Mitchell Report to Name Names

[CALSGR8]

I keep hearing about the big story that is going to break regarding Mitchell's investigation of Steroid Use in Baseball.  All I keep hearing about this is there is a list of players who may be on the mailing list of pharmaceutical companies.  If its just a mailing list, unless the player has been tested and tested positive or admits to it, does just being on a mailing list constitute guilt? 

I get spam in my email every day.  I don't ask for winning laptops, life insurance, various drugs but I still get the ads in my email.  It doesn't mean I take them up on their offers.  In fact I usually put them on a junk sender's list and delete them.

If this is all the Mitchell investigation has, then that's pretty weak.  Because unless a player has been tested over the years or admits to it or has witnesses to him taking them.

Balco and Barry are well documented.  This better be well documented and not circumstantial.

[shoeshineboy]

The Mitchell investigation is a joke. Anything that comes out of that will be whatever Bud Selig wants to come out. Mitchell is in no way an independent investigator.

[natsfan1a]

Wonder whether anyone who is playing in the postseason is on the list. Have the leaks been selective? (conspiracy theory )

[Nat of the Living Dead]

Whoever is on the list, evidence or no evidence, will have a black spot on the career for good.  That is for sure.

[kimnat]

Whoever is on the list, evidence or no evidence, will have a black spot on the career for good.  That is for sure.

That would be a shame if what shoeshine is true.  And I trust what he says!

[shoeshineboy]

That would be a shame if what shoeshine is true.  And I trust what he says!

Mitchell served as a Director in the front office for the Boston Red Sox when Selig hand picked him to run the "investigation". How independent can he be? Also, reporters have indicated that conversations around the league with FO personnel indicate that, on the record, they are cooperating with the investigation, but off the record, they are doing as little as possible. Selig knows that he and the other owners are culpable in this whole mess, but he refuses to come clean. My hunch is that they will likely have their scapegoats and pay some lip service to how comprehensive and exhaustive the process is, but Mitchell has probably had very little access to talk with anyone, and with the ongoing criminal investigations going on, players aren't likely to say anything anyway.

[spidernat]

I keep hearing about the big story that is going to break regarding Mitchell's investigation of Steroid Use in Baseball.  All I keep hearing about this is there is a list of players who may be on the mailing list of pharmaceutical companies.  If its just a mailing list, unless the player has been tested and tested positive or admits to it, does just being on a mailing list constitute guilt? 

I get spam in my email every day.  I don't ask for winning laptops, life insurance, various drugs but I still get the ads in my email.  It doesn't mean I take them up on their offers.  In fact I usually put them on a junk sender's list and delete them.

If this is all the Mitchell investigation has, then that's pretty weak.  Because unless a player has been tested over the years or admits to it or has witnesses to him taking them.

Balco and Barry are well documented.  This better be well documented and not circumstantial.

Don't worry. I doubt Cal Ripken was dumb enough to leave a trail that would lead back to him. Besides, he probably just shared Brady Anderson's supply.

[Kenz aFan]

The Mitchell investigation is a joke. Anything that comes out of that will be whatever Bud Selig wants to come out. Mitchell is in no way an independent investigator.

What he said

[PC]

I was just listening to the Buster Olney clip on ESPN.com and he was talking about the Players' Union wanting named "sourced" and talking about due process.  Sourcing or due process has nothing to do with this.  Due process would only matter if someone was being prosecuted and no one is being prosecuted.  MLB isn't even going to punish them because, at the time these things were being done, they were "legal" in baseball.

And the "court of public opinion" doesn't count because you don't due prison time if you're found guilty in the CoPO.

Anyone whose name is released in the report will almost certainly deny any performance-enhancing drug use so we'll be exactly where we we've always been, people being accused and the accused denying it.

[shoeshineboy]

I was just listening to the Buster Olney clip on ESPN.com and he was talking about the Players' Union wanting named "sourced" and talking about due process.  Sourcing or due process has nothing to do with this.  Due process would only matter if someone was being prosecuted and no one is being prosecuted.  MLB isn't even going to punish them because, at the time these things were being done, they were "legal" in baseball.

And the "court of public opinion" doesn't count because you don't due prison time if you're found guilty in the CoPO.

Anyone whose name is released in the report will almost certainly deny any performance-enhancing drug use so we'll be exactly where we we've always been, people being accused and the accused denying it.

Yup, sure sounds like a good description of a joke to me.

I'm typically not a fan of si.com columns, but I thought this one from back in may struck the right chord:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/05/22/extra.mustard/index.html

[spidernat]

Anyone whose name is released in the report will almost certainly deny any performance-enhancing drug use so we'll be exactly where we we've always been, people being accused and the accused denying it.

[arkymark]

Depends on what the mailing list is -- people whose address they have, or people to whom they mailed drugs.  George Mitchell's done great things in his life, like helping end the killing in Ireland.  I wouldn't jump to the conclusion he's Bud Selig's boy.

[shoeshineboy]

I wouldn't jump to the conclusion he's Bud Selig's boy.

Mitchell was picked by Selig and is part of the Red Sox organization. He is not an independent prosecutor or government investigator with subpoena powers or authority to depose people throughout the league. I fully expect Mitchell's report to point out past abuses and name some players, which is nothing new. The only way I would change my mind on this is if the Mitchell report comes out saying that Selig and all the owners in GMs colluded to encourage/not discourage steroid use, knowingly condoned it, and did everything possible to try and cover it up and use their influence with the media and government officials to avoid prosecution. That would make me think Mitchell actually did a real job of investigating. Anything less than a complete condemnation and scathing expose slamming the owners, front offices, and players across the board will simply reinforce my belief that he is a stooge with massive conflicts of interest who ran a bogus PR scam overseen by Selig.

[heatchucker]

selig sucks  can we impeach him?

[CALSGR8]

selig sucks  can we impeach him?

If only we could and if only O's fans could Impeach Peter!  

[Ashburn]

I wouldn't worry about names being tossed out there with little thought or evidence.  Mitchell, after all, is a former federal judge, U.S. Senator and Ambassador.  So if anything, I'd expect his report to be under-stated.

[arkymark]

A director is not in the front office.  A director's job is to ride herd on management as an independent voice on behalf of the shareholders --management, in theory, answers to the directors, not the other way around.  Course, it doesn't always work out that way, but it's not like he's an employee. 

[CALSGR8]

Yup, sure sounds like a good description of a joke to me.

I'm typically not a fan of si.com columns, but I thought this one from back in may struck the right chord:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/05/22/extra.mustard/index.html

You're right.  Excellent Article.

[shoeshineboy]

A director is not in the front office.  A director's job is to ride herd on management as an independent voice on behalf of the shareholders --management, in theory, answers to the directors, not the other way around.  Course, it doesn't always work out that way, but it's not like he's an employee. 

Actually, I pulled that title from his wikipedia entry where the direct quote was: "Mitchell also serves as a Director in the front office for the Boston Red Sox." So I can't vouch for all the duties it entails, just that that's his title. He's listed on the Boston Red Sox site under front office personnel as well http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/team/front_office.jsp?c_id=bos

The sematics may certainly be an issue of accuracy as point out (whether technically Director is above not in the front office, etc.). But I think most people tend to use "front office" as an umbrella term for the organization that owns and operates everything and encompasses the personnel outside of all the coaches, players, and team staff. Regardless of the technical definition of his role, the bottom line is that he is part of the Red Sox organization (or was when he was tapped by Selig, not sure if he temporarily stepped down or something.) So unfortunately for Mitchell, no matter how competent or dilligent an effort he puts in, he was immediately tainted by an appearance of conflict of interest.

[tomterp]

A director is not in the front office.  A director's job is to ride herd on management as an independent voice on behalf of the shareholders --management, in theory, answers to the directors, not the other way around.  Course, it doesn't always work out that way, but it's not like he's an employee. 

Actually, I pulled that title from his wikipedia entry where the direct quote was: "Mitchell also serves as a Director in the front office for the Boston Red Sox." So I can't vouch for all the duties it entails, just that that's his title. He's listed on the Boston Red Sox site under front office personnel as well http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/team/front_office.jsp?c_id=bos

The sematics may certainly be an issue of accuracy as point out (whether technically Director is above not in the front office, etc.). But I think most people tend to use "front office" as an umbrella term for the organization that owns and operates everything and encompasses the personnel outside of all the coaches, players, and team staff. Regardless of the technical definition of his role, the bottom line is that he is part of the Red Sox organization (or was when he was tapped by Selig, not sure if he temporarily stepped down or something.) So unfortunately for Mitchell, no matter how competent or dilligent an effort he puts in, he was immediately tainted by an appearance of conflict of interest.

I think SSB is correct on this - Director can also be a position title within a management heirarchy.  We use that title in my company, as the level below Vice President.  From the wording and descriptions, I don't think Mitchell is a member of the Board of Directors, but rather is employed by management in some vague capacity.

[arkymark]

I would bet not.  He's the Chairman of a ginormous international law firm and holds tons of prestigious board and committee appointment.  I don't see him working in upper management of a baseball team.  Could be wrong, but that's my guess.

[tomterp]

I would bet not.  He's the Chairman of a ginormous international law firm and holds tons of prestigious board and committee appointment.  I don't see him working in upper management of a baseball team.  Could be wrong, but that's my guess.

Upon further research, you could be right.  I finally found a small reference to Mitchell being one of the ownership group, albeit probably a small percentage.  One of those prestige members brought on to make your group look good.

[NatsAddict]

Like most baseball teams, the Red Sox are a partnership, with the general partner being an LLC.  In this case, the general partner is New England Sports Ventures, LLC (NESV) - a Delaware corporation.  Being a partnership, there are no directors  in the conventional corporate meaning.

On April 4, 2006, NESV amended its corporate registration.  I found this part of the registration interesting:





[attachment deleted by admin]

[kimnat]

HUH????

[shoeshineboy]

Upon further research, you could be right.  I finally found a small reference to Mitchell being one of the ownership group, albeit probably a small percentage.  One of those prestige members brought on to make your group look good.

Yeah, I wouldn't expect Mitchell to have any actual day-to-day interaction with the operations of the organization. But he is an interested party from the ownership perspective - and probably has some sweet seats at Fenway. The bottomline is that as a person with a stake in one of the most popular franchises in baseball, and part of the establishment of baseball's ownership cabal, he has a conflict of interest. This is why most expect him to produce a report that focuses on players and a network of PED abuse in clubhouses, but not a public admonishment of owners and front office personnel who knowingly supported the proliferation of PEDs for their own selfish benefit without regard to the health and legal considerations.

Mitchell is a respectable guy. It would be so nice if he let his conscience take over and circumvented Selig to carry out a scathing dressing-down of ownership and the commissioner's office. But I am not holding my breath.