Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

Miguel Cabrera Is Doing Great

What with the emotional end to the Mariners' season, I don't know if you've been following this story at all, but in case you hadn't heard, Miguel Cabrera

  • went out drinking with some friends on the White Sox after Friday's game
  • got wasted
  • came home at 6 in the morning with a BAC around .26
  • fought with his wife
  • was taken to the police station
  • got picked up from the station by GM Dave Dombrowski around 8
  • went hitless in the series

Ordinarily I like to take this opportunities to come to the players' defense. Fans tend to hold players to an impossible standard of behavior and hate to find out that they have the same flaws as everybody else, and that isn't the least bit fair. But in this case...in this case, Cabrera comes off seeming, at best, irresponsible, and, at worst, indifferent. This one's going to haunt Cabrera for a long long time.

I'll say this for Miguel - I don't think it's that he didn't care. I don't think that's it at all. People will take this as a sign that he's all about himself and the money and couldn't give two shits about going to the playoffs, but that allegation rests on knowing more about his motivations than any fan ever could. Players do this kind of thing all the time. At the start of the year, at the end of the year, in the heat of a race - players don't have the flu as often as TV would have you think they do. I imagine it's just more likely that he didn't think about it. Professional athletes are a different breed. They've been conditioned to think they're great to the point where they think they can do anything, and a lot of superstars like Cabrera take that to the extreme. Had you asked him in an impossible and hypothetical moment of sobriety Saturday morning whether he'd be fine in time for the game, I'm sure he would've said yeah. He's Miguel Cabrera. One night of drinking with buddies at the end of a long season couldn't be of any harm.

And maybe it wasn't. There's no way of knowing whether Cabrera's being drunk on Saturday morning played any part in his going hitless Saturday night. It's not hard to imagine that it did, but then it's not hard to imagine that it didn't, either. I've woken up hungover from a couple drinks, and I've woken up not hungover from a dozen drinks; I've struggled with a clear mind, and I've done amazing shit with a headache. Miguel Cabrera's Friday and Saturday nights very well may have been completely independent of one another.

But that's not how fans are going to see it, and, ultimately, this is probably going to deal a severe and perhaps immutable blow to his image. No one's going to care that he may have landed a hand on his wife. History has shown that fans tend to be pretty forgiving of players who do bad things in their personal lives. For Cabrera, though, to put himself in a situation that could be interpreted as showing disinterest in the success of his team - to a fan, there is no greater insult. Ask Manny Ramirez or Erik Bedard how well people respond when they think you don't care.

After Friday's game, Miguel Cabrera did a stupid thing. He did a few stupid things, really. That, by itself, doesn't make him different from a lot of other players in the league, but what makes this situation exceptional is that he's a high-profile player, and that he got caught. And now he gets to deal with the fallout for far, far longer than he ever would've imagined. This little episode won't soon be forgotten. Even if Cabrera ends up hitting the winner homer on Tuesday, people are still going to bring this up every time he strikes out in a big at bat or otherwise seems lackadaisical. And should Cabrera go hitless or the Tigers lose - there are a lot of people to blame for the Tigers' collapse, but Cabrera's in position now to be hearing about a careless night of drinking for the rest of his career.

I'm sure this is exactly what everyone in the organization wants to be talking about a day before the biggest game of the season.

Comment 85 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

.26 BAC.

.35 can put you in a coma. That’s a lot of liquor. Pretty miserable decision all around. But I would still employ him as my first baseman.

by rizzshairpiece on Oct 5, 2009 10:48 AM PDT reply actions  

As much as yesterday gave me the warm fuzzies I've said this before and I'll say it again

If I could have a team full of Miguel Cabreras, Manny Ramirezes, Gary Sheffields and the like that wins a World Series, I’d take that team in a heartbeat over a team that I would be willing to have over to my house for dinner that never wins anything. Off field stuff doesn’t matter, at least not to me.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Oct 5, 2009 10:52 AM PDT reply actions  

This is a weird one for me.

In the one hand, I am capable of separating a person’s personal life from their professional life; I love Roman Polanski’s work even though he is a rapist, I insist that Phil Spector is the greatest producer in the history of popular music even though he is a murderer and just an all-around dreadful person and as far as John Huston, well, it’s probably best that I don’t get into detail about what a shitbag John Huston was, but he was a hell of a filmmaker.

So in general, I agree; Miguel Cabrera would look great at 1B for the M’s, and I can certainly root for a team that contains assholes. But I will never like a person that batters women. I would certainly hope for the best in regards to that player’s performance, but I’m still going to think they’re a fucking asshole that is beneath my contempt unless they were to publicly apologize (in a genuine manner) and follow through on said apology with positive action afterwards.

In a nutshell, I want my teams to win, but the winning is a hell of a lot more fun if I like the players. Given the choice between good player that isn’t a wife-beater/racist/A.J. Pierzynski and a good player that is any one of those things, I would prefer option A.

by Aaron Campeau on Oct 5, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't have to like the person to like what they do career-wise

John Huston is a great example. Complete fucking shitbag, as you say; that doesn’t make me like the Maltese Falcon any less. I guess I tend to draw my own personal line at “if all I know about a person is their work product, all I care to know about from that person is their work product”. I am probably alone in this, at least in a sports context; sports tends to bring out this desire for every sportsman (at least the Jordan/Griffey/Brady level ones anyway) to be straight out of a Norman Rockwell painting and be the kind of person you’d want your daughter to marry, which I have always found to be very odd.

If I were to ever be friends with a professional athlete, my detached stance might in fact change; the odds of me becoming friends with a pro athlete are so remote, though, that I can divorce myself from caring what kind of people they are for the most part.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Oct 5, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think that it is increasingly difficult to keep the two separate for a lot of people.

I don’t want to know things about athletes/artists personal lives. I really don’t give two shits. But a lot of the time, I don’t have a choice. If it’s something neutral, like drinking or drug problems or just being kind of an asshole, well, whatever. I ignore it. When it’s something like this, though, it’s a lot harder for me to do.

by Aaron Campeau on Oct 5, 2009 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Gonna have to side with Aaron on this one

Phil Spector was a genius producer. Too bad he was/is insane.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Oct 5, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just a conflict of taste I think.

George Martin would have to be my favorite producer. Tucker Martine, too.

I like more economic and “necessities” production. Rubber Soul is the perfect example of a well-produced album.

In my opinion, Phil Spector is the very picture of overproduction.

Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.

by qrsouther on Oct 5, 2009 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

To me, this is about employee behavior. And timing.

Normally I wouldn’t care what an athlete does on his own time, and fighting with his wife is his none of my business. But allowing yourself to get that drunk before a huge work-related responsibility is pretty bad. My employer has no say over what I do with my time, but if I show up hung over and work at a snail’s pace for half the day, I’m in the wrong. You’re paid to show up ready to work, and I have a hard time believing that a 0.26 BAC doesn’t hurt your abilities the next day. He could very well be superhuman, but I’m skeptical. As Jeff mentions, there’s no way of knowing for sure if it affected him, but it’s at least pretty clear to me that it was irresponsible. I’d be a little pissed if I were a Tigers fan. Or an executive with the club.

It’s just so weird. Of all the weekends to get hammered with your buddies . . .

by Teej on Oct 5, 2009 11:22 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Dude likes to party.

Props to him for being that schmammered at 6 am.

Kinda sucks if you’re a Tigers fan, but I like him more now. (except for the fighting wife part)

Go Nova

by dbroncos31 on Oct 5, 2009 11:40 AM PDT reply actions  

Hmm. Now it seems he scratched his wife.

That’s some weaksauce if it’s true

Go Nova

by dbroncos31 on Oct 5, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

At least she got in some good shots, too!

Though Cabrera told reporters that his dog beat him up, so who knows.

by Teej on Oct 5, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

This says it all:
Miguel Cabrera went out drinking with some friends on the White Sox after Friday’s game

You’ve got to think those “friends” got Cabrera wasted on purpose knowing how important this series was. It wouldn’t surprise me if it was Ozzie Guillen himself! Although on one side of the story it may appear a player doesn’t care about winning, it’s comforting to know the opponent, being out of contention, wanted to win badly enough that he/they went to great lengths of sabotaging. May not be the most ethical thing to do, but can’t knock the competitive motivations.

by Wilder. on Oct 5, 2009 12:11 PM PDT reply actions  

Do we know who he was with?

Aren’t there websites dedicated to exposing drunk athletes?

by zeeehjee on Oct 5, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'd like to believe that

But when you are a public person (and pro-athletes are public people) your behavior IS public, and it is the public’s business to a certain extent. It’s true for athletes, actors, politicians and even to a certain extent, teachers.

If a website exposes bad behavior and holds public persons accountable I’m not sure its bad… I just wish there were websites out there chronicling all the GOOD stuff that they do as well. I’m sure Cabrera does great things for the community in Detroit, which are being overshadowed by (as far as any of us know) an isolated incident.

by zeeehjee on Oct 5, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Which part?

The first part, the second part or both?

Let me put it this way. If my kid decides one day that he is going to idolize some public figure, I’m going to be very curious as to what this person is up to in his public life… and being out in public at a bar or wherever is by definition his public life. I guess I don’t see why that is wrong… but I’m open to the conversation.

by zeeehjee on Oct 5, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

The first part.

I don’t agree in the slightest that a public figure’s entire life is worth public record, or even most of it, or at least, the parts you mention.

by Matthew on Oct 5, 2009 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'll take umbrage with the second part then

If a website exposes bad behavior and holds public persons accountable I’m not sure its bad…

What do you mean by “holds public persons accountable”? Why do you care if, say, Player X gets drunk and pukes on a bartender? What kind of “holding accountable” is necessary there? Or, in Cabrera’s example, why is HIS arrest for alleged domestic violence any different or any more deserving of notice than an arrest of some nobody who lives down the street who gets arrested for the same thing?

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Oct 5, 2009 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

There's also the fact that "actions on the public record" and "public life" are two very different things.

Despite the fact that what Cabrera did is a matter of public record, I would still consider it to be a part of his private life.

by Aaron Campeau on Oct 5, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not to be harsh

but that’s your job as a parent.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Oct 5, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I don't doubt that for a minute

but I think “holding celebrities accountable” is kind of a foolish path. Shouldn’t your kid grow up to learn that “celebrities” are pretty much just people like you and I?

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Oct 5, 2009 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

And not only that, if he breaks the law and gets caught he'll be held accountable.

If he doesn’t break the law, who cares? A lot of this ties into the way our society views drinking and recreational drug use and in general having a good time which is a totally different subject and way too far off-topic to get into in depth here, but the reality of the situation is that I do not doubt for one second that a lot of these stories (not necessarily the story in question) are blown way, way, WAY out of proportion because of the points of view of columnists or editors or what have you.

by Aaron Campeau on Oct 5, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think we can all agree with that

After all, the only reason the story was brought up here was that it was a work night, not the other aspects of the incident.

by zeeehjee on Oct 5, 2009 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's probably true.

And yes, celebrities are people who, like me, make mistakes. There mistakes make in the paper, mine stay private… is that injustice? Perhaps… but at least I think its safe to say that, whether it is right or wrong, celebs need to be careful out there because you never know who’s watching.

by zeeehjee on Oct 5, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly.

See for me, it’s the corporate media that is at the heart of the "what about the children!" problem, not the misbehaving athletes. Celebrities are their never-ending source of news; and even when celebs are the villain of the story, the fact is that they are important, to the point that our kids hear more about Kate Gosselin and Michael Vick than they do about flooding in the Philippines, because hearing about the goddamn Philippines isn’t going to make anybody buy shampoo.

by Manzanillos Cup on Oct 5, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

The point I'm trying to make is not that celebs need to be careful out there

it’s that we as a society (and you as a parent when talking to your kid(s) ) should stop valuing the celebrity so highly.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Oct 5, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thats probably true as well.

But it’s not always a convincing argument to simply tell someone (especially a kid) that they value something “too highly.”

Thanks for the parenting advice everyone. I’m out.

by zeeehjee on Oct 5, 2009 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

that's not what I meant at all

I believe it is a parent’s job to help their kids put things in a good perspective, for lack of a better way to put it; I’m not speaking about you specifically, just parents in general, when I say that it’s up to parents to show their kids what is and is not important in life. It’s important for kids to have people to look up to; it’s also important that the people that kids look up to are not made out to be anything more than sports heroes or movie stars, and that’s where this society needs a little help these days. “Celebrities” are held out as being somehow…better than most people, seemingly only so that we can then track their every move and laugh at them when they pass out in the back of a cab.

I would not presume to tell you how to parent your child; I would just wish that the culture that seems to value celebrity over anything else can somehow change and figure out something more important to do.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Oct 5, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Right.

I’m not speaking to you directly, I’m commenting on our culture at large.

by Aaron Campeau on Oct 5, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oh, I get it.

And I wasn’t being tongue in cheek with the last comment. But forming a young mind into being a responsible human being takes a lifetime. Forming good behaviors and values can often be undone by one mistake… I think my behavior is much more important than any celebrity, but other people that kids admire also have serious weight in forming these values and behaviors.

I really do appreciate the comments guys.

by zeeehjee on Oct 5, 2009 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

I didn't mean to infer "Entire Life."

So if I did, I apologize. Private lives are private, and I don’t need to know what any player is doing in his own home. But going out in public is going out in public. Now I’m not for any kind of paparazzi or ridiculous websites that chronicle what every celebrity is doing at all times, but if a celebrity is out acting in a way that is morally or legally suspect I’m not surprised that people want to take interest, for a variety of reasons, some reasons being better than others (such as pure gossip).

by zeeehjee on Oct 5, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not surprised people want to take interest, I just wish they wouldn't.

There is also the fact that the media outlets that report on “suspect” celebrity behavior are in the business of making celebrities look bad. Even departments of generally reliable media organizations have this problem. If it’s sordid it’s going to sell.

by Aaron Campeau on Oct 5, 2009 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

If your kid decides to idolize a public figure to the point that he begins emulating their personal path in life, you've done something wrong.

I know that sounds harsh, but it’s true. When I was a kid I idolized the performance of athletes, and as I grew older I idolized the work of musicians and artists, but my role models were always chosen for different reasons. On occasion those role models were public figures, but in those instances it was always because of the way they did things.

Kids are a lot smarter (about certain things) than people give them credit for. No one is ever going to become an alcoholic because one of their heroes drinks too much.

by Aaron Campeau on Oct 5, 2009 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

There is a different between legally acceptable and morally acceptable.

Yes, anything you do in public is public information, and there are no laws against websites/tabloids/whatever reporting that information. I just wish people would stop caring because I think it says really terrible things about our society.

by Aaron Campeau on Oct 5, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Beat me to it.

It’s perfectly legal. But we’re perfectly free to find it awful.

by Teej on Oct 5, 2009 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Teachers? What the hell?

The job of a teacher is terrible and unappreciated enough as if it without them having to deal with the media invading their privacy. How could th at even be beneficial?

by Kaorikaze on Oct 5, 2009 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Quick, vaguely on-topic question:

Will the tiebreaker tomorrow and the postseason as a whole be available on MLB.TV?

Apparently it’s a separate purchase and is available to US residents only.

Needless to say I’m pretty fucking annoyed about this.

Fuck Anaheim.

by Eyeball Kid on Oct 5, 2009 7:04 PM PDT reply actions  

Were we able to watch the playoffs on MLB.tv before?

I honestly don’t remember, but the national broadcasts seem like they would’ve gotten in the way. I’m sure there will be free steams available in the usual places online.

by Jeff Sullivan on Oct 5, 2009 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's not so much the extra payment as the fact that it's US only

Seems it’s on TV over here but on a channel I don’t get anymore :(

Low quality internet stream it is then. This would have been really annoying had the M’s made it, but since it’s such an uninteresting posteason I’m sure I’ll manage.

Fuck Anaheim.

by Eyeball Kid on Oct 5, 2009 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Starlin Castro's fit with Seattle
Kawasaki80_small
Lists! So many lists!
M_s_hat_copy_small
OT -- May 22nd In Memoriam
Ichiro_small
Why do managers and media members hate walks?
Wbc_029_small
Friday Morning Music Thread
Small
Dustin Ackley BP swing vs game swing
Beastquakerwallpaper_small
More on the Struggles of Smoak
Randy2_for_sbn_small
Albert Pujols 2012: Three Retrospectives
Small
On Batting Orders
Niehaus_small
More on Dustin Ackley and the strikezone

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Sexy People

Wbc_029_small Jeff Sullivan

Small Matthew

Claw_small JY