Ortiz lied to us

A Sox player gets caught up in controversy and Mr Knee-Jerk is itching to chime in right away.

You knew this was coming. The question was how quickly it would take to Dan write about it. The answer: Not long. The Globe even videotaped Dan at his desk talking about David Ortiz' name popping up on the infamous Steroid 103 list. Dan probably wrote this article a year ago and has been waiting and waiting to hit the publish button.

Yet again, this is piss-poor journalism. Yet again, this is Shaughnessy. Who is the fraud? Ortiz, quite possibly. Shaughnessy, most definitely

There are anonymous sources who say Ortiz is on the list. Yet, Ortiz says he did not even know. There is no corroboration. There is no indication of what he tested positive for. There is no due process. Yet, this doesn't stop Shaughnessy (and pretty much the entire press for that matter) for declaring him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Shaughnessy emphatically and dramatically starts his column, "David Ortiz lied to you. It seems safe to say that his entire Red Sox career is a lie."

When did Ortiz lie to me? What proof do you have Shaughnessy that he lied to me? Have you done any damn bit of investigation to give us any more than an anonymous source? Shaughnessy, you may end up being right but yet again, you have engaged in lazy, wreckless and knee-jerk journalism. Unfortunately, it is a sad commentary on the state of journalism that you are not alone here.

And, Shaughnessy why do you even bother anymore? For the second straight time this week, you have simply said pretty much the same thing Massarotti did. So not only are you a lazy hack, you are redundant.

Dice-K

There is nothing like a good player controversey to flush a rat from hiding. Shaughnessy returns from many days away from his column to write about Daisuke Matsuzaka's recent comments about the Red Sox handling of him.

This one (save one thing*) contains all the elements that drive me personally to want to continue this website. *The one surprising element is that it did not end with the line "This must be a case of Dice-K being Dice-K. " Shaughnessy must have realized that he had already written the same piece as Tony Massarotti who did end with the "Being Dice-K" line and realized that perhaps he should try to at least be a little different. As for the standard Shaughnessy fare that he did invoke, we have:

- Painting a picture of things that never really happened in the first place. Shaughnessy talks about what a dream marriage this was in the beginning -- World Series victories, 18-3 records, etc. Except Shaughnessy glosses over the fact that the marriage has never been particularly rosy--high salary, high walks, high pitch counts...high maintenance. Dont think this was ever a "perfect marriage"?

- Contradicting the picture that he paints: Shaughnessy starts his column saying "At the beginning, it was a perfect marriage." and he ends the column with "Since Day 1, Matsuzaka has been a hired gun in the clubhouse." Hmm, which is it Dan?

- Throw in a couple of inappropriate cultural references (which incidentally are also contradictory). He calls this a "hundred-million arranged marriage" after calling it a "perfect marriage"? Why call it an arranged marriage? Was it any more arranged than Texeira signing with the Yankees? It was a mutual business deal - no one forced anyone into anything.

- Failure to allow for the possibility that something is lost in translation: It seems like many of Shaughnessy's targets (Pedro, Manny, and now Dice-K) are ones whose native language is not English. Any chance that something is lost and misunderstood in the cultural and language translations? Do you really think Dice-K purposely upset the retirement ceremony of Jim Rice's number? Was there something taken out of context? Perhaps not but Shaughnessy is not likely to take the time to even consider the other perspective

This is simply another case of Shaughnessy piling on clumsily and lazily--tripping over himself along the way. Pathetic.

Farewell, Jerry

It is with much regret that I inform readers that Jerry Gutlon, the latest keeper of the DSW, has passed away.

In times like these I often need to borrow the words of others. In F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic novel, The Great Gatsby, upon learning of Gatsby’s passing, Meyer Wolfsheim tells the narrator, Nick, “Let us learn to show friendship for a man when he is alive and not after he is dead.” My wish here is I that had taken the time to do that for Jerry.

Jerry had intimated he had health problems, but never truly acknowledged (to me, at least) the extent of his fight. I am posting a note I received from his wife, Kristie. She and his family have my sincerest sympathies.

---------------

Dear Friends,

My husband, Jerry Gutlon, passed away July 7^th after a long battle with heart and lung disease. He fought hard, but in the end, it was time for the Lord to take him home.

I have to admit, this has been very hard for me to take. I love him with all of my heart and wish he would come back. His son, Joshua, has been my rock through this whole thing. His daughter, Alicia, hasn’t taken this very well, and I feel like I just need to back off and let her grieve in her own way.

The funeral will be Tuesday, July 14, at 5:30pm at Conner Westbury Funeral Home in Griffin, GA.Visitation will follow until 8:30. The address for Conner Westbury Funeral Home is 1891 W. McIntosh Rd., Griffin, GA 30223.The phone number is (770) 227-2300. The burial will take place Wednesday, July 15, at 1:00 at the Georgia National Cemetery in Canton, GA. He will be buried with full military honors.

The address for the Georgia National Cemetery is 2025 Mount Carmel Church Ln., Canton, GA 30114. The phone number for the administration office is (770) 479-9300. For those of you who live in the New England area, I’m considering the possibility of traveling to Massachusetts to do something in his memory with his friends and family up there. I don’t know for sure if I’ll be able to do it, but I’m hoping I can.

If you would like to contact me, my e-mail address is HiCNote@yahoo.com. I’ll try to keep track of Jerry’s e-mail for a while.

Thank you all so much for being Jerry’s friends. Jerry was a good man, and I’m honored and privileged to be his wife. God bless all of you.

Sincerely,

Kristie Gutlon

Picked up pieces

Dan dusts off a format he has not used in awhile - picked up pieces. Woo hoo. Good to hear the random thoughts of a media titan.

Let's see....Manny blasting: Check, check, check; Gratuitous Schilling Shot: Check; Strained analogies to the Red Sox - Yankees rivalry: Check (Comparing the recent NBA FA wheeling and dealing to the Red Sox and Yankees "winter wars" is downright stupid); John Henry close talker comment: check. Attempt to show cultural hipness: Check (Dos Equis commercial)

Also, Shank takes a shot at a recent NY Times Op Ed on steroids. Shank is critical of Chafets apparent indifference on the steroid issue. Chafets points out that many folks take performance enhancers in different forms and MLB has a long history of it. Shank ridicules Chafets but I personally think Chafets makes valid arguments. I personally use performance enhancers everyday (caffeine) and I take meds (motrin) to help me recover from injury - where do you draw the line? As usual, Shaughnessy is too lazy to at least consider the logic of an opposing viewpoint and instead issues dismissive one-liners. (And if you ever email Shaughnessy a critical comment, he does the same thing in his responses.)

Well, at least we were spared any 70s music references. And I actually did appreciate Shaughnessy's book and TV recommendations (I did not know about the HBO special on Ted Williams and look forward to it)

Baseball's Softer Side

On Monday night, Dustin Pedroia missed the Red Sox game because his wife went into premature labor. Dan talks about the old school days of baseball when players missed births and graduations compared to baseball's new softer side where family trumps baseball. He posits that Terry Francona represents the best of new and old in his approach to managing the game and its players.

Perhaps, I am reading too much into this but I think there is some Shark snarkiness here when he notes that the Red Sox were thrashed by the lowly Oakaland A's but then says:

No problem. The important thing was that Kelli Pedroia was OK and Dustin Pedroia had some peace of mind

And he concludes the column noting that Pedroia's return to the lineup came as the Red Sox won the game.

In my mind, the two words "no problem" is tinged by Shank sarcasm. Perhaps I am too jaded by Shank's continued negative vibes?

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Dan writes about Nomar's return to Fenway last night. Dan reminds us of how beloved Nomar was before it all went south. Dan says "He bled for this team for eight seasons."

I am surprised Dan gives Nomar eight seasons of credit because wasn't it old Dan who said that Nomar had to go? Wasn't it Dan who was leading the "Get Nomar out of here" bandwagon because Nomar had quit on the team in the bitter end? But, now good ole Dan is actually hinting that a reunion between the Sox and Nomar would be a good idea? As much as I think that a reunion would be kind of cool, it is disingenuous for Dan to be the one to suggest it. I imagine it is akin to a friend of a married couple who is pushing for the couple to get divorced only to say a couple years later, "You guys should get together. You would make a great couple."

Dan, you are truly an idiot.

Pathetic., just pathetic

Dan is blind. He is blinded by ignorance; he is blinded by laziness; he is blinded by his bitter contempt for professional athletes. His work on Manny Ramirez is pathetic, today's piece is particular rubbish.

(Disclaimer: I am not here to defend Manny Ramirez. Manny is a cheat and there seems to be a consensus that he quit on the Red Sox. I am not arguing this. I am appalled, however, at Dan's analysis of the whole situation.)

For what seems the 100th time, Dan lashes out at Manny. He lashes out at the softball media in LA. And he lashes out the ignorant fans who cheer Manny on. This has been a recurring theme. For some reason, Dan traveled to LA last month and forecasted that the fans would be cheering Manny on. Low and behold, Dan was right! Now he is back in southern California to recertify his contempt for Manny and the baseball universe.

Given all this, Dan concludes "Nobody cares about steroids." His statement is not qualified or caveated. Dan takes one sample of behavior, extrapolates it across the entire universe, and concludes that this sample represents everything. This is thin analysis. But this is Shaughnessy analysis. It is reckless and lazy journalism.

For once, why can't Shaughnessy move past his venom? Perform some analysis. Is it really the case that "Nobody cares about steroids?" Barry Bonds did not see a lot of love outside of northern California, did he? ARod is sure not receiving the adulation of the masses. Couldn't Shaughnessy simply look at those two cases and then conclude that "Everyone cares about steroids." That would be about as fair of an assessment as his conclusion from looking at Manny that no one cares.

Some analysis, Dan, please? What is different about Manny? Is it strictly his goofy personality? Is it the fact that he lives and plays now in Southern California, the hub of superficiality? Is there roid backlash? Has the coverage hit a tipping point where folks are so numb to it now, that they just don't care? There are many angles here but you have explored none of them. You are so blinded by your contempt of Manny and southern California that you are incapable of extricating yourself from it. Instead, we have your lazy conclusion that "And now we know the fans don't care. About steroids"

And now we know (again) that Shaughnessy is incapable.

Of Analysis.

He flew 3000 miles for this?

Seriously?

The Globe, ever mindful in these tough economic times, sent the obsessive one to San Diego to cover Manny's return. Shaughnessy says it was a circus. Does he realize he is the clown? He strings together quote after quote; throws a John Lennon reference in for good measure and calls it a day. Hope the Globe gets a good return.

Lou Gehrig's Disease

Somehow I missed Dan's nice column yesterday about MLB's efforts to raise funds for research on ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease. Shaughnessy provides a very nice summary of the disease, Lou Gehrig's struggles and eventual death, and a look at this weekend's efforts at major league ballparks to raise funds.

It is a good effort. Two quibbles - he repeats the "luckiest man on the face of the earth" twice but in the earlier online editions, one of the lines said "this earth". Looks like it has since been corrected. He also acknowledges Schilling's efforts with respect to this disease but for some reason he feels compelled to introduce Schilling's political orientation into it. Just did not think that was necessary.

Happy 4th. Let's see if Shaughnessy delivers fireworks this weekend. If the Celtics sign Rasheed Wallace, he may have a new favorite target?