17 Seconds

player talk, posturing, blah blah blah. this means nothing

a made up one

do you really not realize that the people who make fun of you aren't milton bradley apologists, but rather are making fun of you for your usage of a meaningless statistic like rbi's? yes, bradley has been a big dissapointment, but there are numbers out there that actually show that. rbis do not.

"even more"?

Yeah but Jones was also a much more frustrating player, with his constant throws into the dirt, soriano-esque at-bats, and baserunning blunders. He seemed like a likeable guy, but not a likeable players. Burnitz kind of just sucked and was there. plus, most of his boos came in 2007, when he was really crappy and well below expectations.

Did Jeromy Burnitz ever get booed in 2005? everybody knew burnitz would suck when we signed him heilman gets booed. miles gets booed. howry got booed. marquis got booed. Fair enough. Not saying I agreed with Bradley, just pointing out an example of a RF in the very recent past that was bad but seemed like he got a free pass from the Wrigley faithful. offensive players usually only get booed at wrigley when they perform below expectations. if bradley was just a stop gap type guy who signed a small contract, he probably wouldn't be getting booed right now. they would have expected this production. that wasn't the case though. people expected big things from bradley, and have been disappointed. that's when the booing occurs.

Did Jeromy Burnitz ever get booed in 2005? everybody knew burnitz would suck when we signed him heilman gets booed. miles gets booed. howry got booed. marquis got booed.

What were his postgame comments tonight?

If that's your opinion, fine, and it may very well be correct. I'm just saying that some of the people who are claiming that his contract is untradeable are also saying it would be stupid to move it if the opportunity presented itself. It's like "oh well he's still productive enough to want to keep that contract.....but only if you're the Cubs. No way another team would take that on. It's good for the Cubs though." You think it's untradeable? Fine. Just don't say that and then in the next sentence say how it makes sense for the Cubs to keep the contract. It doesn't go both ways. Either it's a desirable contract or it's not. That's what doesn't make sense. I literally suggested the "we could eat part of it" thing ONCE, and I was only half serious about it in the first place. I don't really see this wavering that you talk about. I also never pretended that we could dump him. I simply expressed that I'd like to, and then questioned the people who blasted me for wanting to get rid of it.

because the cubs are the ones already holding the risk. other teams have the option of taking on that risk at $10M per year for 2 years, or leaving it. they'd be wise to leave it since he's often injured and often an a-hole. lol what? your argument makes no sense whatsoever. what does it matter who is "holding the risk" right now? when the offseason arrives, you're talking about a player at 2/20. that 2/20 contract is exactly the same to the cubs as it is to any other team. it's milton bradley at 2/20, period. if it would be "wise to leave it since he's often injured and often an a-hole", then that goes for the cubs too.

it's not that bad as far as his production, but given his demeanor, relatively poor season (except for OBP) and injury history, he's a significant risk and nobody is going to take on his contract at full value. And they're wrong to not want to take that on? what are you talking about? who said it was wrong for nobody to want milton's contract? just saying that you seem to think it would be stupid for the cubs to rid themselves of bradley and his contract, but then you also say it would be nearly impossible to do it. if it's a contract that you think is worth keeping, why wouldn't any other teams think the same thing?

his ops is up to .738 it would be the perfect capper to this nightmare season if he ended the year with an ops of like .800

yeah plus aramis got hurt with no reasonable backup to be found, fontenot tanked and soto either sucked or was hurt. that's a lot of bad production from a number of positions and we don't have a monster like pujols to carry the lineup. It was a pretty awful cocktail of obvious things (fontenot, lack of health/depth at corner IF/OF positions) going wrong, and not so obvious things (Harden being healthy-ish but no good for so long, Marmol's wildness, Soriano falling apart, Soto sucking, etc..) going wrong. I'm really ready for this year to be over with. oh man, i almost forgot how bad fontenot was this year and how they were counting on him. whoops. bradley miles dempster gregg heilman fontenot those were the guys that hendry basically banked on last offseason (meaning guys he either signed, traded for, or gave starting jobs to to fre up payroll). man, crash and burn. 2 slightly above average seasons and 4 huge failures

it's not that bad as far as his production, but given his demeanor, relatively poor season (except for OBP) and injury history, he's a significant risk and nobody is going to take on his contract at full value. And they're wrong to not want to take that on?

yeah, hopefully management can sit down with him and get him to cool it for the rest of this disastrous season, and then next year things will be better. i certainly don't want him to make himself so hated in chicago with these comments that they're essentially forced to move him for scraps while eating a bunch of money. the red sox dealt with manny ramirez for a long time... milton can't be a bigger asshat than manny. Yeah but Manny is so good that you could put up with his nonsense. Milton is not remotely close to being the hitter Manny was with Boston. I think this could definitely get ugly over the next month though. The more he says, the more he's going to get booed.

There's that FIRE that this team needs so bad. Maybe we should keep this guy after all.

ok, so three questions: 1. Who's trading us a corner outfielder who's better than bradley? 2. What do we have to give up (in prospects) to get that player? 3. Is it really worth giving up very good prospects for what's likely to be a marginal improvement at the position? How am supposed to answer those questions if I don't know exactly who is available? There are almost always guys available. I'm not talking about a superstar. I'm talking about a good player who is cheaper than Bradley (money-wise), stays healthy, and isn't a headcase. And we have prospects to trade for these types of good-but-not-great players. Wait, so it would take a"magical world" for somebody to take on Bradley's contract without us eating salary? Then why are you acting like it would be so stupid to udmp off his contract? Make up your mind. Is it a bad contract, or not?

Obviously Soriano and Bradley's contracts are different, but it's the same principle. You are saying it's stupid to get rid of guys if you are getting lowest possible value. It's not stupid if you'e doing it to simply rid yourself of a contract and open up that money to spend elsewhere. Trading bradley wouldn't be about getting anything in return. The return would come from what you spend that money on. And yeah, I already said his OBP is very nice, but I'm sorry, a .400 slugging percentage just does not cut it for a corner outfielder making 10 million in my opinion.

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Let's dump Bradley at his lowest value and get junk in return. Yes, it makes perfect sense to get rid of his remaining 20 million so we can spend that money on a better right fielder. It's not about getting anything in return. the return is getting back 20 million dollars of your poor investment. Look at it this way. Let's say Bradley was a free agent this offseason. You have the choice of either giving him 2/20, or signing somebody else. That's what we're basically talking about right now. You'd give him 2/20? I wouldn't. Yeah, I'd be so pissed if we traded him, got a right fielder who actually hit next season, and then watched Bradley put up an .840 OPS for 400 at-bats on a different team next season. Man, that would SUCK. Who's the RF that's going to replace him? Rule out all of the good FA outfielders because they're not going to be able to sign guys like Holliday or Bay. This should be interesting. You know you're allowed to make trades in major league baseball, right? And how do you know they wouldn't have a chance at Holliday or Bay?

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Let's dump Bradley at his lowest value and get junk in return. Yes, it makes perfect sense to get rid of his remaining 20 million so we can spend that money on a better right fielder. It's not about getting anything in return. the return is getting back 20 million dollars of your poor investment. Look at it this way. Let's say Bradley was a free agent this offseason. You have the choice of either giving him 2/20, or signing somebody else. That's what we're basically talking about right now. You'd give him 2/20? I wouldn't. Those cost-cutting moves sure worked wonders for us this past offseason. Hate him all you want, but he's going to rebound next year. I just hope he's still with us when that happens. What is this based on? He's now been this low .800's OPS for 3 of the last 5 seasons. The odds are more in favor of him being that than being the great hitter he was for like 600 at-bats spread out over 07 and 08. And I don't get the comparison to the cost cutting moves that have been made. Mark DeRosa was GOOD last year. Kerry Wood was GOOD last year. They were both worth what they were making. Bradley, despite the high OBP, has not been worth what he's making. If somebody offered to take Soriano off our hands, would you say "no, he's at his lowest possible value right now!". No, of course you wouldn't. You'd be happy to get rid of the contract. I'd be happy to get rid of Bradley's contract. Oh well, I guess I'm ridiculous for wanting a right fielder who can actually slug higher than .450

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Let's dump Bradley at his lowest value and get junk in return. Yes, it makes perfect sense to get rid of his remaining 20 million so we can spend that money on a better right fielder. It's not about getting anything in return. the return is getting back 20 million dollars of your poor investment. Look at it this way. Let's say Bradley was a free agent this offseason. You have the choice of either giving him 2/20, or signing somebody else. That's what we're basically talking about right now. You'd give him 2/20? I wouldn't. Yeah, I'd be so pissed if we traded him, got a right fielder who actually hit next season, and then watched Bradley put up an .840 OPS for 400 at-bats on a different team next season. Man, that would SUCK.

i gave milton the benefit of the doubt for a long time, but i'm done. there's a difference between "wearing your heart on your sleeve" and being a whiny bitch. right now, he's the latter. he knew damn well when he sined with the cubs everything that came with it. if you sign a big contract and you don't perform up the expectations, you're going to get booed. you're not performing up to expectations, so you're getting booed. is that right? maybe not, but don't act like you weren't aware that this would happen. his little gestures to the crowd are pathetic at this point. oh good job, you hit a meaningless home run to raise your OPS just over .800. sounds like a perfect time to say "yeah, i'm awesome now... why arent you booing me?" hopefully this gets uglier and uglier over the next month so hendry will be forced to dump this joker off on his 24th team. i dont even care if he has to eat some money

unless you play baseball. then they make it AWESOME

Cubs new offseason theme... get more triple play friendly?

.288/.420/.584 (1.004) And in a pitchers' park, no less. Just sayin....