- This topic has 81 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
White knighting for unsolicited activists is a personal bias.
I could be wrong but my suspicion is that these complaints against players only come up when two things happen:
1. The player is underperforming on the field.
2. The player’s “activisim” is contrary to the opinions of the critic.If Jack was performing like a top 5 cy young candidate would his activism still be such an irritant?
If Jack’s activism were directed towards a different political bent would his on the field struggles be more easily forgiven?Like I said, no one wants to be preached to unless they walk into the church. That goes for activists from Hollywood, MLB, a neighbor, or the commoner who shares an office cubicle with you at work. I don’t think performance is the main factor. Maybe ESPN can get Ricky Gervais to host the ESPYs next time.
Also, if you’re criticizing the critic of an activist for having a political bias, then the bias probably goes full circle.
I’d give up Martinez and either Woodford or Oviedo for a good bat. Maybe Soler. I’m also intrigued with Mitch Haniger, if he can rebound from injuries. He may not cost as much in a trade.
I am saying that the critics seem to be inconsistent as to when this activism bothers them.
Not in my case. My criticism is consistent once established. There are more than a few movies I have not seen because one of the actors has ticked me off in the past and usually they are great actors but I just can’t look at them without being reminded of whatever sin it was they committed to tick me off. Same thing in other fields including sports but not whole teams – just individuals.
gscottar – you asked how many prospects I would give up for a bat. I gave you an answer in a possible trade. We have lots of trade chips, including some of our present major leaguers like Wong and Bader.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.