Did Omar Minaya just accuse the Daily News’ Adam Rubin of having an agenda in his reporting on Tony Bernazard because he wanted to land a player personnel job in the Mets’ organization?
OMG!
Nice job by SNY doing a split screen of Rubin’s shocked reaction as Minaya spoke . . . minutes after Rubin had appeared on SNY to discuss the Bernazard story.
Now Rubin and Omar are debating this in the middle of a news conference, which has taken its place already as one of the strangest in the history of New York media!
Back in the studio, Jon Heyman - with whom Rubin has had issues of late (10 questions down) - expressed his shock, and Bob Ojeda said the last time he witnessed something that uncomfortable was the infamous Strawberry-Hernandez fight of many moons ago.
Kevin Burkhardt just said on the team-owned network that Minaya bringing Rubin into the story in this manner was “kinda nuts.”
Why do the Mets continue to let Mr. Minaya serve as their spokesman in these news conferences when he is so consistently bad at it?
Repoz
Posted: July 27, 2009 at 09:47 PM |
147 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags:
mets
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
And Ojeda has witnessed some uncomfortable things.
well done. I assume this works for any of the 1986 Mets.
Indeed. That presser was phenomenal. I can't imagine letting Omar speak for anyone, anywhere.
It looks like I was wrong.
Among the things I learned today that I didn't like:
1. Either the entire organization was in cahoots to cover up what a terrible person Tony B is or they're clueless about themselves. But what Tony B did was too flagrant and public to think that they were clueless.
So basically what it means was that management (and ownership?) knew that one of their executives was abusing their own minor leaguers, terrorizing their own employees, and mistreating outsiders in general. Yet rather than firing Tony B, they chose to cover it up.
2. When a reporter exposed their cover-up, Omar (and Jeff Wilpon?) rather than simply admitting his mistakes, chose instead to smear the reporter who actually did reveal the facts, who actually helped this organization (by forcing them to remove Tony B).
I think it applies more to the '93 Indians.
Am I out of some loop on this particular, or is Omar indeed just a huge mouth-breather?
True, even more remarkable that he never lost his head in those situations.
So inappropriate.
And yet so awesome.
Am I out of some loop on this particular, or is Omar indeed just a huge mouth-breather?
No, I don't think there could have been any real possibility about that (Adam R replacing Tony B.).
I think basically Omar just spilled out something - stupidly?, sinisterly? - that most people wouldn't like to be made public, i.e, I'm covering this team as a reporter but I would be thrilled if I were part of your organization rather than as a journalist.
I'm just shocked that anyone holding a public press conference wouldn't realize that it's a complete faux pas to do something like that.
SOUNDS LIKE SOMEONE IS ANGLING FOR A GM JOB BLURG
OK, but why this line in the FA then? :
Did Omar Minaya just accuse the Daily News’ Adam Rubin of having an agenda in his reporting on Tony Bernazard because he wanted to land a player personnel job in the Mets’ organization?
And yet so awesome.
Thanks. I always appreciate positive pier reviews.
You're on a roll. I'd almost say you're crewsing, but I won't.
Come on, the jokes about boating accidents are good, but not <u>that</u> good.
Boat you said it anyways!
Come on now, don't let me be the olin one...
EDIT: Okay, I'm done now.
Where is Jay Horowitz, the director of Mets PR, in all of this?! Didn't he go over with Omar exactly what he was going to say and how he was going to answer the questions? Omar sounded like someone who was basically going to wing it, in a press conference where the reputation of the front office was at stake.
Jay Horowitz also dropped the ball on this one.
Delgado was smiling when he was asked about Tony's firing and continued to smile as he said "I've known Tony for a long time. So, uh. "
Manuel and Wright didn't seem too upset. David said "you never want to see anybody fired, um, you know, but, uh, um, that's not something we as players can control."
Ah, this is either going to be transcendant comedy or transcendant tragedy.
Come on, the jokes about boating accidents are good, but not that good.
You're on a roll. I'd almost say you're crewsing, but I won't.
Come on now, don't let me be the olin one...
Thank goodness I already had my coffee. I'd hate to read these dopey jokes without being fully decafitated.
"Dead babies" jokes came ahead?
Hey, anyone think the Mets are gonna be quick to post this conference on the official website?
Like cutting off his own finger.
True, even more remarkable that he never lost his head in those situations.
Yeah, but he did lose a finger.
Minaya is (or at least SHOULD BE) totally ######.
Beat reporters, in general, are conflicted or limited in what they can say. It's kind of the nature of the beast. Just observe the tone of how a beat writer discusses a team and how a columnist does.
Yeah, what's interesting is that the Minaya/Rubin spat will probably lead us to reassess what levels of conflicts of interests are tolerated. Because in the real world, I imagine journalists can't possibly have *zero* biases or conflicts while doing their everyday job. It's just impossible.
They haven't done that for quite a while...
They bring their AAA lineup every game.
Edit: Damn, too slow.
That could still work in New York. The Wall Street crowd hasn't tell the difference between A and AAA for a couple years now.
No, no, no. Their problem is confusing CCC and AAA.
Because he was going off script and just saying what came into his head
http://web.sny.tv/media/player/mp_tp...vid=8852&_mp=1
Mostly he's just saying that he asked about how one goes about getting a job in baseball.
Mostly no reason given, but at one point he mentions the state of journalism.
He is not saying he wanted a job in the METS organization.
In case the overall context isn't understood:
Many newspapers, including 3 in the NY/NJ area (Rubin's own Daily News plus Newark Star-Ledger and Bergen Record) have a story-sharing arrangement since March, along with Buffalo and Albany (picture Daily News in the center of the equation and it makes more sense).
Star-Ledger now uses the Daily News' Mets/Yankees copy in its print edition, and has bloggers for its Web site. Ledger dumped its baseball writers in the offseason.
It is not at all inconceivable that half the newspaper pro beat jobs in this market (and others) could disappear in a couple of years, if not sooner.
If any of those beat writers in any sport have not started looking at possible emergency exits, they are fools - and if they have a family, they are irresponsible.
Now, would it be better to ask those general questions ONLY of officials from other teams (and Rubin would/should know plenty)?
Yes, because of that potential perceived conflict of interest issue.
But it's interesting that by writing a story that humiliates the Mets, it makes Rubin look more credible even if he had previously asked around in a general way - if he was looking for a recommendation from Minaya or the Wilpons, he'd be slitting his own throat.
And even then, at what point do the Mets fail to realize that PR, that playing in the biggest media market in the world -- also means something -- and that good PR is probably worth firing someone you like once and awhile.
Just an all around epic fail.
Of course, given all the stories which have come out, including the one from Templeusox about Bernazard's landmark performance as a little league coach, it's not like Bernazard has exactly covered himself in glory either.
If the Mets have a problem with the way they think they are being covered this isn't the way to go about it. Even so, I hardly think fair coverage is the issue here. This is NYC, my goodness -- you have to expect these things. Fair has nothing to do with it in this case. The Mets have to be better than this.
He admitted it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/sports/baseball/28minaya.html?hp
Asking a baseball owner how to get a job in baseball is directly asking that person to help you get a job in baseball. If he's writing an article on how baseball owners guide employment decisions at their teams, there is an entirely different tack to take. To his credit, Rubin didn't even try to spin a lie that bold. Instead he said he asked a long time ago, and that he didn't directly ask for a job, just advice on getting one, so it shouldn't be a big deal.
But admitting to using his position to try to gain favors is a big deal, which means Rubin has no more credibility left as a reporter, and needs to be shown the door.
Wilpon sounded like a moron in their press conference, and if Fred didn't think he was on the inside of a scam with Madoff, then he's an idiot too.
So, the owner is either an idiot or a crook, the heir is an idiot and the GM is an idiot.
Good luck Met fans. I actually feel bad for you for once.
I just don't see it. Say the conversation when something like:
"So how would one you know, get their foot in the door in baseball? I'd be willing to start small, you know, in PR or something."
"You're asking me if I know anyone looking, that I could put a good word in for you?"
"Yea if you could"
Rubin obviously didn't get any jobs, so I can't really see it going much beyond this. Now, did Rubin hold a grudge, maybe. Was it against the ethics of journalism as an institution? Sure, but journalism as an institution isn't really the issue here for me, it's how the Mets are running their baseball club - which seems to be pretty damn lousily.
If Minaya thought Rubin had acted unethically as a journalist he should have talked to Rubin's bosses about it in private -- for numerous reasons, not the least of which it would make the Mets come off as the good guy in all this, which I'd think was one of the primary goals of Minaya when he went off on his tangent -- to get some sympathy.
(Speaking of disintegrating teams, I'm now the poud sponsor of the 1998 Florida Marlins page on BBRef.)
That would be a pretty troublesome version as well.
Best-case version would be where to your hypothetical, he said, "No, no! I'd be doing own work on that. Just mulling the process."
And no, even that is not "fine."
If done at all, should only have been done with officials from OTHER teams (while even THAT isn't perfect, it's grinding the potential perceived conflicts down to a much lower level).
But his supporters would probably say that the reporter's house is on fire, and we're wondering if he got a permit to use that fire truck in his driveway.
That said, journalism ethics shoot for high ideals even if they sometimes aren't reached.
That's what I was rooting for too. Just another opportunity the Mets completely screwed up.
They're starting a Rockies castoff in LF. I liked Sullivan, but it's not good if you have to start him.
Nonetheless, to think that Adam Rubin intended to take over as the Mets' (hot-headed) vice-president of player development is totally, completely crazy. So his Bernazard stories were not motivated by that.
That all seems obvious. Then it becomes less clear, but psychoanalyzing from afar, I'll bet $14,692 dollar bucks on this scenario: Minaya wanted to hurt Rubin's feelings because Rubin had forced Minaya to fire his friend. (This, of course, means Minaya wouldn't have fired Bernazard absent pressure, even though Bernazard deserved to be fired.) So, Minaya pulled out the dirt that he had on Rubin. If Omar knew that Rubin was cheating on his wife, he could have said that instead. It would have served the same purpose, and been just as relevant to the issue of Tony Bernazard.
Yep, Stormin' Gorman was traded to Seattle in that deal. I got to take a tour of the Mariners locker room when Thomas was on the team. I saw a gallon plastic jug that, IIRC, was labeled DMSO. It also bore this inscription.
"Property of Gorman Thomas. Keep ####### hands off."
Sure, that's absurd, but I don't think that's what was implied. More like Bernazard was in a position where he could have helped Rubin - either through a direct hire or recommendation to another team - and didn't, so Rubin got back on him. Not at all saying this happened, only that this might be what Minaya was (in)articulating.
For a second there I was asking myself, "Wait, Bichette has long since been retired now, right?"
Rubin: with newspapers going under left and right there is a good chance I could be out of a job soon, if so what skills should I work on getting that a team might look at when reviewing my resume?
Bernazard: ####, #### damn who needs a ####### god damn resume why are you wasting my ####### time you ####### whore bag?
Rubin: um nevermind, I think I'm just going to interview a few players instead... have a good day
McCoy, did you go to school in Mass.?
I don't see this as "using his position to try to gain favors." It's called "networking."
The thing that would kill his credibility is if there was any implication that he would slant coverage in return for a job. There is no accusation of that.
And I don't think there's any conspiracy behind Omar opening up with this. He was just frustrated and ranting.
Nice work, Omar. When you have no decent explanation for the fact that you allowed this screwed-up tyrant to destroy your minor league system, run roughshod over employees, prospects, and major league players alike, you just trot out a totally trumped-up and exaggerated allegation against the reporter, and claim that his doing his job MUST have been ill-motivated. Bernazard probably planted this notion in Minaya's head when the first stories broke, to explain why Rucin had it out for him and/or the Mets in general. A GM with half an ounce of sense would have said, "Oh, give me a break. Tell you what, Tony. If these stories prove to be mostly made out of whole cloth, maybe I'll buy that. If they prove true, then cry me a river." Well, they not only proved true (other than a couple of details Madden -- not Rubin -- got wrong), there was a lot more there than even Rubin reported.
Yet people here are buying that -- because Rubin made an ambiguous inquiry about seeking a major league job, sometime in the past, not even with the Mets -- it somehow taints a story that has proved accurate. Well, IMHO, that is utter crap. The media, especially the tabloids, can be full of it. But when the nail something, especially a SOB like Bernazard, I say well done. And when Minaya goes out of his way to try to retaliate the he did today, I say that to impugn Rubin's motives is really quite astonishing. Most of you guys are barking up the wrong damn tree.
Rubin is the good guy here.
Should be an interesting week peaking over at the headlines on the train, because, you know, I would never pay money for that trash...
Nonetheless, to think that Adam Rubin intended to take over as the Mets' (hot-headed) vice-president of player development is totally, completely crazy. So his Bernazard stories were not motivated by that.
As one of the scores of people here who know absolutely nothing about what literally happened, I would say I agree with this that DA said the most.
Sometimes, appearances are NOT deceiving. Sometimes, wysiwyg.
Sam is right. That anyone here is discussing Rubin is weird.
A good, modern reporter now would draw the line at coverage. If the coverage got slanted because of a personal connection, then you've crossed a line. If someone reading at home--especially in a city with multiple papers--can't tell who you like and who you hate, then you've been a pro.
It's always been different for columnists, who make no pretense of objectivity. Some papers care less about this than others.
If what happened is what Rubin wrote this morning--he had a conversation on the phone with Wilpon about whether it was even possible for a reporter to transition into baseball front office work and if so how to go about it, and if Wilpon invited him to come in and talk to him and Rubin did not take him up on that offer, then it's really hard to imagine any world in which this is an issue at all.
I know there's tension among non-reporters about the arrogance that reporters show people who write on the web. That's fine, and it's natural to nudge back when reporters show they are human, too. But I cannot see what the problem is.
Now, if the story is wildly different, and if Rubin threatened to punish the Mets if they didn't hire him or something crazy, that's a different story. But Wilpon said specifically that the extent of it was a single, general phone conversation, something he has all the time.
The equivalent is not the Supreme Court Justice who is supposed to be shrouded off from society but a junior prosecuting attorney. Is it kosher for one to ask a defense attorney casually what it's like to work on that side? Of course. Every single Assistant DA has had that conversation. Is it kosher for them to offer to throw a case in order to get a job with a defense attorney? Of course not. By some crazy stretch the line may seem gray but it's the kind of gray that people deal with and navigate all the time.
you'll have to ask "not amused" about the second part of that statement...
Hell yeah, I love the Metspocalypse!
I don't know what that means, but it does seem to confirm that those Delgado/Met talks from off-season 2004-05 were among the most bizarre in recent memroy.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main