OnlyBucs

Pirates owner’s newspapers face advertiser boycott over the Andrew McCutchen trade



http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2018/02/02/pir ... hen-trade/

This may be a little like pygmies hunting an elephant. The elephant has a tough hide and it'll take more than one pygmy with one spear to bring him down, but it's sure nice to know that the first spear has been thrown and hit the target regardless of how much real impact it has.

5F7B6F67620E0 wrote: This may be a little like pygmies hunting an elephant. The elephant has a tough hide and it'll take more than one pygmy with one spear to bring him down, but it's sure nice to know that the first spear has been thrown and hit the target regardless of how much real impact it has.
The anti-Nutting petitiion is another tiny spear. But it sends him a message.

745954454253440407360 wrote: This may be a little like pygmies hunting an elephant. The elephant has a tough hide and it'll take more than one pygmy with one spear to bring him down, but it's sure nice to know that the first spear has been thrown and hit the target regardless of how much real impact it has.
The anti-Nutting petitiion is another tiny spear. But it sends him a message.




Unfortunately, that message is:



Mr. Nutting, you're doing everything right. It doesn't matter what the fans think or what the advertisers think. It only matters what Rob Manfred thinks. And what he thinks is that it's a good idea to keep sending the Pirates those gigantic MLB welfare checks.

Two observations about the article...



1. It sounds like the "boycott" is temporary. Therefore, nothing that will really hurt Nutting or the relationship between the hospital system and Nutting.



2. It still seems ironic to me that people are mad about the McCutchen trade. Of all of the egregious things that Nutting has done, this seems like one of the most benign.

1B0622202E4B0 wrote: Two observations about the article...



1. It sounds like the "boycott" is temporary.  Therefore, nothing that will really hurt Nutting or the relationship between the hospital system and Nutting.



2. It still seems ironic to me that people are mad about the McCutchen trade.  Of all of the egregious things that Nutting has done, this seems [highlight]like one of the most benign.
[/highlight]

yes, but it is an emotional reaction. Unless players received for him turn into very good players, the team would have been better off to let Cutch play out his contract and hope he would have a good year. Dealing him for two players that may not contribute much in 2018 (Crick might but he is more likely to be Daniel Hudson than Nicasio) doesn't get anybody excited.

04193D3F31540 wrote: Two observations about the article...



1. It sounds like the "boycott" is temporary.  Therefore, nothing that will really hurt Nutting or the relationship between the hospital system and Nutting.



2. It still seems ironic to me that people are mad about the McCutchen trade.  Of all of the egregious things that Nutting has done, this seems like one of the most benign.


Yeah, maybe it's just emblematic of the Nutting regime. Usually, it's what he doesn't do that upsets the fan base. But it's easier to protest something that happens than something that doesn't happen. So this has sort of been a lightning rod for all the fans who are disgusted with Nutting's seeming priority of turning a profit and indifference to winning.

The Weirton Medical Center describes itself as a nonprofit. I'd be more impressed if they were boycotting with their own money instead of someone else's.



It raises an interesting legal question: any advertising dollars they spend would have to be for the good of the organization. It's hard to find a connection between that and the trade of a ballplayer.

64574B4A4941774A514D5651404C4B250 wrote: The Weirton Medical Center describes itself as a nonprofit. I'd be more impressed if they were boycotting with their own money instead of someone else's.



It raises an interesting legal question:  any advertising dollars they spend would have to be for the good of the organization.  It's hard to find a connection between that and the trade of a ballplayer.
Could be they are going to spend advertising dollars in other places. I didn't really see that in the story. They got some free pr for doing this too. Of course, a lot of Bob Nutting fans may say, I'm going to go to a different medical center.

476160776171020 wrote: The Weirton Medical Center describes itself as a nonprofit. I'd be more impressed if they were boycotting with their own money instead of someone else's.



It raises an interesting legal question:  any advertising dollars they spend would have to be for the good of the organization.  It's hard to find a connection between that and the trade of a ballplayer.
Could be they are going to spend advertising dollars in other places.  I didn't really see that in the story.  They got some free pr for doing this too.  Of course, a lot of Bob Nutting fans may say, I'm going to go to a different medical center.


As likely to exist as unicorns...