Why Am I Here?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 12:47 AM CDT
in Statistical Analysis
195 comments
This post is a bit of an extended introduction, and its title is a nod to this thread, where Al asked the question: "Why are we Cubs fans?" I'm going to expand on this question a bit to also let you know why I use statistics, why I care about them so much, and why I'm happy to take on a larger role talking about them here at BCB.
Let's start with the origins of my Cub fandom. I started out a very young White Sox fan, just like everyone else here... right? ;-) I could see Comiskey from our apartment building, and so I rooted for the White Sox to win so I could watch the fireworks. I also remember telling my dad that because we lived closer to Comiskey than Wrigley the White Sox were my "hometown team." The fact that Harold Baines lived in our apartment complex reinforced this notion in my mind. (Insert joke here about how even at a young age I was failing due to an over-reliance on logic and facts.) My dad, a lawyer, told me that we lived closer to Wrigley but that it was on the other side of our building and so I didn't realize how close it was. In other words, he lied. Well I bought the lie, and many Harry-filled summer afternoons later I was a Cubs fan for life.
There's something else that happened in those afternoons spent in front of a TV tuned to WGN. I watched games on TV with my dad... every. day. My dad was pretty old (over 50) when my parents had me and this meant that we didn't have the typical father-son relationship where we'd play catch in the yard or where he'd teach me how to hit a curveball. Instead, we'd watch games together and I'd ask him about everything... and I mean everything. Little details about the rules, strategies, numbers, stats - you name it, I wanted to know all about it. I suppose I did this to some extent with other sports, but nothing compared to the fascination I had in baseball and the passion I had for the Cubs. I think all the way back then I was already starting to become the fan I am today, with a love for the game but and an obsession about its details (more after the jump)...
When I was in high school I was by no means a typical jock or outstanding athlete, but I did play sports. Unlike most other athletes, I also started a career in sportscasting. And unlike Michael Jordan, when I got cut from the varsity basketball team I hung up my sneakers and picked up the mic full-time. My passion for talking about and analyzing sports continued to develop, and I did everything I could get my hands on: video editing, hosting a call-in radio show, play-by-play, color commentary, and finally co-producing, co-writing, and co-hosting a SportsCenter-like studio show for our high school teams. I loved it, and found I really enjoyed talking about sports with all kinds of people: friends, family, coaches, players, and most of all fans that had previously been complete strangers. I think that background makes me really enjoy interactions on sports blogs, as it's a little bit of my past come back to life.
At the end of high school, I had a tough decision to make: I could either go to a college with a strong sportscasting program or to one with a strong pedigree in more "traditional" disciplines. In the end, I chose the latter route and started a new journey that led to a career as a scientist. During that journey, I was trained to value and apply the scientific method and developed the belief that the communication of science is the greatest responsibility of modern-day scientists. Therefore, I agree with this sentiment from Goodie1969 and share the hope that what I do here is more teaching and less lecturing. Despite all my love for the Cubs, I wouldn't spend my time writing here if I didn't think I could teach some readers a little bit about the sport and a little bit about science... and I'd go a step further than that. In addition to teaching some of you a little, my sincere hope is that I learn a lot from all of you in return... and that the Cubs win a lot of games in the meantime... oh, and I'll over-use the ellipsis... a LOT... Anyways, I hope you enjoy my writing as much as I expect to appreciate your feedback.
0 recs |
195 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I'll also warn all of you...
that I’ll often post here late at night, as I’m a night owl that currently lives on the West Coast, and I try to limit my baseball analysis and writing to after-work hours.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 12:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Why, then...
…we’re in the same time zone.
Now for your first post, you can explain UZR & WAR to me.
Welcome aboard, and I look forward to reading more of your statistical analysis!
"With Chance on first, and Evers on third,
Great things from the Cubs will soon be heard."
by LeSaboteur on Oct 6, 2009 3:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I won't explain UZR or WAR here,
but I promise to in another post. It may not be the first one, but it will be up there towards the front.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 4:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apart from Baseball, what kind of science do you do, if I may ask?
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
by eths on Oct 6, 2009 3:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm an astrobiologist.
… and with that I’m off to bed.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 4:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Guten nacht...
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
by eths on Oct 6, 2009 4:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You study the evolution of the Jetson's dog?
Fontenot (fon-te-no): Cajun for "scrappy"
by zambranofan on Oct 6, 2009 8:08 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
ruh roh!
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 6, 2009 8:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rat's Scrooby-Dooooo!!!
Kevin Gregg is the Mother F'n Anti-christ!
by VegasCubFan on Oct 6, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No it's not! "Ruh roh, George" is pure "Astro"...
Scooby stole it…
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
by Zeke on Oct 6, 2009 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That would be
“Ruh roh Rorge”
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 6, 2009 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and mmmmm Jane...
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 6, 2009 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jane, Wilma... 60s cartoon hotties...
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
by Zeke on Oct 6, 2009 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't forget Betty!
"When you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
by vonde6 on Oct 6, 2009 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Her giggle drove me nuts.
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
by Zeke on Oct 6, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It really got nuts
When Wilma and Betty giggled together.
They were the babe-licious, Hanna Barbar-ic Beavis and Butthead of their day.
"When you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
by vonde6 on Oct 6, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The evolution of the Astros
would be worse – Yuck, Roy Oswalt’s not evolved much.
"I won't be like A-Rod" - Z, 3/17/09
by Ihatethecards on Oct 6, 2009 8:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I think Oswalt has.
But Lance Berkman… maybe not so much.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Berkman is going in reverse.
From Centerfield to missing link in less than a decade… The Lance Berkman Story.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 6, 2009 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it is safe to say that the Ass-tros as a group, believe in creationism.
Not a real scientific bunch. Let’s leave it at that.
"Truth hurts. Maybe not as much as jumping on a bicycle with the seat missing, but it hurts." - Leslie Nielson
by LAcarl519 on Oct 6, 2009 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Creationism and
The All You Can Eat Buffet
"When you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
by vonde6 on Oct 6, 2009 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought they believed that Bud Selig killed their 2008?
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 6, 2009 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No - lightning did
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 6, 2009 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, that just killed Berkman's shorts
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 6, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol...
I hadn’t hear that one before.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And then there's me, who chose to go into television for a career because I sucked at math...
I was OK with math until they started screwing up perfectly good number problems by putting in friggin’ LETTERS instead of digits. So my world moved from base 10 to base 60 (seconds)…
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
by Zeke on Oct 6, 2009 6:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That was my route, too.
Though when the resume tapes didn’t pan out, I realized that writing press releases and media guides is a pretty simple business. Especially when you get to do that around sports. (And the math is easy)
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Trey2317 on Oct 6, 2009 9:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I ended up doing TV after learning photograpy...
…and always kind of assumed math was a pain, so did not want to go there. And now? Now I program computers (a kind of applied math) for TV and am an active ham radio operator (requires a fair amount of math as well).
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
by eths on Oct 6, 2009 9:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Math is always a little easier for me when I have practical applications for its use...
Back-timing a live show to close on time to join network is always fun…
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
by Zeke on Oct 6, 2009 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey! I was told there would be no math!
I used to do that stuff too, when I worked nights.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like your dad...
Crafty! I’ll have to remember that one when I have kids…
by hmlee on Oct 6, 2009 7:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Sweet man! Good introduction. I'm stoked.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Oct 6, 2009 7:27 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Shawn - welcome aboard
Thanks for the background. you sound like a great addition to BCB. I look forward to it.
"I won't be like A-Rod" - Z, 3/17/09
by Ihatethecards on Oct 6, 2009 7:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Outstanding first post...
… and I look forward to interesting discussion and learning a few things from you.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 8:06 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
As do I
And kudos to you, Al, for brining in a different voice.
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 6, 2009 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How do you know what he sounds like by his typing?
Kevin Gregg is the Mother F'n Anti-christ!
by VegasCubFan on Oct 6, 2009 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kinda "clicky"...
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
by Zeke on Oct 6, 2009 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a good point.
AT LEAST HE WASN’T YELLING
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 6, 2009 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Welcome to BCB!
I am looking forward to your insight and analysis.
by cubdreamer on Oct 6, 2009 8:17 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Welcome...
…to the ballclub!
Having an advanced degree in a science related field and having played college ball, I can appreciate the role science can play in understanding what may or may not contribute to on field success and I look forward to your insight.
With that said, I am also a firm believer in recognizing so much of human performance (especially in highly skilled team sports) is about as predictable as the weather at any given moment. The least understood part of a human being is what goes on between the ears, and since the brain tells the body how to move at any given moment, this is what gives us the beauty of not knowing what will happen from pitch to pitch and from AB to AB and the uncertainty of what any one game, or one season can bring.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 6, 2009 8:58 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
As a huge fan of the Cubs... AND the ellipsis...
…I look forward to your statistical posts. Welcome… and good luck!
Being a Cubs fan is something you're born into... Nobody would be a Cubs fan by choice. - Me
by Scruff0082 on Oct 6, 2009 9:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
PENN STATE!
There. Now I’m yelling.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least it's Big 10
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 6, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now all you have to do
Is get Al to list you as a contributor on the bottom of the page.
"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root
by Clutch16 on Oct 6, 2009 10:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The ellipsis
Cannot be overused. Life does not stop, pause, and start as conveniently as a period, or even a comma, would indicate…
"When you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
by vonde6 on Oct 6, 2009 11:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You... are... correct!
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah.
It helps that William Shatner taught me how to write.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In that CASE
You should ONLY yell every THIRD word.
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 6, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am very right brained and need more lefty.
Not sure if I will be able to comprehend because like Zeke stated above I was only OK with math until they started putting in friggin’ letters, but I am very anxious to try. Thanks for doing this.
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
by katie casey on Oct 6, 2009 11:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Shawn: welcome and good luck!
Since I gave you a 97% chance of posting, I am glad that you did not let me down.
I have always been good at math, yet I have been one who maintains a healthy skepticism about overuse of statistics in baseball. I look forward to becoming more enlightened through your posts and the dialogue that they create.
BTW, I hope that graph in the picture (on your computer) is not your 401-K portfolio valuation. If it is, you should not be smiling.
"Truth hurts. Maybe not as much as jumping on a bicycle with the seat missing, but it hurts." - Leslie Nielson
by LAcarl519 on Oct 6, 2009 12:07 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
To all the "I'm not good at math" folks...
I’ve always held that the sentiment has more to do with bad teachers than bad students. IMO, there are a lot of bad math teachers out there (and even more bad physics teachers).
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 12:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Speaking as a mathematician
I agree with this statement. If you want to waste a day or two, ask a mathematician with kids what he/she thinks about K-12 math education.
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 6, 2009 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's even worse at the college/university level...
but that’s a part of a much broader discussion about the role of faculty in educating students.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not so sure
Most everyone I have met that was a really good math student (including myself) has said that there was one or two teachers that really turned them on to math and motivated them. That certainly was true of me. But, the teacher that did that for me was despised by 99% of the students that had him. He was very disciplined and demanded the same of his students. He also was very demanding but never asked more of his students than he was willing to give.
I thought that was awesome and it was just what I needed at that point in my academic progress. But, like I said, most everyone else did not appreciate his approach or being pushed like that. So, was he a “good” teacher or not? I would say absolutely, but many of his other students would say no. But, I was probably one of only a handful of his students that really sought out math and math related pursuits as a career.
So, I think it is over simplifying to say it is bad teachers that make people hate math. I had some bad teachers too. I endured them while hoping the next one would be better…and they usually were.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Felipe Lopez
says you are horrible at math and he couldn’t think of a worse student.
Just playing—couldn’t resist.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ahh
you picked up on the fact that I am not a big Felipe fan? I thought I was subtle about it. :-)
He does have a hot wife though, and I’m sure would look good in a box seat at Wrigley.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
she's rated
hotter than De Rosa’s wife—was it Maxim? We could upgrade teh Budweiser Fan Cam.
FWIW, I don’t want to go there with Lopez either.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is Jen Lopez, Felipe Lopez's wife. And yes, her name really is "Jennifer Lopez".
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
This is probably the best post in the last 10 days.
Recommended.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Oct 6, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have never
been in more agreement with you.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't know we disagreed.
But I’m glad we could agree to agree upon this post.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Oct 6, 2009 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
love it :-D
it’s a matter of degrees of agreement
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I won't rec it
Because I am afraid she will turn green
"When you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
by vonde6 on Oct 6, 2009 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's consistent with what I feel.
I’m not saying all math teachers are bad. On the contrary, I’d argue that most people that are good at math had a good teacher at some point.
I’d put it this way: most of the people I’ve met that think they’re bad at math do decently once they have a good teacher.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, thinking about it further
Most people I know who, like myself, developed an interest in, and an aptitude for math at an early age have a different perspective of what is a good math teacher. We want to be challenged and turned on by exploring deeper into the world of numbers.
Other folks who find math confusing and difficult want a teacher who can make it fun and interesting. Those teachers drove me nuts, but they were the ones that most of the rest of the students thought were “cool”.
Remember the Disney film “Donald Duck in Mathmagicland”? I was in about 3rd grade when they showed that to us. I think some math teachers in high school thought that was the way to teach math, and I guess it is for a lot of students. Let’s face it, unless you become an engineer (like me) or an astrobiologist (like you) or some such, differential equations and trigonometry are not things most people see as having a lot of relevance to their everyday lives.
In any event, I love statistics and numbers, and I look forward to reading your articles. I think advanced metrics are very useful in baseball, I am just not very impressed with the way they are generally applied.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, but I don't know about blaming my teachers.
I’m an artist and I’ve said similiar things about how anyone can learn to draw to people that say they can’t draw a stick figure. However, I think I may just be trying to be encouraging or being modest when I say that. Truthfully, I think some things simply come more naturally to some folks than others. I’m sure they can learn with a lot of effort and desire, but they may not be as good at it as someone who has a natural talent for it. Math doesn’t come easily to me. As a matter it took me awhile to master the concept of players having position numbers to be able to comprehend what the hec a 6-4-3 double play was. I don’t think a mental block that bad could be anyone’s fault, but my own.
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
by katie casey on Oct 7, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a good point...
because I’m definitely not good at drawing anything better than stick figures… and I can even screw that up! I do agree that math comes easier to some than it does to others, but I also believe that a lot of people that are really good at math just don’t know it because it’s often not taught well. Actually, there is a good deal of creativity needed to excel at math once you get to advanced levels, and i’m sure an “artist’s brain” like yours could do well, even if you’re “bad with numbers.”
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
When it comes to pricing my paintings
I’m pretty creative with numbers. :)
Anyway, I’m really looking forward to your articles regardless of my fear of math.
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
by katie casey on Oct 7, 2009 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Name-dropped on the front page!
I have arrived.
Once again, looking forward to your contributions, Shawn. It’s always nice to read a little background on the people who frequent BCB, but even more so when you find out they are converted White Sox fans. :)
"Was you ever punched in the face five hundred times a night? It stings after a while." ~Rocky Balboa
by Goodie1969 on Oct 6, 2009 4:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I thought the Bradley/Salesman Article Sucked
It was factually inaccurate, and used a statistic that’s only useful at season’s end. Bradley’s value this year was $5.5 million, yet he was paid $7 million ($5 million + $2 million signing bonus). So he deserves to be “fired”.
by Drunk Cubs Fan on Oct 6, 2009 4:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I just thought the analogy
was pretty weak, at best.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 4:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought it was a good one...
but that’s probably apparent from my use of it!
We’ll get into all this more at a later date. But I do believe in using these advanced metrics for valuating ballplayers, especially for fans that don’t have the “eyes” that scouts do.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 4:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is a old saying
in the sales game that goes like this:
“If you make the numbers, nothing else matters. And if you don’t make the numbers, nothing else matters.”
The thing is, in baseball, there are a lot of things that matter besides the raw numbers and Milton Bradley is the poster boy for why that is true.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 5:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's true, but only to a certain extent.
You may think that all these things matter a lot, but baseball teams generally do not. There were a couple great articles spurred by the Bradley fiasco that used a few historical examples to place a value on “personality.” The bottom line seems to be that teams will keep a jerk on the team as long as he is producing. But if he’s not, then a his bad attitude won’t be tolerated.
In this case, he didn’t produce AND had a bad attitude. Thus, he’s gone.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's my question.
Would EITHER of those things — lack of production or bad attitude — by themselves, would have made the Cubs want to trade him this offseason? Or is it the combination of the two that proved fatal to his Cub tenure/
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think production could be...
but triggering a trade on production alone would have required MB playing even worse than he did. I don’t think a player of his “talent level” gets forced out if they play up to their potential, even if they cause attitude problems. The bottom line is he didn’t play well and acted much worse. And you can’t justify keeping a bad clubhouse guy around if he’s not producing.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll drop an answer into this
it is, my opinion of course, the combo of the two. Had Bradley produced the same numbers as he did last season—.999 OPS with his 22 HR’s, then he would most definitely be back as our RF.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yup, that's what I'm trying to say.
If he puts up MVP-caliber rate stats, I don’t think we’re talking about this right now.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree 100%
with this. If he were putting up MVP caliber numbers (which in itself is a fantasy, because MVP caliber players don’t take themselves out of ballgames and complain about fans, media, try to attack broadcasters, etc), all it would do is give Bradley some extra slack. Given his history, he would eventually use up the extra wiggle room and eventually he would be in the same boat.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
which in itself is a fantasy, because MVP caliber players don’t take themselves out of ballgames and complain about fans, media, try to attack broadcasters, etc
You know there are glaring counter-examples to this, right? Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, Alex Rodriguez, and, oh… um… Barry Bonds.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right, but you are talking about...
… Hall of Fame caliber players, who, as you point out, do get some more slack.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No doubt.
That was just a specific reply to the statement I quoted, which is essentially that guys that do stuff MB does don’t put up MVP-caliber numbers. Bonds was probably the biggest clubhouse distraction of his generation, and the Giants kept him around for years. Why? Because he was probably the best player of his generation, as well.
Clubhouse chemistry is important, but if there’s a tie talent wins. That’s not just my opinion, it’s how MLB teams operate.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Quote
“which is essentially that guys that do stuff MB does don’t put up MVP-caliber numbers.”
And I stand behind that. I didn’t say that HOF caliber players can’t be jerks. But, you can’t seriously compare any of these guys to MB. You just can’t.
Ty Cobb, maybe. But that was a different era. If Ty Cobb were around today, he would be banned from baseball.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barry Bonds?
You don’t think he was worse for the clubhouse than MB? Really?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely
without question. Give me an example of something Bonds did or said that even comes close to any of the Top Five Bradley incidents.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
First of all
the teammate was Kent. Enough said about that. Kent had incidents like this throughout his career, so he is the common denominator.
Also, I can assure you shoving incidents are pretty common. I have known a number of professional baseball players and they laugh about things like this. If all Bradley had done in his career was shove a teammate from time to time, we wouldn’t even be discussing this.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you have no idea
about the clubhouse environment in SFO.
I do and I can tell you it was difficult because of how Barry “had his section” with recliner chair and all and you couldn’t go near it. I know this from a friend of mine who played with Barry for 6 years.
Ever hear about how Sosa’s boom-box? No problem until he walked out and then the thing was destroyed. This is the same type of thing.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not just your friend...
the “Barry zone” in the SF clubhouse is fairly well documented.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
and if you think that is comparable to Bradley…well, I just don’t know what to say to you. I have heard Randy Johnson’s teammates say that he never spoke to them the whole time he was a teammate. But, I never heard one of them say they thought he deserved to be suspended because of it.
I think both of you are lacking any sort of perspective here. Things things aren’t even in the same universe as Bradley.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you wrote
about a hand grenade versus a nuclear bomb. What did MB do that was a nuclear bomb compared to things posted about Bonds or RJ—your so-called hand grenades?
Dissing a teammate for the 8 months you are together is just as bad as anything MB did, if not worse.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 6:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was also brutal to reporters.
Bradley had one incident where he went after a reporter, and had a generally standoffish attitude towards them otherwise. Bonds was always outwardly hostile towards them, and that was much more important because of all the attention placed on him.
I’m genuinely surprised someone has Bradley above Bonds on the list of “problem guys” in baseball.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bonds was brutal to reporters
with some justification, BTW. Bradley was brutal to teammates, fans, the organization, etc.
Can you see the difference? Just simply not comparable at all.
Zambrano has gone off on the media. Yet, he always goes out of his way to praise his bosses, teammates, the fans, Wrigley Field, etc. It’s a HUGE difference.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I bet I know more
about the SF situation than you do. I have a friend who works for the Giants.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you keep thinking
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, let me put it this way
I have been in the SF clubhouse, and have seen Bond’s infamous separate locker, recliner, etc. Have you?
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I once smelled a girl's underpants.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Oct 6, 2009 7:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't have issue with either poster.
I simply don’t see the advantage of one-upping each other when clearly both of you know a good deal of insider information.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Oct 6, 2009 7:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just to be clear
I don’t claim to have “insider information”. I was merely refuting the statement that I “have no idea of the clubhouse environment in SF.”
I saw the infamous clubhouse and have talked to my friend and I am convinced the Barry Bonds locker thing was no big deal. Just like I am convinced that the fact that Randy Johnson wouldn’t talk to half his teammates was no big deal. These kind of things are accepted and almost expected when it comes to superstar players.
But, players are as sensitive as teenage schoolgirls when it comes to actual or perceived criticism from a teammate in the media.
A good example: After Randy Johnson signed with the Giants this past year, he went out of his way to praise Miguel Montero, who at the time, was the 2nd string catcher during RJ’s last year in AZ.
The 1st string catcher, Chris Snyder, took this as an implied criticism of him, and he and half the team were all up in arms about this.
I honestly don’t think RJ meant anything by this, he was just pumping up a young player. But, there were stories about the D’Backs being out for “revenge” when they played SF this year.
The funny things is that, as things developed in 2009, Montero established himself as the #1 guy and the D’Backs are now looking to deal Snyder.
If a player is nasty to the media, he will get kudos from his teammates (see Zambrano). If he praises the #2 catcher, the #1 catcher and half the team gets their noses out of joint.
That is just how it works.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 7:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wait a second...
These kind of things are accepted and almost expected when it comes to superstar players.
That’s kind of my point. How is that different from what I am arguing?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 7:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I have responded to this
multiple times now, but just for clarity, I will again.
The things we are talking about (locker room amenities, not talking to teammates) just are not on the same level as trashing teammates in the media, walking off the field in the middle of games with no warning, going after fans, etc). There is no comparison.
And maybe I misunderstood your point. I thought you were saying that Milton would get a pass if he had performed to the level that was expected of him this year. With that, I disagreed.
If you are saying that team management and fans would be more tolerant of Bradley’s behavior if he performed to a level comparable to Barry Bonds, then I would agree…but I still think he would be a PR nightmare.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe we agree afterall...
Here’s what I would say:
1.) In terms of on-field performance, MB fell short of his contract. I fell that it was closer than most people think, but he did fall short.
2.) On top of that, he had serious off-field issues that further detracted from his value. It’s even possible that had he lived up to, but not exceeded, his deal that the team would want to get rid of him, anyways.
3.) Teams may tolerate attitude problems when they are associated with elite players (I’m thinking players worth $10M/season or more based on their on-field production). But if a guy is average or worse, bad attitudes simply will not be tolerated.
4.) Given 1., 2., and 3., 2009 was a very bad year for Milton Bradley and came nowhere close to being worth his contract. The Cubs should try to move him.
Is there anything there that we disagree on?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 8:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, not really
other that some nitpicking over what the expectations for Bradley were.
If the expectations were his career norms, than you are absolutely right.
But, I think the Cubs thought that if he could stay healthy, he could approach what he did in Texas, and that is why they structured the contract the way they did. And I thought, even at the time, that this was flawed thinking.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think those were the expectations...
well, the ones that mattered, anyways. You and I don’t really determine what the relevant expectations were. The team’s expectations are what matters. So I think we agree here. You just (correctly) though the team was over-valuing him from the start.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I did
but, at the same time I can understand why the Cubs thought that.
After all, they were inserting Bradley in the middle of what was already (in 2008 anyway) a lineup that was an offensive juggernaut. Why wouldn’t he produce like he did in Texas?
Well, it’s obvious now why that was a pipe dream, but it wasn’t so obvious at the time.
Twins win!!!
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 8:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should also say...
that my opinion on the matter has changed since my original article on this. That’s due in large part to this article, as well as this reply to it.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 8:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes I have--multiple times over multiple years
and I have spent time in Scottsdale in ST and been on road trips in the visiting clubhouses in COL, SD, LAD, and LAA and had box seats for Game 7 of the World Series in Anaheim. All courtesy of my friend. Thanks. I feel very confident I know a heckuva lot more than you about this.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and
that’s not to say your experience is “wrong” either. I just don’t believe you know what lies beneath the surface.
We have different perspectives—that’s all.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The interesting thing
is, and you should appreciate this if you were at Game 7, is that the Giants were a good ballclub and playoff contenders pretty much the whole time Bonds was there.
He also went to the playoffs several times when he was with the Pirates.
I remember several years ago, in defending Dusty Baker by citing his managerial record in SF. I was told he was just lucky to manage a team with Bonds on it.
Bonds, Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens and Alex Rodriguez all have something in common – they have been to the playoffs a zillion times.
Now, if you had said that the Cubs might have more tolerance for Bradley if the Cubs were in the playoffs this year…then I would agree with you. A disruptive clubhouse influence is considered “colorful” on a winning ballclub. Otherwise, it is just disruptive.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 7:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
he was distruptive and I believe it woul dhave been less had: 1) her met or exceeded team and fan expectations and 2) the Cubs won the division or wild card.
He is no saint, but a bad teammate is a bad teammate regardless of the methods to disrup the club.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 9:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The biggest problem...
…with Bradley was this; his behaviour was unpredictable. One day he would act one way, the next day another. With Bonds, his behaviour was predictable and you could deal with it, and the numbers didn’t hurt.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 6, 2009 8:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I don't think
any of these players did anything like what Bradley has done. I know darn well Randy Johnson didn’t. That is why I say all these things are relative. Is Johnson a jerk? No doubt. Is Barry Bonds? Yup. But, none of these guys did anything that rises to the level of what we have seen from Bradley.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You and I...
clearly have different opinions on just how bad of a clubhouse guy Bradley is. I do think he’s a problem, but you seem to think he’s about the worst clubhouse guy in baseball this decade. I don’t agree, but there’s not much evidence to support either argument so it’s probably best to just let it go.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Clubhouse guy"
is not really a useful concept in discussing Bradley, IMO.
The behaviors that Bradley has exhibited in his career can only be explained as pathological in terms of psychology. I know for a fact that Randy Johnson was a negative influence in the clubhouse in Arizona and so was Barry Bonds in SF. But, while being a jerk is disruptive, what Bradley has done is his career isn’t disruptive as much as it is destructive. It’s the difference between a hand grenade and a nuclear bomb.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
pathological
I think you might be reaching there.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 8, 2009 8:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you are missing the point
Bradley is not a topic of conversation if he carried the team while Sori, Soto, Lee, and Fonty all had struggled or struggled with injuries. And possibly, the Cubs would have gone into the last 7 games of the season in the Wild Card hunt.
Due to his <.400 slg and <.250 average, he was a hot topic and easy target everyday.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just don't agree
again, if that is true, why didn’t Texas try to keep him? He was arguably the best offensive player in the AL in 2008. He mostly got a “thank you” and a quick ticket out of town, and the Rangers have said they won’t bring him back even if the Cubs are paying his salary.
How can that be if what you say is true?
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Texas also had a loaded OF...
and a couple good bats coming up through the minor league system.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley was a DH
in Texas, so what OF they had in the system was irrelevant.
And if you think the Rangers didn’t bring him back because they thought they had someone in the organization that could put up the numbers that MB did, then we will have to just agree to disagree.
BTW, quite a game in Minneapolis right now! Hope everyone is watching/listening!
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I don't think anyone thinks
Texas had guys capable of putting up the numbers Bradley is capable of. But having guys that can put up good numbers does make Bradley more expendable. The better they are, the more expandable Bradley is.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
why?
It’s simple. They could not afford a 3/$30MM contract for Bradley. I think you do not remember correctly the off-season.
Daniels wanted him. Washington wanted him. Young wanted him. Hamilton wanted him. Only after Milton said one of the stupidest things ever in ST, did they have a change of heart.
And I think this has taken on a different path—my point is had he produced like WE EXPECTED him to produce from April 1 to the end of the season, then all this other stuff is a non-issue.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 6:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Daniels
did NOT want him. He negotiated with Bradley’s agent that the Rangers would offer arbitration if they agreed not to accept.
The Rangers had no way of knowing what Bradley would eventually get offered, but it was clear that the 2008-09 offseason was going to be a tough one with many players not getting market value.
Hendry wound up bidding against himself for Bradley, as subsequent events proved. Washington preferred Dunn and that was who they targeted and they managed to get him on the cheap.
And you are still wrong on your main point…which is MY main point.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dunn didn't live up to his contract, either.
He was awesome in a good way at the plate but equally awesome — but in a bad way — in the field. In fact, if we’re limiting ourselves to on-field performance they were equally valuable last season.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would think
getting 38 HRs, 105 RBIs, .400 OPB and .928 OPS for $8M would be considered a good deal by just about anybody in baseball.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be for anyone...
but Dunn. He’s about the only guy in the sport that’s bad enough on defense to offset those kinds of numbers. His offense was worth about $15M, so you’re right. The problem is his defense was worth about -$15M.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
...and if Dunn were in the AL
where he could DH, he’d be worth his contract. Unfortunately for him, and more so for the Nationals, he isn’t in the AL.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wel, you probably don't recall
but back when Al was campaigning for the Cubs to sign Adam Dunn, I was the one posting about his lousy defense (and baserunning, and brain freezes, etc).
But, surely you don’t seriously think those things are negative $15 M. Or maybe you do.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 7:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do.
Take a look at his fangraphs page. His positive runs created on offense are exactly equal in magnitude to his negative runs “prevented” on defense.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 7:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry if I seem distracted
this Twins-Tigers game is one for the ages.
I saw Dunn up close and personal in the final month or so of 2008 when he was with the Diamondbacks. I learned all I needed to learn about him as a ballplayer during that time. No fangraph needed.
To relate him back to Bradley, the D’Backs wanted to offer Dunn arbitration in the worst way. The reason being, they wanted the draft picks. They approached his agent to try to get him to agree to decline arb and he refused. So, the D’Backs didn’t offer arb in fear he would accept!
This happened at the same time the Rangers were deciding what to do re: Bradley. They did the same thing, the difference was that Bradley’s agent announced they would decline arbitration and test the FA waters, so the Rangers went ahead and offered.
Obviously, Bradley’s agent had more confidence in what offers he would get in the FA market than Dunn’s did.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 8:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Twins-Tigers...
is indeed a great game.
As far as valuing Dunn is concerned, I would argue you couldn’t possibly learn everything you’d need to in a month to properly value him, unless you’re a scout. (If you are, I’ll defer to your judgement.) Assuming you’re not, it’s better to rely on two metrics for analyzing a fielder’s ability. The first is the UZR ratings posted at fangraphs, and the other is the “fans scouting report.” (You should participate in this year’s Cub entry!) Both have Dunn rated as an absolutely horrible fielder.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well my problem with Dunn
goes way beyond any UZR ratings or anything that has to do with fielding.
I’ve already far exceeding my bandwidth limit here today, so I won’t go into a lengthy explanation, just a quick anecdote.
Dunn was acquired by the D’Backs in the wake of the Dodgers trading for Manny. At that point, it was clear that Manny was making a tremendous difference for the Dodgers, much like Holliday did this year for the Cards.
It was thought that Dunn could do the same for the D’Backs. He seemed similar to Manny…great power, a run producer, an offensive force with similar issues defensively and both prone to losing focus and not always hustling.
It became quickly obvious that Manny and Dunn are NOT similar. It would be interesting to see how their metrics compare. And it wasn’t because Dunn slumped when he was with the D’Backs. He was his usual self…hit some home runs, drove in runs.
But, he is not a ball player that wins you games as Manny does. And he makes mistakes that cost you games, and Manny doesn’t. The difference is obvious if you have see them both play.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 8:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK here is a question for you
to bring this more OT.
There was a key play in the game just now. Young threw to the wrong base on a base hit, allowing the batter to take second, and forcing the Twins to walk the bases loaded to set up a possible double play. The inning ended with the batter swinging at a pitch that clearly would have been ball four, forcing in the go ahead run.
That one play could’ve cost the Twins the game…throwing to the wrong base. A mental error (the kind of thing Dunn does with regularity).
Is there a metric that accounts for a mental error like that?
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 8:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think so...
we jokingly have one at various blogs called the “TOOTBLAN” (Thrown Out On The Bases Like A Nincompoop), but it’s somewhat subjective. One could develop one, though, from the play-by-play data. In other words, this isn’t unknowable even if it’s unknown.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 9:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, TOOTBLAN
can sometimes be due to a coach giving a green light when a stop sign is in order (one of those happened in tonight’s game, too).
So, how do you know when to assign a TOOTBLAN to a player vs a base coach?
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 9:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We usually assign it to the player...
but not every time they get thrown out. We usually reserve it for particularly nincompoopy events. It’s pretty tongue-in-cheek, but it’s there…
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I don't recall that,
but I believe you. I wasn’t around much at that time.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no
Texas wanted Bradley and he wanted to test free agency. Texas could not afford him. All articles and diologue in the off-season back it up.
My main point is CORRECT. The clubhouses in major league baseball are full of bad apples. The one’s that produce great seasons and great numbers are given a pass. The players who play like crap and under-perform are the “trouble makers” and shown the door. The same holds true with Milton.
Had he produced from April 1 like the guy who played in Texas—he would have been a fan favorite and this saga would have taken on a different path.
We agree to disagree then.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Revisionist history
and most assuredly incorrect. The Rangers never even made an offer to Bradley or his agent, nor did they enter into negotiations. And you are ignoring the most telling thing….now that they have a chance to get him back for next to nothing, they have said they aren’t even interested in exploring that.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I did not ignore it
I spoke to this above/below when I said the GM, manager, and players had a change of heart after “Milton said one of the stupidest things ever”—I think that was my quote. They are not interested after hearing a teammate say he “jaked it” for part of the season. What else would you say? I would not want a guy back like that either.
You are so wrong—you have no idea how the contract negoatiations went. Bradley said he wanted to explore free agency. Once the Cubs and Rays were said to be bidding near $10MM per year, Texas was out. Plain and simple. At $6MM per year, I’m sure Texas would have done everything to try and keep him. And Daniels said as much.
You are just wrong on this account.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem with this
is that the decision to not pursue MB was made LONG before Bradley made those comments.
All those comments did was make Bradley’s teammates and the organization say, “We clearly made the right decision”. Bradley was already the Cubs problem when he made those comments.
In fact, I do know how the contract negotiations went (in fact, there were none), they were reported at the time. Unless you are saying that the Ranger purposely made false statements, which is of course, ludicrous.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The answer is clear
to me, anyway. Look at Soriano – he had a much worse year than Bradley. All you hear from the Cubs about Soriano is how they expect him to rebound in 2010.
Why aren’t they saying that about Bradley? As has been pointed out, there is PLENTY or reason to think Bradley’s numbers would improve in 2010, were he to stay in Chicago.
I still maintain that 80% (or near that) of the issues that Bradley causes, in the clubhouse, etc have never been reported. The comments by his teammates…team leaders…were really revealing. They are just the tip of the iceberg, as no true professionals are going to rip a teammate to the media.
The only reason they said anything at all, was to show support for the decision to suspend Bradley, when, on the surface, it looked like a marginal decision.
Those are the reasons why Bradley won’t be back. If they weren’t, what you would be hearing now is why they think he can bounce back in 2010.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying he doesn't have clubhouse issues.
… and I’m not saying they would be solved if the guy was hitting well. I’m not even saying they don’t matter… I’m just saying the front office would be more willing to tolerate them if he had a better season.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Back to your original point...
which was that my analogy was weak. After all this conversation, I’d still stand by it. Your argument seems to be that MB has exceptionally bad attitude, and is pathological. If that’s the case, you’d probably get rid of him in a business, too… even if he was putting up big numbers, right?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he was damaging to the organization as a whole
yes I would.
If he trashed his co-workers, his customers and his superiors, he would find his ass out the door in a NY minute.
And I would no matter what his performance was. And that kind of supports my point doesn’t it?
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't really know what your point is anymore...
I’ve kind of lost it, to be honest.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the feedback...
You make a couple fair points. And I’d admit he didn’t earn his salary. The point of that article was to highlight how he was at that point on pace to be worth his deal, at a time when the conventional wisdom was that his contract was a complete disaster and an albatross to boot.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait a second...
what about it was factually inaccurate?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think that is true at all
there are a multitude of examples of teams jettisoning players who put up good numbers. Heck, the Rangers made no real effort to bring Bradley back, even though he led the AL in OPS in 2008. And now, they say they are not interested in him, even if the Cubs eat a good chunk of his salary.
And it’s not just the jerk factor that I was referring to. There are a lot of things that impact winning and losing on the field that are not reflected in statistics. Hustle, for instance. That is really, when you get down to it, is my biggest gripe with Felipe Lopez. They guy never runs hard or shows any hustle at all. I hate that.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now dang it
I definitely hit the reply button below your (Shawngolden) post that began “That is true, but only to a certain extent” and it posted at the bottom of the page. I think it must have been because Al’s post and mine were concurrent.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've done that before, too...
… and i found your posts anyways, so no harm done.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
this has happened to me twice
in the last week when I tried to reply to the last post on the page. I think it has to do with the last post on the page.
by socalbob on Oct 6, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem, I think, is...
… that you see the posting box at the bottom of the page and it appears that you’d be replying if you just use that box. You still have to click “reply” to any post you want to specifically reply to.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 5:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, i'm pretty sure that's what i've done
when I messed it up.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to nitpick...
but MB did hustle, on almost every play. He certainly had attitude problems, but a lack of hustle wasn’t one of them.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, not to nitpick
but the hustle comment was not made about Bradley. I mentioned it in general terms as a reason why a player’s performance is not always reflected in stats. Actually, the player I was thinking about was Lopez, but it applies to others as well (not Bradley, though).
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, fair enough.
I just get defensive when people rip on Bradley for that because he does hustle. But you weren’t ripping on him for that, just using it as an example. I mis-read your post.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Bradley
could be evaluated on his play only, and all his other issues did not exist, he would be regarded as one of the better players in baseball. I don’t think there is any argument there. That is what makes him so tantalizing and frustrating. When he has been moved by team after team after team, I don’t think it was ever because they didn’t think he was a good baseball player.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, there are examples.
But Bradley wasn’t really jettisoned from Texas the same way he’s about to be jettisoned from Chicago.
Think of it this way… look at the Cubs who have been gotten rid of that had bad attitudes. Most of them were gotten rid of after disappointing seasons. Sosa may be an example, but the 2nd half of his 2004 was just brutal from an on-field standpoint.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No he wasn't
but they made no real effort to bring him back, either. How many times has a player led his league in OPS and the team he played for basically let him walk? Not often, I’ll wager. And the funny thing is, if you read the Rangers blogs from that time, I think they were split about 50-50 as to whether the Rangers should try to re-sign him. Isn’t that rather amazing? And no teammates spoke out about the need to re-sign him, either, AFAIK.
And…he had a relatively calm year in 2008…at least in terms of what was reported in the media, with the KC incident (which was defused before it got ugly) being the only real reported Bradley transgression.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, that's a good point.
Every team is going to handle these things differently. And as a result I think you and I could throw examples at each other all day long of teams valuing or not valuing clubhouse chemistry and player attitudes. But I think the market as a whole doesn’t value attitude as much as it values talent. And it also values attitude proportionally more for less talented players.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well the thing that has kept
Bradley employed in baseball, and will no doubt keep him employed in 2010 is that every team that he has not already played for thinks they can provide an atmosphere where Bradley can thrive and succeed. That is what Hendry thought, and Kevin Towers and Ned Colletti and Billy Beane. It is human nature.
I once had a girlfriend who had all sorts of emotional issues and if you listened to her, they all stemmed from the awful way people had treated her. I thought if she had a relationship with someone who treated her nicely and with respect and love, that it would “fix” her. I was wrong….
Someone will pick up Bradley thinking they can “fix” him just like the Cubs did. And they will be proven wrong, just as the Cubs were.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't want to mis-represent my position here...
What I’m trying to say is this:
A team will tolerate a “bad attitude” if that attitude is also attached to a “great player.” But if the guy is average or worse, there’s no way they’ll keep him around. So bad attitudes matter, but only if the guy isn’t producing. And Bradley didn’t produce this year.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's all relative
What you say is true. But, I flinch when I hear Bradley’s antics referred to as a “bad attitude”. He is nothing short of pathological. That is a whole different scenario that transcends what the numbers are.
Heck, just about every player that played with Pete Rose has said that he was a jerk. He was despised by most of his teammates on the Reds. Several of them did not speak to him for years. But, they relished the opportunity to play with him because he was a difference maker that could bring about a championship.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 5:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right.
I think we agree here, for the most part… For the record, I no longer stand by what I said in my article a couple months ago. The reason? Things changed a lot down the stretch, both in terms of MB’s on field performance and of-field issues.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 5:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure they changed that much
it’s more that the comments Milton made to the media brought some of the previously hidden issues into the sunlight. That is why I keep saying 80% of it we do not know. Read the comments from his teammates. Bascically they are saying, “look, I don’t want to throw Milton under the bus here, but trust me, this suspension was justified. I know things you don’t know.”
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Things did change.
His play was bad down the stretch, and those comments came out.
The team may have known those things already, but we did not.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but
I maintain that his play down the stretch was not a significant factor in the decision to suspend him, or the subsequent decision to try to move him. I bet Hendry would say the same.
by azjazzman on Oct 6, 2009 6:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But his statements were.
Unless they were just looking for an excuse to end the relationship (that’s possible). But if things were already that bad by the end of the season, then Hendry should have dealt him earlier. Maybe he tried…
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that we don't know 80% of it...
and that’s why, especially as fans, I think we should be careful when evaluating the attitudes of players. The only thing that we get comes through a media filter, that is often biased towards or against certain players.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 6, 2009 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
While I agree with this...
… I do not think I have ever seen public statements made by any major league players similar to what was said by Cubs players after Bradley was sent home. They were very careful not to call him a bad person or bad teammate, but it seemed clear that they were all quite happy to see him go.
I’m in agreement that we don’t know the vast majority of what goes on in the clubhouse.
Further to your other statement above, I had heard that Hendry DID try to move Bradley earlier this year (before the nonwaiver trading deadline of July 31), and came close to doing so.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 6, 2009 9:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Was this from Deep Goat, or Steve Stone?
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 6, 2009 11:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's DG info.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 7:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you at liberty to say where and for who?
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 7, 2009 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately, no.
It’s still possible, from what I hear, for a similar deal to happen during the offseason. If it does, I’ll post that “that was the one I had heard about”.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If it does
Will we be severely disappointed that it didn’t happen in July.
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 7, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
*
?
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 7, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shawn,
I believe I have not welcomed you here.
Welcome to the board at BCB! Hope all goes well for you as a member of the staff here!
Go Badgers ... beat Ohio State!!!!!!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Oct 6, 2009 7:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Welcome, Shawn.
As a lawyer, I’m “allergic” to numbers but I recognize the importance of statistics. So, I look forward to your input and insight.
by Fraggin Judge on Oct 6, 2009 9:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Shawn -- Welcome
So what stat measures Team Chemistry? Hustle and heart? What measures a player that is “due”?
I might as well start this off right by lobbing a “welcome to the blog” grenade.
It is these unmeasurable things that are the bane of the stat lovers.
I, too have a career in science as well. I love to listen to the illogical argued as facts.
I believe in the hot hand, and gut feelings. Easily measured stats account for a lot in this game but it is the yet to be measures stats that interest me the most.
The Cubs will be great in 2008!
by Scott G F on Oct 7, 2009 7:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'll leave that question be for now...
but I assure you I’ll cover it.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One thing which would interesting, but non-trivial to assess,
to what extent are, for example, stats such as batting average, OBP, OPS, RBIs, etc. “falsified” by the quality of the teams, pitchers etc. the player has faced. In other words, would a batting average of .250 mean the same thing for a Cub player in 2009 as it does for the average player of other teams.
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
by eths on Oct 8, 2009 3:56 AM CDT 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.
