bc2k

There's a reason five organizations rid themselves of Milton Bradley, and it's not because of his baseball ability. Dumb move. Five organizations? Montreal traded him because they were getting Zach Day, both were good prospects at that point. Cleveland traded him because they had Sizemore coming and he was arbitration eligible, in addition to his off field problems. Bradley's only been with 3 organizations, and this would be the only one to get rid of him for solely behavioral issues. Nope. I've already mentioned his behavior issues he had in Cleveland, his attitude problem in Anaheim with Mike Scoiscia are well known, and now the Dodgers are getting rid of him, BECAUSE OF HIS ATTITUDE and character flaws. It's likely that Montreal traded Bradley away for the same reasons, just that his incidents in Montreal aren't public. But hey, if you still want the guy despite of his thugish attitude, there's nothing else I can say. Or maybe just one more thing: Police have responded to the Redondo Beach home of Los Angeles Dodgers outfielder Milton Bradley three times this summer on domestic violence calls, including one instance in which he allegedly choked his pregnant wife, bloodied her lip and hurled a cellular telephone into a wall. http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/1705006.html Bradley never played for the Angles. I think you are thinking of Guillen. Yes, Guillen. You're right. I had Guillen and Bradley confused. The other incidents I posted and links provided are about the criminal activities of Bradley though.

There's a reason five organizations rid themselves of Milton Bradley, and it's not because of his baseball ability. Dumb move. Five organizations? Montreal traded him because they were getting Zach Day, both were good prospects at that point. Cleveland traded him because they had Sizemore coming and he was arbitration eligible, in addition to his off field problems. Bradley's only been with 3 organizations, and this would be the only one to get rid of him for solely behavioral issues. Nope. I've already mentioned his behavior issues he had in Cleveland, his attitude problems in Anaheim with Mike Scoiscia are well known, and now the Dodgers are getting rid of him, BECAUSE OF HIS ATTITUDE and character flaws. I wouldn't be surprised if Montreal traded Bradley away for the same reasons; perhaps his incidents in Montreal aren't public. But hey, if you still want the guy despite of his thugish attitude, there's nothing else I can say. Or maybe just one more thing: Police have responded to the Redondo Beach home of Los Angeles Dodgers outfielder Milton Bradley three times this summer on domestic violence calls, including one instance in which he allegedly choked his pregnant wife, bloodied her lip and hurled a cellular telephone into a wall. http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/1705006.html

There's a reason five organizations rid themselves of Milton Bradley, and it's not because of his baseball ability. Dumb move. Five organizations? Montreal traded him because they were getting Zach Day, both were good prospects at that point. Cleveland traded him because they had Sizemore coming and he was arbitration eligible, in addition to his off field problems. Bradley's only been with 3 organizations, and this would be the only one to get rid of him for solely behavioral issues. The man has character issues. When you spend 9 months together, those flaws appear. While in Cleveland, Bradley was arrested and spent 3 days in jail for leading police on a high-speed chase after refusing to pull over for speeding: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2004-12-15-legal-roundup_x.htm What was his mindset? Pull over, take your speeding ticket which you deserve for going more than twice the posted limit, or hit the gas and flee from the police so you can spend 3 days in jail? He's not bright.

He's had well-documented problems with Jeff Kent in LA. Now, whether you think that falls on Bradley or Kent is another matter altogether... I believe the story went, Bradley said to a reporter that Kent was being an a-hole and wasnt talking to the black players and was being discrimatory. Former teammate and seemingly good guy, Brad Ausmus, quipped "thats crazy, Kent hates all people the same" or something like that. Frankly, I wouldn't exactly call that a clubhouse problem. And in all honesty I think he handled the beer bottle (plasitc) situation about as well as you could hope him to. He could have easily chucked it back and tried to hit the guy or God forbid pull an Artest. IMO at least publicly hes improved his maturity with age. Jeff Kent confronted Bradley for not scoring from first on Kent's double, IIRC. Bradley thought Kent only said that because Kent doesn't like African-Americans, while some teammates said Kent spoke up as a veteran who thought a younger guy was dogging it. Whether Bradley was dogging it or Kent is a racist, or both, I don't want Bradley on the Cubs for other character reasons. Manager Jim Tracy tried to keep the issue in the clubhouse, telling Bradley and Kent not to comment on the issue publicly any more. Bradley blatantly refused his manager's request, and continued talking to the media about how he was a victim.

There's a reason five organizations rid themselves of Milton Bradley, and it's not because of his baseball ability. Dumb move.

I agree with this. Especially since I've heard from a couple Phillies fans that Abreu doesn't hit in the clutch and his swing was messed up the entire second half from the home run derby. When is Zambrano scheduled to become a FA?

1/2 season of winter ball? What a poor attitude. For those of you who tell non-Corey fans that they don't know his mindset, what he's thinking, how much he cares about the game, this helps solidify that the non-Corey fans are correct. I'm a fan of Corey's talents, but not a fan of Corey's attitude, intelligence, on-field results or respect for the game. Towards the end of the regular season, reporters kept asking Corey if he will play winter ball. He telled us a lot by skirting the question. The fact that that question was even asked, tells us that his game needs much improvement and his "answer" tells us that he's not interested in putting in the work to get better. I'm done with this loser.

Giles is at the top of my wish list, but I hope Hendry doesn't forget about Matsui. Either would be a definate upgrade, and if the Cubs are negotiating with both players, we could have whichever one will cost less.

The home run was a big part of the Sox's success, but you can't discount the rest of their offense as "myth." I've watched portions of many Sox games this year, and smallball is just as much a part of their offense as longball. The portions of Sox games I liked to watch were the 1-2-3 hitters--especially the first time around--so I can tell you that they do have a smallball-minded philosophy. The first half of the season, Podsednik would get on first, Iguchi (the greatest #2 hitter I've ever seen) would take pitches and strikes to allow Pods to steal second base. Iguchi would then either bunt Pods to third or unofficially sacrifice himself with a ground ball to the right side of the infield, sometimes getting a hit. Then with Pods on third, Everett (who had a ton of RBIs for his at bat total) would plate Pods with a sac fly or hit. I can see why my Sox friends talked about it so much; it's exciting baseball. Podsednik's value went down when he hurt his groin/leg? and when he came off the DL, he was caught stealing at a much higher rate than before he was injured. I've read articles by statheads arguing that Podsednik's value is not good because of his end-of-season stolen base statistics. What they overlook is that in the first half when healthy, his stolen base success rate was much higher than post injury. It is no coincidence that the Sox got out to such a great first half lead because of Pods's smallball contributions, and lost much their lead when he wasn't healthy enough to do what he could in the first half. So my point is, just because every guy in the lineup couldn't bunt, steal and run, that doesn't mean they were not a good smallball playing team. Don't forget that the Sox had some ridiculously high number of outscoring opponents in the first inning throughout the season. That first inning scoring ratio is a result of successful smallball.

Murton is also my choice for the Cubs 2006 starting left fielder. He impressed me with his batting approach and plate patience--especially considering he didn't always get regular PAs. I hesitate to say he's proven, but for the money he makes, I do believe he's proven enough to be giving the starting job with a good ST. So yes, part of the reason I want him starting in LF is because of the money that leaves to fulfill other positions--starting with the guy playing next to him.

Is it really 5 years? I thought it was less than that.

That was a BOMB!

I'm rooting for the Sox. It's good for Chicago and respect around the nation. But besides that, I still don't like Oswalt after his incident with Barrett and the Cards are our biggest and long-time rival.

I don't foresee any Sox pitchers getting hurt over the next 4-7 games, so my answer is no. Usually if a manager has ridden his starters too hard during a season, those men will break down in the following season. This is what happened to the Cubs in 2004 (after a pennant run), and the Sox in 2001 (after their short playoff run). Of the five Sox startes that I can see getting hurt next year, I'd guess Freddy Garcia and of course, El Duque. Fortunately for the Sox, if one starter does miss an extended amount of time, Brandon McCarthy is a decent replacement. That said, I'd rather trade positions with them. I tip my cap to them and have already congratulated my Sox fan friends. I respect their style of play. Didn't Buerhle and Garcia log the most innings in the AL this year? Yeah, Buehrle's pitched a lot of innings, but he does that every year. He pitched like 245 innings last season. He's never been on the DL or even missed a start. So with his track record, I can't imagine the IP affecting him. Even though El Duque didn't throw a lot of innings this year, I think he's the most likely to be injured at some point next year. (Not that it's a stretch to say that, he's been on the DL twice this season and is older.) Next to El Duque, I though Garcia was the most likely to be injured sometime in 2006. That said, I'd gladly trade a season mired in injury if it meant winning our first pennant since 1945. Heck, our pitchers get injured anyway and we don't even get a division title out of it! :oops:

I don't foresee any Sox pitchers getting hurt over the next 4-7 games, so my answer is no. Usually if a manager has ridden his starters too hard during a season, those men will break down in the following season. This is what happened to the Cubs in 2004 (after a pennant run), and the Sox in 2001 (after their short playoff run). Of the five Sox startes that I can see getting hurt next year, I'd guess Freddy Garcia and of course, El Duque. Fortunately for the Sox, if one starter does miss an extended amount of time, Brandon McCarthy is a decent replacement. That said, I'd rather trade positions with them. I tip my cap to them and have already congratulated my Sox fan friends. I respect their style of play.

And unless one of Podsednik's intangibles is getting the pitchers on his team to be awesome, then there isn't much evidence supporting that as part of a reason for their success. Actually, Podsednik's intangibles may include getting Sox pitchers to pitch better. Podsednik, the leadoff hitter, is a huge reason why the Sox were so successful scoring in the first inning, making early Sox leads commenplace. The starting pitchers were able to pitch with a lead quite regularly because of Podsednik's contributions, setting the tone for a well-pitched game.

I'm still waiting for Oscar Acosta to come back. :(

\:D/ Hey, Stuart's lazy eye is better than that bug-eyed runaway bride. :shock: Yeah, but she's not influencing the MVP discussion. Besides, she could probably take in the whole stat sheet at once. :lol:

That's amazing. What a good, heartfelt story.

\:D/ Hey, Stuart's lazy eye is better than that bug-eyed runaway bride. :shock:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=jackson/050802 Scoop Jackson's column claims the Chicago/LA white, racist media is plotting to sway public opinion against Dusty Baker because they want a white manager of the Cubs. Scoop criticizes the white media for blaming Dusty only because he's black, and then says the only reason he is defending Dusty is because he's black, which makes his column's premise hypocritical. From Scoop's column: "The only question left to ask will be this: If it were Bobby Cox and not Dusty Baker, would I have ever had to write this column?" I don't understand this Bobby Cox comparison. Bobby Cox has won his division 14 years in a row; Baker hasn't won a division since 2003. I also found Scoop's comment that "suddenly" Cubs fans want to win. Thanks for writing the stereotype. I have no respect for Scoop Jackson.

Every time I start getting my hopes up, something like this happens to punch me in the gut. What's most disappointing is I had such high hopes for KW after his last start where he just dominated. He pitched ahead of hitters, didn't walk guys, and made me believe that he can help us to the WC. Then he gets hurt...agan. For those of you disagreeing with OldHappyCubFan, he is right in saying that Kerry Wood is overrated.

6/10, but without the help of guessing.

Dusty, please don't use Scott Williamson like you used Chad Fox. The Cubs don't need a closer but we do need bullpen help, ASAP. We can't wait for Williamson because no one knows if he will be good. Get Guardado or Baez and if SW turns out to be dominant, then more power to the Cubs. But what Hendry cannot do is wait. The way this team has come out fighting since the All-Star break, these guys deserve some reward in return. The players have showed that they haven't given up on the season, now Hendry must return the message to them.

Thanks for the answer guys. 2008 is A LOT better than 2006.