Don't Make the Mistake of Dumping Bradley
by Hank493 on Oct 29, 2009 2:58 PM CDT
222 comments
It's almost certain that the Cubs will open the 2010 season without Milton Bradley, and that's a damned shame. The Cubs will be a worse team without him. Numerous reasons why have been discussed here in the past, and are met with much resistance. Everybody knows Bradley is a very contentious topic around these parts.
Nick Steiner, over at the Hardball Times, took a look at Bradley's 2009 season and had this to say
The fact that Bradley has such a bad year - and it wasn't even that bad - can be placed solely on a huge drop in ISO from his previously established norms. His plate discipline and contact skills were just as good as they were in 08 and the year before that, and there is no evidence that the drop in ISO is anything "real". Despite the personality problems, teams are apparently lining up to try and steal Bradley away from Jim Hendry because he is still a very good player.
The Cubs will be making a mistake if they get rid of Bradley, although they undoubtedly will. The guy is a damned good hitter. Bradley should be given a second chance if for no other reason then the fact that he provides us a better chance to win than any other OF we'll acquire this offseason. Don't let the fans affect your baseball decisions, Jim!
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
5 recs |
222 comments
Email
Print
Comments
"Despite the personality problems".
That’s what the HT link says. It appears that the problems were far more than being able to be dismissed as “personality problems”.
Sorry — Bradley must go. Jim Hendry did a good job turning Todd Hundley, a similar problem, into something useful. I have confidence he’ll be able to do the same this year.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 29, 2009 3:06 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Milton Bradley is a much better player than Todd Hundley was.
by Hank493 on Oct 29, 2009 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And if I had him on my Strat-O-Matic team, I'd keep him
But the human beings, not paperboard, that make up the Cub roster weren’t sorry to see him go.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 29, 2009 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's an unverifiable claim.
Sure, players didn’t uniformly love the guy, but you’ll never find proof that they were happy to see him go.
by Hank493 on Oct 29, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
At some point, deductive reasoning comes into play
When no one stands up for him in the media, when players state things that they said on the record . . . yeah. They were.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 29, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
when bradley was suspended
no one came to his defense. in fact, some of them indicated that it was milton’s fault. They may not blatantly come out and say they were happy to see him go, but that’s as telling as anything, that none of his teammates would rally to his defense. That speaks volumes. Bradley’s a good player, and losing him may hurt, but I’m fine with moving him, particularly if we upgrade OF defense at the same time by finding a good CF.
by toonsterwu on Oct 29, 2009 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I figured
That when they suspended him it was a sure sign that there was NO way he was coming back.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 30, 2009 7:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's LOTS of circumstantial evidence.
"That’s what I love about my skip, man. He’ll tell you that you suck...I know I suck. We know we suck...Yeah, we suck. But we’ll see who sucks at the end."
- Gary Sheffield
by DrGalazkiewicz on Oct 29, 2009 11:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who cares if you have proof
I don’t care if they all despise each other. If hypothetical player X is THAT affected by not liking someone else in the clubhouse to the point where it affects them on the field, they should be the one shipped out of town.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 30, 2009 1:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about if there are 24 of "hypothetical player X"?
Do you get rid of all 24 of them and keep the one who’s causing the trouble?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 30, 2009 7:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously?
Bradley’s bad attitude kept the Cubs from winning games this year? Please.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 30, 2009 9:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where does it say that?
The comment is that he’s the one that caused the personality conflicts. That may be an unfair generalization, but it doesn’t say that he caused the Cubs to not win.
In most businesses, if you piss off a good portion of your co-workers and your boss on a regular basis, it really doesn’t matter how good of a performer you are – you’re not going to be invited back.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 30, 2009 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
You don’t remove the co-workers, since there appear to have been quite a number of them. You remove the single individual causing the problem.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 30, 2009 9:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the key is the boss
I worked with a guy who alienated people in the office, in the region and in other countries with the same company. But he had a rep for being a great ass-kisser, so he got away with it. Until his bosses lost power.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 30, 2009 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't disagree with that point, IF...
you could replace this problem employee with equal productivity. Which the Cubs most certainly will not. I’m all for signing players who get along when all things are equal, but all things are not equal with Bradley. There’s little doubt that the Cubs team will be worse next year with whomever they get for Bradley/replace him with than if they kept him. Bradley’s job (and Hendry’s) is to win baseball games and win a championship.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 30, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are right about there jobs
However, it’s not that simple. It’s just as wrong to ignore human factors as it is to ignore the value of statistics.
This is an untenable situation, and to just bring the guy back because he’s a good hitter – which he is – would take away any credibility that Hendry has with his players.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 30, 2009 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
*their
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 30, 2009 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you keep a guy who is a disruption to everyone else because no one else can do what he does?
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Oct 30, 2009 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, no one else that the Cubs can/will get in the offseason
so, yes
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 30, 2009 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess you could say...
That the Cubs will be “cutting of their nose to spite their face” but I think of it more of “removing a cancer” or "addition (team chemistry) by subtration (removing Bradley).
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Oct 30, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is that any more ridiculous
than saying it had no affect as you seem to believe?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 30, 2009 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not only were there a lot more than one (to Al's point)
But there is also reason to believe that he alienated his manager and GM – you know, his bosses.
I suppose Ricketts could fire Hendry and Piniella, and dump Theriot, Ramirez, Dempster, Johnson, Lee and anyone else who spoke up in the wake of Bradley’s suspension, and then keep Bradley. After all, he has a good OBP.
Does that sound logical?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 30, 2009 8:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
A more questionable use of stats I have not seen. Bradley must go.
"When they signed Fukudome, I knew they were trying to get me fired". - Ron Santo, January, 2008
by BeerCub on Oct 29, 2009 3:16 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Bradley is good when happy.
He’s obviously not happy with the Cubs
:D
by Nooblet on Oct 29, 2009 3:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The sad thing is that
MB, an obviously talented ball player whose skill set could really have helped the Cubs, blew what could have been a marvelous chance to redeem himself.
All of the interviews with Lou and other team members I’ve read and heard seem to indicate that Milton seems to exult in being a self-anointed black sheep, someone who intentionally demands their space and who is a polarizing and antagonistic character who probably, as the old cliche says, “didn’t play well with others” on the sandlot, let alone the diamond.
Only that raw talent he has keeps him in the game. He will be moved before Spring training.
I hope.
Blue mountains high .. Blue valleys low
I don't know which way we will go ..
One summer dream .. one summer dream ..
coda
ELO, 1975
by cubnational on Oct 31, 2009 6:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for posting the article - it's an interesting read.
But this appears to be an employment issue, not a baseball issue.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 29, 2009 3:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
There’s no way Milton Bradley is with the Cubs when spring training begins.
In fact, I’d imagine Hendry will try to make sure he’s gone before the convention, to avoid having to answer questions about him then.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 29, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not only that
But it affects the rest of the planning. My guess is he’s gone by Christmas – maybe Thanksgiving.
Hey, how about a BCB pool?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 29, 2009 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
After the World Series...
… I’ll probably post a poll on this. A pool? I dunno.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 29, 2009 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, it'd be fun
Pick the date, the team, the return and salary eaten.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 30, 2009 8:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like fun, for sure.
I’ll do something like that after the WS is over.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 30, 2009 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Within a week...
after the organizational meetings end. They’ll need him gone long before the Winter Meetings.
by Damen Jackson on Oct 29, 2009 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Although...
.. the Winter Meetings might be a good place to finalize a deal. That’s only about five weeks from now.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 29, 2009 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe...
But I think they’ll try to figure out what money they actually have left — or what player they’re stuck with in return — and then use the Winter Meetings to work on actual needs.
by Damen Jackson on Oct 29, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's my thinking, too.
You don’t want the whole off-season to be left hanging wondering what you might get for Bradley or how much money you’ll have to hold.
It does lessen the market because if we waited for Holliday and Bay to go off the board, the Bradley market would pick up, I think.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 29, 2009 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This was my article
It wasn’t intended to be anything analytical or a projection of how well he is expected to play going forward. The point of the article was to take a look at Bradley’s at how good plate discipline has been the past 3 years. The line quoted was just a throwaway line at the end of the article and shouldn’t be taken seriously.
To be clear, I don’t think the Cubs should keep Bradley. There are simply too many bridges burnt. However, I do think that he’ll make a good pickup for other teams, especially given that the Cubs will likely pay a lot of his salary.
That’s what the HT link says. It appears that the problems were far more than being able to be dismissed as "personality problems".
I didn’t dismiss anything. The problems that Bradley had with the Cubs weren’t based off of performance, but based on his interactions with teammates and fans. Hence, personality problems.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 29, 2009 5:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
well
now i have a name to go with the sn. not that it matters.
anyhow, i think the article’s valid in the point that bradley, assuming he doesn’t cause problems, could be a useful asset to some teams.
by toonsterwu on Oct 29, 2009 10:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Send him to the Cardinals!
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Oct 30, 2009 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously?
He’d have to be a guaranteed All-Star to put up with the downside he brings to the clubhouse and team chemistry.
Go ahead, let all of the people who never played on a team flame me about how there is no such thing as “chemistry”. right up there with “there is no such thing as clutch hitting”.
by CalDeano on Oct 29, 2009 5:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
"there is no such thing as clutch hitting".
if that was true, aram would be out of a job…
"hey
by jesus christos on Oct 29, 2009 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a wha?
Aramis would be out of a job? I guess his .814 OPS with no one on or his .832 OPS with someone on first (I would assume this is a “non-clutch” situation) wouldn’t really save him the job. I’m not convinced about this whole “clutch” hitting thing. That’s a whole different discussion. However, to the point, Aramis Ramirez is not starting because he’s a clutch hitter. He’s starting because he’s a damn good 3B overall.
by LetsMakeADeal on Oct 29, 2009 9:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, lets keep him, getting rid of Bradley would be seen as just more negativity.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Oct 29, 2009 6:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
it makes hendry rub off as a racist
"hey
by jesus christos on Oct 29, 2009 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
really?
or is this tounge in cheek?
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
by IowaCubs- on Oct 30, 2009 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
try harder next time
no one like a spelling nanny
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 30, 2009 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the contrary, I love that show!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 30, 2009 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Was Fran Drescher in that one?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 30, 2009 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah, I think it was some British woman...
…who insisted everyone use words like “colour” and “wanker.”
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 30, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A month after the season ends and you're still playing the victim about that?
by Wreckard on Oct 30, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please provide a timeline when comments are past their date of use.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Oct 30, 2009 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say that indignant, whiny posts playing the victim about imagined accusations of racism
…are usually expired before they hit the shelf.
by Wreckard on Oct 30, 2009 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please find the door Milton
I have grown tired of the 1,244 fan post on the guy.
It was a mistake to sign Milton and it will be a mistake by the team that takes him.
by Grockcubs on Oct 29, 2009 10:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I feel strongly that we the Cubs will get rid of Milton
and that Milton will be successful with his new team. I do not think he can ever be successful as a Cub, though, so he must go. He absolutely needs a change of scenery to enjoy any success. Good riddance
by murphymj on Oct 29, 2009 10:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that we should be doing all we can...
To talk up the guy. Let’s tell the world how great of a teammate he was, how much he loved kittens and how he took in 28 foster kids while with the team.
Look, the record shows that I’ve been a Bradley apologist for most of the season, and I was regrettably happy when they signed him… but something happened in the clubhouse that seems to be beyond repair. Let’s get something decent for him and put this issue to rest soon.
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
by IowaCubs- on Oct 30, 2009 9:41 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
No, something happened in the Man before he ever got to the clubhouse
Hendry took his word at good faith that he was changing. I never cared for the acquisition, posted my doubts, but when he became a Cub, I rooted for him.
Until the insanity of the last two months of the season.
Blue mountains high .. Blue valleys low
I don't know which way we will go ..
One summer dream .. one summer dream ..
coda
ELO, 1975
by cubnational on Oct 31, 2009 6:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Besides, i'm not sure i could stomach...
watching opening day 2010, and he’s still in the dugout… waiting to get on deck. Too many bad memories of last season.
I really wish to wash my hands of the whole thing.
by RMRZisMYmanCRUSH on Oct 30, 2009 9:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
IF, his outbursts, moodiness and behavior had
been managed (somehow) earlier and there wasn’t the finality of the public suspension, I would agree with you that he should be back and expect his numbers to shoot upward next year.
With the drama and humiliation I expect he perceives from the suspension, MB on the Cubs would probably be worse in 2010 than it was in 2009.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 30, 2009 1:31 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He Gawn
Why are we still whinging about this? Door. Ass. Don’t let one hit the other, Milton.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Oct 30, 2009 3:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Someone...
wrote this for me I suppose.
by Kansas25 on Oct 30, 2009 4:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I give you a lot of credit for arguing that side.
But I disagree. I think the team will be 10 games better without Milton Bradley next year.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
by cubswynn on Oct 30, 2009 7:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You Sir are correct!
Make that 15 games better
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Oct 30, 2009 8:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Cubs should replace him with Kevin Millar
His JCRL (Joke Cracking over Replacement level) is off the charts. That’s gotta be worth 6 or 7 WAR by itself
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 30, 2009 9:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So if the Cubs win 93 games next year....
… can we come back here and tell you that you were wrong?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 30, 2009 9:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, because the Cubs underperformed this year
So they will naturally be expected to win a lot more games next year.
Do you honestly think that Bradley’s personality problems, or whatever the hell you want to call them, costs his team 10 wins?
by vivaelpujols on Oct 30, 2009 9:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let's not get into the quantifying argument again.
10 wins? Probably over the top, yes. But I do think they’d have been a better team with a different right fielder.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 31, 2009 8:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, true
I would be a lot richer if I had a million dollars.
But Bradley IS a pretty good right fielder. He just had a down year last year. One bad season does not invalidate the talent level he established over the rest of his career.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 31, 2009 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Talent, obviously, is not the only issue with him.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 31, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We would have been a better team with different players in a lot of areas
But only because our players were all having down years. This is a very talented team that simply didn’t play up to their potential last year. If they can play even close to their normal level of production, we’ll be fine in 2010.
by Pre on Oct 31, 2009 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say 10 game swing...
…because of Bradley’s departure, among other factors. Not just MB alone.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
by cubswynn on Oct 31, 2009 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, so how many games is MB's departure worth alone?
As in, assuming we had the identical roster last year without him (replacement level RF instead) . . . maybe Dome in right and Johnson/Fuld in center all year. How many more games would we have won?
by madcow256 on Oct 31, 2009 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is somewhere around 81 or 82
Johnson and Fuld are fourth outfielders for a reason. The better question is how much better will MB be next year when he rebounds from these numbers?
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 31, 2009 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
10 games is a bit nuts.
But I, like you, really don’t like Bradley. Dump him. Please.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 30, 2009 8:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley
Got the impression that there isn’t much that can be repaired. Too many bridges were burned before Hendry suspended him. Besides, the media would continue to eat him alive. Too much distraction.
Never questioned whether Bradley was a good player, and there is a good chance he will have a better season in 2010 on another team. He wasn’t a good fit in the Cub lineup though. He wasn’t the type of hitter they needed.
Comments like Dempster’s might make it a bit easier to market Bradley.
by AboutTheCubs on Oct 31, 2009 12:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ibanez, Abreu, and Dunn...
would have been better choices, but whats done is done. This off-season will be one of Hendry trying to clean up the messes in past seasons.
by montecarlo on Oct 31, 2009 3:00 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I hate to say it but I was down on the Ibanez choice
And look where Raul is now. He plays tonight.
Blue mountains high .. Blue valleys low
I don't know which way we will go ..
One summer dream .. one summer dream ..
coda
ELO, 1975
by cubnational on Oct 31, 2009 6:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no
Even with this year’s down season for Bradley, he’s easily going to outperform all three of those guys over the length of his contract
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 31, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you sound very confident
can i borrow your magic 8 ball? mines broken
"hey
by jesus christos on Oct 31, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not going to take much to outperform Adam Dunn
And Abreu and Ibanez are both old as hell.
by Pre on Oct 31, 2009 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the big mistake
you refer to was bringing him aboard. a man with a giant chip on his shoulder. his track record proves that.
by NOMAR on Oct 31, 2009 7:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
About more than just Hitting
“The guy is a damned good hitter. Bradley should be given a second chance…”
The only reason that Bradley could be traded is his hitting skills. Basically his good (not great) hitting skills.
His fielding is sub-par and his presence in RF forces Fukudome to CF. There’s no DH, so no place to hide him.
His media relations skills are so poor that it can only lead to a negative environment with the press.
Even if he rebounds – and I think he will – his negatives far outweigh his positives and he should be traded.
by RiskyBusiness on Oct 31, 2009 1:51 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
His defense is not subpar
Never has been.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 31, 2009 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, it is
Bradley does not have a right fielder’s arm. He’s not accurate enough for a throw to home or third. He does he have adequate range. I’m not saying he’s Adam Dunn in LF. But he was a downgrade over Fukudome in RF.
And then’s there’s that throw to the right field bleachers that I saw…
Maybe on other teams, Bradley will play a decent OF – play him in LF with a fast CF next to him. But the Cubs don’t have that option today.
by RiskyBusiness on Oct 31, 2009 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree here too
It was subpar for the first time this year, per UZR, whatever any individual anecdotes might say (He thew a ball into the stands thinking there were three outs On noes -10 UZR!!). I’m skeptical of his ability to post above-average defensive numbers again given his injury history and aging. That said, there’s a big difference between sub-par and execrable (Abreu, Ibanez, etc)
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 31, 2009 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His UZR/150 this year was -5 runs
However, his career UZR is +6 runs, including this years bad mark. He’s only 31, so I doubt his defense has completely fallen off the cliff. Most likely, he’s an average defender.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 31, 2009 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think it's fallen off a cliff either. I think his TTL is ~-2 or -3 runs, which is subpar but nothing to get upset about
I think the injuries to make a small difference
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 31, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow, that made no sense
I think that the injuries probably knock his true talent level down a little bit to make his numbers technically sub-par. As we know from our friend Hermes Conrad, being technically correct is the best kind of correct
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 31, 2009 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So now he just a really really really bad year
He was off in hitting, fielding, and chemistry. It wasn’t his fault though, you would have us believe. So what we just forget this year completely because I can’t find anything redeeming about him or this year.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Oct 31, 2009 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was an above average hitter, basically an average defender (-3 runs overall)
And he was healthy for almost the entire season.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 31, 2009 11:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So what I'm reading then...
Is that it is a mistake to get rid of an average hitter/defender. Doesn’t average mean that he is in the middle of pack. If that is the case, that means that he can be replaced, since their have to be more hitters who are average out there.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 1, 2009 5:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
...
1) Bradley is significantly better than average. If in an down year, he was an average player, than means in a good year (like with Texas) he is an exceptional player. He’s not as good as he was in Texas, but he’s better than he was with the Cubs. So he’s squarely above average.
2) Even average players aren’t easily replaceable. Name one player in the Cubs system, or a guy outside who could have be hard for very little, who is legitimately and average player going forward.
I don’t care if you get rid of Bradley. I think you’ll get ripped off by having to take Vernon Wells or whatever.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 1, 2009 5:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh I agree with part of your comment
Trading Bradley for Wells or someone else’s bad contract would be stupid. But I don’t believe Bradley is anything special that can’t be replaced. He isn’t that special of a hitter or defender.
When he was in Texas he was a good hitter, so are most players.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 1, 2009 6:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just like that A-Rod guy
He was a good hitter in Texas too. I bet it had everything to do with the ballpark.
Not to mention that Wrigley Field and the Ballpark at Arlington are basically the same, as far as park factors go.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 1, 2009 9:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i dont think it was just the ballpark that made arod a good hitter with texas....
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 1, 2009 11:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
it was the inspirational paintings
right?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Nov 1, 2009 11:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yes, centaurs are magical beings
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 1, 2009 1:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Arlington and Wrigley are basically the same?
This I gotta see the stats to support that theory. Me I’m too lazy to look them up, but what I’ve heard and seen Arlington is a launching pad while Wrigley is depent on the wind direction of the day.
Also are you really comparing Bradley to A-Rod? Really?
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 1, 2009 4:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, I'm not comparing them
Just saying that good hitters will also hit in hitters parks. Bradley hit well in San Diego too, which is very much not a hitters park.
actually, in 2009 Wrigley was an even friendlier park for hitters than Arlington
http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor
It’s not a big park.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 1, 2009 10:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So would you trade FOR Bradley?
Vivaelpujols – You’re a Cards fan. Let’s say the Cards had Matt Holliday signed for the next 2 years. What deal would it take for you to trade Matt Holliday for Milton Bradley? What would your terms be?
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 2, 2009 10:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the better question would be what they would trade if they DIDN'T sign Holliday
No one here is arguing Holliday > Bradley
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 10:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I just don't think Bradley is an Average Defender anymore
But if somebody does and they think his offense will rebound – then the question is would they trade for Bradley?
I think those legs are going downhill fast.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 2, 2009 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately it’s not always about talent. If it were Sammy Sosa would have been a Cub for life………. well, you get the point. Bradley can hit, yeah, we get that. The thing is, he’s a grade A a$$hole, rubs his teammate the wrong way, alienates the fans, the media, the coaching staff and front office. The Cubs paid him dearly last offseason and he never made a serious effort to change his pissy attitude, his confrontational style. He never had a chance and the reason is he never made an effort. Does anyone really think it’s going to go well if he’s back in Chicago in ‘09? Like I said, he can hit, we get it. Doesn’t make a difference.
If they don’t replace him now they’ll end up having to do it during the season either due to his fragile body or his fragile psyche. I’m as big a fan of statistics as the next guy and I try to pay as little attention as possible to the “intangibles” that are often ascribed to baseball players but never quantified or even verified. In this case though there’s no question that he’s bad for the team, anyone who seriously thinks otherwise either has an agenda contrary to the good fortunes of the team or is being willfully ignorant to the trouble Bradley brings with him. Or maybe they just have a short memory because the guy has only gone through 1/3 of the contract he signed and due to his abhorrent behavior his time with the Cubs is already over.
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant. - Robert McCloskey
by pageian on Nov 1, 2009 9:34 AM CST reply actions 5 recs
LSA & rec'd.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 1, 2009 11:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's throw some green on that!
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 1, 2009 4:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course there is a question
Any trade of Bradley is going to be a step down talent wise AND will likely cost the Cubs more money. If Bradley gets traded for Wells, that would be one of the worst mistakes the Cubs could ever make. No matter how much of a jerk Bradley is, Wells, as a replacement level player being paid for 6 more years, is going to be worse for the team.
The real question is how much talent and money lost is made up for by moving Bradley’s presence from the clubhouse. If they flat out released him, they would have to pay 10 million dollars for Bradley to put up 2-3 WAR on another club, while likely replacing him with a replacement level player. Do you think that Bradley’s personality problems are worse for the team than that? I don’t know, maybe, but unlikely.
The answer is not the HAVE to get rid of him. It’s that they have to make the best possible move for the club. I’m sure, despite Al’s protestations that you can’t value intangibles, that the Cubs FO has a number on how much talent and money they are willing to lose to get rid of Bradley. If they aren’t able to make a deal that satisfies that, they will end up keeping Bradley, and rightly so.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 1, 2009 9:33 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Bradley is not the second coming of Ruth or Aaron or Mays.
He is a player with a good OBP. Will it hurt the team if he leaves? Yes. Taking away a known quality for an unknown, and possibly lower, quality of player is going to hurt any team? Of course. But other than OBP what does Bradley bring to the table? Average Defense? A strong arm in RF? 10-20 HR’s a year?
So now instead of having Bradley in RF and batting second, we have Fukudome. As I recall Fukudome did a pretty fair job hitting in the two hole.
Now as for the trade for Wells, you are right. That would be a stupid move, a really stupid move. Why on God’s green Earth would we trade one bad contract for a worse contract? It would be better just for the Cubs to cut ties with Bradley, wish him luck and hope he enjoys the free $10 million.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 1, 2009 9:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You're arguing from a very odd position
Bradley isn’t amazing, so it doesn’t matter if you lose him? You’re not replacing Bradley with Fukudome, you are replacing him with with Sam Fuld or some shit.
Besides it’s a simple question. In all likelihood, Bradley will be worth about 2 wins above his replacement next year. It could be more, or could be less, but the most likely scenario is that the Cubs will get a lot worse statistically. The question is whether or not getting rid of a “clubhouse cancer” is worth giving up that much in talent. It’s absolutely not cut and dry, they don’t HAVE to get rid of Bradley. They should only do so if they believe that they will improve.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 1, 2009 10:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well from my stand point...
Giving up possible 2 wins over replacement is that bad. You arguing that we can find those 2 wins from some other player? A new second base? A-Ram being health all year? Soto coming back to what he was the year before? A different pitcher?
I believe the improvement will be seen by the team playing better as a team without Bradley. I think an improved club house will affect the other 24 players there in a positive manner, allowing them to play better.
Also yes, because he isn’t amazing it does mean that he can be replaced. He is nothing special. A Flud/RJ combo will get us something close to what he could provide, it won’t be the same but it will be close.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 1, 2009 10:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Are you kidding?
Also yes, because he isn’t amazing it does mean that he can be replaced. He is nothing special. A Flud/RJ combo will get us something close to what he could provide, it won’t be the same but it will be close.
My days of taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 1, 2009 10:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, that is not likely
Yet, you refuse to address comments about ignoring the human element. You seem to think that it’s reasonable to dump half a dozen or more players that spoke out against MB because it’s their problem and he’s good.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 1, 2009 10:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think I've made my feelings clear about the human element stuff
and it’s something we’re never going to agree on.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 1, 2009 10:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's probably a good thing you are in academia, then
Because your organizational philosophy would likely lead to mutiny.
I’m not discounting stats; never did. But if a leader allows a subordinate to alienate that subordinate’s peers and the leader himself, that leader won’t be very effective.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 1, 2009 10:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, but there is a degree of effectiveness, I think we agree on that
If Bradley’s positive contributions on the field outweigh his negative contributions in the clubhouse, whether players like him or not, it becomes the right decision to keep him. Nobodies ignoring Bradley’s problems in the clubhouse; we’re just not assuming that they are the be all and end all of his value.
Here is my argument, again. I think that you and most of us here agree that trading Bradley will likely result in a net loss in statistical talent for the club. However, trading Bradley will also likely result in a net gain in clubhouse chemistry. It’s the FO job to weigh each of those factors and make a decision.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 1, 2009 11:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That, I completely agree with
This is the first time that I’ve seen an acknowledgement from the keep MB camp that there is a clubhouse gain (I may have missed it if it was posted elsewhere).
My comment above wasn’t meant as an insult to Berselius – I’ve seen people that are able to do whatever they want because they are perceived as “getting results” by the right people, and it poisons organizations.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 2, 2009 5:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
...
This is the first time that I’ve seen an acknowledgement from the keep MB camp that there is a clubhouse gain
I thought that was implied ;)
by vivaelpujols on Nov 2, 2009 6:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not necessarily
There has been a lot of passion from both sides, to the point of bordering on stubbornness. I’ve read comments like, “well, he’s going to be better, so if people don’t like him, that’s their problem”, which completely disregards the players’ feelings on bringing him back and suggests that we know everything that went on in the clubhouse.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 2, 2009 6:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I said this the other day
I think in the other MB thread. I’m too lazy to look for it, but basically my point was that all things being equal, you pick the guy who isn’t a problem with the clubhouse/media over the guy who is. I just don’t think that all else is equal by a longshot, and that whatever they get for Bradley, if they trade him, is going to be much worse for the team both in talent and $$.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 8:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, that's reasonable
And sorry for missing your other post.
I think that’s what is causing a lot of the back-and-forth – people are thinking that others suggest that the behavioral issues aren’t worth noting.
You and VEP are right in that the FO has to decide which is worse – but I think that they already have.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 2, 2009 11:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So are you saying there is not player that can replace Bradley?
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 2, 2009 6:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not a player that the Cubs can get for him right now
Unless Ricketts really opens up the pocketbook (which he should do) or the Cubs trade Starlin Castro (which the Cubs should not do). I’m not saying Bradley is irreplacable, I’m saying that I don’t think that anyone is available within the Cubs means to replace him. Signing, say, Matt Holliday would certainly be an upgrade over Bradley. I just don’t see it happening.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 8:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well that's your opinion
And I’m sure that others feel differently about how much of an effect Bradley has on his teammates. It’s the front offices job to put an explicit number on it so they can make the best optimal business decision. Don’t be surprised if they don’t agree with you.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 1, 2009 10:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is a well-thought-out statement on the issue.
I will say only this: that the front office isn’t necessarily going to put “an explicit number” on the “Bradley effect”, or whatever you want to call it. They are simply going to make a yes-or-no decision: does keeping him help or hurt the team, using whatever factors they deem important.
I would argue that sending him home with two weeks left in the season indicates that the decision has already been made.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 8:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This doesn't make sense
They’re not making a yes or no decision in a vacuum. They’re going to use that ‘explicit’ number to decide yes or no
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 8:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In this case, I would disagree with you.
Unless Bradley were the best hitter in baseball — which he isn’t — I would argue the numbers don’t matter.
We’ll have to agree to disagree here. As I said, I believe the decision has already been made.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 9:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Um, shouldn't these things be a matter of degree and not absolutes?
Unless Bradley were the best hitter in baseball — which he isn’t — I would argue the numbers don’t matter.
No one is saying he’s irreplaceable, just that if you can’t replace him with something better you’d better do something else to make the team better.
The fact is there isn’t a reasonable scenario where dumping Bradley results in a better player patrolling the outfield of Wrigley next season. So if you’re Hendry you’d better make damn sure that you can’t get Bradley to kiss and make up with the fans and his teammates before you paint yourself into a corner (something it seems he’s already done).
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 11:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Devil's advocate
They aren’t going to get a better offensive player than Bradley, but what about the improvement if they get a decent CF and put Dome back in RF?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 2, 2009 11:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And how do they do that without spending another 20 million ?
Rowand costs 13 million more and is not likely to be any better than a Fuld/Johnson platoon. No more long term salary unless it is for a player you actually WANT and can afford.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 2, 2009 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Cite specific examples please
Who specifically is available to play center field for the Cubs next year that we can 1) afford (assuming a $140M payroll next season like we’ve been hearing) and 2) will provide both quality offense and defense, to the point where the drop-off from losing Bradley won’t be sizable.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 11:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, my vote would be signing Mike Cameron
But if you’re including the $$ that the Cubs would likely be paying for Bradley to play somewhere else then no one fits the bill. If the cubs manage to trade him for legit prospects it might work out.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 12:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Cameron is one of the few possibilities in my mind
Though like you say we don’t have the money for that right now. If you get rid of Milton without paying a penny of his salary (impossible IMO) then maybe you have tge money (assuming you don’t take on a big contract, again impossible IMO).
Basically you can’t get better baseball wise than Milton Bradley given our budget constraints. Now does that make the clubhouse a toxic environment? Perhaps, but I still refuse to believe that most players played worse on the field because of what was happening in the clubhouse.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Nov 2, 2009 12:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My vote would also be Cameron
We’ll have to see how much the Cubs do have to eat on Bradley’s contract
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 2, 2009 12:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Cameron is the only name that would make sense
…but I really don’t see how he would fit into the Cubs payroll, given the rumored parameters for the 2009 budget.
Assuming we tender contracts to Heilman and Fontenot, we’ve got almost $135M committed, and still need at least 2 relief pitchers and a bench bat / 4th outfielder. And unless you think Aaron Miles can suddenly become productive (or that Andres Blanco’s bat is good enough), you may need a backup infielder as well.
Bradley’s 2010 salary is $9M, and it seems unrealistic we’ll be able to trade him without taking on a similar commitment.
I just don’t see how the $10M that Cameron will probably get next season fits into the rumored $140M payroll.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 12:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Coming down to the bottom of the thread to reply to you...
… I agree, if Bradley is traded for someone or someones who don’t give you the possible production he can, Hendry had better find more production elsewhere.
However, I repeat my point. The decision to deal him was made in September when he was sent home. You will likely disagree with this, but I think the mere fact that he is no longer in the clubhouse will provide a better atmosphere for the other players to produce.
Can I quantify that? No, I can’t. It’s one of them intangibles.
Could I be wrong? Sure, I could. We’ll just have to wait and see.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 1:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
As someone here once said...
…people in baseball can change their minds, you know.
Time heals all wounds, and the decision he made in September was before the ownership change, and before Hendry had a chance to feel out the market for Bradley. If that market looks as grim from the inside as it does out here, then Hendry needs to be reviewing his options and seeing what it would take to get everyone to make amends.
That said, I do agree that a trade is far and away the most likely outcome of this situation. I just hope it doesn’t screw the Cubs as much as I fear it will.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 1:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"Time heals all wounds"...
… perhaps. But it’s likely to take much more than one offseason to heal these wounds.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 2:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How do you know Al
Seriously, Bradley insulted his teammates and the fans. He didn’t hurt anyone, he didn’t threaten anyone, he was just a jerk. His teammates didn’t like him and they would prefer if he was gone, but it’s not like the club is gonna explode if Bradley stays on.
You act as though he shot someone.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 2, 2009 3:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, I simply read the comments of his teammates...
… and his management, and I know that’s probably not 20% of what really went on.
“Act as though he shot someone”? Hardly. I just don’t want him on the Cubs any more — and I think the entire organization agrees with me.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but it isn't so black and white
If the expected net loss in talent outweighs the expected net gain in clubhouse chemistry and media relations, they won’t deal Bradley. They don’t HAVE to get rid of him; they’ll only due so if they believe it is the most optimal decision.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 2, 2009 3:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
On that, we agree.
I believe they have already decided it is the “most optimal decision”, as you put it. Perhaps you disagree; that’s your right.
We’ll see, and I think sooner rather than later.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 3:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fine Keep him...
and bench him for the first week and don’t allow him to do interviews within the clubhouse. Fine him $10,000 every time he speaks ill of the team or fans.
It seems harsh but a “pound of flesh” has to be paid to the fanbase and something has to get through his thick skull that maybe he shouldn’t be doing throwing the team, the fans, and most importantly his teammates under every bus that comes by.
We are people of forgiveness, Americans that is. We love it when a person gets punished, but we love it even more when we, as group of people, give forgiveness. If Bradley got nailed with something like this and came out asking for “forgiveness” then I bet the fan base would accept him back.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 2, 2009 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In other cases...
…I would agree with you, but this one is a little unique.
Sometimes you have to make a statement that your orgnization expects a certain standard to be upheld by the players, and I believe this is a perfect example of that. Whan Hendry suspended him, it was clear the players completed supported that decision. If Hendry did not follow through in moving Bradley, he would lose credibility with the players and what the organization stands for would as well.
This is a time to stand up and say; “no one player is bigger than the team, no matter what numbers they may put up”.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Nov 5, 2009 4:04 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Fixed it
This is a time to stand up and say; "no one player is bigger than the team, no matter what numbers they may put up, unless they are the self-proclaimed ace of the pitching staff".
Figured there hasn’t been any controversy for a couple of days . . .
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 9:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I liked the "self-proclaimed" part
which means you’re obviously talking about Ted Lilly…
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 6, 2009 9:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Are you accusing me of using Ted Lilly's name in vain?
;-)
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 10:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
A quick article about Team Chemistry
I just found this and I think it sums it up the best
For what it’s worth, the idea of Team Chemistry in baseball is often misconstrued. I hear people discuss Team Chemistry in terms of players getting along, being friends, partying together, being buddies, etc., but this is meaningless when on field, and not what Team Chemistry is about.
Instead, from what I can tell when talking to former players, Team Chemistry is really about having players who are ‘all on the same page,’ who trust one another, who will fight for one another, all of whom have the same goal and will do whatever is necessary to achieve it… whether they personally like one another as people is ‘nice,’ but far from a requirement.
Linky
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 2, 2009 6:57 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Which?
Moving Dome to RF? Getting a decent CF?
Why?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 2, 2009 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Here is a Litst of possible Free Agents for CF/RF/LF (AGE)
CF
Rick Ankiel (30)
Rocco Baldelli (28)
Marlon Byrd (32) – Type B
Mike Cameron (37) – Type B
Endy Chavez (32)
Coco Crisp (30) – $8MM club option with a $500K buyout
Darin Erstad (36)
Ryan Freel (34)
Jerry Hairston Jr. (34) – Type B
Reed Johnson (33)
Andruw Jones (33)
Mark Kotsay (34)
Corey Patterson (30)
Scott Podsednik (34)
DeWayne Wise (32)
Right Fielders
Bobby Abreu (36) – Type A
Jermaine Dye (36) – $12MM mutual option with a $1MM buyout – Type A
Brian Giles (39) – Type B
Vladimir Guerrero (35) – Type A
Eric Hinske (32)
Geoff Jenkins (35)
Austin Kearns (30) – $10MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Jason Michaels (34)
Xavier Nady (31) – Type B
Randy Winn (36) – Type B
LF
Garret Anderson (38) – Type B
Marlon Anderson (36)
Jason Bay (31) – Type A
Emil Brown (35)
Marlon Byrd (32) – Type B
Carl Crawford (28) – $10MM club option with a $1.25MM buyout – Type B
Johnny Damon (36) – Type A
David Dellucci (36)
Cliff Floyd (37)
Matt Holliday (30) – Type A
Reed Johnson (33)
Greg Norton (37)
Wily Mo Pena (28)
Manny Ramirez (38) – $20MM player option – Type A
Dave Roberts (38)
Gary Sheffield (41)
Fernando Tatis (35) – Type B
Randy Winn (36) – Type B
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 2, 2009 2:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know but I won't mind seeing Baldelli in CF
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 2, 2009 2:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Baldelli is not physically capable of playing every day
In terms of injury risk he makes Bradley look like Cal Ripken.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 3:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Could he be a platoon player?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I highly doubt it
He’s played 130 games in the last 3 seasons combined… and about half of those were as a pinch hitter or DH.
Until someone finds a cure for his disease, he’s basically stuck as a bench bat / DH / 5th outfielder who may or may not be available on a day-to-day basis.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought that it turned out he didn't have that mitochondrial disease
He had a bad diagnosis, and he’s on somemeds for what he really has. My memory sucks though
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 3:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, you're right. I'd missed that.
He suffers from channelopathy apparently, not a mitochondrial disorder. That’s good news, though I have no idea what the implications are for that on his ability to play every day.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 3:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
CoCo Crisp might be an option also
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 2, 2009 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The main problem with Coco Crisp is that he's not very good
Also he may not be available this year – KC has an $8M option for his services in 2009. They’re considered unlikely to exercise it, but given that they are willing to overpay just to get decent players there, I wouldn’t be surprised if they bring him back on it.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 3:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That list supports everything everyone has said here
There isn’t anyone on that list who we can afford and who would be a net improvement over Bradley other than maybe Marlon Byrd.
If money is a serious constraint, the best bet for the Cubs is to take a flier on Ankiel and hope that his ability to hit hasn’t gone to the same place where his ability to throw strikes went. And that’s a pretty grim option. Even then, Ankiel’s best season (2008) was worth less than every single one of Bradley’s seasons (including the injury shortened ones) except 2009.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 3:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Here is a list of projected Non Tenders Candidates:
Jeremy Accardo
Garrett Atkins
John Bale
Denny Bautista
Jose Bautista
Matt Belisle
Boof Bonser
Bill Bray
Brian Bruney
Taylor Buchholz
John Buck
Dave Bush
Daniel Cabrera
Ryan Church
Neal Cotts
Jack Cust
Randy Flores
Mike Fontenot
Jeff Francoeur
Ryan Garko
Joey Gathright
Chad Gaudin
Jody Gerut
Gabe Gross
Craig Hansen
Aaron Heilman
Jeremy Hermida
Shawn Hill
Conor Jackson
Mike Jacobs
Bobby Jenks
Kelly Johnson
Logan Kensing
Noah Lowry
John Maine
Andy Marte
Seth McClung
Brandon Medders
Corky Miller
Justin Miller
Sergio Mitre
Dioner Navarro
Scott Olsen
Joel Peralta
Scott Proctor
Robb Quinlan
Kelly Shoppach
Tim Redding
Jeremy Reed
Jason Repko
Cory Sullivan
Jack Taschner
Mark Teahen
Marcus Thames
Josh Towers
Matt Treanor
Doug Waechter
Chien-Ming Wang
Tyler Yates
Delmon Young
Some solid names that could be real useful to the Cubs
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 2, 2009 2:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Such as?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Nov 4, 2009 11:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Delmon Young, Mark Teahen, Noah Lowry, Bobby Jenks, Conor Jackson, Ryan Garko
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 4, 2009 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I find it a little hard to believe Bobby Jenks is a non-tender candidate.
And could you be a little more specific as to exactly what the Cubs are supposed to do with some of these guys? If I’m not mistaken, Conor Jackson and Ryan Garko are 1B/LF/DH types. Are you suggesting Delmon Young play centerfield? Isn’t Mark Teahen essentialliy a left-handed Jeff Baker?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Nov 4, 2009 2:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No I was hoping Jenks could play CF.
Wasn’t there a call to arms to trade for Teahen like 3 months ago?
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 4, 2009 2:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, that was last off-season.
Are you going to answer my other questions?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Nov 4, 2009 3:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, not really
I don’t Young can play center, but he could play RF leaving Fukudome in CF, not my first choice no but a possibilty. With Jackson, I’m not sure if he can play LF or RF but once again leaving Fukudome in CF (and this is not my first choice no) and moving Sori into RF (not a great idea I will admitt) and moving him into LF could be an option (Not good for defense that would be for sure).
Garko started out as a cather in college, and in the minors but was blocked by V-Mart. Not really sure we have a spot for him, but it would be nice if we could find one.
I still seem to remember that during this season, when the trade deadline was coming there was talk on BCB about trading for Teahan.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 4, 2009 4:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So basically you're dumping a list of names on us...
…without any clear idea of where any of these guys would fit on the Cubs roster. OK, fair enough.
As vivaelpujols points out above, Delmon Young doesn’t appear to be very good at baseball. He’s had a negative WAR value the last two years running.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Nov 5, 2009 9:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sorry.
I didn’t know I was getting paid to fix all th Cubs problem. WOW!!! I’m the new GM! No I produce of list of names and said some of them would be solid players that could help the Cubs. Are you saying having their bats in our line-up would not help?
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 5, 2009 1:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Whose bats? Whose?
Every single player on that list? I don’t think Major League Baseball would allow that.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Nov 5, 2009 3:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Why???
Turn in a line-up card with 30 names on it!
LLF
CLF
RLF
LCF
CCF
RCF
LRF
CRF
LRF
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
by gaclaudy on Nov 5, 2009 4:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Lowry is the only one on that list who would interest me.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 4, 2009 2:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Lowry?
Why would he interest you? Too injury prone. for my taste.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 5, 2009 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He'd be worth a minor league deal.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 5, 2009 12:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Another Hendry reclamation project?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 5, 2009 12:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, why not?
With a minor league deal, if he’s hurt/sucks you just release him.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 5, 2009 1:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
so why do you say "no" to Rich Hill?
it would be the same thing, no?
by socalbob on Nov 5, 2009 1:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My guess:
One is better known than the other.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 5, 2009 3:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Right.
Been there, done that with Hill.
Plus, Lowry doesn’t seem to have the “other” problems Rich Hill had, besides the injuries.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 5, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Very serious injury to boot
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 6, 2009 8:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
For those that are greening and/or agreeing with pageian's comment here
I hope you’re not the same folks that honestly think the Cubs can trade Bradley without eating any of the contract or without taking an equally bad – or in the case of Wells, worse – contract in return.
If picture is as bleak and depressing as pageian describes it above, then Hendry ought to accept the first warm body that comes along. Or be perfectly willing and happy to just eat the $21M and release him.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 1, 2009 11:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Awful post.
read between the lines. its deeper than just the stats, man. It’s the drama, the complaining, the crap attitude. Drop his ass and don’t let another RF wear 21 in Cubbie Blue again.
by stixball21 on Nov 1, 2009 11:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Kewl!
Let’s run that #21 up the right field flag pole with SOSA across the back.
by FrankSereno on Nov 2, 2009 7:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Marquis
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 2, 2009 8:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Gene Hiser
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 8:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
boy, I wish there was a web site or a book out there that had all the Cubs numbers...
…and who wore them throughout the entire franchise history… ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 2, 2009 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow!
Sounds like a great idea!
Here’s the complete list of everyone who has ever worn #21 for the Cubs.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 10:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The Talent has to be on the Field to be Talent
Here is Milton Bradley’s injury history for 2009:
Apr 13, 2009: Groin, day-to-day.
Apr 16, 2009: Missed 2 games (groin).
Apr 17, 2009: Groin, day-to-day.
Apr 18, 2009: Missed 1 game (groin).
Apr 23, 2009: Groin, day-to-day.
Apr 24, 2009: Missed 1 game (groin).
Apr 25, 2009: Groin, day-to-day.
Apr 27, 2009: Missed 2 games (groin).
May 17, 2009: Missed 1 game (suspension).
Jun 3, 2009: Calf injury, day-to-day.
Jun 6, 2009: Missed 2 games (calf injury).
Aug 14, 2009: Hip injury, day-to-day.
Aug 15, 2009: Missed 1 game (hip injury).
Sep 9, 2009: Leg injury, day-to-day.
Sep 11, 2009: Missed 1 game (leg injury).
Sep 18, 2009: Left knee injury, day-to-day.
These injuries don’t get better with age. There’s no DH in the NL. No place hide/rest Milton Bradley on the Cubs.
Milton Bradley is Rondell White with a bad attitude. And I liked Rondell White when he was a Cub. He was fun to be in the LF Bleachers with.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 2, 2009 4:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
So should we dump Aramis Ramirez too?
Or Derek Lee? Or Ted Lilly? After all, both of them missed as much or more time due to injuries.
The fact is that Bradley was able to play more games last season than the Cubs wanted. His injury risk was nearly a non-factor last season. You list only adds up to 11 games, less than 10% of the season.
by Wreckard on Nov 2, 2009 4:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with your premise here
But to be fair Lee missed a lot less time than Bradley. I’m too lazy to figure out what the proper tradeoff would be for IP to PA for Lilly
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 5:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley had a lot more games in which he only pinch-hit while he was banged up too
just sayin. That said I think that 473 PAs was in the neighborhood (a little higher actually) of what most people were predicting from him in 2009. And 473 PAs of true talent level MB > 650 PAs of a lesser RF (Dunn, Abreu, Ibanez at true talent level)
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 6:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Red herring on Ramirez.
In the five years before 2009, he played more games than Bradley’s 2009 total four of the five, and only one less in the other year.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 5:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's just one piece
You missed my point. The original argument stated it would be a mistake to dump Milton Bradley. That’s a simple argument when you look only at his offensive stats and assume a rebound back up to his norms.
When you subtract the following factors that argument no longer holds water:
1. His inferior defense to Fukudome in RF
2. His injury history – and it goes farther back.
3. The lack of a DH in the NL.
4. His extremely poor relationship with the Chicago media and fans.
I think if Bradley is traded to a small market team with lower media exposure and a DH spot to spell him at that he should rebound.
I just don’t see it happening as a Cub.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 2, 2009 6:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
#1 doesn't really matter that much
Fukudome’s defense in RF is not cancelled out by Bradley’s offense. And I don’t think Bradley’s prescence in the OF is going to stop the fans from coming to see the Glorious Scorboard
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 2, 2009 6:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
They can all play when healthy
Bradley is a .260, low power hitter with an iron mitt. A switch hitter who doesn’t his right handers very well. Oh, yeah, and he’s a psycho, too. :-(
by ClarkFan on Nov 6, 2009 10:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm speechless
Anyone who thinks that Bradley being on this team next year is a good thing should have their head examined.
by TheGrinch13 on Nov 2, 2009 8:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'd want to see Bradley on the team next year
Feel free to flame me and say I need my head examined, but he’s a good player. The players are professionals, and will more than likely put any problems they have with him in the past. The key is getting his head straight, which is a risk I’d take.
Chicagoan in the Lou.
by Mike Martin on Nov 6, 2009 7:49 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The key is getting his head straight, which is a risk I’d take.
10th years the charm, right?
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 6, 2009 8:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's let Albert answer this one
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 8:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"the key is getting his head straight"
What in his career makes you think he is capable of that?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 7, 2009 11:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My career tells me people can get things together over the 6 months he has off
I don’t deny it’s a risk. I just said it was risk I would take. Feel free to disagree.
Chicagoan in the Lou.
by Mike Martin on Nov 9, 2009 3:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
One problem I see with Bradley is that his 2007-2008 numbers have a "juiced’ look to them. Afther his stint at Oakland (Syringe City), he suddleny finds power and the ability to hit right handed pitching, for a brief burst. That season and a half is such an outlier that it adds 20-25 points to his career numbers for OBP and slugging – with out it he shows at about .260/.350/.425, with a home run about every 34 ABs. Pretty sub-par numbers for a corner outfielder.
And PEDs are still in baseball – unless you think that Manny Ramirez was taking those drugs so he could conceive David Ortiz’s love child. Bradely wouldn’t be the first guy to use juice as a training aid for a walk year (see: G Matthews Jr.). That would explain why he was so happy about his contract in spring training. But guys who take the juice shortcut crash hard afteward (see: G Matthews Jr.) – get rid of Bradley now before the jig is up.
ClarkFan
by ClarkFan on Nov 6, 2009 10:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
You realize that they tested for steroids in 07 and 08?
by vivaelpujols on Nov 7, 2009 3:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
Apparently, Manny Ramirez eluded detection until this season. I’m not accusing Bradley — but there may be other players besides Manny who didn’t get caught.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 7, 2009 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Did Manny actuall do steroids in 07-08
Or did he do it earlier and finally got caught, I forgot.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 8, 2009 1:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Based on ...
… this article, it appears it was either last year or maybe even this year.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 8, 2009 8:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I know...
And the designer drugs are probably still ahead of the tests, and test scheduling isn’t perfect. Plus, there is a lot of money in a player having a good season or two just before free agency, especially the mide-level players. That can make the difference between 2 years at $2-$4M/year and 3-4 years at $10M or more per year. And Bradley’s numbers were very different in 2006-2008 from the rest of his career, including a much higher BA against right-handed pitchers and power numbers in San Diego(!). Then he follows that up with a 2009 that is a return to previous form. Makes you say hmmmmm…..
by ClarkFan on Nov 8, 2009 8:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Because he had a down year, it means he did steroids?
……
………………….
by vivaelpujols on Nov 8, 2009 11:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope, it's the good years that indicate something odd was going on
Bradley’s 2009 wasn’t a bad year, it was his normal year. Eliminate the 168 games he played for San Diego and Texas and .260/.350./.425 and a homer every 34 at-bats is his norm – almost exactly what he did with the Cubs.
Which makes those 168 games hard to explain. He posted .319/.430/.570 with a homer every 17 at-bats – and was hitting right handed pitching against a career average 40 points lover. I believe that the change from his career norm is a good definition of the term “gross outlier.” And over the past decade or so, gross outlier seasons often have involved chemical intervention.
by ClarkFan on Nov 12, 2009 1:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You could literrally do that for any player
If you eliminated Derek Lee’s best two seasons (this year and 05) he would look like an average hitter for a firstbasemen.
by vivaelpujols on Nov 12, 2009 2:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He may be, but that is a fairly high average
And for Lee, the two big years are separated by several years, whereas for Bradley the difference is created by 168 games over a season and a half, when he was looking for contracts.
by ClarkFan on Nov 12, 2009 2:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have no words.
The desperation of some fans to get rid of Bradley is laughable.
You know who else had down years after producing before? Soto and Soriano.
I don’t get how the known transgressions of Bradley aren’t enough for some people and they have to resort to accusing him of using PED’s or acting 80% worse than was let on. Disgusting.
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Nov 9, 2009 11:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 8, 2009 11:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
whoops, reply FAIL
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 8, 2009 11:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
