![]() |
|
|
#151 |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Posts: 7,948
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Reed Johnson just made a terrific catch to take away a grand slam from Prince Fielder.
That's a catch that Bradley wouldn't have made, IMO. Rem |
|
|
|
|
|
#152 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Amarillo,Texas
Posts: 3,997
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#153 |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,928
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Sorry it's Milton Bradley the Sean Avery of Baseball I am so glad that act isn't playing in the Queen City.
__________________
2006 Redzone mock Draftee's- 1(st) Daniel Bard(redsox), 1(st sup)( Jordan Walden (Angels), 2(nd) rd.- Zach Britton(Orioles), 3(rd) Blair Erickson(Cardinals), 3(rd) Tim Norton( Yankees),(cuz its a Tim Hortons thing ![]() Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever. |
|
|
|
|
|
#154 | |
|
Box of Frogs
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 15,825
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
And if you had 4/16 as the date that the injury/ejection/potential suspension trifecta gets completed, please see the front desk for your prize.
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#155 |
|
Senor Votto
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,847
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Thats a serious suspension. How many games could he get for that?
__________________
Most Vottomatic Player |
|
|
|
|
|
#156 |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 6,854
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Pete got 30 back in 1988 as I recall. Stupid Dave Pallone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#157 |
|
Box of Frogs
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 15,825
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
The scary part is that he is on a good team. I wonder how his demeanor would be if he was on a team that wasn't a contender?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#158 |
|
Posting in Dynarama
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Boston
Posts: 26,668
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
So he's only good if he plays on the Rangers?
__________________
Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong I'm witchcrafting everybody. |
|
|
|
|
|
#159 |
|
Socratic Gadfly
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,224
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Not to sound like a conspiracy nut, but Bart hated Rose, as the whole kicking him out of baseball sage demonstrated. That same month in 88, Billy Martin actually kicked an umpire, his fourth offense (this was Pete's first offense in his entire career, both as a player and manager), and he got less than a week.
That 30 day suspension for Pete was a joke, no other player or manager ever got anything close to that, ever. For some reason, Bart was out to get Rose, I could go on with other evidence, but it would be too off topic for this thread. Anyway, considering that this is Bradley's umpteenth offense, I say at least week, maybe two if they really want to make a point.
__________________
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
|
|
#160 | ||
|
breath
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: PDX
Posts: 39,400
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#161 | |
|
The Boss
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30,758
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Quote:
__________________
www.redsminorleagues.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#162 | |
|
Socratic Gadfly
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,224
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Quote:
This is not the thread to get into it, but Pete definitely dug his own grave and has no one to blame but himself. However, Bart's actions showed a definite bias against Rose. The clearest example was the fact that Bart signed a legal contract saying that the commissioner's office would not comment on Rose's guilt or innocence, but then at the press conference he said that as "an individual, but not as the commissioner," he thought Rose was guilty. A clear violation of the contract he just signed. And there is sooooo much more (a lot of which is just as damning against Rose too).
__________________
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#163 | |
|
Socratic Gadfly
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,224
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Quote:
However, there still is no way what Rose did justified 30 days. He had nothing to do with inciting the crowd, at least nothing more than any other manager getting kicked out. Heck, I've remember Sweet Lou doing much more than Pete did to incite the crowd after getting kicked out, and he never got more than a few days.
__________________
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#164 |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Cambridge, OH
Posts: 16,274
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Does anyone know what exactly Marty and Joe said that was so inflammatory and irresponsible? I remember the game, but I don't remember Marty or Joe saying anything that made me want to participate in a riot.
__________________
Americans love a winner. Americans will not tolerate a loser....Americans play to win all of the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed...the very idea of losing is hateful to an American. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. |
|
|
|
|
|
#165 | |
|
breath
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: PDX
Posts: 39,400
|
Re: Reds Rumored to be Interested in Milton Bradley?
Quote:
The real issue in the end was the showering of the field and the forced exit of the umpire for the duration of the game. Couple that with a shove, and some choice words from the Reds announcers and you have an incident that reeks of baseball in the 1890's, that fact was not lost on Bart G. is my best guess. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
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. |