Let the Smear Job begin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WoodyHoopz

Ah, the old "prove it" canard. When your argument lacks common sense, just ask your opponent to provide proof, as if any of us are insiders ourselves. Maybe that kind of cop-out BS flies in your treehouse, but it won't here. Take that nonsense elsewhere.



How convenient!



Oh, so you're one of the FO Warriors. Stepping in and making a taking bullets for Sandy and Co at every opportunity. Well, at least now I know why your going to such absurd lengths. Yeah, because a journalist risking his reputation and possibly his career to smear a departing pitcher for New York's second baseball team is so much more likely than one of the Mets front office guys spreading a little venom discretely. I mean, because the Mets FO never does that, right?

---

I guess when you know you are full of **** you start with the attacks.

Yes asking for facts and proof is a cop out argument. Because the logical and sane thing to do would be to act like a child and hate based off of assumptions and non facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by metsbulls1025

I guess when you know you are full of **** you start with the attacks.

---

What attacks? You started this by saying I'm only doing this because I "hate the front office." Talk about getting your facts straight, hold lord.

Quote:

---

Yes asking for facts and proof is a cop out argument. Because the logical and sane thing to do would be to act like a child and hate based off of assumptions and non facts.

---

Asking for proof is ****ing absurd. I don't work with, for, or above Ken Davidoff. I have no way of "proving" that he got his info from the FO. As for asking for facts, I gave them to you: making a claim Ken Davidoff made either requires knowledge, or a propensity for lying. You say he's lying; I say it's far more plausible that he got the info from the FO. I like my chances on that wager.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WoodyHoopz

What attacks? You started this by saying I'm only doing this because I "hate the front office." Talk about getting your facts straight, hold lord.



Asking for proof is ****ing absurd. I don't work with, for, or above Ken Davidoff. I have no way of "proving" that he got his info from the FO. As for asking for facts, I gave them to you: making a claim Ken Davidoff made either requires knowledge, or a propensity for lying. You say he's lying; I say it's far more plausible that he got the info from the FO. I like my chances on that wager.

---

So no facts, but because you hate the FO you are going to chalk this one up as they said.

Am I right or wrong on this?

BTW he doesn't even say team source or official.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by metsbulls1025

So no facts, but because you hate the FO you are going to chalk this one up as they said.

---

Seriously? You're just trolling now. Let's turn this around, see how you like it:

So no facts, but because you love the FO you are going to chalk this one up as this guy's lying.

Quote:

---

Am I right or wrong on this?

---

You're seriously asking?

Quote:

---

BTW he doesn't even say team source or official.

---

So? The information could have come to him off the record.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WoodyHoopz

Seriously? You're just trolling now. Let's turn this around, see how you like it:

So no facts, but because you love the FO you are going to chalk this one up as this guy's lying.



You're seriously asking?



So? The information could have come to him off the record.

---

1. I don't love or hate the ownership or the FO. I just don't agree with ownerships and FO are wrong 100 percent of the time. Especially when there is zero evidence pointing to something that supposedly said according to you.

2. Why should I even have to prove or show facts? He never stated once that anything came from the FO or ownership. The entire quote that I showed you above was his opinion and your telling me that he just inserted a random sentence from the FO in there? Give me a break

3.

Quote:

---

The information could have come

---

- Yeah so I am done. The reason why this is even a problem is because you don't like the higher ups in the organization. You would have something if even 1 team source or insider was referenced and it wasn't. The article is just filled with the author giving his opinion on how Dickey has a huge ego.

Quote:

---

Dickey’s remarks Tuesday underlined how risky it would be to employ Dickey as a one-year, $5-million, extension-less player in 2013.

---

Quote:

---

And, in an under appreciated part of this saga that soared into visibility this week, Dickey can be a handful. He clearly has enjoyed his rise from the ashes into a Flushing folk hero, and while he deserves praise and riches, there’s also the matter of him having to coexist peacefully in a workplace.

---

Quote:

---

If Dickey can’t control his verbiage at a holiday party — “Folks, not today, not with the kids here” was all he had to say to reporters — then how would a full season of uncertainty feel? How many times would Dickey spout off publicly? Or work behind the scenes to make the Mets look bad and boost his own brand?

---

R.A. Dickey has been the best thing to happen to the Mets since 2001 and the World Series. He is a great story and a testament to perseverance. He brings dignity to his profession and the team. What is there not to like? As someone said, he is cerebral - which is not a bad thing. And he won 20 games on a lousy team. Think about that.

Before Pagan was traded, we heard all these stories about how difficult he was to deal with, etc. Noone mentioned that he and his wife were dealing with a child with a seious malady. Sound similar? How did that turn out?

The bottom line is Alderson is a joke. They didn't pull the triggere on a trade for Reyes and would up getting nothing. Don't tell me about draft choices. How many will be on the field this year or next year or the year after ...? They don't count. Tell me they couldn't have gotten some premium talent for Reyes.

So now Alderson has to trade Dickey. He doesn't have anything else. And he will probably make a bad deal. Still, you don't have to smear the guy to justify what you are doing. It s**ks.

It's amazing how many reporters attached to the Mets feel the need to carry water for the Wilpons and help them smear any player the Wilpons "aren't happy with".

It's been going on for years.

Almost every good player on the 1986 team was demonized and shipped out for crap because the very moral Fred Wilpon disapproved of them.

More recently Beltran becomes demonized after getting career saving surgery Jeffy doesn't approve of.

Pagan becomes a clubhouse cancer as soon as the Wilpons decide to go super-cheap and don't want to pay his impending arbitration raise. He was such a bum he wins a ring as soon as he gets out of here and the Giants resign him for 4 years at $40 million.

Reyes somehow becomes a greedy enemy after not even being offered a contract.

They were gearing up for a campaign of character assassination against Wright. Raissman had a hit piece out the morning Wright resigned that immediately got pulled:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...icle-1.1210625

If you recall a bunch of other hit pieces were out during negotiations preparing to paint Wright as greedy.

Now this. The Wilpons have managed to poison the best human interest story in baseball of recent memory.

So either almost every player of any quality the Wilpons have ever employed is scum, or the Wilpons are scum.

I vote for the Wilpons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oscarc

R.A. Dickey has been the best thing to happen to the Mets since 2001 and the World Series. He is a great story and a testament to perseverance. He brings dignity to his profession and the team. What is there not to like? As someone said, he is cerebral - which is not a bad thing. And he won 20 games on a lousy team. Think about that.

Before Pagan was traded, we heard all these stories about how difficult he was to deal with, etc. Noone mentioned that he and his wife were dealing with a child with a seious malady. Sound similar? How did that turn out?

The bottom line is Alderson is a joke. They didn't pull the triggere on a trade for Reyes and would up getting nothing. Don't tell me about draft choices. How many will be on the field this year or next year or the year after ...? They don't count. Tell me they couldn't have gotten some premium talent for Reyes.

So now Alderson has to trade Dickey. He doesn't have anything else. And he will probably make a bad deal. Still, you don't have to smear the guy to justify what you are doing. It s**ks.

---

Give that man a harumph.

Coupon gets one too. This need to trash every player on their way out the door is both shameful and counterproductive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milominderbinde

Coupon gets one too. This need to trash every player on their way out the door is both shameful and counterproductive.

---

Harumph!

This organization and media are grabage. They do anything to tarnish a player's character when they don't want to pay them. Just a low life organization.

Most of the media in this country are a colective group of Antichrists.

Ken Davidoff is a douchebag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMet6986

Ken Davidoff is a douchebag.

---

Harumph!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fanofclendennon

He deserved none of those comments. Upon joining the Mets in May 2010, there have been zero reports implying that Dickey:

• can be a handful
• would have difficulties existing peacefully in the workplace
• Has a gift for Self promotion
• Has a love of attention that doesnt endear himself to most teammates
• Can't control his verbiage
• (Might) work behind the scenes to make the Mets look bad and boost his own brand

You're right when you say "No one on these boards have any idea if Dickey loves all the attention he got and if it alienated other players in the clubhouse. He seems like a nice guy, but who here really knows." But come on jomota, don't you find it the least bit odd that there were zero reports about any of these concerns until this recent contract negotiation? Don't you find the timing to be a bit more than a coincidence?

Just wondering.

---

You're absolutely right. This is Blatant Smear! How did all of these things become a problem with Dickey all of a sudden. Where were these articles before? Wilpons clearly put a hit out on his character