Odds and Ends: McLouth, Doumit, Eyre, Bradley

Where's that "knowledgeable" cardinals writer now who said Milton Bradley would not be a type A free agent?

I expect MB to get a 3 year $48MM deal with an option for a 4th year.

Paging Kevin Towers:

Please trade Kevin Kouzmanoff for Reggie Willits, and then proceed to sign Milton Bradley to play LF.

Does Tilghman instantly become one of the Astros' top 5 prospects? :)

WestCoastBias,

Why would the padres trade one of their only bats with some power for a guy who has none? Besides, Reggie Willits doesn't really have much more upside, he can hit for a decent average and play some good defense but there's no more projection there, that's what he's gonna be for the rest of his life. Kouz has 25-30HR potential, he had 18 last year as a rookie and already has 16 this year.

Bradley is a poster child for a high risk/high reward type deal.

I'd offer him 1 year @ $10m with renewable options for 4 additional years. The options vest based off PA. If he gets 600PA's his next year vests automatically and he gets a $7m bonus for the current year - putting his 2009 salary at $17m.

If he gets between 500 and 600 the option renews with a base pay of $13m.

Less than 500 he gets his base pay with no renewal.

Assuming the options vest, after 3 years allow for him to opt out. If he wants to move on and potentially make more money he now has the ability to.

Long and short of it - if he stays healthy and produces he should be paid like a top player. If he continues to struggle with injuries or has a melt down the team would have less liability.

If I'm Milton I'd look long and hard at a potential $17m contract vs one that will come in around $12m and less years.

Milton Bradley is the Terrell Owens of baseball, but the problem is that baseball's contracts are guaranteed so it is riskier offering more money. I wouldn't want him on my team. I think he should stay in Texas, it seems to agree with him and he has mostly stayed out of trouble, very much like Terrell Owens.

I am one of the only Dodger fans in the world who will admit to being a Bonds fan, but I don't see where the Angels would be served by adding him. Anderson is red hot at the plate and can still play defense, and Teixiera means they have a second left-handed power bat. Vlad and Torii have been killing the ball from the right side and so has Rivera. How much more power does that line up really need now?

"It would be to give the team balance as their left-handed options like GMJ have been under performing, Willits isn't a middle of the order hitter. The Angels are about the only team to not openly deny their willingness to sign him. Also, they probably feel adding Bonds makes sense in a lineup that looks something like this.."

You don't put a hitter like Vlad in the 5 spot. If anything, you move Bonds to that spot behind Tex and Vlad. That said, who cars about GMJ? They have both Anderson and Tex from the left side and have plenty from the right side in Vlad, Hunter, Rivera and even Napoli.