Can We Bury David Ortiz?

Seriously, can we?

Here’s a guy who went from looking like this when he was with the Twins:

david%20ortiz-small

and hitting 10, 18, and 20 homers at ages 24, 25 and 26 (2000-2002), to looking like this with the Red Sox:

04WSeriesGame1OrtizDavid_small

and hitting 31, 37, 41 and 54!!!! homers at ages 27, 28, 29 and 30 (2003-2006).

As if that’s not enough, he hasn’t hit a single home run yet this season.

Look, I’m not saying this because I think he’s the only one.  Far from it.  But on the heels of Manny’s admission and suspension, and this article by Bill Simmons, who is a HUGE Red Sox fan, can we please acknowledge that the Red Sox are just as tainted as anyone else, including the Yankees, and that all the BS Yankee hating was totally unfairly focused on one team, and the fact that the Mitchell Report focused mainly on Yankees and somehow left out all the Red Sox is a little more than curious?  Can we?  Thanks.

Advertisements

10 responses to “Can We Bury David Ortiz?

  1. Every team has some players who took PEDs.

    For some players, there’s documented proof. For other players, there are rumors.

    The Yankees had at least 10 players from the 2000 team, to use that year as an example, with documented cases of use of PEDs. Plus plenty of rumors of others throughout the years. The Red Sox (and other teams) have fewer documented cases, but also had plenty of rumors.

    Other teams also have players who took PEDs. But the Yankees had the most.

    It’s just like the money argument: Yes, other teams also have money. But the Yankees have the most.

    In the end, all teams had players with PEDs. But as a matter of degrees, the Yankees had more. And while teams with less money than the Yankees can also win the World Series, as a matter of degrees, the Yankees — with more money — have had a disproportionate amount of success.

    So no, you can’t acknowledge that the Red Sox are “just as tainted as everyone else” any more than you can say that money doesn’t really play a role in on-the-field success.

  2. BS – complete and total BS conjecture. How in the world can you assert, with what seems to be some certainty, that the Yankees had more juicers than other teams? You have absolutely no idea.

    And when one teams success is built in large part on “the greatest 1-2 punch ever” or whatever people called Manny/Ortiz, it certainly matters who those players are, not just the numbers.

  3. And your example of the 2000 Yanks? Way to cherry pick.

    And your “10” is actually 9, with such luminous names as Jason Grimsley, Glenallen Hill, Denny Neagle, Jose Canseco (picked up off the waiver scrap heap, he played in 37 games with the Yankees that year), Chuck Knoblauch (who in that year hit 5 homers, and was 1 year away from playing Left Field in KC).

    So, please, a little perspective on your completely ridiculous argument, not to mention the totally insane analogy to money.

  4. Yes, yes, and yes!

  5. (I was not answering any question in particular, I was just agreeing with the post in general. Three times.)

  6. Oh, and one more thing:

    can we retroactively take back all the “Theo Epstein is a Genius” bull for getting Ortiz on the cheap? yeah, he sucked, you signed him for nothing, he took roids and became a slugger. Very genius-y.

  7. What is conjecture about “documented cases”? It was documented. The Yankees have more documented cases than other teams… and that’s a fact. If I’m citing documentation, isn’t that the opposite of conjecture?

    The Yankees have more documented cases than other teams. I’m sorry that that fact bothers Yankee fans. The Yankees also have more money than other teams. Are you suggesting that the money doesn’t really help the Yankees?

  8. If I’m citing documentation, isn’t that the opposite of conjecture?

    Ah, but that isn’t what you said.

    You said the Yankees have more documented cases, and then shifted to using that to prove that the Yankees have more PED players overall. Not a safe jump.

    In fact, you said twice:

    Other teams also have players who took PEDs. But the Yankees had the most.

    In the end, all teams had players with PEDs. But as a matter of degrees, the Yankees had more.

    No. As you said, they had the most cases documented in a flawed document that extremely limited in scope.

    So, sorry, your argument fails spectacularly. There is no way to suggest, nor any rational, sustainable reason to think, that the Yankees were any more involved in PEDs than any other team.

    And that, by the way, was the point of the post. Notwithstanding the Mitchell report, I was pointing out that the Red Sox were just as tainted as the other team, without needing “documented cases” from a weak, flawed “report” to back me up.

  9. If I’m citing documentation, isn’t that the opposite of conjecture?

    Ah, but that isn’t what you said.

    You said the Yankees have more documented cases, and then shifted to using that to prove that the Yankees have more PED players overall. Not a safe jump.

    In fact, you said twice:

    Other teams also have players who took PEDs. But the Yankees had the most.

    In the end, all teams had players with PEDs. But as a matter of degrees, the Yankees had more.

    No. As you said, they had the most cases documented in a flawed document that extremely limited in scope.

    So, sorry, your argument fails spectacularly. There is no way to suggest, nor any rational, sustainable reason to think, that the Yankees were any more involved in PEDs than any other team.

    And that, by the way, was the point of the post. Notwithstanding the Mitchell report, I was pointing out that the Red Sox were just as tainted as the other team, without needing “documented cases” from a weak, flawed “report” to back me up.

    Wrong.

  10. Pingback: Yeah, I Was Right | The Noy G Show

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s