DISCLAIMER: EXTREMELY LONG!I’m in a fine rage this morning. Buster Olney, who is actually beginning to annoy me at this point, wrote
the following on Saturday morning (with my responses included):
“You wonder now if Giambi was sincere, whatsoever, with his initial apology…was it simply a media relations ploy?” Look, of course Giambi’s first apology was a PR ploy. Quite frankly, aren’t most apologies at least partly an act of self-absolution? Giambi’s 2005 apology was as much about getting the heat off him for putrid performance during the 2003 playoffs and the 2004 season as it was to get control of the BALCO story that included him, Barry Bonds, Gary Sheffield, and others. And what’s so wrong with that? There was a degree of sincerity to his apology, of that I have no doubt. But what’s the difference if it was 5% sincere or 100% sincere? It achieved Giambi’s goal of getting the bull’s-eye off his back.
Why does Olney care anyway? Have all of Olney’s mea culpas been totally genuine? I’d be willing to bet he’s offered a few apologies in his day that were more about getting his ass off the hot seat than they were about earnest regret. So fuck Olney’s judgmental tone.
“He still has never really been up front and honest about the issue...” He hasn’t? Really? Well then I guess Mark McGwire hasn’t either. I mean, we’re crucifying McGwire and holding him out of the Hall of Fame for something we
think he did, not for something he admitted to doing. If anything, Giambi’s been the most forthcoming about his past steroid use. What’s Olney’s beef here? Does anyone have to read between the lines and guess as to what Giambi’s alluding to? Giambi’s pretty much admitted to everything. I don’t see how we can doubt his frankness at this point, seeing as though he’s told us that he used steroids in his career.
“There is something mildly offensive about Giambi saying that others should apologize for the steroid issue...he committed the crime...walked away with the cash, lied repeatedly about whether he used steroids until he was scared into speaking the truth before the grand jury and has never come clean, completely. And now he’s saying others should apologize? Please.” The media has been screaming for accountability and now Olney is offended by someone stepping up and asking for the same thing? Is it a case of playing semantics or is Olney this obtuse? Giambi’s apology – the one where HE said HE was sorry for what HE had done – also included a statement where he thinks that everyone in baseball should own up for past mistakes.
This isn’t Giambi shirking responsibility here nor is he trying to pass the buck. He’s taking ownership of his own errors (the only thing an individual can do, after all) and volunteering his opinion on what he thinks would be the best way to get past this issue. Olney disagrees? No one else should apologize? It’s wrong for someone who made a mistake to ask that others who made the same mistake or have complicity in the same “crime” to own up to past errors? What’s so offensive about that?
“There’s no doubt that the entire institution of baseball shares the blame for what happened. But for one of the users of the “stuff” to criticize other players and owners, implicitly, reflects the arrogance of a burglar who got away with the goods.” I hardly see the arrogance in Giambi’s position. The media shares as much, if not more, of the blame because the steroids era happened on their watch. Those members of the media who are earning their money and gaining exposure on ESPN or other outlets by offering with their neo-McCarthyism should remember that they – not the fans – were in the locker-room watching these guys walk around looking like Incredible Hulks.
And where was Olney in all of this? With his head in the sand, pretending not to notice that middle infielders were suddenly weighing 200 lbs. with ripped physiques? The height of arrogance is earning a paycheck by wagging a finger at those whose profession you’re leeching off of. Olney’s position on this issue in general, and on Giambi in particular, is nauseating, reprehensible, and the height of hypocrisy.
======================================================
And while I’m ranting about asshole baseball writers from ESPN, I’d like to take a moment to destroy this little “
gem.” This article fails in the following ways:
1. By writing that “the departures of coaches like [Mel] Stottlemyre, Willie Randolph and Don Zimmer, he is left with a cast of failed managers (Tony Pena, Larry Bowa) and future failed managers (Don Mattingly) as his assistants” Pearlman incorrectly assigns blame to the perceived failures of the current coaching staff. Anyone who truly knows the Yankees knows that Mel Stottlemyre was a far greater beneficiary for having had the chance to work with David Wells, Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte, and David Cone than any of those pitchers were for having worked with Stottlemyre.
Does Pearlman forget that Zimmer wasn’t exactly a great manager in his day? In 14 seasons, Zimmer compiled a career .508 wining percentage (885-858), achieved only one first place finish (with the 1989 Cubs) and was the manager of the Red Sox during the famous
Boston Massacre of 1978 when the Yankees overcame a 14 game deficit from July 18-September 10. Hardly the picture of excellence, if you ask me.
Furthermore, I fail to see the relevance in how Tony Pena’s and Larry Bowa’s failures as managers have any bearing on the 2006-2007 Yankees. Seriously, when was the last time you heard of a team’s championship pedigree being determined by the work of the first and third base coaches, respectively? Regardless, is this even serious baseball scholarship? And, truth be told, Larry Bowa’s regarded as one of the best third base coaches in the game...
2. Pearlman, like too many others who write about baseball, overrate (and overuse) terms like passion and chemistry. Case in point, “[w]hen you nurture and develop the Jeters...those men will live and die for those pinstripes. On the other hand, when you shell out fat wads of cash for Alex Rodriguez...and Jason Giambi, are you buying skill and passion, or just skill?” This sentiment equates players acquired via free agency or trade with apathy and homegrown players with grit and resolve. Have David Cone and Roger Clemens (regarded as two of the game’s preeminent hired guns) ever been accused of a lack of passion? Did Pearlman bother to check Pete Rose’s pulse when he was imported to the 1980 Phillies?
Grit vs. apathy is one of those stupid, facile arguments that people try to make when a losing team is composed of a greater proportion of free agents or non-homegrown players. To think that Alex Rodriguez or Jason Giambi care less about winning than Derek Jeter is simple-minded at best and offensive at worst. What about A-Rod would give off the aura of apathy? Further, to quote Corrado “Junior” Soprano, the 2006 Mets came within a c*nt-hair of the World Series and they only had three homegrown players on their roster (Jose Reyes, David Wright, Aaron Heilman). Did anyone question the grittiness of the 2006 Mets, who were the best team in the NL last year? Did anyone ever bring up the makeup and origins of their roster?
The entire premise of Pearlman’s article is that Torre’s laid-back ways are no longer appropriate for a team made up of listless players who require a firm hand to find sufficient motivation. He cites the Mets as a shining example of a team that “scrap[s] and claw[s]...for every run” and as a team that has “immense heart” filled with players who “shave their heads in a sign of team unity.” The Mets have third-highest payroll in baseball, but, again, it comes down to chemistry and grit. Did Carlos Beltran, Carlos Delgado, Moises Alou, and Paul Lo Duca enjoy all those times they played together in the Mets farm system? Anyone else see the irony in such a ridiculous suggestion?
Of course, Pearlman’s solution is for the Yanks to dump Joe Torre and replace him with former Mets manager Bobby Valentine. Never mind that Bobby Valentine was run out of town by the entire city of New York (including the few Mets fans that cared about baseball back in 2002). Never mind that the Mets had endured so much of Valentine’s showboating and self-aggrandizing that they replaced him with Art Howe, perhaps the blandest, most benign persona in all of baseball.
If Bobby Valentine – whose baseball knowledge is indeed exceptional – were in such hot demand as a manager, then why was he essentially banished to the Japanese league? Were there not plenty of managerial openings over the past five years? How come Bobby V. hasn’t been considered for any of them? And why would Bobby V. be a good fit for the Yanks? Don’t they get enough negative press? Valentine is a walking, talking distraction – someone who pretty much taught
Ozzie Guillen everything he knows.
Pearlman and I agree that Torre should be fired. Quite honestly, Torre should’ve been fired after the 2003 World Series. But the reasons (and the issue of his replacement) reflect why Jeff Pearlman is, like so many others, an unsophisticated ass who happens to write about baseball for a living. I fail to understand how the national pastime can continue to survive when the people charged with informing the general public know nothing of which they write.
