Article: On Velvet Ropes

[Riverbrian]

 

Also from the article:

"The injury was caused by a foul ball. His recovery might be affected by the amount of man that shin must support."

 

Yep that was there

 

Along with "Sano is 24 and until this week he had not suffered any injuries related to his bulk"

 

 

 

A perfect contradiction and this makes him the front runner for the 2017 Muddled Point Award.   

 

 

 

 

[Doubles]

After all this, here's where I'm at:

 

* I have zero issue with Souhan's initial column. Does anybody really think a third baseman approaching three bills is not a dicey proposition? Twins would be completely naive to ignore this issue. And more than one media member- including LaVelle- has corroborated Sano's weight IS a cinder for the org. Nowhere did I read Souhan was calling out Sano for being fat or was weight-shaming in any way.

 

* In the initial column, Souhan writes:

"Sunday night, the Twins placed Sano on the 10-day disabled list because of a stress reaction in his left shin. The injury was caused by a foul ball. His recovery might be affected by the amount of man that shin must support."

 

The longer Sano is out of the lineup, the more it appears there may be something to wondering if Sano's weight may be prolonging his recovery. With regard to the timing of the column, Souhan absolutely would have been trashed for writing that Sano's recovery was prolonged after the fact. Instead, he was criticized for trying to get out in front of the story.

 

* I think Gleeman was over the top with his critique of Souhan's column. You don't have to like or agree with everything you read. But at least be fair & rational about what you take issue with. Gleeman accused Souhan of writing things- that Sano was "soft," that Souhan blamed the injury on Sano's bulk- both claims that were patently false.

 

* I think Souhan's blog response to the criticism went too far. I totally get a journalist wanting to defend his integrity & professionalism. I don't think going nuclear with weight-shaming, name-calling, & cheap shots was the best way to get his message across.

 

* Gleeman seems to be thriving on the attention from all of this. I submit he could have gone about criticizing the initial column in a more dignified way that didn't thrust himself into such a negative light. The fact he keeps engaging in "kimono" & "Cinnabon" references as punchlines leads me to think he is reveling in the attention brought to this.

 

* I still think the initial column was met with resistance more so because of who delivered it, than what the message was. Even the column John wrote- "On Velvet Ropes"- that I believe contains many great points made by an extremely talented writer that I have the utmost respect for- made a leap referring to Souhan's initial piece as the "Sano's Too Fat" column.

 

I think this has deteriorated into personal issues between the parties involved that has gone way beyond debating the merits of a newspaper column. In the end, no one looks good when it reaches this point.

 

Wait a second- what are we all arguing about again?

Edited September 6, 2017 by Doubles

[Doubles]

Yep that was there

 

Along with "Sano is 24 and until this week he had not suffered any injuries related to his bulk"

 

 

 

A perfect contradiction and this makes him the front runner for the 2017 Muddled Point Award.   

Now this I can agree with.

 

Well done, Riv!

[The Wise One]

 

Fair question. Yes, the Twins grant credentials to Twins Daily, including me, on a game to game basis and for the entirety of spring training for the past several years.

 

But I wonder why you think that matters? 

 

This is part of the point I'm trying to make. The perception that Access is something about which we have an ax to grind is silly. The perception that it makes people special is ludicrous. 

 

It is a tool, and sometimes a valuable tool. For instance, if I'm wondering what Molitor was thinking batting Niko Goodrum in the DH spot versus a right-hander, I might be able to ask him about that postgame. But that is a small part of what creates quality content. And infinitely overrated. 

Yes it is silly to say that not having access gives you an ax to grind. So isn't it silly to call it tedious and like interviewing office workers. Roger Kahn wrote a book called the Boys of Summer. Way back when when I was in grade school I read it. (they gave you a free book after you bought so many, it was the most expensive one) Much later when I understood the world better I realized what a great book it was. Access provided such insight.   

Souhan crossed a line. He should be slapped for that. The  bits that I have seen by Gleeman are not any better, but nobody here is going to call him. Call it what it is, a petty, public catfight.

[biggentleben]

I'm putting up a bit that I hope will answer some of what I've mentioned a number of times, but the weight number itself, on an ideal baseball body, isn't the exact issue, especially if doing the right kind of lifting and plyometric/flexibility/agility work to go along with it. I had a fun talk with someone about this piece, so I'll link it back here once I have it up...

[biggentleben]

 

Yes it is silly to say that not having access gives you an ax to grind. So isn't it silly to call it tedious and like interviewing office workers. Roger Kahn wrote a book called the Boys of Summer. Way back when when I was in grade school I read it. (they gave you a free book after you bought so many, it was the most expensive one) Much later when I understood the world better I realized what a great book it was. Access provided such insight.   

Souhan crossed a line. He should be slapped for that. The  bits that I have seen by Gleeman are not any better, but nobody here is going to call him. Call it what it is, a petty, public catfight.

 

One of the things that Souhan hasn't yet figured out is that "access" doesn't have to come from the clubhouse anymore. Players are much more willing to talk with someone they know through social media or in the community and give their real opinion. I've got hundreds of opinions on players from front office people and scouts in the game right now that I cannot use a quote on, but they're more than willing to talk with someone who they know will use that information responsibly. Being in the locker room or clubhouse is not the only way to get access to the game and access to the information needed to accurately report on the game. It's just one way.

[Jham]

 

Seth, I like to think of myself as an educated person. I have 2 college degrees and 7 years of college. I have written most of my life. I enjoy reading. I have had 7 of my poems published. I won the Southern Prize for Literature in 1995 for my poem, "The Flak Jacket". Two of my closest friends are professors of creative writing...one at Appalachian State University (Pirates' fan) and one at Harvard (Red Sox fan). My son (Cardinals fan) is a minister, but he has a journalism degree from UNC and wrote sports for the university paper, The Daily Tar Heel. We all enjoy communicating about the writer's craft and we frequently share well written articles about baseball and life. Seth, I chose to read your writing daily. I appreciate your writing skills, but more than that, I like your personality, which is displayed in your writing. I quit reading Souhan several years ago because he always wrote with an ax to grind...his writing contained little happiness and joy. I believe Souhan feels it is his duty to criticize. For some reason, he feels he could better do the jobs of those whom he criticizes. Point of proof is his article criticizing sports writers who are not employed by Sports Illustrated or one of the soon to be extinct, daily newspapers. I guess if one watches baseball so he can criticize and be an arm chair quarterback, then one appreciates Souhan. That ain't me. I appreciate the timeless beauty of the game, the humanness of the players and the coming of spring when I read that the truck in snowy Minneapolis is being loaded with baseball bats, uniforms and catchers' masks, ready for its annual journey south to Ft. Myers.  Seth, you understand that same type of beauty, the humanness of a minor leaguer struggling to keep playing, the "art"  of writing. You write faithfully, beautifully and with feeling, while Souhan criticizes the manner in which the equipment was loaded onto the truck. 

Isn't this just a bunch of posters suggesting that they can write a column better than Souhan?  Time constraints, length constraints, pressure from editors, and editing itself is something bloggers don't even have to deal with.  Walk a mile in a man's shoes.  Souhan may see it as his duty to criticize.  If no one else has the guts to do it, then his column would actually fill an important function, showing the other side of the story.  

So much of this thread is hypocritical finger-pointing and a straight-up witch hunt.  Imagine if there were a whole thread of posters plus a handful of bloggers taking shots at the way you do your job.  You might react somewhat defensively.  So much of his message is being lost due to distaste for the messenger  Or vice versa.  That's not fair. 

It honestly makes me sick.  This forum has always ALWAYS been a pleasure to read and interact in because the posters often disagree.  The healthy exchanges of viewpoints backed with what evidence can be provided is what makes the site so entertaining and what makes Twins fans, forums, and blogs some of the best and most knowledgeable in baseball.  Now we're just killing a local columnist for sharing inside info (which we all crave) and taking a controversial stance (that many of us have also previously taken).  The irony being, of course, that this very disagreement is what this forum is built on.  

If you think Souhan, as a columnist, should be held to a higher standard, well then you just made the point of his second post for him.  
 

Disagree with the message all you want.  Don't read his column if you want.  But the posts suggesting that he sit on information we want to know or that he should feel bad for writing his honest opinion is absurd for a forum based on the free exchange of honest opinions.  

I'm guessing most of us could have a great conversation with Souhan, Ruesse, Terry Ryan, Molitor, or any other knowledgeable baseball fan whose baseball philosophy differs from our own.  At least I'd like to think so. 

Edited September 6, 2017 by Jham

[The Wise One]

 

One of the things that Souhan hasn't yet figured out is that "access" doesn't have to come from the clubhouse anymore. Players are much more willing to talk with someone they know through social media or in the community and give their real opinion. I've got hundreds of opinions on players from front office people and scouts in the game right now that I cannot use a quote on, but they're more than willing to talk with someone who they know will use that information responsibly. Being in the locker room or clubhouse is not the only way to get access to the game and access to the information needed to accurately report on the game. It's just one way.

You missed my point.   Nor did I ever say anything about the only way to talk to people is face to face. That is one of the problems is that people take what you say and make it into something else. 

[biggentleben]

 

You missed my point.   Nor did I ever say anything about the only way to talk to people is face to face. That is one of the problems is that people take what you say and make it into something else. 

 

No, I wasn't ripping on your comment at all...just piggybacking on your thoughts that access can lead to better overall content. It was another thing that bugged me in the "rant" that was published by Souhan in his follow-up. Access comes in lots of forms, not just the clubhouse.

[Nick Nelson]

 

http://twinsdaily.com/topic/21807-article-calling-it-miguel-sano-will-be-al-mvp/

 

Back in March 2016, when you were calling Sano as the MVP, it appears failure wasn't "all-but-certain"

Where in that article was it implied I expected Sano to be anything other than a liability in RF? The idea was that if he hit enough, voters might be inclined to overlook it or even credit him for doing the club's bidding, as silly as that bidding may have been.

 

Had you clicked on the link in the first sentence of that piece, you'd have come across this remark in bold lettering: "Yep, the Miguel Sano in right field experiment is going to be rough."

[The Wise One]

 

No, I wasn't ripping on your comment at all...just piggybacking on your thoughts that access can lead to better overall content. It was another thing that bugged me in the "rant" that was published by Souhan in his follow-up. Access comes in lots of forms, not just the clubhouse.

Did not say it was better content, different content built up over time. 

[Brandon Warne]

 

Who is leaking the info? Souhan said his source was someone he has known for a long time, so it can't be Falvey or Levine.

 

It's the Twins -- most of this front office remains intact. 

[Doubles]

 

Reusse wrote a similar column in spring training last year and received similar criticism. I don't think the "when"the column is written is as important as who writes the column.

 

 

He wrote it while Sano was bumbling around in right field, creating the impression that the player -- not the team -- was at fault for his all-but-certain failure at a position he was grossly unequipped to play. 

 

Timing was very much a factor in the reaction to that column. 

 

From Reusse's article:

"The No. 1 flaw for the Twins in their Sano strategy was not the idea of putting him in a corner outfield position. The No. 1 flaw was making no impact with their pleas to Sano to get in prime condition."  

 

I happen to completely disagree with Patrick's statement above.  The Sano to the outfield experiment was ill-fated from the get-go, and it seems Twins management were the only ones who refused to figure it out.  That notwithstanding, in no way does that absolve Sano of being culpable for reporting to spring training above the weight his team wanted him at, and furthermore for not appearing to work to remedy the situation during camp.  

[Riverbrian]

 

Now we're just killing a local columnist for sharing inside info (which we all crave) 

 

I have often thought about this point that I separated from your other points. 

 

We are all our own worst enemy. We'd love to know what is happening inside the walls but as soon as we learn something from inside the walls... we destroy it.

 

After all the damage is done from our reactions... we are left with PR Departments, Carefully Crafted Messages and Overused Cliches. 

 

We all want the truth... But we can't handle the truth.

 

 

It's not that the GM's, Managers and Players don't want to speak... they have learned that speaking only leads to a public punch in the mouth. 

 

We all caused this and we continue to cause it. 

 

Now I'm going to step aside and impulse buy a National Enquirer. 

[Mike Sixel]

There are good ways to share the truth, and not good ways.

 

Souhan, to me, seems to often take a lower road than I would like. He has some great work, he has some work I don't like. 

 

Also, the org seems to hide behind these inside stories, rather than just say, in an interview, "we've been working with Sano on his weight, but we're concerned about it," said person X....where PERSON X IS PUBLICLY NAMED......

 

so, no, it's not about "we can't handle the truth", it's we can't handle feeling manipulated by anonymous sources and their media partners.

[NapoleonComplex]

 

* In the initial column, Souhan writes:

"Sunday night, the Twins placed Sano on the 10-day disabled list because of a stress reaction in his left shin. The injury was caused by a foul ball. His recovery might be affected by the amount of man that shin must support."

The longer Sano is out of the lineup, the more it appears there may be something to wondering if Sano's weight may be prolonging his recovery. With regard to the timing of the column, Souhan absolutely would have been trashed for writing that Sano's recovery was prolonged after the fact. Instead, he was criticized for trying to get out in front of the story.
 

 

I haven't read every reply to this thread, sorry if this has been asked. Your reply sparked a question: Had Souhan's original article never happened, would people even be talking about Sano's weight in relation to injury and rehab? My opinion is that people would be saying "Damn, that ball must've hit his leg harder than everyone thought."

[Don Walcott]

 

I haven't read every reply to this thread, sorry if this has been asked. Your reply sparked a question: Had Souhan's original article never happened, would people even be talking about Sano's weight in relation to injury and rehab? My opinion is that people would be saying "Damn, that ball must've hit his leg harder than everyone thought."

This is really the sad part of this.  And I think this was Gleeman's main point.  Now that we've publicly labeled Sano as allegedly having a weight problem that allegedly the Twins FO is concerned about, for the rest of his career he may be hearing about it every time he gets hurt or looks slow or slumps.  I hope that's not the result.  It's discussions like this that may help avoid this result.

[ken]

 

Where in that article was it implied I expected Sano to be anything other than a liability in RF? The idea was that if he hit enough, voters might be inclined to overlook it or even credit him for doing the club's bidding, as silly as that bidding may have been.

 

Had you clicked on the link in the first sentence of that piece, you'd have come across this remark in bold lettering: "Yep, the Miguel Sano in right field experiment is going to be rough."

Going to be rough, - likely to be adequate at best in right field, doesn't sound like "all but certain" failure. 

 

 Just like with the Souhan article, it easy to read what you want to read and miss what the author is trying to say.  Which is why I said I believe the outrage here is based on the messenger and not the message.

[The Wise One]

 

Going to be rough, - likely to be adequate at best in right field, doesn't sound like "all but certain" failure. 

 

 Just like with the Souhan article, it easy to read what you want to read and miss what the author is trying to say.  Which is why I said I believe the outrage here is based on the messenger and not the message.

There seems to be a side to the electronic only people (blog, podcast) that can't stand the mention of their limitations. There is also a columnist with thin skin and a history of  of stretching the truth for negativity.  When people read into things what fits their agenda, all lose. It is the bane of any message board. 

[Thrylos]

 

 

* I think Souhan's blog response to the criticism went too far. I totally get a journalist wanting to defend his integrity & professionalism. I don't think going nuclear with weight-shaming, name-calling, & cheap shots was the best way to get his message across.

 

Agree'd, but name calling and cheap shots is Souhan's MO.  

 

If y'all do not remember, this is what he wrote when the Twins traded Slowey

 

Talking about "integrity" and "professionalism".

 

This is what Souhan is all about.

[Doubles]

Agree'd, but name calling and cheap shots is Souhan's MO.

 

If y'all do not remember, this is what he wrote when the Twins traded Slowey

 

Talking about "integrity" and "professionalism".

 

This is what Souhan is all about.

I acknowledged it's not cool. Not sure what more you want me to say.

 

Gleeman went on KFAN this morning and claimed he wouldn't get into personally insulting anyone or criticizing their appearance, etc. Really? Since when? Since going nuclear himself on Twitter & calling Souhan's initial column on Sano 'Bull----'? Since making the blatantly false accusation of claiming Souhan called Sano "soft" & "blamed Sano" for being injured? Since calling Souhan a "----head" on his podcast on Sunday?

 

I've said it before, I think Gleeman could have come out of this smelling like a rose had he taken the high road all along here. He's trying to go down that path now, only after making plenty of his own personal attacks, then taking to the radio waves to denounce such behavior while claiming to be above it. Now that the toothpaste is out of the tube, taking the high road tack looks awfully disingenuous, at best.

 

As I've said, when things deteriorate at such a personal level that goes way beyond debating the merits of a newspaper column, nobody looks good.

Edited September 7, 2017 by Doubles

[Craig Arko]

Given Nick's article, ask Dozier. He knows what's going on with this team. Might even be Souhan's source about this.

[Platoon]

I have often thought about this point that I separated from your other points. 

 

We are all our own worst enemy. We'd love to know what is happening inside the walls but as soon as we learn something from inside the walls... we destroy it.

 

After all the damage is done from our reactions... we are left with PR Departments, Carefully Crafted Messages and Overused Cliches. 

 

We all want the truth... But we can't handle the truth.

 

 

It's not that the GM's, Managers and Players don't want to speak... they have learned that speaking only leads to a public punch in the mouth. 

 

We all caused this and we continue to cause it. 

 

Now I'm going to step aside and impulse buy a National Enquirer.

 

. You should just read the online version. They just announced a Elvis Sighting at the Cinnabun in Omaha. He was driving a white Caddy and wearing a pink Kimono. This whole thing has evolved into what so often happens. The message gets garbled by the personality of the messenger. There is no doubt that Sano is an awfully big man. Nor the fact that he is playing an IF position other than first base. Or the fact that he is going to have to work extremely hard to keep himself in condition for longevity and success. He does not possess a maintenance free body. But if that comes from LE3, Bernardino Miller, or heaven forbid Sid is one thing. Put Souhan or Ruesses name on the header, and we tend to get into the 9th page of a thread.

[Riverbrian]

 

. You should just read the online version. They just announced a Elvis Sighting at the Cinnabun in Omaha. He was driving a white Caddy and wearing a pink Kimono. This whole thing has evolved into what so often happens. The message gets garbled by the personality of the messenger. There is no doubt that Sano is an awfully big man. Nor the fact that he is playing an IF position other than first base. Or the fact that he is going to have to work extremely hard to keep himself in condition for longevity and success. He does not possess a maintenance free body. But if that comes from LE3, Bernardino Miller, or heaven forbid Sid is one thing. Put Souhan or Ruesses name on the header, and we tend to get into the 9th page of a thread.

 

You are right 

 

That is something that Souhan cultivated over the years.  

 

That type of thing comes at a cost. 

[tarheeltwinsfan]

 

Isn't this just a bunch of posters suggesting that they can write a column better than Souhan?  Time constraints, length constraints, pressure from editors, and editing itself is something bloggers don't even have to deal with.  Walk a mile in a man's shoes.  Souhan may see it as his duty to criticize.  If no one else has the guts to do it, then his column would actually fill an important function, showing the other side of the story.  

So much of this thread is hypocritical finger-pointing and a straight-up witch hunt.  Imagine if there were a whole thread of posters plus a handful of bloggers taking shots at the way you do your job.  You might react somewhat defensively.  So much of his message is being lost due to distaste for the messenger  Or vice versa.  That's not fair. 

It honestly makes me sick.  This forum has always ALWAYS been a pleasure to read and interact in because the posters often disagree.  The healthy exchanges of viewpoints backed with what evidence can be provided is what makes the site so entertaining and what makes Twins fans, forums, and blogs some of the best and most knowledgeable in baseball.  Now we're just killing a local columnist for sharing inside info (which we all crave) and taking a controversial stance (that many of us have also previously taken).  The irony being, of course, that this very disagreement is what this forum is built on.  

If you think Souhan, as a columnist, should be held to a higher standard, well then you just made the point of his second post for him.  
 

Disagree with the message all you want.  Don't read his column if you want.  But the posts suggesting that he sit on information we want to know or that he should feel bad for writing his honest opinion is absurd for a forum based on the free exchange of honest opinions.  

I'm guessing most of us could have a great conversation with Souhan, Ruesse, Terry Ryan, Molitor, or any other knowledgeable baseball fan whose baseball philosophy differs from our own.  At least I'd like to think so. 

Let's just agree to disagree on this one. Peace brother.

[tarheeltwinsfan]

 

It's not that access = quality. It's that access = accountability. I.e. only saying things you'll say and then looking that person in the eye the next day.

Imagine for a moment, if you will, that you are a player for the Twins. I wonder how much "truth" you'd give to a sportswriter. If I were a dejected player sitting in the clubhouse after a tough loss, and were asked a tough question about my bonehead play that just lost a game for my teammates in a pennant race, or an injured 24 year old who is feeling that by being injured, he is letting his teammates and his family down, or an aging veteran who is fighting to keep from being embarrassed by being released, the last thing I would want to do is have a heart to heart talk with my "friend" the sportswriter. How many of us have been quoted incorrectly or out of context in a newspaper or read a newspaper account of something in which we participated, only to read an incorrect account of what really happened? When that happens to a player, and it will, the players become guarded. Misquote me once, shame on you. Misquote me twice, shame on me. Access does not = truth. 

[tarheeltwinsfan]

Will Rogers got it right when he said: "All I know I read in the papers, and that is an alibi for my ignorance".

[Brandon Warne]

 

Imagine for a moment, if you will, that you are a player for the Twins. I wonder how much "truth" you'd give to a sportswriter. If I were a dejected player sitting in the clubhouse after a tough loss, and were asked a tough question about my bonehead play that just lost a game for my teammates in a pennant race, or an injured 24 year old who is feeling that by being injured, he is letting his teammates and his family down, or an aging veteran who is fighting to keep from being embarrassed by being released, the last thing I would want to do is have a heart to heart talk with my "friend" the sportswriter. How many of us have been quoted incorrectly or out of context in a newspaper or read a newspaper account of something in which we participated, only to read an incorrect account of what really happened? When that happens to a player, and it will, the players become guarded. Misquote me once, shame on you. Misquote me twice, shame on me. Access does not = truth. 

 

That's why you build trust with them. 

[gunnarthor]

 

After all this, here's where I'm at:

* I have zero issue with Souhan's initial column. Does anybody really think a third baseman approaching three bills is not a dicey proposition? Twins would be completely naive to ignore this issue. And more than one media member- including LaVelle- has corroborated Sano's weight IS a cinder for the org. Nowhere did I read Souhan was calling out Sano for being fat or was weight-shaming in any way.

* In the initial column, Souhan writes:
"Sunday night, the Twins placed Sano on the 10-day disabled list because of a stress reaction in his left shin. The injury was caused by a foul ball. His recovery might be affected by the amount of man that shin must support."

The longer Sano is out of the lineup, the more it appears there may be something to wondering if Sano's weight may be prolonging his recovery. With regard to the timing of the column, Souhan absolutely would have been trashed for writing that Sano's recovery was prolonged after the fact. Instead, he was criticized for trying to get out in front of the story.

* I think Gleeman was over the top with his critique of Souhan's column. You don't have to like or agree with everything you read. But at least be fair & rational about what you take issue with. Gleeman accused Souhan of writing things- that Sano was "soft," that Souhan blamed the injury on Sano's bulk- both claims that were patently false.

* I think Souhan's blog response to the criticism went too far. I totally get a journalist wanting to defend his integrity & professionalism. I don't think going nuclear with weight-shaming, name-calling, & cheap shots was the best way to get his message across.

* Gleeman seems to be thriving on the attention from all of this. I submit he could have gone about criticizing the initial column in a more dignified way that didn't thrust himself into such a negative light. The fact he keeps engaging in "kimono" & "Cinnabon" references as punchlines leads me to think he is reveling in the attention brought to this.

* I still think the initial column was met with resistance more so because of who delivered it, than what the message was. Even the column John wrote- "On Velvet Ropes"- that I believe contains many great points made by an extremely talented writer that I have the utmost respect for- made a leap referring to Souhan's initial piece as the "Sano's Too Fat" column.

I think this has deteriorated into personal issues between the parties involved that has gone way beyond debating the merits of a newspaper column. In the end, no one looks good when it reaches this point.

Wait a second- what are we all arguing about again?

Nicely said. Having read both individuals work for a number of years, I would side with Souhan over Gleeman every time. Gleeman often purposefully mis-characterizes other writers work to then attack it (read his Mauer/Souhan/concussion ****). He seems like a sad guy.

[Don Walcott]

 

Nicely said. Having read both individuals work for a number of years, I would side with Souhan over Gleeman every time. Gleeman often purposefully mis-characterizes other writers work to then attack it (read his Mauer/Souhan/concussion ****). He seems like a sad guy.

Out of curiosity, I just went and read about six articles by Souhan about Mauer spanning from about 2011-May 2017.  Souhan is incredibly harsh on Mauer and his "so-called" bilateral leg weakness, $184 million owed to him, refusal to play a different position for the good of the team . . . I could go on, but it makes me angry.