Great Moments in Puig Derangement Syndrome


Unless and until Yasiel Puig is ever talked and written about as a normal human being instead of some scary monster which portends dread and personifies all of our darkest fears, we’re gonna start handing out awards. With apologies to Charles Krauthammer, who coined the term Bush Derangement Syndrome, our awards will commemorate Great Moments in Yasiel Puig Derangement Syndrome.

The definition of Puig Derangement Syndrome:  “the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the play, the acts —nay—the very existence of Yasiel Puig.” Statements of criticism of Yasiel Puig which appear to be of an emotional origin rather than based in fact or logic.

While some may say this should be called the Plaschke Award for Los Angeles Times’ columnist Bill Plaschke’s perfection of the form, in reality, CBS’ Scott Miller is the gold standard here. That was All-Star work, while Plaschke’s Puig Derangement is more of the lunch bucket variety. He puts in the time and will even be sure to lash out at Puig even when he doesn’t have his best stuff. You gotta respect that kind of dedication.

Today is a great example, as his Puig Derangement operates on two different fronts in one single column. First, he uses his game story to note Puig’s shortcomings in last night’s game, despite the fact that Puig did nothing of consequence, good or bad, that even came remotely close to affecting the outcome of the game:

One of the few familiar sights at Petco was the play of Yasiel Puig, who encapsulated his 2013 struggles in the first inning alone, striking out wildly on three pitches and then overthrowing the cutoff man from right field.

Carl Crawford struck out three times and Andre Ethier twice, but I guess those weren’t as bad as Puig’s one strikeout. And that throw that missed the cutoff man arguably could have gotten the runner heading to third had Hanley Ramirez not intercepted it, but we’ll let that go. We have a narrative to pound. Perhaps as many as a thousand times!

That alone would not have gotten Plaschke notice for his Puig Derangement Syndrome, however. For that we have to keep reading:

In more Puig news — can there ever be enough? — there has been clarification on a report last week that Mattingly called a team meeting about Puig. Actually, it was Puig who summoned several players hanging around the clubhouse and asked them if anybody had a problem with the way he played.

One veteran spoke up. Then another. Both had the same problem, that Puig was playing too fast and loose with their championship hopes.

There is no sign yet that he has listened, but at least on this night, the losing story revolved around the older guys.

This is Plaschke backing off his column of last week in which he talked about how “Don Mattingly held a meeting” in which Puig was lectured by his manager and team veterans about his recklessness. As we noted yesterday, however, the real story was that Puig himself called that meeting in order to ask his teammates how he could get better. Now that the meeting tends to put Puig in a better light, however, it’s no longer a meeting to Plaschke. It’s an informal thing in which Puig basically shouted at veterans “asking them if they had a problem” with him, which is clearly designed to make Puig look belligerent and confrontational. Guys like Puig don’t have meetings, you see. They summon people and put them uncomfortably on the spot. And, of course, it is assumed that he didn’t listen to them.

Excellent work, Bill. Keep this up and we may just name Great Moments in Puig Derangement Syndrome the “Bill Plaschke Awards” after all!

Hall of Fame will no longer use Chief Wahoo on Hall of Fame plaques

Getty Images
Leave a comment

Last month, in the wake of his election to the Hall of Fame, Jim Thome made it clear that he wanted to be inducted as a Cleveland Indian but that he did not want to have Chief Wahoo on his plaque.

His reasoning: even though that was the cap he wore for almost all of his time in Cleveland, “because of all the history and everything involved” he did not think it was the right thing to do. The context, of course, was the club’s decision, under pressure from Major League Baseball, to scrap the Wahoo logo due to its racial insensitivity, which it appears Thome agrees with.

Hall plaque decisions are not 100% up to the player, however. Rather, the Hall of Fame, while taking player sentiment into account, makes a judgment about the historical accuracy and representativeness of Hall plaques. This is to prevent a club from entering into a contract with a player to wear its logo on the plaque even if he only played with them for a short time or from a player simply picking his favorite club (or spiting his least-favorite), even if he only spent an inconsequential season or two there. Think Wade Boggs as a Devil Ray or Frank Robinson as, I dunno, a Dodger.

In the case of Chief Wahoo, the Hall has not only granted Thome’s wish, but has decreed that no new plaque will have Wahoo on it going forward:

To be fair, I can’t think of another player who wore Wahoo who would make the Hall of Fame in an Indians cap after Thome. Possibly Manny Ramirez if he ever gets in, though he may have a better claim to a Red Sox cap (debate it in the comments). Albert Belle appears on Veterans Committee ballots, but I’d bet my cats that he’s never getting it in. If younger players like Corey Kluber or Francisco Lindor or someone make it in, they’ll likely have just as much history in a Block-C or whatever the Indians get to replace Wahoo with than anything else, so it’s not really an issue for them.

Still, a nice gesture from the Hall, both to accommodate Thome’s wishes and to acknowledge the inappropriateness of using Chief Wahoo for any purpose going forward.