I haven't weighed in on this - quite intentionally - but here's my take on it. The tweets were badly worded, as are many tweets when 140 characters are the limitation on a conversation. It's one of the reasons I generally dislike Twitter. Good for snapshots and link-sharing, bad for nuanced conversation and topics... Hell, not even bad. Twitter is absolutely terrible at nuance. Ignoring what I know from internal conversations, I will not try to glean Parker's intent from those tweets. It could have been an observation, it could have been a bit more nefarious than that. BUT, Parker later said he wasn't trying to suggest that Berrios was doing something wrong. So I'll take him at his word on that. That should end the conversation, IMO. Where this all went wrong is Berardino's article. Notice the quote of "pine tar" by Santana. Where the hell did that come from? Parker never said anything of the sort. He never mentioned anything other than a "dark spot". I believe this was an ill-advised tweet from Parker. He should have been more clear from the beginning if observation was his goal. But I feel the real problem here is Berardino. Did he contact Parker and attempt to clarify the tweet? No. He ran into the Twins clubhouse and started escalating the situation. A dark spot becomes cheating. Cheating becomes pine tar. Now, Parker is doing everything but accusing Berrios of going all Joe Niekro out on the mound, throwing a file as an umpire approaches him. So who here was trying to "raise their profile"? It sure doesn't seem like Parker to me. He made a mistake, IMO, the scale of which is certainly debatable. But he's not the one who transformed this into a full-blown cluster****.