Bleacher Report - Articles by Dan Bradley

In Defense of the Chicago Blackhawks' Patrick Kane

Dan Bradley — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:26:13 -0400

I am 100 percent behind Patrick Kane.

First of all, let's set aside the fact that this is over 20 cents. The dollar amount is irrelevant, because any good cabbie knows he should have change. I, myself, worked as a driver for a hotel, working for tips, and I was expected to have change. If you're a business, you have change—period.

Next, while you can't ignore the fact that Kaner was probably drunk, I'm not going to get on his back about this either. The drinking age is 18 in the places Patrick has spent most of his life—Canada, London, and abroad. If you're coming on here to say that you never had a drink before 21, you're in the severe minority. Don't be a hypocrite.

So, here's the real issue:

Patrick Kane is a fresh young millionaire in tough economic times. We're living in an age now where people are angry at people who have money. I can't say that I blame them much. I myself am laid-off and recovering from cancer, which I dealt with without the benefit of health insurance. There are plenty of people like me, and hundreds of thousands are still being laid off every month.

Imagine yourself, being a millionaire, the most famous little person in Buffalo, and instantly recognizable on the street by all your old high school classmates. Imagine carrying the load for your family and suddenly being extorted by a strange cabbie who "doesn't have any change."

I'd be pretty pissed too, because how many people do you think "don't have any change" for little Patrick Kane? How many people see him and have no thought besides: He can spare some for me, too.

We might be struggling, but the thought that just because athletes have money, they "owe" us something seems to be running rampant in our "me-first" country right now. It's dangerous—just think how many have been robbed in their homes lately.

Let me tell you, just because we're struggling doesn't make it any harder to be a professional athlete; to give your body, your energy and your time to a city. To be on the road two-thirds of the year, to get up every day, to emotionally drain yourself and to still be asked for more is tough to deal with in any economy. To have everybody jump in your face, calling you a "thug" when you make one mistake, which you didn't do to Derrek Rose recently, Chicago.

Now, tell me you've never been a little tipsy and had the weight of the world fall down on you. Tell me you've never freaked out. There are people who will say: But Kane is not a normal 20-year-old, he must compose himself. Remember, he is only 20. Try telling a two-year-old that he should stop crying because he's smarter than that. Try telling a dog not to bark. It's still a dog and Kane is still only 20. Patrick has been expected to compose himself for most of his life. He's due one error.

Patrick Kane and the Blackhawks just got me through a long, tough winter. They don't owe me a thing.

Thank you, Patrick. I've got your back.

The Name Game: MLB 2009 Edition – Part I

Dan Bradley — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 04:05:58 -0400

It is a fine tradition among major league announcers to have fun with players’ names. Here in Chicago, Harry Caray liked to announce the names backwards. Current Cub radio play-by-play man Pat Hughes takes it a step further: “I often think that a good matchup would be Chris Carpenter versus Kerry Wood. I also think that the National Anthem on that day should be sung by MC Hammer.” Personally I’ll laugh at things as silly as a guy with two first names (Jay Bruce), guys with one male and one female name (Ted Lilly), guys with last names that are nouns (Matt Stairs) or guys who’s surnames indicate alternate vocations (Josh Bard). Some of these absolutely stab us in the face (Ryan Church) and some blend in rather nicely (Corey Hart). Whew! This is only the beginning. We could go on listing all the inane ones, or we could have some real fun. Lets hand out the awards…

Begin Slideshow

Cold Running Cubs : Lou and The Offensive Woes

Dan Bradley — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 22:23:34 -0400

Jake Fox batted .417 with two doubles and two RBI in his short callup (eight games) with the Cubs. He was almost perfect in pinch-hitting situations.

Piniella's response when this was pointed out to him: "Really?"

(The Cubs lost their last two games 2-1.)

Ryan Theriot has six home runs, but his batting average is down fifty points from where it was at this time last year (when he remained the club's only .300 hitter till season's end). No, Rick Telander, it's not steroids - anyone with the least bit of baseball acumen can see that The Riot is turning on the ball, rather than going with that unique inside-out swing that allowed him to shoot so many singles to right-center.

Apparently Piniella told him to do this.

(The Cubs played almost two full games of extra innings against bad teams on this road trip -- a .500 venture -- because they couldn't drive men in.)

But do we really want, say, 12 home runs on the year from our #2 hitting speedster, and the only guy who can still steal a base??

Personally, I don't want to see yet another Cub get sucked into this spiral they've been in: we're not scoring, so we must hit a home run in every at bat; we're trying to hit a home run in every at bat, so we're not getting men on and over; we're not getting men on and over so we must try to hit a home run in every.... .

Soriano, Soto, Zambrano, Fontenot.. I even saw Bobby Scales swing for the fences the other day.

And today: with men on first and third and nobody out, Ryan Theriot struck out on a high and inside pitch he had no chance at. He was swinging for the fences.

The Cubs stranded 31 runners at Minute Maid Park this series. I lost count of how many warning track fly balls "would have been out at Wrigley," including one that saw Michael Bourne fall down and lie on his back, seemingly thinking "why is there a mountain in my outfield?"

So add swinging for the fences to the list of offensive problems for the Cubs, which also includes: garbage pitchers (Jamie Moyer, Doug Davies), any lefty with a changeup (Cole Hamels), anything breaking towards the outside corner, lack of a leadoff hitter, no speed or aggression on the bases, a tendency towards double plays and players who only contribute on one side of the ball.

The first listed problem used to bother me the most, but now it's the last. If Soriano doesn't hit a home run, then when he bobbles the ball in the outfield, he's simply a negative contributor.

Oh.. and they're still too right-handed, as Fontenot is at best a 300 AB guy and Bradley is better from the right side. This leaves only Fukudome.

The way people talk about DeRosa in this town, you'd think we'd let the Babe go in order to finance a musical. But he did have the second best average with runners in scoring position last year (behind Reed Johnson, who Lou never plays).

And the Cubs can't do anything about all this. Every slugger on the team has either a no-trade clause or millions of years and dollars promised to him. The ownership limbo also prevents the Cubs from investing any more. These guys will have to hit. (So lets not ruin The Riot!)

But with all these problems, you can see why - year after year - the Cubs seem to slide into those eight-game losing streaks (which they avoided last year. This year they've already had one in May. Their second is usually in July. Mark it down).

So the question is: what can these guys hit?

Well..

They can swing away, hope to win enough games off the home run, decent defense and great starting pitching to get into the playoffs in a still semi-weak division.

And then hope to get hot at the right time this time.

Same old Cubs.

Do Coaches Get too Much Credit or Not Enough?

Dan Bradley — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 06:51:17 -0400

It's very easy for the casual fan to turn to the only thing he knows when his team is unsuccessful, and call for a coach's head.

Often, though, the fans chuckle at that notion. The problems run much deeper, we realize—players, scouting, and GMs.

We know that Bill Cowher coached for years before bringing a trophy to Pittsburgh. It often takes the confluence of many positive forces to win a championship.

But, more and more here in Chicago, I listen to the talking heads of the media lavish credit upon Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan in St. Louis for taking pitchers and other players off the scrap heap and forming them into formidable MLB players. And I'll tell you the truth: As a Cubs fan I do have a lot of respect for the Cardinals this year.

But when I listen to the talking heads here in Chicago, they simply deflect calls for Gerald Perry's resignation, as the entire Cubs team not only struggles, but looks downright amateur with the bat. They gasp in horror when fans criticize Larry Rothschild as the entire pitching staff walks batter after batter. "The players must execute," they say. "Any team would love to have Larry! He created Carlos Marmol!" (Who is also struggling, even with his confidence).

So, I posit this: Casual fans usually place too much blame on the coaching staff, while the true sports nuts and analysts (perhaps out of reverence) place too little.

Is there a right answer here? I suppose there are coaches like Phil Jackson, whose championship rings I have literally lost count of. Then again, he's had Jordan, Pippen, Kobe and Shaq. Could he have taken a bunch of no names off the heap, like LaRussa?

What about Bobby Cox, who coached the Braves to 16 straight division titles? Was that just good drafting and a solid GM? How about Joe Torre? Piniella's done okay, but has only won one Series. Even Da Coach, Ditka, won only one Super Bowl, while many around football think he could've had more.

Do coaches make good teams, or do good players make good coaches?

Is the firing of a coach only symbolic? Does it help or should you stick with one?

And almost most important during baseball season: Are the answers to these questions different when you're talking about hitting and pitching coaches?

Blackhawks' Bandwagon Still Knows Nothing About Hockey, But Loves it Anyway

Dan Bradley — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 05:51:40 -0400

Many fans in Chicago learned they have another hockey team besides the Wolves this year. They also learned that this team has spent the past few seasons stockpiling talent younger and more playoff ready than most of the Cubs’ minor league system.

Unfortunately for us bandwagon fans, the next thing we have to learn is when hockey season starts again, because we miss it already.

Until then, here are a few things that watching the Blackhawks’ 2008-2009 campaign has taught us new followers:

Canadians pronounce things strangely -- somehow Toews is NOT pronounced “toes” -- but then again, so do Americans -- that Byfuglien isn’t “Buy-fug-lee-ehn” we don’t understand at all.

Everybody gets nicknames. If nobody on the team is creative, you get an “er” added to the end of your name. If there is already an “er” at the end of your name, take it off.

The old adage “I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out” is misleading, because we all know that fighting is to protect Patrick Kane.

The reason for pulling somebody’s shirt over their head is so they can’t see where they are punching.

If you get into a fight with Adam Burish, he will be smiling the entire time.

Players run into each other so frequently because they’re ON FREAKING ICE! (From the bandwagon girlfriend.)

Single guys -- more girls seem to enjoy live hockey over any other sport. Unless they still find Brian Urlacher attractive.

Almost as many bandwagon ladies now find Patrick Sharp just as attractive, and he’s from Thunder Bay, which just sounds cool.

Brunei is southwest of the Philippines (thanks, Craig Adams).

Murphy’s Law says there will be a hat trick on hardhat giveaway night.

Hockey has the most annoying penalties ever: too many men on the ice (“You didn’t jump off fast enough, idiot!”) and delay of game (“You hit the puck into the crowd just to save your own ass. Wuss”).

Hockey on the radio: less fun than baseball, way more fun than basketball.

Hand passing: more okay than in soccer, less okay than in volleyball.

Goalie: less glamorous than a quarterback, far more sweaty.

Ice crews: nobody cares what they do.

The blue line: easier to understand than a balk.

“Blowout”: when Brian Campbell falls down.

“Crease”: like the pretty girl with older brothers -- you want to be there but you’re gonna get knocked around.

Four minutes in the box for drawing blood. . . still cool.

My playoff beard growing thicker than Kane or Toews’. . . even cooler.

The National Anthem sung by an opera tenor over 21,000 fans screaming for mayhem. . . coolest, most patriotic damn thing ever.

So if you’ve made it through this year, congratulations -- you are no longer a bandwagon fan. You can say that you were there when many of the young ones became legal, when ecstatic energy overcame the brutes out of Vancouver and that you’ll keep coming back until the Blackhawks prove that Detroit still does, in fact, suck.

By Dan “Daner” Bradley, Blackhawks fan for life

A Couple of Early Offseason Points for the Hawks and Bulls

Dan Bradley — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 05:43:09 -0400

BLACKHAWKS:

It's obvious that you need to re-sign Martin Havlat. The inconsistencies of all other scorers have proven this. He's smooth, has the best stick-handling of anybody and isn't afraid to take it to the net.

There are babies being born today who's first words are "Re-sign Havlat!"

You'll let Khabibulin go and thank him for his services. He's injury prone and Huet came through this year when you needed him, for the most part.

There are some obvious players you'll need to keep, and some less-than-obvious. The keen-eyed fan will know the importance of Dave Bolland centering the Havlat line (even though he's a terrible interview).

Adam Burish provides energy when nobody else does. And Cam Barker and Matt Walker provided steady presence at their respective jobs. Byfuglien and Versteeg may require higher contracts, but came through at times that make you think you'd like them to stick around.

Toews, Kane, Sharp, Keith, Seabrook, and Campbell are obvious for various reasons. And I'm not sure why but I do like Troy Brouwer.

Keep most of these guys and I'm excited.

BULLS:

This Derrek Rose scandal should be a non-issue.

I'm tired of the one-and-done college-to-NBA players. Lets get rid of this rule already. Baseball has no rules FORCING players who don't want to go into college.

(Let me state for the record that I always loved school and have a masters degree myself. Hell I'd go back to college right now if I could afford it. Best time of my damn life!)

But this is ridiculous. Do you really want to force coaches to game plan around a super-talented guy who will only be around for a year? And force these players to lie about grades they know they can't get?

It's not Rose's fault. It's the system.

10 Reasons the Cubs Won't Win Squat This Year

Dan Bradley — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 03:46:19 -0400

Welcome to the 2009 season. It holds all the hope of the 2004 season, but with five more years worth of salt rubbed in. Yes, last year absolutely presented the problem of being too right-handed (pitchers can work one side of the plate, no chance at hitting changeups, etc.) but the way Jim Hendry tore apart and re-shaped this team has turned it into something unique, and different, and ... crappy.

Begin Slideshow