Okay, I Have To Do It
I tried really hard to just let this Steve Kelley “apology to Erik Bedard” go. But, I can’t. I can’t just let this sit there. So, here we go.
Last week, a few readers — well actually a lot of readers suggested, demanded really — that certain sportswriters, namely me, owed Mariners pitcher Erik Bedard an apology.
They’re right.
Awesome. You totally do. Glad to hear that you figured that out.
After all, we (and by we, I mean I) have spent a lot of the past two years lamenting the trade that sent a large chunk of the Mariners’ future to Baltimore for a pitcher we (and, by we, I mean former general manager Bill Bavasi) expected to be the ace of the staff as the Mariners challenged for an American League West title.
Of course, that never happened.
Bedard rarely was healthy. He made only 30 starts in two seasons. He ran too many deep counts, which meant the bullpen usually had to get up by the fifth or sixth inning and he was as exciting to watch as your Uncle Bob on the putting green.
Not only that, but he might have been the most media-unfriendly Mariner since, I don’t know, Phil Bradley?
It was as if he were allergic to reporters. He answered questions in a monotone, often snickered at the questions we asked and never let us see what was behind his icy eyes.
It was that way from his first spring-training start in 2008 in Scottsdale, when he got hit hard by the San Francisco Giants and dismissed every question he was asked.
I’m sorry, didn’t you say that you owed Bedard an apology? Does “recounting everything I hate about a person” qualify as an apology to you? Why are you repeating the same tired insults you’ve been hurling at him for two years now? Wasn’t the point of this piece to admit that you were wrong, not to try to defend your wrongness?
His personality (or lack of one) should have nothing to do with the way we covered him, but human nature being what it is, Bedard created an adversarial relationship which affected the way we (I) wrote about him.
Hey, good, we’re back on track here, even though you apparently felt the need to take another swipe at the man you’re attempting to apologize to. But at least you’re admitting that you let personal bias get in the way of whatever journalistic ethics you’re attempting to hold onto. That’s a good first step. Maybe it will get better from here…
Of course, he never made it easy on himself. He asked out of his first homecoming start in Baltimore, because of an injury and he never gave the impression — on the mound, or in the clubhouse — that he had that Cliff Lee give-me-the-ball-and-I’ll-throw-200-pitches-if-that’s-what-it-takes mentality.
He wasn’t a gamer like CC Sabathia. He wasn’t an Alpha Dog like Curt Schilling. He couldn’t be counted on every fifth day from April to September. That was the impression.
And we’re right back to listing the reasons you hate the guy. This is now two attempts to apologize, both of which times you’ve followed an apologetic lead in with shots at Bedard. You suck at this whole apologizing thing.
Last season, it always seemed as if Bedard was afraid to throw hard. His fastball was topping out in the 80s. His control was off.
Erik Bedard’s average fastball in 2008: 90.9 MPH. Erik Bedard’s average fastball in 2009: 91.5 MPH, exactly the same as it was in 2007, when he dominated hitters in Baltimore. You also suck at fact checking, apparently.
There were those of us (me) who thought he was a malingerer. That he didn’t have the heart to pitch in the heat of a pennant race. That he didn’t much like the game.
I’m not sure if you realize this or not, but you’re still insinuating that there’s some truth to this stupidity by repeating it yet again.
Now we know he was hurt. He was trying to pitch with a torn labrum, which is a little like a miler trying to run with a broken ankle.
You should have led with this, and then just stopped writing.
This was, quite possibly, the worst apology in the history of the world. You, Steve Kelley, managed to take an article where the premise was that you were wrong about Erik Bedard, and turn it into a defense of your own stupidity. You now need to apologize for your apology.
Or just go away. We’d settle for that, too.
I’m glad you posted his (um) story so I don’t have to go read it to see how bad this was. Been avoiding him for the past 10 years. I always believe that if we all stop reading him completely that he’ll just go away. For the good of Seattle sports (and beyond).
Welcome back Erik Bedard!
Steve Kelley is a terrible columnist and this piece just proves that even further.
This column is just pandering to the masses of Mariner fans who have decided to hate Erik Bedard on principle. He is as uninformed in writing this as the 10 year old kid sitting in the CF bleachers screaming for the hydro race
Man, what a jerk.
I can understand negative feelings about the horrible trade, and all the time lost to injuries. But that’s not Bedard’s fault. Only a jerk would really hold those things against him.
Only a major-league asshole would not only hold those things against him, but rip him apart in an ‘apology’ column after he signed for peanuts.
If we bend over backwards to assume that Kelley is actually presenting an argument against Bedard, however passive aggressive, then I believe it could be loosely categorized as hinging upon a logical fallacy called “ad hominem abusive.”
From the Wikipedia:
That being said, Kelley was an equally bad writer when he was in Portland. His style hasn’t changed much so whoever hired him can share responsibility for this melodramatic tripe.
Jim Moore at 39:09
I guess it doesn’t help that, to grab viewers, news/journalism/reporting either has to be good or inflammatory. Being good is hard, and subjective. That style created legends. But you either need time to stand out, or have to luck into something.
It’s much faster to say things that people either love or hate. Perez Hilton can “succeed” much more in two years than Murrow could in a decade.
Larry Stone at 19:08
Liam and that’s what happens when you just read the headlines, or skim things.
It would be so easy to Godwin this right now…
I’m disappointed in Larry; it’s like he read a completely different column than the one Dave and I did.
Kelley is a lazy, terrible writer. What does it take for someone to get fired?
Well, Stone (as great a guy – and columnist – as he seems to be) is still a colleague of Kelley’s and in the employ of the Seattle Times. He may have pulled a few punches here.
And Moore? He’s occasionally funny but even less insightful than Kelley.
I read this exactly as Dave did, and thought it was worse than the usual I have come to expect from Kelley, especially in recent years.
What’s funny to me is that some people actually thought it WAS an apology…
First Geoff Baker refuses to vote for Edgar, then Jim Street fires off an indirect cheap shot at USSMariner et. al, and now Steve Kelley slams Bedard in an attempted apology. As if I needed an additional reason to get my Mariners news from this site only –however, as much as I agree that Kelley’s column was classless, I will always be appreciative of his vocal support to keep the SuperSonics in Seattle.
I don’t think Kelley should have apologized.
Anybody here ever read a baseball column from NY? They would have been calling for the public execution of Bedard.
He’s beyond terrible with reporters and his results have not been anywhere near what we gave up for him in the trade.
He also has made millions of dollars for being a complete bust here in Seattle. Shit, I would gladly fail as a pitcher for seven figures a year if all I had to do was take a little flack from reporters.
I don’t think Kelley should have apologized.
Anybody here ever read a baseball column from NY? They would have been calling for the public execution of Bedard.
Yeah. And there’s a reason the other 95% of the country hates that team. Drunken moron fans, way too much of the press, and no sense of perspective.
That sort of bullshit would have written off Pershing because he couldn’t save his family, he must have been useless.
I seem to recall a lot of sources stating that Bedard was a bad pitcher, a malingerer, over-paid and under-worked, a huge mistake, was sullen and uncooperative, had bankrupted our farm system, etc. Kelley apologized for his contribution to the negativity even if he didn’t word it in a way that satisfied some people. For a journalist to apologize in print is a big deal (I was one and had to do it once too) and for his editor to approve of his doing it gives the Times more credibility in my eyes. Let those who have cast their own negative comments apologize first and then they will be free to judge others. I had a negative view of Bedard at times but no longer, which I think is a common condition among Ms fans. I admire your baseball expertise and writing talent Dave but your negativity detracts from that appreciation. Stick to what you do well. You did not have to do it Dave; you chose to impugn a man’s character and motivation and went negative. I think you owe him an apology.
Like that’s all Bedard’s fault. If you want to blame someone for that trade, blame Bavasi, not Bedard.
What I don’t understand about those who bash Bedard, is why they seem to think his flippancy with the media means he doesn’t care about pitching well. Think of the last few years from his perspective. He gets brought over here and given the sisyphean task of saving Bavasi’s rear. His arm obviously hasn’t been truly healthy in the two years he’s been in Seattle, which somehow means he’s a wimp. Turns out he had a torn labrum. A good corollary to this is Walter Jones. I don’t see anyone calling him a wimp for not playing on his knee after microfracture surgery.
Anyway, think about where Bedard would be had he not had these arm troubles. He’d probably have been the top of the FA pitching class and received a deal north of what Lackey got, possibly approaching Sabathia level. Instead of inking a ~$100 million contract this winter, he has just signed for $1.5 million. I doubt that any of us are as frustrated and disappointed with Bedard’s shoulder than Bedard himself. His arm woes have conservatively cost him ~$50 million.
Why do more than ignore him with a casual snort? Just note that he’s nothing less than a typical, old-school sportswriter.
Only classing him in with a certain cult-like political-religious persuasion (a forbidden tactic here – and one I’m glad of) would display my revulsion more than that epithet.
The amount of cheese needed to go with Kelly’s whine would feed an underdeveloped country for a year.
Can somebody help me locate the place where the apology is actually expressed? There’s a bit where he recognizes the need for an apology, but I don’t actually see the words, “I apologize,” or, “I’m sorry.”
Just proves what I’ve thought all along about all of this.
The media honestly believes that making themselves a part of the “story” is a viable part of “journalism” nowadays.
It used to be that the media actually reported stories, now they tell us what we should feel about people, based solely on how they “feel” about them.
That’s NOT journalism!
“We never got to see what’s behind his eyes”??? Seriously? What a joke!
These idiot journalists need to learn that THEY aren’t the reason we read their inane drivel, we read it looking for information about the PLAYERS.
I personally couldn’t care LESS whether or not Bedard likes the media.
In which case, doesn’t the way he was treated by the media validate his reasons for not wanting to talk to them in the first place?
I would snort derisively at the stupidity of most of the questions that players are asked as well…and this backhanded “apology”, simply reinforces his disdain for the media.
These people really need to learn that they aren’t the story, they are just the monkeys typing it out.
Ah, the “unpology”: I tried to explain to a friend of mine once that “I’m sorry you’re such an asshole that you forced me to act like one, too” does not quite capture the spirit of what an apology is supposed to be; apparently Kelley might benefit from a similar talk. In fairness, Kelley’s column does have the flavor of a classical apologia, that is “defense,” but I somehow doubt he was thinking of Socrates before 501 of his skeptical fellow Athenians…
Understatement of the year. I have to change the channel when he comes on the radio. Unintelligible, unintelligent crap.
And an apology in advance – Sorry, Mr Moore for pointing out your many and obvious flaws as a “journalist”.
Steve Kelley would be proud of that…
True what Steve said did not in any way reflect an apology, but I would like to try to look at the Bedard deal and what Steve may have been trying to say from a better prospective.
While Bedard has only been a disappointment to Seattle since his arrival, we should not weigh what we loss to get him against him. Frankly, Bedard let us down in his first 2 years in Seattle; we paid for an efficient 200+ inning starter and we got a -80 inning geriatric. But for a much lower cost, Eric has the chance to at least partially redeem himself. I personally want to believe that the Mariners have what it takes to make it into the post season. While Bedard probably wont contribute much towards getting there, he should be ready to contribute when it counts. If we have 3 or possibly 4 starting pitchers with sub 3 era performances, no one will be able to stop us!
And lets at least look at our future baring one point in mind, the Seattle Mariners should enter the 2010 season with both the best pitching staff in baseball, in a pitchers park, and the best defense in baseball.
[off-topic]
GarForever — not only is it a failure as an apology, it’s a failure apologetic for Kelley’s previous attacks. However you slice it, this piece of his is even more embarrassing than most of his junk.
Kelley criticizes Bedard for not pitching when hurt (“He asked out of his first homecoming start in Baltimore, because of an injury and he never gave the impression… he had that give-me-the-ball-and-I’ll-throw-200-pitches-if-that’s-what-it-takes mentality”) and then criticizes him for pitching while hurt (“He was trying to pitch with a torn labrum, which is a little like a miler trying to run with a broken ankle.”).
Crappy, lazy journalism.
FWIW, Jim Moore’s “apology” to Ian Snell was also not so much an apology as Jim explaining what he knows about depression.
I had better success letting go, Dave. I actually had about half an e-mail put together of similar sentiments and just said screw it.
Steve Kelley sucks at his job, and now we know he sucks apologizing for his suck.
We may agree with Geoff at times, but thank goodness for him and Larry.
I generally get tricked. Usually, it’s Stone who has a print story listed at the bottom of the Blog page. I click without looking closely and contribute to his reader count. D’oh.
Reading Dave and the comments made me laugh. What Steve did by writing the way he did was try to put things in context. He is explaining why he wrote as he wrote for the last two years.
They weren’t meant as put downs, they were meant to show where his thinking came from at that time. He admits that that thinking was wrong.
From reading the comments, a lot of people do not like Steve Kelley. So, you don’t give him the benefit of the doubt when he was actually writing something nice. It is exactly what Kelley had done in regards to Bedard over the years.
I sure am glad to see that others see his “apology” the way I did. It was more about justifying his reasons for his unprofessional demeaner towards Bedard than anything to do with an apology.
There’s an old saying,”When trying to get out of hole, one must first stop digging”. Apparently Kelly’s pen (or keyboard) makes a great shovel.
Two posts in rapid succession. What is this, Lookout Landing?
Steve Kelley’s non-apology reminds me of another famous non-apology. Paul Newman from “The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean”
My favorite part about Kelley’s piece is his statement about Bedard’s fastball. He’s a professional journalist and he says something that can be disproved by anybody with an Internet connection and 5 minutes of spare time — hilarious.
I would say that I was embarrassed that this is the first time I’ve even heard of Steve Kelley, but it doesn’t look like I have much to be embarrassed about. Wow.
Some of you must not have read the same article that I read.
I read the article in question, (usually I don’t read Kelley, at least not in the last 10 years or so, but I guess I got sucked in by the headline and clicked on the article) and saw it exactly the same way that Dave saw it.
It was about as insulting an apology as a person could write, without being purposely satirical. The ad homs flowed like water…
You and me both.
I also had a sense of dissonance reading that column because it was supposedly an apology. It’s definitely one of the weirder columns I’ve seen in the sports section. Was he really trying to apologize, but failed because he sucks at it? Or was he trying to be clever, and inadvertently crossed the thin line into stupid?
I bet Kelley was snacking at the same time he was apologizing. And you can’t snack and apologize.
The general reaction here seems more or less like the reaction in the comments section at the Times. Over there I said that, to me, this was maybe Kelly’s best column ever. That’s not saying much, and it went over like a lead balloon. But it was interesting.
I think you have to start with the fact that Bedard has behaved like a jerk toward the media. That’s a fact.
But why doesn’t this make him less likeable? That’s the part I’d like to know. Maybe it’s our own reaction to the stupid questions that athletes have to answer. Or sympathy with the times that you turn in a terrible performance on the field and don’t want to talk to anyone, but the media won’t leave you alone.
But anyway, back to Kelly. I thought his apology at the end was sincere, in his own pompous way. He genuinely thinks he underestimated Bedard as a person. The buildup was needed for the story. Like I can see it as a movie about the 2010 Mariners. Bedard behaves like a churl to a young reporter, say Chloe Sevigny. She lets him have it. Later she finds out he was injured and apologizes. Felix and Lee go down with injuries, and Bedard has to pitch in the Series along with Fister and Vargas. He wins the Series MVP after throwing 150 pitches in the last game and winning 7-6. Cut to celebration on the field, etc.
Anyway, instead of getting mad at Kelly I find all this very interesting. I’d like to see what Jeff Sullivan’s reaction is.
Agreed, AncientMariner; I intended my “concession” to Kelley’s classical rhetorical skills as facetious. Sorry that didn’t come across (that last part was NOT facetious
).
So Steve doesn’t know how to write an apology; so what. Steve’s apologizing can be compared to Bedard’s contribution to the Mariners; He hasn’t done so well over the last few years, but he’s willing to try again on the cheap and he may be a good contributor on the end.
…and that comparison would fail because Kelley has never been a contributor and there’s no reason to believe he will or could be.
Steve Kelley is the worst sports writer in Seattle, and quite frankly I think you’d be hard pressed to find a worse writer out there. Certainly appreciate that USS Mariner and everyone else thinks the same. The fact that Art Thiel only gets “ink” on the interwebs while Kelley’s trash gets sent out in print to the masses is an injustice.
I Think we owe Steve Kelly an apology (by we I mean I) It was his apology to Eric Bedard that got us (me) all in a tither about certain facts and not so factual facts at that. Its not that we (I) expect beat writers of the local scribe to have a charming personality or even a sense of fairness in the subjects they cover, but when they completely miss the strike zone year in and year out and there is no hope they will ever be traded or even retire we (myself) get to the point where we (I) wish he would magically just disappear. And as we later learned of Mr. Kellys degenerative condition of the medulla oblongata, his writing and obtuse personality comes better into focus.
If writers had an xFIP, Kelley’s would be very high indeed.
I find it funny that journalists complain about bloggers not being informed or objective enough to be journalistic, then turn around and use the blogging medium to air their non-objective, non-journalistic opinions. Fans can’t do it but they can? Pot, kettle, etc.
How was what he wrote nice? He took several jabs at Bedard in the piece. If that’s nice, I’d hate to see his mean.
Also, we’re not paid to present facts to thousands of impressionable customers. Then again, aparently Kelley isn’t either.
So, no, it really isn’t exactly the same thing at all.
Also, we’re not paid to present facts to thousands of impressionable customers. Then again, aparently Kelley isn’t either.
Quite right. As a columnist, Kelley is being paid primarily for opinion, not facts. Baker and Stone are the guys they pay to provide facts.
The worst part about this is that Kelley (and The Seattle Times as a whole) is what the casual fans read. Most fans simply tune into ESPN, local sports radio, and read the local papers to get their baseball/M’s news.
Sadly, this terrible article only perpetuates ignorance.
Thanks, Dave, for expressing so well what I thought when I read the column.
The phrase “personality (or lack of one)” is one of the rudest things I’ve ever read in an alleged family newspaper. Erik Bedard has a personality: he’s rather shy, not particularly comfortable in the United States and not very media savvy, nor does he seek the media spotight. He’s not Barry Bonds, he’s not Steve Carlton, and he had the bad fortune to be the subject of a notorious trade and then be injured for most of two years, neither of which was in any meaningful sense in his control.
If Steve Kelley wanted to apologize, he could have gone up to Erik in spring training, put out his hand and said, “I was wrong about you, I wrote some things that were undoubtedly hurtful and I apologize. I hope you can forgive me and I wish you luck with your rehab and I’m glad you’re still a Mariner.” And then taken whatever Erik did or didn’t say back to him.
I think Kelley’s point, though delivered inartfully, was: “I apologize for implying Bedard is a wuss. He was hurt, and he behaved as any normal intelligent hurt pitcher would under the circumstances. However, I do not apologize for criticizing his treatment of the media. He was never very nice to me, personally, and his injury does not excuse that behavior.” Agree with it or not, that’s what his article was meant to convey. Too bad he doesn’t have the chops as a writer or the balls as a person to convey it.
Steve Kelly is a dick. And he knows very little about baseball.
So Eric does not like reporters? Hum, this is just the latest prime example of why sports figures take that attitude. It would have to be tedious in the extreme to have to deal with Kelly’s crap, only to have him write that “apology”, Steve, word up, don’t expect a smiling Bedard in spring when you show up in front of his locker.
And shame on Jim Moore, and Larry Stone for supporting that indefensible diatribe. SHAME
You are right that this is a funky apology. I enjoyed your disection of it. To be fair, Steve has so many inches to fill and he has to put into context his apology so readers would understand it. In the end, I am glad Steve did this, because it could help all the media re-think their perception of Bedard and perhaps allow Bedard to loosen up a bit with the media. Let’s face it, we are all kind of surprised Bedard and the M’s still wanted each other. Maybe the media and Bedard can forge a new relationship now that won’t be as adversarial.
True, although supporting your opinion with facts that are easily accessible probably isn’t too much to ask for.
It’s interesting how many people are reading Kelley’s article and thinking that, just because he says there’s an apology in there somewhere, there must actually be one, even if they can’t see it all that well. You know, obscured as it is by all the additional personal attacks and insinuations.
It would have made for an interesting column, had he not tried to make an asinine fauxpology. I’m beginning to think that Bedard stole Kelley’s lunch money.
I stopped reading Steve Kelly about ten years ago too, one of the worst sportswriters ever with absolutely no sense of the subtleties of sports. There was absolutely no way in a million zillion years that he would be able to understand Erik Bedard, that was a given from the get go.
So in this column (which I didn’t read) he’s apologizing for writing a column about Erik Bedard (which I didn’t read). What he should do is write a column apologizing to every serious Seattle sports fan for wasting newspaper space and everybody’s time for too many years to count (and I wouldn’t read that column either).
Apparently there there were other complaints that were edited from the final draft.
This part was cut:
I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment, Dave, but I think you even give him too much credit here:
That’s giving Steve Kelley FAR more credit than he deserves. I know it’s part of the piece’s shtick to try to show how even his legitimate attempts at apology are followed by more Bedard-bashing, but you have to really twist yourself in knots to see an admission of anything whatsoever in that quote. Here’s what he did do:
1) Make an abstract statement of principle (“his personality… should have nothing to do with the way we covered him”), and a rather weak one at that. The fact that he needs to be reminded of this is damning enough by itself.
2) Include an unsubtle swipe at Bedard within that statement of principle (“or lack of one”).
3) Lay the blame primarily on … human nature. (“being what it is”)
4) Lay the blame secondarily on … Erik Bedard (“Bedard created an adversarial relationship”)
5) Insert himself as — at best — a tertiary object in the whole thing. Because of human nature (nobody’s fault!), Bedard created a situation (Bedard’s fault!) that affected the way Kelley (and others!) wrote about him.
Pathetic.
I thought it was part of Steve Kelley’s job to interview difficult subjects, and to get behind the reticence.
Lol I laughed so hard when i read that. Thanks Dave finally someone stepped up and put him in his place. I hope he reads your blogs because that was one god-awful apology.
I think we all owe Steve Kelley a big thank you for doing such a good job of showing us why Eric Bedard hates dealing with the press.
One of my favorite players of all time was another left handed pitcher, Steve Carleton, who outright refused to talk to the press. Barry Bonds was always a favorite of mine too. I never minded Randy Johnson biting the head off a reporter, or Lou either.
The press are worms. Its not their fault, they were born that way. But they have a skill, writing, which is hard, that then gives them the false illusion that they know what they are writing about. Once in a while the two skills come together and you will find a sports writer that actually knows something about baseball. But most of the time sportswriters are more concerned about ginning up controversy, and egging on the fans to share their own pet peeves than about actually educating or informing their readers.
Truth be told most baseball blogs aren’t any better, this one and Lookout Landing being notable exceptions.
In addition to Steve Carlton, another famous player that refused interviews was Ted Williams.
The timing is certainly interesting. Had Bedard not re-signed with the Mariners, thus assuring his ongoing presence in Kelley’s zone, Kelley would likely have let matters stand. I seriously doubt he would have written an “apology” column had Bedard signed elsewhere.
What Kelley should have done was apologize to Bedard in person and then ask for an interview, during which Bedard could have (had he so chosen) given his viewpoint on the trade, his injuries, who he is as a shy multiligual Canadian, whatever. But Kelley didn’t bother. The “public” apology has nothing to do with being fair to Erik Bedard. It is Kelley covering his own tracks with everybody looking. Unfortunately, it doesn’t count.
If I were Bedard, I would never give Kelley the time of day.
It was actually a nice classical allusion that GarForever made, it just needed to be explained a little more. I remember a college class where we were trying to understand Socrates’ _Apologia_ (as written by Plato) and the professor explained that “apologia” meant a very different thing to the ancient Greeks than the word “apology” does to us. As GarForever said, an ancient Greek “apologia” is a defense for one’s action, it is not a modern “apology”.
GarForever was being facetious, Kelley was trying to do a modern apology … or was he?? Given how poorly it seems to serve in that role?
I do not believe that “the press are worms.” In fact I do not believe in engaging any generalization about any group of people.
This particular column, and (sadly) more often than not this reporter, is a poor excuse for journalism/a journalist. But don’t lump ALL of his colleagues in with him.
Kelley didn’t deserve Bedard’s cooperation, and Bedard’s reticence toward all reporters was understandable given his treatment by Kelley and others of his ilk. However, that doesn’t change the fact that too few ballplayers understand that the press – like ‘em or not – are the link between the team and the fans, who ultimately pay their salaries. Those members of the press who say that ballplayers must be accountable – even if they come across as over-privileged whiners when they say it – have a point.
It’s just that Steve Kelley isn’t making that point, and what he is trying to say is juvenile and pathetic.
This guy makes Plaschke look legit.
Kelley is right, about pretty much everything he said. I couldn’t agree more with him.
That said, bringing EB back is still a good move. It will give him a chance to redeem himself and revive his fledgling career. But, in all honesty, I doubt he will. I find it far more likely that RRS will be the third starter and I’m okay with that. Stats don’t lie, Bedard is always broke and had been for years. Hopefully he turns it around… I just don’t think he will.
Even all the parts that are provably wrong?
And what years would those be? The two years before he was traded to the M’s when he had 33 and 28 starts? Those years?
How many sports blogs get discussions about Plato and Socrates?
You cant prove opinion Paul. It is my opinion that EB was chappy with the media and appears to not care about the game.
Bedard is always broke and had been for years
Yes. He has been. 08&09: 15 starts each. I’d say being broke for the past two seasons qualifies as “years”. He was healthy in 07&08, and the years before that he was hurt and a lousy pitcher (about 140 IP each year ERA 4+).
Dave, after this blog you really oughtta write Steve an apology (wink, wink)!
Steve Kelley is lazy, uniformed, and just a bad writer. I think the Times keeps his column because they know people get p’d off reading his crap.
As an east coast Mariner fan, I am proud to say that I have never read an article by Steve Kelley before today and quite frankly never care to ever again. He sounds like a pompous, contentious, malingerer, who is either quite clumsy in his writing or extremely rude. Did I mention that he comes off as self-absorbed? Anyway, I sincerely hope that Bedard understands that Kelley does not speak for Mariner fans with this tripe.
BTW, I love the comments attached to this post. Kudos to those that have drawn attention to the Greek word, apologia, from which we get the modern day words apologetics and apology, which can sometimes serve as antonyms. Maybe if Kelley could read this blog he might learn a thing or two about logic, common sense, and literature, after all, he is supposed to be a writer isn’t he? Just another example of why people that get more than the proverbial fifteen minutes of fame find the media arduous. Of course, if Kelley is a columnist then he probably is being paid to agitate his audience.
Is this: His fastball was topping out in the 80s. an opinion? Even if it is, it can be proven to be wrong. So what is an uninformed opinion worth to you?
I found it hilarious that in Steve’s article he compares Bedard’s treatment with that of Bill Walton with the Blazers when it’s Jerryd Bayless that immediately comes to mind as another athlete misunderstood by the media and fans (and who has saved several games with BRoy out, but I digress).
Quite honestly, I find it commendable that most players don’t come off as overly taciturn or grouchy with the mainstream media. The pure tediousness of the same monotonous questions ad nauseum would certainly make me reluctant to speak to any of them.
So, basically, trying to pitch through an injury, thus causing a further injury, is not caring about the game, hm?
That’s a really STUPID opinion. In my opinion.
Seems like this would be a good question for the next event with the M’s brass:
“Given that certain members of the media have, for whatever reason, taken a dislike to certain players over the years, to what extent is media relations the job of the individual players, and is there anything the organization can do to help a player who finds himself on the short end of a personality conflict with a reporter?”
I’m not sure about the mid 80s deal… How about I amend my previous post to read “pretty much everything”… oh, wait, it already says that. Email me and I will expound further on the definition of “pretty much”.
gwangung, writing a word in bold caps REALLY makes your point, well done. I can see you frothing at the mouth while slapping at your keyboard.
OK, here’s your entire post.
Show me where the words “pretty much” appear in that statement.
I completely agree with all of the criticisms of Steve’s piece. That said, anyone calling for his head, click on any article on the Seattle Times site, and notice that his article is currently listed as the most read! Seems backward, but business is business and the Times needs circulation to sell ads, so when the editor sees that Steve is getting so many hits, he would be a fool to fire him just because the readers dislike him and his writing. All he cares about is all those juicy hits.
So I hate to say it, but you can conclude that as annoying as Steve’s article was, and as poor of a specimen of journalism as it was, it was actually a brilliant publicity piece, and it has benefited just about everyone: we all have something to vent about (so it doesn’t benefit our employers I guess), the Times benefits from our readership, Erik maybe even benefits from a freshly fired up and defensive fan base, and Steve can tout having the most “popular” article. “Any publicity is good publicity,” isn’t that how the saying goes?
Anyway, my opinion is that Bedard agreeing to come back here to give it another go in a place he knows there is a lot of skepticism about him, says much more about his desire to compete than those icy eyes will ever tell Steve Kelley.
[name-calling]
that’s the most passive aggressive half-assed apology I think I’ve ever read.
@n8tron3030
I definitely see your point, and agree with you to an extent. In addition, I’d say that Kelley (well, maybe not Kelley…)–an intelligent columnist could have generated significant, if not as much, publicity with a well-written, genuinely apologetic article.
[reply to name-calling]
If you’re going to enter a thread and make claims that fly directly in the face of post you’re commenting on (“Kelley is right, about pretty much everything he said. I couldn’t agree more with him”), expect to see your position challenged. And when you can’t support your position with fact, expect to see it fall apart.
By the way, your claim that agreeing with “pretty much everything” Kelley wrote is not simply about opinion. Your opinion is that Kelley is right about just about everything he wrote. Right/wrong questions are not a matter of opinion. Kelley is not, in fact, right in everything he wrote, so your opinion that he is right is inaccurate. It may be just your opinion, and it’s fine to state that, but when someone points out that your opinion is inaccurate, it is completely unacceptable, immature, and inappropriate to attack them personally.
Will someone please create a moniker “Steve Kelley” and post an apology for the apology? I think that’d be really funny.
Well, yes. Rarely do we have an opportunity to train our sights on someone who’s so obliging in painting such a large target on their back. Well, except, maybe, for Mr. Kelley.
You stated an opinion. It was, on its face, a very ill-informed and stupid one (which was explained) . You should man up and defend it.
Having been part of the Jim Street fiesta on this blog just last week, and regretting any part I had in blowing it up, I will keep my Steve Kelley opinions to myself. But I’m not really sure why Dave, as bright a baseball analyst as he is, throws this kind of raw steak into the pit. It’s not pretty.
Steve Kelley must have whatever the sportswriter equivalent of ‘tenure’ is.
I have to say, Dave, I’m disappointed in you for not taking him to task with the biggest problem of his ‘apology’.
Lack of one sentence paragraphs.
I only counted around seven.
Step it up Mr. Kelley, step it up.
One of the great things about the internet is that I’m no longer limited to whatever columnists are delivered to my doorstep. I can pick and choose where to go and who to read and a writer has to earn my readership on a daily basis. I haven’t read Steve Kelley in years and this reminds me why.
[too far]
He should have just posted an apology to a Bedard bobblehead on YouTube…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl5z_peWpnc
Steve Kelley was a huge fan of the Bedard trade when it was made. Here’s an excerpt from his column on 2/9/08:
Steve Kelley’s opinion has always been worthless and will likely remain so.
For a stats geek you sure do pick alotta fights.. I’m not saying they are not warranted, but the old school paper boys in Seattle might put a bounty on yah Dave. Pretty much all people come unarmed knowing or not, crossing words with you.
My first reaction to reading the column was an immediate question. Would Kelley have written his “Bedard apology” column had Bedard signed with the KC Royals??? I think not! So the motivation was questionable from the outset and the final product was fatally flawed and insincerely timed as well as written as most informed readers have concluded.
We need a similar piece about Geoff Baker’s latest. Augh.
Geoff Baker’s piece wasn’t that funny, but it got the point across. I’m surprised he took such a deep, satirical dig at Kelley.
Yet another reason I cancelled my subscription to the Times.
As a struggling “writer” who hasn’t even come remotely close to making it, it drives me crazy to see morons spouting opinion and getting paid for it. Why can’t I be a rich moron with an opinion? 2 out of 3 isn’t bad, I suppose.
Am I the only one that sees Geoff Baker as being satirical towards Kelley? Maybe I’m just an optimist…Honestly, the players Baker is fauxpologizing to certainly deserve it.
You do realize that Baker’s post was all satire, yes?
Yes. But, like Kelley’s piece, it was horribly executed (IMHO).
I’m not sure that anyone would argue that point. It did pretty much suck.
HOLY NUMBER CRUNCH BATMAN. Does sarcasm register on this hack? Dave the Accountant, Kelley is one of the best commentaries on the page. He is expunging the emotions of the fan w/ re. to Bedard and his lack of…of EVERYTHING. Why so hostile? Diversify man.
It’s much easier for me to believe that this comment shows sarcastic intent than Kelly’s article.
IMO.
Thank you for writing this post. I agree. So many people, it seems like esp those in roles w/more leadership, do not understand basic ethics anymore. How hard is it to make an apology w/o ripping a person? It’s not that hard. IMO, we need to all teach each other the basics again. Yikes.
It just shows me another reason why blogs (good ones that is) are more relevant than newspapers in lots of ways. Someone is keeping it real and has common sense. Thanks.
But seriously, why are we so hostile to Steve Kelley who is a gifted writer (see spelling, grammar, etc. ~more sarcasm) and an outstanding sports commentator. He’s pointing out the lameness of Bedard. He is not apologizing! (see sarcasm) We all agree Bedard has been lame at best.
When I read the original, I thought it was a very lame apology, sort of the kind my kids give which are loaded with excuses and explanations of impulses beyond their control which made them do the offending deed. Kelley sort of but doesn’t really take responsibility for what he’d written. I would suggest that there is a difference between reporting and commentary which is that the latter is most often an expression of opinion while the former ought not to be. I think Kelley writes commentary. Too often expressions of opinion help form the opinions of others – people are generally lazy and if someone like Kelley doesn’t like a ballplayer, there are all too many who will take that as gospel without ever wondering if there’s validity to the criticism. That Kelley had little idea of what was going on in Bedard’s body (no more idea than I had) and took Bedard’s personality with the media personally, published his stuff (and was allowed to do so by the Times’ editorial staff), is bad.
Dave is correct to write what he posted.
[dupe]
I need to make an apology for the double post.
No, we don’t.
I seriously hope that this was missed sarcasm. If not you should really look into what he has done the last 2 years while injured and compare other (healthy) pitchers numbers to his. I think “lame” is far from what you’ll find.
[too far]
sigh…
I am shocked to see more here. Bedard’s value is debatable perhaps. No one I talk to is happy with the acquisition. No one.
To the original point:
1. Steve Kelly wrote a piece and sarcastically wrote about apologizing to Bedard for commentary against him.
2. He berated the pitcher pretty good with the piece.
3. This ‘Dave’ wrote the piece “Okay, I Have To Do It”
4. He wrote, among other zingers, “I’m sorry, didn’t you say that you owed Bedard an apology?”
The author does not understand the sarcasm in the Kelley piece. Certainly.
You should talk to different people.