Turn Off Ads?
Page 10 of 22 FirstFirst ... 6789101112131420 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 330

Thread: The Milton Bradley Thread

  1. #136
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,068

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlifeman21 View Post
    But if Milton Bradley's the documented problem child that edabbs makes him out to be, then his value has to be low, right? ... and teams aren't going to pay top dollar for a problem child...
    I don't know. It's going to be really interested to see what he ends up getting.

    Personally, I hope the Cubs do throw a lot of money and years at the guy.

    Character issues aside, the guy is hard to project. He had a monster 2008. He did very well in limited time in 2007. I haven't watched the guy enough to know what happened. Did he make some kind of adjustment which allowed him to get a surge in offense? Or was he just happy or motivated by pending FA?

    The guy had a monster year in Cleveland, but then really didn't play as well in LA and Oakland. I don't know if that was caused by his mood or what. That's the chance you take with signing this guy. Is he going to fall back to earth like he did in LA and Oakland? Is something going to happen to make him sulk?

    I admit though, the thought of Bradley coming after Brantley and the Brennamans when they criticize him is exciting
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #137
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,123

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Bradley has had chronic hamstring problems. It's unlikely he'd hold up well as a regular in the outfield. He's high risk in a lot of ways -- health, $$$ and intangibles. Put him on a multiyear deal and expect that he'll string together the kind of years you're paying him for? Wishful thinking. I'd still love to see it -- it'd be entertaining -- but my guess is that the Reds go more risk-averse, given that there are several options out there for improving the offense, and it would be hard for me to argue with that approach.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  4. #138
    Titanic Struggles Caveat Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The 513
    Posts
    12,642

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by lollipopcurve View Post
    Bradley has had chronic hamstring problems. It's unlikely he'd hold up well as a regular in the outfield. He's high risk in a lot of ways -- health, $$$ and intangibles. Put him on a multiyear deal and expect that he'll string together the kind of years you're paying him for? Wishful thinking. I'd still love to see it -- it'd be entertaining -- but my guess is that the Reds go more risk-averse, given that there are several options out there for improving the offense, and it would be hard for me to argue with that approach.
    Enquirer headline: "Reds sign Milton to Big Contract"

    Nope, don't see any way, any how, that things could go wrong.
    Championships Matter.
    23 Years and Counting...

  5. #139
    I hate the Cubs LoganBuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,169

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    I admit though, the thought of Bradley coming after Brantley and the Brennamans when they criticize him is exciting
    The Sox traded Bullfrog the only player they've got for Shottenhoffen. Four-eyes Shottenhoffen a utility infielder. They've got a whole team of utility infielders.

  6. #140
    Member Wheelhouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,908

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    The rap on Jim Edmonds was that he had a hideous attitude and was toxic in the clubhouse. He got to St. Louis and that all changed.
    "Don't trust any statistics you did not fake yourself."--Winston Churchill

  7. #141
    Party like it's 1990 Blitz Dorsey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    4,716

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wheelhouse View Post
    The rap on Jim Edmonds was that he had a hideous attitude and was toxic in the clubhouse. He got to St. Louis and that all changed.
    Who knew a steady diet of steroids/HGH could also change a player's attitude for the better. Man that is some good stuff. 'Roid rage is a myth!

  8. #142
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    515

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    I'm really warming up the idea of Bradley if we could get him on a small contract like 2 years. This only costs of money and Dye would probably cost us similar money & Bailey, etc ... the bous is we only have Dye for 1 year.. but if Bradley does well, we could always attempt to trade him before 2010
    Last edited by hippie07; 12-17-2008 at 02:53 PM.

  9. #143
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,423

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wheelhouse View Post
    The rap on Jim Edmonds was that he had a hideous attitude and was toxic in the clubhouse. He got to St. Louis and that all changed.

    When he got there he had a manager who wouldn't put up with his crap. Here we have a manager who is more tolerant.

    I'm not totally against picking up Bradley. Heck, the Reds have had players like Nuxie who went after an umpire once. Pete bumped into an umpire once too. Kevin Mitchell was no saint. The main reason I'd be against getting Bradley is because of his injury history. That said, I'd rather have a productive player for 81 games than someone who stinks for 162.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  10. #144
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip R View Post
    When he got there he had a manager who wouldn't put up with his crap. Here we have a manager who is more tolerant.

    I'm not totally against picking up Bradley. Heck, the Reds have had players like Nuxie who went after an umpire once. Pete bumped into an umpire once too. Kevin Mitchell was no saint. The main reason I'd be against getting Bradley is because of his injury history. That said, I'd rather have a productive player for 81 games than someone who stinks for 162.
    Ideally, I'd like to see Bruce play 150+ games in RF. I'd like to see Dickerson platoon with someone in CF, I don't care how many games each of them plays. I'd like to see Bradley give us as many games as possible in LF, and get the needed days off from Dickerson's platoon, or another guy. If that other guy is Laynce Nix, I'm ok with that at this point.

  11. #145
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,297

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by edabbs44 View Post
    There is a reason why MB is on his 7th organization. We can think that OPS is OPS no matter what the situation, but in actuality it doesn't work that way. This isn't strat-o-matic.

    And that lofty OPS+ was put up over seasons of 96, 61 and 126 games. Awesome, it's the second coming of Griffey circa 2003-2005. Now we just need someone to fill in the 200 missed games.
    Good article by Olney today which is basically the point I was making when the Reds were mentioned regarding Milton B.

    Baseball's strengthening code of conduct

    Thursday, February 26, 2009 | Feedback | Print Entry

    A club official stood by a batting cage this spring, as some of his players hit, and he spoke with relief about how great it was to have a troublesome player out of his clubhouse.

    "We'd ask the other players to do extra work, and he'd give the other guys a look, like, 'what a waste of time,'" the official said. "It's not that he's a bad person, really. It's just that he really wasn't going along with the program."

    Two days earlier, an AL executive spoke of how much it meant to his club to unload a talented player with a difficult personality.

    "He sucked the air out of the room," the executive said.

    Talent evaluators within the game will make judgments about fastballs, about defensive skills, about a hitter's swing. But increasingly, it seems, makeup is regarded as a pivotal factor on whether a player is acquired or dumped -- and this might be part of a broader evolution in Major League Baseball, a shift in focus away from the need of the individuals, to an emphasis on the greater good of the organization.

    And a lot of executives view these choices as business decisions. For a small-market or mid-market team -- clubs that operate with very little margin for error -- a problem personality can have a dramatic impact. Imagine a 16-man crew, says one GM, and you have one guy pulling his oar in the opposite direction. "It doesn't really matter what the other 15 guys are doing," the GM said. "It just sinks you. You can't win. You cannot succeed."

    The most prominent example in recent years might be the Tampa Bay Rays. After the 2007 season, the Rays moved to trade outfielders Delmon Young and Elijah Dukes. Other Rays felt Young simply was on his own program, conducted himself with sense of entitlement, and simply didn't work hard enough; in one memorable moment, teammate Carl Crawford, a player with a staggering work ethic, was ready to fight Young out of his frustration that Young simply didn't try to improve. Dukes played hard, but because of his off-field issues, he seemed unhappy a lot; this sapped energy out of the room.

    Young was traded to the Twins, Dukes was moved to the Nationals, and quite suddenly, the team belonged to manager Joe Maddon, who was suddenly free to focus on getting the best out of emotionally invested players and less time on keeping others in line.

    The official who stood by the batting cage felt the same way, and he nodded toward an intense and energetic young player. "His voice is now becoming an important voice in our clubhouse," the official said. "He gets the other players going. But that couldn't have happened with [John Doe] here. I don't want to make [John Doe] look bad, but it's just the truth."

    Last year, we saw a rash of managers' benching veterans for not hustling -- Charlie Manuel sat down Jimmy Rollins for not running out a ball, and then later for showing up late to the ballpark; Eric Wedge yanked Ryan Garko out of a game for not running out a groundball; and Maddon disciplined B.J. Upton for not hustling.

    We saw the Rays' bullpen succeed down the stretch while essentially abandoning the idea of set roles for relievers; rather, Maddon and pitching coach Jim Hickey, aided by the words of injured veteran Troy Percival, managed to convince the guys in the Tampa Bay bullpen to just be prepared for when they were needed, a culture has a chance to continue into 2009.

    More players are speaking out about how angry they are about the use of performance-enhancing drugs, those complaints best embodied by the words of Houston pitcher Roy Oswalt, who said flatly that he felt like Alex Rodriguez went out of bounds to cheat him of something.

    The players are in a tremendous position these days, participating in a business that has a relatively strong standing. Maybe it's because the decision-makers and the players want to protect that standing. Bit by bit, there are signs that the game's internal code of conduct is strengthening.

    "We're seeing a major change in the game," an AL manager said, "right before our eyes."
    http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog...e=olney_buster

  12. #146
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Newport Beach, CA
    Posts
    8,066

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Good article edabbs, especially when you relate it to some of the comments made by Dusty about Homer having a new, better attitude this spring (as is reported in another thread).

    Rem

  13. #147
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    princeton, nj
    Posts
    9,482

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wheelhouse View Post
    The rap on Jim Edmonds was that he had a hideous attitude and was toxic in the clubhouse.
    my take on Edmonds was that he was way too upbeat after team lost or screwed up, whereas the Angels as a group were very intense perfectionists. Kind of like the George Grande on a team of Marty Brennamens. More a personality conflict.

  14. #148
    Member red-in-la's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Santa Paula, CA
    Posts
    6,536

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    In my brief experience as a fan (at the time) I recall that it was quite a big deal when the fighting A's managed to win the WS.....teams normally worked like a team or were lampooned in the media of the day and the manager was soon fired.

    It was only when Reggie (I did it my way) Jackson and free agency made stars of Hunter and Jackson et all, that having a bunch of "individuals" was OK.

    Hence the point that was made about teams with narrow margins for error. The Yankees hire enough talent that pulling together isn't necessarily needed. Using the analogy of the writer.....if you have twin mercuries pushing your vessel along, the fact that one or two guys are rowing in another direction doesn't mean much.
    Last edited by red-in-la; 02-27-2009 at 12:36 PM.
    "Is there a problem officers?"

  15. #149
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,297

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    The saga continues. Just happy that they didn't spend $30MM+ on this guy.

    Milton Bradley left Sunday's game in the fourth inning with an apparent right leg injury.

    Not even a week. Bradley, who had some trouble with his left quad during spring training, appeared to hurt his right groin tonight. Reed Johnson pinch-ran for him. If Bradley lands on the DL, then Johnson and Kosuke Fukudome would both play pretty regularly.

  16. #150
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?

    Quote Originally Posted by edabbs44 View Post
    The saga continues. Just happy that they didn't spend $30MM+ on this guy.
    Very glad the Reds did not sign him, his injury factor bring just one problem he brings with him.

    Just for accuracy, I believe that his three year contract becomes a two year deal if he does not play at least 75 games in 09. So if the injury is serious, the Cubs only spent $20M on him. Still not a good deal.

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/0...-on-bradl.html

    I would say the curse of the goat continues, but I think no goat was needed for this blunder. Everyone could see this coming.
    Last edited by TheNext44; 04-12-2009 at 10:12 PM.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25