03-27-2010, 07:50 PM
<!--quoteo(post=84813:date=Mar 27 2010, 04:35 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Mar 27 2010, 04:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=84812:date=Mar 27 2010, 04:24 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Mar 27 2010, 04:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I agree with you about Bradley and Z's behavior issues having little-to-zero effect on the standings, but you and me are about the only ones who think that way.
I also find it odd that the writer considers the Brewers to be the favorite in the division. However, I do agree with him on the subject of the Cards possibly <i>not</i> being the indestructible juggernaught that some have made them out to be. I think they're flawed.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not arguing Bradley cost them games in the standings. I am arguing against your contention that Hendry was an idiot for trading him.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's kind of a flawed argument, BT. If, as you assert, Bradley did not cost the Cubs any ballgames, then why <i>did</i> Jim trade him? To throw a bone to the small sliver of racist fans? To promote sweet harmony in the clubhouse?
FWIW, I never called Jim an idiot for the Bradley sitch. I kind of liked the original signing, and I would have liked to see what Milt would do in Year Two.
Yeah, I do think Silva/Silva's obscene contract is an albatross, but I'm not jumping up and down about it. Hendry perceived Bradley as a distraction, and he ate the contract. It is what it is.
As Jim said in the article, it's time to move on.
I also find it odd that the writer considers the Brewers to be the favorite in the division. However, I do agree with him on the subject of the Cards possibly <i>not</i> being the indestructible juggernaught that some have made them out to be. I think they're flawed.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not arguing Bradley cost them games in the standings. I am arguing against your contention that Hendry was an idiot for trading him.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's kind of a flawed argument, BT. If, as you assert, Bradley did not cost the Cubs any ballgames, then why <i>did</i> Jim trade him? To throw a bone to the small sliver of racist fans? To promote sweet harmony in the clubhouse?
FWIW, I never called Jim an idiot for the Bradley sitch. I kind of liked the original signing, and I would have liked to see what Milt would do in Year Two.
Yeah, I do think Silva/Silva's obscene contract is an albatross, but I'm not jumping up and down about it. Hendry perceived Bradley as a distraction, and he ate the contract. It is what it is.
As Jim said in the article, it's time to move on.
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