Results tagged ‘ Reporters ’
The Ministries Of Propaganda And Their Tentacles
- The story so narrow only one outlet is openly reporting it as fact:
According to the Denver Post’s Troy E. Renck (the name sounds like a nom de plume, but
apparently it’s a real guy) the San Francisco Giants are “quietly making an aggressive run at Manny Ramirez”. What that means is anyone’s guess, but it should be a red flag that this story is coming from a writer for the Denver Post instead of a San Francisco, Los Angeles or New York outlet.
That the story was reported this morning and no one’s picked it up as having any validity make it look like it’s: A) a plant from the Scott Boras camp in response to the Dodgers planting the “contacting Adam Dunn” stuff a couple of days ago; B) something completely fabricated; C) a great bit of reporting by this Troy E. Renck person or he’s trying to get
people (like the gullible me) to print his name and garner him some attention for a story that has no basis in fact; or D) all of the above.
Of course Manny makes sense for the Giants, but are they going to spend the money that it’s going to take to get him? We’re talking about between $20-25 million a year for probably three years; that’s a lot of money for a team with a lot of stadium debt to pay off and a limited payroll. If the Giants were able to get Manny for a year or a year with an option based on performance, I’d say they’re a pretty good bet to make the playoffs and it’d be a worthwhile thing to do, but for three years? Maybe not. I don’t think there’s much, if any, truth to this “story”. How it got out and why is a more interesting tale in the long run, if that’s ever divulged. (I wouldn’t hold my breath.)
- How deeply are reporters in bed with management, agents and players?
This Manny thing got me to thinking about how agents, management types and players
use reporters to get their feelings conveyed or to create bidding wars where they didn’t really exist and the reporters receive the quid pro quo benefit of getting some brief national attention. I think back to Moneyball when Billy Beane was in the midst of making one of his deals and refused to take any and all calls from reporters other than Peter Gammons because Gammons was so dialed in then (he’s more of a columnist/reporter emeritus at this point) that he was quite possibly going to tell Beane something he didn’t already know.
The prevalence of this practice is so extensive that it’s hard to tell who’s giving the real deal information; who’s intentionally writing things that they know are extremely unlikely to be true; or are suspending disbelief to write what they’ve heard for the dual benefit of getting further information from the “source” or trying to get their names in the
national spotlight.
I suppose this has been going on forever, but there comes a point where the true reporters who come up with nuggets that wind up being true—-Ken Rosenthal; Jon Heyman—-are being devalued because of the rabble that makes things up or are having things planted with a purpose in mind rather than it being genuine reporting. In today’s media—-where there’s the internet, cable TV, all-sports talk radio and even a channel dedicated to the MLB itself—-there’s going to be such a rush to get the stories out first, that it’s going to cause a number of things to get into the media that have no basis whatsoever in fact.
How many guys are dialed in enough that they have access to the agents, team management and players to get the truth from all sides? I’d say not many. Those that are
passed off as “experts” generally tend to be anything but. I still remember after the Roger Clemens congressional debacle, how Seth Everett (SNY’s “baseball insider”—-hold on a minute, I have to go get a barf bag)….
…Okay. I’m back. Everett went on about how former Red Sox GM Dan Duquette may have been “vindicated” by the Clemens PED allegations and how Duquette was “fired by the Red
Sox after 1997″ when Duquette was actually there until after the 2001 season—-Prince Of New York blog 12/14/2007—-blah, blah blah; Everett clearly didn’t have any idea what he was talking about and was just regurgitating things he heard (or read) and was passing it off as “inside” information and analysis in order to bolster his flagging credentials. (Haven’t seen much of him since as a matter of fact, on SNY anyway.)
This happens a lot and diminishes not only the effort many of us take to keep track of what’s happening, but wastes our time and energy since we’re the ones who are stupid enough to believe it and then, in the case of some mental patients (see Lebowitz, Paul), write about it to drag things out even more.
- More on the connections between writers and executives:
This isn’t going to degenerate into another one of my rants of the arrogant cluelessness of
Paul DePodesta, but it helps with the argument to note how many of the stat geeks who have invested much of their lives in the use of statistics and “objective” analysis above all else in building teams still have the thoughtless audacity to defend DePodesta after he presided over the destruction of a good Dodgers team and then went to the Padres and helped trash that place as well.
&
nbsp; DePodesta has done nothing to warrant receiving another chance as a GM, but he still has those that say with thinly veiled hopefulness that he may eventually get another shot. (I’m still so stunned by his backers that I can’t help but say loudly to no one in particular whenever another one pops up, “How are you defending this guy?” I’ve yet to get an
answer.) Maybe, after doing the penance of being an assistant for ten years or so, being successful and losing his condescending pomposity, he might get another chance, but now? No way if the owner considering it has a brain in his head. This brings me to a former GM who receives universal scorn and ridicule for his tenure despite having pretty good overall success in most aspects, former Mets GM and now ESPN analyst Steve Phillips.
Yes, Phillips made some bad trades as the Mets GM; yes, he was in charge of the club as they made the ill-advised decisions to acquire the likes of a shot Roberto Alomar, the bloated Mo Vaughn, and the one-dimensional Jeromy Burnitz; and yes, he spoke in corporate catchphrases and circles without ever answering a question directly (much as Brian Cashman and Theo Epstein do now); but Phillips was also the club’s GM when they were at the height of their powers as the second best team in the
National League in the late 90s and early 2000s. He made some very smart acquisitions like Mike Piazza; Al Leiter; Turk Wendell; John Olerud and Armando Benitez; and he also signed such unsung unknowns like Rick Reed, who turned out to be very valuable. In the draft, he selected current stars as David Wright and Scott Kazmir and signed Jose Reyes.
Up until the last couple of years of his reign, he was very respectable (on the field) GM who was aggressive (sometimes overly so) in making maneuvers to make his veteran team better immediately. Those decisions cost the Mets players like Jason Bay and Jason Isringhausen among others, but under Bobby Valentine, Isringhausen wasn’t going to pitch
and the Mets weren’t the only team to give up on the late-blooming Bay. Valentine wasn’t exactly blameless in the deals the Mets made although he likes to absolve himself of things like the Vaughn debacle; Phillips wasn’t working alone in the successes or the failures.
I’m not trying to make Steve Phillips look like he was Branch Rickey; nor am I advocating him for another big league job (he seems happy and is pretty good at his current broadcasting vocation); and there were some off-field issues that would give pause before giving him another chance, but to defend and extol the virtues of DePodesta with his heinous record, while treating Phillips as if he were spinning a wheel and getting lucky once-in-a-while like an unevolved, semi-trained primate is even worse because it’s not only inaccurate, it’s not fair based on facts and track record.
Mini-Fallout For The Mets And An Absurd Panic
In the cosmic scheme of things this latest debacle, an 8-6 loss to the Phillies, won’t mean much of anything if the Mets get two well-pitched games today and tomorrow from John Maine and Oliver Perez and win. The older I get, the more I believe the Jim Leyland-theory that momentum is only as good as the next day’s starter. That being said, there are some things that need to be clarified about this game.
- Johan Santana didn’t ask to come out of the game after eight innings, but he didn’t fight to stay in either:
There are a dozen arguments to take a pitcher like Santana out after eight innings. A
three-run lead should have been safe with or without the closer and regardless of the opponent; he’s going to be needed down the stretch and in the post-season(?) and it makes no sense to go over his normal workload for a relatively meaningless game in July; the Mets have a lot of money invested in him for a lot of years and going over his threshold four months into his first season with the team is a panic move; etc, etc.
But there are also viable arguments for him to go out and at least try to finish the game for his team. There’s a difference between going above and beyond what a pitcher’s used to in terms of pitch count and going slightly over what is normal; the circumstances—-105 pitches through eight innings; the unavailability of closer Billy Wagner; that Santana came here to be the man the Mets have been missing since the
days of Dwight Gooden—-dictated that he should have stood in front of Jerry Manuel and told his manager that he wanted to start the ninth inning; that it was his game and without Wagner available, his responsibility to try and close things out himself. Instead he allowed himself to be removed and again the question of whether his desire to win is secondary to his satisfaction of doing well enough to win even if the bullpen coughs it up.
The argument of star players who are reluctant to get down in the muck is always logically sound. When he was at his best as the most dangerous hitter in the National League, former Cincinnati Reds star George Foster responded to the Pete Rose criticism that he never got his uniform dirty by saying that he didn’t run into walls because he didn’t want to get hurt and miss substantial time and not be able to help the team with his bat; but sometimes a player must run into a wall; or a pitcher must go past that threshold of pitches to help the team win.
It’s not like they were talking about him going from 115 pitches to 135-140. That would’ve ![]()
been extreme; he was at 105 pitches and could have thrown fifteen or twenty more as long as he felt all right and his mechanics were sound. Taking him out was the easily explainable maneuver (to their bosses and to the reporters) and that’s what managers tend to lean towards rather than what might be best for the team. Thus far as manager of the Mets, Manuel has shown a strategic acumen that wasn’t present in Willie Randolph and he’s shown the ability to ignore certain orthodoxies that have become all-too-common, but last night, there shouldn’t even have been a discussion or decision to blow up in everyone’s face. Manuel should’ve asked Santana to finish the game and Santana should’ve demanded that he finish the game. He’s thrown between 110 and 120 pitches in his career numerous times and it wouldn’t have hurt him had he gone out there for the ninth inning with a short leash to try and prevent the short-handed bullpen from doing exactly as they did and blowing a game that the team should have won.
- A reporter’s agenda is showing:
William C. Rhoden wrote an article in today’s New York Times—-Column—-basically accusing Wagner of unilaterally deciding to take the game off, sitting in the clubhouse and shaking his head as his replacements imploded; that the Mets leadership from Jerry Manuel on down is lacking; and defending Willie Randolph as if the entire collapse from last season
and lackluster play during his tenure this season was somehow not his fault; he then suggests that the modern day version of Nietzsche’s Superman, Mariano Rivera, has never once been unavailable when the Yankees needed him as the Mets needed Wagner last night. I’m here to tell you that Rhoden’s agenda in defending Randolph is blatantly obvious and that he clearly pulled this vague accusation of a “lack of leadership” out of the air to defend Randolph and rip the Mets.
Wagner and the doctors decided that it would be better to give the pitcher’s sore trapezius/shoulder another day of rest. It’s not as if Wagner didn’t want to be out there on the mound for the ninth inning. Wagner is a lot of things. He’s shaky in big games and he’s got a big mouth, but he’s not an Erik Bedard/Carl
Pavano-style malingerer. This is why it’s so difficult to be a closer especially in New York; if he goes into the game sore and blows the game or blows his shoulder out so he’s lost for the season, he gets ripped for either not thinking about the big picture or for not being good at his job; if he takes the doctor’s advice and gives his shoulder an extra day of rest, he’s accused of fiddling while Rome burns.
One game is very small in the grand context of the last sixty games and beyond(?) that the Mets are going to need Wagner to pitch. If he got hurt, they’d be faced with the possibility of having to rely on their other bullpen pitchers who either don’t have the mental aptitude or ability to close games as well as Wagner (even with all of his faults); then the team would be forced to overpay out of desperation for the likes of Huston Street or George Sherrill when their other needs (a corner outfield bat) should take precedence.
Regardless of how one feels about Willie Randolph on a personal level; or how they feel about the way the Mets botched his firing, I don’t think anyone with an objective bone in his body wouldn’t agree that it was time for him to go. The team wasn’t responding to him and they weren’t going to turn things around with him at the helm; the questions surrounding his job status had become stifling and the leadership that Rhoden claims is still missing was being ignored and dismissed while Randolph and Rick Peterson were still around. Even with
this one loss, Manuel has proven to be far superior strategically to Randolph and the team seems relaxed and at ease with him in the manager’s office.
Mariano Rivera is not invulnerable. There have been times that even he has had to be rested because of a barking elbow. To imply that Rivera would have gone out to the mound in any condition (especially in a game in July) is piling on Wagner because he’s not Rivera, but Wagner, even at his best, was never Rivera. He was never even Trevor Hoffman. He’s a pretty good closer who throws hard and gets the job done most of the time. A player’s performance has little to do with him being injured and Rhoden combines the two to indict Wagner as something that he’s not. He is not a guy who doesn’t want the pressure of pitching a big game whether he succeeds or fails.
To continue to try and defend Randolph is grasping at straws to find reasons for his demise other than that he had his major faults as a manager and it was past time for a change. No matter what happens for the rest of the season, it won’t change that reality. And it should be remembered that even with the entire mess of this season—-the injuries, botched firings, questionable decisions and infighting—-the Mets are still one game out of first place and have the personnel to not only take control of the NL East, but to emerge
from a mediocre National League to make it to the World Series. As the Cardinals proved two years ago, once a team gets that far, they’re still only four wins from a championship and everything that happened as they navigated their way there is conveniently forgotten during the victory parade and raising of the World Series trophy. In the end, this was only one game in July and that’s what everyone needs to remember before panicking. It’s not about the invisible and difficult to gauge expression of “leadership”; it’s about performance and nothing more.
Recent Comments