The Real Story Behind What Jim Hendry Had to Say About Milton Bradley
Earlier this week, ESPN patted itself on the back for securing an interview with former Chicago Cubs outfielder Milton Bradley, and getting him to say all the things that they knew he would say.
Chicago sucks.
Cubs fans are racist.
I’m going to rise above it all and dominate this year.
We’d heard it all before, and with growing antipathy for the whole Milton Bradley saga, most of us who write about the Cubs were content to let it go. It was actually great to watch - the interview was released late on Monday, and for more than 24 hours, there was not so much as a peep about it in the Chicago main stream media. Finally, we’d been released from the curse of Bradley.
But it turns out, they were all just waiting to get the Cubs’ reaction - and when it came yesterday from general manager Jim Hendry, they all blew their collective wad penning stories about “looking in the mirror,” and “Bradley stinking.”
And they completely missed the story.
The real story behind what Jim Hendry had to say about Milton Bradley, after the jump.
ShareWhy the 2010 Milwaukee Brewers Will Suck
Editor’s Note: Yes, it’s that time of year again - the time for us to settle back into our protective bubble where the Chicago Cubs are destined for greatness, and every other team in the National League Central is bound for spectacular failure. If you’d care to check out last year’s fare:St. Louis Cardinals, Cincinnati Reds, Milwaukee Brewers, Pittsburgh Pirates, Houston Astros. Already featured for 2010: Cincinnati Reds, Houston Astros.
The 2010 Major League Baseball season is nearly upon us, and that means two things: (1) we’re all so deprived of real baseball action that we’re willing to treat meaningless Spring Training games like they’re the playoffs, and (2) the prognosticators are out in full force. Yes, every sports publication in the world puts out a season preview. Some are interesting, some aren’t. For the most part, folks just don’t have the time necessary to do the kind of in-depth preview that is going to be of any use to a reader that actually follows the team being previewed.
So most previews end up being pretty surface level, and boring. Well, we’re not going to do that here at Bleacher Nation. It’s much more interesting (notice how I subtly pat myself on the back?) to simply examine why the team currently sucks and is going to suck in 2010.
So enjoy - we’ll be previewing the suckiness (suckosity?) of the other teams in the National League Central over the next five weeks. Up next, Bud Selig’s favorite beer-swillers, the Milwaukee Brewers. Read the full preview on why the 2010 Milwaukee Brewers will suck, after the jump.
ShareWhy the 2010 Houston Astros Will Suck
Editor’s Note: Yes, it’s that time of year again - the time for us to settle back into our protective bubble where the Chicago Cubs are destined for greatness, and every other team in the National League Central is bound for spectacular failure. If you’d care to check out last year’s fare:St. Louis Cardinals, Cincinnati Reds, Milwaukee Brewers, Pittsburgh Pirates, Houston Astros. Already featured for 2010: Cincinnati Reds.
The 2010 Major League Baseball season is nearly upon us, and that means two things: (1) we’re all so deprived of real baseball action that we’re willing to treat meaningless Spring Training games like they’re the playoffs, and (2) the prognosticators are out in full force. Yes, every sports publication in the world puts out a season preview. Some are interesting, some aren’t. For the most part, folks just don’t have the time necessary to do the kind of in-depth preview that is going to be of any use to a reader that actually follows the team being previewed.
So most previews end up being pretty surface level, and boring. Well, we’re not going to do that here at Bleacher Nation. It’s much more interesting (notice how I subtly pat myself on the back?) to simply examine why the team currently sucks and is going to suck in 2010.
So enjoy - we’ll be previewing the suckiness (suckosity?) of the other teams in the National League Central over the next five weeks. Up first, the home of Fat Elvis: the Houston Astros. Read the full preview on why the 2010 Houston Astros will suck, after the jump.
ShareBud Selig is a Hero, a Champion, and is Quite Handsome
Apparently this week, ESPN analyst and podcaster Peter Pascarelli really screwed up. He screwed up so badly that he immediately released an expansive, contrition-filled, Tiger Woods-style apology. He screwed up so badly that he’s reportedly been removed from his podcast.
His screw up? He made a crack about Major League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig.
The offending quote - all traces of which have been thoroughly scrubbed from ESPN - essentially made light of the Brewers’ recent decision to erect a statue in honor Selig, and suggested that the pigeons of Wisconsin will have a new place to relieve themselves. Think what you will of Selig, but that’s kind of funny. It’s also incredibly innocuous.
But apparently not to ESPN. Pascarelli sprinted to record a “special edition” podcast the next day, profusely apologizing for his terrible judgment. And now, he’s unlikely to return to the podcast.
So what’s this really all about? Access! ESPN has it, and doesn’t want to lose it. Maybe this was a directive from the Commissioner’s office (unlikely), but it is more likely simply to have been an internal overreaction at ESPN - “Oh God, someone said something bad about Selig! Fix it or they’ll cut us off!”
I get it, I suppose, but this seems a bit over the top, no? Just to be safe, I want to reiterate how excellent I think Bud Selig is. You think ESPN can hook me up with an interview now?
ShareWhy the 2010 Cincinnati Reds Will Suck
Editor’s Note: Yes, it’s that time of year again - the time for us to settle back into our protective bubble where the Chicago Cubs are destined for greatness, and every other team in the National League Central is bound for spectacular failure. If you’d care to check out last year’s fare: St. Louis Cardinals, Cincinnati Reds, Milwaukee Brewers, Pittsburgh Pirates, Houston Astros.
The 2010 Major League Baseball season is nearly upon us, and that means two things: (1) we’re all so deprived of real baseball action that we’re willing to treat meaningless Spring Training games like they’re the playoffs, and (2) the prognosticators are out in full force. Yes, every sports publication in the world puts out a season preview. Some are interesting, some aren’t. For the most part, folks just don’t have the time necessary to do the kind of in-depth preview that is going to be of any use to a reader that actually follows the team being previewed.
So most previews end up being pretty surface level, and boring. Well, we’re not going to do that here at Bleacher Nation. It’s much more interesting (notice how I subtly pat myself on the back?) to simply examine why the team currently sucks and is going to suck in 2010.
So enjoy - we’ll be previewing the suckiness (suckosity?) of the other teams in the National League Central over the next five weeks. Up first, the ward of the gentleman to the right: the Cincinnati Reds. Read the full preview on why the 2010 Cincinnati Reds will suck, after the jump.
ShareHere’s Something Scary: Carlos Silva Was Really Trying in Seattle
Whenever the Chicago Cubs bring a reclamation project on board, there are certain things that can inspire optimism. The guy was playing through pain or with a lingering injury the last couple of years. The guy was having family issues that distracted him. The guy had signed a huge contract and became complacent.
Any of these things would allow Cubs fans to have just the tiniest shade of optimism about new arrival, Carlos Silva. Silva, acquired in a crap-in, crap-out swap with the Mariners for Milton Bradley, was absolutely horrible in his two seasons in Seattle. Sure, he was hurt last year, but he was awful in 2008, long before the injury. But, he had signed a huge contract before 2008, so maybe, for those first two years, he had let himself go a little bit. Maybe he let himself get comfortable - and we can cling to the hope that he will rededicate himself now. Yes. Yes. I’m starting to feel the optimism.
The only thing that could bring me down would be to learn that Silva was really committed to being the best he could be when he arrived in Seattle.
Silva now is battling not only for a spot in the Cubs rotation but also to redeem himself.
“To be honest, for me, my last two years have been very disappointing, and not for Seattle, but for myself,” Silva said Friday. “It was disappointing because I worked very hard for my numbers and to have a good season.
“But here [with the Cubs], I’m coming with a clear mind. This is my first year in the big leagues, know what I mean? I don’t care how long I’ve been in the big leagues.”
Actually, his first season was 2002. Silva made his Major League debut on April 1 that year for Philadelphia. But he’s decided to make a fresh start. Forget the two seasons with the Phillies or the four with the Twins, although his success in Minnesota helped him get a four-year, $48 million contract with the Mariners in December 2007.
Now, Silva joins Jeff Samardzija, Tom Gorzelanny and Sean Marshall as candidates for a spot in the Cubs rotation.
“We’ll just let ‘em pitch,” Cubs manager Lou Piniella said. “We have a lot of split-squad games early, so we’ll need some innings. There’s some jobs to be won here right now, not only in the rotation but in our bullpen.”
That’s fine with Silva.
“I like to have competition, I like to be fighting for my job, I like to own my spot,” Silva said. “When I signed the contract with Seattle, my mind changed so much. I wanted to maybe impress everybody. I wanted to show people why they paid me so much money — I don’t know why, but I think that’s how I felt. cubs.com.
Son of a crap. If that’s what Silva pitches like when he’s really trying, when he’s committed to being all he can be, what’s he going to look like for the Cubs? Throw in the fact that he’s reportedly out of shape, and it’s probably absurd for us to hope for anything more than Silva taking up space in the bullpen.
Then again, maybe he was saying that, after signing that big contract, he put too much pressure on himself to perform. Maybe he got out of his usual routine, and tried too hard. Maybe now that the expectations could not possibly be any lower, Silva will be able to get back to what made him a (moderately) successful pitcher in the first place - throwing strikes, using his defense, keeping the ball down. Maybe he really can pull it together enough to be a 4.30ish ERA, fifth starting innings eater for the Cubs. Maybe.
Aw crap. Look at me getting optimistic again.
ShareJim Hendry is All Kinds of Reactionary
I suspect that if Jim Hendry were an avid investor in the stock market, he probably wouldn’t have too much success. You see, in the market, you have to anticipate moves. You need to see where the market is going to be in 6, 12 months, not where it is right now. You can’t simply react to every latest craze (though you can sometimes ride the wave for a little bit, but I digress).
The reason I say this is because being a reactionary has been Jim Hendry’s MO for the last several years with the Chicago Cubs. The Cubs lacked a leadoff hitter one year, so Hendry hastily signed a poor fit leadoff hitter to a gigantic contract (Alfonso Soriano). The Cubs had a few games of bad luck against right-handed pitching, so Hendry decided he had to dump a righty or two and get a lefty in the lineup (Milton Bradley (switch hitter)). Then the Cubs had a bad clubhouse guy, so Hendry decided to go out and grab as many “good” clubhouse guys he could find.
That’s all fine, but it reflects a guy who is merely reacting to the needs of his club, and not anticipating them before they percolate to the surface. And when it comes to Milton Bradley, Hendry should have anticipated what happened - but to hear it from him, nothing would have gone wrong if Bradley had just hit better in April.
“Offensively, he was the right guy. It wasn’t like we didn’t do our homework,” Hendry said Thursday on “The Waddle & Silvy Show” on ESPN 1000. “If he’d have hit like he normally did the first couple of months probably a lot of the issues wouldn’t have come out. He was probably our best player in spring training.
“I remember having some chats with Derrek Lee and Aramis [Ramirez] during camp, and they were thrilled to have him. He just got out of the gate so poorly and just didn’t handle that lack of success well. He had always been a good hitter and really good the couple years before we got him.”
Bradley was coming off the best season of his 10-year career after batting .321 with 22 home runs and 77 runs batted in for the Texas Rangers in 2008. He signed a three-year, $30 million contract before the 2009 season, giving the Cubs’ lineup a left-handed bat. His volatile temper was even thought to be a good thing, bringing some energy to the Cubs clubhouse.
But Bradley got off to a rough start, batting .118 in April. The Cubs suspended him for the rest of the season in September for his conduct. He finished his only season as a Cub batting .257 with 12 home runs and 40 RBIs.
The Cubs traded him to the Seattle Mariners for pitcher Carlos Silva and cash in December. They have added several players with reputations as good clubhouse guys such as outfielders Marlon Byrd and Xavier Nady, Silva and Kevin Millar, but Hendry said that is the norm while Bradley was the exception.
“Until Milton we had always had [good character players] so it wasn’t like a U-turn in philosophy,” Hendry said. “We’ve had a great bunch of guys here for a long time, and we still do. Obviously, I made the mistake of trying to fit in the perfect type of offensive player. Obviously when that didn’t work the other issues came out. It was fortunate we put it behind us but [signing good character guys] wasn’t a conscious effort.” ESPN Chicago.
Bradley was a disaster waiting to happen no matter how he hit in the early season. The guy hasn’t lasted more than a full season anywhere he’s been in the last half decade. There’s a reason for that, and it has nothing to do with how he hit early in the season.
I’m sorry if it seems like I’m continuously ragging on Jim Hendry, but it frustrates me to hear him espousing this kind of revisionist history in an obvious effort to stump for continued employment after 2010. I hope the Cubs win in 2010, I truly and painfully do. But it’s becoming more and more clear that, if they should win this year, it will be in spite of Jim Hendry’s recent efforts, not because of them.
ShareLive Together, Die Alone: LOST and the Chicago Cubs
“Every man for himself is not going to work. It’s time to start organizing. We need to figure out how we’re going to survive here. Now, I found water. Fresh water, up in the valley. I’ll take a group in at first light. If you don’t want to go, then find another way to contribute. Last week most of us were strangers. But we’re all here now. And God knows how long we’re going to be here. But if we can’t live together, we’re going to die alone.” - Jack Shephard
I have generally avoided using this space to pontificate on things personal and outside of baseball. I figure you all come here to read about the Cubs, not my thoughts on health care reform. And for a guy who has an obsession with the television show LOST that is equaled only by his obsession with the Cubs, it’s hard not to go off about the show from time to time. Warning: this is one of those times.
But the truth is, this post is as much about the Cubs as it is about LOST. The parallels weaving their way through the show, the Chicago Cubs, and Cubs fandom are worth at least one, little article as we approach tonight’s premiere of the much-anticipated final season and dramatic conclusion of LOST. The article’s a bit longer than our usual fare here at Bleacher Nation, but I think it’s worth your time if you’re a fan of the Cubs or a fan of the show. Keep reading up on the Cubs-LOST crossover.
Share
