Direct Hit

Following up on Shank's April 20th column, we can confirm he successfully trolled the city of Cleveland whilst simultaneously complimenting the Cavaliers. Shank's most recent Jedi mind trick, as coined by Bruce Allen of Boston Sports Media Watch, resulted in a letter to the Globe editor and a number of offended columnists, other Ohio writers and pissed off Cleveland residents, which were fodder for Boston radio and even led to speculation that Shank's troll job led to the lack of confetti, Cleveland's customary celebration of a Cavaliers win, when Cleveland won Game 2 on Tuesday.

Congratulations, Cleveland - You Got Shanked!

Look Away

Shank today accuses Red Sox management of using the celebrations of the 100-year anniversary of Fenway Park as a front to obscure the performance on the field, calling it "a last shameless attempt to direct your eyes away from the playing field." (As if the connotations of a losing record are so complex, your average fan hasn't yet figured it out.)

The solution, says the Bold One, is to hire former Red Sox pitching coach and now Blue Jays manager John Farrell, because no one can turn around a fourth-place team like a guy who is coaching a fifth-place team!

And The CHB -- who when it comes to baseball matters has been right about, what, 3% of the time? --  claims that the Sox need to lose as much as possible "because they need to hit rock bottom in order to get better." 

There you go again, Dan, quoting your AA counselor. 

We say, Direct your eyes from the writer for the Globe.

Spygate II - Is Alex Cora Getting The Ax?

Generally speaking, it's a time to question Shank when he uses the phrase 'do the right thing', but in light of very recent developments he just might be right here.

Red Sox need to do the right thing and fire Alex Cora

The Red Sox need to fire Alex Cora now. Yesterday, if possible. Don’t wait for MLB to tell you what to do. Just do the right thing.

After speaking with two sources with direct knowledge of the situation, I get a sense that the Sox are going to stand by their man and ride this out. They just love Alex Cora, and we understand that.

But this is not an episode that calls for traditional, media-blaming defiance. This is not the time for the Sox to stick behind their guy. The Red Sox are an important local institution. Firing Cora now, before MLB’s next set of sanctions is issued, before it becomes obvious to everyone that Cora must go, allows the Sox to preserve some institutional dignity and let history record that they did the right thing.

Shank mentions some things that are in the MLB report (which came out yesterday or early this morning) that look pretty bad & incriminating. And when even Pete Rose thinks it's a bad situation, you know the shit's about to hit the fan.

You Can't Hit If You Don't Swing

Sometimes I just don't understand Our Man Shank. For the second time in a week, he's passed on a prime opportunity for Patriots bashing:

To recap: Gronk originally broke the arm against the Colts in November. The Patriots and he opted to surgically install a plate so he'd ideally be back for the playoffs; the surgery was performed by Patriots doctor Tom Gill. Gronk broke the same arm again in the Patriots' playoff game against the Texans. Over the offseason, the plate created an infection, so Gronk went back for surgery to clean it out. In total, Gronk underwent three additional surgeries on his arm before it was clean. It was a long summer. But this report from Mike Petraglia of WEEI uses sources who claim that Gronk might have returned sooner if the arm break healed by itself:

One source with direct knowledge of the initial forearm surgery told WEEI.com Thursday night that there is “serious concern” about the integrity of the bone where the implement was placed and the surrounding nerves. The source indicated that if the bone had healed on its own without an implement, there would have been no infection. However, there now are concerns that an abscess developed, causing infection and seriously weakening the bone. This prompted three more surgeries in the offseason on the forearm, separate from the procedure on his back.

So, reportedly, Gill's hasty surgery compromised what could have been a much easier recovery for Gronk. Dr. James Andrews, who didn't perform any of the surgeries, will make the final decision about Gronk's availability this week, not Gill. The Patriots kept Gronk off of the revocable IR in hopes of his return; he still hasn't played a snap. If Gronk ends up not returning this week, this all seems even dumber.

This is an unbelievable chance for Shank to get on his high horse Shetland pony and crap on management and ownership like no one's business. In baseball terms, it's a hanging curve down the middle of the plate. What gives? It's not like the Patriots' owner also owns the local broadsheet newspaper...

Shank's Latest Hatchet Job / Smear

A few hours ago, the New England Patriots traded Chandler Jones to the Arizona Cardinals for Jonathan Cooper and a second-round pick from Arizona. Fellow Shank Boston Globe colleague Ben Volin reasons that the trade was done in order to avoid losing Jones in free agency next year, avoided paying him a monster contract when he hit free agency and at least got something for him by trading him now. In other words, it's a typical logical trade by Bill Belichick and the Patriots (Richard Seymour, etc.). Other local news outlets and sports oriented web sites have reported on and / or weighed in on the trade.

So how does Shank react to the trade?

Chandler Jones traded. Pats Media Cartel mobilizes. Clever Pats knew all along something wrong with Jones. Another steal of a deal.

— Dan Shaughnessy (@Dan_Shaughnessy) March 15, 2016

A few facts first - to the best of my knowledge and based on the stories linked above, there is no known current physical problem with Chandler Jones. This will be confirmed once both players involved in this trade undergo their physicals, the passing of which by both players is required to make the trade official.

So, what do we make of Shank's statement "Pats knew all along something wrong with Jones."? 1) We know Shank has no Patriots insider feeding him such a juicy tidbit, so that avenue's closed. 2) It's possible that Shank is referring to Jones' injury history, but that's speculation. 3) It's also speculation to wonder if Shank is referring to this incident when making that statement. 4) Shank is otherwise in possession of information that isn't known to a number of other sports reporters (UPDATE - or is it? ed.), or 5) Shank's pulling something out of his ass. I don't believe there are any other scenarios to consider here, right?

While it's difficult to assign percentages or probabilities on the outcomes, I will first offer my own speculation - Shank made that part of his statement / tweet to do what he does best - paint the New England Patriots in the worst light possible by asserting the most nefarious of motives (i.e., trading a player where there is 'something wrong' with said player). If Chandler fails his physical, Shank comes off looking like a genius. This is why I consider this outcome as the least likely one.

More likely in my opinion is this scenario / outcome - both players pass their physicals and Shank does one of the following things - he points to 2) or 3) above as his reason for making that part of his statement, or ignores any demands for a clarification or retraction, thus pointing to 5) as the most likely basis for that part of his tweet. It seems to me that 4) is off the table, as I have doubts as to the veracity of Shank claiming he got this info from outside the Patriots organization and somehow Ben Volin (and / or other reporters) missed it. I am certain there will be no direct Shank apology / retraction to the Patriots organization if he is proven wrong on this assertion of his.

And that is how you smear a professional sports team, folks.

UPDATE AT 7:12 PM - Surely he's not referring to Shank's tweet...

Not sure I've ever read a negative word about Chandler Jones as a football player until about 90 minutes ago.

— Kirk Minihane (@kirkmin) March 15, 2016

This will be interesting to see how it all sorts itself out, since the timelines between the tweets don't line up to point to Shank - Kirk seems to know something as well. Maybe it's injury related, or otherwise. Scenario 4), slightly modified, now in play...

Now Get Off My Lawn!

Shank steps into the 'old man yelling at clouds' part of his professional career:

Have celebrations in sports gone too far or are they simply a sign of the times?

Waiting for the Bruins and Celtics to start the playoffs, wondering what the Red Sox will look like when they play good teams, I find myself thinking about sportsmanship, taunting, celebrations, and getting old.

Getting old comes first in this sports story because it colors the way one thinks about sportsmanship, taunting, and celebrations.

This is the sports fans’ circle of life.

I will swear on a stack of bibles I did not read any of this column before going with my opening comments. The title of the column is all that's required.

Old-timers want things to stay the way they were. There’s a (misguided, no doubt) notion that the games, athletes, and traditions were better and more classy in the old days. Guys who hit homers put their heads down and acknowledged their achievement with a polite, Harvard Club handshake as they crossed home plate. Running backs went across the goal line, then turned and pitched the ball back to the official. Our games had a DiMaggio/Barry Sanders dignity. Heroes “acted like they’d been there before.”

In 2023, young fans want action, color, noise, and “look at me” chest-thumping. This is sports. It’s supposed to be fun. There’s nothing wrong with a little celebration — even if that means mocking your opponent. And anybody who doesn’t like it is either Clint Eastwood grumbling “Get off my lawn!” or Abe Simpson yelling at clouds (I’d prefer to be Mick Jagger singing “Get Off Of My Cloud,” but that’s never happening).

Read on for more of the same. I'll make a couple of notes that'll nuke Shank's whole premise and document yet again his hypocrisy on the matter. First - Shank doesn't mind the concept of 'trash talk', as long as it's directed at someone or a team he doesn't like, like the 2015 New York Jets, Arian Foster of the Houston Texans, or even when noted local columnist Jon Keller was defending him for Shank's use of 'trash talk' (i.e., his usual MO of antagonizing fans) with harsh columns.

Second - for anyone who watched the 1980's Boston Celtics, there is no greater trash talker then or now than Larry Bird. Kevin Garnett gives him a good run for his money but let's just focus on Bird for a moment. Does anyone out there think Shank would, for instance, direct this kind of column's critiques toward the Hick from French Lick? Hell would freeze over first.

Third - here's an old gem from the archives, the third and final nail in the proverbial coffin. Shank's also fine with 'trash talk' when it helps him write a column. The salient part:

Further into the column, Shank demonstrates his hypocrisy (We never would have known about it in the genteel good old days.):

“You could not print all the things we said,’’ said Cedric Maxwell, Ainge’s teammate from the 1980s and a Hall of Fame trash talker. “You could not write it all down. The families. The moms. Didn’t make any difference. We didn’t have to be politically correct. We could be asinine.

“I remember one guy, before the start of a playoff series, saying, ‘No way that bitch is getting 40 points off of me.’ Somebody wrote that down and it actually got in the paper.’’

I know. Because Max said it about Bernard King, and I wrote it down, and it appeared in the Sunday Globe on the day of the first game of the 1984 Eastern Conference semifinals between the Celtics and Knicks. King refused to shake Max’s hand before the game. King didn’t get his 40 until Game 3, but the Celtics won the series.

Does anyone seriously think this (or the 1984) column get written if Larry Bird was the trash talker in question?

Some questions are evergreen, and answer themselves.

He might have a point about the obnoxious celebrations (a light show during a Red Sox game is indeed WTF territory) were it not for most of the aforementioned faux lamenting of modern-day trash talk when he's been fine with it for decades.

Fear Factor

After a 13-2 Red Sox win over the Baltimore Orioles, Our Man Shank accentuates the positive.

No one knows where this Red Sox season is headed. Every time the Sox start to slide, they do something to make you think maybe they can play deep into October. Case in point, Tuesday night’s 13-2 win over the Orioles. We know that this season is a gift, and suddenly there’s hope that it might be magical.

The only thing I know for sure is that somehow, someway, the Orioles are going to be a factor. That’s just the way it is with these two teams as we prepare for the final month of the 2013 baseball season.

The Sox crushed the Orioles Tuesday night but are still scheduled to play the Buck Showalter All-Stars eight more times in the final 29 games. The Sox finish their season with three games at Camden Yards, a schedule quirk that scares all thinking Red Sox fans.

Need we remind anybody that it was in Baltimore that the wheels fell off at the end of September 2011? Remember Robert Andino? The Sox lost two of their final three games in ugly fashion, triggering the departures of Terry Francona, Theo Epstein, Jonathan Papelbon, Marco Scutaro, Josh Reddick, and Heidi Watney. New England’s nuclear baseball winter led to the worst Red Sox season in 47 years.

And it all started in Baltimore.

There is considerable hardball history involving these Eastern Seaboard franchises.

Ted Williams hit his final home run against the Orioles in 1960. Willie Tasby — the guy who once took off his spikes while playing during a thunderstorm — played for both teams. The great Earl Weaver Orioles of the 1970s annually tortured the Red Sox, especially in 1974 when the Sox held a seven-game lead on Aug. 23, yet finished third, seven games behind the surging Birds.

Weaver tried to scare a nervous Sox Nation again a year later when he came to Fenway to face the first-place Sox in September and warned, “We’ve crawled out of more coffins than Bela Lugosi.’’

This is how Shank will continue to 'criticize' the Red Sox - keep bringing up the negative stuff from the past, and avoid direct mention of Red Sox management and ownership.

Tale Of The Videotape

It didn't take Shank long to revert to form. Today's column concerns the Denver Broncos and various fines involving a videotaping of the opposing players' walk-through session.

Sound familiar? It should. And in case you forgot, guess who's here to helpfully remind us? Call this the Anatomy of A Smear.

First - Shank wants to make sure this story gets adequate coverage:

I don’t expect to hear much about this on any of the Patriots’ Pravda news outlets, but you can be pretty sure the New York tabloids are going to run hard with it. The headline in yesterday’s Daily News was “It’s Spygate II in Denver,’’ and the vaunted Post went with two stories, one titled “Pats’ coach will always be tied to scandal,’’ and the other with a subhead stating “Incident also has Belichick ties.’’

You bet it does.

Attempt to further propagate the story through additional media writeups.

Second - Of course, these guys (Shank, et. al) don't mean direct ties; what follows is classic guilt by association:

Bill Belichick’s bio in the Patriots media guide proudly features a half-page section entitled “Bill Belichick’s Tree.’’ It reads, in part, “Bill Belichick has had strong influences on hundreds of coaching, personnel, and football operations staff, many of whom have been hired to coach and manage other teams.’’ The lengthy list includes McDaniels and Eric Mangini, both of whom broke into the NFL under Belichick. Young Scarnecchia also broke into the NFL with the Patriots. He is listed as a “video assistant’’ in the Patriots’ staff directories of 2002, 2003, and 2004. He is also the son of Dante Scarnecchia, a beloved presence as an assistant coach on the Patriots’ sideline for the last 27 seasons.

Dante Scarnecchia is one of the finest men you’ll ever meet. He has been a part of all six Patriots Super Bowl teams and currently serves as offensive line coach and assistant head coach. In 1992, he served as Patriots’ head coach for seven games when Dick MacPherson fell ill. He is certainly not responsible for the actions of his son.

Certainly not! So a few people are off the hook. Interesting. On whose doorstep do you think this one will end up?

Now we have the first spy sanction since then, and there are Belichick footprints all over the place. The head coach of the Broncos was one of Bill’s guys. The guy caught taping was one of Bill’s guys and is the son of one of Bill’s present guys.

Oh, and just for good measure, we learned that Steve Scarnecchia was one of Mangini’s video operators when the Jets ratted out the Patriots in 2007. More than that, some folks think Steve Scarnecchia was the one who ratted out the Patriots.

Third - passive-aggressive assertions; "Belichick footprints all over the place". Now, for the passive-aggressive disclaimer (emphasis mine):

It’s important that we remember that Saturday’s sanction was against the Broncos. It is not a Patriots matter. Asking Belichick or any of his people about this is wildly unfair. It’s strictly a matter between the Commish and the Broncos.

So far, it's "Belichick footprints all over the place", but "It is not a Patriots matter". Got that?

So where does Shank finally come down on the matter? As if you have to ask!

But once again, the trail of espionage leads directly back to Route 1, and that is . . . unfortunate.

It's fair to conclude that Shank, a fifth-degree black belt in the dark arts of character assassination and innuendo, is trying to tie this to Bill Belichick any way he can. If he's called on it, he can simply say he was repeating what the New York papers were writing, and he'll say it in spite of his statement ("directly back to Route 1") to the contrary. Talk about a clean hit!

How long did Shank's faux fondness for Belichick last, barely one month?