Jun 02 2006 08:43 AM
From the Daily News:
| ]Protection of Milledge makes Mets look minor league Friday, June 2nd, 2006
"He (Milledge) did irritate the opposition with his flamboyance," said Keith Hernandez on SportsNet New York's Mets-Diamondbacks telecast. "We'll just have to keep an eye on it." Judging by Mets suits' irrational reaction to anyone daring to paint a complete picture of Milledge, Hernandez's and play-by-play man Gary Cohen's eyes will be open at their own risk. When Milledge made his Shea debut Tuesday night, both voices were toeing the company line. The theme, coming from the top down, was of a bright tomorrow. Any baggage Milledge carried into Shea was to be ignored. On a night in which a potentially big and important part of the Mets future was unveiled, the past took a backseat. So did the truth. Then again, both Hernandez and Cohen probably already knew how certain members of the Mets hierarchy had gone wacko - even issuing threats - to anyone with the temerity to shed some real light on Milledge. Once they ran out of nasty and stopped screaming, Mets ownership must have realized they had nothing to worry about. Most of the local media had already rolled over for Fred and Jeff Wilpon, heaping platitudes on Milledge. Either that, or they got hung up on the smoke-screen issue of the rather large cross Milledge was wearing around his neck. So, there was hardly a word or whisper about how Milledge, during spring training, often had his watch set on "Pedro time," taking the star trip and arriving at the ballpark late. What about those legal issues Milledge encountered when he was drafted by the Mets in 2003? They were a figment of some reporter's imagination, right? Mets ownership would also rather have everyone ignore that bench-clearing tango inspired by Milledge after he slid, spikes-high, into Richmond Braves third baseman Jonathan Schuerholz. The suits were not happy about the Daily News noting how Milledge's "flamboyance" has made him a very unpopular guy among his International League peers. This so galled Shea honchos, one Mets official said the team was considering suing for libel. The threat was so baseless, so preposterous, so illogical, it can only be described as a James Dolan moment. It makes you wonder how current Mets brass would have reacted in 1989 when Hernandez and Darryl Strawberry, whose name was evoked often during Milledge's debut, got into that infamous spring-training brawl. What creative ways would they have used to try to cover that up? Would it be something like: "No, Keith and Darryl were just fooling around." Or, "How do you know that was the worst fight you ever saw? What was the second-, or third-worst?" How about: "No, you didn't really see what you thought you just saw. And if you write that I'll sue you." And yet, it's not like Mets ownership is totally against media intervention. It rankled some commentators that Milledge dared to openly express his religion and wear that cross Tuesday night. Of all the Milledge issues that could have been discussed, this was the one creating all the static. Man, this was hilarious. A true, and accurate, reflection of what really is important around here in 2006. The cross "issue" was perfect. It did not get in the way of Mets brass infecting the media with pom-pomitis. Yes, it is more important - and acceptable to the Mets - that a superficial issue like Milledge wearing a cross is No. 1 on the media hit parade. There is no doubt the next great sports-talk debate will be whether Willie Randolph (as he apparently did with the cross) will order Milledge to deposit his do-rag in the clubhouse. Mets suits will welcome that debate. It sure beats anyone further exploring, and writing about, Milledge's past. It sure beats Mets insiders speculating about a need to put Milledge in a more structured - and supervised - environment before he slipped totally out of control in the International League. Those discouraging words have no place at Shea. Especially when you're trying to build a myth. |
