Why I Don't Care

I don't like the idea of making a Fanpost on this, so I will hide this here as a Fanshot where it is out of the way. But I want to make a comment about this Milton Bradley thing that we have rehashed 20 times.

Milton Bradley had an "incident" yesterday. Other websites are using this to show off how right they were. The problem is that they are arguing the wrong thing.

No one denied that Milton Bradley tends to do odd, emotional things as a reaction to baseball events. No one. Lookout Landing didn't. GMZ didn't. Wak didn't. Milton Bradley didn't. He has some serious emotional issues that he has always had and always will have.

The thing is: I don't care. And neither should anyone else. His personal problems may seem public, but the truth is that they don't matter. Why should I, or anyone else, care how Milton Bradley reacts to failure?

1) Milton Bradley's attitude has not caused Figgins, Griffey, Lopez, Sweeney or Rob Johnson's offensive struggles.
2) Milton Bradley's attitude has not lost us all of these games.
3) Milton Bradley's attitude has not caused the poor bullpen management.
4) Milton Bradley's attitude did not cause Cliff Lee's injury.
5) Milton Bradley's attitude is not the reason we lost any of these games.

His emotional problems have, quite frankly, affected nothing. Zero. Nada. We wouldn't win or lose more games just because he is having an emotional problem.

And because Milton Bradley's attitude isn't the reason we have been losing, I don't see any good reason to give a shit if he wants to have an attitude with this team. There is literally only ONE reason to care about his attitude, and that reason is that some times he needs to take a few days off to cool down.

His personal issues are nothing more than the equivalent of a recurring injury. Occasionally he gets hurt, except his hurt is emotional instead of physical. That's it. The only reason to care about Bradley's emotional outbursts are because you are upset he needs to miss a few games, and the only way you can be upset is if you are admitting that his bat is worth having in the lineup. You can't have both.

Bradley's attitude has not caused this team to struggle and Bradley's attitude is unlikely to cause the team to struggle in the future. He can break as many bats on the plate as he wants, and it won't change the fact that the team sucking had literally nothing to do with his attitude, and everything to do with its good players struggling.

about 2 years ago CapSea 28 comments 19 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yup.

My Mariners blog SodoMojo, My Twitter Feed

by Griffin Cooper on May 5, 2010 6:39 PM PDT reply actions

This is rational thinking is why I read LL.

by MT Olson on May 5, 2010 6:52 PM PDT reply actions

Unfortunately, rationality is a disease for the rest of the internet.

The “official” website forums are already rife with Cubs fan who, apparently, have NOTHING better to do with their time than let the entire universe know they hate Milton Bradley.

Fans are typically idiots.

by The Typical Idiot Fan on May 5, 2010 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Well of course they have nothing better to do, their historically bad team of a hundred years of failure means that they have to be whining doucebags rather than focus on their own world-renowned failure.

by EnglishMariner on May 6, 2010 1:44 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

I agree.

I’d given up on baseball until I found LL.

by David Sarmento on May 6, 2010 5:55 AM PDT up reply actions

Good Post/Shot

This should be required reading for Bleed Cubbie Blue.

by Ballard Erik on May 6, 2010 4:46 PM PDT reply actions

Bradley's attitude

is like chicken soup in reverse. It doesn’t help.

by wobatus on May 7, 2010 5:22 AM PDT reply actions

My goodness we are bad at similies

by Graham MacAree on May 9, 2010 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions

And you suck at spelling

on top of being a bit of a pompous ass.

Nevertheless, capsea says that Bradley’s attitude has not hurt the team in any way, and I am merely pointing out that it certainly doesn’t help. Bradley or the team. Rationalizing, jusifying, enabling his behavior doen’t help either. Getting him therapy may help, if he really wants help, and good for him for seeking it and the Mariners for helping him get it.

I think some of the fans may need some help as well, something like al-anon or for abused spouses.

by wobatus on May 10, 2010 8:20 AM PDT up reply actions

"Jusifying" "Doen't"

Usually it is a good idea to make sure you have spelled your words correctly before you decide to insult someone else’s spelling. In addition, “I am merely pointing out that it doesn’t help.”

So what you are saying is that you have no idea if it does anything, but you assume it does, so it must not help the situation. That’s not proof of anything. In fact, that’s barely even a statement. You are basically admitting that you have no idea that it does anything but since it’s probably not a good thing we should all care about it, and that’s ridiculous logic. I understand where you’re coming from, but you’re literally admitting you have no proof it affects anything but that somehow we should all believe it does.

Do you really think that Milton Bradley caused Mike Sweeney to strike out with the bases loaded? Because if you don’t, then you can’t say that Milton Bradley has affected anything, and if you do, then you’re wrong. Either way you prove nothing, and because you have no proof, your argument is invalid.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on May 10, 2010 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions

I believe this is where I should point out that chicken soup sucks.

Therefore chicken soup in reverse is all kinds of amazing.

by Sec 108 on May 11, 2010 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions

Al Yeganeh's

used to be pretty good.

by wobatus on May 11, 2010 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions

Typos

because I was typing fast and didn’t proofread are not the same as an intentional insult and spelling the word “similies” while claiming I am bad at them (it may be lame, and apologies for being thin-skinned about it, but I don’t think his issue was really with the writing style). Nevertheless, I overreacted. I’m human. Kinda like Milton Bradley only not as talented or well-compensated.

I didn’t say Milton Bradley made Mike Sweeney strike out. Straw argument.

Milton Bradley is likely a pain in the ass to work with, like anyone with anger issues. It may not make a difference in their play in the slightest, but if I was on the Mariners or if I was their manager or owner I’d prefer that he get help if he needs it. You probably don’t disagree with that. You are just saying his attitude does not change the team’s record at all and that is true. I don’t think that would be my sole criterion.

It almost certainly doesn’t help him to be such an loose cannon. It clearly upsets him. Leave it at that. Paul O’Neill also probably wasn’t fun to play with at times, except he didn’t seem to have anger issues aside from the odd strikeout outburst. Milton Bradley on the other hand seems to realize himself that whatever his issue is, it isn’t helping him as a ballplayer or teammate. You say it doesn’t hurt, his attitude. I suppose I am not talking about his attitude but whatever emotional issue he has. He thinks that issue isn’t helping him, or management has convinced him that it isn’t helping him and he needs help resolving it.

Ken Griffey being useless at this stage doesn’t help either, but I am not claiming that it does.

Anyway, apologies to you for my first post being flip, and to Graham for overreacting.

by wobatus on May 11, 2010 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions

But you are claiming that his emotions affect the rest of the team's play, not just his own.

Yes, it does affect how well he plays. But so does getting old for Griffey or Jack Wilson getting hurt, or Rob Johnson’s blurry vision, etc. Every player has something that affects how well they play otherwise they would all be Albert Pujols. The question is whether we should care about how his emotions affect the TEAM, and I’m arguing that because his emotions have nothing to do with why Sweeney is sucking or why Figgins struggles, then on a team wide perspective they simply don’t matter. The only thing that makes Milton Bradley’s emotions matter is if it affects Milton Bradley’s play, but it doesn’t matter WHAT is affecting Bradley, only that his performance is poor.

In other words, it doesn’t matter if it is his emotions that are the cause of his struggles, or a recurring injury, or an eye itch, or he’s simply getting older and not doing as well. All that matters is that he’s not performing. What’s causing it is irrelevant, especially because what’s causing it affects no one but himself.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on May 11, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions

Well

I actually am not saying it affects how the rest of the team plays. I concede that it doesn’t change the team’s record. But it can make for an uncomfortable work environment. Which I don’t think makes the team worse. And it isn’t that big of a deal. Maybe he’s great to play with. I don’t know. But in a normal work environment it isn’t fun to deal with someone with anger management problems, if that’s what bothers him, even if your own work performance isn’t hindered. But I get the point that it is like an injury or aging and really only is an issue for him, not the team as a whole, performance-wise.

One of my favorite images of Bradley is him giving a mock rubdown to Josh Hamilton’s old high school coach when he was pitching to Hamilton, Bradley’s then teammate, during the home run contest at the All-Star break at Yankee Stadium a couple of years ago. Hamilton kept hitting homers and the old guy had to keep tossing to him. Milton had a big grin on his face and so did the old guy. Not the image of Bradley that gets bandied about.

by wobatus on May 11, 2010 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions

I guess I'm confused.

You were saying you disagreed with my argument, but it appears you do agree with my argument in its entirety, it just bothers you that he’s got anger management issues on a personal level.

I don’t know if you saw his interview after the game the other day, but it was a thing of pure gold. For a guy that has emotional issues, he’s pretty funny about it. I would bet he’s actually pretty likable in general, but I don’t know if I’d be close to him.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on May 11, 2010 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Hmm

I don’t see where you think this bothers me on a personal level. I don’t live or work with the guy.

by wobatus on May 12, 2010 6:11 AM PDT up reply actions

Well, since you seem to agree it doesn't affect the team, and it only affects his performance.

And since WHAT affects his performance is not as important as the performance itself (ie, whether he was hurt, or he’s getting older, or he’s simply struggling, or its his emotional problems), then what bothers you about it? Players struggle for different reasons. As long as their reasons don’t affect the performance other players (which you admit above that they likely do not) it doesn’t really matter why he struggles, only that he’s struggling.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on May 12, 2010 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions

anything

that negatively effects the work environment should be avoided if reasonably possible. Colleagues yelling at the boss, quitting in the middle of a project, etc. (and I am not saying that’s exactly what Bradley did). Whether it actually effects everybody else’s work or not. I’d think there’s almost no way you could gainsay that it doesn’t help. You are going out of your way to say it doesn’t hurt anybody else. Most organizations would not put the onus on everyone else to say, “ya know, that screaming and my colleague’s erratic behavior makes me uncomfortable, is there a way that can be rectified? I can’t prove it makes me a worse widget maker, but I’d be more comfortable if that didn’t happen so much.”

Do you want to work for an organization where that behavior is simply downplayed? Does Cliff Lee? I am not saying what Milton Bradley did was so bad, but taken to a logical extreme, your argument would suggest he could manifest bi-polar anger issues every day, and as long as the team’s record or play isn’t measurably effected no one should care, except insofar as his play is effected, like any injury.

by wobatus on May 13, 2010 3:52 AM PDT up reply actions

.

as long as the team’s record or play isn’t measurably effected no one should care, except insofar as his play is effected, like any injury.

Correct, this is exactly what I believe. ESPECIALLY as a fan. If Cliff Lee wants to be a little irritated that his coworker is being annoying, that’s his prerogative, but as a fan, what annoys another player but does not affect his performance is not of my concern. Indeed, you are also assuming that anger is the only thing that can annoy other player. Some players are annoyed by happiness. Ian Snell used to have depression, and I would bet you that watching his teammates laugh and joke around with each other ate at him. Should we kick happy people out of the clubhouse too because they get on the nerves of other players?

The only thing that should matter to me, and to you, is whether or not the team on the field is as good as it could be. If removing Milton Bradley made the other players perform better (which, by the way, it hasn’t) then I’d agree he needs to go. But it doesn’t make any difference, and it hasn’t made any difference, and so it is not of my concern whether or not Player X is a little annoyed that his team mates have hissy fits because his performance is unaffected by it.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on May 13, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Maybe

Bradley depressed Snell. Kidding.

There are plenty of studies about the negative effects of anger in the workplace, in families and other social settings. Of course, there can be positive effects as well. Anecdotally, the early 70s A’s and late ’70s Yankee teams were succesful and often fought amongst themselves. same with the ’86 Mets. Anger expression is likely more common in athletic settings.

Major league teams, for whatever reasons, apparently choose to find certain expressions of anger as unproductive. Whether just for the player or for overall organizational efficiency.

While I doubt the unflappable Mr. Lee will be influenced one way or the other by the more flappable Mr. Bradley, I am merely suggesting that creating a more positive work environment would make the team more attractive to players, who have some freedom of chice as to where they want to situate themselves. All things being equal. I presume dollars and cents has a far more tangible effect in that regard.

Nevertheless, my instinct, and I am not an expert on the effect of anger, bi-polar disorder, manic-depression (again, not saying Milton has issues with any of these things), whatever, in the workplace, would be that the behavior isn’t enhancing organizational performance, and may harm it. I could be extremely wrong. Maybe you are correct. You may know far more about the subject than I do. I saw some abstracts on line that suggest it doesn’t help, but couldn’t read the full articles for context and didn’t weant to pay $20 for the rest. Could be academic gobbledygook anyway.

So perhaps my first, flip response is wrong. Mybe it does help. I don’t think it’s been proven in this thread one way or the other whether it helps, hurts, or has no effect. Likely difficult to measure. Prhaps Wakamatsu’s bullpen mismanagement is in part casued by stress in dealing with Bradley. Again, I kid.

Since Bradley is seeking help and the organization wants to help anyway, it doesn’t matter I suppose whether there will be benefit merely to him, or if the organization as a whole will get some side benefit as well. I think when Bradley’s performance is uneffected, when he is healthy and the apparent self-inflicted pressure isn’t getting to him, his production far outweighs whatever negatives might be there. Certainly over his career he has performed well-above replacement, whatever his issues are.

With Saunders playing well, I wonder if he will keep at least some of the left field job and if Bradley will prefer DH’ing more frequently.

by wobatus on May 14, 2010 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions