Sometimes Saying Nothing Means Nothing

I've gotten out of the habit of reading the sports editorials written by Plaschke because to me he pretty much is like a fairweather friend to the subject he covers. As soon as the subject isn't doing so well, he's more than quick in trying to make drama and place blame where there seems at the surface to be none just so people will read it. So stupid me reads a Plaschke article after reading all these ranting blog comments just to see what all the hubbub is about.  

Sad thing is the author just goes on a speculating spree that what McCourt didn't say in an interview means what Plaschke wants to write about.  It smacks to me of what the Jerry Springer Show would be like in print form. There are so many angles to write interesting things about the dodgers, but Plaschke seems to have trouble writing anything that doesn't involve imagining that the owner, manager, or GM is singling out "a few of the young players" and imagined front office chaos.

More specifically, the fact that Mr. McCourt said it wasn't fair to blame the GM for injuries and a high payroll that is underperforming somehow means that it is fair and further implies that the GM's job is probably in jeopardy if the underperforming (the team is just 1 game out of first place still, but yes it's true the team is underperforming) continues.  Then he goes on to cite a rumor from a source that isn't even his to imply there is some conspiracy within the organization to undermine either the GM or the owner.  Lame.  Plaschke might as well be writing about alien visitation or bigfoot sightings because the sourcing and speculation would probably be more credible

Furthermore, he goes on to twist McCourt's statements out of context to weave a tale about the possibility that some of the young dodger players could be dealt because they aren't winners.  This is a theme that Plaschke seems to have an on again off again love affair with despite the fact that all the young players minus Blake DeWitt are performing well.  If Plaschke's spin is to be believed and Joe Torre and the GM think so badly of Matt Kemp, why would he be batting leadoff and in addition be given ample opportunities to steal?  Why would LaRoche still be on the team?  These are the questions that pop the balloon of Plaschke's speculation and implications.

But what I believe is the most telling thing about how Plaschke weaves whatever you want to call that article is when he doesn't quote McCourt but says, "McCourt has learned some kids are ready to be winners and some are not".  Plaschke incorrectly implies that McCourt believes that these nameless young players that are not ready to be winners will never be winners and should be gone right before he quotes McCourt talking about the need for patience with young players.  Plaschke trudges on further to imply that these young kids could be dealt and the GM fired.  Never let the facts get in the way of a good soap opera story line, yeah?

If you look at the facts and who is playing it's clear to see who the organization believes in. Matt Kemp plays every day despite the innuendo from Plaschke's articles that he's some kind of troublemaker.  Another fact just for the heck of it...Martin, Loney, Ethier, and Kemp are the active players on base the most in that order on the dodgers.  What I also see is Ethier not playing enough, but I'm not going to be a Plaschke and pretend to know why that's the case.  I think Ethier should play more, but maybe there's something I don't know.  Maybe the GM or Torre do have that one wrong.  They still have a chance to make it right by continuing to play Ethier when Pierre is healthy again.  I mean, he only leads the team in homers and slugging%, power being the team's biggest bugbear this season, despite missing out on playing time early on.

LaRoche in my opinion since he's finally healthy should be playing third almost every day. DeWitt should be used to rest Kent late in games and started on Kent's rest days at second base.  Kuo should be starting over Stults in my opinion as well.  These are all simple adjustments that could make the team better with the pieces they already have.  There doesn't have to be some magic trade deadline deal to save Colletti's job as Plaschke hints at in his piece of work.  Just play the best players.

McCourt didn't say anything that actually feeds into Plaschke's conspiracy theories about how the dodgers are run.  McCourt didn't have to say it because Plaschke is a mind reader.  Give me a break.

This article makes me feel better about management/front office/GM et al (despite the problems I've expressed) because Plaschke had to work so hard to twist the owner's words to make the organization seem chaotic so all the Plaschke haters would get in a tizzy and the negative, viral, vibe cloud would spread through cyberspace like some internet version of the ebola virus.

I think I'm almost immune now.