Phil Rogers is an idiot (well you already knew that)

[Moon Rock]

He wants the Cubs to just release Milton Bradley. Does he realize how stupid this would be? And didn't he say the same thing about Zambrano back in June?

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-28-rogers-milton-bradley-cubs-aug28,0,2399764.column

Milton Bradley? There are three possible solutions for the Cubs: continued patience and hope, endless headaches while hoping some team is silly enough to deal for him or pay him his money and send him home.

 

My recommendation: Release him.

 

Sadly, Jim Hendry is a baseball executive. The Cubs general manager is not a magician.

 

This is an unfortunate reality, as it means sleight of hand is out of the question. He is going to have a hard time turning Bradley into something that will make an audience ooh and ah, certainly not in the time it takes to look away from Bradley in the on-deck circle to the sight of a pretty magician's assistant, carrying a cold Old Style.

[17 Seconds]

it's phil rogers

[Outshined_One]

it's phil rogers

 

Done in one post.

[SouthSideRyan]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

[DiamondMind]

http://negativegamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/facepalm.jpg

[XZero771679666304]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

 

Because prattling on about things you have no real grasp of without knowledge of their factual elements is quintessentially American.

 

I am more concerned about how many people buy into it, which they obviously do, or jokers like Rogers wouldn't have a job.

[bukie]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

Because they're not paid to provide insight, they're paid to make people read, even if they're angry readers. Best course of action would be to pay as little attention as possible to it.

[fromthestretch]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

 

That's what bugs the crap out of me. I watch a ton of games and listen to even more on the radio, so I hear several different broadcasters. A majority of them (especially the TV analysts) don't know a damn thing about anything outside of the 25-man roster of their own team, and they might not even know that much. Seriously, if it's your job, the thing you do everyday for a living, and you have a fairly decent audience paying attention to you when you're doing your job, you'd think you wouldn't want to come across like a complete moron. If your primary job is to sit in a booth and talk about baseball for approximately three hours 162 times a season, be prepared. If the team you cover is playing a three-game series against another team, don't you think it would be a good idea to get a basic knowledge of the opponent? Perhaps learn a little bit about some nagging injuries they might have that could be affecting performance or learn about some their top prospects? If they're struggling in an area, maybe spend five minutes finding out why, so you can talk about it on the air. Oh look, they called up a mediocre rookie pitcher to fill in for a start; might be a good idea to figure out what he throws before you go on the air.

 

This is a main reason why people rip on Joe Morgan all the time. On the rare occasion he won't offer an opinion on something, he uses the excuse that he hasn't seen that team play much, if at all, this season. He's doing what, one or two broadcasts per week? Watch some damn video and be prepared. I know numbers are scary and all, but pick up a stat sheet and review it for an hour. It's not all that hard.

[InconspicuousZ28]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

Because they're not paid to provide insight, they're paid to make people read, even if they're angry readers. Best course of action would be to pay as little attention as possible to it.

 

This is the correct answer.

[hardcorecubfan]

Well he could have at least thrown out Soriano who has a tough time walking and a very easy time swinging.

[CardsDinoTest]

That's ludicrous.

 

Bradley has clearly had a tough year - but he has a lot of talent and I think it's still a little early to just give up on him to the extent of releasing him and eating his salary.

 

Seems outrageous.

 

His attitude has gotten a little crazy - but that's pretty much par for the course w/ Milton, is it not?

[Vanilla Ice]

Sensationalist Hack

[Benchwarmer]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

 

That's what bugs the crap out of me. I watch a ton of games and listen to even more on the radio, so I hear several different broadcasters. A majority of them (especially the TV analysts) don't know a damn thing about anything outside of the 25-man roster of their own team, and they might not even know that much. Seriously, if it's your job, the thing you do everyday for a living, and you have a fairly decent audience paying attention to you when you're doing your job, you'd think you wouldn't want to come across like a complete moron. If your primary job is to sit in a booth and talk about baseball for approximately three hours 162 times a season, be prepared. If the team you cover is playing a three-game series against another team, don't you think it would be a good idea to get a basic knowledge of the opponent? Perhaps learn a little bit about some nagging injuries they might have that could be affecting performance or learn about some their top prospects? If they're struggling in an area, maybe spend five minutes finding out why, so you can talk about it on the air. Oh look, they called up a mediocre rookie pitcher to fill in for a start; might be a good idea to figure out what he throws before you go on the air.

 

This is a main reason why people rip on Joe Morgan all the time. On the rare occasion he won't offer an opinion on something, he uses the excuse that he hasn't seen that team play much, if at all, this season. He's doing what, one or two broadcasts per week? Watch some damn video and be prepared. I know numbers are scary and all, but pick up a stat sheet and review it for an hour. It's not all that hard.

 

Like Santo prepares for a game?

 

"Who's that in rightfield for the Cubs, Patrick?"

 

"How did Soriano get to third?"

[daske17]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

 

That's what bugs the crap out of me. I watch a ton of games and listen to even more on the radio, so I hear several different broadcasters. A majority of them (especially the TV analysts) don't know a damn thing about anything outside of the 25-man roster of their own team, and they might not even know that much. Seriously, if it's your job, the thing you do everyday for a living, and you have a fairly decent audience paying attention to you when you're doing your job, you'd think you wouldn't want to come across like a complete moron. If your primary job is to sit in a booth and talk about baseball for approximately three hours 162 times a season, be prepared. If the team you cover is playing a three-game series against another team, don't you think it would be a good idea to get a basic knowledge of the opponent? Perhaps learn a little bit about some nagging injuries they might have that could be affecting performance or learn about some their top prospects? If they're struggling in an area, maybe spend five minutes finding out why, so you can talk about it on the air. Oh look, they called up a mediocre rookie pitcher to fill in for a start; might be a good idea to figure out what he throws before you go on the air.

 

This is a main reason why people rip on Joe Morgan all the time. On the rare occasion he won't offer an opinion on something, he uses the excuse that he hasn't seen that team play much, if at all, this season. He's doing what, one or two broadcasts per week? Watch some damn video and be prepared. I know numbers are scary and all, but pick up a stat sheet and review it for an hour. It's not all that hard.

 

Like Santo prepares for a game?

 

"Who's that in rightfield for the Cubs, Patrick?"

 

"How did Soriano get to third?"

 

You will find virtually no one on this board that believes Santo is a great color announcer.

[fromthestretch]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

 

That's what bugs the crap out of me. I watch a ton of games and listen to even more on the radio, so I hear several different broadcasters. A majority of them (especially the TV analysts) don't know a damn thing about anything outside of the 25-man roster of their own team, and they might not even know that much. Seriously, if it's your job, the thing you do everyday for a living, and you have a fairly decent audience paying attention to you when you're doing your job, you'd think you wouldn't want to come across like a complete moron. If your primary job is to sit in a booth and talk about baseball for approximately three hours 162 times a season, be prepared. If the team you cover is playing a three-game series against another team, don't you think it would be a good idea to get a basic knowledge of the opponent? Perhaps learn a little bit about some nagging injuries they might have that could be affecting performance or learn about some their top prospects? If they're struggling in an area, maybe spend five minutes finding out why, so you can talk about it on the air. Oh look, they called up a mediocre rookie pitcher to fill in for a start; might be a good idea to figure out what he throws before you go on the air.

 

This is a main reason why people rip on Joe Morgan all the time. On the rare occasion he won't offer an opinion on something, he uses the excuse that he hasn't seen that team play much, if at all, this season. He's doing what, one or two broadcasts per week? Watch some damn video and be prepared. I know numbers are scary and all, but pick up a stat sheet and review it for an hour. It's not all that hard.

 

Like Santo prepares for a game?

 

"Who's that in rightfield for the Cubs, Patrick?"

 

"How did Soriano get to third?"

 

I've said in the past on here (several times, in fact), that I'm not exactly a huge fan of Santo as a broadcaster. Pat Hughes makes it a lot easier to listen to the radio broadcasts though.

 

What separates Santo from Dibble, Morgan, McCarver, Stone, Harrelson, Brenneman (Sr. and Jr.), etc., is that Santo doesn't come off as a pompous ass. If he doesn't know something, he asks a question, like you've stated above. If the other guys don't know something, they wing it and pass their misguided opinions off as fact. In other words, if you aren't going to be prepared, at least come off as likable. However, you are correct in that Santo's preparation for the broadcast is severely lacking.

[Shilzzz]

Seriously, I want to know why the people who are paid to talk/write about sports know so little about them. Is this not madness?

Because they're not paid to provide insight, they're paid to make people read, even if they're angry readers. Best course of action would be to pay as little attention as possible to it.

 

This is the correct answer.

 

i mean, it ended up on nsbb. as much as everyone thinks he's a moron he's apparently good at his job.

[Post Count Padder]

We shouldn't even be discussing this. Rogers is a tool.

[Roast]

I guess this is a good of a place as any to post this blog from fangraphs. Nothing earth shattering, just good to hear from another source, I suppose.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/bradley-taking-the-fall

 

some excerpts:

In just over 400 plate appearances, he’s been worth +1.2 wins to the Cubs, which translates to $5.4 million in salary. Factor in his expected September production, and he’ll probably end the year with a performance worth around $7 million – less than what the Cubs are paying him, but not anything close to the biggest disaster on the team.

 

...

 

[Alfonso Soriano's] performance suggests he owes the Cubs $3.3 million for taking 0.7 wins off their total for 2009, so Soriano has cost the Cubs almost $20 million this year.

 

...

 

Just because Bradley makes himself an easy target doesn’t mean he’s the right one.

 

 

[Halman]

I agree with Rogers and I agreed with him with Zambrano and Samardzjia hell throw in Harden. They are the problems. We need more Sam Fulds and Ryan Dempsters. Hopefully the cubs go after Mark Derosa aggresively in the FA market. 4 years 36 mill is my floor.

[XZero771679666304]

I often catch myself wondering about how great life as a Cubs fan would be with more Sam Fulds on the team. One can only dream.

[CubsnClippers_1]

I agree with Rogers and I agreed with him with Zambrano and Samardzjia hell throw in Harden. They are the problems. We need more Sam Fulds and Ryan Dempsters. Hopefully the cubs go after Mark Derosa aggresively in the FA market. 4 years 36 mill is my floor.

 

Here, here. They say graet brains think a like and I like the way you think. Cubs won 97 games with Derosa, now only 64. I dont set a ceiling for those kinds of wins, whatever it takes. And count me in on SWeet Sam leading off fulltime next year. That boy can flat out swing the stick.

 

Imagine a Fuld-Theriot 1-2 at the top of the lineup next year. :cool:

[TruffleShuffle]

oh we're still doing the cubs n clippers thing?

[imb]

Hahahaha

[Roast]

Tarver, dude, we know it's you. Give it up.

[imb]

roast, it's still funny, shutup

 

go be unfunny in some stupid thread no one cares about