11/24 - Opinions Can Be A Pain
by bdalebs on Nov 24, 2009 5:00 AM EST
in Daily Links
Email
Print
Okay, so I lied about the Filter being daily this week. Yes, I realize this situation's stupid. Let's move on to the links, shall we? As an experiment, I'm not going to say much about most of the links - except these:
This Dirt Is Free - A Red Sox Fan From Pinstripe Territory
Not completely relevant, but I figure that some people are going to want to be on the lookout for this. Doesn't bother me too much, but I don't own a blog and I don't see most advertisements anyways. That's more of an aesthetic choice than a political one though - I don't enjoy explaining the presence of certain ads to anyone that glances over my shoulder. However, there is a political aspect to blogging that I'd love to discuss:
I don't particularly like Mr. Simmons's work. Most of it isn't entertaining, to me. But that doesn't mean I think that ESPN should be able to control what he can and can't say. (Yeah, I know, the stupid kid is ranting about stuff that he's not old enough to understand, but just bear with me.)
For one, maybe it's the young and naive view that needs to be considered here; I haven't been around long enough to be corrupted into thinking money is the only thing that matters. That'd be why I tend to over-romanticize simple stuff like curfews - but I digress. To me, there isn't a thing in the world more valuable than my voice. Without it, I wouldn't be able to write this post. Without it, I wouldn't be able to further my education through questioning the material. Without it, I wouldn't be able to express my many, hormone-driven emotions, I wouldn't be able to share my faith, and I wouldn't be able to be the die-hard fan I am. In short, I wouldn't be me without my voice.
Unless Mr. Simmons shares my flair for the dramatic and decided to sign an iron-clad contract with Lucifer so that he could have his voice amplified, I don't see how ESPN can justify censoring someone who was simply defending himself. Even though he probably could have found a more intelligent way of doing it than name-calling via Twitter, Mr. Simmons was not in the wrong to speak his mind. It may be part of the conditions that he agreed to when he signed onto ESPN, but I'm sure an insanity plea wouldn't be that hard to make for Mr. Simmons' case.
And now, onto the other links: some interesting, in not confusing, stuff about different parks and their effects upon stats; a couple of takes on recent Sox news; and plans for MLB domination!
For those of us that get a kick out of the wind tunnel effect at New Yankee Stadium, here's some interesting data.
Is UZR park adjusted[?] - Inside the Book
Yeah, I got lost a lot during this, but maybe someone can explain some of the more technical stuff?
Type A label hurts free agents such as John Grabow, Juan Cruz - Sky Andrecheck
Terry Francona's Staff One of the Best in Baseball - NESN.com
Even After Rough Season, Jonathan Papelbon Still the Red Sox' Best Choice for Closer - NESN.com
JD Drew Undergoes Shoulder Surgery - Bleacher Report
Good job, sir. Basically what we've been saying around here for a while.
Trade Market: Righty Relievers - MLBTradeRumors.com
We REALLY should have traded MDC for Nick Johnson. And now he REALLY needs to be good.
Red Sox May Take a Step Back in 2010 To Take Two Steps Forward in 2011 - Bleacher Report
As long as we can fail spectacularly so that we can lose some of the bandwagoners.
Red Sox Don’t Need to Break Bank to Win 2010 World Series - NESN.com
Yes, this is a generally accepted and completely obvious fact. And?
David Ortiz Has No Desire to Be General Manager - Heidi Watney
Try to focus on what Papi is saying, gentlemen.
All-Aughts Team of the Decade RP5: Rich Garces - Fire Brand of the American League
All-Aughts Team of the Decade bench IF: Alex Cora - Fire Brand of the American League
I kid you not, Drugs.
All-Aughts Team of the Decade SP2: Curt Schilling - Fire Brand of the American League
Ben Cherington Is Underrated Difference-Maker for Red Sox - NESN.com
The replacement for Jed Hoyer gets a nice little biographical post.
How Sabermetrics saved my dissertation - THT
What does clinical psychology have in common with Sabermetrics? Quite a bit, as it turns out.
Awesome story.
NEW SEGMENT: OMGOMGOMGIWantToCallItTheJedSectionButItWouldBeWeirdYou'llSeeWhatIMeanInASecond
Falling to the Bottom of The Filter
New Poll Question: Left Field Left-overs - Fire Brand of the American League
Umm... where's Cameron? Or at least the Ells (with a new CF) option? I guess not every Sox blog has explored these options.
Miguel Cabrera Reminds Us That Character Still Matters - NESN.com
So THAT'S why he got a 1st place vote!
Why The Red Sox Should Get Alfonso Soriano - Bleacher Report
So... the contract... not at all a bad thing?
Links, comments, and angry rants (just warn us if there's any NSFW language) are all appreciated.
60 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
RJ Anderson on the consisency of the Red Sox
"That was a lot of fun… You just keep pounding balls into the gap. The one thing you don’t want to do is hit a home run. That’s a rally-killer." Jeff Francoeur
Interesting
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 24, 2009 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
That's really weird.
Should probably remember that for the next discussion about our failing offense.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Their highest BABIP of the four matching seasons came in 2008 and their lowest n 2009.
Interesting
Didn’t hurt that we had 3 cripples in the lineup, but still.
Also, BS, it is sort of something you have to accept that, when you’re one of the faces of a network, you’re going to have to watch what you say. In a lot of jobs I’d agree with you that the employer should but out when it comes to off-the-job communication, but Simmons is never really off-the-job. He’s always the Sports Guy and has to act knowing he is, to many, representing ESPN.
It makes sense for them to keep him under control a little.
Precisely
You are a representative of that company, and your actions therefore impact the company. It’s more than just being an employee, you represent the company.
For example, folks are banned from here all the time. Is that imposing upon freedom of speech? If you start saying aggressive and inappropriate things on this site that is causing a lot of negative press, do you think that OTM should keep you as a writer based on “freedom of speech”? Clearly not.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Should they? Yes. But that's a personal opinion, not one that is necessarily shared by anyone else in the world.
If I have something to say that I know wouldn’t stay up for long, then I’m going to find somewhere else to say it. And I reserve my right to publish under whatever name I want – bs.uf15bosox9bears23, my real name, Santa Claus, Jim Bob Bobbington LXVIII of Romania, etc. It doesn’t matter, really, because the ideas themselves are what are supposed to be judged, not the random combination of symbols given as identification of the source.
It’s not my problem if readers are stupid enough to assume that people have to agree on everything in order to have any sort of connection – I’m not responsible for the illogical thought process of humans. If I am asked to give my best effort to guarantee that no one assumes that, sure, I’ll give whatever legalese preface SB Nation wants me to before speaking my mind.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
That's not really how freedom of speech works, though
The First Amendment protects you from undue impingement by the government on your right to express whatever you want. ESPN isn’t the government, and there’s no law that says that they can’t restrict their employees’ posts on Twitter or any other social networking tool as a condition of employment.
Banning folks from here isn’t a violation of anyone’s free speech rights either because this is a private domain, just like your home. For instance, if you come into my house and start spewing racism or pro-MFY bull***, I’m well within my rights to kick you out because that’s my home — it’s my private property — and my rules apply. Just as this site is the private property of the site owner, who gets to determine who is and isn’t welcome here. That means, in the end, that the merit of your ideas has no bearing on whether or not you have the right to post here except insofar as the site owner says so.
Okay, so maybe not based on the 1st amendment, but on principle.
I though Bloggy was implying the latter by putting it in quotes. Again, I don’t see any reason to ever prevent someone from saying something. You don’t have to listen, but other people might want to.
The only spam I would take down if I ran a site would be something that poses a threat to the security and function of the site or the machines involved.
Yes, I’m probably being unrealistic.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Yes, you're being unrealistic, but that's fine
This site, as much as we all enjoy it, isn’t a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and it’s not big business. You and the other moderators can be a little more free in how you deal with things than ESPN can.
Let me give you an idea why I think that. Never mind exactly where I work, but I’m a VP of a decent sized firm. I run a division of about 75 people. I couldn’t care less about what my employees post on the internet so long as it’s anonymous, but if their name is readily available attached to it, they cannot post anything that would embarrass us. The main reason for that is because if one of my employees posts something that reflects poorly on the firm — whether the post is racist, misogynist, discriminatory, or otherwise unprofessional — it can cost us business. And it’s a very tough economic climate — all of my firms competitors have eliminated jobs, and the only reason we haven’t is because the top executives (myself included) slashed our salaries by 30-50%. None of my people got even a cost-of-living increase in salary this year, and not one of them complained because they knew if things had gotten any worse we’d have to choose between laying some of them off or cutting everyone’s salary.
So suppose one of them posted something that cost us business. In this economy, that would hurt a lot of people because either some people would have lost their jobs or everyone would have had their salary cut. Now, as the boss, if faced with the choice between 1) firing someone who did something that reflected poorly on my business, keeping the business of the people who complained, and not hurting the rest of my employees, or 2) not firing the person who screwed up, costing us business, and hurting every one of my employees, I don’t see it as much of a choice. Depending on how badly the offending employee screwed up, I may or may not help him/her seek employment elsewhere, but s/he’s gone because I’m more interested in protecting the rest of my people.
I don’t think Simmons did anything that rises to that level. I’m just saying that ESPN has their policy for a god reason, even if they applied it stupidly in this case.
I totally understand.
But I don’t totally understand the parallel – for one, I’m pretty sure that Mr. Simmons, ESPN, and the people at WEEI are much better off than employees at a firm in which the executives are taking massive pay cuts (you are beyond awesome for doing that, by the way).
For the sake of the metaphor, I’m going to say you work at for a bacon company. The equivalent of the ESPN situation, in your bacon company, would be if someone was to go to partner restaurant and eat breakfast there, but chooses to go to a rival restaurant for lunch and giving them your company’s bacon, that this traitor had produced, to use, because they prefer the way the rival prepares lunch.
Yes, I just made a bacon metaphor – I apologize if that makes it difficult to focus while reading it. I’m just a guy in need of a midnight snack.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Really it does not matter the situation.
It is not a moral question for Simmons, it is a contractual one. He accept a lot of money from ESPN to do many things, including behave in a certain way. What he did was clearly against their policies. Whether their policies are right or wrong, he signed the contract. Period.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
Which is why he's partly to blame.
But I’m sure he didn’t sign a contract that said he has to let anybody affiliated with ESPN bash him without expecting they’d face the same consequences.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
He signed a contract that said he had to behave in a certain manner. The specifics are not important.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
Not all contracts are valid.
Some of the lawyers on the site could spell out the reasons for invalidation much better than I, but there are ways to get out of contracts. For example, a contract signed under duress (ex. at gunpoint) is not valid. Other contracts are illegal. I can’t legally sign myself and my family into slavery, even if I wanted to, because slavery is illegal.
"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.
And I'm not trying to argue the legality of ESPN's actions.
I’m saying it just isn’t right.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
It's absolutely right.
Because a person’s actions impact more than just that person. So Mr. Simmons wants all the glory of being Mr. ESPN Big Shot? Well, he needs to take some of the responsibility, too. And the responsibility is that you don’t behave in a way that embarrasses the company/brand.
Simple as that.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
But they did nothing to defend him.
That’s one of the major issues.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
If ESPN doesn't want to get into a shit-throwing contest with WEII, that's understandable
It’s perceived as taking the high-road.
I didn’t read what was originally written/said about Simmons. But ESPN, it seems, has a policy about not taking shots at competition. If Simmons is looking to work for someone who will have a BS mudslinging feud with a competitor, he should see if FOX is hiring.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Except they are in a partnership with WEEI.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
But to punish him in particular, for something he said on an independent service...
And not the instigators who posted the original attack on him on a site run by ESPN? Seem like they pretty much have told Mr. Simmons that he doesn’t own his name anymore. It may be good business practice, but it doesn’t sit right with me. Yeah, he represents the network, but does that mean he should literally be a puppet for them?
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Ugh, bad wording:
Seems like they pretty much have told Mr. Simmons that they own him.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
it's pretty standard practice for any kind of entertainment person
because they are essentially marketed as a brand. Most companies will make any kind of contractor working for them sign non-disparagement clauses, ESPECIALLY in the entertainment world
Essentially, he doesn’t need to do what they say, but he does if he wants to continue working for them, which is pretty fair. If I was at work and I kept telling everyone that my boss was a moron and they told him, I wouldn’t expect him to be very happy about it. For the record I like my boss :)
Correct
Legally, ESPN didn’t do anything right. But as I’ve already posted here, hanging their employee out to dry while their partners attack him and suspending him for defending himself was a real d-bag move. Completely legal, but completely classless.
I'm assuming you mean "anything wrong."
Exactly – I don’t care what the laws say about it, ESPN should not have taken the course of action they did. It seems to me that they essentially told Mr. Simmons* that he could either lose his job or continue acting like a puppet. They would really prefer that he not choose the former option, since it would hurt them badly. The latter option actually helps them in allowing them free publicity (I hate that this is probably exactly what they want to happen) and doesn’t force them to make any difficult decisions.
To make a really horrible metaphor, Mr. Simmons is like a politician that got involved with the mob to gain power, and now has to do a bunch of horrible stuff because his family and career are being held hostage.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Other Anologies:
An athlete signs a deal with Nike. He then starts aspousing racially insensitive thoughts. Is Nike allowed to drop him? Clearly yes.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
Because he's providing the service of acting as a spokesperson/model.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Bill Simmons
I completely agree. Once you gain any level of sports sophistication Bill Simmons comes off like a whiney Red Sox fan whos whole existence and identity was tied to losing every season. When the Red Sox won in 2004 Bill Simmons kept crying and he was just not that funny any more. He is like Chirs Berman, after 25, he just becomes annoying. Wow, you named another football player after a Fleetwood Mac song, how original…
Even so, what a d-bag move for ESPN
It seems like no one here is a fan, but he is one of their more popular writers for reasons that escape me, he’s completely right about WEEI, and it’s pretty crappy that ESPN would let their partner attack his character like that but won’t let him defend himself (however juvenile the defense may have been).
Exactly.
[famous, cliched Voltaire quote]
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
The scary thing about Soriano is that there are actually some people who think we should get him
We call these people “idiots.”
He can’t hit anymore, he’s never gotten on base much, and what’s that UZR/150 for 2009? Is that a -15.9? All that and a toxic contract too.
So I guess we can call those people “MFY fans” too.
Hey now
We need SOMEONE to fill Lugo’s “resented God awful contract” on the site.
Papi and Lowell we like too much. Bring in Soriano to suck for 5 years at big bucks without ever having any of the hype, and we can get back to our angry ways.
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 24, 2009 12:34 PM EST up reply actions
Bay will get the role if he signs for any more than the current offer.
And Ells, assuming he doesn’t learn to read flies better, will immediately draw my ire if gets what I’d expect him to in arbitration.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Oh, and TMPalomino was indeed registered with some spam.
Not like anyone was going to stumble upon it in a 3-week old post, but it’s gone now.
Nice.
I’m probably very alone on this, but I really don’t mind the spam. As long as it’s not something that could literally damage the site or my machine, it’s just a matter of skipping over it.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Bill Simmons
ESPN pays him a lot of money and therefore he must abide by the constraints of their contract. It is analagous to athletes being fined for questioning calls or being restricted from drug use. One agrees to these terms when the contract is signed. If Simmons wants to say anything he wants, he can always quit his job with ESPN. His freedom is not really being restricted. He has chosen to abide by these rules in exchange for a great amount of money.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
true
but by the same token, the guys on WEEI, as a partner of ESPN probably technically should be held to the same sorts of standards since by attacking Simmons (a representative of ESPN) they are by defacto attacking ESPN.
I think that THAT is the thing that bugs most of us about this. Simmons is a grown man and can take care of himself. But ESPN as a corporation comes off as hypocritical by censoring just him and not their other representative appendages.
Not just hypocritical, but clueless and mean-spirited too
By standing by and allowing their partner to attack their employee, they’re effectively attacking their employee themselves. To then suspend him for doing what they should have done just reinforces the insult.
I'm well aware of that
I’m saying they should have their employee’s back when their partner attacks him. By ignoring the attack and punishing the reaction to it, they’re essentially contributing to the attack.
This story clears up some stuff:
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/article/134848
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
That does put a different spin on things
But they still come off as jerks. Simmons shouldn’t be promoting their competition, but their partner — essentially their representative — shouldn’t be denigrating their employee either.
Exactly.
I was just making sure everyone knew what the chain of events was. Although really, I would much have seen ESPN let Mr. Simmons and WEEI fix their issues, esp. once they entered into a partnership with the station. Guess what situation I’m going to compare this to…
ESPN = Sox FO, Mr. Simmons = Jed, WEEI issue= Jed’s broken wrist (just go with it)
The Sox FO invested in Jed when he wasn’t popular, and then he started to get more followers. Jed got to the big time, and then his wrist broke. It wasn’t obvious, because everyone involved managed to keep it under wraps for a while. The news got out though, and everybody got interested and wanted to see where it’d go. The Sox didn’t see any reason to fix it, so they avoided the intervention and decided to focus more on the more pressing issues (not sure what that is in ESPN’s case). And then it blew up in their face when the wrist didn’t heal properly by itself, and Jed became a minor pain in the FO’s neck. The FO decides to use kid gloves with Jed, and it ended up just making the situation worse.
For the record, I do not have the same obsession with Mr. Simmons that I have with Jed; it just seemed like an eerily similar situation.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
That was what I had issue with the most, but I figured it went without saying.
I’m sure that Mr. Simmons’s fanbase could more than support him if he chose to drop ESPN. But I’m being unfair in expecting people to put money second – not everyone is as weird as me, I get that. I don’t see any reason why someone should agree to a contract that says anything more than “A performs Service B, is paid amount C by D.” If an athlete (A) can’t perform a certain service (B), then the team (D) doesn’t pay them ©. That means if they are arrested, killed, or otherwise prevented from completing their service , then they don’t have to get paid. Simple as that.
Of course, the geniuses that ESPN employs really shouldn’t have signed contracts that gave up so many rights, but it’s personal preference. All three parties in this case (Mr. Simmons, ESPN, and WEEI) are at fault, but ESPN deserves most of the flak for deciding that the best way to deal with the situation was a novelty “suspension” for Mr. Simmons (except for when his tweets could make them money). Why should he be punished more than WEEI? Because it gives ESPN some free publicity.
Then Mr. Simmons describes it as a mutual decision, which means, to me, that both sides wanted to go with the option that harmed them the least – if he left, he loses a paycheck, and they lost one of their most popular writers. Overall, ESPN just comes off like a huge, whorish dbag; sadly, we’re probably playing into their hands by discussing it.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
(almost) Any job you ever work will have pre-conditions.
Most jobs require a certain level of grooming (shaving daily, short hair etc.); they require a dress code; they require many, many other things. And when your success depends upon your public appeal, it is entirely understandable that many more conditions are placed on your employment.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
Whish is really sad.
Because I was under the impression that we are supposed to care more about the work someone does than who they are. Simmons could be a conspiracy-theorist hobo wearing yellow polka-dotted boxers for a hat for all I care – if he wrote a good sports article or produced a good sports podcast, I’d give him my attention.
Basically, it appears that I’m going to have to realize that people don’t always do what they should (according to my ideals), not only economically, but in every aspect of life.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
You are partly right.
And Simmons could be everything that you say, as long as he does not go out of his way to publicize illicit behaviour (though I’m not sure any of your description is illicit). The point is that in this world people expect certain things out of others. For example, would you want someone with long finger nails as a waiter? No. Its gross, even if it does not actually effect their performance. Would you be quicker to trust an accountant that is wearing a nice Italian suit, or a sweat suit? Obviously the former. No matter how subconscious, we all make judgements based on appearances and it is entirely appropriate for an employer to take some control over their employees to manage these appearances.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
Alright, going with your logic, ESPN made a bad business decision then.
They aren’t letting Mr. Simmons be the character that attracts readers – if nothing else, they are telling potential customers that Simmons isn’t as important to them as some radio show.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
This could be true.
Readers and listeners are certainly attracted to controversy. Maybe the problem is that he communicated through Twitter, instead of through his column?
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
So ESPN freaked that he didn't give them a chance to edit him?
That’s one of the best things about Twitter – it doesn’t censor anyone (unless they’re breaking the law with their posts). And it really wouldn’t be that hard for ESPN to simply have someone run the Twitter for Mr. Simmons.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
or that twitter got the hits and not espn.com?
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
Then they shouldn't let him have a Twitter to begin with, except for as a link feed?
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
An appropriate comic:
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Josh Hamilton on public relapse: ‘It was just wrong. That’s all it comes down to.’
- Photo: The Marlins’ ridiculous-looking home run sculpture is almost complete
- Yankees GM Brian Cashman lures alleged stalker into police dragnet
- Report: Josh Hamilton had a relapse with alcohol
- Happy Birthday Boy! Wes Ferrell, the best-hitting pitcher of all-time, would be 104
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
