Barry Bonds Perjury Trial Begins in San Francisco

Bonds case update: the prosecution will rest today

4 Comments

Today will be the last day of the prosecution’s case-in-chief in the Barry Bonds trial, as they finish with Don Catlin, the anti-doping expert, and have the grand jury testimony read to the jury. The defense will then start their case, either today or tomorrow, but it will be a shorter deal than the prosecution’s. Indeed, it could be over this week.

Observers are pretty down on the prosecution after one of their own witnesses, Dr. Arthur Ting, blew a hole in the credibility of one of their other witnesses, Steven Hoskins on Thursday.  Calling Ting was just a baffling move by the prosecution. If they knew what he was going to say, why call him?  If they didn’t know, why risk it and, really, how prepared were they?  Given that, in the absence of Greg Anderson,  Hoskins is the witness who comes the closest to nailing Bonds for knowingly using steroids, having him impeached like that is simply brutal.

The consensus now is that, if the prosecution is going to get a conviction, it will be on count two of the indictment: the “did you ever have someone inject you” count. This, I think, Hoskins’ sister nailed pretty well, and did so with credibility according to those who watched her in court.  For those who never obsessed on this bit, the testimony in question involved a particularly hostile exchange between Bonds and the prosecutor in which, after Bonds was asked if Greg Anderson ever injected him with anything, Bonds lashed out with a rambling non-sequitur. His testimony:

“I’ve only had one doctor touch me. And that’s my only personal doctor. Greg, like I said, we don’t get into each other’s personal lives. We’re friends, but I don’t – we don’t sit around and talk baseball because he knows I don’t want – don’t come to my house talking baseball. If you want to come to my house and talk about fishing, some other stuff, we’ll be good friends. You come around talking about baseball, you go on. I don’t talk about his business. You know what I mean?”

Which made absolutely no sense. He eventually said no, Anderson never injected him.  Ego demands that, at this point, I reproduce my analysis of this charge from March 2008:

The famous “don’t come to my house talking baseball” digression. Bonds offers it – and a few paragraphs more about not knowing what’s in his wife’s purse and “getting into other people’s business” – in response to a simple question: “Did Greg ever give you anything that required a syringe to inject yourself with.” It’s a total non-sequitur on Bonds’ part, and seems distinctly like someone vamping while trying to figure out how to answer a question he doesn’t want to answer.

The question is why he’s doing this? To that point he’s done a pretty convincing job of playing dumb. Even if Bonds himself knows that he’s being injected with illegal North Korean nuclear secrets, he’s probably Scot free if he says “yes,” and when asked what he was injected with says “I don’t know.” Instead he draws glowing neon attention to himself with his non-answer, and it prompts follow up questions about injections, many of which can be found in the indictment.

What is Bonds doing? To me the answer appears obvious: he’s trying to protect Greg Anderson. No other explanation makes sense. Simply saying he was injected with something does nothing to put him in any worse a light than the stuff he’s already says. The issue of syringes are ultimately inconsequential, but as I note above, the thing he’s probably most likely to be convicted of lying about at trial. How utterly pathetic.

Know what I think? I think this was the one time when the prosecution asked Bonds a simple question that required a yes or no answer and Bonds, unable to truthfully say no, kind of freaked out and ultimately lied.  If they did this with the steroids-related questions he may have pleaded out years ago or he may be convicted now.  But he was allowed to weasel and, ultimately, was allowed to testify without explicitly lying on those points.  With the syringe question, however, he’s fairly dead to rights.

The interesting question is going to be what we make of it all if Bonds is convicted on a single count of lying about something that doesn’t itself involve steroids.  Some people have sought to make Bonds and Roger Clemens special cases among PED users because they allegedly lied rather than come clean (the Andy Pettitte corollary, we can call it). If Bonds is acquitted of lying about his use under oath, these people will need a new argument to stay intellectually inconsistent it seems. Or, I suppose, they could cite his lie under oath about a syringe as the same thing. Or they could just join in with the “Bonds is a bad seed crowd” and forget their prior distinction.

It does seem to me, however, that the legal and public case against Barry Bonds was premised on more than a mere lie about whether a syringe was ever used on his body by someone other than his doctor. If that’s all that comes out of this, I don’t see how one can conclude that this was a success by any measure.

Bryce Harper struck out four times in a game for the first time in nearly four years

Washington Nationals' Bryce Harper reacts after he struck out during the fourth inning of a baseball game against the Philadelphia Phillies, Thursday, April 28, 2016, in Washington. The Phillies won 3-0.(AP Photo/Nick Wass)
AP Photo/Nick Wass
Leave a comment

Nationals outfielder Bryce Harper has not exactly been strikeout-averse over his five-year career, but he has been pretty good about not bunching them up. Entering Sunday’s game against the Cardinals, Harper had struck out three or more times in a game only 21 times in 533 games. He had registered two four-strikeout games, the last of which occurred on August 21, 2012 — his rookie season.

On Sunday, Harper struck out three times against Cardinals starter Carlos Martinez and once against reliever Seung Hwan Oh for the dreaded golden sombrero. The reigning NL MVP has now equaled his walk and strikeout totals at 17 apiece.

Despite the rough afternoon, Harper still owns a lusty .272/.390/.679 triple-slash line with nine home runs and 24 RBI.

Chase Headley doesn’t think Yankee Stadium is as hitter-friendly as advertised

New York Yankees Chase Headley (12) breaks his bat on a ground out to third during the third inning of a baseball game against the Texas Rangers on Monday, April 25, 2016, in Arlington, Texas. (AP Photo/Brandon Wade)
AP Photo/Brandon Wade
2 Comments

Yankees third baseman Chase Headley finished April without registering an extra-base hit. Across 71 plate appearances, he registered only nine hits for an uninspiring .150/.268/.150 triple-slash line. Speaking to David Laurilia of FanGraphs, Headley said that Yankee Stadium isn’t as hitter-friendly as many people think it is, and added that the shift has helped to limit his offensive success.

“Everybody talks about how good of a ballpark Yankee Stadium is to hit in, but it’s pretty big with the exception of right field,” said Headley. “The rest of it plays as big, or bigger, than most yards. It’s maybe a better fit for guys who hit the ball high down the line than it for guys who hit the ball like I have for a lot of my career.”

[…]

“Because of the shifting that’s going on now, if you hit the ball on the ground, for the most part you’re out,” Headley told me. “I’m trying to get the ball elevated — I want to hit it hard in the air — and if I never hit another ball on the ground, I’ll be happy.”

According to StatCorner.com, Yankee Stadium is indeed better for left-handed hitters, and particularly so when it comes to extra-base hits. It lists park factors for handedness, setting 100 as average. A higher number means it’s more hitter-friendly. Here are the left-right numbers as of today’s writing:

  • Singles: 101 for left-handed hitters, 102 for right-handed hitters
  • Doubles and triples: 101 LH, 82 RH
  • Home runs: 137 LH, 127 RH

Headley’s hypothesis seems to have some merit. But his claim that shifts have been hurting him doesn’t seem to hold up to the numbers.

babip

Headley’s ground ball BABIP (batting average on balls in play) this season is only .022 behind his career average of .239. As he’s only hit 23 ground balls total this season, the difference between .239 and .217 is less than one hit.

Where Headley’s BABIP is notably lower is line drives. His career average line drive BABIP is .698, but it’s only .333 on nine line drives in 2016. This could be simple bad luck or it could mean Headley is making worse contact. FanGraphs’ batted ball data suggests Headley has been pulling significantly fewer balls (36 percent to his 45 percent career average), and he’s making “hard” contact less often (21 percent versus his 31 percent career average). Overall, there’s been very little change in his ground ball rate versus his fly ball rate.

Headley mentioned to Laurila that if he could, he would try to hit fly balls to the pull side more often. “I’m working on that,” he said.

Carlos Martinez sued for battery, negligent transmission of STDs, and more

St. Louis Cardinals starting pitcher Carlos Martinez throws against the Arizona Diamondbacks during the fourth inning of a baseball game, Tuesday, April 26, 2016, in Phoenix. (AP Photo/Matt York)
AP Photo/Matt York
5 Comments

Cardinals starter Carlos Martinez was given permission to leave the team on Friday in order to travel to Miami. Martinez was named in a lawsuit filed by a woman who claimed he knowingly trasmitted mutliple sexually trasmitted diseasese to her. She is seeking $1.5 million in damages for battery, negligent transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, fraud, and more, TMZ reported on Saturday.

Martinez rejoined the team and started on Sunday afternoon against the Nationals. His attorney called the allegations “100% false”.

The Cardinals are waiting for more information to find out if the league will investigate the matter under its domestic violence policy. Via Dan O’Neill of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, GM John Mozeliak said, “We wait. And once we learn more, then we’ll have more of an idea. These are things you just learn as you go.”

Should obstruction have been called on Ryan Webb?

Toronto Blue Jays' Kevin Pillar gestures to the dugout after hitting a triple against the Boston Red Sox during the first inning of a baseball game Friday, April 8, 2016, in Toronto. (Fred Thornhill/The Canadian Press via AP)
Fred Thornhill/The Canadian Press via AP
9 Comments

The Blue Jays had a comfortable 5-1 lead in the top of the ninth inning of Sunday afternoon’s game against the Rays, but one never knows when a base runner might be crucial. Kevin Pillar was on first base when reliever Ryan Webb threw over to first on a pickoff attempt and got him in a rundown.

First baseman Logan Morrison chased Pillar towards second base, lobbing the ball to shortstop Brad Miller. Miller sent Pillar back to first base, throwing to Webb covering the bag. Webb chased Pillar back towards second base and threw to second baseman Logan Forsythe. Forsythe chased Pillar back again, but Webb wasn’t able to get out of Pillar’s way. Second base umpire Mark Ripperger immediately signaled “no obstruction” and Pillar was easily tagged out after he was essentially bear hugged by Webb.

Here’s the MLB.com video.

Major League Baseball defines obstruction as “the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner.” Webb had already thrown the ball and Forsythe was in possession of it, so he couldn’t have been considered “in the act of fielding.”

At any rate, the Jays still won 5-1, giving them the series win over the Rays.