<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Bradley Comments</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/</link>
	<description>Daily baseball statistical analysis and commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:32:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: CH</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65920</link>
		<dc:creator>CH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:39:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65920</guid>
		<description>Well said.

Bradley is actually a very intelligent guy, so I&#039;m sure he &quot;understands&quot; the power structure and is enraged by it, but he encounters problems because he&#039;s enraged by EVERYTHING.  He doesn&#039;t pick his battles, so after a while it sounds like he&#039;s always crying wolf, and people become annoyed by him and ignore/ostracize him.

If David Ortiz said “I want to give the best for my team, and considering my health...&quot; like you suggest, most would buy it.

Bradley doesn&#039;t have that kind of equity built up with the public, however, so picking his battles would really help him immensely.

I don&#039;t think he&#039;s a bad person, I don&#039;t even think what he said was that awful, but he should have sat this one out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well said.</p>
<p>Bradley is actually a very intelligent guy, so I&#8217;m sure he &#8220;understands&#8221; the power structure and is enraged by it, but he encounters problems because he&#8217;s enraged by EVERYTHING.  He doesn&#8217;t pick his battles, so after a while it sounds like he&#8217;s always crying wolf, and people become annoyed by him and ignore/ostracize him.</p>
<p>If David Ortiz said “I want to give the best for my team, and considering my health&#8230;&#8221; like you suggest, most would buy it.</p>
<p>Bradley doesn&#8217;t have that kind of equity built up with the public, however, so picking his battles would really help him immensely.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think he&#8217;s a bad person, I don&#8217;t even think what he said was that awful, but he should have sat this one out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hans</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65911</link>
		<dc:creator>hans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:33:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65911</guid>
		<description>Yeah I think thats what happened. He shot on the hoop the Cavs had been defending.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah I think thats what happened. He shot on the hoop the Cavs had been defending.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tyger</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65832</link>
		<dc:creator>tyger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:30:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65832</guid>
		<description>I thought he shot on the other team&#039;s hoop. Like... he took the ball from out of bounds, dribbled the wrong way, hit a lay-up against the rim and grabbed the &quot;rebound.&quot; And then he didn&#039;t get the rebound because you can&#039;t rebound something that wasn&#039;t a shot and it wasn&#039;t an official shot because you can&#039;t officially shoot on the other team&#039;s rim. Or so I thought.

http://media.www.dailygamecock.com/media/storage/paper247/news/2004/04/14/Sports/Nba-Ruling.Thwarts.TripleDouble.Attempt-659325.shtml

(scroll down)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought he shot on the other team&#8217;s hoop. Like&#8230; he took the ball from out of bounds, dribbled the wrong way, hit a lay-up against the rim and grabbed the &#8220;rebound.&#8221; And then he didn&#8217;t get the rebound because you can&#8217;t rebound something that wasn&#8217;t a shot and it wasn&#8217;t an official shot because you can&#8217;t officially shoot on the other team&#8217;s rim. Or so I thought.</p>
<p><a href="http://media.www.dailygamecock.com/media/storage/paper247/news/2004/04/14/Sports/Nba-Ruling.Thwarts.TripleDouble.Attempt-659325.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://media.www.dailygamecock.com/media/storage/paper247/news/2004/04/14/Sports/Nba-Ruling.Thwarts.TripleDouble.Attempt-659325.shtml</a></p>
<p>(scroll down)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tyger</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65830</link>
		<dc:creator>tyger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:18:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65830</guid>
		<description>Actually, aren&#039;t most &quot;jump[s] in performance&quot; typically in counting stats, affected most by players actually playing &lt;i&gt;more&lt;/i&gt;, trying to rack up numbers? Basically, that most players fight through minor injuries in contract years, playing more. At least, that&#039;s what I remember reading.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, aren&#8217;t most &#8220;jump[s] in performance&#8221; typically in counting stats, affected most by players actually playing <i>more</i>, trying to rack up numbers? Basically, that most players fight through minor injuries in contract years, playing more. At least, that&#8217;s what I remember reading.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason T</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65776</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:38:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65776</guid>
		<description>This is well put.  Sometimes fans and/or sportswriters put a little to much emphasis on being an &#039;Everyday Eddie&#039;.  I&#039;d rather have a player take some time off and play well, than play hurt.  (see: Putz, JJ - second game of the &#039;08 season).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is well put.  Sometimes fans and/or sportswriters put a little to much emphasis on being an &#8216;Everyday Eddie&#8217;.  I&#8217;d rather have a player take some time off and play well, than play hurt.  (see: Putz, JJ &#8211; second game of the &#8217;08 season).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MB21</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65762</link>
		<dc:creator>MB21</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 23:39:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65762</guid>
		<description>the cubs only need about 60-70 games per season from Bradley for him to be worth the contract.  It&#039;s definitely a high risk deal, but odds are very likely he averages at least that many games over the next 3 years and if he plays in a lot more than that, it turns out to be one of the best contracts given out this offseason, if not the best.  

Bradley&#039;s comments from time to time are going to rub people the wrong way, but it&#039;s not his job to sugarcoat things.  I think the media and fans have seemingly placed that task upon the players, but I like that Bradley seems to be more intelligent about value than many of the other players.  He isn&#039;t going to be well liked because he doesn&#039;t give the nice interview the media wants, but all the Cubs need are about 180 games from him and they got $30 million worth of production.  If they can somehow find a way to get 360 or 400 games from him, that&#039;s an outstanding contract.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the cubs only need about 60-70 games per season from Bradley for him to be worth the contract.  It&#8217;s definitely a high risk deal, but odds are very likely he averages at least that many games over the next 3 years and if he plays in a lot more than that, it turns out to be one of the best contracts given out this offseason, if not the best.  </p>
<p>Bradley&#8217;s comments from time to time are going to rub people the wrong way, but it&#8217;s not his job to sugarcoat things.  I think the media and fans have seemingly placed that task upon the players, but I like that Bradley seems to be more intelligent about value than many of the other players.  He isn&#8217;t going to be well liked because he doesn&#8217;t give the nice interview the media wants, but all the Cubs need are about 180 games from him and they got $30 million worth of production.  If they can somehow find a way to get 360 or 400 games from him, that&#8217;s an outstanding contract.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NickP</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65739</link>
		<dc:creator>NickP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:58:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65739</guid>
		<description>Memphis, but your point stands. Awful win and almost cost them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Memphis, but your point stands. Awful win and almost cost them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hans</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65738</link>
		<dc:creator>hans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:24:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65738</guid>
		<description>Ah yes it was the year before. Those bums almost blew it though, as they pulled out a win vs. TOR on the last game of the season (thanks in part to Smush Parker&#039;s team leading 17 pts for the game) allowing them to tie with DEN for the worst record and allowing DEN equal chance in the lottery (both teams had 22.5% chance at the 1st pick). But all ended well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah yes it was the year before. Those bums almost blew it though, as they pulled out a win vs. TOR on the last game of the season (thanks in part to Smush Parker&#8217;s team leading 17 pts for the game) allowing them to tie with DEN for the worst record and allowing DEN equal chance in the lottery (both teams had 22.5% chance at the 1st pick). But all ended well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roscoe</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65731</link>
		<dc:creator>Roscoe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:03:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65731</guid>
		<description>What if Milton changed his sentence structure and said something to the effect of... &quot;I want to give the best for my team, and considering my health there are some days that I feel I won&#039;t be able to put up the production, and someone else may be better to plug into the lineup, and overall I will put up more production for my team if I play 120 healthy games, rather than play 160 that are in-between&quot;. 

Now he said essentially the same thing, but the emphasis was placed on himself and not the team. Especially considering the fact that baseball is as individual a sport you can get while still belonging to a team, this just smacks of heirarchical hypocrisy. 

The nature of competition, especially economic competition, is subjugation, but its first implementation!  Even fan graphs is in the business of doing this, we all are either rabid fantasy baseball players who want to get the value of the next breakout player without having to draft him until the later rounds, or baseball fans who want to be able to tell thier buddies who the next joeschmo will come out of nowhere to win the Cy Young. As bad and as intense as we get about that sometimes, Do you ever think what owners must do? What owner wouldn&#039;t want to pay Milton Bradley 2 million dollars instead of 8 million? If you haven&#039;t bought into the system, as Bradley seems not to, or sadly, or maybe fortunately it seems like he&#039;s never been taught how to exist within it, can you see how a cognitive dissonance and a paranoia about being taken advantage of would occur? 

Again, I&#039;m not sure I&#039;m happy that Bradley hasn&#039;t bought in or if I feel sad that he doesn&#039;t know that all he has to do to get those contracts he wants is to satisfy the power structure already in place.  Most people just know, when confronted with A, just say B and everything will be okay.  This is why players like Milton Bradley and Manny, and to a small extent Ian Kennedy are my favorite players. They don&#039;t sacrifice themselves for the system, whether they know it or not, they are contributing to the fabric, the story of humanity much more than any of the drones who will make more money than them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What if Milton changed his sentence structure and said something to the effect of&#8230; &#8220;I want to give the best for my team, and considering my health there are some days that I feel I won&#8217;t be able to put up the production, and someone else may be better to plug into the lineup, and overall I will put up more production for my team if I play 120 healthy games, rather than play 160 that are in-between&#8221;. </p>
<p>Now he said essentially the same thing, but the emphasis was placed on himself and not the team. Especially considering the fact that baseball is as individual a sport you can get while still belonging to a team, this just smacks of heirarchical hypocrisy. </p>
<p>The nature of competition, especially economic competition, is subjugation, but its first implementation!  Even fan graphs is in the business of doing this, we all are either rabid fantasy baseball players who want to get the value of the next breakout player without having to draft him until the later rounds, or baseball fans who want to be able to tell thier buddies who the next joeschmo will come out of nowhere to win the Cy Young. As bad and as intense as we get about that sometimes, Do you ever think what owners must do? What owner wouldn&#8217;t want to pay Milton Bradley 2 million dollars instead of 8 million? If you haven&#8217;t bought into the system, as Bradley seems not to, or sadly, or maybe fortunately it seems like he&#8217;s never been taught how to exist within it, can you see how a cognitive dissonance and a paranoia about being taken advantage of would occur? </p>
<p>Again, I&#8217;m not sure I&#8217;m happy that Bradley hasn&#8217;t bought in or if I feel sad that he doesn&#8217;t know that all he has to do to get those contracts he wants is to satisfy the power structure already in place.  Most people just know, when confronted with A, just say B and everything will be okay.  This is why players like Milton Bradley and Manny, and to a small extent Ian Kennedy are my favorite players. They don&#8217;t sacrifice themselves for the system, whether they know it or not, they are contributing to the fabric, the story of humanity much more than any of the drones who will make more money than them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: t ball</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bradley-comment/#comment-65727</link>
		<dc:creator>t ball</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:51:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=3490#comment-65727</guid>
		<description>The problem is not Bradley only playing 120 games.  It&#039;s that there is a significant chance he will only play 20 games, or 0 games, or 40 games.  Why in the hell should a team pay for three years of that?  The Ranger got a $20M season for just over $5M, but there&#039;s a very good chance he won&#039;t total $20 altogether over the next 3 years.  I don&#039;t blame him for his stance, but I think the Cubs were foolish (especially with the FA market this winter) while the Rangers made the right move.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem is not Bradley only playing 120 games.  It&#8217;s that there is a significant chance he will only play 20 games, or 0 games, or 40 games.  Why in the hell should a team pay for three years of that?  The Ranger got a $20M season for just over $5M, but there&#8217;s a very good chance he won&#8217;t total $20 altogether over the next 3 years.  I don&#8217;t blame him for his stance, but I think the Cubs were foolish (especially with the FA market this winter) while the Rangers made the right move.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

