Thursday, July 30, 2009

Big Papi Fallout


Photo courtesy of ESPN.

On Thursday, the New York Times reported that both Manny Ramirez, currently with the Los Angeles Dodgers, and David Ortiz, currently with the Boston Red Sox, tested positive for steroids in a 2003 test, when both players were members of the Red Sox. To put it mildly, the news has caused shockwaves throughout New England and the baseball world at large.

This story has so many angles. First, it's not a surprise that Manny Ramirez's name showed up on the list. He served a 50-game suspension earlier this season for failing a steroid test. His name was already tarnished in the eyes of many baseball fans. His Hall of Fame career will have the taint of steroid use that may have lasted his whole career from his start in Cleveland in the 1990's to Boston to LA.

The main angle, and the one that's the shocker, is David Ortiz. Ortiz is one of the most outspoken players in regards to banning steroid use in baseball. Prior to spring training this year, Ortiz said:


"You test positive, you gonna be out. Serious and period. I would suggest that everybody get tests, not random, everybody. You go team-by-team, you test everybody 3-4 times a year, and that's about it...bang 'em for a whole year. I know that if I test positive by using any kind of, um, substance, I know that I'm going to disrespect my family, the game, the fans, and everybody. And I don't want to be facing that situation."

To see the video of these comments, click here.


Photo courtesy of Soxblog.mlblogs.com.

For someone to be so outspoken on steroids, then to be on a list of players that tested positive, something doesn't seem right. David Ortiz, known to Red Sox fans as "Big Papi", is known to be a fun, outgoing member of the Sox clubhouse and a standout member of the community. The two things that don't fit are the steroid use and his stat line from 2000-2009. If he were to be subject to his own recommendation for steroid users, he'd be banned from the game for a year.

There's other conflicting information floating around. Nomar Garciaparra, a former Red Sox player currently playing with the Oakland Athletics, said Thursday that players that wanted testing would ask that they be counted as "positive" in order that a drug testing program would be put in place. Shortly after these comments, many baseball sources denied this. Another thing that hasn't been sorted out is that if players were on the list, the player's association was to contact the player and give them the bad news. Ortiz claims he found out through the NY Times article released today.

The third angle, and perhaps the most mysterious, is how the information came out. The initial news story, broken by the NY Times' Michael Schmidt and David Waldstein, has the headline, "Ortiz and Ramirez Are Said to Be on 2003 Doping List". The main sources for the report are lawyers involved with litigation regarding the list. The lawyers spoke anonymously because the actual list of players is under a court seal. Problem is, divulging information that is under federal court seal is a crime.

There's a host of journalism questions here. First, why did the lawyers willingly break the law by leaking names to the Times? Surely, they would have known the ramifications beforehand. Second, should the Times have taken the sources' information, knowing the law would be broken? Third, will the Times be facing legal issues for publishing the details? On a related note, I find it interesting that the NY Times, through its ownership of the Boston Globe newspaper, has a minorty ownership stake in the Red Sox.

For more on this story, you can read the NY Times article here. For ESPN's take on the story, including a great video with investigative reporter T.J. Quinn, go here. For Curt Schilling's opinion, click here.

I'll be adding my own personal thoughts as a Red Sox fan in the coming days. There's lots of debate going on and it'll require a second post to gather my thoughts together and write them up. It's been a sad day to be a resident of Red Sox Nation.