An interesting story on the Oakland A's site

I think we can all agree that as a news operation, mlb.com is a great arm for Major League Baseball. Which is why this story on the A's site re: the groin injury suffered by Huston Street is so interesting:

http://oakland.athletics.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080610&content_id=2884535&vkey=news_oak&fext=.jsp&c_id=oak

There's a really good quote in there from a "team source" just killing Bob Geren (w/o naming him, of course) for using Street in a six-run game in Texas 10 days ago. It turns out that Street's groin has been bothering him since then.

I can't remember seeing a slam anywhere near this potent anywhere on the site since, well, ever. So I wonder: How did this slip thru? Is it b/c the source is noted manager killer Billy Beane? MLB.com isn't much for stirring up controversy, but is some negative coverage OK if it helps further the GM's agenda? Very interesting.

Even more interesting would be if the source is Street, but he doesn't strike me as the type of guy to kill his manager. Of course I could be wrong.

Thoughts?

 

It tells me two things: one, that the writer isn't worried about ruffling the organization's feathers, and two, that the organization itself is moving past a typical case of public relations.

At least, I really hope both are true. A large part of me wishes that those writers who work for these sites would be willing to cover real news, but I think everyone will always have doubts because of where the paycheck is coming from.

 

I'm calling bullshit.

You used the word "interesting" about a baseball story.

 

FIXED.

 

No, BYH is definitely interested in groins.

 

And groin-ravaged stories.

 

You're gone for a month and come back asking about groins? What happens in July??

 

Stay on topic, fuckers, and have a happy Huston Street's groin is sore day.

It's not about the writers not wanting to cover the real news. It's about the directive from up high, both at MLBAM and within the team. Some teams are willing to allow their reporters some freedom in the reportage of less-than-positive news. Others, like a certain bunch of chokers in Queens, are not.

That, to me, is why this is so interesting. I can't imagine any other team allowing its site to run with a "source" who is killing the manager's decision-making. But Beane has as much or more autonomy than any GM in the game. If he wants to use his club's official website to start steering public opinion against his manager, then he will.

 

Beane was in Geren's wedding. It ain't that.

If Beane wanted to fire a guy, he would. He has no interest in leaks, building public support for what he does, etc.

 

I know that. And Jim Fassel and Brian Billick were best friends before Billick hired Fassel. Not so much anymore.

That's not true. He wrote Moneyball. [/Joe Morgan]

You very well may be right. I just find it interesting and worth wondering why the A's site features such an inflammatory quote directed at the manager.

 

Damn. I thought the story was going to blow the lid off why the A's have an apostrophe in their name. </crossthreading>

 

MLB.com writers have editors who work for MLB. But the teams themselves do not get to see stories before they're published.