December 10, 2013
Who is Shyster?
Or you can search by:
Most Recent Comments
Mike Hargrove Interview (13)
Can they be the California Angels again? (9)
Another great moment in mass transit? (7)
Just another ten-percenter (his mind is like an ocean) (7)
Great Moments in Half-Baked Populism (8)
Shyster's Daily Circuit
Joe Posnanski Blog
Cot's Baseball Contracts
It IS About the Money
Baseball Think Factory
MLB Trade Rumors
Way Back and Gone
Bats -- NYT Baseball Blog
The Biz of Baseball
The Daily Fungo
The Common Man
Jorge Says No!
Baseball Over Here
Thursday, January 08, 2009
MLB = Pravda?Baseball Prospectus' Derek Jacques has been watching the MLB Network and believes he's found evidence that the on-air talent is whitewashing history:
However, there was a stray phrase in one segment of Tuesday’s Hot Stove that made me do a double-take, and risks dampening my enthusiasm for the network as a whole. The segment was about the Yankees‘ history of spending on high-profile free agents. In it, reporter Greg Amsinger divided the Steinbrenner era into four parts–1973-1981, when the team spent on premier free agents like Catfish Hunter, Reggie Jackson, Goose Gossage and Dave Winfield, and won championships; 1982-1995, when the team “join[ed] other franchises in self-restraint and a change of philosophy that led to a title drought in the 80s;” 1996-2000, when the team built from within and used mid-market signings to become a champion again; and 2001-present, when the Yankees have been on a fruitless spending spree with no end in sight.
Just because this was inevitable doesn't mean that it isn't disappointing. No, I don't expect MLB Network people to sling crap at the people who pay their salaries on a regular basis, but as Jacques notes, the refusal to reference stuff that happened two decades ago is inexcusable. Are Amsinger and the talking heads permitted to mention baseball's color barrier? The Black Sox scandal?
(link via BTF)
Posted by Craig Calcaterra at 8:10am
The Common Man said...
I saw that too, Craig, and was amused/disappointed. If MLB isn’t going to talk about collusion, it obviously also isn’t going to have anything critical or meaningful to say about the way steroids was/is being handled. And that’s disappointing, as I was hoping to watch the MLB network all day, every day, except when The Office and 30 Rock are on.
Posted 01/08 at 10:59 AM
Everyone, aside from people like us, has pretty much forgotten that collusion even happened. I’d put the percentage of baseball fans who would have any idea what you’re talking about if you mentioned the collusion scandals at around 5%, and even that number may be high. At this point, a mention on its own wouldn’t do—they’d have to actually explain that it happened if they were going to reference it.
It’s really a shame that so few people seem to remember the collusion in the 80s. The dialogue surrounding salary caps, “evil” agents, and “greedy” players might be a little more intelligent and balanced if more people did.
Posted 01/08 at 10:59 AM
The Black Sox Scandal was a PLAYERS effort, not an owners effort. It will probably get an hour-long retrospective.
Posted 01/08 at 01:44 PM