Johan Santana was accused of sexual battery

1 Comment

As you may have seen, earlier this afternoon TMZ reported that Johan Santana was accused of sexual battery last fall.

There’s always some degree of uncertainty when it comes to reports such as these. At the moment, however, the facts as we know them are that (a) there was a complaint filed; (b) there appears to have been some sexual activity between Santana and the accuser; (c) the
police who investigated found that
“the alleged victim’s statement
is not
consistent with other witnesses;” and (d) no charges were filed. There are multiple, conflicting possible explanations for
each of those things
.

Perhaps the woman told the truth and people simply didn’t believe her because of who she was or who the alleged assailant was.  Perhaps the woman made a false accusation. While, in my limited personal experience in defending criminal cases phrases like “the alleged victim’s statement is not consistent with other witnesses” is police code for “we believe the alleged victim is lying,” we simply don’t know nor can we know which of any of those things are true.

I offer all of that merely as a reminder because, given how these sorts of things go, the fact of the accusation and the salaciousness of the details contained in that accusation will get major play over the next couple of days as the story is portrayed as “breaking news.” Indeed, as ‘Duk notes over at Big League Stew, the heat on this story may get extra-crazy because the east coast tabloids will likely view this as a west coast outfit besting them on their own beat and thus they’ll likely try to cultivate their own angles.

But there appears to be nothing that sparked TMZ’s report — no civil suit
no new investigation no new evidence — beyond TMZ’s own happening upon the public
documents. 
Which is fine, of course — facts are facts and the public documents themselves are newsworthy —
but that makes the media narrative the news, not the sexual assault allegations, which appear to have no legal merit. The media would probably do well to keep that in mind.

MLB Network airs segment listing “good” and “bad” $100 million-plus contracts

Lisa Blumenfeld/Getty Images
Leave a comment

On Wednesday evening, Charlie Marlow of KTVI FOX 2 News St. Louis posted a couple of screencaps from a segment MLB Network aired about $100 million-plus contracts that have been sigbned. The list of “bad” contracts, unsurprisingly, is lengthier than the list of “good” contracts.

As Mike Gianella of Baseball Prospectus pointed out, it is problematic for a network owned by Major League Baseball to air a segment criticizing its employees for making too much seemingly unearned money. There’s a very clear conflict of interest, so one is certainly not getting a fair view of the situation. MLB, of course, can do what it wants with its network, but it can also be criticized. MLB Network would never air a similar segment in which it listed baseball’s “good” and “bad” owners and how much money they’ve undeservedly taken. Nor would MLB Network ever run a segment naming the hundreds of players who are not yet eligible for arbitration whose salaries are decided for them by their teams, often making the major league minimum ($545,000) or just above it. Similarly, MLB Network would also never think of airing a segment in which the pay of minor league players, many of whom make under $10,000 annually, is highlighted.

We’re now past the halfway point in January and many free agents still remain unsigned. It’s unprecedented. A few weeks ago, I looked just at the last handful of years and found that, typically, six or seven of the top 10 free agents signed by the new year. We’re still at two of 10 — same as a few weeks ago — and that’s only if you consider Carlos Santana a top-10 free agent, which is debatable. It’s a complex issue, but part of it certainly is the ubiquity of analytics in front offices, creating homogeneity in thinking. A consequence of that is everyone now being aware that big free agent contracts haven’t panned out well; it’s a topic of conversation that everyone can have and understand now. Back in 2010, I upset a lot of people by suggesting that Ryan Howard’s five-year, $125 million contract with the Phillies wouldn’t pan out well. Those people mostly cited home runs and RBI and got mad when I cited WAR and wOBA and defensive metrics. Now, many of those same people are wary of signing free agent first baseman Eric Hosmer and they now cite WAR, wOBA, and the various defensive metrics.

The public’s hyper-sensitivity to the viability of long-term free agent contracts — thanks in part to segments like the aforementioned — is a really bad trend if you’re a player, agent, or just care about labor in general. The tables have become very much tilted in favor of ownership over labor over the last decade and a half. Nathaniel Grow of FanGraphs pointed out in March 2015 that the players’ share of total league revenues peaked in 2002 at 56 percent, but declined all the way to 38 percent in 2014. The current trend of teams signing their talented players to long-term contract extensions before or during their years of arbitration eligibility — before they have real leverage — as well as teams abstaining from signing free agents will only serve to send that percentage further down.

Craig has written at great length about the rather serious problem the MLBPA has on its hands. Solving this problem won’t be easy and may require the threat of a strike, or actually striking. As Craig mentioned, that would mean getting the players all on the same page on this issue, which would require some work. MLB hasn’t dealt with a strike since 1994 and it’s believed that it caused a serious decline in interest among fans, so it’s certainly something that would get the owners’ attention. The MLBPA may also need to consider replacing union head Tony Clark with someone with a serious labor background. Among the issues the union could focus on during negotiations for the next collective bargaining agreement: abolishing the draft and getting rid of the arbitration system. One thing is for sure: the players are not in a good spot now, especially when the league has its own network on which it propagandizes against them.