From the “if it makes you feel better” department:
Red Sox star David Ortiz may soon provide more details about his 2003 drug test. The Boston slugger and incoming players’ union head Michael Weiner plan a news conference Saturday at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox play New York . . .
. . . “I’m going to let you guys know what I’ve got. Period,” Ortiz said after the Yankees beat the Red Sox 13-6.
I don’t know how this serves anyone’s interest. Certainly not the public’s. Unlike the case with A-Rod and Manny, there hasn’t been a big “he must come clean!” groundswell with respect to Big Papi. Probably because everyone knows that whenever a ballplayer makes a statement about these things all we get are prepared remarks which were in all likelihood crafted by legal counsel. The union’s general counsel and future president, Michael Weiner, will be at Ortiz’s side tomorrow, so it’s not as if we should expect anything candid or all that interesting here.
A statement is not really in Papi’s interests either. It’s still early, but doesn’t it seem like people are willing to go a bit easier on Ortiz than on other PED-implicated players? Maybe that’s because everyone always liked him. Maybe it’s because he probably wasn’t a Hall of Fame case anyway and holds no records, so no one is too worried about what his legacy means. Maybe it’s because his career is obviously winding down and there’s no sense in piling on. Whatever the case, I don’t know that his situation is crying out for a P.R. offensive.
The final reason I think this is a bad idea is that, as I’ve mentioned several times before, the whole reason Ortiz’s name is out in PED land is because of someone’s illegal, unethical act. It’s quite likely that the reason this scumbag is releasing these names is because he wants to make a spectacle out of these players and would like nothing more than to see them make this media perp-walk. Why give him the satisfaction?
Ortiz’s positive test is more than six years-old. It’s troubling and regrettable and all of that for the reasons so many people have stated so often, but it certainly doesn’t call for a news conference.
Let it go, Papi.
Right-hander Dale Thayer and the Orioles have agreed to a minor-league contract that includes an invitation to spring training.
Thayer had a rough 2015 season for the Padres, posting a 4.06 ERA and spending time in the minors, but he was a solid part of San Diego’s bullpen from 2012-2014 with a combined 3.02 ERA and 173/50 K/BB ratio in 188 innings.
At age 35 there’s no guarantee that Thayer will look good enough to claim a spot on the Opening Day roster, but he’s got a strong chance to wind up pitching middle relief for Baltimore.
Taylor Featherston, who was designated for assignment by the Angels last week, has been traded to the Phillies for a player to be named later or cash.
Featherston stayed in the majors with the Angels for all of last season due to being a Rule 5 pick from the Rockies organization, but the 25-year-old infielder hit just .162 in 169 plate appearances.
He’s been much better in the minors, but nothing about his track record there screams quality regular and the Phillies are likely viewing him as a defense-first bench option for now.
Flags fly forever! Hooray for The Process championship!
Ah, sorry. This is about as much rooting as I’ll get to do this year, so cut me some slack.
This is the week when ESPN’s Keith Law releases his prospect and farm system rankings. He kicks off his content this week with a top-to-bottom ranking of all 30 farm systems. As a rule he limits his analysis to players who are currently in the minors and who have not yet exhausted their rookie of the year eligibility. The top system: the Atlanta Braves. The bottom: the Los Angeles Angels, about whom Law says “I’ve been doing these rankings for eight years now, and this is by far the worst system I’ve ever seen.” Enjoy Mike Trout, though, you guys.
If you want to know the reasons and the rankings of everyone in between you’ll have to get an ESPN Insider subscription. Sorry, I know everyone hates to pay for content on the Internet, but Keith and others who do this kind of work put a lot of damn work into it and this is what pays their bills. I typically don’t like to pay for content myself, but I do pay for an ESPN Insider subscription. It’s worth it for Law’s work alone. And though he drives me crazy sometimes, Buster Olney’s daily column/notes thing is also worth the money over the course of the year.
The funny thing about that “stick to sports” stuff I was going on about the other day is that, in reality, a whole lot of the people who say “stick to sports” don’t really want to just stick to sports. They’re totally cool going on about political, social or cultural stuff as long as it fits their world view. It’s not “stick to sports.” It’s “don’t talk about the social implications of sports-related stuff in ways that upset me.” If sports and culture come together in other ways, however, they’re completely fine in grinding their axe.
For example, Beyonce is playing a concert a Citi Field this summer. The show is so popular that they added a second date. The Mets’ Twitter feed just announced that tickets will go on sale for the new show soon:
A while lotta Mets fans responded to that negatively. For political/social/cultural reasons that they are willingly bringing in to a conversation about a pop singer and a baseball stadium that will double as a concert venue:
And they go on and on.
How much do you want to bet that a whole lotta these respondents would tell you to “stick to baseball” if you wanted to bring up how race affects the sport or how, if instead of Beyonce, this was announcing a Kid Rock/Ted Nugent-headlined festival and you mused whether that was a case of the Mets somehow endorsing their messages?