Kill The Messenger

I was waiting for a chance tonight to write something stupid and punny along the lines of “Jason tried to run out a single, but he didn’t look so speedy.” In the mean time Deadspin summed up my opinion about the current Giambi dust-up. It’s a shame that so many pretended to ignore what was going on was some “magical” confluence to destroy everything long-timers knew about power and baseball. It’s a shame that now a confessor gets the Scarlet Letter treatment for telling us what we already knew. It’s a particular shame that Yankee management takes a line that it’s not possible that anybody outside the users knew what was going on. Hang Giambi out to dry, if it makes you feel better about the past. I’m disappointed in him, to be certain, but there is something about the fact that He’s The Only Guy In Baseball Talking About It. Just remember to ask yourself what are you willing to learn with full disclosure.

32 comments… add one
  • I should add that I’m not apologizing for Giambi or thinking that his honesty earns him some sort of pass. On the contrary, I’m tired of the fact that what he has done and what he says about it seem to be for the the purpose of convenience for his circumstance at that moment.

    attackgerbil May 24, 2007, 8:50 am
  • Ok, at least you clarified it, because I’m sick of the hero welcome most Yankee fans are giving him based on his “honesty.” Really, he wasn’t honest, he’s never been honest and he’s only doing this because he was painted in to a corner.

    LocklandSF May 24, 2007, 9:01 am
  • The current situation is just making way too many people way too much money to risk blowing it up. In “The Right Stuff” parlance, “don’t scr&w the pooch.”
    Although I really don’t think it would (or more inevitably, if it will) anyway. Hearings before Congress, extended media frenzy, arguments over what a ‘record’ really is, not to mention the chaos in the blogosphere….. sure it would be a mess for a while…… but ultimately (cynically, he says) I think we in ‘fandom’ would get over our nobility and moral outrage and come to terms with it, just as we’ve repeatedly done with the strikes and lockouts and spitters and everything else. Cuz we really want to root for our Sox and Yanks. We’ll put up with just about anything from the players and the sport in order to keep rooting. We’ll tolerate about anything the players or the sport want to do to themselves for better performance (=better entertainment). Just look at the NFL. Or college ball.
    (It’s only in not-big-money, not-big-fandom sports like cycling or track that we’ll really throw the big guys under the bus.)
    So I’m a cynic. Sue me. I guess I’d still rather watch Sox/Yanks (or even Sox-Rangers) than, say, working on a solution for global climate change. And I don’t think that changes whether Giambi, or Canseco, or the Mets assistant ballboy, blabs or not. Just don’t get thrown out, Jason, my fantasy keeper team needs your OPS.

    Jim in CT SF May 24, 2007, 9:14 am
  • I don’t know, it’s easy for someone like Canseco to admit it because he has nothing to lose. Giambi still has a bit to lose, and almost nothing to gain. That I give him credit.

    Lar May 24, 2007, 10:25 am
  • In the meanwhile, Yanks donates a million to VA Tech memorial. Also will play an exhibition game there in 2008.

    Lar May 24, 2007, 10:26 am
  • Also unrelated note, Carl gone for the rest of the contract, probably.
    I’m just curious on the finance part – don’t they have insurance for these kind of things? Maybe even on the luxury tax?

    Anonymous May 24, 2007, 10:30 am
  • Also unrelated note, Carl gone for the rest of the contract, probably.
    I’m just curious on the finance part – don’t they have insurance for these kind of things? Maybe even on the luxury tax?

    Lar May 24, 2007, 10:30 am
  • Even though I don’t like him, I think Giambi earns a pass here. He may be a greasy, sweatty, overweight, overpaid baller on the downside of his career, but he is the only one talking about it.

    jp-sf May 24, 2007, 10:33 am
  • “but he is the only one talking about it.”
    What exactly is he talking about, though? He throws out accusations about who “knew” but doesn’t name names. He still makes ambiguous what he “did”, but all he says is that everyone should apologize. What, exactly, is Giambi saying that has any constructive use? Are there people who are saying Giambi has courage for speaking out? Courage for doing what, exactly?
    Jose Canseco got pilloried for “talking about it”. What’s Giambi doing that is any more useful than Canseco that he should receive credit? I might even venture that Canseco was far more forthcoming than Giambi, and has done the history of the game a greater service than Giambi in exposing it’s dark side.

    SF May 24, 2007, 10:54 am
  • > He still makes ambiguous what he “did”, but all he says is that everyone should apologize.
    I don’t need to know the names of the specific chemicals or products he used to hear an admission of guilt in his statement.
    > What’s Giambi doing that is any more useful than Canseco that he should receive credit?
    I believed Canseco from the beginning, and agree that he has done a greater service to opening the topic.

    attackgerbil May 24, 2007, 11:17 am
  • SF, but that just highlights the absurdity of baseball’s and the Yanks’ reaction to Giambi’s comments. You’re right. He’s vague to the point of meaninglessness. Yet, even with these comments, baseball feels threatened and leaks confidential information about one of its players. Cashman makes a ridiculous comment about how management had no idea about Giambi’s connection to steroids. It’s remarkable that baseball has managed to make Giambi seem sympathetic in comparison. This is a tale so far without any heroes. And any potential heroes are being told to stay silent lest the awaken the ire of baseball or the team their on or the players association. The only one who has any incentive of talking is someone who is through with the game and stands to make money through books sales.

    Nick-YF May 24, 2007, 11:21 am
  • by the way in that instant post-modern classic “Juiced” by Jose Canseco, the author claims that Jeter would have been the greatest player of our generation if he’d ever taken steroids or PEDs. Alas, the author claims Jeter’s scruples got in the way.

    Nick-YF May 24, 2007, 11:25 am
  • Is ther really anyone out there who doesn’t know what “it” is? (nod to BC)
    Greenies aside, this new episode is old news.
    It’s hard for me to get behind the idea that Canseco did the game a service here; he did himself a service – needing money, he wrote a “tell-all” book that lined his pockets and now he’s even more of a household name than he was as a ballplayer.
    And no, in my book, Giambi doesn’t get a pass based on his admission.

    Andrews May 24, 2007, 11:32 am
  • Absolutely Canseco did it for money/fame and not for higher concepts such as dispelling fantasies or outing and hopefully marginalizing practices that have serious health consequences and that send the wrong message to kids and young adults. It’s a good thing that those results weren’t mutually exclusive.

    attackgerbil May 24, 2007, 11:46 am
  • Isn’t that what capitalism is founded on? =)

    Lar May 24, 2007, 12:05 pm
  • “the author claims that Jeter would have been the greatest player of our generation if he’d ever taken steroids or PEDs.”
    Really? I know they turn some off-the-wall doubles into homeruns, but Jeter was always the guy who’d, when he hit a ball really hard, it was a homerun. It’s not like he’s Miguel Cairo up there, who barely has the power to hit the ball to the wall. I would think A-Rod would benefit more from the ‘roids. Remember all those warning track shots he had during his minislump?

    Andrew May 24, 2007, 12:28 pm
  • I agree, Andrews. A-Rod on the stuff would have made Bonds look mediocre, at best. It would have been a sight to see him at twenty pounds heavier and quicker bat speed. I can’t even wrap my mind around how untouchable those records would have been.

    Regular_Brad May 24, 2007, 12:41 pm
  • I agree, Andrews. A-Rod on the stuff would have made Bonds look mediocre, at best. It would have been a sight to see him at twenty pounds heavier and quicker bat speed. I can’t even wrap my mind around how untouchable those records would have been.
    I completely disagree and don’t understand this discussion. Do steroids impact all players equally? Are they a magic pill that causes “production x 1.10” when any player takes it? Is there an “increased performance quotient” that is guaranteed if you do the stuff?
    I imagine that one of the main roots of the disease of PED use is the simplistic attitude that if you take it, you automatically get better and perform better. This perception has probably led many kids to do steroids, f*ck up their health, yet derive almost no positive performance improvement out of that use. Why would it have been a “sight” to see A-Rod on PEDs? I think it would have been an abomination to see him on PEDs.

    SF May 24, 2007, 1:06 pm
  • I don’t think it’s the a magic bullet, but even a 5% increase in bat speed is another, 5 mph, is what, another 20 feet? (Give or take the hand-waving math)
    It wouldn’t be hard to imagine it add, say, 5 HR a year over a career, which is 75 HR’s over 15 healthy seasons. I’m not sure if my numbers are conservative (I try to be), but just putting some perspective.
    By the way, I totally would root for ARod to break the record cleanly.. but that’s obvious as a YF. But I would even guess that some SF (and true baseball fans) would too, four, five or six years down the line.. (too lazy to do the math..)

    Lar May 24, 2007, 1:34 pm
  • I’m a SF and root against A-Rod as a matter of course, but I’d rather him be the HR leader than Bonds in a heartbeat. I just hope he’s not a Yankee after this season.

    Froggywomp May 24, 2007, 2:51 pm
  • Christ, SF. Calm down, man. I wasn’t suggesting that it would have been a “sight” in the sense that I would have loved to see it, but rather something that could have been an amazing display of power. Of course it would have been bad for the game, someone’s kids, and whomever else I’m forgetting who are easily swayed into drug use.
    All I’m saying that a stronger A-Rod, with quicker bat speed is a scary thought, and most of the records he would/may/could have produced would have been untouchable.
    I wasn’t suggesting that “if” ARod was to take them it would have made him all-world (which he already is), but that the possibility certainly exists he ends up stronger and faster than he is without them. Either way, I was simply agreeing with Andrews (imagine that!) that if any player was going to absolutely dominate the game if on PED’s, it’s ARod, not Jeter. The discussion is silly in and of itself, but I’d have to imagine that both Andrews and myself are correct in this assumption.
    Now that I’ve said that I’m going to go kick a few puppies.

    Regular_Brad May 24, 2007, 3:18 pm
  • It wouldn’t be hard to imagine it add, say, 5 HR a year over a career, which is 75 HR’s over 15 healthy seasons.
    How many guys have stayed healthy for fifteen years while doing PEDs, I wonder? Most of the players suspected of (or who have admitted) doing steroids have broken down, are out of the game from injury, had to come back after injury but did so as lesser players, or are dead. If A-Rod had juiced, I imagine he’d be a far lesser player now, on the comeback trail after injury, or in the unlikely (but possible) scenario that he’s still all-universe and on historic, record-setting paces for numerous stats.
    And Brad, I was reacting to the “sight to see” colloquialism, which to me means something different. Just a simple misinterpretation, so I understand now what you meant.

    SF May 24, 2007, 4:19 pm
  • I agree with that, SF. But during those healthy years (like when Giambi was in Oaktown), I can’t fathom the numbers he puts up if he was aided the way Giambi was.

    Regular_Brad May 24, 2007, 4:38 pm
  • I still don’t understand Canseco’s argument about a pumped-up Jeter being the best player of our generation. Sure, he’s already one of the best pure hitters of our generation, but I just don’t get where he’s coming from.

    Andrew May 24, 2007, 4:46 pm
  • Also, I’m different from Andrews. I’m Andrew without the s. I hope I’ve not been confused with the other Yankee fan Andrews for all this time.

    Andrew May 24, 2007, 4:51 pm
  • Andrew, a friendly suggestion, make it more obvious, like AndrewYF, or something like that.

    LocklandSF May 24, 2007, 5:03 pm
  • Andrew, you and Andrews are both YFs. I’m not sure I feel a need to make a distinction between the two of you. :)

    QuoSF May 24, 2007, 5:48 pm
  • I dont know where else to say this as there really is no relevant thread.. so I’ll post here at the top.
    I plan on paying for an milb.tv day pass (about 4 bucks) to watch Lester’s start tonight. Might be fun for SF (or someone) to great a game thread for the game as there is no major league game today, so those buying day passes or watching on GameDay can comment on the continuing return of our boy, Lester.
    Plus, I presuem the quality between milb.tv and mlb.tv are about the same so this Day pass lets me test the water to see if I WANT to commit to mlb.tv subscription! Weee!

    Dionysus May 24, 2007, 6:22 pm
  • Son of a gun. I just saw that that game isnt available in milb.tv! THats DUMB!
    *stomps aroudn angrily*
    I already paid too.

    Dionysus May 24, 2007, 6:26 pm
  • Dio, how about watching Bowden instead?

    QuoSF May 24, 2007, 6:28 pm
  • Unless I’m blind thats not available today either
    11:00a Indianapolis Indians @ Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Yankees 350K
    2:35p Salt Lake Bees @ Sacramento River Cats 350K
    7:05p Buffalo Bisons @ Louisville Bats 350K
    7:05p Greenville Drive @ Lexington Legends 350K
    Thats all that shows as available that I can see. Again. Stupid.

    Dionysus May 24, 2007, 6:40 pm
  • Good idea, Lockland. Thanks.

    AndrewYF May 25, 2007, 12:28 am

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.