(Image: Totalprosports.com)

In JSOnline.com’s most recent online chat with Brewers beat writer Todd Rosiak, one participant named Craig called into question the professionalism of Mr. Rosiak and his colleague Tom Haudricourt (edited for clarity):

Is it accurate to characterize what you and Haudricourt do with the Brewers as journalism?  It seems like you guys hardly do more than serve as a mouthpiece for the organization…relaying the desired narrative. Considering Journal Communications and the Brewers are long standing business partners, is it unrealistic for fans to think the beat writers will do anything beyond soft peddle the coverage?

Rosiak speculated Craig’s question was motivated by specific anti-player/manager animus, and said “Our job is to report on what happens, not editorialize.”  That’s all well and good, and while it appears that Craig was being provocative, it’s true the Brewers and Journal Communications have overlapping business interests.  Is it reasonable to assume that we, the sports journalism consumers, are getting an inferior product because of those overlapping interests?

The Milwaukee Brewers certainly are able to choose what journalists have access to players and coaching staff, so it makes sense those with access wouldn’t want to lose it.  But imagine the Brewers decided they didn’t like Rosiak asking questions about (say) optioning John Axford to Nashville, and revoked his press credentials.  If Rosiak was behaving professionally and asking reasonable questions, the Brewers would have a scandal on their hands.  They would come under heavy fire from professional and amateur sportswriters alike.  Therefore the Brewers have nothing to gain by insisting that reporters “relay a desired narrative,” or taking punitive action against those who don’t “soft peddle the coverage.”

Likewise, Rosiak has nothing to gain by ignoring fans’ interests.  If he doesn’t produce content people want to read, he’ll find himself out of a job.  One gets the impression Craig’s complaint is a matter of semantics.  Rather than asking Ron Roenicke something like, “How long are you going to stick with Rickie Weeks?” Craig might prefer Rosiak used a wording along the lines of, “Why are you letting this sucker Weeks waste a spot in your starting lineup?”  That certainly wouldn’t be soft peddling coverage.  That also would guarantee Rosiak loses his access without anyone feeling sorry for him.

The work of Rosiak and Haudricourt speaks for itself.  Last week, Rosiak wrote a blog post reporting on Roenicke dropping Weeks in the lineup, which noted, “overall this is the second consecutive season the 2011 All-Star Game starter has gotten off to a miserable start at the plate.”  When Axford gave up a two-run lead and took a loss against the Pirates earlier this month, Haudricourt’s game recap post on the pitcher’s “melt down” led with, “Even when he is on a string of solid pitching performances, his tormenter always seems to lurk around the corner.  The home run.”

That doesn’t seem like soft peddling coverage to me, although your mileage may vary.  But even if you don’t care for Rosiak and Haudricourt’s work, it’s silly to accuse them of not being journalists.  Maybe folks like Craig need to be more realistic about what they expect from journalism.

(Photo: Mark J. Terrill/Associated Press)

It’s obvious that Carlos Gomez’ performance in the early part of 2013 is enhanced compared to previous seasons.  These days, remarkable production can lead to speculation that a player might not be enhancing appropriately.  Last week, The Brewer Nation included a post partially titled “In Defense of Carlos Gomez,” which recounted a talk radio discussion where one host said Gomez’ improved stats “raise an eyebrow.”

The Brewer Nation’s defense of Gomez speaks for itself, but it also provides the opportunity to review what we think we know about PEDs.  Roger Clemens was acquitted of perjury charges last year, but it’s widely assumed that his dominating career was made possible by PEDs.  When Melky Cabrera was suspended for using PEDs last year, he was the top hitter in the NL.  Almost baseball fans outside of Milwaukee believe Ryan Braun owes his MVP in 2011 to PEDs.  It’s conventional wisdom that PEDs result in improved production.

The connection between PEDs and actual enhanced performance is murkier.  PEDs can take many forms, but I believe what comes to mind for most folks are anabolic steroids, i.e., synthetic testosterone (certainly in the cases of Braun, Cabrera, and Clemens).  What do we know anabolic steroids can do?  They do have legitimate medical uses, such as helping those afflicted with chronic wasting diseases or AIDS build muscle and recover their appetites.

Presumably athletes already have healthy appetites, so one imagines they would be more interested in the prospect of building muscle, reducing body fat, and recovering more quickly from injury – all of which we know with reasonable confidence that steroids can do.  Those are advantages that may improve performance in some ways, but steroids alone cannot explain outstanding production.

As far as I know, steroids have never been shown to help players pick up the spin on a slider.  Steroids can’t keep a batter from being fooled on a changeup.  They won’t help a ground ball find a hole in the infield, or keep a line drive fair.  They won’t help a pitcher throw a ball in the strike zone.  They might help a player leg out more infield hits, but at least in Gomez’ case, speed has never been an issue.  For many of the things that make a good baseball player, steroids don’t help at all.

To be sure, plenty of players past and present have taken steroids and other PEDs.  A couple years ago, the infamous Mitchell Report listed the names of players who thought PEDs were worth a try.  If you go through the names, there are several productive players, but there are just as many that had unspectacular careers – including the likes of former Brewers Derrick Turnbow, Gregg Zaun, and Fernando Vina.  PEDs don’t turn all hitters into sluggers, or stop all pitchers from issuing costly walks.  Even when players thought PEDs would improve their performance, the results were inconsistent at best.

As far as helping players recover from injury, there are lots of things athletes do that fans and officials don’t seem to mind.  Cortisone is widely used in baseball and no one bats an eye.  Tommy John surgery prolongs the careers of pitchers who otherwise would have to retire, but no one thinks they are doing anything unfair – even when some pitchers come back stronger than before.

When we suspect a player of artificial performance enhancement, we should keep a couple things in mind.  First, PEDs provide less of an edge than is commonly assumed.  Second, a lot of PED rules are arbitrary.  If a player like Gomez is having an unprecedented year, it’s more likely due to old fashioned hard work than some unnatural advantage.

Besides, if Gomez cools off and ends up hitting closer to his career average of .254, any talk of PEDs will seem pretty silly.

Here are the solutions to yesterday's anagrams, pertaining to names of current and former Milaukee Brewers players and managers.
 

JOY! LUNCH ON A RAT - Jonathan Lucroy

LANDSCAPE  - Dan Plesac

NONE ROCKIER - Ron Roenicke

OUCH! SCAR PAIN - Chris Capuano

TEARS INJURE GUY - Jerry Augustine

YUCKY BARITONE TUNES - Yuniesky Betancourt

HERRING PAL - Phil Garner
 

Hope you enjoyed solving this first batch of Brewers anagrams created by Diane Firstman (@dianagram). And don't forget to check out her site, as well!

(illustrations - J. Lemont)
 

I’ve been a big backer of Owgust, the Barrel Man, and it’s been very cool to see him pop up prominently in the Brewers’ recent YOUniform contest (here’s hoping Ben’s design with the Barrel Man becomes part of the regular-season uniform options).  Seriously, Barrel Man rules, Ball ‘N Glove drools.  I do love the Ball ‘N Glove (or Ball in Glove or Ball and Glove), but it’s so played out and who wants to see the Brewers lose to the Cardinals while wearing the Ball ‘N Glove, thereby forcing us to think about the 1982 failure that haunts the franchise to the present day?  Not me.  The Brewers tossed out the Barrel Man logo originally in favor of Ball ‘N Glove, which was fine, but then they tossed out the Ball ‘N Glove in favor of the abominations of the 1990s.  That all led us to today’s cursive ‘M’ with the barley, so I guess we’re all good, albeit a bit disoriented. 

Along comes this Brewers promotion with Leinenkugel’s now, where there’s a special Miller Park-only beer coming at the end of May and the club is asking fans for input on the name of said brew.  Unfortunately, the options for the name are fairly lame.  The first is ‘Brew Crew Brew’, which is cool because it has the phrase ‘Brew Crew’ but then ultimately sounds redundant.  There’s also ‘Brewers All-Star Ale’, which comes off as generic and perhaps a little presumptuous.  Finally, the clear winner in my opinion is ‘Bernie’s Barrelman Ale’, which is brilliant in that it contains a nod to the almighty Barrel Man, but inexplicably includes Bernie Brewer in the possessive.  Surely the Brewers meant to include both great symbols of the team in an innocuous fashion but it comes across a little bit like Barrel Man is in deference to Bernie, which I don’t like.  In any case, it comes across as muddled with both Bernie and Barrel Man in the name.  ‘Bernie Brewer Ale’, ‘Bernie’s Chalet Ale’ or better yet: ‘Barrel Man Ale’ would’ve been great.  Alas, I nitpick.  Vote ‘Bernie’s Barrel Man’, because the other two choices are as boring and sterile as Bernie sliding into some water instead of beer.        

Recently, Diane Firstman, creator and curator of the fabulous Value Over Replacement Grit baseball site on ESPN Sweetspot Network and a favorite of mine, was kind enough to anagram the names of some current and former Milwaukee Brewers players and managers. She made quite a few for the Brewers Bar to use, so this will be split up into a series.

Not sure what an anagram is? An anagram is created by rearranging the letters of a word or phrase to produce a new word or phrase, using all the original letters exactly once. Those good at constructing them can arrange things in a way that reflects somehow on the original subject.

Here's an example: (this is one I tried, so as not to waste one of Diane's) "Lad Afire Forgo" - would be the Brewers relief pitcher, Alfredo Figaro.
- - - - -

This weeks list features 7 anagrams (without answers). See how many of these you can figure out, and I'll have the answers posted tomorrow night!

Fun With Anagrams – created by Diane Firstman (Value Over Replacement Grit)


Part 1

JOY! LUNCH ON A RAT

LANDSCAPE

NONE ROCKIER

OUCH! SCAR PAIN

TEARS INJURE GUY

YUCKY BARITONE TUNES

HERRING PAL

*Answers will be posted tomorrow night!

Once again, many, many thanks to Diane Firstman for lending one of her great talents to The Brewers Bar in providing anagrams! For more on her work, here is her bio and other information. And make sure you check out her site, - where you will be welcomed by the phrase "We are the VORG. Replacement is futile." You also can find her on twitter (appropriately under the neame @dianagram). She's pretty famous.