We often wondered why Paul Sullivan and company were so eager to run Milton Bradley out of town, given that he was 63.71 percent of what they wrote about during 2009 (according to a Deloitte audit of Cubs media coverage).

There was no need for worry. Bradley's departure hasn't slowed the coverage much, if at all - something that is understandably annoying the 2010 Cubs.

How much do Chicago's baseball writers still have Bradley on the brain? Tons.

Below is a somewhat comprehensive list of the times Bradley has been mentioned by the Tribune or its employees in the last four weeks (does not include radio, TV or things my Google machine did not pick up). It basically works out to one a day, even though pitchers and catchers didn't report until 11 days into this highly scientific study.

Here we go:

(click "read more" for full article)

February 7: Paul Sullivan says Jim Hendry "shoulders all the blame for the Cubs' busts of 2009, which included Bradley, Miles, Aaron Heilman and Kevin Gregg" and wonders if former Gov. Rod Blagojevich had pushed the Bradley signing on him.

February 13: Phil Rogers lists Bradley as one of the players who is gone from 2009. Completely innocuous.

February 15: Paul Sullivan reports the Cubs would like a quiet camp after last year and notes 2009's camp was "devoted to the licking of wounds after an unexpected playoff collapse and the arrival of Milton Bradley to provide the team with an edge."

February 17: Paul Sullivan reports: "The addition of Byrd and the departure of Bradley figures to alter the complexion of the team, changing the chemistry overnight." Comparing Bradley and Byrd. Hmm. Not Byrd and Harden. Curious.

February 18: Phil Rogers says Milton Bradley could be one of the 12 most likely players (No. 6, actually) to be Comeback Player of the Year.

February 19: Paul Sullivan reports Kevin Millar is the kind of player the Cubs sought "after the failed experiment of Milton Bradley." He doesn't mean over the hill and in a steep decline, apparently.

February 19: Paul Sullivan reports Ron Santo said the Cubs will have "drastically" better chemistry without Bradley and that he was "always kind of mad." As such a pleasant person, Santo can say that.

February 20: Phil Rogers mocks Milton Bradley for throwing the ball into the stands in a column on the best and worst fielders by position. To be fair, though, Rogers also wrote that Jose Rijo is the shortstop for the Mets in the same column - and nobody has bothered to fix it. Karma is a bitch.

February 22: Phil Rogers says the Mariners could surprise people, though he remembers: "Of course, the Mariners also have Milton Bradley, don't they? Maybe he'll sink them, as he has been saddled with more than his share of responsibility for doing to the 2009 Cubs." Rogers then suggests Seattle is a better "marriage" for Bradley.

February 22: Paul Sullivan reports that Alfonso Soriano says the addition of Byrd and subtraction of Milton Bradley will help the team chemistry, pulling this quote out of him: "He's a totally different guy than Milton. He's a nice guy. Milton is a nice guy, too, but everyone knows what kind of problems he's got. I'm very excited we've got Marlon Byrd." Again, we still wonder why, exactly, is Sullivan asking Soriano to compare Byrd and Bradley - and not Byrd and Gregg or Millar and Bradley or Harden and Byrd?

February 22: Paul Sullivan Tweets on the above comments from Soriano. Unsolicited, I'm sure.

February 24: Paul Sullivan reports that Carlos Silva has a great opportunity with the Cubs while calling him the "consolation prize in the Milton Bradley trade." He also notes "the Mariners were so desperate to move him they took the risk of acquiring the underachieving and moody Bradley."

February 25: David Haugh calls Dutch speedskater Sven Kramer insolent. "Think Milton Bradley in lycra."

February 26: Phil Rogers reports that Ken Griffey Jr. insists Bradley will have fun in Seattle and warns readers to not be surprised if Bradley is a productive player in Seattle.

February 26: Phil Rogers uses his latest love letter to Curtis Granderson to suggest the Cubs missed out on Granderson because Jim Hendry was "more occupied with the time-consuming effort to deal Milton Bradley" - and not because, as Tigers officials say in the very same story, the Yankees offered a better deal.

March 1: David Haugh says the expectations are lighter on the Cubs this year, noting "Milton Bradley isn't the only burden missing from last spring."

March 1: Phil Rogers reports that Cardinals GM John Mozeliak says the Cubs will be better in 2010, prompting Rogers to ask: "We'll give him two out of three, but how did the Cubs get better? 'Addition by subtraction,' Mozeliak answered, and it looked like he was having a tough time not laughing about the end of the Milton Bradley era."

March 1: Paul Sullivan Tweets on the above story.

March 1: Paul Sullivan reTweets the following: "teammktgreport @PWSullivan Better watch out Sully, you're going to have the dumb Cubs bloggers after you for picking on Milton again."

March 3: Paul Sullivan reTweets the following: Quick, somebody blame @pwsullivanRT keithlaw: Milton Bradley just loafed after a flyball let it drop for a two-run "double."

(WV23: Nope. We've never blamed Sullivan for Bradley's troubles. We just think he has acted indecently toward him and unethically in the way he has discussed him publicly. Nice effort at a straw man, though.)

March 4: Paul Sullivan reports on the New York Times story in which Bradley blames Chicago for his problems. Sullivan tsk-tsks Bradley thusly to lead the column:

MESA, Ariz. -- When Milton Bradley was traded to Seattle in December, he said he no longer wanted to discuss his controversial stint with the Cubs.

"I have no interest in speaking about Chicago," Bradley told reporters. "I'm a Seattle Mariner. I've moved on. I wish you would move on, and I wish the Chicago Cubs organization the best."

But three months later, Bradley had some interesting things to say about Chicago in an interview with the New York Times.

So this is the one thing Bradley says in three months. Take a look up at the eleventy hundred links above to see what the Trib has had to say about him. Who has the problem here?

Anyway, carrying on ...

March 4: Paul Sullivan Tweets on the New York Times story, sarcastically calling it shocking.

March 4: Paul Sullivan Tweets Lou Piniella's response to Bradley.

March 4: Paul Sullivan reTweets a Bradley-critical item from someone named Dean W. Lamb of Grayslake, Illinois.

March 4: Paul Sullivan reports on Tyler Colvin's big day: "Colvin went 3-for-3 with the home run and a pair of doubles. He's stronger than last year after adding about 20 pounds to his frame, and appears more comfortable after a late-season call-up to replace Milton Bradley following Bradley's suspension."

March 6: Paul Sullivan reports Ozzie Guillen thinks Lou Piniella will return in 2011 in part "because one of his biggest headaches left." Sullivan then plays cute: "Who was Guillen talking about? 'You know who I'm talking about,' he said, referring to departed outfielder Milton Bradley."

March 6: Paul Sullivan reports: "Carlos Silva picked up where Milton Bradley left off in 2009, drawing the ire of Cubs fans in his debut performance at HoHoKam Park."

March 7: Phil Rogers mentions Bradley three times in four paragraphs in a column about the 2010 Cubs and White Sox.

So there you have it. When will it stop? The smart guess would seem to be when regular season games start, but you never know what obsession will do to one's mind - or newspaper.