Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64125:date=Sep 23 2009, 07:39 AM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Sep 23 2009, 07:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The Reggie example is interesting, but the difference is that he was a jerkoff who produced. Bradley didn't.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But that's really the point, isn't it? You can accept a guy who produces if he is an asshole, but if he is an asshole and doesn't produce, he hurts the team. In that equation, the only thing changing is the players performance, NOT his personality.
Look, in 1998, from everything I have heard, the Cubs clubhouse was a DISASTER, as Grace and Sosa despised each other, and 2 distinct camps formed. They managed to do OK. Then in 1999 it all went to shit, with roughly the same personalities involved.
Yes, the Cubs look loose and relaxed right now, after getting rid of Bradley. They also won 7 of 8 the week before they shitcanned Bradley, so it's possible to play well even when you have a cancer in the clubhouse.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 14,130
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64130:date=Sep 23 2009, 08:52 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Sep 23 2009, 08:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=64125:date=Sep 23 2009, 07:39 AM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Sep 23 2009, 07:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The Reggie example is interesting, but the difference is that he was a jerkoff who produced. Bradley didn't.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But that's really the point, isn't it? You can accept a guy who produces if he is an asshole, but if he is an asshole and doesn't produce, he hurts the team. In that equation, the only thing changing is the players performance, NOT his personality.
Look, in 1998, from everything I have heard, the Cubs clubhouse was a DISASTER, as Grace and Sosa despised each other, and 2 distinct camps formed. They managed to do OK. Then in 1999 it all went to shit, with roughly the same personalities involved.
Yes, the Cubs look loose and relaxed right now, after getting rid of Bradley. They also won 7 of 8 the week before they shitcanned Bradley, so it's possible to play well even when you have a cancer in the clubhouse.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't disagree with any of that. I generally don't buy into the "clubhouse cancer" theories. All I'm saying is that when you have a certain chemistry to your team (I'm essentially lumping the 2007-08 teams into one bucket) and then all of a sudden you throw in a douche like Bradley who brought nothing but negativity and a limp bat, remove 2 (productive) clubhouse leaders like Wood and DeRosa, and add in a few career-worst seasons and an injury or 2 or three, and it all adds up. We're actually very fortunate to have an above .500 record at this point. I'm not pinning the entire lost season on Bradley, but I just think this team would have put a lot less pressure on itself without him. The pressure was already unbearable in the playoffs, and now this just tipped the scales even more. Maybe we'd still miss the playoffs had we never signed Bradley in the first place, but at least it would have been one less daily distraction to deal with.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64127:date=Sep 23 2009, 08:38 AM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ Sep 23 2009, 08:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=64125:date=Sep 23 2009, 07:39 AM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Sep 23 2009, 07:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The Reggie example is interesting, but the difference is that he was a jerkoff who produced. Bradley didn't.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The other difference was...as noted...the clubhouse was chaos...it wasn't one guy being a distraction. It was the culture of that clubhouse.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yep, you stole my response.
the reggie jackson comparison is dumb. he was a cancer on teams full of cancers. incredibly talented cancers at that. the cubs are a mentally weak team as it is. add a complete nutjob and is it so out of the realm of possibility that one man can disrupt a whole team? i tend to agree that baseball players, and cub players in particular, can be pussyish, but to just dismiss bradley's influence on this team is naive.
hendry fucked up when he signed this guy. it may be the greatest fuck up of his career and it could possibly get him fired. BUT the way he's handled it has made me respect him. by suspending bradley, he admitted he made a mistake, and he had the guts to do something a lot of GMs wouldn't do. i have to commend him for that.
criticize him for making the deal in the first place, but not for how he's handled this mess since then.
Wang.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64136:date=Sep 23 2009, 09:33 AM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Sep 23 2009, 09:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=64130:date=Sep 23 2009, 08:52 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Sep 23 2009, 08:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=64125:date=Sep 23 2009, 07:39 AM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Sep 23 2009, 07:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The Reggie example is interesting, but the difference is that he was a jerkoff who produced. Bradley didn't.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But that's really the point, isn't it? You can accept a guy who produces if he is an asshole, but if he is an asshole and doesn't produce, he hurts the team. In that equation, the only thing changing is the players performance, NOT his personality.
Look, in 1998, from everything I have heard, the Cubs clubhouse was a DISASTER, as Grace and Sosa despised each other, and 2 distinct camps formed. They managed to do OK. Then in 1999 it all went to shit, with roughly the same personalities involved.
Yes, the Cubs look loose and relaxed right now, after getting rid of Bradley. They also won 7 of 8 the week before they shitcanned Bradley, so it's possible to play well even when you have a cancer in the clubhouse.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't disagree with any of that. I generally don't buy into the "clubhouse cancer" theories. All I'm saying is that when you have a certain chemistry to your team (I'm essentially lumping the 2007-08 teams into one bucket) and then all of a sudden you throw in a douche like Bradley who brought nothing but negativity and a limp bat, remove 2 (productive) clubhouse leaders like Wood and DeRosa, and add in a few career-worst seasons and an injury or 2 or three, and it all adds up. We're actually very fortunate to have an above .500 record at this point. I'm not pinning the entire lost season on Bradley, but I just think this team would have put a lot less pressure on itself without him. The pressure was already unbearable in the playoffs, and now this just tipped the scales even more. Maybe we'd still miss the playoffs had we never signed Bradley in the first place, but at least it would have been one less daily distraction to deal with.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
agreed on all accounts.
Wang.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->the reggie jackson comparison is dumb. he was a cancer on teams full of cancers.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So the Reggie Jackson playing for the Yankees example is "dumb"? OK, how can you explain the A's going to 5 World Series in a row, and winning 3 of them, all with a "cancer" playing in RF?
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64156:date=Sep 23 2009, 10:50 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Sep 23 2009, 10:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->the reggie jackson comparison is dumb. he was a cancer on teams full of cancers.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So the Reggie Jackson playing for the Yankees example is "dumb"? OK, how can you explain the A's going to 5 World Series in a row, and winning 3 of them, all with a "cancer" playing in RF?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the A's had more cancers than the yankees, that's how. they were legendary for their in-fighting. just like the yankees were a few years later. i don't think one player is going to ruin any chemistry when everyone is insane.
and i'm pretty sure when kb brought up reggie, he referred to oakland and new york. it's a bad example.
Wang.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64191:date=Sep 23 2009, 01:54 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Sep 23 2009, 01:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=64156:date=Sep 23 2009, 10:50 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Sep 23 2009, 10:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->the reggie jackson comparison is dumb. he was a cancer on teams full of cancers.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So the Reggie Jackson playing for the Yankees example is "dumb"? OK, how can you explain the A's going to 5 World Series in a row, and winning 3 of them, all with a "cancer" playing in RF?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the A's had more cancers than the yankees, that's how. they were legendary for their in-fighting. just like the yankees were a few years later. i don't think one player is going to ruin any chemistry when everyone is insane.
and i'm pretty sure when kb brought up reggie, he referred to oakland and new york. it's a bad example.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How the fuck is that a bad example? Who were the "cancers" on the As? You are pulling shit out of your ass on this Tom. Was Joe Rudi an asshole? Sal Bando? Is there someone out there with a bunch of stories about what a cocksucker Bert Campanaris was?
I know Vida Blue did drugs, and Claudell Washington was sorta lazy, but other than that, who were the "cancers" on the A's? How are they worse than the Yankees? I know Bill North got into a fight, but that was WITH Jackson, which completely reinforces my point. What were the other legendary non-Jackson fights?
Basically, you are using fighting WITH Jackson as an illustration of how these teams had cancers other than Jackson. It doesn't work that way.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64206:date=Sep 23 2009, 03:34 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Sep 23 2009, 03:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=64191:date=Sep 23 2009, 01:54 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Sep 23 2009, 01:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=64156:date=Sep 23 2009, 10:50 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Sep 23 2009, 10:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->the reggie jackson comparison is dumb. he was a cancer on teams full of cancers.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So the Reggie Jackson playing for the Yankees example is "dumb"? OK, how can you explain the A's going to 5 World Series in a row, and winning 3 of them, all with a "cancer" playing in RF?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the A's had more cancers than the yankees, that's how. they were legendary for their in-fighting. just like the yankees were a few years later. i don't think one player is going to ruin any chemistry when everyone is insane.
and i'm pretty sure when kb brought up reggie, he referred to oakland and new york. it's a bad example.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How the fuck is that a bad example? Who were the "cancers" on the As? You are pulling shit out of your ass on this Tom. Was Joe Rudi an asshole? Sal Bando? Is there someone out there with a bunch of stories about what a cocksucker Bert Campanaris was?
I know Vida Blue did drugs, and Claudell Washington was sorta lazy, but other than that, who were the "cancers" on the A's? How are they worse than the Yankees? I know Bill North got into a fight, but that was WITH Jackson, which completely reinforces my point. What were the other legendary non-Jackson fights?
Basically, you are using fighting WITH Jackson as an illustration of how these teams had cancers other than Jackson. It doesn't work that way.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
wow, why are you so pissed about this?
Wang.
Posts: 1,172
Threads: 22
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I believe it.
I mean I have a great job at a great firehouse, but I work with an absolute cunt. So much so that I am now hating my job, hate turning up for work and my confidence in my work is way down. I know its two totally different things but I bet its the same result. When he was on annual leave last month, I had the best month at work for over a year. I bet its the same in the Cubs locker room at the moment.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Don't like the Reggie example?
How about that Barry Bonds fellow? Makes Bradley look like Derek Jeter.
When he was on the Pirates, he was completely <b>despised.</b> Yet, his teammates <i>somehow</i> managed to not be complete pussies about it, and came in 1st place every year.
Bonds leaves town; result: a team that makes the playoffs every year suddenly reels off 17 straight losing seasons.
Bonds goes to SF. The Giants suddenly are either in the playoffs, or in the hunt every year. If Bonds was a clubhouse cancer in Pittsburgh, in Frisco he's a fucking nuclear bomb. Doesn't matter. Why?
Because his teammates weren't a bunch of fucking crybaby pussies.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Boy, I sound like a complete dick in the above post.
Anyway, to get back to Butcher's original question, I think you can make examples for both ways. Ideally, you want everybody getting along, helping each other out, and going out for beers together after the game. But I think we've seen quite a few of those types of team right here in Chicago, and often, they seem <i>too</i> mellow to succeed at professional sports.
Often times in sports, like in art, emotional pain equals extra effort.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 650
Threads: 12
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64222:date=Sep 23 2009, 10:36 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Sep 23 2009, 10:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Don't like the Reggie example?
How about that Barry Bonds fellow? Makes Bradley look like Derek Jeter.
When he was on the Pirates, he was completely <b>despised.</b> Yet, his teammates <i>somehow</i> managed to not be complete pussies about it, and came in 1st place every year.
Bonds leaves town; result: a team that makes the playoffs every year suddenly reels off 17 straight losing seasons.
Bonds goes to SF. The Giants suddenly are either in the playoffs, or in the hunt every year. If Bonds was a clubhouse cancer in Pittsburgh, in Frisco he's a fucking nuclear bomb. Doesn't matter. Why?
Because his teammates weren't a bunch of fucking crybaby pussies.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Barry Bonds put up an OPS over 1.000 every year except for one from 1992 to 2007, the lowest in that span was in 2006 where he OPSed .999. Milton Bradley OPSed his career high last year, want to take a guess what it was? .999
Bonds' teams won because he was the best hitter of this generation, Milton Bradley can't carry his jockstrap. I highly fucking doubt it was because the Giants and Pirates "weren't a bunch of fucking crybaby pussies."
![[Image: 2hz4sk2.jpg]](http://i35.tinypic.com/2hz4sk2.jpg)
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Thanks for making my point for me. (there's no such thing as a "clubhouse cancer," especially if the dickhead is hittin')
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 8,041
Threads: 100
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64232:date=Sep 24 2009, 12:06 AM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Sep 24 2009, 12:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Thanks for making my point for me. (there's no such thing as a "clubhouse cancer," especially if the dickhead is hittin')<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The reasons the Jackson and Bonds examples fail is because their performances trumped their prima donna attitudes. First of all, their teammates care primarily about performance. Secondly, the media isn't in your face asking "Barry, what do you think the problem is?" every day. When the media ultimately turned on Bonds (rightly), it fell apart nicely.
Milton was a negative attention whore while underachieving and failing to build any bridges with his teammates. That's not going to be easy to get away with.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=64223:date=Sep 23 2009, 10:46 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Sep 23 2009, 10:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Boy, I sound like a complete dick in the above post.
Anyway, to get back to Butcher's original question, I think you can make examples for both ways. Ideally, you want everybody getting along, helping each other out, and going out for beers together after the game. But I think we've seen quite a few of those types of team right here in Chicago, and often, they seem <i>too</i> mellow to succeed at professional sports.
Often times in sports, like in art, emotional pain equals extra effort.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
don't sweat it kb, bt came off as a far bigger dick than you did.
and the bonds example was much better than the reggie example, which didn't make much sense.
Wang.
|
