I’m going to go off topic today (that topic beng the Cubs) and instead talk about a firestorm that is raging around a blog post that Jerod Morris (JRod) wrote on MidwestSportsFan.com.  It started out innocently enough, but has now mushroomed into a national issue.

In addition to being the managing editor for MidwestSportsFan.com, Jerod is in a fantasy baseball league.  Raul Ibanez of the Philadelphia Phillies is one of the players that Jerod has on his fantasy team.  Ibanez’ hot start to the season (.327/.384/.682, 20 HR, 55 RBI) gave rise to some speculation by one of Jerod’s fellow fantasy baseball players that the 37-year old Ibanez was not coming by his stats honestly.  So Jerod set out to prove that Ibanez’ move to the Phillies and Citizens Bank Park could explain Ibanez’ performance.

Jerod did a good job of analyzing Ibanez’ career numbers and researching the impact moving from pitcher-friendly Safeco Field in Seattle to Philadelphia’s hitter-friendly Citizens Bank Park may have had on his stats.  He looked at the relative dimensions of the two ballparks as well as the ERA of the pitchers Ibanez has faced this year.  And what did Jerod conclude?  He didn’t.  He found that all of the stats he compiled didn’t fully explain Ibanez’ performance so far this year, and then he said:

“ [I]t’s time for me to begrudgingly acknowledge the elephant in the room: any aging hitter who puts up numbers this much better than his career averages is going to immediately generate suspicion that the numbers are not natural, that perhaps he is under the influence of some sort of performance enhancer. And since I was not able to draw any absolute parallels between his prodigously improved HR rate and his new ballpark’s hitter-friendliness, it would be foolish to dismiss the possibility that “other” performance enhancers could be part of the equation.”

That’s when the whole issue took on a life of it’s own.

The next morning, Philadelphia Inquire columnist John Gonzalez wrote an article taking Jerod to task for simply stating the obvious.  Gonzalez wrote:

“The MSF post, written by the previously undiscovered poet “JRod,” noted that Ibanez has bashed the majority of his 19 homers at hitter-friendly parks like the new Yankee Stadium, Great American Ball Park in Cincy, and Citizens Bank Park. It also conceded that Ibanez has taken advantage of some really terrible pitchers – guys like Daniel Cabrera, Scott Olsen and Saul Rivera, all of whom have badly bloated ERAs.

Then JRod dismissed all the evidence of opportunism, pivoted like a second baseman turning a double play, and fired his conclusion into the mitts of conspiracy theorists and amateur drug testers everywhere: “Any aging hitter who puts up numbers this much better than his career averages is going to immediately generate suspicion that the numbers are not natural, that perhaps he is under the influence of some sort of performance enhancer. . . . Maybe the 37-year-old Ibanez trained differently this off-season with the pressure of joining the Phillies’ great lineup and is in the best shape he’s ever been in. And maybe that training included. . . . Well, you know where that one was going, but I’d prefer to leave it as unstated speculation.”

Yeah, except when you put the words “under the influence” in close proximity to “performance enhancer,” that’s not really “unstated speculation.” That’s pretty much an updated version of the old “Hey, pal, have you stopped beating your wife yet?” trick.”

Ibanez read Gonzalez column and fired back, saying “You can have my urine, my hair, my blood, my stool – anything you can test.  I’ll give you back every dime I’ve ever made if the test is positive.”

I don’t have a problem with Ibanez’ response, but I have to wonder where he was when the Players Union was fighting MLB over drug testing.  I have to wonder why Ibanez didn’t speak up before to make sure that nothing like this ever happened.  And I have to wonder why we didn’t hear from Ibanez earlier when his fellow MLB players were failing drug tests.  It’s easy to strike back at a guy you’ve never met and call him “cowardly” and demean him by calling him a “42-year old typing in his mother’s basement.”  That’s easy, but where was this outrage and tough talk when it could have made a difference? 

Then ESPN got in on the act.  On Outside the Lines (a very good show), Jerod appeared with Gonzalez and Fox Sports’ Ken Rosenthal.  Unfortunately for Jerod, he was overmatched.  Gonzalez made the point that, sure, baseball fans are going to speculate about players using steriods, but Jerod was out of line putting his thoughts in writing (even though Jerpod explicitly stated that he did not personaslly believe Ibanez is using PEDs, but simply stated that in this day and age, having suspicions was only natural). 

Before I let go of Gonzalez, I want to deal with one point that I haven’t heard expressed yet.  Gonzalez took Jerod to task for putting his thoughts in writing, but then why was it okay for Gonzalez himself to give Jerod national attention by writing about Jerod’s blog post in the Philadelphia Inquirer?  It seems to me that this was a rather cowardly way for Gonzalez to voice his own suspicions without having to claim responsibility for them.  It’s akin to when an interviewer asks a question and couches it in the terms of, “Some people would say,” or “It’s been said.”  It’s a cowardly way for the interviewer to distance themselves from the question.

Now for Rosenthal.  Let me start by saying that I generally like Ken Rosenthal.  I think he does a good job and is one of the top guys when it comes to rumors around MLB.  That’s why I thought he was so out of line to blast Jerod for printing speculation.  Rosenthal makes his living by reporting rumors, so where does he get off complaining about Jerod?

Rosenthal was completely condesending toward Jerod.  He acted as if was some sort of “High Priest of Media” and Jerod was nothing but a peasant.  It was infuriating.

As Jerod explained his position, Rosenthal rolled his eyes and shook his head.  He interrupted Jerod as he tried to talk and chastised him for not understanding the power of the written word.  Blah, blah, blah.  Did Rosenthal even read Jerod’s article?  It sounded like everything he knew (and it was precious little) came straight from Gonzalez’ column.

But here’s the thing that really makes me angry.  Where were these two self-important so-and-so’s when Rick Telander of the Chicago Sun-Times wrote the following:

“Sorry, Ryan Theriot, you’re a suspect. Forget Manny Ramirez and Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds and Jason Giambi and Mark McGwire and all the other hulking, accused performance-enhancing drug users.

You, sir, all 5-11, 175 pounds of you, are doing devious things.

To wit, Theriot — no disrespect, but if he’s 5-11 I’m 6-12 — hit two home runs Wednesday night at Wrigley Field against the Padres, giving him five times more home runs in 33 games this year than he hit all last season.

Brrinnnng! Eee — ah! Eee-ah! Zzzt! Zzzzt!

That rings the steroid/HGH/ whatever-designer-drug-is-in bell, doesn’t it?”

In his article, Jerod never even came close to saying anything like that.  Even so, neither Gonzalez nor Rosenthal said one word about their fraternity brother, Telander.  If Jared was off base, Telander was way off base.

In fairness to Telander, he was trying to make the same point that Jerod made.  In baseball circa 2009, any jump in performance is viewed with skepticism.  As Telander wrote, “this is what baseball has wrought.”

The bottom line is that Jerod wrote a very well researched article that looked at Raul Ibanez’ performance thus far this season and came to the conclusion that the change in scenery from Seattle to Philadelphia doesn’t fully explain Ibanez’ early season stats.  He did the type of legwork that is sorely missing in much of what passes for journalism today.  He stated the facts truthfully, including the fact that as much as he would like, he can not draw a conclusion based on the facts presented.  And one of those facts is that baseball has made skeptics of us all.