Nothing Ever Simple About A Mets Deal - Gary Armidas Blog - Operation Sports

It’s funny that there were zero reports of this during the season. New York is the media market that can criticize what a player has for breakfast or if he was out with someone the night before. It is a market for controversial stories like that. In three years, there was not a single negative RA Dickey story printed. Not one. Yet, as they were about to deal one of the most popular players on the team, the negative message came out. And, those public appearances and extra media attention? Dickey did appear on the same shows that David Wright has done before. And, his Sports Illustrated cover story was about his history with child abuse and what he endured. The Mets evidently have a problem with a person having the courage to share his story so that it may help another. Could a team botch a good story worse?

Could a team stain a trade that is actually beneficial for them even more than the Mets?

via Nothing Ever Simple About A Mets Deal – Gary Armidas Blog – Operation Sports.

Related Articles:

My book! $9 for paperback, $3 for eBook/kindle.

2 comments
blueshirts26
blueshirts26

How are the Mets to blame for this? They aren't writing the articles. I know Mets brass has the ability to shape how certain articles are written but you think they are feeding this stuff to idiots like Ken Davidoff who wrote negative things about Dickey just for shock value? Give me a break. The Mets are not to blame, rags like the NY Post are to blame

Shawn Sparks
Shawn Sparks

You know it. Whether it's exaggerating negatives about Dickey, or pounding the "the Mets screw up everything" drum, the objective is the same: to rile people up and sell papers/generate page views. When controversy doesn't exist, it will simply be created. It's a lot easier to pick on the Mets than to call out the tactics employed by one's own profession, especially until the team is contending again.

Subscribe via RSS

Free weekly newsletter