I defend professional athletes against the hoary accusation that they are paid “too much.” I remember all the arguments my father would have with my Aunt Beatrice, an unshakeable liberal, who would insist that baseball stars getting higher salaries than teachers was “ridiculous.” Dad would patiently try to explain to her the economic principle of supply and demand but to no avail. It would be even more difficult keeping the late Aunt Bea’s passions in check now, when one baseball player has a ten year contract worth 700 million dollars, and the minimum MLB salary is $780,000. The amounts don’t matter, however. Those salaries reflect the actual value of those players, who have rare talents essential to a multi-billion dollar industry that supports many other industries with millions of employees.
However, alleged superstar Vladimir Guerrero Jr. of the Toronto Blue Jays recently made an exquisitely absurd argument to justify the obvious disparity between the 14-year, $500 million contract extension he signed in 2025 and his current disastrous season in which he has performed only slightly better than one of those minimum salary players. Guerrero’s mysterious season-long slump pretty much destroyed 2026 for the Jays, last year’s American League World Series representatives that were the overwhelming favorites to repeat.
In an interview, the 30-year-old Guerrero was asked about his struggles and explained that fans just don’t understand that he is being paid for what he has done in the past, not what he is expected to do in the future.
An awful event that could have been avoided in many ways if even one of the key players had just behaved responsibly and ethically, or knew what behaving responsibly and ethically is…
Bert Atienza, 77, was shopping at Walmart with his wife after church a week ago when store a 17-year-old store employee rushed down the aisle narrowly missing Josephine Atienza with a cart. Bert sharply admonished the young woman, saying, “You almost hit my wife with your heavy cart, and you did not even say excuse me or apologize to her,” according to his wife in interviews after the event. The African- American staffer argued with him briefly and then tossed a can at the couple as they walked away. Minutes later Travis White and Erika Mitchell attacked Bert as their daughter, the reckless employee, watched according to store surveillance video. [Note:Accounts say they “allegedly” attacked him. It it’s on video, it happened, unless the claim is that the video is a “deep fake.” I hate that reflex news media characterization. (‘John Wilkes Booth allegedly shot Abraham Lincoln in Ford’s Theater in front of hundreds of witnesses…’) Even the attorney for White and Mitchell doesn’t dispute the attack].
The two parents shoved Atienza from the back, one punched him in the face, then they pushed him into the shelving unit. After he fell to the ground, as one of the attackers kicked him. “While he’s on the floor, they’re still kicking him and I told them stop. My husband has heart problems,” Josephine said.
Oh! We’re sorry, if we knew the 77-year-old man had heart problems, we never would have attacked him!
Bert Atienza lost consciousness before help arrived and he was rushed to a hospital where he died the next day. White and Mitchell were arrested days later and charged with second-degree murder. Their daughter (described as “no longer employed by Walmart”—ya think?) has also been charged with assault and battery, aggravated malicious wounding and conspiracy to commit a felony. Her name has not been released to the press because she is a minor.
The most famous and, clearly, most amazing Major League Baseball player—also the highest paid, by far—is the LA Dodgers’ two-way superstar Shohei Ohtani. From his days as a Japanese baseball star, Ohtani has been both an all-star level starting pitcher and a superior batter. He insisted on being allowed to continue pitching every five days and being in the lineup the rest of the time as a condition of signing with a U.S. team. In his ten years in the Majors, Ohtani has performed feats unmatched in the history of baseball, including the legendary game in last year’s National League Championship Series in which he pitched six scoreless innings, striking out 10 batters and allowing just a two hits against the Milwaukee Brewers and went 3-for-3 with three home runs at the plate, outhitting the Brewers single-handedly.
Only one player before Ohtani had the ability to do that: Babe Ruth, widely regarded as the greatest baseball player of all. For the Boston Red Sox Babe was a Hall of Fame-caliber pitcher who also appeared to be one of the best hitters in the league until he was sold to the New York Yankees. They made Babe give up pitching on the theory that an everyday superstar at the plate was more valuable than an ace pitcher even in the days when pitchers could start every third day and pitch complete games. The second part of the theory was that no athlete’s body would stand up to the rigors of pitching and being in the line-up every day.
This is one of my biases that I am certain is completely justified, and I’m not giving it up. It also is linked to the recent posts about why the U.S. hasn’t yet had a female President.
I am involved in a project right now anchored by two qualified, smart women. However, much of the time when they make a suggestion or a decision, they giggle afterwards, often looking to each other for affirmation and getting a return giggle in response. This habit does not enhance their status, respect within the group, or perceived effectiveness, indeed quite the opposite. I have been observing this behavior, with alarm and disdain, for most of my life.
In my family, the women did not giggle, cackle, or feel it necessary to defuse their opinions with inappropriate laughter. As a result, I was puzzled when I started noticing the practice, which must be ancient: in the Gilbert and Sullivan operetta “The Mikado,” the “Three Little Maids from School” giggle to punctuate their famous song. For heaven’s sake, why?
One online forum on the question concluded that women giggle as “a natural physical and emotional response to nervousness, polite social easing, shared humor, or romantic attraction.” Giggling is a gender-based coping mechanism for anxiety, stress, or embarrassment; in short, it signals insecurity. I know that is my reaction to it: when a woman follows a statement with a giggle that isn’t a response to humor, I think that she isn’t confident and is girding herself for rejection.
Women have also been socialized from girlhood to think that the male of the species finds the rote light laughter appealing, in part because it sends a message of submissiveness and determination not to offend.
Boy, did the women in the Marshall family not share that theory.
I noticed myself doing it when I spoke to colleagues, friends, acquaintances…it was incessant.Then, I started noticing it in the women around me.
I have one friend who laughs loudly at the end of her sentences, but only when she’s trying to be assertive or make a point. The giggling obviously has the opposite effect, and leaves her listeners (me included) a bit confused. Is it supposed to be funny? Is she upset, or nervous, or confused, or all those things at once? It makes her sound more friendly, sure, but it robs her sentences of the intended effect…Somewhere along the line, my brain said — if you giggle at the end of sentences you will seem more likable! It will stop the end of your sentences from sounding harsh! It will cover any awkwardness or nervousness you feel! Oh, and you’ll sound like a complete weirdo, but that’s a small price to pay to come across as amiable surely?
…It reminds me of how many women feel the need to say sorry so often, or use too many exclamation points in communications to maintain a positive tone. Chalk it up to years of being told to be mindful about “how you come across.”
How giggling women “come across” to me is as lacking confidence and character, people trying to force themselves into roles where, deep down, they don’t believe they belong.
If you want your daughter to grow up to be President, teach her not to giggle. It won’t be enough all by itself, but its a start.
Two “the rest of the story” items to kick things off:
As we all hoped would be the case, MLB reprimanded umpire Doug Eddings for telling rookie St. Louis Cardinals rookie reliever Hancel Rincon to straighten his cap and to “Grow the hell up!” Eddings issued an apology. EA covered the episode here. But last night, as many suggested, many Cardinals wore their caps askew as a visual rebuke to Eddings, who was the umpire at third base. Interestingly, some of the Colorado Rockies had their caps tilted as well. Eddings claimed that he admonished Rincon because a Rockies batter, Hunter Goodman, flagged the rakish angle of the young pitcher’s headgear. Goodman, however denies that he said anything.
See? I said this was an ethics train wreck!
In this post, EA discussed the absurd controversy involving “Stars and Stripes” staff maintaining that they were “independent” of the Pentagon. In a 24-page ruling this week, U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden turned down the entreaty by the newspaper’s publisher, editor-in-chief and Middle East reporter to stay their firings while a lawsuit challenging the terminations as First Amendment violations works its way through the court system. McFadden found the government probably did not violate their First Amendment rights by firing them. I think their claim came perilously close to being a frivolous suit. If it were to prevail, no reporter or journalist could be fired by a government publication for an inflammatory or anti-American output because it could be framed as “censorship.” Editor-in-chief Erik Slavin and reporter Lara Korte told CBS in an interview that they “worked for Stars and Stripes, “not for the Pentagon, not for any administration, not for any policymaker.” They were asserting total independence and autonomy, despite being a Pentagon publication and funded by tax-payers.
Meanwhile…
1. The NFL is increasingly ridiculous, and I continue to wonder when it’s core audience will just say, “Enough already! Bye!” The league’s woke virtue signaling and DEI embrace is obnoxious, but its recent decision that football needs screamingly fey male cheerleaders boggles the mind. Look at this guy:
What the hell? I find female NFL cheerleaders an embarrassment, but this…any idea what the NFL is going for here or why? Tim O’Brien writes in part,
“I mean, who in the world asked for this? What market research told the NFL that what it really needed to do was complement all that toxic masculinity during the game with this? Seriously, are gay men a viable market for the NFL? How big is that market? Perhaps even more pointedly, as a percentage, how many not just gay men, but flaming gay men, watch the NFL on Sundays? Are we missing something? …[T]he NFL continues to find ways to alienate me and the millions of others who tune in because all we want to do is watch good football, see a little patriotism, and get a dose of a high-energy, traditional game-day atmosphere, nothing more….All of it is telling me the NFL no longer wants or needs people like me as fans. I’m cool with that, but if I have one message for the league, it’s this: “Be careful what you wish for.”
The NFL is already the most unethical sports league in existence (after the WNBA, of course). More on that tomorrow.
2. Speaking of the WNBA, ESPN’s headline was “Cathy Engelbert, who oversaw WNBA boom, to retire as commissioner.” It could well have read, “Cathy Engelbert, who proved completely incapable of leading the WNBA as it found itself immersed in racial and gender controversies, is running away. Good.” “Over the years, it has been amazing to watch WNBA players thrive and lead the massive cultural surge around women’s sports,” Engelbert said in a statement. “I retire knowing we have built something bigger, stronger and more enduring than we could have imagined. I am grateful to the WNBA and NBA team owners and staff, players, investors, fans and the powerhouse league office staff, who believed in what this league could become. I retire with immense gratitude and tremendous optimism for the future of the WNBA, with the best yet to come.”
Englebert is an accountant, and served as the CEO of Deloitte. She was brought in to develop the WNBA as a business, but had no skills or orientation that qualified her to deal with the league’s image and public relations problems. It took some gall for her to talk about the surge in “women’s sports” as so many of her league’s coaches speak as if they don’t know what a woman is.
Players and coaches have described her as “negligent.” One player said that the WNBA had the “worst leadership in the world.” From my observations, this was a severely limited leader who saw her job in the narrowest possible terms. She was hired to cut business deals and make money for the owners. She was good at that. Meanwhile, under her stewardship the WNBA has acquired the reputation of being dominated by lesbian thugs who resent the few white heterosexuals in their midst.
Maybe the WNBA should acquire the NFL’s gay cheerleaders…
I could teach a conflicts of interest course based on lessons spewing out from the recently-canned NFL reporter’s certitude that she did nothing wrong despite being caught canoodling with one of the sports figures she was charged with covering….objectively, independently. You know. Like all the other journalists do. <cough!>
Dianna Russini was the senior NFL reporter for The Athletic, which serves as the New York Times’ sports pages. She resigned last week after photographs “surfaced” of her hand-holding with and embracing Mike Vrabel, the head coach of the New England Patriots.
“While I can’t share the details of our investigation into Dianna’s conduct,” Steven Ginsberg, executive editor of The Athletic wrote to his staff, “I want to emphasize that the leadership of The Athletic has taken this matter seriously from the moment we learned about it.”
The publication’s editorial guidelines demand that its journalists avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of a conflict. This is standard stuff, even though such prohibitions are too often weakly enforced, if at all. Remember Nina Totenberg reporting on Supreme Court decisions while she socialized with her pal, Justice Ginsberg? That violated NPR’s ethics code. Naturally, the brass ignored the breach.
If I have learned one thing writing Ethics Alarms since 2009 is that I don’t know anything, particularly regarding which posts will spark the most interest or the most lively debates. I never expect the usual volume of commentary on my baseball ethics posts (the first ethics post I ever wrote, on the old Ethics Scoreboard, was on baseball: Pete Rose), but yesterday’s quiz regarding Red Sox pitcher Peyton Tolle’s impulsive hug of an opposing player as he applied an inning ending tag spawned commentary that raised some aspects of the incident that I never considered.
[Oh: I’m from Old School Boston. I have always been uncomfortable with hugs of any kind, from any one, for any reason. I have learned over the years when to submit and also when taking the initiative in a hug is expected of me and therefore only polite.]
***
For transparency purposes, I have to disclose that I am a big fan of hugging.
It took a very long time for me to realize that not everyone likes to be hugged, though. Also, that there is a time and a place to hug people.
A workplace setting, for example, that wants to be taken seriously might want to discourage hugging among colleagues and, especially, between superiors and subordinates. An employee that wants to be taken seriously might decide that hugging people in the office undermines that goal. One never knows how another person may react to spontaneous hugging, after all. It might be welcomes, it might be spurned, it might give you an unwanted love interest or it might get you reprimanded by HR.
During a baseball game, a player is expected to be professional. Is it any different from being in a boardroom, a classroom or an examining room?
Wow, it takes some impressive ineptitude to get two “Incompetent Elected Official of the Month” designations in less than 30 days, but this creep was up to the challenge.
Yesterday the House voted 413-2 to censure Edwards. The House Ethics Committee recommended the action after it found last month that he had engaged in unprofessional and inappropriate behavior with two former female staffers. EA wrote about that stage of this episode here.
Edwards then stood up and sort-of-kind-of apologized, but not really, saying,
“I want to say something directly and publicly to the two women who have been at the center of all of this. I am sorry. I’m sorry that my actions, my judgement or the way that I expressed a friendship ever put either of you in an uncomfortable position. My intentions were only grounded in what I understood our friendship to be and in genuine admiration and respect that I had for each of you. Not only as professionals, but as people. I ask each of you, Republican and Democrat alike, to look beyond the headlines and examine what the committee actually found. I am not asking for special treatment, I am asking for fair treatment. I am asking you to decide if the punishment before you is supported by the evidence proportional to the conduct actually established.”
Many of you don’t get it, but baseball is a wonderful laboratory for general ethics problems, revelations and teachable moments. To wit…
Ketel Marte, 32, is one of the top second basemen in baseball, indeed one of the top players in the game at any position. However, Marte failed to show up for a game last week with his team, the Arizona Diamondbacks in the middle of a pennant race. He deserted his team mates without letting anyone connected with the Diamondbacks know the reason for his absence or his whereabouts for more than 24 hours. His manager, Torey Lovullo, said he was dealing with “personal problems,” then Marte was determined to be injured and was placed on the injured list. Cameras subsequently caught him enjoying himself at a casino. This isn’t the first time Marte has gone AWOL either: he did it last season too.
The Athletic, which serves as the New York Times captive sports service, asked Diamondbacks General Manager Mike Hazen why the Diamondbacks tolerate Marte’s behavior. The answer made me nauseous.
“He’s an extremely talented player,” Hazen said Wednesday. “At some point, there’s a balance between what you are willing to deal with to get a level of production that can win you baseball games. We’re in the business of winning baseball games.”
Milwaukee Brewers shortstop Cooper Pratt has a bright future ahead of him, but it is brighter now because his manager, Pat Murphy taught him a lesson about what it means to be a professional in general and a Major League Baseball player in particular.
As you can see in the video, Pratt hit what looked like an easily caught pop-up in the fifth-inning of last night’s game against the New York Mets, so he jogged down the baseline more slowly than Pete Rose used to run to first after a base on balls. The Mets, because they stink this year, managed to mess up the play and the ball dropped in for what would have been a double if the kid had been running hard. Standing on first, he looked surprised to see that Murphy was replacing him with a pinch-runner, pulling him off the field in an old-school public rebuke for unprofessional play.
