Ramirez has gotten called out at every level by players and managers. Now a former teammate says he wouldn't have a pizza with the guy. You think it is jumping to conclusions to assume it is for the same reasons that Ramirez has been getting called out for all these years (and most recently basically got his manager fired for)?
Of course it is. It's the very definition of jumping to conclusions. The conclusion may well be correct but the process of getting there is flawed regardless.
To put it another way, we extrapolate performance all the time on this board with incomplete information. We look at defense using limited metrics. We predict future performance based on small sample sizes. I'd say my perspective on Hanley has more predictive factors than most comments here.
That's a horrendous analogy. You're claiming because we often make general statements based on incomplete information we're justified in making specific statements based on an almost complete lack of information.
This isn't saying that Adrian Beltre is a damn good fielding third baseman based on several years worth of imperfect statistics; it's saying that Jose Iglesias is going to win the 2015 Gold Glove for the Diamondbacks because lots of people say he plays good defense.
There are very few acceptable reasons to imply that you do not like a guy to a reporter and #1 on just about any list is that he is a lousy teammate. I guess it is a subjective call, but I would give you 100 to 1 odds that I am right (of course without any objective way to verify this short of Lester sitting down with us and explaining his true intent this is, admitedly, internet posturing).
If you can find a way to get a real answer, I'll find a way to put up a hundred bucks, not because I think you're wrong but because those are odds I can't pass up.
Edited by Rasputin, 14 July 2010 - 05:02 PM.