I don't know where it went wrong. I had a great relationship with Wedge in Triple-A. When you...

I don't know where it went wrong. I had a great relationship with Wedge in Triple-A. When you become a big-league manager, maybe you have different responsibilities. I don't know if he had a format as to what he wanted everybody to be. It seemed he wanted everybody to be clones of each other. I'm not that type of guy.

Milton Bradley

about 1 month ago Jay Comment 41 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

He wanted 25 Casey Blakes!

Dear Mr. Sabean, I hear you have a reputation of being stupid. Want to deal Lincecum or Cain? You can pick THREE of these 4 players for either: Borowski, Dellucci, Blake, Byrd.

by westbrook on Jul 15, 2008 6:24 PM EDT 0 recs

Well, he certainly is one-of-a-kind.

by Ryan on Jul 15, 2008 6:32 PM EDT 0 recs

Wait, LaPorta is represented by Scott Boras?

Oh goody.

--
2008: let the hate flow through you.

by vbc3 on Jul 15, 2008 6:34 PM EDT 0 recs

That was my first thought.

by mjschaefer on Jul 15, 2008 6:34 PM EDT up 0 recs

These comments are very similar to what Brandon Phillips said not too long ago

by Roger Dorn on Jul 15, 2008 7:08 PM EDT 0 recs

Regardless of what Wedge’s player preferences are, that does not make him culpable for Bradley’s behavioral problems.

by Ryan on Jul 15, 2008 7:34 PM EDT up 0 recs

And by that I mean that Wedge wasn’t the root cause of Milton Bradley getting traded.

by Ryan on Jul 15, 2008 7:40 PM EDT up 0 recs

I blame society.

by Jay on Jul 15, 2008 8:01 PM EDT up 0 recs

i blame the plain dealer.

by Brick. on Jul 15, 2008 8:54 PM EDT up 0 recs

Let’s be honest: I blame Paul Hoynes.

by odradek on Jul 15, 2008 10:08 PM EDT up 0 recs

Dude’s hurt all the time anyway.

by piersall on Jul 15, 2008 10:35 PM EDT up 0 recs

couple days ago Hoynes told me to “stick my OPS in my ear.”

by kwoog on Jul 16, 2008 10:54 AM EDT up 0 recs

Yea, Milton wasn’t specifically my concern, he has had trouble with too many teams. To me it just seems to be more of the body language thing with Wedge that has held Marte back as well as others….

by Roger Dorn on Jul 16, 2008 8:46 AM EDT up 0 recs

I think that’s right. The moping around, the aggrieved stance, the constant posture of injustice. The guy must be a pain to be around, but he sure would look good in right field (in place of Gutierrez, which is what we have to show for MB).

by odradek on Jul 16, 2008 10:08 AM EDT up 0 recs

In all fairness, at the beginning of this year, 95% of us would have been glad to have Gutierrez instead of Bradley.

Burn on, big river, burn on...

by Turkmenbashi on Jul 16, 2008 10:31 AM EDT up 0 recs

We reserve the right to wildly change our mind, back and forth, every three months, forever.

by Jay on Jul 16, 2008 10:49 AM EDT up 2 recs

I still don’t want Bradley, who still seems a “You lookin’ at me?” moment away from cracking someone upside the head. Doesn’t mean I want Gutierrez out there either, but there’s got to be something in between ineffective and insane.

by FredOx on Jul 16, 2008 10:51 AM EDT up 0 recs

OT, but could the Cavs sign him? He seems like the type of player they need.

You know, aside from the crying when an old white man in the broadcast booth makes a comment about another player that he takes as critical of himself.

You know Selig? Ombudsman.

by rolub on Jul 16, 2008 10:54 AM EDT up 0 recs

“there’s got to be something in between ineffective and insane.”

This might make a great byline.

by elsandito on Jul 16, 2008 12:02 PM EDT up 0 recs

Problem is, he’s more of a DH this year than anything because of his knee injury. Plus there’s all those years of keeping him on the team despite injuries, temper tantrums, etc, etc. If it was all sunshine and daisies with Milton, he wouldn’t be on his sixth major-league team.

by Ryan on Jul 16, 2008 10:51 AM EDT up 0 recs

by FredOx on Jul 16, 2008 11:40 AM EDT up 1 recs

He’s obviously a difficult man to get along with, but I don’t believe the knee injury was his fault.

by odradek on Jul 16, 2008 4:04 PM EDT up 0 recs

Understood. I was just pointing out that, beyond the obvious past conflicts, having Milton Bradley play right field every day for the Indians in 2008 wasn’t practicable.

by Ryan on Jul 16, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up 0 recs

Yeah, that’s true. He was supposedly terrible in the outfield earlier on. But when the Indians played the Rangers he stole a base down by many runs.

Mostly, it’s crying over spilt milk. The Indians had to unload Milton after the debacle in Florida, but maybe it would have been better if we still had Andrew Brown (who we traded with Kouzmanoff for Barfield).

by odradek on Jul 16, 2008 5:41 PM EDT up 0 recs

It would be better if Gutierrez was a solid everyday player. It would be a non-issue in that case.

by Jay on Jul 16, 2008 5:48 PM EDT up 0 recs

Or Barfield, for that matter. But that’s crazy talk.

by ganatz on Jul 16, 2008 7:17 PM EDT up 0 recs

I don’t know if a productive Barfield alone makes up for losing both Bradley and Kouzmanoff.

by Jay on Jul 16, 2008 8:01 PM EDT up 0 recs

Kouzmanoff sucks.

by afh4 on Jul 16, 2008 8:19 PM EDT up 0 recs

So far!

by Jay on Jul 17, 2008 1:58 AM EDT up 0 recs

Agreed. My point is that it would take some of the sting out of where we find oursleves.

by ganatz on Jul 16, 2008 8:25 PM EDT up 0 recs

Well, it is true that a productive Gutierrez

or Barfield

or Garko

or Martinez

or Sowers

or Hafner

or Marte

or Betancourt

or Miller

would take the sting out of a crap season. But for now, it’s Cliff, Grady, and two good weeks of Mujica.

by Jay on Jul 17, 2008 1:59 AM EDT up 0 recs

2.5 good months from Perez

by APV on Jul 17, 2008 9:26 AM EDT up 0 recs

I guess I was specifically referring to the players that we directly or indirectly got for Bradley. But, you’re right – I’d take any ointment right now for the sting.

by ganatz on Jul 17, 2008 9:57 AM EDT up 0 recs

The so called trade involving Bradley was a distressed sale, a dumping. Evaluating it as a trade is a disservice to Shapiro.

by elsandito on Jul 17, 2008 1:16 PM EDT up 0 recs

Weren’t people doing cartwheels at the time? To get Gutierrez and Brown at a distress sale?

by odradek on Jul 17, 2008 2:03 PM EDT up 0 recs

I don’t remember who felt what at the time. Whaever we got was all we could get. Shapiro was in a position with no leverage.

by elsandito on Jul 17, 2008 2:07 PM EDT up 0 recs

Don’t know about “at the time”, but looking back Jay said this:

Bradley clearly has been a quality major leaguer, but injuries have kept him both from contributing to his team all year and from becoming the star player we saw in 2003. The point being, we haven’t been missing out much on his “production.” We could have used him most in 2005, but he only made it into 75 games that year.

The Dodgers let Bradley go for Andre Ethier, ironically, who is a year older than Gutierrez and about equally valuable. We also got Andrew Brown. Both guys are under control for another five years, while Bradley is now a free agent. The Padres let Bradley walk for nothing, not even draft picks, since they declined to offer him arbitration. Make of that what you will.

by FredOx on Jul 17, 2008 2:45 PM EDT up 0 recs

Shapiro insisted at the time that he would not be giving Bradley away, that there were plenty of serious bidders and plenty of time to make a deal. Bradley was viewed as a potential impact player — if healthy, a middle-of-the-order bat and above-average CF in the field. At any given moment, probably 15-20 guys could use a player like that.

The point being, Shapiro deserves only a small fraction of a pass on this trade, not a full pass. Having said that, you have to consider how the trade was viewed at the time, very favorably in general.

April 2004: Dodgers win Bradley sweepstakes

Dec 2005: Dodgers tire of Bradley, send him to Athletics

June 2007: Padres Risk Little, Take Chance On Bradley

by Jay on Jul 17, 2008 3:30 PM EDT up 0 recs

Should have been:

At any given moment, probably 15-20 teams could use a player like that.

by Jay on Jul 17, 2008 3:31 PM EDT up 0 recs

Somewhat humorous article from SI a few weeks ago about our friend describing a board game called “Milton Bradley” (you’ll never guess which company made the game).

by Buckeye Brad on Jul 15, 2008 11:55 PM EDT 0 recs