remember BB traded Jeremy Giambi for some scrub named John Mabry back in 02 cause he was pissed at Giambi's partying and whatnot (of course that move actually worked but it was due more to luck than anything). Look, Billy isn't some totally objective baseball god capable of making completely rational baseball moves every single frickin time. He's human just like the rest of us and prone to irrationality. I'm pretty sure this move had nothing to do with salary issues, injury issues, roster space issues whatever you wanna throw out there to defend the move.
Bottom line, Milton did something to piss off Billy (a lot) and Billy irrationally DFA'd him in another Jeremy Giambi move.
by lenscrafters on Jun 21, 2007 11:23 AM PDT 0 recs

