May 5, 2013; Arlington, TX, USA; Boston Red Sox designated hitter David Ortiz (34) follows through on his home run swing against the Texas Rangers during the first inning at the Rangers Ballpark in Arlington. Mandatory Credit: Jim Cowsert-USA TODAY Sports

Counterpoint: Shaughnessy Was Over The Top With Ortiz Article


Yesterday, my colleague, Steve Peterson, wrote an article saying that Boston Globe columnist Dan Shaughnessy’s latest rehash of unfounded steroid allegations against Red Sox slugger David Ortiz was fair but that the reactions to it were hysterical and over the top.

I respectfully disagree.  I think the Globe article was uncalled for and unnecessary because there really isn’t a whole lot of new news value to it.  It’s simply trying to sell newspapers.

Consider the source here.  Shaughnessy has a history as a negative hack in the Boston media who doesn’t put a whole lot of imagination into his columns.  Go back and look at his Globe archive about the Red Sox or any of the Boston sports teams.  I think you will find an overall theme of negativity in his writing.  In my opinion, this latest escapade is classic Shaughnessy and both Ortiz and the fans have a right to be annoyed.

The question that I think gives them that right centers on what evidence is there that Ortiz is enhancing his performance during his hot start since coming off the DL?  Is there a particular source saying this?  I believe the answer is no because Shaughnessy didn’t name anyone in the piece, not even an anonymous.  And how about Ortiz’ 0-14 that followed the hot start?  Is he now cycling off?

Shaughnessy simply rehashes the ol’ PED accusation column and then claims he’s just doing his job by asking the questions fans and media everywhere are supposedly asking about Ortiz.

Look, I know bad news sells newspapers more than good news.  I get that.  But for Shaughnessy to back Ortiz into a corner and start asking him about supposed rumors that are going around baseball about his PED use is a joke.  Show me where these rumors are and attribute them to somebody.

And don’t give me the alleged Ortiz positive test in 2003 and the steroid list with 103 names on it. That has already been dealt with and reported on.  It’s ancient history.  We all know Ortiz has probably done something in the past.  I’m not trying to defend him.  After all, I’m not blind to the ugliness of baseball’s steroid era.

But, if you want a good story go find the list, release it, find Ortiz on it and then you have a reason to bring all of this up in the present day.  Until then, give it a rest, please.

Ortiz is right about one thing:  with the Boston media you really are damned if you do and damned if you don’t produce the numbers on the field.

Shaughnessy has the First Amendment right to publish anything he’d like as long as he is prepared to deal with any consequences that may come along.  But that’s not the issue here.

My problem is that there’s nothing new here to discuss.  Again, we’ve been down the PED road for years with Ortiz and it’s time to move on to another topic unless and until this one becomes relevant again.

Throwing out baseless accusations in Ortiz’ face is unprofessional and lazy on Shaughnessy’s part.  He should know better.

 

Tags: Boston Red Sox David Ortiz

  • $6101468

    Past history (always relevant), performance and the Dominican connection are all in play. Players have been suspended in this organization and others so the issue continues to be of importance. The use of PED’s continues to be one of getting the right mixture to avoid detection. I applaud “Big Red” for bringing this issue up and if I recall wasn’t Papi interviewed on this? Now we have Papi in defensive mode.

    • Paul Prims

      And the point is what? The issue can be brought up again when the list of 103 is released or other plausible evidence arises. Until then, why bother?

      • $6101468

        The point is exactly what I stated. Did you miss that? I’ll try again….there is a questionable history with Ortiz. Why bother? I guess that means (a) you approve of the use of PED’s and (b) you are defensive about the possibility Ortiz may be using them.

        • Paul Prims

          I’m not defending Ortiz. If there are goods to be gotten here, then suspend him. I don’t necessarily approve of PED use. The fact is that I just don’t care. The owners and union didn’t seem to care about tackling this problem until only recently so why should I care. To me, all players are under suspicion and it’s not going to ruin my enjoyment of the sport one bit. Sorry if you don’t agree and absolutely need to know who’s clean and who’s not but that’s been my stance on steroids from day one. Watch my web show and you’ll see I’ve always said as much.

    • John Fahrer

      That curly haired tool always likes to start controversy though. And his little mythological best seller about a supernatural jinx is historically inaccurate when he recalled the story of the sale.

      He also failed to cite Damon’s May of 2005 interview in his article where he ripped Sox fans for being the reason Damon vetoed a potential return in 2010.

      Shaughnessy hates the Sox at heart. He should just come out and admit it already. Then we can trade him to the New York Post for Joel Sherman.

  • $6101468

    So, John, your issue is “The curly haired tool?” My issue is Papi. Is the discussion legitimate based on past and current history? You bet. Here it is in a nutshell – the dynamic duo that lead the Sox in 2004/07 were probably juiced to the gills and one has already been suspended (twice) and just maybe Papi will join him.

    The author in question actually is quite gifted with many rewards. I may not agree with him but he is certainly interesting.

    • Paul Prims

      The author is quite gifted? That’s a laugh. Except for this piece that I came across by accident, I stopped reading him long ago. Sports is supposed to be positive not always negative as he seems to see things.

      • Rick M

        Your assumption is he dwells on the negative? Obviously your exposure to his writing is quite limited so I would suggest you actually expand you view to encompass “Senior Year” a wonderful book. I would say his book “Francona” was a wonderful read and quite meticulous.

        The real issue is that Shaughnessy actually is capable of viewing some issues such as potential PED use from a objective view point and avoiding the parochialism so prevalent in RSN. What he wrote about was legitimate. Maybe you have been viewing The Dan Shaughnessy Watch blog too much?

        • John Fahrer

          So does Shaughnessy’s assumptions.

          Francona was a good read thanks to Francona providing actual facts of his job. Had Shaughnessy written it alone, he would’ve put some supernatural crap in it.

          Read Red Sox Century’s recount of the Ruth Sale. Then compare it to Shaughnessy’s terrible recollection in his BS book from the early 90s.

        • John Fahrer

          My biggest problem with the article is that he doesn’t cite anything, just makes assumptions.

          He is objective, but his little book from the early 90s takes away a ton of credibility. I also really resent his hatchet piece from 2010 when he blamed Sox fans for Damon nixing a return without citing the reason why Sox fans booed him in the first place (signing with NY after giving that interview in May of 05). Also would’ve been nice to cite that the heat on Damon cooled down considerably after the 07 WS.

    • John Fahrer

      Shaughnessy didn’t cite any numbers in that article to back up his claim, he just made an accusation for the sake of making an accusation.

      Manny was suspended after he left Boston. But there’s a good chance he was taking stuff while in uniform or maybe he just decided to get a little help late in his career when he started to slip after 08. And everybody was on stuff in 04 and 07, even that choking Yankees team who had Miguel Cairo as a regular 2B, Tony Clark becoming relevant again as a backup, and Sheffield in RF.

      Shaughnessy’s a gifted hack. His only relevant title is the most hated journalist in New England.

      I’m sick of people accusing a guy of steroid use just because he’s still good at his job at an older age. It’s not like Ortiz is on pace for 80 home runs or anything. He’s gotten leaner in recent years. There’s a really good chance he’s maintaining above-average productivity just by taking better care of himself.

  • Felicia Fitzgerald

    Shaughnessy is not a good journalist. Maybe he was in the distant past. But those days are long gone and he hasn’t been creative or objective since the turn of the century.

    He has become the ultimate bandwagon-on-hopper. He trashes teams and players without mercy until they produce and/or win. Then he acts as if he’s the biggest fan on the earth.

    BTW: People bringing up the so-called “Dominican Connection” to PEDs are only exposing themselves as racist and/or thoughtless.