Milton Bradley Suspended
by dmlichte on Sep 20, 2009 5:03 PM CDT
Email
Print
Milton has been suspended for the remainder of the season, this according to The Chicago Tribune online. I know some may feel that this would be best as a fanshot but this is a pretty big deal. According to Jim Hendry
"The last few days became too much for me to tolerate," Hendry said. I'm certainly not going to let our great fans become excuses. I'm not going to tolerate [Bradley] not being able to answer questions from the media respectably."
So we finally have some action on the part of Jim Hendry. It will be interesting to see the response of Bradley, who likely will now disappear and frankly, we may not see him until spring training. The question now is whether or not that will be with Bradley as a Cub.
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.
417 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Alot of us....
On here have been saying how detrimental he has been to this team all season long. Of course most of us got the your a racist or a ledge jumper responses. Nice to see the blinders by the “always positive” fans have finally been removed!
Bradley is a journeyman for nothing. There’s a reason no team keeps him! That’s because he has always been and always will be a “cancer”. Only thing I’m sick about is if he had any trade value even a tad bit—It’s gone now for sure! We will be eating this contract in all probability!
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
Such a sad and disappointing season...
Visit FanIQ.com for sports news, bloggings, polls, and more!
Wow.
Jim Hendry grows a pair.
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Sep 20, 2009 5:20 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
The horse has left the barn...
…but I guess it’s better late than never.
I wonder if Hendry would have stepped up like this if a new owner wasn’t coming onboard?
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
This is also being discussed in the game preview thread.
But I will simply add that Milton Bradley has certainly played his final game in a Cub uniform. What a horrendous signing.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Never in my wildest dreams....
….would I have guessed this as an ending, though. Talk about a flame out. I guess if he wanted a ticket out, he pushed the right buttons. Now you have to guess if this was calculated on his part or he really has no clue.
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Sep 20, 2009 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions
I think he has no clue.
He said he doesn’t want attention, but signed with a high-profile team. Then he set out to alienate every single person who could have been on his side. And, didn’t perform.
His baseball career could be over.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I doubt that
Someone is going to take a chance on his talent—especially if the Cubs are going to be paying most of his salary, which we will. He’s only one season removed from a monster year.
But Bradley needed to be playing for a lower profile team in the AL. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him in Baltimore or back in Texas.
by Josh Timmers on Sep 20, 2009 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Baltimore?
Maybe; MacPhail has taken other Cubs from Hendry.
I still think Toronto is a possibility, if the Cubs would take Vernon Wells’ deal. It’s a lot of $, but Wells could play CF with Fukudome back to RF, and at least Wells has a track record of success.
And as bad as Wells’ 2009 season was, it was better than Bradley’s.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
No it wasn't
Wells has been worth -.02 WAR this year. Milton Bradley has been worth 1.3 WAR this year. Wells was worth 1.2 WAR last year. Bradley was worth 4.5 WAR last year.
Bradley >>>> Wells
And his contract is for a lot less money and years also.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 20, 2009 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I'm so tired of seeing these number rankings.
Can’t you see that distractions like this hurt a team? Or are you so wrapped up in numbers that you’d take the player with the higher number ranking every single time, no matter what kind of human being he was?
You’d find yourself the GM of a losing team. Every single time.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Not every time
Because there are different levels of jerkiness, too.
One can be a complete arrogant ass but still have grudging respect for their teammates. It doesn’t sound like Bradley fits that.
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 Sep 21, 2009 8:33 AM CDT up reply actions
Correct.
And that’s a MAJOR problem if you want to have a good clubhouse. Seems like it was 24 players getting along and Milton off in the corner by himself, blaming everyone but himself for his troubles.
Like Ryan Dempster said, sometimes you have to look in the mirror.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
As a minor throw-in,
my family in Toronto speaks very well of Wells as a CFer. I don’t know the roto-stats to back-up anything or disprove it, but they say his OF-ing abilities are beyond reproach.
That being said, his offensive numbers aren’t quite up to his contract recently; though he, like Bradley, has shown the ability to put together a fine year every now and then. And using the series of stats I tend to favor, he would be an upgrade.
Also, I don’t completely buy into the WAR number the more and more I read into it. I think WAR should be calculated by position, not corrected by position with an arbitrary number. It is nuts to compare the replacement of a position with the average performance of all positions combined, and then introduce an arbitrary factor as an equalizer. Bad math: an apple times .05 does not equal an orange.
"Bite my shiny metal ass!" -- Bender Bending Rodriguez
"Life is just one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead."
by The Jade Scorpion on Sep 21, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions
How do you know that's what's been happening?
Because a couple of players said they didn’t like him?
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 6:15 PM CDT up reply actions
do you just troll sometimes looking to start shit
with everyone?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Um... no
That seems like what you are doing though:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2009/9/20/1045679/milton-bradley-suspended#21573522
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions
for someone who tries to act like he knows everything
you seem to miss points all too often. try reading as well as you try to jam your opinions
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
I'm seriously confused
I said this:
I understand that Baseball ins’t played on a spreadsheet
However, it you are valuing intagibles, you are inherently putting a number on them.
Here’s the question again. If you had a guy with great intangibles (say Jeter) who was statistically a 2 win player, would you pick him over a guy with awful intangibles who was a 4 win player (say Bradley)?
And you replied with this:
yes, team chemistry is important in real life in fantasy baseball not so much.
We’re you literally answering my question, or was this a snarky response? I really can’t tell.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 6:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Easy, Tim...
….you have no proof that’s really him writing under that screen name. Also, that whole suspension thing might be a dirty rumor to smear Milton Bradley.
I mean, did you hear Jim Hendry say it yourself? With your own ears? Then, what, you’re going to believe it’s true because some reporters say it’s true?
As far as I’m concerned Bradley is an angel and this whole suspension thing is smear tactic by haters, using misquotes and out-of-context quotes to make it seem like Hendry didn’t like his behavior.
Since neither you nor I heard Hendry say it with our own ears (and our own eyes, to ensure it wasn’t an impersonator), we simply have to believe Bradley was NOT suspended, and he never said those negative things people are making up that he said.
I mean, there’s never been any actual indication that Hendry saw any inappropriate behavior except for the rantings of a couple of reporters. So how do you know it’s true?
"Bite my shiny metal ass!" -- Bender Bending Rodriguez
"Life is just one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead."
by The Jade Scorpion on Sep 21, 2009 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions
I was...
….having fun with the sometimes impossible “burden of proof” some folks require to believe anything at all reported about Milton Bradley.
"Bite my shiny metal ass!" -- Bender Bending Rodriguez
"Life is just one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead."
by The Jade Scorpion on Sep 22, 2009 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Here's what I don't understand.
These players and managers are paid millions of dollars to play a game. To play a game!
Most of us are paid much, much less to work in environments that are mostly more stressful. Some of us have to work directly with customers who “are always right.” We have to learn to work together, to make use of the jerk who has talent and/or skill.
Chemistry may not be overrated, but it should be when these guys are paid millions of dollars to play a game. To play a game!
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
It is a game...
…but it is their livelyhood, and it is also their job. I don’t believe most of us get near the attention any of these guys do as to how they perform on a day to day basis and there is real pressure that comes along with that. Sure, the money is out of sight, but that’s all relative to these guys.
I guess this just shows how important attitude is when you have to work together as a team.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
"Livelihood"
This is precisely my point – to nitpick on a word’s definition. This winter, Ryan Theriot will sign a contract that will set his family for life if he cares to invest it and/or live on a budget. His livelihood is provided for. He doesn’t have to worry about that even if he plays miserable baseball from this game forward.
The rest of us are staring a rising unemployment number in the face and many actually have to worry about what our families will live on. We learn to work side by side with bad people. We learn to smile without irony when the customer is absolutely wrong, lying, hateful, and hysterical.
Yes, there’s pressure. Yes, it’s a job. Yes, they’re traveling together. But they’re also being paid millions to play a game.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
Right
Chemistry is important, but how important is it? Does Bradley being an asshole cost his team 2 wins a year? 3? Maybe it’s only a couple of runs. We don’t know, and really have no idea.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 9:33 AM CDT up reply actions
baseball is only a game if you don't get paid to play it.
after that it’s business.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Absolutely!
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Yes, it's business for people being paid to play
but they are being paid to play, which is a much easier business than most.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
+1
numbers are good, but reality is better
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Okay
But how much are you going to value the character issue? If you’ll agree with the numbers, and Bradley is, say, 2 wins better than Wells over a full season, is that worth the character problems.
Basically, I’m saying that if you consider character and intangibles, you are inherently putting a value on it. Or else it’s just guesswork. Personally, I don’t think that Bradley’s character problems are so bad as to make him worse then Wells. OBviously you feel different though.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions
Yes, I do.
If I were a major league GM, I would certainly consider character and intangibles. Can you put a number on those? Of course you can’t.
But baseball is not played on a spreadsheet by numbers. It is played on a field by human beings who have to interact with each other for eight months on a daily basis.
Maybe Vernon Wells isn’t the answer, and that’s likely because of his huge contract, not being “2 wins worse than Bradley”, and that’s only by one statistical measure.
If you were a GM and put together a team strictly based on numbers, you’d lose a hell of a lot of games.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
They're also professionals
But baseball is not played on a spreadsheet by numbers. It is played on a field by human beings who have to interact with each other for eight months on a daily basis.
We all have coworkers we hate. Professionals deal with that and go on with their day. I find it hard to believe a baseball clubhouse is any different.
Intangibles certainly exist and have some influence on the game. But if that influence was large, it would be measurable – you’d be able to do a regression analysis for the “Eckstein factor” to see how much better his teammates are with him than without, for instance.
Unless you’re saying that the intangibles of a good player make his teammates better in an intangible way as well. But intangibles don’t win games – runs and only runs do.
A regression analysis for the Eckstein factor?
Seriously?
Why is it that you cannot acknowledge that there are some things that CANNOT BE MEASURED?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I DID ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
Intangibles certainly exist and have some influence on the game.
See?
But if a player’s very presence can make his teammates better or worse, why wouldn’t it be measurable? And if it isn’t measurable, wouldn’t that indicate that its importance is dwarfed by such things as a persons ability to play baseball well?
People have done similar regression analysis on coaches before to see if they really make their player better; I don’t see why the same thing wouldn’t be possible here.
I thought of a better answer.
“Intangible” means “can’t be touched”. It’s not something you can measure. Period.
You and I are never going to agree on this. Regression analysis on intangibles? That’s just silly.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
It's ridiculous but not why you think
Do intangibles affect the number of runs scored in a game? The number of hits a player gets? Will the teammates of a good leader be more likely to hustle and get on base more often? To win close games?
Maybe Kevin Millar gruff sense of humor really does make Lyle Overbay more relaxed at the plate, improving his batting average with runners in scoring position. I’m willing to concede it’s a possibility.
Any of those things could theoretically be measured by a regression analysis.
There’s only two reasons that intangibles can’t really be measured – one is that people like yourself are unwilling to define them in any meaningful way (making them unfalsifiable arguments of faith) and the other is that they influence the game to such a small extent that they get lost in all the noise of the millions of other things that influence the outcome of a baseball game.
Sigh.
Regression analysis surely makes those of you who like to analyze baseball statistics happy.
But they don’t really have anything to do with winning games.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I'm seriously starting to wonder if you even know what a regression analysis is
I’m not even being glib here – I honestly wonder that.
Winning a baseball game is a measurable event. Team A scored more runs than Team B. All a regression analysis does is to see if you can isolate the influence that the many other measured variables (hits, walks, outs, etc etc) had on that outcome.
The presence or absence of a player is also a measurable event. You’re saying that this is something that can influence the outcome of a game. Why is it such a stretch to say that if this is true, it should be measurable?
If it’s not measurable, how is it influencing the outcome of the game?
Go on back to your spreadsheets.
You’ll never understand human nature.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
As a spreadsheets guy myself...
I take offense to this type of comment.
I’ll reword Wreckard’s question: if it is not measurable, how can you say WITH ANY CONFIDENCE that it is influencing the outcome of the game?
I’m willing to accept the possibility that “intangibles” could influence results. But I’m not willing to accept the supposed “intangibles” effect as fact when, by definition, you can’t prove it.
and also why they play the games
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Actually, no...
I’d argue that intangibles are not the reason that “they play the games” – at least not in the way that people use the term “intangibles.”
Aside from the obvious entertainment answer, I’d say that random variability is why they play the games.
Right. You're missing the point...
if you can’t measure them, how can you say for certain that they matter?
You can believe that intangibles are the cause. But you can’t unequivocally tell someone they are wrong for saying that they aren’t.
I disagree
as its the same as VEP explaining to me that projections have an acceptable range of 7 to 9 games off the mark. meaning a projection of 85 wins, gives the projecter a window of approx. 76 to 94 to be correctly projected.
If you listen to players (happy and upset) they tell you the story about the team chemistry. MB is a perfect example unfolding in front of us.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
We'll have to agree to disagree...
I just ask that Al lay off the putdowns.
fair enough
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Not trying to make this a "putdown"...
… only to ask that people see that certain things cannot be measured, no matter how much those who like measurementt want them to be.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
What things???
You have yet to provide a substantial example of something that influences the game but can’t be measured. You just keep saying over and over again “Oh well intangibles exist, and they can’t be measured. Anyone who suggests they can is a broken human being.”
So please – enlighten me, what am I missing here?
Look I'm not going to sink to your level here.
Stop insulting me for one second and give me an example.
There is no "example".
Wasn’t meant as an insult — was meant to say, you are not taking into account the human factor, which in my opinion, cannot be measured.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Al
If you are putting a value on it (like you saying that Wells is “better” than Bradely because he isn’t a dick), than you ARE measuring it.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions
It's the same argument people make for MVP.
What is “most valuable”? Is it adding up certain numbers? Or is it giving ana award to whoever is most “valuable” toa team?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Okay, so answer this question
If you have a player who is statistically a 2 win player and he is a great guy, and you have one player who is statistically a 4 win player and is a dick. Who do you choose?
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions
after this experience...
a 2 win player
by cooliogirl47 on Sep 21, 2009 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions
with the info you gave me
no one.
would need to know who they are, what are their make up, what position do they play (and is it something i need filled), what age, what skill set, etc, etc, etc
To base it on a 2 win vs 4 win alone is insane, and you know that!
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Okay then
Say it’s Milton Bradley and Vernon Wells (let’s just assume they have the same contract for simplicity).
Milton Bradley projects to be about a 3 WAR player, while Wells projects to be about a 1 WAR player.
Which one would you take?
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions
neither
there are other options to look at, and better ways to spend finances. You cannot paint meinto a corner on this VEP.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Jesus Christ
I’m not asking you to manage a team. You say intangibles are important. So how important are they? That’s the simple point of this exersize.
If you wanted to trade Bradley and the only taker was the Jays, would you trade Bradley for Wels?
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions
that is the only option
I cannot cut or release him, I cannot suspend him for conduct unbecoming without pay? You are too wrapped up in trying to discredit intangibles, yet there is a phrase you hear often which is 100% proof positive for intangibles “he needed a new start with a different team”
If it was 100% numbers, nothing intangible, then it would not matter what team, what city, or who bats before/after you.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
But most of the things people label "intangibles" are things that could be measured
You seem to be making the argument that not only can’t these things be measured, they can’t be defined. They make people better in a way that affects the outcome of the game… but they affect the outcome of the game in a way that doesn’t show up on the page.
People just don’t get that the “Invisible Hand of Eckstein” can guide a game in a way that won’t ever show up in the box score.
That's exactly what I'm arguing.
And if you ask a baseball player if those things exist, he will undoubtedly tell you “yes”.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
thats an intangible
thing as well. It is something that you cannot measure, yet does make a difference. In this case, the socks not changing is called comfort zone. Like not talking to a pitcher during a perfect game.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
So then why do you use them to value players?
If you have no idea how to measure them, how can you be sure how much of an effect they have?
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes Al that's exactly it.
As a robot from the future, it’s true that I know nothing of this thing you hu-mans call “love” …or “intangibles”. My synthetic brain was actually developed by Microsoft as part of a vast conspiracy to eventually get baseball players replaced with spreadsheets.
As a side-note to this, if I could feel emotions I would laugh in the face of those at those upset about Barry Bonds having the home run record. After all, by 2040 the home run record will be held by an Excel Macro called SlugMacro(). Team chemistry has been replaced with the regular kind, so it doesn’t really matter that SlugMacro() is a real jerk who’s constantly talking shit about his fans.
I'm with you !00% AI
Where were you when i was feuding this point last week with some guy from VivaElBirdos about numbers not being the whole story?
I was calling for some support and didn’t get much.
Bad character can POISON a team, no matter what numbers the poison produces….Barry Bonds comes to mind.
There are a number of GM’s that will pass on a player because of character over numbers. It’s sound thinking in my book.
I agree with you, AI.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions
oops...that's 100%, AI
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions
let me guess...vivaelpujols?
he and i have gone back and forth about this as well.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
No it wasn't me
It was probably one of the other 50 VEBers who thinks like me.
And you and Al seem to be missing the point of “intangibles”. They DO make a difference, I would agree with that 100%.
But if you are considering a players intangibles in terms of making a judgment on his worthy (like you guys clearly are with Bradley), then you ARE putting a number on them. It’s a simple as that.
The problem is, it becomes guesswork as to how much a player intangibles affect winning.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions
You're absolutely right.
That’s why we have humans managing and making these judgments.
If it were just a case of numbers and measuring everything, what difference would it make who the GM and manager are? Just plug in the numbers and press “play”.
Baseball, and most human endeavors, don’t work that way.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Al, you're ignoring the fact that
humans making these judgments have been systematically wrong about any number of factors for a very long time.
Lots of people deeply believed that bleeding sick people helped get bad humors out of them.
the truth can't hurt you, it's just like the dark/ it scares you witless, but in time you see things clear and stark -- macmanus
You're not seriously comparing my view to leeching, are you?
I’m well aware of advanced metrics and how to use them.
i refuse, however, to say they are the ONLY way to analyze baseball players.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
but what makes your guesses
or even player and manager guesses correct?
you were appealing to authority above by saying that players believe in chemistry. it’s entirely possible, and even likely, that players and managers believe that things that don’t affect on-field play, do.
finding phony causation rather than believing in random variation is a common part of human nature.
the truth can't hurt you, it's just like the dark/ it scares you witless, but in time you see things clear and stark -- macmanus
What makes a good stock broker?
He guesses correctly. that’s it.
numbers CAN lie.
if you really believe that numbers are that accurate and that human behavior and tendencies are of less value, then put ALL your money into the best looking stock based on the numbers….with total confidence. You’ll quickly find out how human behavior can affect the numbers.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions
a good stock broker
is a gambler who is not scared to bet it all (as my brother would say, and he is a stock broker).
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Stocks do not go up or down based on intrinsic causes
That’s not the case with a baseball player – they tend to succeed or fail based on their ability to play baseball.
That’s why baseball players’ statistics are remarkably consistent and predictable from year to year, where stock prices are not.
Aron Miles being an exception.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions
There's lots and lots of exceptions.
Generally speaking though, baseball player statistics are more consistent from year to year than any other team sport, because success or failure is determined largely by that player and that player alone.
50% agree
since “bad contracts” prove the numbers and projections to not always be right.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
I'm not even sure what you're saying there.
Bad contracts could prove lots of things – they could prove that injuries exist, that people spend money poorly, that the economy changed, or that some people don’t understand aging curves.
No statistician has ever claimed a projection is always right. The only people who get hung up on that are people who don’t understand what projections are.
they also are signed based
off projections for a player who had a perfect surrounding for his ability. Aaron MIles is a perfect example. TLR knew how to use him, where to bat him, etc so Miles looked better than he is. That is an intangible, you cannot gage managerial decisions for a player.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Actually
Miles was never a good player. He was replacement level in 06 and 07 and was only good in 08 because of an unsustainably high BABIP. Every blogger and his mother knew that he was gonna suck this year.
Of course nobody thought he would have one of the worsts seasons in the history of the game.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions
He was rehired in'08
because of ‘06 & ’07 wasn’t he?
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions
They released him first then resigned him
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 4:29 PM CDT up reply actions
That's right.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions
i never said he was good.
I said that TLR knew how/when to use him, allowing him to be productive, instead of being used wrong, and looking horrific in doing so by Lou. That is not a stat based ordeal, that is an intangible thing
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
No he didn't
The point was that Miles was still replacement level, even when Tony “knew what to do with him”.
Also, Miles has had ~200 at bats this year, you don’t think it’s possible that he’s just had a bad year? That seems a lot more likely than Tony is such a better manager than Lou.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Are thede comments falling where they should?
I’m having a hard time figuring who is replying to who?
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions
it could be
that he looked worse than he is by not being used in the right spot for the right job according to what he does best.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 4:23 PM CDT up reply actions
exactly
a player can have more success when used in the right situations to do so. and disaster can be caused by misuse just as quickly. LaTroy Hawkins is a perfect example. He told Dusty, and the press many times he is not comfortable (comfort, an intangible part of the game) pitching in the 9th during save situations. He always did well in the set up role.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
These are not examples of intangibles
Every example you’ve given (who a player’s manager is, whether Latroy is closing or setting up) are things you can control for and measure. These are tangible, measurable attributes of a player’s performance.
What exactly are you saying here
That we shouldn’t use projections because they might have been wrong once? Even though it’s been shown that they’re right a significant percentage of the time?
If you’re saying Tony Larussa can make his players better, which I’ll concede is possible, isn’t this a measurable attribute? Couldn’t we control for and measure the affect that Tony Larussa has on his players’ statistics?
I heard Mike Shannon say...
about the ‘64 Cardinals, that he thought Bob Eucker was a major factor in the club’s success.
Eucker (i might have it spelled wrong) was a .200 hitter and a mediocre catcher at best. But Shannon said that his attitude and humor kept the club loose all season. He said he doubted that they would have won without him.
Shannon was on the team and if he said it I believe it.
That’s intangible.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions
ok, it must be me.
there were no numbers involved at all. No ability on the field as a factor.
Exactly what is intangible in your view?
I’d say Eucker IS an intangible.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions
They're supposed to be something immeasurable
Something that statistics can’t capture.
What I find though is that the people who insist that intangibles exist always give examples of things that are in fact quite quantifiable.
In your example, Bob Eucker has some kind of quality that makes his teammates better. You’re saying he makes his teammates better (i.e. they score more runs when he’s on the team than when he isn’t, or win more games, or whatever) which is a completely measurable thing. It doesn’t matter that what Eucker does isn’t showing up in the box score, so long as the influence of what he does shows up in the box score.
VEP has said projections are
correct and that reality lies before. So i guess, technically yes someone has
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
You are completely misunderstadning the point
I have said, and proven, 100 times that projections are a more accurate predictor of future performance (or True Talent Level) than performance in a single season worth of play.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 6:06 PM CDT up reply actions
proven to yourself
that some formula is more accurate than reality. proven to me that you buy into the stats and projections too much.
sorry, if there is a 7-9 game leeway to be accurate in the projection, then it is not accurate of worth a damn. a 97 win team is not the same as a 88 or 79, but based on the information you have told me, they are.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Cubbie-Tim
You really have no idea what you are talking about, you are truly just sadly misinformed and grasping onto straws.
The 9 games of leeway (over a full season) is more accurate than what you would get by projecting a a team based off of their performance thus far in the year.
I have PROVEN this, seriously, read the article:
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/7/16/931675/btb-playoff-odds-july-16th
If you continue to oppose this viewpoint, than you are in fact denying reality.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions
go look at my post at the bottom
it answers this better. Since the difference is determination, hard work, heart, things you cannot and never will be able to place a numeric value on
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
I was just being humorous.
but there’s nothing funy about Miles this year.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions
I guess Umps
dont make mistakes as well, as the mistake would be a human error, and would not be in line with the numbers fed into the computer.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
and a job
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
I understand that Baseball ins't played on a spreadsheet
However, it you are valuing intagibles, you are inherently putting a number on them.
Here’s the question again. If you had a guy with great intangibles (say Jeter) who was statistically a 2 win player, would you pick him over a guy with awful intangibles who was a 4 win player (say Bradley)?
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions
yes, team chemistry is important in real life
in fantasy baseball not so much.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
it looks like
if you read one you read them all.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions
you continue to try to
place a number on everything so it fits nicely into your spreadsheet, and avoid the fact that you cannot do so.
Do you understand what an intangible oblject is? It cannot be measured, making it intangible, if it can be meausred it is tangible.
A good example from here
A colloquial expression for qualities in an individual or group of individuals, especially those organized in an official group (e.g. a sports team or office) which affect performance but are not readily observable. They are often cited as a reason for performance which is surprisingly better or worse than expected.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Sep 21, 2009 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
I asked Al a simple quesiton
Can he answer it please?
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions
i think he did...
it was just an intangible reply.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions
really?
seeing as your question was a direct reply to my comment, I thought you asked me. I didnt know that you asked Al via my comment. Look above and see the chain, and maybe u are incorrectly posting questions now?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
My question was a reply to Al
Here’s the question again. If you had a guy with great intangibles (say Jeter) who was statistically a 2 win player, would you pick him over a guy with awful intangibles who was a 4 win player (say Bradley)?
Than you said this:
yes, team chemistry is important in real life in fantasy baseball not so much.
?????
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions
and here if your reply
to me which I answered, only to get asked why I replied to you
Did you even read my comment?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Yes
Because you’re reply to my comment didn’t make sense. Where in that question did I mention anything about chemistry or stats? The only thing I did was ask a question for Al.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 5:51 PM CDT up reply actions
then next time
dont post on a blog, send an email direct.
My answer was correct, and answered what you asked. You didnt like it, got defensive, and now you whine about me answering, when prior to now you replied back with a discussion.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Okay, seriously
What the hell are you talking about?
My comment to Al had nothing to do with you are denouncing the impact that chemistry has. Why you replied to it like you did is beyond me.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 6:14 PM CDT up reply actions
dude, go troll VEB
you are really becoming a pain. I respect you, but you get stupid the minute people dont agree with you sadly
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
You've insulted me about 5 times during this thread
For expressing an alternate opinion to you. The only differnce is that I have taken the time to prove my opinion.
It’s pretty clear that you are being the troll.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 7:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes, I would indeed choose such a player...
… but not before examining ALL the factors involved, including the spreadsheet stats.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
So then you are putting a value on intangibles
You are saying that in that instance, they are worth over 2 wins.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 8:23 PM CDT up reply actions
I have never heard of a player being suspended for not meeting projections
or for having stats less than what they should be based on a formula used by someone who over uses stats.
now I have heard of players beign suspended due to character issues, which does impact the team.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Thank You!!!
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions
My bet is Toronto
Out of the country, where baseball is just to pass the time between hockey seasons. I’ll bet he comes back to life. In fact, I think that’s the most likely outcome. He just cannot stand the spotlight. His only way is to lash out at others.
This guy seriously needs counseling.
by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Sep 20, 2009 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions
why
Why Toronto? I’m not sure I see a fit there. I’d rather DFA Bradley than take on Wells contract. Assuming Wells is there, they have to find AB’s for Lind/Snider. Sure, there’s 1st and DH to figure in, but when you factor that they are likely to shop Halladay this offseason, along with a young core, I’m not sure Bradley is the type of gamble they take. Granted, you never know … and only time will tell … but I really don’t see this one.
I’m trying to ponder destinations, and not many come to mind. His old stop of Oakland may be a thought. Dayton Moore has made some strange moves of late … and they do need some offense (and KC might be a good, low key spot for him). But even then … KC might ask us to take on Jose Guillen’s final year while also having us eat money. Maybe the Giants if we eat a huge chunk. Probably a couple more teams could be in the mix, but I’m not sure the market is all that great. Actually … the Mets, on the surface, might be a decent fit … outside of the whole big city, media glare thing.
I doubt it
"F@*& Lidge and the horse he rode in on!"
-Cards Fan in Chitown, via text message shortly after the VEB Get Together Day.
I doubt it's KC
(I accidentally hit enter or something)
He tried to attack the KC tv broadcaster last year. As dumb as Moore is, I can’t believe he’d think it’d be a good idea to bring in Bradley when there’s already a tense relationship.
"F@*& Lidge and the horse he rode in on!"
-Cards Fan in Chitown, via text message shortly after the VEB Get Together Day.
ah forgot about that
yeah that makes that one seem a bit unlikely … although after the Yuniesky trade, I wouldn’t rule out anything from ole Dayton.
But in general, I can’t think of many teams that would ponder Milton in a trade (unless we do something really stupid, like take on a horrendous contract). There’s always a possibility of a surprise team emerging I guess.
Wells is a bad idea...
First, his on-the-field performance was actually WORSE than Bradley’s this year. Second, it wasn’t surprising, given that he’s been bad the last few years. Third, he makes more than Soriano moving forward. We’d be taking on over $75 million in payroll. And finally, he’s a terrible CF these days. The past two years, his UZR is -14.3 and -19.3.
I REALLY hope we don’t trade for Wells. I know you hate having Bradley (I’m warming to the idea of trading him too), but that’d be making a bad situation worse.
No on Wells.
Just eat all of Bradley’s contract instead of taking Wells.
Agreed...
If it’s a given that Bradley won’t be playing for the Cubs next year, we’d be better off just cutting him than trading him for Wells. Compare the situations:
Cut Bradley: burn $21 million, go with a league average CF or RF.
Trade Bradley for Wells: burn $98 million, have a replacement-level CF.
So in comparison, by cutting Bradley outright, the team saves $77 million over the next five years and is just as well off. I think trading Bradley and paying much of his salary for meaningless prospects makes more sense than either of these scenarios. But I’m really against trading for Wells and praying that “a change of scenery” fixes his awfulness.
This is the worst idea ever
I still think Toronto is a possibility, if the Cubs would take Vernon Wells’ deal. It’s a lot of $, but Wells could play CF with Fukudome back to RF, and at least Wells has a track record of success.
No to Wells
He is over 30. His deal is Soriano-bad. There is no reason to expect he’ll return to form.
I’d eat Bradley’s money before making it worse by trading for Wells.
It's pretty much setlled...
…the Cubs will be eating a large chunk of what he has left on his deal.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Oh yeah...
…I just don’t know how anybody would want Bradley, especially after the way this season ended.
by TheHawkRules on Sep 20, 2009 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Then maybe eating the contract is the right thing to do.
Unless they can find something in those comments he made that would be able to be termed insubordination and they could void it.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
good samaritan clause
most contract have one
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
The only thing I can compare it to
is the Jose Guillen situation in 2004. The Angels suspended Guillen for behavior pretty similar to Bradley’s—in fact, Bradley’s was arguably better since he ripped into the fans and the media whereas Guillen was constantly ripping into his teammates. Both were insubordinate to their manager. Of course Guillen had a better season.
The Angels got Juan Rivera and Macier Izturis for Guillen, which was a great deal. Here’s our problem: Jim Bowden is no longer a GM. I’m not sure any other GM is dumb enough to make the deal.
by Josh Timmers on Sep 21, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Wouldn't have guessed it?
His antics haven’t changed his entire career! My gosh I’m amazed at some fans!
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
but has he ever been suspended at the end of the season...
….to simply get him off a team? Let me guess, you had the scenario all mapped out, right?
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Sep 20, 2009 11:12 PM CDT up reply actions
But it's not suprising!
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
Well....
I was talking about “never would have guessed” the SCENARIO, not the fact that it actually happened.
I doubt you’ll find anyone that finds the suspension surprising.
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Sep 21, 2009 7:46 AM CDT up reply actions
Good riddance what an embarrasment
Get the hell out of Chicago, you bum
Lets Go Hawks!
by CubsBall2202 on Sep 20, 2009 5:30 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Thursday's game
I was at the game on Thursday, when Milton got the single and then promptly removed himself from the game. I happened to get the invite from a friend who got had tickets about 7 rows behind the Brewers dugout and we had a great view of the entire incident. Basically once Milton headed from first towards the dugout he went straight into the dugout and right down the stairs and into the tunnel to the clubhouse. The Cubs trainer went down the stairs shortly after and reappeared about 20 seconds later. The entire incident really struck us as odd because Bradley did not appear to have tweaked anything, it was as though he got to first and then just headed towards the dugout. Once he got to the dugout he didn’t talk to any coaches, Piniella, or any teammates, just straight down the steps and into the tunnel.
Hendry is going to have to eat some crow on this disaster of a signing and pull off a miracle and find someone who will take him.
Thanks for the info.
Sounds like Bradley’s version of that incident is something short of the truth.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Bradley's version of events isn't contradicted by this guy's observations at all.
Bradley said he told Lou before he went to the plate that he would have to come out if he got on base. He got a hit, ran to first and then left the field which is what he had told Lou he would do. Where is the conflict here?
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Sep 21, 2009 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Damen Jackson noted the same as you
and Friday, he said there was something more to it. Thanks for the confirmation.
Sosa type exit?
Sad, since MB is not that bad a player, and he was having an off year. Can agree he is wrong, but I have to admit that he was ripped before putting on a uniform, which was wrong, and got the relatoin off on the wrong foot. But, he also didnt make it any easier with his own bonehead moves.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Kind of figured the end of Bradley's time with the Cubs was coming...
I caught part of Thursday afternoon’s game. I noticed during Dennis Miller’s visit with Pat and Ron, he was riffing on Bradley’s behavior and attitude and they weren’t really making much effort to stop him. Kind of figured, hmm, maybe it’s not all not giggles and lollypops behind the scenes. Then, Bradley’s interviews on Thursday and with the Daily Herald. Tipping point!!!
Eating Bradley’s contract=necessary for the organization to move forward=sunk cost. It’s going to hurt from an accounting standpoint, but it has to be done.
"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"--The Brain
He's played his last game as a Cub
Just an educated guess, but I can’t see him coming back after this. Reminds me of Jose Guillen being suspended by the Angels a few seasons back. The Angels said all the right things about how Guillen still could come back, but it was never going to happen.
I’m very sorry this didn’t work out. But it didn’t, and now Bradley has to go. If we have to cut him in the offseason and eat his contract, that’s what we’ll have to do. But we need a new right fielder next season.
I'd think so.
The Cubs, right now, have exactly one healthy full-time outfielder: Kosuke Fukudome.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I know why you'd ask
His season is over, he’s going to be on the 40-man anyway this Fall, and he can play all three outfield positions if necessary.
But I hope they don’t bring him up. It would be a nice reward for a good season, but this is also a very negative situation. Even without the Bradley issue, the Cubs are not playing well. I’d rather leave Tyler with the feeling of making the final round of the playoffs in AA.
He can have his cup of coffee next year.
Fontenot (fon-te-no): Cajun for "scrappy"
Well, it'd be silly to put Colvin on the 40-man roster and not call him up...
there’s no value in doing that. Either he gets called to the active roster or he stays off the 40-man roster.
along with that
I’m not sure you really want to bring a kid up in this climate, particularly with only a handful of games left.
I think it's a good idea
I’d like to get a look at him in the majors.
by Josh Timmers on Sep 20, 2009 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Good
Keep this guy away from our clubhouse for the season and for the rest of his career. He’s been a cancer since day one, don’t care what the Bradley apologists say, he is not good for this team nor any team.
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
See...
… as I’ve been posting, he doesn’t want to play for the Cubs. He’s been taking it easy, hoping there was some way out of his contract. This will void the 3rd for sure. So maybe… the Cubs will be able to trade him during the off season. If they CAN’T, then the relationship will only have to go on for one more year.
I believe...
… if he isn’t able to play, then there is a clause in the contract that the 3rd year can be void.
by TheHawkRules on Sep 20, 2009 6:13 PM CDT up reply actions
I think that clause is based on injury - not suspension...
he’s able to play, but the team suspended him. I think he needed to be on the DL for the clause to kick in.
SOME OF THE OTHER GM'S ...
had to be wondering what Hendry was thinking . I sure was when I heard he was headed to the Northside . He was not a good fit for this team . The suspension was only a matter of time .
Can the Cubs rescind the balance his contract?
by cubssouvenirman on Sep 20, 2009 6:21 PM CDT reply actions
I doubt it I don't think there's an "asshole clause" in the contract.
Probably should be, but…
"Enough foreplay- let's get crackin'"- Fred Garvin
this is amazing
i was critical of milton bradley a couple of months ago after similar comments were made and i was absolutely dragged through the mud. only one or two people agreed with me. how could so many people have been so fooled by this guy? what had he done in the past to warrant their continued faith and trust?
I was one of the people who disagreed with you in a big way
I’m not remotely an apologist just because someone plays for the Cubs but I admit that I really wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt.
But now I’ll say that I was wrong and you were right. Bradley has problems that I never dreamed he did when he was first signed.
by bluekoolaide on Sep 20, 2009 8:12 PM CDT up reply actions
GOTTA WATCH ESPN ???
Wonder what Miller and Morgan will have to say about Milton ?? Almost cruel to have to watch ESPN but have no choice ….
Daily Herald Quote
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=322741
from Daily Herald interview published 9-19-2009
" Bradley claimed to have no opinion on where he bats – “In the lineup,” he said of his preferred spot – and the only time he became expansive at all was when he was asked if he had enjoyed his first season in Chicago.
“Not really,” he said. "It’s just not a positive environment. I need a stable, healthy, enjoyable environment. There’s too many people everywhere in your face with a microphone asking the same questions repeatedly. Everything is just bashing you. You got out there and you play harder than anybody on the field and never get credit for it. It’s just negativity.
“And you understand why they haven’t won in 100 years here, because it’s negative. It’s what it is.”
Asked whether he was talking about the fans, the media or even the Cubs organization, he replied: “It’s everything. It’s everybody.” . . .
General manager Jim Hendry most likely will try to trade Bradley this off-season. When asked if the thought he’d be back, Bradley said: “Who knows?” . . .
Bradley has been booed frequently at Wrigley Field this season
Last month, he talked of not being “comfortable” because of the “adversity and hatred” he said he faces.
Asked to clarify those comments the next day, he said: “All I’m saying is I just pray the game is nine innings so I can be out there the least amount of time as possible and go home.”
by cubssouvenirman on Sep 20, 2009 6:36 PM CDT reply actions
That sounds like it's Hendry's fault, not Bradley's
by vivaelpujols on Sep 20, 2009 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions
WHAT?!?!?!?!
That’s HENDRY’s fault? How could that possibly be true?
You’re dead wrong here.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
it was probably a culmination of things
but it sounds like his recent negative comments about playing in Chicago was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
IMO
It seems like Hendry, et al, are scapegoating Bradley. He really hasn’t had that bad of a year, and still has a very good shot at being worth his contract. Guys like Soriano, Fontenot and Soto have been MUCH worse than Bradley, yet you don’t see as much scorn towards them.
It would be really bad to trade Bradley now, IMO.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 20, 2009 6:42 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
It's a bit of both...
Bradley’s on-field performance has been below-expectations, and he’s fought with the manager, the media, and the fans. The comments about the organization and repeated bashing of the fans was the proverbial straw breaking the camel’s back. He hasn’t had one particular incident, but it’s a culmination of things.
Is he also being scapegoated? Probably. He’s not the sole reason that the season hasn’t worked out. But he’s made a tough situation worse by always being a pain in the neck for the organization this year.
Will the Cubs get full value in a trade? Absolutely not. The team is going to get 50 cents on the dollar (if that) in return. But if Hendry and the team feels that continuing with Bradley’s personality would be worse than taking the trade loss, it may be that the trade is the best scenario.
I agree that he should be better based on past performance. But he also has a history of petulance, and it may be that he WON’T do better simply because he’s unhappy. A bad situation could actually get worse. So simply looking at the past stats as a gauge of future performance may not be applicable with Bradley.
by SouthernCub on Sep 20, 2009 6:48 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, he's always had problems with teams
And he’s always been able to rebound with the next organization to put up good numbers. He is a very good player, and if you treat him right, and get the fans and the media off of his back, he may very well have an exceptional season.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 20, 2009 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions
And if ifs and buts were candy and nuts...
Hypothetically, sure, if everything were hunky-dory, he’d be a big asset. But you aren’t going to be able to keep the fans and media off his back at this point. That ship has sailed. So you have to factor that in.
Bradley has never, to my knowledge, bounced back with the same organization. He’s gotten a fresh start, then (for the most part) burned bridges there. Once things go downhill for him, they seem to continue to go downhill.
Right
I agree with that. I believe that if an organization is able to handle him and prevent him from becoming a scapegoat, he would be very valuable. The Cubs failed at that obviously.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 20, 2009 7:29 PM CDT up reply actions
EVERY organization he's been with then has failed.....
… according to your logic. The common denominstor is Bradley. HE’S the problem, not any one organization.
If he goes to St. Louis next year, he’ll fail there too. Guaranteed. He’ll have the same type of problems he’s had everywhere he goes. I hope he banks his money. He’s made himself into a baseball pariah and it’s his fault, no one else’s.
"When they signed Fukudome, I knew they were trying to get me fired". - Ron Santo, January, 2008
He's never failed
He’s played well and teams have failed him.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 7:19 AM CDT up reply actions
Nonsense.
“Teams have failed him”?
You know numbers well. But you seem to have a lack of understanding of how teams actually work, how players get along with each other, fans, and media, etc.
This is Bradley’s fault. Period.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I think that neither one of use knows about exactly what's been happening to make that determination
The evidence points towards the fact that Bradley was the problem; however, based on his comments, it appears that he didn’t start it this time. Again, I don’t know enough about the situation to make a determination, though.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 9:04 AM CDT up reply actions
He can't be serious, AI.
I think vivaelpujols is just trying to yank a chain.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly Al. If only he had your knowledge of the inner workings of a baseball clubhouse
You know numbers well. But you seem to have a lack of understanding of how teams actually work, how players get along with each other, fans, and media, etc.
Viva, don’t you realize you’re talking to an expert on locker room psychology here? Al talked to Mike Fontenot on the phone once for like 20 minutes – he knows what it’s like in there much more than you do.
Right
I have also never ever played baseball in my life. It’s not like I got into the game because I enjoyed playing it. No, I just like goddamn numbers.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm not saying I do.
But neither do you, so for you to say that what goes on in a clubhouse doesn’t affect play disregards the fact that human beings have to get along with each other for eight months.
I presume you have a job. If you went to work every day and one co-worker was being an ass every day, wouldn’t you have a different attitude about how easy it was to perform your work, no matter how good you were at that job?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I would be a professional.
I have had bosses, coworkers, bandmates, and teammates who were unworkable, broken human beings, were cripplingly defensive, or just plain fucking nuts.
Did it affect my attitude? Maybe. But it certainly didn’t affect my personal drive to accomplish, act, and create to the best of my abilities.
I'll bet, however...
… that when those individuals who were the way you describe them, were no longer there, your attitude, and perhaps your performance at your job, improved.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
You're welcome to him, then.
He’ll fail in St. Louis, too, if that happens. I’d gladly trade him to you right now for Mark DeRosa.
Want that deal?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Well DeRosa is 34
And coming off of a wrist injury and has had a poor year. How much would you eat of Bradley’s contract?
by vivaelpujols on Sep 21, 2009 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions
Please take him
and then come back next year to update us as to how well he is doing for the Cards.
The sun will shine in '69
HEY!!!!!!!!!!!
We’re suppose to be some of the “most knowledgeable” baseball fans.
don’t wreck it.
I suggest the BCBers pool a little money and buy a bus ticket for milton….but not a ticket to St Louis.
Baseball first, teams second, players third, agents last.
by Dave Pendleton on Sep 21, 2009 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions
This is Lou's MO
Every season he scapegoats a player or three. Last post-season he scapegoated Fukudome before the series was even over.
Bradley is different in being unwilling to take the scapegoating. The writing’s been on the wall since mid-season.
The shame of it all is that it’s bound to happen again. I cannot see an available left-handed OF who can bat 5th who will satisfy what Lou is looking for. This will lead to more banging of square pegs into round holes. From an on-the-field perspective alone, Milton Bradley is still a better option than any other we will even consider this off-season. But he’s clearly not an option when you consider more than just the on-the-field perspective.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
I agree.
As respects Bradley, I’m more dissapointed in Hendry and Lou than Milton himself. MB’s been difficult, abrasive, and confrontational to the media from his first week after signing and from the current quotes from teammates, he’s been similar in the clubhouse as well.
For the “last straw” to occur after the Saturday loss and the team all but mathmatically eliminated is chickens**t. From all accounts MB deserved a similar suspension earlier in the season for multiple other offenses. Hendry’s finally calling him out and completely ruining what little trade value he had seems like an empty gesture this late in the season.
Hendry is pacifying fans by throwing meat to the lions when the playoffs hopes are dashed, but further hindering an already crippled and overcommitted budget.
If lucky, Hendry can package Z and Bradley for something way under value to get Bradley off the payroll without eating too much.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Well ... that was a fun ride
I think most people were anticipating Milton getting moved this offseason, so it’s not like we had a lot of leverage to begin with, so this suspension is alright with me, even at this late juncture. With 2/21 left, though, we’re probably going to have to eat a huge chunk of it, and even then, we might have to take back a bad contract to make it happen. Either way, it’s time to turn the page from this. I was hoping Milton would get moved this offseason anyways, as I would like to upgrade CF defense (and shift Kosuke to RF … although I really wouldn’t mind if the Cubs shopped Kosuke as well this offseason, but that’s for another time. I just think we know what we have in Kosuke, basically a 2 WAR guy with bouts of offensive inconsistency to go with some hot stretches, but I think he’s proven he can stick and his 2/26.5 might be moveable (without eating much) while allowing us to get a capable replacement at perhaps a cheaper cost).
Well, time to break out the bad contracts list again and peruse it for guys that might make a trade palatable. The usual suspects come to mind. It wouldn’t really stun me if the market isn’t there and we either have to take junk back … or that we have to designate him for assignment. The leverage for the Cubs simply isn’t there right now.
I believe with Milton being sent packing
that the final nail was put in Hendry’s coffin. The day after the WS, expect Hendry & Lou to get pink slips. Hendry for his recent strings of bad signings and Lou for not being able to make a silk purse out of the pig’s ear he was handed.
The sun will shine in '69
I'll be a bit surprised if the release impacts anything
Every indication so far is that Ricketts is going to give Hendry one more year. I have a hard time seeing Milton getting released changing that. Now, if Ricketts simply changes his mind, fine. Honestly, though, I think Hendry comes back one more year. It’s likely to be 3 straight winning seasons … not exactly what we were hoping for, but it’d be a bit harsh to cut him off for a new owner.
The frustrating thing is that the Cubs do this again and again -
run their players’ trade values into the ground. We have given away so much talent over the past few years.
It had been clear to us fans for a while that Milton wasn’t coming back – I’m sure it was clear to Milton. And Milton wasn’t going to play the way other players would under those auspices.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
This is such BS
Every player traded in the Harden deal was sold high. Kevin Hart helped get two major league pitchers. Hart will never be anything.
No one has a crystal ball to know when to sell high.
I'm not saying we haven't made good deals or sold high.
I’m saying we’ve tanked a growing list of players who had trade value and given them away.
Michael Barrett
Will Ohman
Scott Eyre
Felix Pie
Michael Wuertz
to name just a few recent ones…
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
I will agree with you
to a point but most of these were because of players in the Piniella doghouse. I never understood the reluctance to use Eyre and Wuertz. On Pie, I expect he would have been better than Gathright but I think Piniella decided he needed to go.
Piniella...
…decided he needed to go? I thought Jim Hendry as the GM?
Keep in mind, at the beggining of 08, Lou and several others thought Pie needed more seasoning in the minor leagues and Hendry and his contingent wanted to have him start with the big league club. As it turned out, Pie did need more work, but Hendry got what he wanted and it didn’t pan out.
If Hendry thought Pie was worth keeping he should have kept him and no one should have stopped him in making that decision.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
I sense Lou didn't want him
I’m not one that expects Pie to become a star but basically he was traded for Heilman and then the Cubs signed Joey Gathright. Why?
Lou didn't think he was ready...
…in 08, and you can’t blame him because he was charged with needing to “win now”.
On your other comment, I have my doubts as to whether Pie will become a star.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Everyone should doubt that every prospect
will definitely become a star. Just look at Delmon Young and Alex Gordon two of the most recent top hitting prospects.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
There's a difference between being a star and a capable MLB regular...
Very few prospects (even elite prospects) turn out to be stars. Pie is showing, however, that it’s at least possible for him to become a solid MLB regular.
I can blame Piniella for trying to change Pie into something he wasn’t. And I blame Hendry for not having the stones to stand up to Piniella when he felt Piniella was wrong.
Both Piniella and Hendry have had their good qualities and bad qualities. Neither is free of blame in the handling of Pie. Nor is either free of blame in the unnecessary hunt for a LH power bat.
by SouthernCub on Sep 21, 2009 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions
How exactly...
…did Piniella try to change Pie into something he wasn’t???
Pie’s capabilities were built on his current talents and how he was nurtured in the farm system, not anything that happened once he got his chance. If a farm prospect makes it in the bigs, it’s because the capabilities are there when they come up, not because they all of a sudden become better at the major league level. The adjustments at the major league level are more mental than they are physical, and if the physical abilities aren’t there, failure is highly probable.
Pie’s number one strength natural strength is his speed, and he wasn’t taught at the minor league level to use it properly to help maximize his abilities.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Did you forget the "personal tutelage" that Piniella spent on Pie's swing?
Pie came up, struggled for a week or so, and Piniella said he needed to rework his swing. He then benched him and tried to rework his swing. It didn’t work for Pie.
Now, in Baltimore, he’s being allowed to use his approach and they’re being patient with him. And he’s hitting now.
by SouthernCub on Sep 21, 2009 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Ain't quite that simple...
…and some time has passed since his time with the Cubs.
It’s highly unlikely a minor league prospect is going to be able to make significant swing adjustments in short order at the big league level, and I don’t care who is providing the tutelage.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
In other words, when you say:
It’s highly unlikely a minor league prospect is going to be able to make significant swing adjustments in short order at the big league level, and I don’t care who is providing the tutelage.
then you’re basically saying Lou set Pie up to fail…
… but it was Jim Hendry’s fault!
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
You lost me...
…Piniella didn’t want Pie to come north with the club last year, but Hendry won that battle. Since Piniella had him, he tried to work with him, but there were too many physical flaws in his swing to make a short term impact.
Trust me, making swing changes with a player is not a short term process, and can take considerable time. It is not unlike a golfer who revamps his swing, and that can take a year or two to accomplish.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
You said that re-working a player's swing at the ML level can't work.
So, Lou had two choices – 1) he could stash Pie at the bottom of last year’s stacked lineup, maybe even batting 9th, and let him do what he’d always done in the minors even if he thought it wouldn’t work. That’s what Lou didn’t do.
Or, 2) Lou could demolish Pie’s swing, play him in scattershot appearances, mostly against strikeout pitchers, and that would accomplish – as you said – failure.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
As an Orioles fan, I disagree with this.
Terry Crowley has worked extremely hard with Pie this season. He’s been Crowley’s “pet project.”
I get some, not all.
Barrett was Piazza defensively without the big offense. I get it.
Ohman wasn’t good and bad mouthed the org.
Eyre, I will never understand this move. I get a RP had to go, but Howry sucked more.
Pie. Felix is exactly the 5th outfielder, speed, a little power and good D, the team needed. It was as if the requirement coming out of AAA is to be a ROY candidate to be a good addition. He was cost controlled, but the team paid extra for Gathright. Keeping Felix and allowing Hoffpauir, or someone else to prove themself from the minors, or as a placeholder for someone else made more sense than having to sign a big tix free agent.
Wuertz, don’t get either.
I want the organization to operate that big ticket free agents/blockbuster trades are to fill glaring gaps in the lineup and not to be used to make a fantasy team roster.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Bingo...
…on your last sentence.
Also, when they do sign FA’s it would be nice if they had a better feel for those players skills and how they fit into what the club needs to be successful.
In the draft, it’s ok to go for the best available player, but when you are signing guys that are going to be in the major league lineup, you can’t do that.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
All of these players had their negatives.
The problem is that if you’re trading players, you want to highlight their positives.
All players have negatives. Albert Pujols, for example, doesn’t hit left-handed and wouldn’t fit the #5 spot in the Cubs’ lineup.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
GAME BOARD.....
They knew the baggage Bradley had . Bet they try to deal him asap . But Cubs might eat a huge portion of that contract . HAs he really played that bad when he did play ??
Ahh the OPB justification
Managers, GM’s, and Owners don’t like it when you tick-off the fan-base, throw your fellow players under the bus, and become a distraction off the field. If Puljos did the same things, I imagine the Cards would try hard to find a trade, otherwise the inmates are running the jail.
The sun will shine in '69
Just a dynamite signing all around
Can we suspend Hendry next?
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
For 1 signing in an injury riddled year after making the playoffs 2 years in a row?
Seeing awful comments like that make me think Bradley has a point.
by Wreckard on Sep 20, 2009 8:51 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
How bout for ignoring reality
And signing Bradley coming off a career year as DH in a hitters paradise? Or how bout even giving Aaron Miles or Aaron Heilman a job? Or going with a part time player over DeRosa?
No those were great moves, anyone who doesnt like Bradley or Hendry must be irrational
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Reality would like to remind you that Wrigley is just as much of a "hitter's paradise"
Not even the most pessimistic of fans could have expected Miles and Fontenot to be as horrendous as they were this year. I have a hard time faulting him for failing to see that coming.
Heilman seemed like a decent gamble; it obviously didn’t work out.
Given that every projection system and analyst in the country picked the Cubs to win the division by a huge amount, I just have a hard time getting upset with Hendry to the point where I’m calling for his head. Shit happens sometimes.
Agreed on Wrigley
But my point was, Bradley benefitted, as good as he is, from playing in Texas and Hendry shouldve been wary of that.
I dont know, Aaron Miles was never terribly impressive, certainly not enough to warrant the deal he got from Jimbo. Sure Fontenot deserved to get more ABs after his performance last year, but at what cost? Was it worth losing DeRosa?
I think Hendy has to be held accountable for his recent decisions, his fleecing of the Marlins for Derrek Lee was a long time ago. Too many times his signings show a complete lack of foresight and we’re going to be hamstrung by them in the next few years, meanwhile, the minor league system still hasnt bore much fruit either.
So whats he living off of? Two straight years of getting swept in the playoffs?
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Well whatever.
My point was simply this: Wanting to fire the winningest general manager in either of our lifetimes for one second place finish is ridiculous enough as it is. Doing it in a thread where people are criticizing Bradley for calling Cubs fans too negative is downright hilarious.
by Wreckard on Sep 20, 2009 9:50 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Preach it, Wreck
This is proof positive it’s embarrassing to be a Cubs fan sometimes.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Sep 21, 2009 1:25 AM CDT up reply actions
+1 the it's embarrassing to be a Cubs fan crap really is getting old
Some people say the glass is half empty, some say half full. I say, are you going to drink that?
by BleedsbluinMI on Sep 21, 2009 7:19 AM CDT up reply actions
I'd rather
try to hold a meaningful dialogue with you than be a White Sox fan.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Sep 25, 2009 1:53 AM CDT up reply actions
Its embarrassing
that you think all Cubs fans should be of one mind.
What has Hendry done thats so great? He got a blank check and spent like a drunken sailor on shore leave after 2006, and he spent it poorly; the only move that has worked with any consistency was Lilly; the Soriano deal was horrible, Fukudome and Bradley were even worse, Dempster isnt worth his deal either. And the minor leagues are still barren.
So why is Hendry lauded as the greatest thing ever to happen to this team
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Because...
…he is a nice guy.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
thats a great reason to keep him on
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Well, let's see ...
- Lee
- Ramirez
- Nomar
- Harden
Just off the top of my head.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Sep 25, 2009 1:54 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm not a Hendry fan, but
the aforementioned Lilly
DeRosa :-) acquiring, that is
a flier on Dempster
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