Scrub is a great word, but I seem to be calling everyyone a grub these days.

Todd Jones is a homopohobe!!!!!!1 I'm saying that because it's relevant to this piece!!!!

Small point: Schulman is the Giants beat writer, not a columnist.

Raburn is far from a scrub. He's a very good hitter with a strong arm.

This reminds me of when Stephen A. Smith called Kwame Brown a "scrub" on some ESPN broadcast and several of his anonymous friends in NBA front offices lamented him for it. That seems like the one term that really infuriates professional athletes.

Raburn is far from a scrub. He's a very good hitter with a strong arm.

I agree. I like Ryan Raburn. He put up 56 homers with 36 steals in 333 games with Toledo from 2005-2007, his ages 24-26 seasons. Yeah, his strikeouts double his walks (except in 2007) there, but it's split time from Ohio to Michigan. He enjoyed some success last year in Detroit. Useful player to have, especially on a team as old as the Tigers.

What, no TLC reference in the intro? Repoz, you've let me down.

Raburn is far from a scrub. He's a very good hitter with a strong arm.

Raburn may have the potential to be more at some point, but so far, as a 27 year old with barely more than 250 career PAs with a OPS+ of 95, he's a scrub, and it's not Schulman's job to describe what a bench player on a team that he only has to cover for 3 games every 3-4 years could be, but what he has been so far at the blip in time he has to write about him. And that Jones would waste a moment being pissy about that, well I guess that what you do when you are the geriatric closer on a severely underachieving team.

Or maybe Jones just assumed Schulman was gay since he works for the SF Chronicle.

Raburn may have the potential to be more at some point, but so far, as a 27 year old with barely more than 250 career PAs with a OPS+ of 95, he's a scrub, and it's not Schulman's job to describe what a bench player on a team that he only has to cover for 3 games every 3-4 years could be, but what he has been so far at the blip in time he has to write about him. And that Jones would waste a moment being pissy about that, well I guess that what you do when you are the geriatric closer on a severely underachieving team.

Or maybe Jones just assumed Schulman was gay since he works for the SF Chronicle.

Are you Schulman? It absolutely is his job to know who he is describing when writing a column. I know it must be incredibly tedious and annoying for a writer to look to see that Raburn had a 119 OPS+ last year, or a couple seasons of dominating AAA, but that's still his job. Boooo hooo baby Schulman has to consult baseball-reference.com before mouthing off.

Are you Schulman? It absolutely is his job to know who he is describing when writing a column. I know it must be incredibly tedious and annoying for a writer to look to see that Raburn had a 119 OPS+ last year, or a couple seasons of dominating AAA, but that's still his job. Boooo hooo baby Schulman has to consult baseball-reference.com before mouthing off.

I'd guess Schulman didn't give it nearly the amount of thought you or Todd Jones have, in part because he doesn't see it as the pejorative you guys obviously do. He probably called Raburn a scrub because he's a low-priced, bench guy (in some circles, also known as a scrub). I'm sure he'll be pretty surprised that Jones and the Tigers were livid at his word choice. And his reaction would be understandable.

There is no definition of scrub which is not a pejorative when used to describe a human being.

There is no definition of scrub which is not a pejorative when used to describe a human being.

Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, Definition 4: A person not belonging to the first string.

Ian, in your mind, would it have been acceptable if he had said "fringe major leaguer" or "bench player"?

I have a problem with the context that plays up how embarrassing it is to give up a HR to Raburn, because Raburn is a scrub. He's quite good at hitting, it has been his defense that kept him out of the majors.

Schulman wrote: "Adding to the wickedness was the fact that Sanchez was beaten not by one of Detroit's high-salaried thumpers, but a .219-hitting scrub named Ryan Raburn, who pinch-hit for Kenny Rogers in the eighth inning and broke a 1-1 tie with a homer three-fourths of the way up the leftfield bleachers -- Andres Galarraga territory."

That, and I find the ignorance defense about how scrub could be interpreted to be weak. Todd Jones isn't exactly young yet he understands the common adjective form.

Are you Schulman?

No. Are you Raburn?

It absolutely is his job to know who (Raburn) is describing when writing a column.

Schulman wasn't writing a column, he was writing a game story. And he does know who Raburn is: a 27 year old bench OF batting .219, and a career OPS+ of 95 and who has managed to only scrounge up 250 PAs in the major leagues. More succinctly, a scrub. Maybe Raburn will prove to be more than that if given a chance, but at the time the game story was written, Raburn was a scrub.

But don't let the facts confuse you.

PS: given the short amount of time between the end of night games and deadlines, looking up the minutia of a bench player (aka a scrub) you only cover 3 games 3-4 years is, in fact, an unreasonable standard of research. Looking at his stats for 2008 is more than sufficient research.

I find "scrub" to be less offensive than the construction "somebody named ______", which the NY media, at least, seems to trot out all the time.

What Dig said. Baseball has a particular set of jargon, and to describe Ryan Raburn as a scrub is entirely accurate within the context of describing his place on a major league roster. Jones is demanding we all genuflect before the greatness of ballplayers and he's the last one to be able to hide behind political correctness. (He's also trying to build camaraderie and fire in a underachieving ballclub, which is a clever leadership technique on his part.)

Non perjorative terms that could have been used:
Reserve
Second-stringer

I think the Tigers should rename themselves the Detroit Scrubs.

He should have called Raburn "a player so bad he can't even start for an also-ran team like the Tigers." That might have made Jones happier.

I'm really tired of 'progressives' like Todd Jones trying to foist their political correctness on Middle America.

Schulman is usually better than this. I would love to have Raburn play for the Giants - his 87 OPS+ this year is largely the result of a .283 BABIP. Any team looking for improvement on the cheap should probably be targeting Raburn and the Cubs' Murton.

Ian is completely out of his mind on this (as is Todd Jones). In post #10, Ian rants that there is no definition of scrub which is not perjorative. However, the very dictionary definition of scrub, when used in the sports context, is a reserve or bench player. It doesn't matter what Raburn did in the minors, what he did last season, what his future potential is or what whiners who don't own dictionaries think: what matters is that Raburn fits the definition now of a scrub and that is what Henry Schulman correctly called him.

People use scrub to mean a bench-player of limited quality rather than simply a reserve, in my experience. If your experience is different than so be it.

I think we should use the term "baseball-challenged" instead.

I'm really tired of 'progressives' like Todd Jones trying to foist their political correctness on Middle America

.

Heh.

I think both Rich and Ian are right. "Scrub" is not pejorative, technically speaking. But the way the section is written...

Schulman wrote: “Adding to the wickedness was the fact that Sanchez was beaten not by one of Detroit’s high-salaried thumpers, but a .219-hitting scrub named Ryan Raburn, who pinch-hit for Kenny Rogers in the eighth inning and broke a 1-1 tie with a homer three-fourths of the way up the leftfield bleachers—Andres Galarraga territory.”

...it is clear that the message was that Sanchez got beat by a crappy player, and "scrub" was meant to suggest that. The ".219-hitting" is actually nastier than "scrub", but it is all part of the same rhetoric. Guys like Schulman are at heart populists--expressing the perceived JoeFan POV: "Crap, I could see it if Cabrera got us, but who the hell is Raburn?"

I went to the Tigers/Padres game last night, and in the 7th Leyland used Marcus Thames to PH for Granderson when Black went to Hampson in a 5-5 tie. Thames hit a 410-foot laser on the 2nd pitch to win the game. Wonder what Schulman thinks of him.

As to Jones, his issue was the tone, not the word per se, but he missed that. I also think players would be better off if they just ignored this stuff, but probably someone showed it to Raburn and Jones, fishing for a story.

There were about 12,000 or so Tigers fans at the game, about 80% of them in caps and jerseys. With the Padres back at the bottom of the standings, the out-of-towners and transplants will be frisky and numerous all summer.

Scrub is a term that we as kids used all the time in describing utility infielders, backups, and journeyman players who weren't good enough to start for much of their career. It's not really a term that I would use as a professional writer, but it doesn't strike me as some huge insult coming from Schulman. As stated above, it's really just a throwaway term for a fringe or backup player. Now if Schulman had called him "a joke," "a lousy excuse for a ballplayer," or "someone masquerading as a major leaguer," I could better understand the Tigers' fury.

This reminds me of the best advice I've ever heard given to active ballplayers: "Don't read the sports section of the newspaper, especially the local paper."

I don't think of scrub as particularly derogatory, but I'm definitely cautious of my use of the term in my day-to-day baseball discussions. Just for kicks, I ran a search on my blog to see how many times I've used the term in the last 4 years.

I've only used the term once, in 2005, to describe David Newhan and Sal Fasano, who both went deep in the same game. Fasano was playing his first game in the majors in 3 years, and Newhan had always sucked despite a fluky productive 2004 season.

I guess we should call all newspaper writers "piece of sh1t", since that is an accurate description of their vocation and level of ethics.

Robin, would it be any different, really, if Schulman had written: “Adding to the wickedness was the fact that Sanchez was beaten not by one of Detroit’s high-salaried thumpers, but a low-paid .219-hitting reserve named Ryan Raburn, who pinch-hit for Kenny Rogers..."

I don't think it's any more of a put-down to call him a scrub than a reserve. Yet clearly, as you state, Schulman was contrasting him with high-paid, highly touted Tigers like Cabrera, Ordonez, etc., whom his readers have heard of.

If he's going to get his knickers in a twist over the use of "scrub" I'd go straight for the perjorative in future and just call him ####.

If he's going to get his knickers in a twist over the use of "scrub" I'd go straight for the perjorative in future and just call him ####.

Oh, please. This is why you couldn't pay me enough to be a 'professional' writer. Get the hell over yourselves, major league ballplayers. You don't want to be called a scrub, play better. You can't play better, just happily accept your six-figure salary and deal with it.

Yeah, there are definitely better players to stick the 'scrub' tag on than Ryan Raburn (Tony Pena Jr./HITTER OF FAIL comes to mind), so sure, criticize the crap out of the guy's choice of players. But this crap where you can't speak negatively of anybody because we're all terrified of labels and you might hurt somebody's feelings... no. You tell me I'm a sucky writer or a poser or a wannabee, fine, whatever. I don't sleep any worse.

Now if Schulman had called him "a joke," "a lousy excuse for a ballplayer," or "someone masquerading as a major leaguer," I could better understand the Tigers' fury.

Even if it happens to be true? Can't say something that's true, like "Luis Rivas is someone masquerading as a major leaguer," or hell, for that matter, "the Pirates are masquerading as a major league team," because someone's feelings might get hurt?

Just want to clarify, I also think it's kind of dumb to refer to Ryan Raburn, particularly, as a scrub, and I'm fine with Jones when he says it was uncalled for; hell, I even agree with him. It's the idea that we shouldn't ever call anybody a scrub or anything else derogatory, ever, because it's mean, that's ridiculous.

Raburn is a useful player, but there might be an argument when he finally starts more than 60% of the games he appears in. I don't believe Schulman meant any insult through the use of the word, but he used it accurately. By jeez, people, we've already lost the phrase "cranks". If we keep losing colourful, informal words like "scrubs", what's next? We can't call a reliever a "mop-up man" due to the extreme difficulty of pitching in the major leagues in any situation? We can't call it a "bloop single" because any sort of base hit at the major league level calls for extreme skill and hand/eye coordination?

Schulman is a beat writer for the Giants. He's a paid scrub-watcher. He knows his scrubs and if he says the man is a scrub, he's a scrub. Case closed.

Terry Crowley is lucky he's in ####### baseball, for Christ's sakes.

If anyone knows scrubs, it's mainstream sportswriters. They're the scrubs of the entertainment reporting world, the journalism world, and the professional writing world. They're the scrubbiest scrubs that ever scrubbed a scrub.

Todd Jones' lucky he's in ****ing baseball, for ******sake. He was released by the Colorado Rockies, he was released by the ****ing ******* Tampa Bay Devil Rays. We saw that Todd Jones could sit on his ****ing *** for eight innings and enjoy watching a baseball game just like any other fan, and has the ability to get up there and shut one down in the ****ing ninth. So if this ********** would mind his own business and let me write the ****ing game story we'd be better off.

Mudpout wins the thread. But then, Manager's Corner adaptations win pretty much everything.

Yes, but is he or is he not a fag?

According to the Oxford Post, Raburn indeed did drag the books of an upper-classman around for two years at his prestigious English university. So the answer to your question is yes.

So the answer to your question is yes.

And he is also a homo. Homo sapiens, that is! And his sister is a thespian.