Rosenthal: Castillo to Cubs being discussed [Updated]

Update – 12:02 a.m.: Well, here’s a fitting start to the rumor-mongering I so hate (yet so get sucked into all the time). The Chicago Tribune is reporting that the Blue Jays want “no part” of Bradley. And who can blame them.

Still, keep voting. It started as just a hypothetical, anyway.

Original post: Ken Rosenthal is reporting from the GM meetings in Chicago that a deal that would send Luis Castillo to the Cubs and bring Lyle Overbay to the Mets has been “discussed.”

A three-team deal that would also send Milton Bradley to Toronto has “some legs, but not much,” according to a source of Rosenthal’s.

Overbay, a left-hand hitting first baseman, shouldn’t be on the top of the priority list for the Mets. I’m not sure if they realize it, but Daniel Murphy is still on the roster. It’d be a silly move, especially with Ike Davis prospering in the minor leagues. (Overbay only has one year left on his deal, so it wouldn’t affect Davis.)

Still, I think it would be silly. What do you think? Vote below and leave your two cents in the comments.

Twitter Poll: Should Milton Bradley be a Met in 2010?

There’s no denying that Milton Bradley is a character.  He’s been suspended for the rest of the 2009 season by the Chicago Cubs due to comments made to a newspaper about Cubs fans.

With two more years left on Bradley’s contract in Chicago, the Cubs may be looking to deal the embattled outfielder to avoid any future disasters.

So I asked my Twitter followers if they would want to see Bradley on the Mets in 2010.  Here are their responses… (It was pretty lopsided.)

YES

dmoneymania said: Yes. We need talent.

BlackMagic718 said: For Oliver Perez, sure. He'll help out the offense, and Ollie can be replaced with a QUALITY starter via free agency.

NO

awolf12 said: No. No way. Uh uh. Nyet. Nein. Nope. Thanks, but no thanks.

Lou_Bolkovic said: NO! Bradley brings too much baggage and is always an injury concern. After this season we need players who are durable.

cutiepie0319k said: NO! i just don't like him.

bosco86 said: No, Bradley is a nut case that Omar, Jerry, Wilpons cant control. if they didn’t want Manny why take Bradley.

Ryan_J_Smith said: No way. Milton Bradley is selfish, conceited, and a locker room cancer. He is the opposite of what the Mets need right now

YaGottaBKiddnMe said: NO way. Because of his mental issues. We don't need that in our clubhouse. I think he may be utter poison.

julierubes said: No. The cities & fans of NY and Chi aren't all that different: criticism everywhere. If he can't handle Chi, NY isn’t better.

shyonelung said: no. Clubhouse cancer and a general idiot.

jnetty99 said: Bradley said "I need a stable, healthy, enjoyable environment,". Mets might have enjoyable but not healthy or stable

DhmkJp said: Absolutely not because the Mets need to go with a youth/power/speed outfielder next year and Bradley provides none of that.

swirlywand said: Are you kidding? Trying to test the ridiculously outrageous responses to such a SILLY question? LOL- No, in 43 languages!

swirlywand continued: Maybe we can get Elijah Dukes for Brian Schneider...you know, to make sure Beltran is flanked by not one, but TWO SHOWBOATS

gwong said: F*ck no to Milton Bradley on the Mets. He is the definition of clubhouse cancer.

And from the peanut gallery…

Retire31 said: Yes, only if Bradley causes Jerry Manuel to take off his shirt and start a brawl with him.

EliFromBrooklyn said: I would love to have Milton Bradley on the Mets. He is all about fun! The game creator Milton Bradley, that is.

drsexington said: My litmus test: If they fit in better with the 1992-93 Mets than the current ones, bad choice#vincecoleman #bretsaberhagen