hangoverJust a few links this morning to clear out the inbox.


  • We have heard these exact sentiments previously, but Buster Olney is reporting that the Rays will only trade Pat Burrell to the Cubs for Milton Bradley if the deal is on their terms. In other words, there is no negotiation. Take it, or leave it. [MLB Trade Rumors]
  • Tampa Bay Rays Fan did a point/counter-point with Dock of the Rays on the merits of trading for Milton Bradley. [Tampa Bay Rays Fan]
  • Jorge Says No! looks at what it might take to sign Carl Crawford to an extension and suggests 3-years/$45 million with a raise to $13 million in 2010 and growing to $18 million in 2012. The post doesn’t think the Rays would be willing to go that high…We think the numbers are about right but we are not sure Crawford will want a deal so short. [Jorge Says No!]
  • Strange. A writer for NESN.com (The Red Sox TV network) wrote a piece based on last week’s blog post at a New York website that claimed the Rays backed out of a handshake agreement with Carl Crawford to not pick up his option and that Crawford was “livid.” Most people with a clue picked up on the errors in the report and lack of fact-checking and now assume that the “source” for the piece was fictional. And yet, NESN.com just assumed it was true. [NESN.com]
  • MLB.com is running a series of “Organizational Reviews” and the Rays are up. Did you hear? The Rays have depth of pitching talent. Imagine what Lisa Winston would have written before the Rays traded Edwin Jackson, Jason Hammel and Scott Kazmir. [MLB]
  • For those that are still pissed the Rays traded Edwin Jackson: The Tigers are so determined to trade Jackson that “it’s like they want to give him away.” [MLB Trade Rumors]
  • This is a fantasy baseball evaluation but still interesting topic: Jacoby Ellsbury or Carl Crawford? [Fantasy Baseball 365]
  • Mark Fernandez, a senior VP with the Rays, returned to his elementary school to speak about his work in Major League Baseball. [Tampa Tribune]




  1. Just to clarify...

    A lot of people think I am anti-Milton Bradley and I am, but not because I think he is crazy and would at some point be a distraction and piss off the fanbase (he is and he will).

    No. I am anti-Bradley because he is injury-prone. And yes, I realize he would mostly DH for the Rays, but he mostly DH'd for the Rangers in '07 and still missed 35 games. And remember, a stint on the 15-day DL for most teams is 15 days. With the Rays that becomes 25-30 because they are so cautious. How often does a player come off the DL the day they are eligible? It is VERY rare.

    So while I think Bradley would be a slight improvement over Burrell for 100-120 games, Burrell will be much better than Bradley's replacement in the other 40-60. Not to mention the roster headaches DL stint(s) cause.

  2. Gus says:

    Who on the 2010 roster will Burrell be better than? I'm okay with Bradley because any injuries he has opens up opportunities for starters to catch some rest and DH or for Aybar, Joyce, whoever to DH. All of whom are preferable to Burrell anyway. And Bradley in the line-up gives you swagger. PB is the anti-swagger; guy looked frightened from the first day he arrived.

    • I am *hoping* that Burrell will come back next season healthy and motivated. He will be a free agent after next season and I would like to think that the 2009 season hurt his pride a little.

      I fully expect Burrell will be better in 2010. How much better? I dont know. But he will be better.

      • Don says:

        I use to be "hoping" for a pony when I was a kid and I never got it!
        Also how hard could it be for Burrell to be better.....bat .215/18hr?
        I got an idea.... trade Burrell to Detroit for "our" EJ....they could use the hitting....EJ to bull pen...till a starter blows up or gets hurt...Aybar to DH...everybody wins.....the Rays would be better...guaranteed!


Leave a Comment