I hear people talking now about how there should be a “rule” that a local player should be in the Home Run Derby. That’s seems impossibly dumb to me—we need a rule for something that logical? Rule: You should invite the bride’s parents to the wedding. Rule: When hosting a charity roast, invite people who know the subject. Isn’t it kind of obvious that you might want a local player in something as aimless and trivial as the Home Run Derby? It’s a meaningless exhibition event inside a meaningless exhibition weekend—throw the local fans a bone, for crying out loud. Maybe baseball messed up by putting [Robinson] Cano in the line of fire rather than just insisting that a local player be chosen, but come on. This isn’t that hard.
Some found the booing offensive. Some thought it was classless. More than one person ripped KC to me, and later in print and comment. I have to admit, I didn’t see it that way. At all. For one thing, Cano is a Yankee, and the day it becomes uncool to boo the Yankees is the day we need to reevaluate what the national pastime is all about. For another, it’s just booing. I’m not a booer myself, and I usually dislike the “fans paid their ticket they can do what they want” argument, but in this case—you’re telling me that fans who pay 200 bucks a pop to sit in the upper deck to watch executive batting practice should cheer the guy who didn’t take the local player? Seriously? This is Wimbledon now? ...
I have no doubt that Cano’s struggles—the fouling back pitches, the way his long fly balls hit the wall—made the fans boo him more. If there’s one thing fans love more than anything it is their ability to affect the game. You’ve no doubt seen the self-congratulatory joy of people waving behind the backboard when a guy misses a free throw. I suspect the fans came in planning to boo Cano, but then they saw him foul that ball back. They thought: Hey, this is working. So they booed him a little louder. And a little louder. And a little louder. Until, at the end, the whole stadium wanted desperately for Cano to hit zero home runs, and the boos expressed that hope.
From what I can tell, Cano took the boos in stride. He tweeted out a couple of funny little bits—“I can’t believe I have so many fans in KC lol”—and he’s now part of Home Run Derby lore. I have little doubt he’ll be fine—he’s one of the great hitters in the game. I also have little doubt he will get booed whenever he comes to KC—it’s grown into legend now. The only thing I wish had happened was for [Billy] Butler himself to have come out during the Derby, put his arm around Cano, maybe waved a white flag. That would have been cool. And maybe, with three or four outs to go, Cano would have turned the bat over to Butler. They should really have a lot more fun at these things.
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.
Since the home run derby has been around for a million years and this has never been the case, no.
If I ever find myself in a bar with Posnanski, I'm buying his next drink.
Not unless mom or dad is at least in double figures in HR at the break.
I find this notion silly. A homer in the celebrity softball game by all means. A Royal on the coaching staff sure. What if the game had been in San Fran, ya gonna invite Posey and his 10 HR? Or SD, is it going to be Headley? (Quentin not a bad choice actually)
What I want to know is where was Trevor Plouffe?
Getting his nails done. I mean, how can we be expected to take a guy seriously when his name is Trevor Plouffe?
Chauncey?
Jesus?
Tyronne?
Emerson?
Or what if the Royals got the game? Their best HR hitter is tied for 16th in the league.
Just ahead of the guy who won the HRD!
I don't see why not. Its not like the people chosen for this are the top four HR hitters in each league. But maybe Billy Butler doesn't live up to the storied history of HR Derby names like Damion Easley, Brandon Inge and Hee Sop Choi.
(That was a thing, right?)
Of course you should invite a local...
Beavis.
I didn't mean to suggest that Butler wasn't qualified just that a hard and fast "rule" is going to lead to a really odd pick at some point.
Now, amazingly, the b-r bullpen has all the HR derby results. There was not a local batter on the team in:
2011, 2010, 2008 (at Yankee Stadium!), 2007, 2006, 2003, 1996, 1995, 1994, 1993, 1989, 1986.
2009 was Pujols, a good choice anywhere.
2005 was the world vs. USA year and IRod was a Tigers rep
2004 was Berkman
1992 the Padres had two guys (Sheff and McGriff)
Anyway, it was common to have a homer in the early days and again in the height of the sillyball era (when everybody had a 40 HR guy so that looked good). But, from 2006-2011, the only homer to make it was Pujols and that includes the game at Yankee Stadium. I don't recall Yankees fans booing the AL players ... but then they're well-known for being classy.
Of course it's possible that in some of those years there was a homer on the squad who bowed out due to "injury."
If lesbian porn stars have porn names, that's gotta be a great one.
Biff Plouffe
How about...
DRUNGO PLOUFFE??
Why not just make the whole thing Royals, then. Let the fans pick which 8 Royals they want to see. It's not like it's important, so therefore let's make it as stupid as possible.
I say it's Cholmondeley & I say the hell with it.
Or a certain former Giants prospect could enter a civil union with Mr. Plouffe, take his name and be Boof Plouffe.
(I know, too far to go)
During the middle innings, the boos and "Daaa-ryyyyllll" chants were raining down on him in waves. In response, Darryl turns to the fans along the rightfield line, and starts waving his arms in time with the chants--like a maestro conducting an orchestra. Thousands of people laugh at the same time, Darryl laughs, and from that point on the boos were delivered with a wink and a nod--it was like booing a pro wrestling heel.
Later in the game, of course, he clangs one off the scoreboard in right center. Ah, Darryl.
I won't swear to having perfect recall of the Home Run Derby, but I think the team captain aspect of things may be new. So there may not have been a particular person at whom Yankee fans could direct any ire they may have had.
According to the Freeh report, Paterno was in on the cover-up from as far back as 1998. Had full knowledge of Sandusky's behavior, and went to major lengths in multiple instances for multiple incidents to keep Sandusky's actions away from the police and the press and to allow Sandusky to continue to rape and molest young boys. A towering paragon of morality, that Joe Paterno.
That Posnanski book on the greatness of Joe Paterno (set for a symbolically appropriate Father's Day release!) is going to be so f**king tasteful.
Seriously, Poz can never actually write this book, can he?
EDIT: Dear god, reading the Key Findings of the Freeh Report...it's devastating. I'm remembering all my anger at Posnanski for defending Paterno all over again. (Needless to say I recognize that the real monsters here were Sandusky and Paterno, as well as the PSU leadership, and not Poz...but ugh, he defended actual honest-to-goodness Evil, and still hasn't given an accounting for it.)
He has an opportunity to get it right, and to be the first to get it really right, with a story of Joe Paterno and the institutions of Penn State football, how they tried to do a number of good things and in time rotted awfully from the inside. An April story in the Times about Posnanski and Paterno had the most recent statement from Poz that I've seen:To get this book right will require Posnanski to do a sort of reporting and writing that in his career he's usually shied away from. I'm worried he's going to get it wrong again. But since he has the opportunity to get it right, I'm willing to wait. (Apparently the book drops August 21st, so I don't have to wait that long in reserve of full judgment.)
'Cause it's nationally televised. Include a local to juice up the crowd that the people on TV hear.
Well, I'll take the non-grump version Matt puts forward.
Is this true? I've never heard this before. People jumped down Poz's throat for basically saying, "let's wait until the facts are in". Is that worthy of tarring-and-feathering?
Freeh Report
Live Blog: Washington Post
Dan Wetzel: Freeh Report assigns blame to Joe Paterno, other Penn State officials for Jerry Sandusky's crimes
Remember, Pos didn't "say nothing". He actively defended Paterno and PSU. If Posnanski had written something to the effect of, "Obviously, this story has an enormous effect on me personally and professionally. If true, it's horrifying. Like everyone else, I want to know the truth." and then ended discussion, he wouldn't be lampooned like this.
The problem with Posnanski's book is that, even if he handles the revelations gracefully, it will almost become a book about Posnanski rather than a book about Paterno - because clearly Posnanski was charmed and fooled too and the book will have to be about how Paterno created and maintained this illusion for all these years.
He was live-tweeted as telling a Perv State University class the following after the scandal first broke:
Just out of curiosity, which of those statements do you read as "basically saying, 'let's wait until the facts are in'"?
Sounds more like he was saying "I drank Joe Paterno's Kool-Aid (probably made using the senile old goat's bathwater), & let me tell you, it tasated goooooooooood."
Chronicle of Higher Ed cites report as indicting a "culture of reverence for the football program that is ingrained at all levels of the campus community". At this point, who could disagree?
Doesn't Penn State football have to go the #### away for a generation?
Can't the NCAA just shut the program down for a decade?
EDITed to make clear I was responding to Lassus and gef. To nick, I mean, I think the evidence is pretty clear that big time college football is profoundly destructive of whatever service goals a university might have. I'll be very impressed if a university puts its service mission before the money the football program brings in, but I'm not expecting it even if this extreme situation.
I know, I was just kidding. I don't know how this scandal is about JoPo. He's like a wart on the rear end of this elephant. I can forgive him for being a bit star-struck, so long as he has some sort of mea culpa about it now or writes the book we all hope he will write, and not a glossed over hagiography.
Black Shoe Diaries is beyond sickening right now.
Well, the Catholic churches, schools, and seminaries here in Boston have been closing and/or emptying over the past decade. So....maybe.
The problem wasn't that children got molested - that is a matter for the criminal justice sytem, which has worked - Sandusky is in jail for the rest of his life. The problem from this perspective is that children got molested and good people in authority did nothing about it. That was quite clearly because of football.
On one hand, it certainly is unfair to punish the current players and staff for the trangressions of people ten years ago.
On the other, retribution is certainly a valid response. Clearly, the culture and power of Penn State football enabled a man who sexually abused children to continue to do so, so it would make sense to come down on the program.
The NCAA sanctioned Ohio State coach Jim Tressel for "unethical conduct" for failing to report his players selling memorabilia for tattoos, even though (AFAIK) that's not a specific NCAA infraction. I would guess they will try to go after the PSU actors for "unethical conduct", but I don't know if that can be applied to an institution. My guess is Eddo's argument will be what they use, "lack of institutional control."
What did Baylor basketball get hit for? Was it the murder cover-up or was it only the NCAA infractions they committed?
Sounds like a really good start, though the vast herds of people who wouldn't be able to function without someone telling them what to think & do would probably prove to be disruptive.
No shvt.
On the other, retribution is certainly a valid response
Retribution to whom? Paterno is dead, Sandusky is in jail, and others are headed to trial. A football program is not a human being. Are we to head back to the medieval ages and hold trials for pigs and cows because the farmer was killed when the animal kicked him? You punish the people responsible for it not inanimate objects.
No, that was quite clearly because people are people. People cover up unpleasant things all the time because they believe it is in their own self interest to do so.
Entire programs are punished all the time despite not being human beings. Why can't they be this time? As far as the NCAA's call for doing so, well, Penn State is in the NCAA, and the NCAA might be worried about how Penn State is representing them.
No, that was quite clearly because people are people. People cover up unpleasant things all the time because they believe it is in their own self interest to do so.
Saying that they believed it was in the best (self-)interest of their football program - $$$$$$$ - cannot be that much of a leap for you.
I believe it was an infraction. Players aren't allowed to sell memorabilia when students because otherwise it would make an easy circumvention of rules regarding player compensation.
EDIT: A. J. Green got into trouble for selling his jersey a couple of years ago.
Which is stupid. Does the NCAA have the power to fire people at colleges? I know they can suspend coaches for games but can they just say "you're done"? It seems to me the NCAA punishes programs because they don't have direct authority over the employees of colleges.
Yes, but the fact that Penn State football had gotten so powerful and out-of-control enabled those people to act at their worst.
If my buddy rapes a kid, and I help him cover it up, we'll both get caught. If we had a powerful organization to hide behind, our chances of getting caught drops. A perfectly valid response is to punish the organization for enabling the cover up.
I don't see why this is so hard to understand. Do you believe that organizations should never be punished for actions of their members, especially their powerful members?
So what? You're going to blame football because people acted selfishly? The root cause wasn't football it was people being people.
The logic is:
1. A member of an organization does something that goes against the rules of a higher governing organization.
2. The governing organization punishes the smaller organization, which they have control over.
3. The smaller organization can often lessen the punishment my dealing with the individuals who committed the acts in the first place.
It's akin to the SEC levying fines against businesses.
Organizations are made up of human beings that make decisions. You wouldn't be hiding behind a rock or something you'd be hiding behind a large group of human beings that are making a decision to help you get away with it just you made the decision to help your buddy cover up the rape. Are you an organization?
1. A member of an organization does something that goes against the rules of a higher governing organization.
2. The governing organization punishes the smaller organization, which they have control over.
3. The smaller organization can often lessen the punishment my dealing with the individuals who committed the acts in the first place.
It's akin to the SEC levying fines against businesses.
Yes, and it appears that in this case the "smaller organization" has already cleaned house or is in the process of finishing that up so banning the football program at this point seems stupid.
Blaming Penn State's football program does not blame football, it blames Penn State's football program.
Oh, forget it.
Good, because when I say "football" I'm talking about the PS football program.
If you wish to beleve that the people acted the way they did independently from the cult of Penn State football, go ahead. I think that's ridiculous.
If enough people, who make terrible decisions, get together to form an organization that enables horrible behavior, then I don't see why coming down on the organization - or even forcing it to disband - is such an awful thing.
This.
I think it's perfectly likely that the people involved were extremely capable of acting "the way they did independently from the cult of Penn State football," but the fact remains that that isn't what happened.
as others stated he could have remembered the sage line about keeping one's mouth shut and being thought a fool versus opening it and removing all doubt. joe had a 50/50 chance of it working out by speaking and got the wrong 50.
his book will be ridiculed because there is no going back and changing passages that now will likely read as nothing but codswollop, he will be heckled for some time either in person or electronically and any mention of him will be tied to paterno.
i am hopeful i am completely wrong since this will be a large price to pay for not wanting to believe that the guy you sat across for months was anything but honorable at the end of his life.
Again, the people who created that "cult" are now gone or awaiting trial. But, hey, go ahead kick the dead horse if it makes you feel better.
Posnanski's problems run deeper. From a quick skim of the report, it looks like a heckofalot of folks in State College knew "something" was up re: Sandusky, dating back years. One of the key focuses of the report is the lack of compliance at PSU, which allowed so many people to "know" without there being institutional knowledge. Posnanski, who freakin' moved to State College, never heard a whit of this? Some journalist.
The lower level people, who are not reporting or following-up because of fear of institutional backlash? You betcha. How do you think reporters get leaks re: scandals?
I'm pretty sure that "cult" goes back decades, & it didn't & doesn't consist only of Paterno or any of those who have been dismissed.
Can Posnanski really be called a journalist? I haven't followed his career, but my impression is that he's never been much for, say, writing actual news or conducting investigations or whatever, as opposed to penning paeans to people he thinks are the bestest folks evar.
I'm not talking about the player infractions, I'm talking about the sanctions against Jim Tressel. AFAIK (and I could be wrong), there was nothing in the bylaws about not turning that in, but it falls under the NCAA's "unethical conduct."
So, Posnanski is IMO in many respects EXACTLY the wrong guy to be in this situation he was in at Penn State, and, predictably (and unfortunately), he blew it.
If people were acting selfishly, they would have covered their ass and turned Sandusky in. But they didn't because they either wanted to protect their program or if they did act selfishly it was to protect their career by protecting the program. I can't see how anyone could see that this wasn't about football.
I may not be Harveys, but I have enough farmers in my family to know that some diseases require the herd be slaughtered.
The NCAA requires coaches to file affidavits stating they have no knowledge of NCAA infractions - which Tressel did. I am quite certain that there is an NCAA rule which requires them to be truthful or why bother?
this is true. more for sheep than most others. hogs have really good immune systems interestingly enough. similar to humans
ok, now you have me going on a tangent about animal physiology and immunology so i better stop........
How do you prevent a cover up like this from happening again? Can it even be prevented?
So, he's like what, Rick Reilly without the alcohol problem? IIRC, his background is as a journalist.
So's mine. Doesn't mean I'm one now. (In fact, I'm not. Neither, apparently, is Posnanski. Judging from the bio on his blog, he was a columnist -- not a reporter -- for most of his newspaper career.)
Or the rehashing of stories outdated by 18 years. Joe's been a columnist for decades. He's a reporter as much as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is a tank driver.
I agree that if he heard whispers about Sandusky he should have done some snooping around, which apparently he did not, but I'm not going to hold him accountable for not breaking this story.
Tressel was informed about the players selling their jerseys to a tattoo shop and failed to report it to the NCAA, although he did let his QB's mentor know that people were on to the players. He then lied to OSU when the university asked him about the deal, saying he had no knowledge of anything. (OSU had been informed of the players actions bu the justice department that was investigating the tattoo shop for different illegal activities). Tressel also had a history of covering up player misdeeds while the AD at Youngstown State. This was a case of the university getting it right and firing a popular, winning coach for not playing by the rules.
Again, I understand the feelings. I too am sickened by all the pro-Paterno rationalizations. In the future, if you want to talk about the Paterno/Sandusky matter please submit a post of an article marked as OT-Football: <Article title> and you can discuss the topic there.
Jim
In essence, this is what they've done with Jim Tressel and his "show cause" penalty. Any NCAA member who hires him has to prove to the NCAA they shouldn't be put on probation for doing so.
Exactly right, given that evidently the head football coach, athletic director, and president of the university all were alerted to what happened and all chose to do nothing.
***
Ya know, much like Poz, I also always admired Paterno. He seemed to be the exact opposite of the SEC/Big 12 coaches who seemed to think football was the reason the university existed, as opposed to the other way around. His players graduated in droves; you never heard a peep about rules or recruiting violations. When all of this surfaced, I found it unimaginable that Paterno could have known and not done a thing.
Unfortunately, much like I was when the first stories about Jim Tressel came out of Ohio State, I couldn't be more wrong.
I think Poz can redeem himself, if he (1) rewrites the book, with what we know now as the backdrop or (2) squashes the book altogether, with a very public article about everything that happened. We tend to forgive people who own up to their mistakes.
Sure, I'm not defending Tressel here. My point was that he was slapped with the "Show-cause" sanction by the NCAA for "unethical conduct", not AFAIK, for technically breaking any rules, although as Pops points out in #83, perhaps lying on an affidavit to the NCAA would violate one of their sanctions. That same "unethical conduct" umbrella might be used by the NCAA against Penn State officials, although probably not the entire institution.
And it's not even like this popped up all of a sudden once Posnanski got there.
Not saying that Poz should have changed the focus of his book plan based on early reports, but Sandusky was Paterno's trusted defensive coordinator for many years, so it might've made sense to dig at least a little bit.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main