Jack Says Milton’s Coming Back
Dave · January 25, 2011 at 12:26 pm · Filed Under Mariners
“Milton is going to get a achance to come in and compete for a job,” Zduriencik told (Dave Mahler of KJR). “When we acquired him, we felt he had a chance to be a middle-of-the order hitter. Obviously some things fell apart for him last year and he had one thing happen this winter. We’re hoping he comes in and competes for a job.”
Well, that’s interesting, surprising, and kind of confusing. This could all change, of course, depending on how things play in March, but the Mariners don’t appear to be planning on cutting Bradley loose right now.
Comments
48 Responses to “Jack Says Milton’s Coming Back”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I was all for giving him a shot last year, but he proved he doesn’t have anything left to contribute and continues to cause off the field distractions.
In a wierd way this parallels Griffey last year, yet without even the very small upside. Milton shouldn’t be taking ABs from younger players anyway.
I honestly don’t know why this would be confusing or surprising.
MB has not been convicted of anything, only accused.
he may well have done something wrong, but no one has that information in so much as I’ve read.
At this point, since he’s only accused of a crime (and we’re not even sure exactly what he’s accused of) they have no legal basis for cutting him. If they don’t let him come to camp, they owe him $12 million bucks.
If they keep him around and wait and see how the legal situation develops, there’s still the possibility of putting him on the restricted list or cutting him. This isn’t about giving him a shot, it’s about saving millions of dollars. I would bet money he doesn’t break camp with the team. I imagine the team’s lawyers had a lot of advice for Zduriencik on how to phrase this.
Notice he didn’t say “he’s going to compete for a job.” He said “we’re hoping he comes in and competes for a job.”
ummm, what’s this then…
“Milton is going to get a achance to come in and compete for a job,”
I don’t know if I just like an under dog but…
I really hope that MB didn’t actually do anything (this time) and he comes back to not only “compete” for that job but win it out right.
If you put biases aside, MB is exactly the kind of bat we need. Switch hitter, Power, can still play the field, knows how to work the count and he’d costs the team less if he remained on the 25 than if he were to be cut.
this just sounds like polite GM talk to me.
One is definitive one is not. “Is”, the important word left out of your quote above.
The Refuse to Abuse camp is having a worse off-season than the Angels.
Hey Milton, here’s your chance to compete for a job: you just need to agree to restructure your contract from $12MM to $2MM and you’ll be invited to spring training.
We really hope he comes in and competes for a job.
I don’t think it’s a given he’ll report- or that he’ll stay with the team all the way through spring training. Jack’s phrasing (“We’re hoping he comes in and competes for a job”) doesn’t seem to imply that it’s a given, either (at the risk of doing Soviet-style parsing of Jack’s statement, similar to Kremlinology’s habit of parsing the latest Pravda editorial for clues on Kremlin power struggles).
Remember, this is a guy who in the middle of the season asked to be excused from the team while he got his head on straight. I wouldn’t be shocked to see him retire and call it a career before Opening Day. I think the only outcome that will surprise me even modestly would be Milton Bradley playing a full season and contributing at the 1.5-2.5 WAR level as a LF/DH- and even that isn’t out of the realm of possibility (Saunders regresses or is injured, Cust is injured and/or bad, Bradley bounces back like he did in 2008 in Texas).
No way… Vernon Wells for actual useful parts? Worst off-season ever.
If this were just a baseball decision, I think of course you have to bring MB back and see if he has anything to give, after all he’s got $12 million dollars coming.
But MB is anything but ‘just a baseball decision’. Looks like MB – this is truly your last chance in MLB, you are on life #8 of 9. How bad do you want it???
I think Ralph Malph has it right. This is PC talk and nothing more. MB probably doesn’t get out of spring training with the M’s. They can’t do anything with him now, but they might be able to after his court date.
I really doubt that this situation plays out in the Mariners favor financially, but it does give them a chance to save money by waiting a few months to cut him.
It’s not a long article. Why it’s misquoted here now twice I have no idea.
It’s maybe splitting hairs but he didn’t say he hopes MB will come in and complete. He said he is.
Further down, he says he hopes MB has a bounce back season.
You guys are reading into this and coming out with your own take complete with fantasy quotes.
Read it again. It says:
Allright,
I didn’t see the that he reiterated it again.
My bad.
I’m getting tired of waiting. Whatever happens (or doesn’t happen) with Bradley, I want spring training and I want it now!
This is nuttier than squirrel turds…
I don’t believe any of it. Of course Jack isn’t going to say “Yeah, as soon as Milton is convicted, were gonna put him on the restricted list and try to recover some salary. If that doesn’t work out, we’ll just drop him!”
He has no choice but to say what he did, and wait till the results of a trial.
I don’t see how the M’s could say anything but this right now.
Sure, they could just cut him and eat the entire $12 million…but they can’t do that with even a hint that it’s related to the incident this winter. They’d wind up spending a lot more defending themselves to the union…and in court.
On the other hand, there is no reason not to sit down with Milton and say, ‘look, you’re welcome back. But do you really want to spend the next six months of your life answering the same questions from reporters every day? Taking time off for the court hearing? Maybe leaving for community service mandates…or even a short jail sentence? Is this what you want your legacy to be? Or would you rather have that all play out privately?”
Not knowing him, it seems like he’s a pretty proud guy, and would probably insist he’ll tough it out. But for the M’s. I don’t see a downside to them saying, “look, we’re rebuilding, you don’t want to put up with those reporters every day, why don’t we just give you $10 million of the $12 million and get on with our lives.”
It couldn’t hurt to ask.
Why on earth couldn’t they release him? As long as they continue to pay his salary, nobody will have a problem with it, regardless of the reason.
Are you seriously saying that this allegation actually guarantees Bradley a roster spot?
Are you seriously saying that this allegation actually guarantees Bradley a roster spot?
No, I’m saying they can’t be seen as cutting him because of the allegation. They have to make it baseball/performance related. Which is why Jack has to say he’s welcome back.
Larry Stone has a few more quotes from Jack.
But that’s not true, as long as they pay his salary.
But that’s not true, as long as they pay his salary.
Yes, that may be true in terms of fulfilling the literal terms of the contract. But the lawyers are telling them that potential liability extends beyond that.
The allegation by the union, or his lawyers, would be that by cutting him, the Mariners were casting doubt not on his ability to perform, but his character. And thus, they hinder his ability to continue practicing his profession. We may think that’s b.s., and the M’s may know that’s b.s., but they won’t want to spend any time or money trying to argue this in any legal proceeding. Which is why you get painfully worded quotes like this:
Asked if Bradley’s status could change following the Feb. 8 court hearing, Zduriencik sid, “I don’t think I’m in a position to comment at the moment. He’s a member of the organization, he’s signed. Our stand right now is that he’s going to come in and compete for a starting position.”
But to get back to my original point, I’d be surprised if the M’s weren’t in quiet negotiations with him…the purpose being to save a million or two when they do cut him. And Milton signs on the dotted line agreeing to no litigation, hard feelings, etc.
his contract is not going to get voided. So those that are wishing as much should wish upon another star.
A court may fine him if he’s guilty. THe league might also. Not sure if the team can at that point.
Voiding his contract is another matter entirely. Whether or not anyone thinks it’s fair, there is precedent. Stone went over that a week ago. Contracts are guaranteed in baseball.
Knowing that, there is really no better outcome for the M’s than for MB to be acquitted of all charges, come in and win that spot and contribute. Financially,anything else incurs even greater sunk cost.
That is the most tortured reasoning I’ve heard in a long, long time.
No, I’m saying they can’t be seen as cutting him because of the allegation. They have to make it baseball/performance related. Which is why Jack has to say he’s welcome back.
I’m pretty sure that saying “you’re not making our roster because you hit .205/.292/.348 as a DH last year” counts as a performance related reason. Carl Everett got released in the middle of the season for hitting BETTER than that, and he didn’t turn around and sue Bavasi.
That being said, there really isn’t any harm in letting him come to spring training, unless Everett breaks out the “(Expletive Deleted) Eric Wedge” T-shirts and decides to take his anger management issues out in the clubhouse, at which point, you have a built-in reason to send him home, so why burn a bridge before you have to? Bradley is basically a really expensive non-roster invite.
I also tend to believe that if Bradley WANTS to play in 2011, he will be on his best behavior (which, admittedly, might not be very good or last very long). He has to know that Wedge isn’t going to be giving playing time to a sulky, bitter veteran coming off of a bad season and an offseason of rotten publicity, during a season where it’s more important to develop and evaluate young talent than rely on veterans, and the Mariners are probably fine with writing him off as a sunk cost unless he demonstrates he is capable of contributing more than he did in 2011.
That is the most tortured reasoning I’ve heard in a long, long time.
It’s not my reasoning. I’m trying to explain to you the way the world works.
Carl Everett got released in the middle of the season for hitting BETTER than that, and he didn’t turn around and sue Bavasi.
Sorry I didn’t make my point clearer. As I remember, Carl Everett was not facing a criminal charge when he was released.
But the point is that the Mariners have a colorable excuse of “gee, you kind of suck and spent last year not being able to do the job we need you to do, Milton, so go away”. Or does that mean what someone like Bret Boone should have done to avoid being DFA’ed is go rob a liquor store, because then it would have been SO UNFAIR to release a terrible player, because, oh my gosh, it’s obviously not performance-related?
The Mariners just signed Chris Ray to a minor league deal. Ray, 29, went 5-0 with a 3.72 ERA in 63 combined appearances with the Texas Rangers and San Francisco Giants.
He was traded to the Giants on July 1 for catcher Bengie Molina, but did not appear in the postseason.
I’m guessing this is good right?
I think its good you keep your options open. Maybe he tears it up in ST? Can’t hurt.
What are your thoughts on Chris Ray Dave?
Isn’t it sad that our offseason is so void of excitement that these comments by Z in an interview could warrant 32 responses, and honest debate?
I could go either way with Bradley, depending on how the court stuff turns out…
But it’s pretty much standard procedure by a team… There’s a rape allegation against an unnamed UW player right now, but whoever he is (hasn’t been named) he’s still on the team, and still playing… I assume that will change if the case proceeds and it goes to court.
I just figured it out – it’s so obvious.
Jack made this statement one day after Anaheim took on the Vernon Wells contract. No way that’s a coincidence. Mark my words, another few days and Milton Bradley’s gonna be an Angel. They’re taking both him and his contract, and sending us Jered Weaver.
It is your reasoning and it’s not “the way the world works”.
You have not and cannot provide a single piece of evidence (or sound rationale) to support the notion that the Mariners’ options are somehow limited because of Bradley’s legal issues.
The best I can tell is that you seem to be conflating the right to “presumption of innocence” with the Mariners’ responsibilities under contract law.
Great thing is you could almost interpret this as something other than sarcasm.
Can we please just agree to take Milton out and “put him to pasture”? Find him a “nice home in the country”? Maybe help him to “buy the farm”?
Seriously, though, this is an embarrassment. The only goal with Milton Bradley is to release him and maybe get the money back if he goes to jail. There is no condition in which I think that he should be on the team. I mean, I suppose if 15 members of the 40 man roster just wander off, I could understand having him at Spring Training.
But, seriously, why is he around? The M’s are going to be bad, with a young team, and a bunch of PR problems. Let’s let crazy Uncle Milt hang out? Seriously? Seriously, Jack?
The best I can tell is that you seem to be conflating the right to “presumption of innocence” with the Mariners’ responsibilities under contract law.
OK, one more time.
Conflation? Yes. But I’m not doing the conflating.
I’m telling you that this kind of consideration…no matter how ridiculous it might seem…is entirely common in these kinds of cases. And what takes it from ‘possible’ to ‘likely’, in my mind, is the tortured nature of Jack’s statement to Stone.
If you ask whether that means that it would have actually been easier to cut Milton if he had NOT been charged…then the answer is yes.
What I’m not saying is that it’s fair.
RE: Chris Ray…
That’s some pretty good news actually. He’s sort of another Bedard, but in the bullpen. The downside is he’s having trouble staying healthy, but the ceiling is pretty high if he can get fully recovered from Tommy John…
We’ve quietly built a pretty decent bullpen, looking at League, Cortes, Lueke, Ray, and Aardsma (when he’s ready)… plus long relief from whomever doesn’t win the 4th/5th starter spot.
(Also RE: Bedard, Z said in his interview today that both the doctors and Bedard are saying he’s in the best shape he’s been “in years”. Optimism isn’t a word I like to use with my thoughts of Bedard, but he couldn’t be any worse than the last two years– so getting ANYTHING from him will be a plus.)
I’m telling you that this kind of consideration…no matter how ridiculous it might seem…is entirely common in these kinds of cases. And what takes it from ‘possible’ to ‘likely’, in my mind, is the tortured nature of Jack’s statement to Stone.
What is likely, and supported by Jack’s “tortured” statement, is that the Mariners want to keep open the possibility of recouping some money by voiding Bradley’s contract.
What is not likely, or possible, is that they’re worried about “potential liability” issues created by releasing Bradley.
If something is “entirely common” then it shouldn’t be hard to give an example, right?
Diderot,
Let’s approach it from a different angle.
In your scenario, when do the Mariners become free to release Bradley without risk? After he’s convicted? But what if he’s acquitted? Can they release him then?
Or, what if this had not been a criminal matter. What if the (alleged) victim had gone to the press instead of the police. Would the Mariners be able to release Bradley then?
What creates the “potential liability”? Is it that the incident speaks to character and, as such, it creates defamation issues?
No. What you are doing is inventing some foggy individual and imagining how he might fashion a legal argument while ignoring that mlb teams can remove a player from their roster for any reason as long as they abide by the term of the CBA. Clearly the MS are not in any civil jeopardy if they choose to cut bait with Bradley.
In what kinds of cases? Can you give a single example of a player ever suing a team for defamantion of character due to being released? If the M’s are willing to pay him they are under no legal obligation to play him.
I think the point is that if the Ms cut him now, there is no way they can avoid paying him. If something happens in the courts, so that he is indicted, etc., then there is a chance they could void the contract and pick up at least a little bit – they might not be able to get away scot free, but the history of these kinds of cases suggests that they could save a million or two
Exactly. Of course they can cut him for performance related reasons. If they do, they have to keep paying him.
None of us have any idea what his contract says about off-field stuff. So giving an opinion about the outcome under contract law would be silly. Maybe they can find a way out of some of his salary, maybe not. But I think it’s safe to say they’d like to figure out a way, and this keeps their options open.
He sucks and he’s a jerk. Bad combination. Of course they don’t want him on the roster.
Even with the addition of Cust, Olivo, Ryan and Kennedy, even with a rebound from Guti, Wilson, and Figgy, even with continued improvement from Smoak, Saunders and Moore, this team isn’t an offensive juggernaut. They certainly could use his bat from a couple of years ago. He’ll still be only 32 on Opening Day. Why wouldn’t Z – or anyone – hope for a Milton Bradley comeback, personally or professionally? It’s January, it’s the month of hope. That’s the word I took away from the interview.
So, January is the month of hope. I didn’t know that, but I knew it wasn’t April through September.
This paid political announcment has been brought to you by GMZ. At this point, there is nothing for GMZ to say – other than what he has stated … whether he actually believes/means it or not.
The reference to “one thing happened this winter” is hilarious. Yep, just one little thing. You sold me Jack. I truly believe that you hope he comes back and makes a contribution.
When the opportunity presents itself (and it will at some time soon) they will cut Bradley loose quicker than a fart on a skillet.
If this is true, then wow. We are that hard up for a hitter that we’re going to f- around with Bradley again this year? Did last year with all his gossip and on-field production not give them enough evidence that maybe we need to just cut it and move on? Give the time to someone who needs it to develop or prove themselves.
I was a fan of bringing in Bradley originally, just cuz I like his personality and fire. Soon I figured out I liked those things while watching him on other teams, and not screwing up mine.
We need to turn this team around, get some talent in here. Milton shouldn’t be a part of this group.