Has this been the most important week in Seattle sports history?

[dude82]

If it was one guy, it'd be easier to write it off as sour grapes of a disgruntled former employee, but, whether it confirms prior suspicions or not, having that many people say that things were out of control and hearing about specific instances backing that claim from multiple people is a lot harder to write off. It should be anyway.

And yes, it does take some air out of the balloon that was the Cano signing, even if it wasn't exactly shocking news. One of the few positive things that the team has done over the past decade has now been overshadowed by the reality of the front office situation and Cano hasn't even had his introductory press conference or even his physical yet.

Now the press conference is likely to be less about Cano and more about this article. That's not necessarily Baker's fault and he shouldn't have had to sit on it until people have had enough time to bask in the glow of the Cano signing before being brought back to reality, but it would have been nice to be able to enjoy it for a bit longer.

There are also some possible repercussions to all this that haven't been talked about that can't be overlooked, IMO. For one thing, how much of the kind of front office meddling described in the piece will McClendon now have to worry about dealing with? How will he handle it if any of that happens with him? On the player side of things, how much, if at all, could this impact the players we already have and, just as importantly, will some of the allegations of meddling prompt other free agents who thought about coming here to change their minds?

It's these kinds of uncomfortable thoughts and questions that make the timing of the article unfortunate, even if the article needed to be written if only to confirm the suspicions people already had.

 

[jakedog56]

You guys are over-reacting and the reporter is sensationalizing a bit.

It was already a known issue. Everyone knew these guys are a problem before this article. I knew it and I don't even follow all that closely.

The part that makes me think this way is that the reporter has like 3 guys that he talks to, all disgruntled ex-employees. Beyond that he just makes statements about unnamed sources, which to me means absolutely nothing.

Either bring the full list of names and hold the people accountable for their statments, or, as far as I am concerned, it means nothing, particularly in this day and age.

Not saying that management shouldn't change their behavior, but I don't read too much into the article that was not already basically a known.

 

[blstoker]

You guys are over-reacting and the reporter is sensationalizing a bit.

It was already a known issue. Everyone knew these guys are a problem before this article. I knew it and I don't even follow all that closely.

The part that makes me think this way is that the reporter has like 3 guys that he talks to, all disgruntled ex-employees. Beyond that he just makes statements about unnamed sources, which to me means absolutely nothing.

Either bring the full list of names and hold the people accountable for their statments, or, as far as I am concerned, it means nothing, particularly in this day and age.

Not saying that management shouldn't change their behavior, but I don't read too much into the article that was not already basically a known.

A majority of all information about how things happen comes from ex-employees. Discounting that the article is true based on the fact that they are unhappy with the Mariners means nothing. Just because a person is disgruntled, doesn't mean they aren't telling the truth.

Baker had more than enough sources, named, to confirm his story and like any good journalistic piece, gave the Mariners FO a chance to have their say. They released a statement rather than be interviewed. That's their right, but unless they put their own side out there then they have to accept that a majority of the press will be negative.

I see nothing wrong with the piece, it is well done, researched well and gave the team a chance to refute what was said and that was declined. Until more info comes out, it has to be taken at face value, as there is nothing in the piece to suggest he was being overly biased one way or the other.

 

[dude82]

Here's what I don't get... For years, there's been speculation from the fans that the front office was meddling or interfering too much for their own good and now that we have details of encounters between the front office and the coaching staff that would seem to confirm those suspicions, we're gonna give the guys in the front office the benefit of the doubt because those details came from "unnamed sources" and "disgruntled former employees"?

Lincoln and co. aren't gonna just come right out and admit they've been doing it and then say they won't do it anymore out of the goodness of their hearts, and nobody that is currently in the organization is going to criticize his or her own bosses in an article that anyone can read. Not on the record, anyway. That's just begging to be fired. So that leaves the people who were already fired or who already quit to tell us on the record, because they no longer have to fear losing their jobs, whether any of that stuff was going on or not.

 

[Itsmytime]

Most important week in Seattle sports history has to be either the victory in the 1995 ALDS or when Paul Allen saved the Seahawks from that ass Ken Behring