Wear It! It's time to apologize to Urban.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 7:59 PM PDT
81 comments
I think everyone on AN, including myself, owes Mychael Urban an apology. At least, for his Milton Bradley "tired act" article. I liked Bradley. I think most ANer's did. But, Urban told it like it was and was raked over the coals here at Athletics Nation.
I have it on relatively good authority that this had nothing to do with overcrowding in the outfield, or accelerating trade negotiations, or keeping Dan Johnson at 1st base. Please... I am probably one of the few DJ supporters on this site, but even I don't believe that one.
It was strictly a "dump Milton" move. He'd worn out his welcome. Urban was right. He got to be a tired act. I'm sure Mychael is privately saying "FU AN! I told ya so." Well, Mychael, you were right, I was wrong. And, IMO, so was most of AN.
I'm sure Billy made this move because he feels he has other options now. But, let's face it, he's going to get very little in return for Bradley. And, he really doesn't care.
Edit (in order to enhance my "tired act" status):
Byrnes AVG OBP SLG OPS HR
Season .318 .370 .514 .884 11
June .355 .383 .500 .883 3
So much for your hoped-for June swoon. ;-)
0 recs |
81 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I'm getting a lttle old, and maybe suffering from
Alzheimers, and I don't remember well anymore,but wasn't that article last year?
by theblackpearl on Jun 21, 2007 8:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
yes, i'm sure MU is amazed Milton lasted...
this long. Sure, he would have been more soundly vindicated if this had happened last year. Nevertheless... it finally happened.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bollocks to that.
Urban wrote something that was wrong. Bradley wASn't moved because he's emotional, he was moved because he's broken down and we have a glut of competitors for his spot and he has no years left on his contract.
That he was DFAed because Beane was worried about his reaction changes nothing. More or less the same thing happened to Piazza a few days ago.
by Ozzz on Jun 22, 2007 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Give me a break
If Milton was a tired act last year, he would have been shipped out this off-season.
Clearly, something came up that wasn't there before.
by SeanR on Jun 21, 2007 8:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I never doubted there was some
truth to Urban's article, ie he didn't just make it up.
But calling out one of the A's best players (in a pathetic and disgusting attempt to use his A's access for the benefit of his career) using unnamed sources deserves the permanent ire of A's fans.
It is obvious from his mlb.com articles that Urban is a hack. The Bradley article made clear that he is a chickenshit hack.
by mikeA on Jun 21, 2007 8:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I demand that this comment be deleted.
by salb918 on Jun 21, 2007 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure whether salb's
by Nico on Jun 21, 2007 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In jest.
mikeA's comment isn't a personal insult. He's calling Urban a hack - not a very good writer, which is plainly obvious. He's also calling Urban a coward, inasmuch as it relates to his reporting, which is also fair criticism. I don't see any of it as a personal insult to anything except his skills as a journalist. The only way to see more is if you want to see more. Urban's just gotta wear it.
by salb918 on Jun 21, 2007 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sal Jr.
will be receiving a gift from Uncle Mike.
by mikeA on Jun 21, 2007 8:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right on the money
I'm all for civility too...it's one of the ways AN is better than 100s of other sports sites. But critique of a meaningful figure in the A's sphere, based on what he writes, is easily within bounds no matter how cutting it may be. Like, saying Larry Davis is a fat slob is out of bounds and not cool. Saying he's an incompetent waste of bench space is legit...even if incorrect. Which it isn't.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jun 21, 2007 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. Definitely not cool
by Nico on Jun 21, 2007 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My money is on "in jest"
$100 LOL
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here is how I see it, Nico
Media figures are fair game. Urban is bad at his job and has conflicts of interest besides. That is fair game for an A's blog.
Many have commented that Vince C. is similarly bad at his job, even sometimes in the form of "attacks." Also fair game.
Urban went out of his way to undercut the team with that article, and if I can't "attack" him (as a generally very polite poster as regular users would agree) for that than what am I doing here?
by mikeA on Jun 21, 2007 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't mean my comment
In other words, I find Vince C's descriptive style to be inadequate for the standards of Bay Area baseball, but I would still bristle if someone chose to say--on a site he may well read, no less--"The guy's pathetic."
But sorry; I didn't mean for my comment to be directed at you personally.
by Nico on Jun 21, 2007 9:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see
I don't see a big difference between criticizing the players' performance and the media's.
"but I never really like seeing pot shots taken at people when the criticism itself can stand on its own."
You went on and on on opening night about how Crosby made the costly error because he's a choker and always has been. Calling him a choker in the field is just absurd, and for that reason much worse than "the guy's pathetic." How do you know Crosby doesn't read that nonsense?
You take incessant pot-shots at the medical/training staff and you are something of an opinion former. You once indicated that there is reason the training staff might retained in spite of incompetence. I have no reason to disbelieve that.
However, I will issue you the same challenge as I did monkeyball: Provide me with actual evidence that the training/medical staff conducts itself appreciably differently than the other MLB staffs.
I can read Urban's columns and tell for sure that he is a hack, certainly compared to Slusser. Without evidence, you cannot tell me that the medical/training staff is incompetent or that Crosby's infrequent erros are due to choking.
by mikeA on Jun 21, 2007 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Regarding Crosby,
And I'm not worried about Crosby reading AN because I have no reason to believe his eyes are good enough.
So I think that pretty much proves my defense "beyond a reasonable gout". And by overlooking the question about the training staff, I feel I have sufficiently stalled to where the statute of limitations must have expired.
Damn, I'm good!
by Nico on Jun 21, 2007 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nico is drunk
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stop telling everyone my password!
by Nico on Jun 21, 2007 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
heh, that is a good response
Your posts are consistently funny. Don't mean to pick a fight, but I seem to disagree with you a lot lateley.
If you or monkeyball ever see fit to justify your posts re: the training staff, I'll be all ears. And I won't accuse you of incivility!
by mikeA on Jun 21, 2007 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm actually not of the opinion ...
... that the training staff is incompetent per se: I think they're probably right around the MLB median. (If you want to provide evidence that they're above it, be my guest; I think they did do a good job managing Thomas, but his was a unique situation where they could make demands on him that they couldn't of any other player -- and he was willing to meet them.)
What I don't understand is why Beane -- especially when he's been stockpiling fragile players (and seeing his previously non-fragile players become more and more so) the last 3-4 years -- would tolerate replacement-level medical/training staff. Does he tolerate replacement-level scouts, sabermetricians, or actuaries? I don't think so.
by monkeyball on Jun 21, 2007 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aha!
They're right around the MLB median, you say. Therefore, they're not to blame for the abnormal level of injuries. Yet you blame them anyway! I'm all for Beane investing (to some degree)in innovative training/"health maintenance" techniques. I just thought it was silly to blame the training staff for the injuries that past two years. I have no evidence that they're better than average or worse than average, and neither do you. That is not the explanation for the spate of injuries (or in the unlikely event that it is, there is no way for us to know.)
Also: I think he probably does tolerate replacement-level scouts because it is difficult to judge the quality of scouts.
His actuaries have tallied precisely 10 more wins in Oakland for Harden.
by mikeA on Jun 22, 2007 12:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
now you're fudging
"Wins," with Harden coming out of the pen and with DiNardo, Kennedy, and Gaudin losing luster and durability, might be easy to vulture.
Starts or saves. No more than 10 of either.
by monkeyball on Jun 22, 2007 12:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My mistake
but surely he'll get to 10 starts/saves before 10 wins/saves. I withdraw my unintentional talon.
by mikeA on Jun 22, 2007 12:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK MikeA, here's my serious reply
Some specifics like:
* Dan Meyer, allowed to continue pitching in March, 2005, when his fastball was topping out at 85MPH but he said "I'm fine".
* Bradley and Swisher both allowed to come back from hamstring injuries sooner than I've ever known it to be a good risk.
But it's more the general stuff:
* Harden, Crosby, and Chavez all attributing injuries to "more, more, more!" weight-lifting programs.
* Larry Davis' public scoffing at acupuncture and chiropractic care, coming across as an "old school" guy who isn't a life-long learner, but just "does what he knows" even if his belief systems are a generation behind.
* Players consistently going around A's personnel not just for second opinions, but also for treatment, because they don't trust their own staff.
* A fear that Davis/Cockrell are "untouchable," which could mean that the A's know they are not competent but won't act on it.
by Nico on Jun 22, 2007 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can always tell it's you immediately, FSU
Uh, whoops.
by monkeyball on Jun 22, 2007 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
consistently going around Larry is a good workout
by monkeyball on Jun 22, 2007 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some of those are good points
and they raise reasonable suspicions. I still have the problems that 1)you are making these judgments on very little information, ie the scraps of info thrown to the media, and 2)There's not much evidence there that the training staff handles things very much differently than other clubs. I'm not sure the coming back from hamstring injuries thing is true, lots of guys on lots of clubs lift weights (and it's not clear that Harden etc. were doing all that weightlifting at the club's behest), and just generally players are allowed to play hurt if they want to all the time, however bad an idea it may be.
by mikeA on Jun 22, 2007 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Welcome to fanworld and blogworld,
'Tis nature of beast.
by Nico on Jun 22, 2007 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True
and you at least attempt to use some facts in your criticisms (as opposed to certain other primates). In the original context of "personal attacks" however, my criticisms of Urban are on sound footing because his hackery leaps off the page, whereas your attacks on Davis are far more speculative.
by mikeA on Jun 22, 2007 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose one could say
by Nico on Jun 22, 2007 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh, please
You know precisely as much about what went on in the background of Urban's column as I do about what Larry Davis hides in his fanny pack.
I want you to demonstrate some facts to me regarding the specific manner in which Urban researches his pieces and works his sources, and how that falls below the median practices of other beat writers.
by monkeyball on Jun 23, 2007 2:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Milton always seemed to have support
from his teammates, to the extent that they wrote "Tired Act" in the clubhouse mocking Urban to show their support of Milton.
In every way I can judge the situation of the team and Milton, I can’t help but still see Urban’s article as being way off base; maybe if he had any sort of support to his allegations I would feel differently. And maybe this now is the support to his claims, but there still seems a wide divide between his assertions from back then and the unclear state of affairs surrounding Milton’s DFA.
by F171615 on Jun 21, 2007 8:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The plight of a beat writer
It's been a while since I read Urban's column, and I can neither defend nor or refute everything in it.
But the bottom line is that baseball beat writers must tread a fine line in covering a team. They need access but can't simply be lackeys for the team's players or the team's management.
Nobody in baseball, who wants the respect of their peers, is going to slam a teammate or one of his players on the record. Billy Beane is already spinning absurd tales to try to explain away why he would dump his best outfielder. I would expect nothing less. Beane is trying to get something for Bradley, and it's not in his interest to trash him anyway. His teammates will keep quiet too, for now anyway and maybe forever.
If memory serves, Urban wrote his article last summer. On the first day of this summer, Bradley was thrown off the team. (No, we don't know the real reason, but the only rational explanation is that he had some sort of emotional meltdown/temper tantrum.)
I suppose one can make the argument that the criticisms were all filthy lies last year, but true now. That sounds implausible, though.
But Urban's job is to find out what's going on, and to let his readers know. He's the first and only writer to suggest that Bradley's temperament was grating on some of his teammates (and perhaps on management too). He was apparently right.
The fact that we, as A's fans, don't want to read it doesn't mean it is not true. I say this as someone who is unhappy about Bradley's departure, because I liked his fire on the field and the talent he possesses. The A's don't usually get five-tool outfielders in the prime of their careers. They had one in Bradley. Now they don't.
by bear88 on Jun 21, 2007 8:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
very well put...
and, it only enhances my respect for bear88 as one of the very best and most balanced posters on AN.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, if I weren't drunk
<falls over>
by Nico on Jun 21, 2007 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except he's wrong.
His entire post is based on the presumption that Bradley was cut because he wasn't getting on with people.
And nobody has shown me any evidence, nor quotes, nor even unnamed sources that concur with that theory.
Bradley is certain a five-tool outfielder. The problem is, three of those tools are broken, and his contract is up.
Period.
by Ozzz on Jun 22, 2007 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can you provide me with
an instance ever where a quality player has been DFA'd in the last year of his contract?
Injuries as the reason just does not make an ounce of sense.
by mikeA on Jun 22, 2007 12:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It makes PERFECT sense.
He thinks, who do I cut? The hot new DH? The lights out CF who just got his back sorted? The new guys, who were all hitting great before they got injured and will be under club control for several seasons?
Or the always injured OF who is in the last months of his contract and has only taken swings 65 times this year?
I actually think it makes perfect sense. Take emotion out of it, and Bradley was a non-performer for us this season, has zero trade value, and has to be moved now if we're going to have time to get his replacement ready.
by Ozzz on Jun 22, 2007 11:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, Oz...
I like ya... I normally agree with you. I can't show you the quotes. But, you're just wrong this time.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 22, 2007 12:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Prove it, dude.
by Ozzz on Jun 22, 2007 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha...
that's funny.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 23, 2007 12:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and it remains true.
Other than one 'tired act' article full of unnamed sources, which the players duly mocked in the locker room the following day.
by Ozzz on Jun 25, 2007 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boolshit
As soon as he got that side gig with the Examiner (because, apparently, the Payless couponbook couldn't spare the inches) Urban started staking out a edgy/hostile shtick with which to plot his climb up the media hierarchy. It's pretty clear to me that the Bradley slam was explicitly an audition for the job he now holds with KNBR. So he used Milton and his A's sources to springboard himself into the role of copycat to hundreds of TV/radio hollerin' windbags before him.
Subsequent "reportage" has of course borne this out, as he figuratively threw at Henry Aaron and (wished he could) literally have thrown at Travis Buck. So if Milton's demise now "proves" Urban was right a year ago, then I suggest that Urban's Cold Pizza wannabe fomenting tough guy act now "proves" he was plotting the ascent-by-dickheadishness career track a year ago too.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jun 21, 2007 9:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wow--and this is all in the
by Nico on Jun 21, 2007 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're forgetting
that the original Über Urban criticism diary was, in fact, a positive one along the lines of "Gosh, we're losing Urban to the Giants, that sucks, he's cool." The mob chimed in otherwise. Still, the original pro-urban tone didn't spare it from the guillotine.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jun 21, 2007 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow, he's way smarter and more machiavellian...
than, I ever gave him credit for. But, of course, you think moving to Fremont is a vast conspiracy, FSU, so I'm discounting your analysis.
Or, maybe I just don't think Mychael's that smart.
I'm undecided. I'm going to post a new poll.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 9:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
re: Machiavelli
I wouldn't say that it's particularly Machiavellian to nkow who you want to work for and then try to tailor your abilities or image to match that. It's only like, one step from here to there.
I mean, if he wrote the "Tired Act" piece just to piss off Milton so that later on, Milton would attack him, just so Mychael could beat him up in order to get an opening into the WWF so that he could rile up all the rednecks from flyover land to storm the capital buildings and take over the country. That'd be Machiavellian.
by hunter on Jun 22, 2007 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your wisdom is unsurpassed.
by mikeA on Jun 21, 2007 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Aaron thing continues to rankle ...
... especially after MU came into a prior thread late to say that he still expects Aaron to attend the 756th, if/as/when. Unstated in that post was his continuing belief that it is professional jealousy that would keep him away. That suggests a profound level of "not-getting-it" wrt Barry Lamar.
No. Mychael, and HELL No. Aaron deserves way better.
by The Dogfather on Jun 22, 2007 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
when is urban going to critize barry bonds
for being a total asshole?
pretty much everyone agrees bradley is a nice guy, he just has anger management issues. bonds is a piece of shit 24/7, and certainly no less hated by teammates than bradley has ever been when at his worst.
i won't hold my breath.
by xbhaskarx on Jun 21, 2007 9:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
But Bonds hits
(I do a mean rebuttal.)
by Nico on Jun 21, 2007 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but, he certainly wouldn't be alone in doing that
even Radnich steps tentatively over that line. Not enough, of course, to get himself in trouble with the flagship, but...
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
does KRON have a flagshop?
It seems that they pretty much let Radnich go wherever he wants, even when it obviously makes his coworkoers uncomfortable, and no matter how inappropriate....
by gigglingone on Jun 21, 2007 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
flagshop = flagship
gigglingone is tired. no act.
by gigglingone on Jun 21, 2007 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought maybe you wanted to buy a KRON flag.
by Poppy on Jun 22, 2007 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
KRON let's him do whatever he wants...
because nobody watches, anyway. I think even he agrees with that.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm still of the opinion that ...
... Urban was basically set up by Kotsay his unnamed source(s) last year -- either intentionally, semi-intentionally, or unintentionally. (My guess is that after the column appeared, "a team source" spoke directly to the leaky player and told him to can it with the chatter to Urban.)
A column like Urban's doesn't spring out of the writer's head unbidden, especially for someone such as Urban who still had to maintain professional relationships with the A's, organizationally and individually. Of course, once he was burned by his source(s), Urban was powerless, because he couldn't, by his professional code, "burn" the source(s).
by monkeyball on Jun 21, 2007 11:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
my guess...
intentionally, semi-intentionally, or unintentionally...
Okay, you distracted me, momentarily.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 21, 2007 11:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so, are you defending Kotsay?
And saying that he played Urban? Wouldn't those two positions somewhat undermine, respectively, Byrnes Uber Alles and this diary's thesis?
"Semi-intentionally" would be my guess: he went bitching to Urban (likely, not for the first time, knowing he'd get a responsive ear) hoping maybe to grease the skids for Milton, but also aware that he stood no real risk in doing so, and both that Urban's column would be organizationally disavowed and that he himself could write the "tired act" on the wall and be seen as a good team player after receiving the collegial slap on the wrist from Beane.
Or is that what you presumed I meant by "intentionally"? (I meant out-and-out lying to Urban, with the intent of specifically embarrassing him.)
by monkeyball on Jun 22, 2007 12:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
defending Kotsay?
I guess I misinterpreted what you meant by "intentionally." He had every intention of harming Milton. He didn't care if Urban was embarrassed or not.
I give Kotsay lots more credit than Urban for being Machiavellian.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 22, 2007 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but, now, I'm thinking he told the truth...
so, maybe, it wasn't so much of a set-up. But, he was a malicious prick, nevertheless. So, I can still hate him.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 22, 2007 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Get out your tinfoil hat...
and tell us some more conspiracy theories you've dreamed up.
by McFood on Jun 22, 2007 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chris Daly snorts coke ...
... while wearing a Gavin Newsom mask.
by monkeyball on Jun 22, 2007 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whoa
What diabolical schemes might you have attributed to the Scottisch Player? That trade is looking worse and worse.
by mikeA on Jun 22, 2007 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
nah, not Marcus -- but his *wife* ...
by monkeyball on Jun 22, 2007 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's a major stretch.
Every week of my life as a writer, I've heard a bit of information that would make a great story, but then the shutters come down and nobody will put their name to it.
The big question then is, do I spike the story or run with the 'unnmaed sources' schtick?
Since I'm a journalist and not a gossip columnist, I spike anything I can't back up.
Clearly Urban doesn't/didn't have the same set of internal guidelines.
by Ozzz on Jun 22, 2007 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
depends how hard the story's sold
Your dependable source is adamant, he says, "Don't believe me? Go ask anyone else." Of course, if "you" are Urban, your dependable source knows pretty much which 3 or 4 guys will constitute "anyone else," so he knows he'll have you hook, line, and sinker.
Urban's always said "sources," which from his perspective puts him in the clear -- no matter the motivation or backstory of the sourcing.
by monkeyball on Jun 22, 2007 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but it doesn't put him in the clear at all.
If you can't name that source, you're engaging in gossip - right or wrong.
And as time showed, Milton's 'tired act' wasn't so tired in the eyes of his teammates after all.
by Ozzz on Jun 22, 2007 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oz...
Billy DFA'ed the guy, knowing he wasn't going to get diddly in a trade. Billy doesn't do that unless the situation is intolerable. Connect the dots.
I have to admit, your theory is superficially plausible, but only if you think BB couldn't trade Bradley before the impending "roster crunch" caught him by surprise. It didn't. Hell, I could've traded Bradley for Nunez before I DFA'ed him!
Billy DFA'ed Milton knowing full well that he might have to eat his salary. And, now, it looks like Bradley has out-maneuvered Beane by feigning an ouchie. Oh well... Beane didn't care. He wanted Milton gone.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 23, 2007 12:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh, and my point to all of this...
just because you (and, most of AN, including myself) were unsatisfied with Urban reporting what was apparently the truth about Milton doesn't mean it wasn't true.
No journalist reveals his or her sources unless authorized. And, if citing specific instances would be tantamount to revealing a source, they don't do that, either.
by FoolshGame22 on Jun 23, 2007 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here you go again..
And that's the problem with the article - it brought NOTHING to the table other than anonymous heresay.
by Ozzz on Jun 25, 2007 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
horseshit, Oz
I think that contemporary journalists are overreliant on anonymice, and bend themselves into pretzels to justify their continued reliance. And the pretzel logic leads to a lot of obfuscation and arcana. And it's usually deployed for score-settling rather than out of real risk to the leaker.
But there are professional principles involved, and a level of professional trust among the writer, his/her editors, his/her subjects/sources, and his/her audience. And Urban didn't just say "some random person," he said multiple players on the team -- which limits it to 24 (or perhaps 39) individuals.
And while I think that every journalist who's burned by an anonymouse like Urban was should return the favor and name the source, I do also think that there is an admirable principle involved where Urban gave the players his word, and despite the players breaking their word, Urban held true to his.
by monkeyball on Jun 23, 2007 2:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All of which is aboslute conjecture.
But you don't KNOW. A good article would have fixed that little side problem by ensuring you DID know.
by Ozzz on Jun 25, 2007 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a little late getting into this
and it looks like the usual crowd (mikeA, sal, FSU, monkeyball) has already nailed this one: the problem was that Urban was unwilling to go on the record with specifics about either who was doing the complaining or what they were complaining about.
Kotsay complaining about something vague could conceivably constitute news. An anonymous source complaining about something specific could constitute news. But an article consisting of anonymous complaints about unnamed actions is just poor journalism.
Bottom line: I still think Urban is a hack and the Bradley hit-piece remains the most hacktastic bit of hackery in his hackeriffic career.
by andeux on Jun 22, 2007 10:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hack, hack
bo Back, Bonana fanna fo Fack,
Fee fy mo Mack, URBAN!
by F171615 on Jun 22, 2007 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pssst. Your urban's on hackward.
by McFood on Jun 22, 2007 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
passionate folks
if anybody ever needed evidence about the passion of the fans on this site, they could just search for comments about urban... the MLB.com beat writer for the team!
i personally didn't have a problem with urban's comments about bradley, even though i realy like bradley (cry). i also generally like urban's writing. compared to most mlb.com writers, he's pretty good (though, sadly, i really didn't like his work in Ace's, which i really wanted to love). for my money, though, Alyson Footer, beat writer for the Astros, is the best of the bunch on mlb.com.
by Eric in Atlanta on Jun 22, 2007 11:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
