Posts: 4,641
Threads: 210
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=82464:date=Mar 12 2010, 05:55 AM:name=Rappster)-->QUOTE (Rappster @ Mar 12 2010, 05:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=82463:date=Mar 12 2010, 02:39 AM:name=bz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Mar 12 2010, 02:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Ace...say "I'm wrong." Say, "Bz was totally correct." The writing is on the wall, son. Lest I pour beer on your feet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry, Beaze...that's just not his game. His assaults on Hendry are no longer just an argument, they've become his motif.
As best as I can figure (to borrow parlance from another era), it's about selling papers.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's pretty low, Rapp.
Not to mention glass houses, stones, and the like.
Posts: 4,641
Threads: 210
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=82463:date=Mar 12 2010, 03:39 AM:name=bz)-->QUOTE (bz @ Mar 12 2010, 03:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Ace...say "I'm wrong." Say, "Bz was totally correct." The writing is on the wall, son. Lest I pour beer on your feet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The best I can do is concede that there's a chance that Hendry had non-nefarious reasons for saying such unbelievably ridiculous things like "the only problem with Bradley was his lack of production." I admit that. That no one else has a problem with him saying such absurdly false things really bugs me, though.
It is my opinion that Hendry had some self-preservation reasons for saying it. I think I'm entitled to that opinion, just as you're entitled to yours.
And I just spit on your feet.
Posts: 1,440
Threads: 63
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=82467:date=Mar 12 2010, 06:49 AM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 12 2010, 06:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=82464:date=Mar 12 2010, 05:55 AM:name=Rappster)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rappster @ Mar 12 2010, 05:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=82463:date=Mar 12 2010, 02:39 AM:name=bz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Mar 12 2010, 02:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Ace...say "I'm wrong." Say, "Bz was totally correct." The writing is on the wall, son. Lest I pour beer on your feet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry, Beaze...that's just not his game. His assaults on Hendry are no longer just an argument, they've become his motif.
As best as I can figure (to borrow parlance from another era), it's about selling papers.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's pretty low, Rapp.
Not to mention glass houses, stones, and the like.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
On this one...you get a PM.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=82450:date=Mar 11 2010, 08:24 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 11 2010, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=82449:date=Mar 11 2010, 09:20 PM:name=AnnoCatuli)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AnnoCatuli @ Mar 11 2010, 09:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->isnt that basically what Hendry said?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. He added - twice - that Bradley came the Cubs and did not perform. Hendry went so far as to say the "only problem" with Bradley was the "lack of performance."
I mean, what the hell is that? Totally unnecessary to be said.
But there's a reason he said it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ace, couldn't Hendry simply be saying that Bradley sucked, and everything else flowed from that? In other words, if he had played well, none of these problems would have happened?
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: 11,810
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Here's my take, if anyone cares. And I'm certain all of this has been said already by others...but I'm saying it anyway.
- Everybody knows Bradley is a grade-A douche and that he's no longer on the Cubs primarily because of his awful behavior. Everybody. Except maybe Bradley -- but that's only because he's clinically insane.
- Does Hendry believe Bradley is gone entirely because of his poor performance on the field? Of course not. Does he expect anyone else to believe that? I don't think so.
I'm just trying to think about what purpose it would serve to respond/retaliate to Bradley's psychotic babbling at this point. Why let Bradley drag us down into the muck with him? If Hendry plays on the same field as Bradley with all of this nonsense, then to some degree, doesn't it legitimize Bradley's ranting? It would make all of it seem much more personal, wouldn't it? Is it possible that Hendry is just trying to take the high road?
I don't think there's anything Hendry can say at this point to make himself look better when it comes to the Bradley trade. No amount of verbal gymnastics is going to distract anyone from the facts. Bradley was a disaster. Hendry traded him for the worst starter in baseball. Whatever Hendry says at this point isn't going to make anyone gloss over this. I don't think Tom Ricketts (or anyone else) is going to fall for that.
Posts: 3,710
Threads: 119
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=82473:date=Mar 12 2010, 10:11 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 12 2010, 10:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Here's my take, if anyone cares. And I'm certain all of this has been said already by others...but I'm saying it anyway.
- Everybody knows Bradley is a grade-A douche and that he's no longer on the Cubs primarily because of his awful behavior. Everybody. Except maybe Bradley -- but that's only because he's clinically insane.
- Does Hendry believe Bradley is gone entirely because of his poor performance on the field? Of course not. Does he expect anyone else to believe that? I don't think so.
I'm just trying to think about what purpose it would serve to respond/retaliate to Bradley's psychotic babbling at this point. Why let Bradley drag us down into the muck with him? If Hendry plays on the same field as Bradley with all of this nonsense, then to some degree, doesn't it legitimize Bradley's ranting? It would make all of it seem much more personal, wouldn't it? Is it possible that Hendry is just trying to take the high road?
I don't think there's anything Hendry can say at this point to make himself look better when it comes to the <b>Hendry traded him for the worst starter in baseball.</b>Bradley trade. No amount of verbal gymnastics is going to distract anyone from the facts. Bradley was a disaster. Whatever Hendry says at this point isn't going to make anyone gloss over this. I don't think Tom Ricketts (or anyone else) is going to fall for that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The one important point that you may have missed was Hendry traded Bradley for $6 MM of salary relief from Bradley's contract. You'll be hard pressed to find anyone to believe that the trade was Bradley for Silva. Officially it's Bradley for Silva + Cash which can be interpreted as Bradley for Cash Relief from Bradley's contract.
Regarding Hendry's line "the only negative on Bradley was that he couldn't produce". It's interesting if you look back to the comments Hendry made when the trade was first announced, you'll see that he has used very similar comments a number of times.
I interpreted Hendry's comment as, "If the douche bag could have produced 80 RBI's last year, we could have put up with his bat shit craziness."
Posts: 11,810
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Given some of the stories we've heard, 80 RBI might be a little low.
Of course, if he produced, he probably wouldn't have sulked around the clubhouse as much and/or lashed out at the fans/media/invisible dwarf in his head as often.
Posts: 8,024
Threads: 100
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=82468:date=Mar 12 2010, 06:53 AM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 12 2010, 06:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->It is my opinion that Hendry had some self-preservation reasons for saying it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But Ace, who would buy it? Who would Hendry even think would buy it? It's just an exec spewing whatever because he doesn't want to feed into the racism bullshit and he doesn't want to call the guy a crazy asshole. So what's left to a guy with Hendry's limited imagination is crapola.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity...and all that.
Posts: 3,710
Threads: 119
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=82478:date=Mar 12 2010, 10:49 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 12 2010, 10:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Given some of the stories we've heard, 80 RBI might be a little low.
Of course, if he produced, he probably wouldn't have sulked around the clubhouse as much and/or lashed out at the fans/media/invisible dwarf in his head as often.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Figured that Moises Alou had 61 RBI's the first year of his 3 year deal and the Cubs held on to him and he was dumb enough to piss on his own hands so 80 RBIs might have been enough to keep management quiet.
Then management would have just blamed injuries, instead of Bradley, for the team losing last year.
Posts: 1,440
Threads: 63
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Actually...lots of good points here, and Hendry actually does Bradley a favor. Having a bad offensive season as a reason for trade is far more palatable than saying the dude was bananas.
Being a professional sometimes calls for diplomatically dicing the commentary...
Posts: 540
Threads: 26
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->You see, when Hendry chose to sign Milton Bradley over Raul Ibanez, Adam Dunn and Bobby Abreu - all of whom had successful 2009 seasons - he did so knowing full well that Bradley had been with five teams in six seasons, had a reputation of being a distraction and terrible teammate, and had an inherent risk of self-destruction<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Cubs needed a run producer to hit 5th. Abreu or Ibanez (I will give Hendry that he could not know, Dunn would end up in his price range) were better choices. There were many reasons. Bradley could have a blow up, he could be injured, he could be a bad club house influence, he never has been a great run producer and last and least he could have his worse OPS in 8 years.
Hendry is playing it off like "oh yeah, I made a mistake, I never expected him to OPS .775."
I like you guys a lot.
Posts: 4,641
Threads: 210
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=82492:date=Mar 12 2010, 12:50 PM:name=leonardsipes)-->QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Mar 12 2010, 12:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->You see, when Hendry chose to sign Milton Bradley over Raul Ibanez, Adam Dunn and Bobby Abreu - all of whom had successful 2009 seasons - he did so knowing full well that Bradley had been with five teams in six seasons, had a reputation of being a distraction and terrible teammate, and had an inherent risk of self-destruction<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Cubs needed a run producer to hit 5th. Abreu or Ibanez (I will give Hendry that he could not know, Dunn would end up in his price range) were better choices. There were many reasons. Bradley could have a blow up, he could be injured, he could be a bad club house influence, he never has been a great run producer and last and least he could have his worse OPS in 8 years.
Hendry is playing it off like "oh yeah, I made a mistake, I never expected him to OPS .775."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
LENNY! I've always loved you.
Posts: 181
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2010
Reputation:
0
Come on Leonard, who would have ever of expected Ibanez to have a career year at the age of 37. I didnt.I can understand why he was avoided.
Dunn, I would have loved to of signed. But if he was signed, the outfield defense would have given Cub fans heart attacks, as well as the pitchers. I can understand why he wasn't signed.
Abreau though, is the guy I would have looked into before Bradley. Abreau is the one that really ticks me off.
Posts: 2,100
Threads: 41
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Posts: 8,024
Threads: 100
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
"In all fairness to Milton, I thought he thought there were three outs," Wakamatsu said.
I literally laughed out loud.
|
