November 25, 2005
Draft Dodger
A New Mexico reader sends an article about governor Bill Richardson embellishing his baseball credentials:
What you won't find in the record books is a baseball distinction that's been attached to Richardson's name for almost 40 years: that he was drafted to play pro baseball by the Kansas City Athletics.
Publications ranging from The New York Times to the New Republic to the Albuquerque Journal have reported that as fact. So have USA Today, Time magazine and National Review.
In the just-published "2006 Almanac of American Politics," these words appear in a history of Richardson's career: " ... in 1967 was drafted by the Kansas City Athletics."
In preparing a story earlier this year on Richardson's baseball past, the Journal was unable to confirm in any authoritative record that he had been drafted.
Richardson said he believed that he had been, based on conversations with scouts and other sources, and asked for additional time to find proof.
But in a written statement provided to the Journal last week, he said, "After being notified of the situation (by Toby Smith) and after researching the matter ... I came to the conclusion that I was not drafted by the A's."
"However, as the Journal's reporting should reflect, I was actively scouted by several Major League teams ... "
As far as I can tell, Richardson was a very good high school and college pitcher, and struck out a ton of batters. The story appears to be that he would have been drafted out of high school, but his father insisted they younger Bill go to college. Since teams were reluctant to draft someone who wasn't going to sign, Richardson was passed over.
I love this circular thinking:
Steve Vaughn, a teammate who was drafted, said he thought Richardson "clearly was a prospect" and "remembered hearing" his teammate had been offered a contract by Kansas City.
Being offered a contract isn't the same as being drafted. Teams approach players before the draft and try to head off negotiations with agents by offering the player a contract if he's drafted.
That was 38 summers ago, and Richardson was playing for the Cotuit (Mass.) Kettleers, a team comprised of standout college players.
The Kettleers published a 25-cent handout they issued to fans.
Next to Richardson's name on the faded program are four brief lines, and the words "Drafted by K.C."
"When I saw that program in 1967," Richardson said, "I was convinced I was drafted. And it stayed with me all these years."
So Richardson sees his name next to "was drafted", and believes it to be true. But where did Cotuit get the information?
At Richardson's urging, the Journal talked to Arnold Mycock, who was the general manager of Richardson's Cape Cod League team in 1967.
Mycock, 82, and living in Cotuit, Mass., has a copy of that 1967 program. He said information on the bios came from the players or their college coaches.
Nick Furlong, a pitcher for the Kettleers in 1967, later drafted by three major league teams, said he filled in his Cotuit bio sheet himself and sent it to the club.
College athletes typically fill out a biographical form to help a school's athletic department disseminate information to a student's hometown media.
On the bio sheet Richardson completed for Tufts in his junior year, he penciled words "Drafted by Kansas City (1966), LA (1968)."
So what Richardson likely saw in the program either came from his own hand, or came from Tufts relating what Richardson had told them! He believed he was drafted after seeing it in the program, but he had supplied the information! (There is also no evidence Richardson was drafted by the Dodgers in 1968.)
The person sending the link to the story believes Richardson is going to run for president in 2008, and wonders if this will be a campaign issue. It seems anything can become a campaign issue, so I have no idea. It could very well be that as a young man Richardson was confused by what constituted being drafted. In 1967, the baseball draft was only three years old. Before that, players were basically free agents until they signed with a team, often netting large bonuses to sign. The model of direct signings was the model Richardson grew up with, so he could have made a pattern recognition mistake. The baseball draft was always oqaque, with only the first round picks made public. Hypothetically, a scout saying, "We're going to draft you if you're willing to sign a contract," could be remembered as, "We've drafted you. Are you willing to sign a contract?"
Of course, thinking he was drafted twice makes that explanation a little less plausible. So will this be an issue? I suspect reporters like Toby Smith, who did a great job tracking down this exaggeration, will start looking for other embellishments. If there's more, it will be an issue. If this is the only one, it's likely an honest mistake.
Update: Joel Jacobsen of New Mexico sent me the link to the article. I hadn't heard back from Joel about using his name when I published the original post.
Posted by David Pinto at
10:40 AM
|
Draft
|
TrackBack (0)
Much as I hate it when public figures lie... I think we've all embellished our previous athletic achievements at one time or another. Or maybe that's just me.
Like you said, if that's the worse they can find, he should be OK; look at how well Clinton did with everyone knowing what he probably did.
However, as the saying goes, where there's smoke, there's usually fire. As noted, this incidence should get an enterprising reporter the impetus to see if there were other, worse embellishments and should smoke them out before the 2008 campaign even is a realistic dream in a candidate's mind.
I know this isn't exactly the point, but someone's name is Mycock? Good lord.
Speaking as a Tufts alum... I had no idea Richardson was a Tufts alum.
In reality it was probably just a misunderstanding, but Lord knows in politics they'll rip you for anything. Whoever put together the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (sic) is probably salivating at the bit over this story. That's probably why Richardson's thankful it's becoming public now instead of during the election year.
Or, during primaries Hillary's team is salivating as much as the Democrats during the supposed Karl Rove led CIA leak.
Personally, political affiliations aside, I don't think this is, or should be, a big deal. I'm a Republican, but if the party went after this I'd just put my head down and laugh at the absurdity of it. Leave the baseball to baseball, and the politics to the politics.
wow
another lying politician.
imagine that.
and don't forget about richardson lying about him being a "foreign policy advisor" to senator somebody when he was really only an intern.
it's like that old johnny carson thing - the great carsoni-
lying sack of ***
hmmmmmmmmm
what is politician?
I agree with David. A thing like this can be an issue if it's part of a pattern of exaggerations. Otherwise, it's just harmless puffing.
It's not that Richardson may have puffed himself with his "I wuz drafted by the Athletics" stuff. It's that he offers up the lame excuse that he "thought" he was drafted.
Well, that all by itself should be enough of an indication he wasn't, since there wouldn't be any thinking involved if he was. You're either drafted or you aren't.
So he even now doesn't accept that he was just puffing himself. What a wienie.
Curve balls and Hatchet jobs on Governor Richardson in Baseball History
Dear Editor:
I thought I had witnessed the ultimate in newspaper hatchet jobs and curve balls in political journalism, but this latest "discovery" by the Albuquerque Journal that Bill Richardson was not drafted by Kansas City A's ought to win some kind of new prize for "Absurd Political Journalism," since this story even was printed in the New York Times!
Forty years ago, drafts were discussed generally, hinted at, and not accompanied by clear cut contracts. The Governor's recent biography makes this perfectly clear, and I believe that he truly believed that he had been drafted by them and several other teams. At that point, he was 19; who has not made any errors of judgment when they were 19?
What Bill Richardson pitches to the New Mexico Legislature about health, elementary education, fiscal policies, environmental policies, higher education, consumer protection: these are a lot more important to me than ancient baseball history and whether the guy was drafted by the A's or not.
I abhor the astonishing fact that conservative papers across the nation has picked this up and even some have described it as if he had been caught in a lie. This is a dismal and failed attempt at character assassination.
How about the other party's leaders' protracted and elaborate lies about Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction," which were grandiloquently strewn forth in the United Nations General Assembly before the ill-informed invasion? Are Americans just supposed to forget about those really big lies which directly resulted in 2000 dead G.I.'s, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths, and billions of wasted-unless-you-are-Halliburton dollars they have caused, while the entire nation is side-tracked by absurd articles on the Sports and political pages about Bill Richardson?
Are these our new priorities in national politics and qualities of leadership?
Let's get really real here, folks, for a change!
Truly,
Stephen Fox
Santa Fe
Sure, Stephen.
This being a BASEBALL blog, why don't we dispense with the political-campaign talking points and stick with the baseball.
"Forty years ago, drafts were discussed generally, hinted at, and not accompanied by clear cut contracts."
Since you seem actually to believe that somebody could be drafted by a major league baseball team and not know it, in other words, no tender, nothing to sign, no dough--maybe you should offer up something to support such credulity.
Forty years ago... what does that mean, that the business of baseball was conducted all aw shucks and gosh durn?
Uh, sure, Stephen, whatever you say. I would hate to disturb your idyllic slumber.