slack, sloppy, sad

by lboros on May 1, 2007 8:55 AM EDT in St. Louis Cardinals News

there was a little good news: carpenter's elbow didn't swell. dennis dove made a successful big-league debut. tyler johnson, pitching with a broken heart, retired the only two men he faced.

but these tiny life rafts were swamped by waves of grief of shock. it's a disheartened team. the cardinals already were unsure of themselves before this happened, already equipped with thin reserves; i'm sure we'd like to see them "dig down deep" or whatever the cliché is, but there isn't a lot of depth to mine.

for the time being, i'm releasing them from judgment. if they gather themselves and start clawing back to .500, i'll be impressed; if they take a nosedive --- well, they don't owe me a thing. i don't dispute what pujols told the p-d: "We still have to go out there and perform. It's our job." he's right --- life goes on and the cardinals have to get on with it, same as any of us who've suffered a personal loss. but how many of us performed like champions when we were dealing with our grief? you do the best you can do, but you're really just trying to get through the day. that's where the cardinals are right now, and there's nothing anybody can do about it. take the "no excuses" stance if you want; personally, i wouldn't take kindly to anybody putting expectations on me while i was mourning the loss of a friend. i wouldn't demand peak performance of myself. and i won't place that demand on the cardinals.

to be perfectly honest, i could give a rat's ass whether they win or lose their games right now, nor whether they look good or bad while doing it. at the very least, i'll wait until they have buried their teammate before i start holding them accountable.

the season has 5 months left to run, and i'm not writing them off; i am a long way from declaring the season over. let's just see where they are in two weeks, in a month; let's see if carpenter can pitch, if edmonds can sock, if encarnacion can play at all . . . . . the cardinals' on-field problems are enough to sink them even in the absence of a death in the family. this slack, sloppy, sad first month may prove, in the end, to be an accurate measure of the team. but it is a long season, and i'm in no hurry to draw any conclusions or make any pronouncements.

i will say this much: the brewers won't be easy to catch. they have a very good rotation, above-average hitters at 7 positions, a deep bench, and a solid bullpen; they also have two of the game's top triple-A prospects in 3d bagger ryan braun and starting pitcher yovani gallardo. they're the one nl central team that appears capable of blowing the doors off the division. but even they have their flaws; despite the .640 winning percentage, milwaukee had a run differential of just +3 in april --- 117 scored, 114 allowed. the team with the division's best run differential, +21, is tied for last place with st louis --- the cubs.

* * * * * * * * *

it's beginning to look as if hancock was driving drunk. should that prove to be the case, there will need to be a reckoning; but that, too, should wait until the man has been buried. there is no hurry to do anything right now --- to play good baseball, to catch the brewers, or to proclaim the moral of the story. just get through the day.

Tweet Comment 115 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Excuse me

With all due respect that is the same conclusion most people suspect when an individual passes in a single car accident. I'm not sying that is not the case but without an official release I don't believe it is right in any way to jump to that conclusion. I could be very wrong on this and have read the interviews, witnesses statements from earlier that evening and what not. I enjoy and respect your writings and opinions very much but please don't jump to unfounded conclusions. He is innocent until proven guilty, that's the only story that should be told. His team, his family, and his friends have been through enough with out having to deal with that at this time. Thank you and you do a fine job with this site.

by DJ4508 on May 1, 2007 9:30 AM EDT reply actions

i didn't jump to any conclusions

read it carefully.

also, it is far from "unfounded" to suggest that alcohol might have been involved. there is, on the contrary, a pretty solid foundation for that suspicion. i agree that it's not a fact until the autopsy confirms it; but let's not pretend that this is just wild speculation.

by lboros on May 1, 2007 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions

Well

The circumstances, rear-ending a stopped, flashing tow-truck on the side of the road indicates something. Whether it's changing a cd, eating a sandwich, suffering from night blindness, or being smashed is entirely irrelevant. Anyone with a brain has had the suspicion, why bring it up?
My uncle Darryl died of a blocked colonary artery, am I gonna stop eating at Fuddruckers?
Linking alcohol to a death where only the driver of the car died only taints the victim. I could understand if someone else had been injured but that is not the case. I for one do not need another "example" of why driving when you are obliterated is bad, so let's not make one.

PBR: When only the next best thing will do.

by sherwood on May 1, 2007 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions

preposterous

it's ridiculous to the point of absurdity to compare eating unhealthy food to driving drunk. i'm not sure if you were just being flippant or what, but i think that's an inappropriate analogy to draw.

i'm glad you don't need another "example" to convince you that driving drunk is a bad idea - though i hope that also means you never do (one doesn't necessarily follow from the other). but to the extent that josh hancock ultimately IS an example, he is his own proof that there are still people out there who CAN learn from his example. again, that is small comfort, and not nearly enough silver lining to justify the cloud. but if one cardinal, or cardinal fan, promises to never drive drunk again, that at least is something.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on May 1, 2007 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions

Whether it should or shouldn't

be brought up, it will be. If it turns out that he did, indeed, have too much to drink, it will become public and, considering LaRussa's legal troubles in Florida, there will be a reckoning. To suggest that people can't learn something from someone driving from a drunk driving accident, frankly, is absurd.

It should cause people to think twice when they have that drink or at least when they're offered a cab and refuse it. If your point about your uncle Darryl was that it's going to have no effect on your drinking and driving, then you have bigger problems than the 1/2 lb. burger you eat at Fuddrucker's.

It, unquestionably, will taint the victim if it turns out to be true. But that's not all it does. Whether you or I like it or not, it will become a topic of conversation and I don't think that LB's comments about "the reckoning" are out of line or misplaced.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions

Witness Accounts...

Not to go all lawyer here, but sorting out what various statements from both Thursday and Saturday it seems we have a small pattern emerging. Granted, if this were a criminal or civil jury issue, it would still come down to the credibility of each witness. (Interestingly, I find each of the witnesses extremely creditable in so much as they are reluctant to give their full names, like the couple who spoke to him at length at Mike Shannon's. Or they are reluctant to share details or speculate, like the waitress who served him.)

I'm writing this to say that Larry's main page post was justified, not to build a case against the deceased. It is emerging that he was drinking and a rationale person, putting together what we know, would conclude that the situation seems to be what most of probably asked out loud or at least thought when we heard, was he drunk?

Here are facts, while still circumstantial, that seem to cast a further pall on this horrible situation.

Hancock was involved in a vehicular accident in Sauget, Illinois at approximately 5:30 A.M, while coming off of Yellow Brick Lane, which is the address of the after hours club the OZ. While this doesn't confirm that he's drunk, or even been drinking, it makes one wonder. (On a personal note, in my experience, people go to Sauget for two reasons: underage drinking, or to keep drinking after the bars close.)
Patrons of Mike Shannon's who spoke to Hancock immediately before the accident indicate that he was drinking at the time. The wife of Vince, the man who refused to give his last name, noted to her husband that Hancock was having trouble speaking.
The waitress at Mike Shannon's who served Hancock asked about his destination and offered to call him a cab when he indicated that he was going to the Westin downtown, which is only six-ten blocks from the restaurant. She was concerned about his ability, either driving or on foot that much is unclear, to make it the short distance to the hotel.

I hate to be the grumpy old man here, but the one good thing that can come out of Josh's death is that it gives pause to all of you who get behind the wheel after drinking. In my younger days, I did it, stupidly, and thank god I lived to tell about it and didn't kill my friends, myself, or anyone else. He should serve as an example.

by Brock20 on May 1, 2007 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions

It should be pointed out

that the incident in Sauget was 2 or 3 days prior to this incident. Aside from that, I think you're quite right.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Thanks..

I did in the first line but not in bullet point 1. I meant that the accident occured a few days before, Thursday I believe.

by Brock20 on May 1, 2007 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions

My gosh man

6 to 10 blocks between the Westin and Mike Shannons? What downtown have you been in? That walk is more like 2-3 blocks.

by JMedwick on May 1, 2007 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions

Which begs the question

What was he doing on highway 40? or maybe I misunderstand the situation.

by OCCardsFan on May 1, 2007 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions

I no longer know which night

any of you were referring to, but he told hte police the night of his first accident that he often drives around after a game to calm himself; it's impossible for him to go home after a game and get any rest.

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions

I was being extremely generous...

for the sake of argument. I thought it was more like four or five, but was just pointing out that the waitress didn't think he could make it that far.

Apparently, he was on 40 going to Clayton to meet Edmonds, Kennedey, and Bennett. See below.

by Brock20 on May 1, 2007 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions

Sauget..

You just don't wander there at 5:30 A.M. on a drive. You have to WANT to get to Sauget. I could understand that if he was off the highway, turning around, but that part of Sauget requires you to double back under the highway to get to.

by Brock20 on May 1, 2007 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions

I am sure

I could have worded my post better but in the last 5 years I've had too many acquaintances and friends lost overseas. As with any death rumors and speculation run rampant and I apologize if I offended any one. I guess all people deal with losses differently but I just hate to see anything negative said about the deceased, proven or unproven. If they were lost in a moment of poor judgement and that is dwelled on it just goes to hurt their character and family in my eyes.

by DJ4508 on May 1, 2007 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions

No...

I don't think anyone got mad at you. At least as far as I can tell.

by Brock20 on May 1, 2007 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions

no offense taken dj4508

i just want to clarify my words, because i think you have misinterpreted them. i am not saying anything against hancock's character; if anybody thinks i am making moral judgments, you are misreading.

i just think we have to deal with the truth. in my mind, it's disrespectful to everyone --- the dead, and those mourning the dead --- to tell the story untruthfully.

by lboros on May 1, 2007 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions

in my mind

I wouldn't say that, if someone had been drinking or had had too much to drink before driving, this is speaking badly about the dead. It's helping to explain the situation to people who need some sort of explanation to help them through this process.

If he was drinking and if he was drunk, it means he made a very tragic mistake, not that he was a bad person. I hope you don't feel as if people were piling on, in fact my response wasn't even to your post directly, but I just don't agree that explaining why he died is speaking ill of the dead. If you do, I apologize.

From everything I can tell, Josh was a super person. Everyone makes mistakes from time to time and, if he did that night, he paid the ultimate price for that mistake. But it doesn't lessen him in my eyes.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions

no, excuse me

I agree. The conclusions are hardly unfounded and it certainly is not "jumping" to conclusions. It has already been written about in the Post-Dispatch. Here is the article if you want to read it.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/E60CF4326FCA8483862572CE00145F0A ?OpenDocument

And sorry, the comment "innocent until proven guilty"? He is dead, there is no "guilty" or "not guilty" here. His part in this is over. It is for the rest of us, mostly his family, to come to the reckoning for this tragic event. If the guy was drunk then he made a mistake and hopefully we can all learn from that. It doesn't mean he was a bad person, just that he made a bad decision. We all make bad decisions all the time, at least I do. It doesn't make the death any less tragic or sad. I hope that his unfortunate death will be seen for what it was, unfortunate and unnecessary. And I hope that he is in a better place.

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions

thanks eglasier

well said. nobody is going to suggest that josh was a bad person if the facts show he was driving while impaired. nobody will mourn his death any less.

i have a business associate who did jail time because, while driving drunk, he killed someone. i still do business with that person. i like that person. he's a good person.

but he made an awful, awful mistake that caused a great deal of pain and diminished many lives, including his own. he is not afraid to admit that mistake, or to confront it head on. on the contrary, he is eager for people to know about his mistake --- so that it will be repeated as infrequently as possible.

by lboros on May 1, 2007 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions

to be honest....

at this point I could really care less of the circumstances, all that matters is a good man and a true cardinal has been loss and the team is in mourning. Even though none of us for the most part directly knew josh, he is still part of us cause we are all uniquely innertwined in this team. I hope they start to win again but like Larry said I don't think any of us would be able to perform under these circumstances. Last night they just weren't all there cause in reality they truly were not. i will just be happy when they come home. I wish they weren't on the road right now. I think the support of St. louis could really help them, hell, it would help me. All I can say is that my prayers are with them and i will be in the bleachers on friday. I shelled out the cash for tickets not to see the game but to be there for the team that i love.

Go Cards

2/3rd's of the earth is covered by water, the other third is coverd by Jim Edmonds

by cardsphan04 on May 1, 2007 9:39 AM EDT reply actions

They....

weren't getting any better results before the accident though. I'm sure it's tough dealing with things, but the team has significant problems...

Acquire any Established Major League Outfielder!

by guayzimi on May 1, 2007 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions

No matter the BAC

we should mourn Josh and be thankful no one else was killed

"I don't believe what I just saw!" ~ Jack Buck

by itsalemmon1019 on May 1, 2007 9:43 AM EDT reply actions

With the relevation of the accident on Thursday

I'm very concerned about what might have 'really' happened to Duncan's head and the possibility that the team may have hid something.

I truly hope this isn't the case.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 10:08 AM EDT reply actions

I'm not

I've heard that speculation as well and think there might be something to it. But IMO the team doesn't have an obligation to report what really happened to his head. To the contrary, the team has an obligation to police themselves from within, to see that it doesn't happen again (if it did), and to preserve their privacy when necessary.

It's not the same as if they worked for the government.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions

I'm not sure I follow,

are you concerned that he hit his head while drunk? Or that he was in the car with Hancock?

by plh903 on May 1, 2007 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions

That he might have been in the car

and that the Cardinals might have covered it up.

I have no proof and I don't really like speculating, but it seems an odd coincedence that they were both late on the same day (Thursday).

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions

Oh, I see

Yeah, I mean, who knows. I don't really see that being the case for a few reasons, but it's pretty irrelevant now and I wouldn't really care to begin with.

by plh903 on May 1, 2007 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions

Additionally

the story in the p-d this morning is that Hancock was hung over (or told Dave Campbell that he was) on the day he was late rather than that he overslept. Some have speculated that, with Hancock's hangover and Duncan's head wound, there's more to the head wound story than he bumped it on a stairwell at his apartment.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions

Fyi, Campbell

said he doesn't recall anything like that.

Really, though, I shouldn't post this. This discussion is literally in the past.

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Just in case anyone missed it

Pujols walked on 3 balls last night. When it happened in the game, I said to the family, "I don't think that's right. I think that was only ball 3".

The umpire didn't question it, nor did Soup but on rewatching it, he certainly only got 3 balls in that at-bat.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 10:09 AM EDT reply actions

What inning? I'd like to see that play.

by Zubin on May 1, 2007 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions

The inning that Rolen hit into the DP

It was a 2-2 count and he walked.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions

Was the TV wrong?

Every once in a while the TV messes up the count... is it possible it was actually 1-3, and not 2-2? Not saying it isn't possible, just curious.

by sgfcards on May 1, 2007 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions

if it was 1-3

he was already out. :)

by effin fisk on May 1, 2007 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions

pujols 3 ball walk

Saw it on Sportscenter. Albert is trying to go through the motions but his head is not in the game. Very understandable. The whole Cardinal team was going through the motions in Milwaukee. And I think Soup was commiserating with them. Saw Soup get jobbed on a couple of bad calls (like the failure to ring up Rolen on an obvious swinging 3rd strike) but Soup just shrugged each incident off like it was meaningless.

by jjray on May 1, 2007 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions

Just to lighten the mood a bit...

it must be hard to walk with three balls...

by cardsrul on May 1, 2007 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions

not really

by plh903 on May 1, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions

why, do you

have three balls? jk :)

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions

an old joke suggests...

what do you do to an elephant with three balls?

walk him and pitch to the giraffe.

by sdesserman on May 1, 2007 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions

For years

when I heard that joke, it was always "you walk him and pitch to the rhino" and it was ALWAYS a Cub fan telling me that joke for some reason.

I spent a lot of brain cycles trying to figure out what Ryne Sandberg had to do with that joke, since it had to be some kinda Cub inside joke!

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions

it'd make no sense

to pitch to the rhino as the giraffe has a bigger strike zone.

my guess is that the cubs fans just never figured out the 'pun'.

by sdesserman on May 1, 2007 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions

per cnnsi.com

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/05/01/cardinals.pujols.ap/index.html

Here is an article about it.

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions

I saw it too

or atleast I thought i did, but i didn't have replay so i couldn't tell if I had just missed something.

2/3rd's of the earth is covered by water, the other third is coverd by Jim Edmonds

by cardsphan04 on May 1, 2007 10:16 AM EDT reply actions

I do care if they win

but I don't blame them if they don't. Yesterday, when I saw the replay of Kip Wells' 2nd inning I thought "Oh geez" rather than "GODDAMNIT!!!!!!".

I have a bad feeling. They just don't have the muscle to recover if they fall too far behind. I'm not saying the season is over, but I really question how able they'll be to recover if they go, say 2-7 and fall to 8 or 9 games back by the end of the month b/c they're struggling with this.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 10:23 AM EDT reply actions

concern

i hate to be the DARE officer of the group here, especially because i'm very much living in a glass house on this issue.

but if hancock really was driving drunk (which hasn't been confirmed), and duncan was drunk when he hurt himself (certainly sounds like a "beer bruise" to me, and i've had my share), and their manager had a dui in spring training ... i mean, is all this evidence of a deeper, organizational problem - or, rather, a problem in a few individuals that the organization lacks the wherewithal to help?

again, i don't want to make this a bigger issue than it is or to connect dots that shouldn't be. these are grown men and the assumption should be that they can take care of themselves. but if there's any deeper issue in that clubhouse, let's hope that one small silver lining in josh hancock's death is that it serves as a wakeup call to anyone who needs it.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on May 1, 2007 10:38 AM EDT reply actions

agreed

I didn't think of that. Does sound like a patter of "acceptable" behavior up to this point.

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions

Well, first thing I thought when

I read about Duncan was "yeah, I kinda thought he might be a hard partying guy."

I dunno, he just strikes me as one of those guys who goes at everything all out. His swing, his frequent dives in the outfield, and maybe his drinking (though I have no idea how often that occurs).

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions

I doubt it,

I would bet that it's a problem in baseball and always has been. Hell, I bet it's a problem anytime a group of young men come into large sums of money.

Yes, I suppose it could be somewhat institutional but I would venture to guess that it's limited or worse in any one clubhouse than another. This isn't to say that any Cardinal or MLB'er can't take something constructive from the tragedy. I agree there, I just don't think it's that specific.

There was plenty, plenty of that on my college baseball team and we didn't have wads of dough for the most part. All kinds of substance abuse without regard to how many miles we had to run the next day. It's kind of ingrained I think in the sport, although I'm not really sure how to express it.

by plh903 on May 1, 2007 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions

I'd have to know more

but right now it sounds like a case of really bad luck. Maybe there's an organizational problem that should be dealt with but I doubt that it's any different from what the other 29 teams deal with. It's young males w/ money and fame (largely) and these incidents are shining a light on it that isn't happening in the other 29 cities. Somewhere else, a player probably narrowly missed a major accident b/c they were out drinking.

I should point out that I'm not justifying it, now am I saying that, if there is a problem among players and coaches, that the organization doesn't have a responsibility to try and do something about it. I'm only saying that the LaRussa incident, the Hancock incident, and Duncan's head wound are all really bad luck (one is tremendously bad) that other players and teams have managed somehow to avoid.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions

I thought of the same thing

but I was quite afraid to post such an idea. I'm glad you had the courage.

by Zubin on May 1, 2007 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions

that should be

"it's not limited or worse"

To correct an already awkward sentence.

by plh903 on May 1, 2007 11:04 AM EDT reply actions

Baseball in general has a drinking problem

If you ask me...

There's no penalty for drunk driving, but a 50 day suspension for steroids.

I remember Ryan Freel of the Reds getting charged with DUI after opening day (2005), and the question asked was "will he be available to play tonight"... nothing about any kind of team punishment.

by redbird2006in on May 1, 2007 11:05 AM EDT reply actions

I don't

think it is the "drinking" that is the biggest problem and although I don't want to condone alcoholism, I think that in this situation it is the "drinking and driving" that is the problem. And it is not limited to baseball or sports in general. Football and basketball players get into trouble for it all the time (See Bengals, Cinncinnati). It is just more rare that someone dies that we know from sports because professional athletes are such a small percentage of the general public. And baseball is a microcosm of society in general. If there is a "drinking" problem in baseball then it probably extends to society at large. I don't however agree for long suspensions by the league. If the team wants to then I think it is a good idea. But steroids is cheating, drinking isn't. If anything, it causes performance to decline. If this behavior goes on in the Cardinals organization then it is their responsibility to set higher standards. And apparently that is not the case, at least this year. It is sad and hopefully the organization will do something to change this.

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions

this sucks

I hate speculating on a situation where we don't have all the facts. Even if the speculation is well-founded and ultimately true, it still blows.

I'll also just remind everyone that we are discussing someone's death and I hope the tone of the speculation and discussion/debate remains respectful. The last thing anyone wants is for this thread to become too heated and vitriolic.

again, this whole situation just sucks

John Rodriguez for Right Field

by azruavatar on May 1, 2007 11:15 AM EDT reply actions

We still don't agree on J Rod

but thank you. That was a much simpler way to say what I was trying to get across.

by DJ4508 on May 1, 2007 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions

definitely agree

to the extent that my posts above seem to be in conflict, they're not. i tried to be very clear that we do not know all the facts at this point. and if it turns out that the speculation is true, it will just make me sad, and, at most, worried. there won't be any vitriol, or even anger, from me in any case.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on May 1, 2007 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions

A little brevity

You may like it, you may not. Warning: it's an IM conversation between Hancock and Kile.

http://dugout.progressiveboink.com/archive/jon115.html

I thought the ending was cute.

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 11:42 AM EDT reply actions

Those guys really are brilliant

The one after Lidle passed was genius, as well.

JH32. RIP Big Guy.

by Alxfritz on May 1, 2007 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions

sdrone

I can't see it because the computers at the school I teach at won't let me. Can you give a synopsis?

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions

check it out when you get home

it's worth it.

JH32. RIP Big Guy.

by Alxfritz on May 1, 2007 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions

Ok

Hancock runs into Kile in heaven. Kile hasn't been sleeping for years. Like something isn't done.

Hancock gives him his WS ring. Kiles goes to sleep.

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions

thanks

I'll read it in full later.

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions

Is it unreasonable...

to suggest that these guys shouldn't be drinking more than two drinks at a sitting and no more than four per week during the regular season? I mean, they're professional athletes and there's a game 9 days out of every ten.

Why was Edmonds, Kennedy, et al hanging around a bar at 2am? They should go work out, stay hydrated and try to get 8 hours of sleep every night. Yes, yes they're adults and they have the right to do all sorts of things, but when I hear they're getting wasted on a daily basis or staying up to the wee hours I have to assume they're not really taking their jobs as seriously as they might.

Edmonds just signed an $18 million contract, he has a bunch of injuries, and he's obviously in decline. Is it old fashioned to suggest that he should get his ass to bed early so he can get up early, do rehab, work out and so forth?

Acquire any Established Major League Outfielder!

by guayzimi on May 1, 2007 11:45 AM EDT reply actions

I actually don't

agree in this case although I see your point. I was more thinking, doesn't Edmonds have little kids? You would think that during a home stretch he would be with them...not out drinking with buddies.

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions

I don't know, but

the kids could be in California. At least until the school year ends.

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions

hadn't thought of that

n/t

by eglasier on May 1, 2007 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions

There's the kids...

but I've also heard things like, "baseball players inevitably lose muscle mass during the season because there's no time to work out." This sounds like a bunch of BS to me and it's reinforced by the insights of what these guys do in their free time.

Another thing is the heinous travel schedule and the night games that must play havoc with their rest routines. You'd think an off day would be time to catch up on sleep.

Acquire any Established Major League Outfielder!

by guayzimi on May 1, 2007 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions

I do agree

but we're talking about changing an entire culture, aren't we? I tend to think that they have a job to do and probably shouldn't be shutting the bars down at night. But they do work different hours than most of us and maybe this was 1 night in a week, not an every night thing. But I'm 1 year younger than Edmonds, and I can tell you that I don't go out drinking 'til even 10 or 11 during the week lest I be completely useless at work the next day.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions

The Cardinals/Cubs game wasn't until night

If he had to be at the park at 3:00 pm, Edmonds, Kennedy et al could have gotten to bed at 4 am and still gotten 8 good hours of sleep and 3 hours in the cage.

And no one is saying they were out there hanging from the lights either. Go out with friends, try to unwind from getting your brains beat in earlier in the day and try to build a 'team' bond between a couple of guys who are knew with some vets.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't get paid $1M a year

But if I did, I doubt my employer would be happy with my showing up hung-over for work every other day.

by redbird2006in on May 1, 2007 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

What if

that's the only way you could maintain a 4 to 1 strikeout to walk ratio ?

I'm just saying.

Oh well.

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions

Show me where Edmonds showed up hungover

for work?

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions

The reality is, this looks like a serious problem

In one of Whitey Herzog's books, he wrote about how disgusted he was with the blatant substance abuse by guys like Keith Hernandez. He also talked about David Green's alcohol problems, and suggested they were the reason he never reached his presumed potential.

Alcohol is a debilitating substance. It wears a body out. It interferes with protein synthesis (the creation of new muscle tissue, a process that occurs every second of every day to keep your body functioning properly). It encourages fat deposition around the internal organs, which is the worst place to have fat, whether you're an athlete or a fan. And it dehydrates a body, slowing down reaction time.

The P-D stories state that Josh was heading out to meet four fellow ballplayers for drinks around midnight, several hours after the completion of that day's game. This happened just two days after being in a serious auto accident that occurred just five hours before he was supposed to show up for that day's game.

Worse, the P-D suggests LaRussa covered up for Josh in the media, and several of us suspect he may have covered up for Chris Duncan as well.

Given LaRussa's own drunken-driving incident, on top of the poor, unfocused performance of the team so far this season, I think we should all start wondering if perhaps this is a serious, systemic problem for the Cardinals.

by Lou Schuler on May 1, 2007 11:50 AM EDT reply actions

I just don't think

LaRussa's under an obligation to share that stuff w/ the media. He is under an obligation, I believe, to handle it privately and to issue some sort of discipline for that stuff. In fact I think it would be wrong to air that sort of stuff out to everyone.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions

i agree hc

by Zubin on May 1, 2007 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions

If I had been plastered by the Cubs that day ...

I might very well want to get some decent rest and turn things around on the field instead of getting trashed and staying up most of the night.

Makes one wonder if the team is playing hungover more that we might realize. They certainly act as if they are (face it, it's been a sloppy month of baseball).

by Urban Pawnee on May 1, 2007 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions

we can't possibly

step into the minds of these players. There have been rough days at work when I've had a couple of drinks with friends rather than going straight to bed to rest up for the next day. Saying drunk driving is wrong is one thing. Blaming and accusing players for drinking or sleeping habits seems a bit off topic at the moment.

by effin fisk on May 1, 2007 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions

just for some perspective

Depending on the resource, about 8 - 10 percent of adults have drinking problem.

http://alcoholism.about.com/od/problem/a/blnih040802.htm)

This means you should expect at least 2 individuals on a 25 man roster to have a problem.

Baseball players also have increased chances because they are athletes, have money, travel a lot, and are young males - all factors correlated with increased drinking. All together, I think it would take a lot of incidents to claim this "team" has a problem compared to their risk factors.

by enoscountry on May 1, 2007 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions

good post

But I would argue that the club has a leadership problem, not a drinking problem. The drinking is a symptom. If Hancock was going to meet Duncan and Skip that would be one thing, but he was driving out to meet two of the guys who should be taking premier leadership roles on the team. That is just not just unacceptable, it's depressing.

I won't go so far as to say that Jimmy and Gary Bennett are responsible for this tragedy, but it definitely does not look like they were doing their part to foster a winning team culture. Someone has to stand up and say "this is what good ballplayers do", and it definitely wasn't them.

Heck, 2 of the 3 he was meeting (kennedy and edmonds) have been just killing the team with their inability to hit- they look like total crap and even if this tragedy hadn't happened I would be angry to hear that they were out that late on a game day. They're wasting my time and yours, as fans, when they show up to ball games hung over and exhausted and playing like they've been playing this past month.

Nothing disgusts me more than to see potential greatness being squandered. How many of us have looked at the way this team is playing and said "geeze, they look old" or "what is wrong with these guys this year?" Every one of us, I think. Now we know at least part of the reason why.

RIP, JH. I hope your death causes these jerks to do some real soul-searching.

Free Ryan Ludwick!!!

by SleepyCA on May 1, 2007 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions

while i would like a win

at this point, i just want to get through the rest of the season with no problem.

as soon as Mulder comes back healthy, we can get rid of Kip Wells unless he starts getting better.

i'm on TLR's side right now when it comes to talking with the media. people are grieving right now. i hate drunk drivers as much as the next person, and i think had it been the case, he should have taken a cab. but does that make him any less of a ballplayer? mickey mantle was a drunk. babe ruth as well. does that make them any different? Both are in the HOF. Okay, that ends my rant.

Josh was able to get the work done when no one else wanted to. May he rest in peace.

Redbirds Fun
2006 WS for JB and DK57 RIP: Josh Hancock

by cardsfan84 on May 1, 2007 11:55 AM EDT reply actions

Hancock

This seemed like the perfect opportunity for the media to actually show some restraint and wait until the full details are out - given that the toxicology reports should show whether or not he was drinking. Would make sense to cue this discussion at that point.

Instead they run with the interview of "Vince" and leave everyone to speculate with nothing but second and third hand information.

As for the accident Thursday, the Sauget police chief was interviewed yesterday and said that the officers on the scene didn't even give Hancock a field sobriety test because there didn't appear to be any evidence that he was or had been drinking.

I don't think that anyone who saw the circumstances of the fatal accident could ignore thoughts about if he was drunk, but it seems like a cheap and lazy way out for the media to jump on the story before they have the facts. Not suprising though.

http://www.joesportsfan.com

by jbacott on May 1, 2007 12:18 PM EDT reply actions

Baseball better be careful here

I don't know how much of an anti-drinking message they can send here. Alcohol and baseball has turned into so much of the game. With teams/stadiums and plenty of other advertising devoted to it.

by birdsonthehat on May 1, 2007 12:20 PM EDT reply actions

The bigger picture and a greater good

Yeah I think it's about time MLB takes a look and a stand about a big problem, alcohol and its players. It's a major problem that everyone knows about but everyone also ignores. Think about a major leaguers life. Hancock played a day game, probably got out of the stadium around 7. His next game was a Sunday night game, meaning he would have to show up to the ballpark around 2 or 3. Even in his hometown, he was staying in a hotel. Who would want to spend all that time in a hotel room? He probably has no family and very few friends if any outside his team in the St. Louis area. Ball players have a plethora of income to spend and I'm not for sure if they get it for home game but they also receive vast meal stipend also. Unfortunately all these factors cause players to go drinking, and honestly I would do it too. How else are you going to cease the boredom and meet people? This problem is rampant throughout the Majors and I'm sure even the minors.

How do we stop this problem? I'm sure there is a program in place by every team that has a specialist come and tell everyone how drinking can cause bad things. Well clearly this isn't working and something else needs to be done. A change can always work and I have seen it work. While in college I sat on a student advisory panel. Our University's alcohol program was just sitting there telling incoming freshman drinking was bad and wrong and they shouldn't drink because they were under 21. Yeah, give me a break. Its college and everyone is going to drink, that's just reality. Well within the first week of school 9 students went to the hospital for alcohol poisoning. Clearly the program wasn't working. Luckily the Dean and I were good friends and I convinced her to let me change and shape the alcohol programming and education. I wasn't going to stand there and tell them not to drink. I lead education panels that taught them how to drink responsibly and how to take care of one another. Well after these sessions only one student went to the hospital.

What does this story prove? Change is good and it can achieve something. The MLB needs to sit down with every team and show them what their responsibility is when they drink. I would hope maybe even Hancock's family could become involved and travel to every team letting them know what the consequences really are. Members of the Cardinals can travel around also. After this I guess I can envision at least one member standing up and saying, Hey I've made this terrible decision before also. Can you imagine the impact of a Derek Jeter or a Lance Berkman standing up before their team and saying, " I once almost had a car accident driving drunk, can you imagine losing me?"

Will this completely solve the problem, No. But if it at least affects one person its successful. Maybe that person would have been Josh. I would also like to see the MLB impose a 15 game suspension for any player convicted of a DUI, maybe that will make players think twice also.

I hope that it is found that Josh wasn't drunk. However, that still doesn't diminish this major problem affecting baseball. Ignoring the problem is just baseball acting in ignoranance. Its time they make a change and stand against this deadly problem.

by stl3bagger on May 1, 2007 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions

I know you've got your heart in the right place

here, but really, by now we've been exposed to decades of advice, facts, support groups, publications, warnings, penalties, etc., about the dangers of too much drinking. And I would bet that MLB is already doing things along these lines to some degree, not to mention the players' association and their agents and their wives and girlfriends and parents, etc. The fact is that young healthy men with a lot of time on their hands are going to drink, and some of them will do stupid things afterwards. Short of becoming really totalitarian about it, I don't know how much of an effect you can have. And at a certain point, people will adapt to all the ADDITIONAL programs, practices, meetings, etc., that you create, then eventually tune it out and go back to the prior behaviors.

I would go along with the automatic suspensions for DUIs, though.

by MdRedbirdFreak on May 1, 2007 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions

P-D

maybe i'm overreacting, but i'm sorta hacked off at the pd for publishing this whole 'eyewitness' acct. i don't blame tony for threatening to grab his fungo and start swinging, there's not much use out of reporting this when the autopsy will tell us this stuff anyway. the whole story sounds sorta made up to me. i've never been to shannon's, i imagine it's pretty noisy in there. i just i can't imagine how one can overhear all those details in that situation.

Future Redbirds

by erik on May 1, 2007 1:19 PM EDT reply actions

Not only that, but it appears the P-D

didn't contact Dave Campbell until after ESPN reported his statements the contradict the whole eyewitness account.

The new story up today has his quotes included.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions

If a notable...

person dies in a one car accident, does his actions and whereabouts leading up to the accident constitute news? If they had simply said he was hanging out at a bar beforehand, would that have been ok? Seems to me all they said was that he was drinking and seemed to be inebriated, and the manager offered to call him a cab. What's difficult to believe about this?

The P-D reports the news, good and bad.

Acquire any Established Major League Outfielder!

by guayzimi on May 1, 2007 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm a Tony LaR fan, but ...

him threatening nosy media with a fungo bat is the worst kind of paranoid, let's-close-ranks behaviour that, in light of the inescapable collage of facts filtering in, smacks of a cover up.

Whether there's something to cover up, I surely don't know. But Tony needs to stop trying to make things worse. Cover ups don't work. Just look at the Army's pitiful handling of the Pat Tillman death. The family is beyond livid that their dead son became fodder for some patriotic fairy tale.

The truth is all we want. Tony can't stop it ... not even with a fungo bat.

by Urban Pawnee on May 1, 2007 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm pretty sure

Tony just wants to keep the media from slamming Josh and saying he was a drunk when no facts are out. and as close as that clubhouse is, he is the dad of them all, it's natural for him to defend his kids, all the players. sure saying he going to go babe ruth on a reporter who asks a question he does not like is probably a bit much. but I can't really blame him for trying to protect the players. I don't think anything any of them do can be held aginst them for a while. it's all part of the greving process. everyone greves differently. this is the second time in 5 years Tony has had to deal with this. who among us can judge him for how he deals with this all over again?

The 2006 St.Louis Cardinals. WORLD CHAMPIONS OF THE WORLD. And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on May 1, 2007 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions

This may be the only way

Tony has of controlling the team's performance in light of all this. Maybe the team can rally around this, kind of an us vs. the media sort of thing, to bring the team together and use their performance on the field as a rallying cry. It's not a cover up. They're trying to protect Josh and, I think, Tony's going to use it to try to refocus the team.

by chuckb on May 1, 2007 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions

Does anyone have the link

to the article people are talking about that apparently insinuates that Duncan got hurt drinking? I must have missed that one.

by TICY on May 1, 2007 1:23 PM EDT reply actions

There is no article

it's just bad presumptions or 'questioning' on my part.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Ah ok

I missed a few days after the game Duncan was scratched from, never really heard the reason.

by TICY on May 1, 2007 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions

question to all....

I know we are still dealing with the Hancock death and so forth so I don't mean to be rude when I ask this, but does anyone know if they are going to reschedule the game they postponed. If so when? The only reason i ask is because i invested some serious cash for really good seats. Thanks again, GO CARDS

2/3rd's of the earth is covered by water, the other third is coverd by Jim Edmonds

by cardsphan04 on May 1, 2007 2:13 PM EDT reply actions

I heard

the series at the end of July. Probably a double header

President of the Skip Schumaker Fan Club. : D

by stltrav09 on May 1, 2007 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions

There are a bunch of issues

'cause the team the Cubs are playing in the series before us or after us (can't remember who) needs to make up a game or 2.

There are conflicts with the "can't play more than 20 games in a row" rule, and the Cubs would obviously like to keep their off day.

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't know if you guys read

The Dugout, but while they're often hysterically funny, they have a softer side as well, and the Dugouts they did for the deaths of Cory Lidle and Buck O'Neil made me cry. It's no different with Hancock, as they imagine a lovely conversation between him and Darryl Kile in heaven and the ending has left me in tears again. :( Very much worth a read.

Rest in peace, Josh Hancock.

by Scarlet the Cardinal on May 1, 2007 2:18 PM EDT reply actions

RIP JH

From an Astros fan, I have nothing but respect for the classy organization the STL Cardinals are. I enjoy the rivalry the Astros and Cards have developed the last few years. Yesterday I wore a Cards hat that I got when visiting STL last year. I wore it in honor of JH and the Cards organization. I am so sorry to hear about this great loss to the Cardinal Nation! I hope Josh was not drunk but regardless of the circumstances, it was a terrible tragedy. He will be missed!

by astros76 on May 1, 2007 2:42 PM EDT reply actions

A bit non-sequitor

but Viva El Birdos was mentioned (again) in the Wall Street Journal's sports roundup.

On Viva El Birdos, Larry Borowsky writes that "being a fan is largely about abandoning perspective. ... you can't feel the weight of every life lost in the world, in the country, in your town; you couldn't function if you did. that's another reason we abandon perspective so enthusiastically --- for the sake of our sanity. all of us, baseball fans and non-fans alike, attribute great significance to endeavors that we know are truly insignificant. but every once in a while, we don't have the luxury. as cardinal fans, we feel like we knew josh hancock; we feel like we know his teammates and friends. the loss is a personal one; it's not an abstraction. hence the jarring intrusion of perspective into a realm of our lives where, very consciously, we are trying to give perspective the slip."

I thought they had a good perspective on Josh Hancock's death and the prospect of alcohol being involved:

If alcohol did play a role in Mr. Hancock's tragic death, that will come out and should come out -- in its proper time, the Fix adds firmly. For now, Cardinals fans are groping for perspective -- never easy when we're jolted by a reminder that sports is, after all, not fantasy but part of real life, and gets no exemption from life's disappointments, mistakes and sudden, sickening grief.

by Zubin on May 1, 2007 3:22 PM EDT reply actions

Re:

That is a wonderful sentiment, and I wholeheartedly agree; but in this microwave-like day and age of Anna Nicole and VA Tech, not very realistic, I'm afraid.

by cardsrul on May 1, 2007 3:32 PM EDT reply actions

Look guys (and girls)

While I do realize that the Cardinals have a significant investment in JEd, Kennedy, and any other player that makes the big league club, they really have no right to intercede in their personal life unless it affects their on-field performance (i.e. steroids and hangovers).

Any poster here knows that the Cardinals are FULLY aware of all their players personal habits. Jimmy Ballgame has been a Cardinal for a long time, and I doubt his habits, for better or worse, are much different now than they were then.

Players lose muscle mass due to this "roady" lifestyle more than a complete lack of time. I work out and run on a very regular basis, but when I travel, the general road fatigue leaves me feeling deflated and tired all the time. Even when I do lift or run while on the road, seldom is it a quality workout. Try it and you will understand their plight. Please do not try to assign the team's woes this year to a sudden onset of mass-alcoholism.

And, by the way, I am 29, and I do really enjoy going out with my buddies when we get a chance and having a few beers. Does it affect my mental and physical performance the next day? You bet it does. With that being said, that is part of being human.

According to you folks above, we should put ankle-bracelets on all our athletes and only let them eat some sort of nutrient paste in order to keep their bodies at an optimum level of performance all year.

This is my fundamental disagreement with what a lot of us are doing now with these stats and projections. We sometimes neglect the human element of a team. I know you will argue that a large enough samle size will eliminate most human slumps and streaks, but not all. Sometimes an element as simple as chemistry can lift the performance of all the team members. Look at the Yanks. These guys are all exemplary performers by themselves, but they have never gelled into a great cohesive team.

I'm a man, a manly, manly, man. Unknown

by Eckstreem on May 1, 2007 3:54 PM EDT reply actions

Heh. Well

I think you need pitchers who aren't on the D/L to gel!

by sdrone on May 1, 2007 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions

ned yost on rome

they are talking about the 3-ball walk.

suppan and graffafino thought it was three balls. yost didn't argue

Redbirds Fun
2006 WS for JB and DK57 RIP: Josh Hancock

by cardsfan84 on May 1, 2007 4:40 PM EDT reply actions

Skip to lead off

Cards lineup (thanks to Goold)

Skip
Duncan
Pujols
Rolen
Edmonds
Kennedy
Molina
Eckstein
Looper

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 1, 2007 5:18 PM EDT reply actions

When was the last time

That Eckstein was in the starting lineup and did not bat leadoff?

Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time.

by Solanus on May 1, 2007 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions

I dunno

But this might be the stir he needs to get back on track. I like that TLR is mixing things up a bit.

On with the youth movement!

by aet15 on May 1, 2007 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions

at least he didn't touch 3-4-5

but still, eckstein has been slumping of late.

Redbirds Fun
2006 WS for JB and DK57 RIP: Josh Hancock

by cardsfan84 on May 1, 2007 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Answered my own question

Never with the Cardinals. Last time was the final game in 2004, still with the Angels, he batted 7th with Chone Figgins batting leadoff. Apparently Figgins and Darin Erstad shared that responsibility the last two weeks of the season.

Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time.

by Solanus on May 1, 2007 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions