On the Beat: Monday Up... (05/03)
24 comments have been left for this article. BP Comment Quick Links
| |
|
|
May 3, 2010 The Week in QuotesApril 26-May 2NO WONDER ROY HALLADAY ONLY WANTED TO TRAIN IN FLORIDA THIS SPRING
"It's a bad thing. Now they're going to go after everybody, not just the people behind the wall. Now they're going to come out on the street. What if you're walking on the street with your family and kids? They're going to go after you."
"We're going to keep moving around. We're not leaving, because we didn't do wrong here. We just work. We just come here to work. We got to support baseball, and that's what it is. I know there are people upset about it. I'm upset about it, and wish I could do more about it than what I'm doing."
"The Major League Baseball Players Association opposes this law as written. We hope that the law is repealed or modified promptly. If the current law goes into effect, the MLBPA will consider additional steps necessary to protect the rights and interests of our members."
"People come here for a reason. They don't come here to do bad stuff. They got a reason [to sign the law]. But I was disappointed, because I think this problem should have been resolved a long time ago."
"What if you go to Arizona and the starting pitcher that day gets asked for his papers and he doesn’t have them? What happens then? I don’t like it, and I think pretty much all of Major League Baseball feels the same way. We are part of the community. You hear there won’t be any profiling or racial stereotyping, but it’s hard to believe that. Us as Latin Americans are going to be put through that process and have to worry about it on a daily basis."
"Nobody sees those guys getting up at 4 a.m. to go to work on the farm, picking all kinds of stuff and leaving at 6 o'clock in the afternoon. Nobody complains about that. Leave those guys alone. Help them. Try to do something different to maintain those guys here. As soon as you do that, there are less immigrants, less illegal people here, because they help each other. They cannot live without us. Put it that way. They're workaholics. And this country can't survive without them. There's a lot of people from this country who are lazy. We're not. Prove me wrong. A lot of people in this country want to be on the computer and send e-mails to people. We do the hard work." SCOTT BORAS HASN'T BEEN THIS EXCITED SINCE ALFONSO SORIANO SIGNED FOR $18M PER
"It's a pretty impactful deal because he sets the standard for first basemen. When the scale goes up, it can't be considered anything but good."
"The sabermetricians are welcome to have their opinions about our business; however, I choose to ignore their opinions."
"There's a small list of sluggers in this game who can hit 40 homers and drive in 130 annually. Now, there's one less available."
"This was going to be Ryan's big bite of the apple. (Five years) was where the ceiling was drawn as far as where they felt comfortable guaranteeing a deal at the age of 32. They wouldn't go any further than that . . . They set five years as their absolute bar and really had to stretch to there, given the fact that it did take him all the way to the age of 37." ARODYS VIZCAINO, MELKY CABRERA, AND MIKE DUNN LOOK BETTER AND BETTER EVERY DAY
"Anyone can turn it around. You always have the ability to rewrite the script.''
"It's a tough game. We all go through struggles. I don't know one player in the history of baseball that hasn't gone through struggles. The question is how do you respond?"
"No, no, no. I hope somebody in the other room said something, I'll be cussing his ass. When the players come to me and say something about the pitchers, I say, ‘Hey, that's an excuse.' I don't fool with pitchers. … I bet a lot of people believe that I was doing it." IT EXTENDS TO THE BOX OFFICE, THE VENDORS, MY WIFE, MY CHILDREN AND PHIL JACKSON
"Overall, I'm not satisfied with the presentation, I'm not satisfied with the execution and I'm not satisfied with the thought process. It starts with me and goes to the manager and coaching staff and everybody playing the game."
"He would say something from time to time. I don’t think it’s that unusual. Manager, general manager, the thing about it is, you have to take personalities into account. Ned is a passionate guy and a very proud individual. He wants to bar to be [higher]. I’m not so concerned about what they said, as maybe what made them say it."
"I don't see the same player I saw last year. Maybe it's early, maybe that's what it is. It's not just Matt. I haven't seen it across the board, with rare exception. I don't want to make this [only about] Matt Kemp. The Dodgers are 8-12. We have more errors than anybody in the league, maybe in baseball. We're last in fielding in the league. This team a year ago was in the top three in hitting, pitching, defense. We're in the top half hitting, the lower half pitching and the bottom defensively. If they had a category for execution, we'd be in the bottom half of that, too."
"He has a chance to be the best Dodger in the history of the franchise. He has the ability to do that." FOR CHRISTMAS HIS KIDS WERE REDUCED TO DISCOUNTED JUAN PIERRE UNIS
"I grew up poor. I'm a pretty frugal person. I don't like to have ridiculous waste. I was raised to be wise and prudent and not overpay."
"There's a difference between cheap and wise. I like to think we're wise."
"For Pittsburgh and Kansas City and all those teams that have outspent us, what do their fans have to be happy about? They're still going to have 18 or 19 losing seasons in a row. We're not." A THIRD BASEMAN IN NAME ONLY
"I think at some point when you start getting older, you really have to do the extra things. You've got to get in that whirlpool, you've got to stretch, and really work hard to keep your flexibility before you get out there on the field."
"And I'm not sure if he's dedicating himself to doing that. He's so used to—you know, I played with him so long—just sitting around and waiting for the game, and take a couple jogs and go play. But as you get older, you know, you cannot do that. You've gotta go the extra mile to be ready to play."
"It's kind of a lose-lose situation for Brian, because he played with me and he knew my routine back then. Yeah, I would just show-and-go. The difference is now I am taking more precautions to get myself ready to play and he's not in the clubhouse anymore. He doesn't see that any more." HE MAY NOT BE MUCH ON THE MOUND, BUT HE REMAINS BASEBALL'S LYRIC POET
“There’s no end to the list I could make for all the things that I felt were wasteful tonight. I think I got a little bit too greedy in this first start."
“After that first home run in the fifth inning, I felt it was such a waste. After that I felt like I moved along and I didn’t think that I let it drag on in my mind for too long, but if you look at what happened, I guess you can come to the conclusion that maybe that’s what happened.”
"I think I did have the right amount of nervousness going up to the mound. So I think that was a positive. I think my pitches themselves, like I said, were pretty good, but there are some adjustments that I do need to make. If I’m not able to make those adjustments before my next start, I think you can continue to see negative results. So I really have to do what I have to do between these next starts.’’ THE REST
"One of his enormous talents is to make everybody feel comfortable and make you feel you can engage in what I like to think of as witty repartee with the leader of the free world."
"It seems like whoever we give the ball to other than Tyler, before we get to Tyler, gets in a little trouble and we end up having to call on Tyler. We're going to have to ask other guys to step up and get that job done. We can't use Tyler Clippard at this pace."
"That's the way it is–good for him, enjoy it. I wish he could do that for me–he was a horseshit player for me. He was very bad for me."
"I’m sure I have; I’m sure everyone has. You don’t even think about it. I see guys cross the mound all the time. You just run the quickest way. If it’s across the mound, it’s across the mound."
"I’m a law-abiding citizen, so it’s just the way it is. We’re not supposed to smoke here, and I won’t do it. I’ll try to find someplace outside somewhere, I guess, but I think you’re not supposed to smoke at all in the park. ... It’s legal to smoke a cigar up there, but you can’t smoke a cigarette in a cigar bar. I’m not into making the laws and everything. I’m into abiding by them. I’ll just have to do what I can, and I’ll be fine. I’ve got till 6 a.m. It might be two cartons. I don’t know." --- Alex Carnevale is a contributor to Baseball Prospectus.
|
I wonder if Izturis, Guillen, or Barajas have even read the law or know how it works. My bet would be no.
I'm not going to wade into whether I think the law is good policy or not, but you are arguing that those three may be issuing an ill-informed opinion with no evidence to back it up....by issuing your own ill-informed opinion with no evidence to back it up.
I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption. These are busy guys, and it's pretty well understood that the vast majority of people offer their opinions on subjects that they know very little about. Don't get all huffy.
I'm not going to argue policy either, but Izturis' quote at the very top of the article is all the "evidence" I need to suggest that he has no clue what the new law actually allows the police to do.
Meanwhile, your immediate attack on me assumes that I simply threw out an opinion without considering whether or not it was likely to be valid, making your comment ill-informed as well. I guess we're all hypocrites today.
Last post from, I promise...sorry to all who aren't interested. It would appear based on your posts that you have missed my point. If I was unclear because I was too concerned about being snarky, I apologize.
My point was not and is not to question how well you know SB1070. This ain't the forum. My point is that based on a two-line quotation provided without context, we cannot know how well-read Cesar Izturis is, and it is unfair of you to presume that you do.
I'm sure baseball players are all busy guys. But they do travel extensively for six months, and spend six weeks at spring training, and usually do these things without traveling with their family and the obligations that go with it. Sure, some of them probably play cards and play more rounds of golf in six weeks than I could hope to squeeze in over six years. But, some of them may actually read a newspaper once in a while too.
You state that you don't think it's an unreasonable assumption. I do. I find your statement that "the vast majority of people offer their opinions on subjects that they know very little about" to be exceedingly arrogant.
Immigration, health care, stats vs. scouts....the level of discourse over these and other issues will never improve if everyone assumes that anyone taking an opposing viewpoint just doesn't have any idea what they are talking about. If you consider this an attack, if my tone seems huffy, then I'm sorry, that isn't my intent. My intent is that we all make an effort to listen to each other once in a while.
I caught your intent better this time around - thanks for the clarification. I disagree, only because Izturis etc are public figures. If they are going to make statements such as those above, then they are 'fair game' for criticism from skeptics such as myself.
But thanks for clarifying.
Quick follow up, because your attack annoyed me more than it should have, here is the exact text from the law:
"For any lawful stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. Any person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released."
So all an illegal needs to do is just follow the rest of the laws of the US, same as the rest of us have to. It certainly does not allow police to set up random checks of citizenship unless another crime has been committed, as Barajas ridiculously asks (above). Last time I got pulled over, they asked to see my drivers' license, which is proof of my own citizenship.
I'm not saying the law is right, wrong, or indifferent. What I'm saying is VERY clearly from the quotes above, Guillen, Barajas, and Izturis are completely ignorant of what this law says, and therefore my opinion is NOT ill-informed, and I don't really appreciate you jumping on my case. The proof is in the article; I didn't make this stuff up.
You're just plain wrong. The law requires the police “when practicable” to detain people they "reasonably suspect" are in the country without authorization. It also allows the police to charge immigrants with a state crime for not carrying immigration documents. And it allows residents to sue cities if they believe the law is not being enforced. Like the Jews in Nazi Germany, people can be stopped and made to show their papers on the whim of a law enforcement official. It is an abomination and guys like Adrian Gonzales, Ozzie Guillen, etc. are showing true courage and leadership by opposing it.
Define 'lawful stop'. A sobriety check point? A "Hey, can I talk to you for a second?" Cops are allowed to try and engage you in a conversation, and if your english not so good...? Maybe you fit the description (male, Hispanic) of someone who just committed a crime nearby, and the cops just want to stop you and make sure you're not the guy. I assume there are loads of lawful reasons for a cop to stop a person that doesn't necessitate the person breaking the law first. "Lawful stop" seems like some pretty broad language, offering cops lots of leeway if they want it.
There is a reason why this bill is attracting insta-lawsuits, and there's a reason why some AZ sherrifs are saying they won't try to enforce it. And that MAY be because the people who know the most about it (lawyers and the people in charge of implementing it) think it's a turd sandwich that's going to cost a fortune in wrongful arrest lawsuits. Maybe Barajas and others are conjuring up an unrealistic worst-case distortion of what could happen, but a lot of people who *have* read the bill are hating on it just as much, and their reasoning isn't too far from the reasoning displayed by our quote machines above.
Add in the fact that the bill effectively singles out Hispanics (no one is under any illusions that AZ is sweating the influx of Canadian illegals) in a way that they feel (with some justification) is hostile, and you have a very hot button issue for MLB, and Hispanic players in particular.
It's interesting that baseball is once more pushed near the front of a very important issue that is affecting our time and culture. As a baseball history buff, I have always found it remarkable that great events of historical significance were somehow mirrored by the game, on and off the field. It could be the war the two World Wars affected the game, the breaking of the colour line, labuor rights in the 60's and 70's, and now basic human rights in a state with a far-flung reputation for general intolerance of people who are somehow different.
This issue ties in directly with the abundance of Latin baseball players (both new immigrants and the descendants of immigrants), as well as the game's attempts to grow globally to cultures without strong pedigree (parts of Asia, Europe and deeper into South America). In a very real sense, the outcome of this issue may play a heavy role in the future of the game - what sorts of kids are playing baseball. I know where I stand on this issue.
Going to answer you and HeavyHitter in one reply.
Obviously, neither of you read my full post before flying into a frenzy of typing. I presented the actual text from the new law, and made no conjecture whatsoever about whether it was good or bad. (I have my opinions, but they don't belong here.)
If you have a serious argument against my actual point, instead of an abstract objection against the law itself, it would be nice if you would present some logical argument, such as other quotes from the new law that back up the claims you are making. I will happily read them and consider changing my opinion of Guillen and Friends.
P.S. I'm not "just plain wrong". Saying it doesn't make it so.
P.P.S. Ozzie Guillen has never showed "true" courage or leadership in his entire life. Witness his calling Nick Swisher a horseshit player above. That took real balls, to call out a player on an opposing team without him being present. If that's true leadership and courage, I'll eat my mouse.
They did read your post - at least enough of it - the wording of the law is abstract enough to create serious leeway for egregious rights containment. Your first bolded point mentions lawful stop, detention or arrest and the second one only arrest. What's to stop a cop looking for action and fabricating "lawful" stops?
On the other hand, if your point was that the players are ignorant, then so what? Did anyone ever expect them to be role models here? Literal interpretations of laws is irrelevant. What matters is a growing culture of fear for any Latin-American, ballplayer or not.
If everyone has misunderstood you, then clarify yourself without resorting to insinuations.
Totally understand your point, but a quick search results this: "So now, in response to those critics, lawmakers have removed “lawful contact” from the bill and replaced it with “lawful stop, detention or arrest.” In an explanatory note, lawmakers added that the change “stipulates that a lawful stop, detention or arrest must be in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state.” "
I think that's pretty clear. If the lawmakers are to be believed (and I will concede that all of the opponents to this bill will say that they are NOT to be believed) then a person may not be questioned about his citizenship unless he is a suspect (or caught) in some OTHER crime.
As to your last sentence, here is my point, put simply:
Guillen, Izturis, and Barajas make claims above that sound ignorant to me. My point to Randy is that I have the right to think they sound ignorant, just as they have the right to make the quote, and Randy has the right to disagree with me.
The whole argument about the validity of the law was started by others here.
A) Do we know whether the quotes here come from before or after the change in wording of the bill? I suspect at least a couple were before or concurrent.
2) Lawful stop, etc. still leaves a lot of leeway for abuses. Here in Arizona, we already see a pretty steady stream of profiling complaints. No matter how upright and honest the majority of law-enforcement officials are, there's always room for misunderstandings and a few bad apples to cause trouble. Even revised, this bill just opens that door a bit wider...
I think you're exaggerating how stringent the requirements are, Chris. A "lawful stop" could occur when a car rolls through a stop sign, stops in front of the white line at a traffic light, or a person jaywalks or crosses the street when a do not walk sign is displayed. These are all things that average citizens don't question doing on a regular basis but now could potentially subject exclusively citizens of a certain skin color to harassment. Without taking a position on the merits of the bill if enforced as intended, it's clear that the powers in the bill are subject to manipulation, especially when our country's police have a history of pretext stops in the context of racial profiling.
Considering that, it's entirely reasonable for Rod Barajas to have some fear of being harassed when playing in Arizona. I probably couldn't pick Rod Barajas out of a lineup, and I'm probably a bigger baseball fan than the average police officer, so he is equally at risk as any other Hispanic citizen to be subject to the risk of the bill not being enforced as intended.