The Giambi Mess

Right -- Giambi said nothing that could legally be construed as an admission and used against him for disciplinary reasons. You can play connect-the-dots all you want but there's nothing there that would stand up to legal scrutiny. MLB and the Yankees surely understand this, so let me know when disciplinary action comes of it. This reminds me of the logical leap that was taken when people began saying Barry Bonds "admitted" using THG in his leaked grand jury testimony when, in fact, he admitted nothing of the sort. Keep connecting dots.

 

Hey, give Giambi a break! Once he gets used to his new orthotic, why, he'll be right as rain!

 

Exactly.

 

Bob Nightengale's original story last week contained some mild news in that Jason shed a little more light about his opinions on the topic. However, all of the "ha-ha, it was an admission now how is MLB going to discipline him" follow-up stories were foolish exercises in nonsense.

 

So here's my question: What, if anything, should baseball do?

1. Giambi made a statement, however they wish to interpret 'that stuff.' Do they sit him down and say, 'Now, what stuff are we talking about here?' And he says ' Gee, I just meant I was sacrificing hamsters in the basement before games, I know was wrong to do that stuff, and it didn't help anyway!' And they can say, 'We feel confident that Mr Giambi broke no rules, play ball!'

2. Or do they make an example of him, guaranteeing no player will ever again come clean and set the record straight?

3. Offer a one time amnesty period, let everyone send their admission to MLB 'confidentially' (until someone leaks the list to Dan Patrick), and agree to hold those players harmless from any future revelations?

4. Just watch old game film of Mickey, Willie, and the Duke, those were the days.

Sorry, I should not have editorialized. I really want to know: What should MLB do with this?

 

... looked pretty damn good Sunday against the Ducks, too.

As for others on your list, Chuck:

Nolan Ryan led the AL with 301 strikeouts -- a number no pitcher has reached in the last four years -- at age 42. (And then, of course, threw a no-hitter at 43 and another at 44.)

Carlton Fisk caught 137 games and hit .285 at age 42.

Satchel Paige went 6-1 (including two shutouts) and helped the Indians win the World Series at age 41, and later won 12 games for the Browns at age 45.

The knee problems are Bonds' own damn fault. He's too heavy. Legs can't support him.
[/quote]
Ok(I was talking about baseball). But has anyone hit homers like these at the age of 42?
And does it really matter if it was his fault. He came back from the knee injuries. It's called the "Comeback Player of The Year Award".

 

They can try to use his statement to extract further information from him, but that would be a pretty useless exercise.

They can't make an example of him because he didn't do or say anything that would hold up in arbitration.

Nobody's falling for that. Players have learned the hard way that there's no such thing as anonymity.

Whatever. As long as they don't bring in Terry Cashman to sing that insipid "We're Talkin' Baseball" song that got almost as much air play as Kim Carnes' "Bette davis Eyes" during the strike in '81.

Quietly ask Jason to refrain from comment unless he has factual information he'd like to share with George Mitchell's not-so-independent investigation?

Either that or ignore his comments altogether. Giambi was just voicing an opinion, which he's entitled to do.

 

The first option is like a SNL skit...'Jason, do you have something you'd like to share with the class?'

The second option is a guaranteed PR fiasco, isn't it? The guy took a major dump on the picnic table, how do you ignore it? 'Oh, that crazy Jason, you just never know what he's going to say....now how about some nice smores??'

I just can't see a good solution here, whatever 'good' means. One way or another, MLB is going to be forced to set a precedent it doesn't seem prepared to set.

 

There's nothing MLB can or should do. Giambi didn't do or say anything that could make him subject to disciplinary action -- just provided opinions when asked. MLB doesn't have the authority to impose gag orders on players. And I don't see why it would be a PR fiasco if Yankees/MLB ignore it and move on. The Daily News published a speculative story suggesting the Yankees might seek to void the contract. No official with the Yankees has so much as confirmed that the team would even consider such a thing. MLB/Yankees should say nothing and if they feel compelled to say something, it should be limited to, "Jason is entitled to his opinion. However, we disagree with the insinuation that the league or the club owes an apology ..."

 

Wait ... the team that just signed Roger Clemens is thinking about voiding the contract of a steroid user? You can't make this stuff up.

 

I feel like we're talking about two different things. Putting aside Giambi's opinion that someone should apologize (and I agree baseball should give that dial tone, nothing more), you have a player admitting to something when he says he shouldn't have done 'that stuff.'

As much as MLB would love to ignore it, because they have no idea what to do with a player who retroactively and voluntarily admits to something considered 'wrong,' how can they? If it wasn't wrong or illegal, where's the brass band for Bonds?

He's admitting to something, probably because he's too dumb to realize he got a pass the first time around, and now MLB has it's feet of clay held to the fire.