Somebody maybe ought to check the Mets if they did that. Their [bleeping] home record is out of this world and they’re losing on the road. Sometimes that’s a good indicator of getting signs and [crap]. I see somebody setting there at (14-7) at home and (4-8) on the road, I’d get concerned about that. That kind of crosses my mind.
I’m not accusing them, but you look at that and – damn. We’re about the same home and road. I’m just saying their record is much better at home and they hit better.
– Phillies manager Charlie Manuel, as told to CSNPhilly.com.
OK, a lot of stuff here: First of all, who put “[bleeping]” in to replace the expletive there? I mean, I carefully dance around including curses on this blog as best I can, and I realize it probably looks stupid sometimes. But “[bleeping]”? Why not “[freaking]” or just straight up “[expletive]”?
Second, while it’s true that the Mets have a better home record than road record, a) that’s often true for lots of teams, b) it’s almost entirely fueled by the Mets’ 9-1 homestand against the then-struggling Cubs, Braves and Dodgers, and c) it’s just way, way too early in the season to suggest the Mets are playing to any sort of massive home-field advantage, especially since they’ve played so few games on the road.
Also, a pretty great way to accuse someone of something is to just flat-out deny that you’re doing so. Now, make no mistake: I’m not accusing Charlie Manuel of subterfuge or of haphazardly lashing out at the Mets because he’s defensive about his team getting caught stealing signs. That’s just something that crosses my mind.
For all I know, the Mets are breaking the rules to steal signs, and the Phillies were too. My stance on the matter is the same it has always been: It’s not cheating if you don’t get caught.
Ask Leo Durocher. Baseball players are hard-wired to compete, and stealing signs is a way to gain a competitive advantage. This is why the game has written rules: It’s not the players’ or coaches’ responsibility to police themselves. That falls on opposing teams and, in cases like the Phillies’, the league.
If the story’s true, the Phillies thought they could get away with the binoculars-in-the-bullpen scheme. They didn’t, so the league made them stop. The system worked. There are plenty of things to fault the Phillies for without assuming some sort of moral high ground against sign-stealing.
To quote Manuel: “I’m sure if teams could steal signs they would, and if we can we will, too, if we can get them legally…. If you’re dumb enough to let us get them, it’s your fault. It’s been going on in the game a long time. If you’re dumb enough to let us get them, that’s your problem.”


I would say any firestorm is at least partly due to writers needing a story, as suggested. People eat up NFL offseason news — look at all the coverage around the draft and schedule announcement. So probably every paper in town assigned a writer to cover the Jets’ rookie minicamp, and McKnight — given his upside and backstory — makes for the easiest copy.
You set yourself up for criticism and snark when you fret about the margins of a team’s roster. In comments sections sometimes, the great Val Pascucci campaign from 2008 is derided with all sorts of snark, even if the Mets fell short of the playoffs by a single game that season while entrusting most of their pinch-hit at-bats to a bunch of dudes who couldn’t hit even a little.
Hayhurst’s prose is entertaining from the start. It quickly becomes clear he can tell a story and has a lot of witty insight about baseball.