Article: Gleeman & TheGeek, Episode 173: Talking Torii

[John Bonnes]

Aaron and John visit Sociable Cider Werks and talk about the Minnesota Twins signing Torii Hunter, the varied paths of Carleton grads, a tutorial on defensive metrics, and reactions to Hunter's press conference comments. You can download it from iTunes, Stitchr or GleemanAndTheGeek.com

 

http://gleemangeek.l...3-talking-torii

 

Click here to view the article

[ashbury]

Either that bar table is on a slant, or else I've already had too much to drink and it's not even 1 pm my time!

[Brandon]

While I personally agree with Hunter, my issue with Berardino pressing Hunter is I am tired of the self appointed PC Police.  Hunters signing was about baseball and the gay issue was brought front and center and made a big deal.  This point of view was not discussed in your podcast.  I follow baseball to get away from this type of garbage.  I don't want to discuss politics when watching baseball other than maybe the politics of why an organization makes the moves they make based on baseball and financial reasons.  Also I am not hugely religious so that does not affect my views.

 

As far as my logic to support the signing is exactly in line with what Bonnes said.  There isn't a lot out there and its a 1 year deal, He can hit, RF is smaller in Target so that helps and we have Schaeffer as a defensive replacement to further help minimize it. So the move is not the worst and there wasn't a lot out there either.  Also I think if Hunter can play 2 more seasons his Hall of Fame candidacy at least becomes a debate whether that can happen remains to be seen.

[Secondary User]

I follow baseball to get away from this type of garbage.  I don't want to discuss politics when watching baseball other than maybe the politics of why an organization makes the moves they make based on baseball and financial reasons.  Also I am not hugely religious so that does not affect my views.

 

If you don't want to discuss politics when you're watching baseball, be upset with Hunter for using his baseball profile to enter himself into the political forum.  Berardino asked a question about a topic (and even kept it related to baseball) that is important to many people, many of whom are sports fans.  Hunter is welcome to his opinions and his beliefs, but once he throws his hat into the political discussion on the subject, he opens himself to scrutiny and debate.

[John Bonnes]

Here's the thing - if you want to blame someone for making this an issue, it's Hunter, and it's not just about him talking about it first. It's about him going back to it. 

 

Berardino's question wasn't asking Hunter to expound on his beliefs. His question was whether Hunter thought that stating his support of a political candidate affected his free agent market. Then he followed up asking if, in the future, Hunter would want to talk about his views on "marriage." Certainly, that gives Hunter the chance to get in trouble, but it's a legitimate question about Hunter's free agency experience - and Hunter even handled it so that it wasn't really a story. 

 

It exploded because Hunter couldn't leave it alone. He stayed away from it at first, didn't take the bait. But he was the one who went back to it, though it might have also been a reaction to the awkward silence that followed that question. He used the term "prick" when using a less vulgar term like "pitbull" or "rabble rouser" would have kept it a non-story. And he kept using it when stopping after the first or second sentence would've seemed like jocular, maybe even bonding, humor. 

 

I even think it's fair to blame both sides of the issue for blowing up this story into a controversy, so both sides can sound off on their view. But I don't think it's fair to blame Mike for asking the question. 

[jrog625]

I came to this conversation a little late, but while I agree with Bonnes about the legitimacy of the question, I really take issue with Aaron's little rant following the conversation about the press conference. His remarks divided people into two camps: so-called "religious types" and people who are in favor of civil rights. They were remarks given with a real lack of charity, followed up by a banal comment about being on the "wrong side of history." The undertone was that people who follow religion are backwards thinking and not worth his time. 

 

For someone who proudly wears his "non-religious" badge, Gleeman sure does preach a lot. From listening to that portion of the podcast again, it sounds like even Bonnes was uncomfortable with the level of vitriol his co-host was exhibiting. 

 

I just wish AG would stick to what he's good at--baseball and personal, local chatter. Every episode he seems to get a little more angry and sneaks in a few more insensitive remarks about people he doesn't like.

I know AG would just say, "Well, no one is forcing you to listen." I get that. But you guys used to be the best baseball podcast available. Each episode AG slips a little further away from that, into self-aggrandizement, taking pot-shots, and alienating entire sections of the audience.