It's only cheating if you win.
The ink is now dry on the contract former Blue Jays catcher Gregg Zaun signed last week. Zaun, who the O's drafted in 1989, is returning to finish his career with the team that traded him in 1996. The 37 year-old catcher has made the media rounds and consensus is he's going to be a great addition to the O's, both with his glove and his “clubhouse presence.”
Zaun is expected to start the 2009 season as the Orioles number one catcher before giving way to super prospect Matt Wieters.
I have yet to find a fan in Baltimore who sees any fault in the Zaun signing, which is saying something because long-suffering Orioles fans are quick to criticize--and rightfully so. Eleven straight losing seasons is enough to make any fan base cranky. Everyone is just peachy with the Zaun signing, though. He's “gritty,” “experienced,” and “a good mentor.” Hey, I'll admit that when I heard Zaun interviewed on 105.7 last week, I thought his attitude was the right one for the O's. The Caifornia native sounds like a no-nonsense guy who won't take losing lightly.
Plus, he has a pretty cool website.
That being said, I can't believe there hasn't been even a single mention of Zaun's being named on the Mitchell Report. Not in the papers, not online, not anywhere. And I've spent some time looking.
For the report, Kirk Radomski produced a 2001 check from Zaun that he says was given to him in exchange for illegal performance enhancing drugs. Former Expos bullpen catcher Luis Perez also said that he supplied Zaun with steroids.
Here's the check image, if you are interested in such things.
Zaun's story? The media-friendly catcher was uncharacteristically silent for two months before claiming that the check he wrote was intended for Jason Grimsley, to whom he “probably” lost a bet. Zaun claims he must have signed the check but he did not write the check to Kirk Radomski. Someone must have done that after the fact.
My guess is the bet was, “I bet you can get me steroids.”
Meanwhile, as the Orioles have continued their search for a power hitter, Barry Bonds, a player for which Senator Mitchell could not produce a smoking gun, has been denounced as “a cheat,” a “jerk,” and a “clubhouse cancer.” I've tried on multiple occasions to drum up support for the slugger, who wants to get another shot in the major leagues.
Of course, Baltimore was humiliated in 2005 when Rafael Palmerio wagged his finger at the United States Senate, so a natural revulsion to players linked to steroids is understandable, but if Gregg Zaun is good enough for the O's, why isn't the all-time home run king?
Is it because Bonds doesn't give out blank checks?
Because Bonds didn't apologize? Neither did Zaun. When he finally stepped forward, he used the Brooks & Dunn defense: Deny, deny, deny.
In light of the evidence, how can one assume the innocence of one player but not the other? And if we assume that one is guilty, then we should assume the same of both. So why would Baltimore, a city whose team that has been sullied with steroids allegations, open its arms for a 37 year-old soon-to-be-backup catcher but not for the best hitter in the history of the game? What is it acceptable to allegedly use performance enhancing drugs while hitting for a career .251 average but not to club the most home runs of any player ever?
Since Zaun hasn't broken any records except for the title held for most “g's” in a first name, fans can look the other way. Bonds, however, is not given the same treatment because he broke one of the game's hallowed records.
Also, Bonds has a reputation for being prickly with the media, while Zaun is a guy who knows how to work the beat reporters. Check out his talk with masnsport.com's Roch Kubatko. Clearly, Zaun knows what he's doing when he opens his mouth, which is what makes his blank check defense so glaringly weak.
This is not intended as a knock on Zaun. I, too, think he is the right catcher for the O's this year. This is a criticism of all of those O's fans, and MLB fans elsewhere, who have shunned Bonds while cheering the arrival and presence of lesser steroids-tinged players. Those who get up on their moral high horses to hurl insults at Bonds are themselves practicing situational morality, the same type of moral relativism Bonds is accused of practicing. The next time Bonds' name comes up, don't say “he cheated the game.” No fan, at least no fan I've met here in Baltimore, really has a problem with players who cheat the game. Not with the way we've stood by Brian Roberts, and not after we've rolled out the red carpet for Zaun.
The next time you want to knock Bonds, Mr. or Ms. “baseball purist,” say “he was too good to play the game.” That is, technically speaking, what fans are so enraged about.
It seems many fans only have a problem with players who are so good they have solved the mysteries of the game. Barry Bonds, whether through PEDs or otherwise, is the baseball equivalent of a card counter. He's not really cheating in an unacceptable way. He's just better than everyone else at doing it. So the house, in this case the owners, have thrown him out. We're not good enough to count cards, and we're jealous of someone skilled enough to do so, so we're happy to shun someone who can win like that.
Let that be a lesson, kids. If you're going to allegedly cheat, make sure that doing so doesn't make you better than the rest of us. We are only willing to accept alleged cheaters who aspire to mediocrity.
Barry Bonds' representatives declined to comment for this story.
Comments
"What is it acceptable to allegedly use performance enhancing drugs while hitting for a career .251 average but not to club the most home runs of any player ever?"
That's exactly right! Zaun did not cause any lasting harm to the game, so it is easier to forgive and forget. He's a bit player. Bonds, on the other hand, is the poster boy for the steriods era. He stole one of the sport's most treasured records, and the history of baseball will forever be tainted by him. On top of that, he is a first-class jerk with a swelled head (both figuratively and literally)!!!
C-man, don't you think it's a little dishonest to condemn the "poster boy" for steroids, but not average steroids users? Does Bonds' accomplishments truly make his alleged indiscretions worse than Zaun's?
PS, how do you "forgive and forget" Zaun when he hasn't apologized?
You are correct with the notion that cheating is cheating, but your reasoning as to why one signing gets done and one doesn't is incomplete. It's true that Zaun does not provide the offense Bonds does, however it's also true that he doesn't provide the bagage. The last time I checked, Zaun wasn't indicted on 10 counts of making false statements to a federal grand jury and one obstruction of justice charge. Zaun does not have a trial date set for March. There are different sets of circumstances surrounding these two players; it is thought by many that Bonds' issues are often magnified as a result of his own success, while some feel that his surly demeaner and poor relationships with teamates and the media fuel the added scrutiny. I don't doubt that even at his advanced age Bonds could still help a team with his bat, but any team that signs him gets the total package, which happens to include constant media scrutiny, criminal trial proceedings, and a cancerous clubhouse presence. So, lets just remember, there are more factors in play that seperate these two players than just batting average and career home run totals. Now, whether or not you veiw that as fair is irrelevant, fair or not, it is a reality.
tyninmd5150,
I think your points are very relevant. I can't really advocate for actually signing Bonds at this point because I think the urgency of doing so went out the window when they traded for Pie, thereby relegating Scott to DH.
With Scott DHing the team probably doesn't need the distraction he would bring as a 44 year old player putting up perhaps only somewhat better numbers at this point in his career.
What I really want is for people to stop moralizing. Maybe by the time Bonds is ready for HOF voting, they will have done so.
I doubt it.
So the O's couldn't use Bonds because he is blocked by Luke Scott? Are you serious? One of the greatest hitters in MLB history is blocked by Luke Scott?
Ummmmm, were I making the calls, I'd go with Bonds over Scott, but most fans would not. I don't get it, either.
No, I would trade Scott and get some prospects, then sign Bonds. If you can get anything out of Bonds, they would get ticket sales not to mention free press.
The Mitchell report was an absolute joke. Nothing came out of it. Suspicions arose that was it. (a few players WILL stay out of the hall of fame aka McGwire) If players could get away with it, they will. ALL of them.
I think its more the popularity of Bonds over Zaun rather than it being a moral issue.
Morals went bye bye a long time ago in sports.
Just play the game. Entertain the masses. Thats all i care about. Compete. Win. Charge mounds. Fill ballparks.
Jay, like you and I chatted the other day -- I don't think fans care for the most part who did what unless they are a HOF caliber player who tarnished himself or someone who became infamous.
Contrast the treatment that Jay Gibbons got over Brian Roberts, or how Gary Sheffield was more or less forgotten for being implicated with BALCO, while Giambi was flogged and then ultimately forgiven for his involvement.
Meanwhile, why is Barry Bonds in a heap of legal trouble, while Lance Armstrong -- whom many have accused of drug use -- is treated like an icon in society?
Fans, I think at this point realize what happened, are at peace with it and saw it for what it is. From what I see, all people still care about is their entertainment and want to see competition.
BTW, if helps if you're a good guy.
I don't think the players see anything wrong with what they did -- most did it to keep their spot, or simply become better players than they would have been otherwise.
PEDs will not make an average hitter into Ted Williams, but will make a guy with warning track power into a better power hitter thanks to time in the gym. Furthermore, a lot of players used HGH and other drugs in simple recovery from surgery, pain, etc.
I assume some players are still 'cheating'; however, I just want enjoy the game and see for what is -- a business where a lot of millionaires play a child's game.
I've come to acceptance to what I am really seeing in sports.
Well said, OP. Your points are well taken. I waited two weeks to put this stuff about Zaun out there because I was hoping someone else could bring it up and let it be out there.
I don't really want to dwell on the subject, a lot of athletes cheated and still cheat, and in the past the league was responsible as well.
I still think it was something that is worth mentioning, in this case in regards to Zaun because he is being viewed as "a great mentor."
But I don't want to argue about who's guilty and who's innocent.
Right about now, you and me both probably just want to watch a few innings of ball.
I'd like to see Barry back in the game somewhere. I dig the long ball. I view the game as entertainment and homers are entertaining. Barry's talent was immeasurable without the juice. I think the juice helped him stay in a few games that he might have stayed out of to let his muscles rest. When another guy juices to hit .250 and 20 HR's it is a bit comical. While records are a bit sacred, I kinda don't care that some of them are tainted to some degree. Even with Barry I think he'd be in the high 600's in HR's without the juice. Having him hold the record isn't giving anyone else cancer, making anyone else less money or diminishing their legendary status. Let it rest already.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!