FIRE JOE MORGAN

Dear Ken Tremendous,

I was on the internet today and happened to read your Open Letter to Theo Epstein. I'd like to talk about that letter, and I apologize to you and anyone else reading that this is going to be boring and unfunny. I blame you.

As far as points 1-4, 7, 8 and 10: as I said from the beginning, I'm leaving it up to Theo as to whether or not the Sox would be better off spending their resources on Bonds. They probably aren't. Bill James has already made a great case for not signing Bonds on a pure baseball-performance level; I don't need Ken Tremendous running the numbers for me when it's already been done by the pros. (Why does anybody read this website anyway?)

I didn't think this was going to be about numbers or even baseball analysis. I also didn't think you were going to call me an asshole.

5. Barry Bonds hated Boston and thought it was racist, before he had ever been there. That seems like a dude you definitely want on your team, which plays in Boston.

I'm fine with it. I'm fine with a guy saying that he didn't want to play in Boston because he thought it was racist, four years ago. I'd be even more fine if that same guy decided to retract his statement, and play in that very same city if it proved to be his only viable option (which again, it won't; this is all hypothetical and pointless).

As I said before in the comments to the original post, I think it might help repair the racist image of the Boston sports world if the Sox signed one of the most high-profile African-American athletes in the country, especially at a time when no one else wanted him. I don't think it would make a big difference, but I certainly don't see the problem. I mean, if you don't like Bonds for calling Boston racist, wouldn't you want to see him admit that he was wrong, put on the Sox uniform, and (hopefully) find out that he was, in fact, at least kind of wrong?

That might be an unlikely scenario, but, within the universe of scenarios wherein Bonds plays for the Red Sox (I'm so bored right now), I submit that it's more unlikely that he would end up saying something like "Man, this place is even more racist than I thought." To be sure, Boston has its problems, but I like to think that (a) the situation is not nearly as bad as Bonds thought it was and (b) he'd be on his best behavior anyway and therefore pretty careful about what he said about his new team's town.

6...Now, I know a lot of guys in professional sports can proudly claim one or more of (a)-(f). But only one has all of them. And you want to put that guy -- that 43 year-old mini-scrotumed douchebag -- on your team?

There are hundreds of guys who are guilty of (a) and (b) (using PEDs and lying about it). Are you certain that none of them played on the 2004 or 2007 Red Sox? (Again, Gagne.)

I'm going to assume that every single baseball player cheats on his wife until proven otherwise, and I don't really care much if a guy cheats on his taxes or buys a house for his mistress (c). I'm not in favor of these things, and I also don't think it speaks very well for him. But I also don't root for my sports teams based on character. I root for the Boston Red Sox, and so do you. Sure, I'd prefer that they sign nothing but dudes who spend every non-baseball-playing-moment volunteering at the Jimmy Fund, but I tend not to worry about this kind of thing.

As far as calling racism everywhere he went (d), yeah, I'm not fond of that neither. But I'd also be willing to bet that he's been the victim of racism more often than you or I. In fact, I give him a pretty long leash on this one...do you think he would have booed so vehemently if he had been white? Hard to say.

As far as the kids thing (e), well, if you're going to lie about using steroids (which again, dozens of players have), you might as well use your kids, right? I give him points for creativity. And skipping a Home Run Derby (f)...you really care about that?

I can't defend everything Bonds has done. My main point is that many of his transgressions have been unnecessarily vilified, or seem worse relative to other players guilty of the same shit, simply because of how good he was, the stage he played on, and, perhaps, his race. None of those things are his fault.

Some people are jerks. Some of these jerks play baseball. Some of these people will end up playing for the team you root for. Would you root for a guy who was guilty of 1 of these a-f things (and surely you've rooted for at least one player who's taken steroids for years)? How about 3? Where do you draw the line?

I say once you're a fan of a team, you've signed up for the absurdity of the whole thing. You can't control who your team signs. You want to root for people you like, sure. But there's so much about these players we don't know, anyway. How sure can you be that Bonds is more of a douchebag than Mike Timlin? How can you even measure that? Why root for one but not the other, if they were wearing the same uniform? Are we still friends?

9. Let me ask you something -- and you too, dak. Is there any part of you...any part at all...that thinks that this would go well:

"Barry?"
"Yeah?"
"Hi. Allow me to introduce myself. I'm Dan Shaughnessey."

You want that? You want what follows that in your clubhouse?

Fuck, I don't care. Part of me thinks these two guys deserve each other. My biggest concern would be that Shaughnessy would garner more attention if he gets to cover the Bonds beat.

Do you want to be the guy who makes a case that this clubhouse atmosphere would adversely affect the performance of the other players? Go ahead, dude. Be my guest. I thought I knew you.

11...With (dak')s logic, there is no crime, no matter how heinous, that a player on your favorite team could commit that would sour a positive result on the playing field.

Of course there are crimes that are so heinous. I would not root for a team of convicted murderers, or players who have been proven to fix or throw games. I don't know how I would feel if this guy turned out to be Curtis Leskanic, but it would certainly wouldn't make me feel great about the Sox '04 Most Awesome Thing Ever.

As you know, I don't think Pete Rose belongs in the hall of fame. I think Barry Bonds does. I also don't really care that much, because almost everything about the Hall of Fame (again, the Hall, not the Museum) is poopyshoes.

Every day Pete Rose passed a sign on the wall explaining to him that anyone who engaged in the exact kind of behavior he was engaging in would be banned from baseball for life. Until 2003, MLB didn't even have a penalty in place for steroid users until 2003. (First time violators faced the near unbearable penalty of...counseling.)

But I just can't fault a guy for taking steroids when there wasn't a penalty for it. I'll take it to the extreme: I still think there's a case to be made that it's worth taking steroids today, in certain dire injury circumstances, and risking the first time 50-game suspension. People have broken the rules in every sport since the day they were invented. In the case of steroids, Bill James' travelling analogy seems worth bringing up (remember when he was on your side of the argument?).

Fortunately, sins of the highest magnitude (incest; game fixing; finding SJP more attractive than Trachtenberg) are weeded out by a combination of the law and MLB policy. Of course, those are the easy calls. The real question for both/all of us: where do you draw the line?

I don't have an answer.

Aaaaaand, I win!

Labels: barry bonds, bill james, michelle trachtenberg, red sox, steroids, theo epstein

This is the second in a series of FJM's Peabody- and MacArthur Genius Grant Award-winning essays on the topic: "Should the Boston Red Sox sign Barry L. Bonds to replace the injured David Ortiz's production in the line-up?" In Vol. 1 of this series, dak argued: "Yes." In order to make things interesting, and because it is the correct answer, I have decided to take the position: "no."

COUNTERPOINT: dak IS A WEIRD AMORAL CONSEQUENTIALIST ASSHOLE*

Dear Mr. Epstein,

First, allow me to apologize for the inappropriate and juvenile way that my friend dak tried to forge a bond with you in his essay. His odd attempts to raise tenuous "connections" with you, based on nothing more than childhood geography and Jewishness was, in a word, embarrassing. I know that you do not stand for that sort of thing, because you and I totally met at the 2003 Hot Stove, Cool Music and talked for several minutes and we're basically best friends, so, again, I apologize, and also let's hang out.

To the matter at hand, though: you shouldn't sign Barry Bonds, even in a theoretical world in which you might be contemplating signing Barry Bonds, which is not this world, because you are not a crazy insane mad man.

Normally on this site, and in my life as a rule, I prefer to use numbers and statistics to back up my points, so let's start there and gradually work our way toward my final point.

dak seems to think signing Barry Bonds is a good idea, for an offensively-needy club like yours. This, as Baruch Spinoza famously said, is fucking insane. Here are like 11 reasons why: (I don't even know if I have 11, but I am so confident I can come up with 11 I'm just going for it):

1. dak suggests that Barry Bonds, who is 43 (that's 78 in "I never took steroids" years), could just waltz onto an MLB 40-man roster, walk 100 times and OBP .480 and hit like 28 HR (pro-rated, I guess). I doubt this. PECOTA's 50% projections had Barry at .233/.387/.462, EqA of .293. That ain't bad, but it's not a .480 OBP and 28 HR.

Now, obviously, this is a dude who has been blowing away 50% PECOTA projections ever since he started using zinc and flaxseed oil, but the fact remains: there isn't a good reason to think that the guy will hold up that well, especially since it turns out that the zinc and flaxseed oil he was using was actually (spoiler alert! stop reading now if you are a simpleton who believes that Barry Bonds never used steroids) Winstrol/Stanozolol, Deca-Durabolin, HGH, The Cream, and The Clear, among other things. Without that kind of zinc and flaxseed oil, this could be one broken-down 43 year-old pituitary case.

2. Bond's VORP was set at 12.1. I think you can probably make up 12.1 runs (pro-rated) by DHing Manny and playing both Crisp and Ellsbury in the OF every day -- those two have to be worth 12 runs of defense over Manny and either of them. Manny is -73 FRAA over the last five years (14+ runs of badness/year). So, already, without doing anything, you are probably better off without Bonds.

3. Barry Bonds hasn't played baseball yet this year.

4. Barry Bonds has never played in the American League.

5. Barry Bonds hated Boston and thought it was racist, before he had ever been there. That seems like a dude you definitely want on your team, which plays in Boston.

6. Let's see...what else...oh -- he is the world's biggest douchebag. Now. I know we're supposed to be objective here, and we're supposed to get all stat-y and rational and everything, but this dude is actually the #1 Douchebag in America, according to a recent study by professors at the College of Excellence. Consider that he (a) has been cheating at baseball for like 10 years and (b) lied about it the whole time and (c) cheated on his wife and used non-IRS-reported cash to buy his mistress a house in Arizona and (d) claimed racism everywhere he went for whatever reason if it suited his purposes and (e) once dragged his fucking kids into a press conference and used them as literal human shields to try to protect himself from questions about whether he was using steroids (which, again, he totally was) and to try to make the reporters who were asking the questions feel guilty for asking them and (f) didn't even show up to the fucking HR-hitting contest held at his own fucking ballpark, thus essentially producing his weiner from his XXXXXXXXL pants and urinating on the one group of fans anywhere, in any city, that still liked him.

Now, I know a lot of guys in professional sports can proudly claim one or more of (a)-(f). But only one has all of them. And you want to put that guy -- that 43 year-old mini-scrotumed douchebag -- on your team?

7. You don't really need him that bad. Your team has scored 309 runs, 2nd in the AL. That'll take a hit with Ortiz out, but again, DHing Manny and having Crisp in CF every day will help on the other end.

8. The core of this current team has won two WS in four years. There is no urgency here. This is not 2004, when it'd been 86 years and Pedro was old and leaving and Lowe was leaving and Damon and Tek and all those dudes were either leaving or about to start sucking. There is no urgency. None. Boston always wants to win, but after '04 and '07 we don't have to. You don't have to do every single thing in the world to try to win. (This simple fact should prevent you from signing the World's Biggest Douchebag, and should be thought of as a corollary to #'s 2 and 7, which pretty easily show that there is no guarantee the guy would even help that much, overall.)

9. Let me ask you something -- and you too, dak. Is there any part of you...any part at all...that thinks that this would go well:

"Barry?"
"Yeah?"
"Hi. Allow me to introduce myself. I'm Dan Shaughnessey."

You want that? You want what follows that in your clubhouse?

10. Your real problem, Mr. Epstein, is pitching, and we all know it. SSS warnings here, but: Oki is more hittable and more wild this year...Francona is starting to have to rely very heavily on Craig Hansen in the late innings...Justin Masterson is not going to remain undefeated the whole year...Schilling is a ?...Wakefield is Wakefield...Beckett is suddenly allowing HR at his 2006 rate...Buchholz is a ?...none of these problems can be solved by a 43 year-old asshole who's being chased by like 11 government agencies at once and whose blood contains certain mutated proteins heretofore found only in syphilitic sharks.

11. I guess for my final salvo, I shall respond to one of dak's points. He charmingly writes:

The real issue, of course, is steroids. Or cheating. Or lying about cheating? I don't really know. Let's put it this way: the other night, my friend Junior asked me, "Would you want the Red Sox to win the 2008 World Series if, on the same night they clinched, Red Sox DH Barry Bonds tested positive for steroids and HGH and let's say, for the fun of it, black tar heroin?"

Yes. Yes yes. Yes yes yes. I want the Red Sox to win the World Series.

This is lunacy. With this logic, there is no crime, no matter how heinous, that a player on your favorite team could commit that would sour a positive result on the playing field -- an amusingly inane brand of consequentialism usually reserved for budding fascists and Machiavelli enthusiasts whose underdeveloped brains and beatings at the hands of older jocks have driven them to the conclusion that murdering the high school quarterback is actually a utilitarian good.

Why, dak, why? Why allow your team to win at any cost? Are you out of your fucking mind? Great, the Sox won the Series. Now we get fucking SpyGate II for the next 25 years. And every time anyone brings up the Red Sox' World Championships of 2004-2008, instead of remembering Roberts stealing second or Bellhorn's HR or Schilling's sock or coming back from 3-1 down against Cleveland, the first thing everyone remembers is -- how about that time they clinched the Series and that night it came out that Bonds was a one-man farmacia?

With similar logic, dumbass, would you want the Red Sox to win the 2008 WS if on the night they clinched it came out that DH Barry Bonds had fixed the games? That he had personally taken some of the not-reported-to-the-IRS cash (which he got from ripping kids off at autograph sessions) that was originally earmarked for another house for his mistress, and gone to the Cubs' pitchers and said, "I know you guys need money -- what if I give you this untraceable cash in exchange for you blowing the games?" and they'd said: "Okay, that sounds good. We will further embarrass and enrage the city of Chicago for $25,000 a piece." Would you still savor your sweet victory then, dak?

After two WS wins, you'd welcome a third, no matter how bad the scandal that accompanies it? That is insane.

Listen, people, (I forgot whom I'm even talking to at this point), there are a lot of dudes out there who can give you 12.1 VORP. Brandon Moss might be able to give you 12.1 VORP, even appendixless. Coco Crisp might be able to give you 12.1 FRAA. Maybe Youkilis and Drew will step it up in Ortiz's absence. Maybe a rest in the middle of the season will even do him good...

Barry Bonds is a horrorshow. Barry Bonds is the single most hated and divisive and polarizing figure in the history of sports. He's also 43 and hasn't played baseball this year. I want the Red Sox to win the World Series too, but Jesus, man. Come on.

(My high school debate coach taught me that you should end every debate with: "Jesus, man, come on," so I'll stop there.)

*Sorry I called you an asshole.

Labels: barry bonds, baruch spinoza, consequentialism, dak, david ortiz, red sox, theo epstein

So, it's not going to happen, but with the Red Sox short one monster hitter for an indefinite amount of time (Papi), the name Barry Bonds has come up as a possible replacement. It's not even a legitimate rumor (jumbo shrimp / military intelligence, right people?!), but there is an argument to be made that he's one of the best available fits for the situation.

On this issue -- should the Red Sox pursue Barry L. Bonds -- we at FJM are squarely divided. So we're taking a bit of a departure from our usual nonsense to bring you the first of two open letters to Red Sox GM Theo Epstein. Stay tuned for a fiery, illogical, and misguided sequel from KT, a man who hates fun.

===

Dear Theo Epstein,

If you think it will help the Boston Red Sox, you should totally sign Barry Bonds.

I don't know you, but, like 90% of the other human beings I know, I love you. You are good at your job; you seem humble; and yet you had the stones to trade Nomar. Your team won it all, twice. New England likes the cut of your jib, and your form-fitting shirts. You've earned such respect from Sox fans that most people would have faith in you if you traded Ellsbury to Aston Villa for Alan Smith. And on top of that, you don't care about most people. So go ahead. Not because I or anyone says so, but because you in your near-infinite wisdom have decided it's best for the team. Sign Barry Bonds.

I like it when you call David Ortiz "David."

You'd know better than I if Barry Bonds can help the team, or if it's worth spending whatever it will take to get Bonds. Of course, there are no outstanding offers for Bonds that anyone knows of, so just how much could it cost, anyway? I mean, how much do you have to pay a dude to give him his only opportunity to pad his stats? Jesus, dude. Sign this guy already. (Assuming that you know he's ready to play, and you think it'll help, etc etc.)

I bet we both like the same kinds of music, and we could talk about that over Kelly's roast beef sandwiches.

Do you know what Barry Bonds' OBP was last year? Of course you do. You're a handsome genius. It was 480. He hit 28 taters in 340 ABs. Oh, also, this is cool: he's Barry Fucking Bonds. You can bat him in front of Manny Ramirez. And then Manny will be batting with at least one dude on base 48% of the time. That's assuming that Bonds will be as good as he was last year. Which of course he won't. But it will still be awesome.

Hey, man. What was your Haftarah parsha? Mine was Korach.

The real issue, of course, is steroids. Or cheating. Or lying about cheating? I don't really know. Let's put it this way: the other night, my friend Junior asked me, "Would you want the Red Sox to win the 2008 World Series if, on the same night they clinched, Red Sox DH Barry Bonds tested positive for steroids and HGH and let's say, for the fun of it, black tar heroin?"

Yes. Yes yes. Yes yes yes. I want the Red Sox to win the World Series. Also, if Bonds is the DH, that means they're winning the WS at Fenway. How can you pass that up? You think Gino from Brockton is going to care if Barry Bonds took some extra special medicine while he's dancing somewhere in short left-center along with 34,000 people who just want to pour beer on Mike Timlin's head and bang a townie? Nope sir.

Sometimes I think about what it would be like just to hug you. Just once.

Remember last year when you traded for Eric Gagne? You knew he was a roid dude. But you did it anyway. The fact that he had "cheated" in the past didn't prevent you from acquiring him. So Barry Bonds did it all on a bigger stage, and maybe benefited from it more. Does that make him any more morally reprehensible than any of the dudes who juiced at any point in their careers? Why does Bonds have to sit on the outside while Andy Pettite gets to toss his Godball under the bright lights? Hey, by the way, that guy sucks, right?

I bet you and I would make a pretty sweet doubles ping-pong team. We have a table in my garage...I'm just saying.

Do you think most Sox fans have cheated in some tiny form or another on their taxes? I do. I bet most of them have. I say these jerks are taking money away from poor people. When they deducted that round at Leo J. Martin as a business expense, they were taking money away from people who really needed it. Which do you think is worse, Theo Epstein/America? Stealing money from poor people, or taking banned substances to try to make yourself better at your job?

Exactly. So who are these assholes to tell you that if you sign Barry Bonds, you'd be somehow tainting the sanctity of Fenway Park? These jerkstores taint it every time they sit their thieving asses down in the bleachers, am I right? I've sort of lost the point of this rhetorical exercise, so I hope you're still on board.

I have "Manhattan" on DVD if you ever wanna watch it at our house the next time the Sox are playing in Anaheim. Holds up pretty well.

What are the other possible cons? The media circus? Even if you believe that the scrutiny of the media can actually affect the team, you'll remember that the Red Sox have performed for decades under what is generally considered the largest, most warped magnified glass in all of sports journalism. Hard to imagine Youkilis's OPS taking a nosedive if he has to answer questions about the size of Bonds's clubhouse recliner (which, by the way, should be five of the largest recliners available at Jordan's furniture fused together to form a Voltron-like megarecliner).

I bet our moms would like each other.

It's cool for baseball players to get cortisone injections, but they're not allowed to use other kinds of steroids. Tera Patrick should be more ashamed of what she does than Megan Fox. Most people wouldn't take a virtually harmless pill that would make them better at their jobs, if it were against company policy. What a shame it would be for lovable Bud Selig to have to watch his nemesis, Barry Bonds, finally win a World Series ring. To all of these related-only-in-my-head-statements, I say: BULLPOO. Think outside the bun.

Sign Barry Bonds.

Labels: andy pettitte, barry bonds, food metaphors, HGH, korach, megan fox, recliners, steroids, theo epstein