392 replies to this topic

[joyofsox]

Something I blogged about yesterday:

Peter Abraham, Globe, September 29, 2011:
[T]here will be a press conference where Theo Epstein will take questions about the disaster that was the 2011 Red Sox.

Peter Abraham, Globe, October 4, 2011:
[I]t's time to be honest. The 2011 Red Sox were not a disaster.

***

It's nice to see Abraham own up to his part in perpetuating a lie - "I'm as guilty of propagating this as anybody else and for that I apologize" - but it remains distressing. Having done most of the Globe's in-game blogs, Abraham clearly knew all of these hitting stats throughout September.

The Globe's Extra Bases blog (and similar pages at other sports websites) has further blurred the line between factual reporting and the opinions of a columnist. Anyone who has read Extra Bases knows Abraham is no stranger to snark and back-handed (and front-handed) insults that should be out of place at a national newspaper.

If Abraham labels the team a "disaster" and then completely reverses himself four days later - and says that anyone who did call the team a disaster (like he did!) needs to "dial it back a little" - how can we take seriously anything he says from now on? Even his most factual reporting will (and, perhaps, should) be read with extreme skepticism. Readers of any future article may well wonder if Abraham will be shortly posting a complete retraction.

Unlike some other writers, who are either lazy or have agendas so blatant they might as well be posted in neon orange on their employers' websites, nearly all of Abraham's work for the Globe newspaper is well-written and the amount of material he posts to Extra Bases is clear evidence that he works his ass off.

But his about-face - however welcome it may be - damages the reputation of every writer that covers the Red Sox. It would have been better if Abraham had resisted the temptation to exaggerate and pile on when the team was going down the tubes. We deserve some professional distance and level-headed perspective from the beat writers.

***

Peter Abraham, Globe, September 29, 2011:
[T]he Red Sox were a collection of talented individuals who didn't necessarily seem all that concerned with the guy next to them.

Peter Abraham, Globe, September 30, 2011:
It was rare that a pitcher, particularly one of the starters, spoke to a position player and that created a gulf in the clubhouse ...
The 2011 Red Sox also were not the hardest-working team you'll ever see. Some players are extraordinary in their level of preparedness. But others did the minimum expected of them. ... It also was telling that the only regular players who routinely showed up for optional batting practice were Dustin Pedroia and Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

***

Is some of this true? Is any of it true? It seems within the realm of possibility that most of it is accurate, but, unfortunately, we really can't be sure.

[JimMonaghan]

Unlike some other writers, who are either lazy or have agendas so blatant they might as well be posted in neon orange on their employers' websites, nearly all of Abraham's work for the Globe newspaper is well-written and the amount of material he posts to Extra Bases is clear evidence that he works his ass off.

But his about-face - however welcome it may be - damages the reputation of every writer that covers the Red Sox. It would have been better if Abraham had resisted the temptation to exaggerate and pile on when the team was going down the tubes. We deserve some professional distance and level-headed perspective from the beat writers.

Those two paragraphs sum up the Pete Abraham experience for me. He has the talent, knows what it takes to do the job, but doesn't always deliver. Hmmm. Sounds a lot like some members of the 2011 Red Sox.

[JimD]

It would have been better if Abraham had resisted the temptation to exaggerate and pile on when the team was going down the tubes. We deserve some professional distance and level-headed perspective from the beat writers.

Exactly. He was also uniquely positioned to do so, given that he came from NYC and is not a longtime Boston guy like others who couldn't wait to relive the bad old days. I used to read his LoHud blog and was thrilled when Boston.com landed Pete Abe but he has been a Crawford-esque disappointment.

Edited by JimD, 05 October 2011 - 06:03 PM.

[cromulence]

I've said this here before, but I couldn't stand him when he covered the Yankees. He clearly had some players that he liked ("gutty gritty Brett Gardner", Swisher) and some that he didn't (or, in the case of A-Rod, openly despised). He would constantly bait and troll the readers of his blog, particularly when it came to A-Rod. He acts like a fan. When the team is playing well, it can be great - he definitely spends a lot of time and effort and produces a lot of content. But when things start going downhill or if something bothers him, he becomes insufferable.

[Spacemans Bong]

Exactly. He was also uniquely positioned to do so, given that he came from NYC and is not a longtime Boston guy like others who couldn't wait to relive the bad old days. I used to read his LoHud blog and was thrilled when Boston.com landed Pete Abe but he has been a Crawford-esque disappointment.

But he's not, he's from New Bedford. He grew up a Red Sox fan and it shows with his bellyaching every time they have a bad loss.

Cromulence shot this down in flames, but I wonder if covering the Yankees made him treat it like a job rather than an avenue to funnel his emotions about his favorite baseball team.

[cromulence]

But he's not, he's from New Bedford. He grew up a Red Sox fan and it shows with his bellyaching every time they have a bad loss.

Cromulence shot this down in flames, but I wonder if covering the Yankees made him treat it like a job rather than an avenue to funnel his emotions about his favorite baseball team.

I imagine his belly aches on a nearly daily basis.

*rimshot*

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Cromulence shot this down in flames, but I wonder if covering the Yankees made him treat it like a job rather than an avenue to funnel his emotions about his favorite baseball team.

Isn't this what we want? I really don't want our baseball scribes to be fans of the teams that they cover because while you get fawning articles when the times are good, you get the reverse when things suck.

Personally, I think Abraham has done a pretty decent job covering the Sox beat--actually, I haven't had a problem with any Sox beat writers in awhile as they've all been pretty good. On Twitter, Abraham does not come across very well, but Keith Law is way worse and I'll still read both of them. It seems to me that's the biggest problem people have with Abraham, he's mean on Twitter.

I have a feeling that if many of us got the same tweets he did (either from idiot fans or people clearly looking to start a Twitter fight) the reactions would be similar.

[JimD]

But he's not, he's from New Bedford. He grew up a Red Sox fan and it shows with his bellyaching every time they have a bad loss.

I didn't know that.

[backpeddling]

It's not that he's mean it's more the embarrassment of seeing a grown man and a so-called professional get into flame wars and Twitter beef on a nightly basis. Growing up as a pumpkin-headed C.H.U.D. must have really seeded some life long anger in him.

Edited by backpeddling, 06 October 2011 - 12:03 PM.

[soxfan121]

Isn't this what we want? I really don't want our baseball scribes to be fans of the teams that they cover because while you get fawning articles when the times are good, you get the reverse when things suck.

See Massarotti, Tony for the past two & half weeks. Good lord, I've never heard a media member sound so much like Jim the Drunk Asshole at my neighborhood bar, kvetching and whining about the team as if he were a fan.

OTOH, Gammons made a career out of being a reporter on (for?) his favorite team without ever coming across as the unhinged lunatic at the local bar. So, it can be done, at least by a HOF level talent.

Peter Abraham is not a HOF level talent. My suggestion for him would be to get off twitter and stop reading any email that comes from fans. He's clearly too thin-skinned to participate in either one, professionally. His editor should lay down a twitter rule on the guy, for his own good.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Getting off Twitter is not an option, IIRC the Globe requires them to use it.

[soxfan121]

CHB "uses" twitter - by writing 140 characters on a slip of paper and giving it to the intern who inputs his words into the typing machine.

There's a difference between using twitter and what Abraham does. Peter cannot handle real-time interaction. He comes off as a thin-skinned jackass and that undermines his credibility and ability to do his job. Instead of reading the tweets that call him a hack, he should be directed to only use twitter for his job and not engage in pissing matches with followers.

[ItOnceWasMyLife]

Pete makes his "who's the next manager" guesses here.

"One suggestion for the Red Sox: Make your candidates available to the media when they come to town for interviews. It makes sense as an evaluation tool. A big part of being manager of a team like the Red Sox is having the ability to be an effective team spokesman twice a day for 162 days and all of spring training. There's not much point in hiring a manager who can't deal with the media. That only leads to trouble."

Because dammit, I'm just that important!

[Brianish]

It makes absolutely no sense as an evaluation tool.

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

It makes absolutely no sense as an evaluation tool.

Really? The Red Sox manager has literally 200 press conferences every single year, not to mention upwards of 10 newspapers, five or six tv/radio outlets plus a national press following him from February through October. You don't think it's the least bit important that he knows how to handle himself in front of microphone or have some semblance of cool when talking to a journalist?

Come on, I know that Peter Abraham is the media meanie, but not everything he says is completely wrong.

[Brianish]

It makes sense as a hypothetical evaluation tool. Stage a press conference, sure. But taking them to actual media when they're just candidates? Before they have any stake in the organization, making them go back and forth with these guys? Whether you mean to or not, you wind up deputizing the media into your decision-making process, by virtue of their questions, their reaction - hell, their personalities. And the media's interest is different than the Sox'.

Besides which, do you really want to give the Boston media the opportunity to make decisions about these guys before you've made yours?

I mean, if you controlled the environment and worked with them to choose the questions, sure. But then why not just use your own guys to stage it?

The last thing I'd want is to put the Boston media where they can influence this decision. The organization has a policy of making decisions according to their own process, not media or public reactions, and it's generally worked out pretty well.

Edited by Brianish, 07 October 2011 - 09:13 AM.

[Average Reds]

It makes sense as a hypothetical evaluation tool. Stage a press conference, sure. But taking them to actual media when they're just candidates? Before they have any stake in the organization, making them go back and forth with these guys? Whether you mean to or not, you wind up deputizing the media into your decision-making process, by virtue of their questions, their reaction - hell, their personalities. And the media's interest is different than the Sox'.

Besides which, do you really want to give the Boston media the opportunity to make decisions about these guys before you've made yours?

I mean, if you controlled the environment and worked with them to choose the questions, sure. But then why not just use your own guys to stage it?

The last thing I'd want is to put the Boston media where they can influence this decision. The organization has a policy of making decisions according to their own process, not media or public reactions, and it's generally worked out pretty well.

This is absolutely 150% correct.

Understanding how a potential manager would handle the media is an important consideration. Feeding him to the lions before he's even the manager to see how he reacts will inevitably skew the process. Just a bad, bad idea, IMO.

[mt8thsw9th]

Really? The Red Sox manager has literally 200 press conferences every single year, not to mention upwards of 10 newspapers, five or six tv/radio outlets plus a national press following him from February through October. You don't think it's the least bit important that he knows how to handle himself in front of microphone or have some semblance of cool when talking to a journalist?

Plus, I think this is something they did in 2003 when they were interviewing the candidates. Where Abraham is lazy is in looking up how the last process went.

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

You know what, I apologize. I completely read that wrong, I had no idea that Abraham wanted the candidates to meet with the media prior to being hired. I thought he was saying that the manager should have some familiarity with speaking to the media.

What he's suggesting is kind of dumb.

[Brianish]

Honestly, logic aside, what floors me about that is the ego.

"Let us help you decide! We're supremely important; we should be involved in the process!"

Never mind that their job description is to be on the outside looking in. Methinks the little child inside Pete Abe secretly wants to work in a front office.

[mt8thsw9th]

Of a chocolate factory! Amirite?

[cromulence]

Honestly, logic aside, what floors me about that is the ego.

"Let us help you decide! We're supremely important; we should be involved in the process!"

Never mind that their job description is to be on the outside looking in. Methinks the little child inside Pete Abe secretly wants to work in a front office.

It fits with his personality perfectly. He was extremely harsh on Girardi during his first year, and while he probably had a legitimate gripe or two, it all pretty much boiled down to "He's not giving me every single piece of information he has, and I MUST HAVE THAT AND EVERYTHING ELSE, FOR I AM THE ALMIGHTY MEDIA!" He's extremely self-important.

[pedros hairstylist]

His harshness on Girardi was a. going along with the crowd -- they all came guns blazing at Joe; and b. being the 29th man on the NY media depth chart and therefore getting no tips or access that others didn't already have.

[Dogman2]

You know what, I apologize. I completely read that wrong, I had no idea that Abraham wanted the candidates to meet with the media prior to being hired. I thought he was saying that the manager should have some familiarity with speaking to the media.

What he's suggesting is kind of dumb.

It's just another way of saying, "Let's make sure the new manager can handle this pressure" mentality that brews from the beat writer's ego. It's dumb, self serving and screams "SEE, WE ARE RELEVANT"!!!

[Toe Nash]

This post really bothered me:
http://www.boston.co...thoughts_4.html

It's probably not particularly smart to drink while your teammates are playing. But be advised that this probably happens every day in some clubhouse. And more. One outfielder I covered, now retired, used to pour a shot of Kahlua into every tin of smokeless tobacco he opened. He kept the bottle in his locker and didn't care who noticed. Other guys sneak cigarettes in back rooms.
...
Baseball is not like football, basketball or hockey. It's a long, drawn-out season full of lulls, rain delays and hours upon hours of sitting there watching other people play. There are bound to be moments that push the boundaries of professionalism.

Now, he's pretty much right. Stuff like this goes on all the time and it's not a problem if the team wins.

But who was one of the main contributors to the Hohler report? Who was shown to have misrepresented Adrian Gonzalez quote about the schedule as Adrian Gonzalez complaining when he was actually just answering a direct question? Who has published numerous reports riling up the fans and sports radio about this whole mess? Abraham.

I don't doubt that he was being honest in his post today. But it's pretty hypocritical when you've published the stuff he has over the last few weeks and used misleading language to take players' quotes out of context. But I'm sure he's happy about the page views.

[SoxScout]

WEEI is killing Abraham this morning, basically calling him a liar. He had a throwaway line confirming Amorosino's dugout report, and then has not added anything. They are saying he wanted to be the first reporter, not tv guy, to have this so they think he just flat out lied.

This was from last night:

PeteAbe Pete Abraham
@
@JohnDennisWEEI No plans to. We checked it out, it checked out.

[drtooth]

Looks like a former WEEI intern (Ryan Hannable) took issue with Pete.

Hannable--Why hasn't @peteabe came out on record and confirm WHDH's report that there was drinking in the Sox dugout? He confirmed it to @IanMeropol

Hannable--@PeteAbe On record with who the "team source" is. You kinda just threw it in the article too. Pretty big info, why only one paragraph?

Pete--@hannable84 Um, you mean I wrote in the newspaper? Like that?

Hannable--@PeteAbe Is it a Globe policy not to name "team sources?" Or did the source wish to be anonymous? I just have an issue with unnamed sources

Pete--@hannable84 I'm sure Mr. Dennis will be impressed with your tenacity. But you don't out sources. We confirmed their report.

Hannable--@PeteAbe Understandable, just doing your job. Would be nice to see a "team source" come out on record with a name. Thanks for clarifying

Pete--@hannable84 Feel free to take it up with my editors. I've told you all I can. Hope you understand.

Hannable--@PeteAbe I agree, just when it comes to unnamed sources on an issue like this + num. of Sox denying it makes me question validity of source

Pete--@hannable84 Yes, our policy , much like every media outlet in the world, is not to reveal names of sources who require anonymity

Hannable--@PeteAbe It's nothing against you though, you're just doing your job and reporting on what you hear

Pete--@hannable84 That would be awesome. But people fear for their jobs, etc.

[MedfieldFan]

WEEI is killing Abraham this morning, basically calling him a liar. He had a throwaway line confirming Amorosino's dugout report, and then has not added anything. They are saying he wanted to be the first reporter, not tv guy, to have this so they think he just flat out lied.

This was from last night:

Yesterday D&C were holding Abraham up as part of the evidence and went on air with the response from Amorosino that one of his sources reconfirmed the report the Red Sox know the drinking in the dugout story is true.

Are they crapping on Amorosino too?

[SoxScout]

Yesterday D&C were holding Abraham up as part of the evidence and went on air with the response from Amorosino that one of his sources reconfirmed the report the Red Sox know the drinking in the dugout story is true.

Are they crapping on Amorosino too?

Amorosino went on TV last night and held his ground. They were incensed that Abraham wrote a throw-away line, then refused to revisit it.

[MoGator71]

Amorosino went on TV last night and held his ground. They were incensed that Abraham wrote a throw-away line, then refused to revisit it.

Yea I didn't get the outrage over that. There were suggestions that Pete was either downplaying the story intentionally, possibly per the team's request, or just slacking off not digging for more corroborating sources. They did say that Pete's source(s) are apparently not the same ones who spilled their guts to Amorosimo, so apparently there's at least been some note-comparing going on.

[HomeBrew1901]

Yea I didn't get the outrage over that. There were suggestions that Pete was either downplaying the story intentionally, possibly per the team's request, or just slacking off not digging for more corroborating sources. They did say that Pete's source(s) are apparently not the same ones who spilled their guts to Amorosimo, so apparently there's at least been some note-comparing going on.

How would they know? If a source is anonymous, I can't imagine other reporters comparing notes to see if they have the same person.

I could be completely wrong there, but I just don't see Amorosino or his editor talking to Pete or the Globe about who their sources are.

[pedros hairstylist]

How is it Pete Abraham's job to verify a story by Joe Amorosino? This is WEEI just trying to be part of a story that they're watching from the sidelines.

[HomeBrew1901]

How is it Pete Abraham's job to verify a story by Joe Amorosino? This is WEEI just trying to be part of a story that they're watching from the sidelines.

I think that's exactly what Peter Abraham is doing by commenting about this after Amorosino came out, he's trying desperately to be noticed and part of the story.

[MedfieldFan]

How would they know? If a source is anonymous, I can't imagine other reporters comparing notes to see if they have the same person.

Pete Abraham to Source : "You talk to Joe Amorosino?"
Source to Pete Abraham : "Nope"

I kind of understand WEEI's point - you confirm the story in a throwaway line in a blog post, and then write a long blog post summarizing the 11 PM press release denying it - not mentioning that you have a source that has confirmed the same story, and then write a strange "I sympathize with the players" blog piece that calls what you just reported not that a big deal. You've effectively buried your own reporting.

My take on it was that he wrote the "this is all blown out of proportion" blog post to get more access to players and is burying the drinking in the dugout story along the same lines, even though that's the real story - are Lester, Beckett, and Lackey all lying?

Edited by MedfieldFan, 20 October 2011 - 12:51 PM.

[HomeBrew1901]

Pete Abraham to Source : "You talk to Joe Amorosino?"
Source to Pete Abraham : "Nope"

I kind of understand WEEI's point - you confirm the story in a throwaway line in a blog post, and then write a long blog post summarizing the 11 PM press release denying it - not mentioning that you have a source that has confirmed the same story, and then write a strange "I sympathize with the players" blog piece that calls what you just reported not that a big deal. You've effectively buried your own reporting.

My take on it was that he wrote the "this is all blown out of proportion" blog post to get more access to players and is burying the drinking in the dugout story along the same lines, even though that's the real story - are Lester, Beckett, and Lackey all lying?

All good points and that was my first thought when he wrote the bolded portion, that he was trying to gain access.

[MoGator71]

How would they know? If a source is anonymous, I can't imagine other reporters comparing notes to see if they have the same person.

I could be completely wrong there, but I just don't see Amorosino or his editor talking to Pete or the Globe about who their sources are.

One of them (I thought it was Meter but I wouldn't swear to it) said that Pete's source was different. Not sure where they got that...unless they talked to Abraham and he told them he had it from a different source. But in general I agree, it's odd that either Amorosino or Abraham would know unless their source(s) told them "yea, this is the same story I told Amorosino (or Abraham)".

[pedros hairstylist]

I'm not saying PeteAbe is not also trying to become part of the story, he's been trying to drive this train for weeks now. I'm only saying the faux outrage of D&C over this one minor thing makes no sense. Attack the guy on the merits, not on piddly stuff like this. The "news" was already broken by Amorosino so doing his own separate reporting and separate story would have been also-running and a waste of time and real estate.

Pete doesnt need to talk to Amorosino -- he can ask his sources if they talked to Joe and if they say no, then he goes with it.

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

PH is exactly right. EEI has been getting their lunch handed to them over this by both ESPN.com, the Globe and TSH. They needed to get into this and what better way than a media fight? Unfortunately, the perception is that EEI (at least the radio guys) is the house-organ and they wouldn't risk their broadcast deal with the Red Sox in order to break this type of news.

Last week John Dennis was the guy breaking the Theo to Chicago rumors and it doesn't take a lot of dot connecting to assume that his source was the guy that's on their radio program many times during the season: Larry Lucchino. Because I can guaran-fucking-tee that John Dennis didn't put on his Scoop Brady fedora and beat the bushes for the news. Unless he found out the news at the bottom of a box of Dunkin Donuts, in a note stuffed in a bottle of gin or buried in the cup on the fifth hole. That fat, drunk prick can barely find his way home.

[MedfieldFan]

One of them (I thought it was Meter but I wouldn't swear to it) said that Pete's source was different. Not sure where they got that...unless they talked to Abraham and he told them he had it from a different source. But in general I agree, it's odd that either Amorosino or Abraham would know unless their source(s) told them "yea, this is the same story I told Amorosino (or Abraham)".

This is my recollection : I think Chachi from WEEI talked to Amorosino - and Amorosino had talked to his own source after the 11 PM press release came out and reconfirmed. That time frame would have been after Abraham had published his post confirming Amorosino's story - a logical question would have been whether the source had also talked to Abraham.

Edited by MedfieldFan, 20 October 2011 - 02:33 PM.

[MoGator71]

PH is exactly right. EEI has been getting their lunch handed to them over this by both ESPN.com, the Globe and TSH. They needed to get into this and what better way than a media fight? Unfortunately, the perception is that EEI (at least the radio guys) is the house-organ and they wouldn't risk their broadcast deal with the Red Sox in order to break this type of news.

Last week John Dennis was the guy breaking the Theo to Chicago rumors and it doesn't take a lot of dot connecting to assume that his source was the guy that's on their radio program many times during the season: Larry Lucchino. Because I can guaran-fucking-tee that John Dennis didn't put on his Scoop Brady fedora and beat the bushes for the news. Unless he found out the news at the bottom of a box of Dunkin Donuts, in a note stuffed in a bottle of gin or buried in the cup on the fifth hole. That fat, drunk prick can barely find his way home.

And that's being enhanced by the angle they're taking with this story. These 2 are always right there ready to rip guys for this or that, but now this dugous story breaks and Callahan is buying the denials based on the degree to which Pete Abe bulldog's this story.

[I am an Idiot]

Humor?

JD Drew

[moretsyndrome]

Humor?

JD Drew

The Rooster??

[Lose Remerswaal]

Think he got that from P&G where it was posted this AM?


Or from Uni-watch, where I got it from to post on P&G?

[Tyrone Biggums]

Why do people still read this clown? You can read the same stuff 3 hours before print on the AP Wire.

[E5 Yaz]

Why do people still read this clown? You can read the same stuff 3 hours before print on the AP Wire.

It's sort of an online puzzle game. Track down where Abraham ripped something off from, then wrote it without attribution.

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

Why do people still read this clown? You can read the same stuff 3 hours before print on the AP Wire.

To me, Pete is akin to Carl Crawford. I was excited to hear he was coming to town. Initially I cut him some slack and tried to truly enjoy his efforts. But thus far it's been an outright disaster. The only difference is I still have some hope CC can turn it around.

[rembrat]

In his defense, the story had this:

Thanks to loyal reader Dan from Arlington who passed along this photo and allowed us to have a little fun. And get that "2" fixed before Pudge Fisk sees it.

[I am an Idiot]

Think he got that from P&G where it was posted this AM?


Or from Uni-watch, where I got it from to post on P&G?

edit: I need to learn to read

Edited by I am an Idiot, 06 November 2011 - 06:26 AM.

[Corsi]

She looked good in the still picture. I watched the clip of her going fur shopping and Anna has lost more off her fastball than Kris has. Time has not been kind

Saw 5 minutes of "Baseball Wives" before the onset of retching. Anna Benson lost her fastball worse than Kris ever did

https://twitter.com/...106509374001153


Pete posted this one-liner at 12:03am -- exactly 8 minutes after BigMike.

Edited by Corsi, 01 December 2011 - 06:54 AM.

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

We should go to Abraham's house and burn it down. Taking a well-worn cliche and juxtaposing it with a previously hot pitcher's wife is certainly grounds for accusation of plagiarism.

You're doing God's work Corsi.