Bradley traded??

[bz]

<!--quoteo(post=82418:date=Mar 11 2010, 07:19 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 11 2010, 07:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=82413:date=Mar 11 2010, 08:17 PM:name=bz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Mar 11 2010, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Everyone knew it was a gamble to sign him. But the gamble was that he'd play 130 games, and that would appease his dickishness. No one expected him to be relatively healthy and not perform. No one calculated that as part of the risk.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So yes or no: you're saying the primary reason the Cubs had to dump him was because he "didn't perform"?

EDIT: I get what you're really saying. You're saying it was both douchiness and performance. But I'm saying Hendry's quotes - all of them - only focus on performance. And that's wildly, wildly misleading.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Any respectable boss doesn't bash an employee. If he wanted to be Ozzie Guillen and grab a mic spouting such and such about Bradley being a dickhead closet racist who couldn't hit a fat woman with a truck and who cries when he stubs his cooter on a tampon he could have. But in an attempt to save face while being classy he took the higher road. I wish he wouldn't have because it would have been high comedy, but let's get real here.