A Defense Of Adenhart

This is my first official post, so if you're reading this, you should feel special. At any rate, what I'm writing about this morning is something that happened a few days ago: the news of Nick Adenhart's tragic death. I think to give closure to this topic (from the media standpoint because, yes, as it seems, I am media now) requires righting the "news" ship that was wronged when the story was broken.

I have a soft spot for professional athletes; I have an even softer spot in my heart for baseball players just making their trip through the minors, set to begin their big league careers, and are described as just overall fantastic men with whom everyone gets along. When news of guys like this is bad - like the news of Adenhart's death, I expect news stations to be mindful of what they are saying and showing on air. They owe it to the good souls that play because they have been available for every interview, every fan clinic, and if they're good, a memorable performance for excellent highlights. Even with what may have been the best intentions, I'm not so sure ESPN, or those involved, did this.

I watched SportsCenter on April 10 and saw a follow-up story by Colleen Dominguez. I have many issues.

Gauging the level of appropriateness, most everything she, or her team of shooters and editors did, was acceptable, but the final product did not come together for a real, genuine tribute. The piece was intended to show how the Los Angeles Angels' fan base was mourning, along with the team's administration, to show this deep sense of togetherness. It was appropriate to show Manager Mike Scioscia upset, for he worked with the young man very closely. It was appropriate to show another front office person express grief and condolences to the Adenhart family. It would have been appropriate to show a teammate, but not in the way they did, nor was it appropriate to have shown Nick's agent, Scott Boras.

I was upset with the sound byte of Torii Hunter that she used. If he had said anything of substance to add to the story during the piece (and if it were shot correctly), it would have been great. The fact Hunter was sitting in his car so that the angle was pointing down, looking at a seemingly disinterested ball player on an extreme profile shot, made it unusable; the fault lies with SC (for broadcasting it in this way) because they made Hunter look kind of bad.

In a perfect world the professional athlete, that when being asked about his lost teammate, would gladly step out of his car to do the interview. However, what was worse was in what he said, because it came off selfish. The gist was that every other teammate was blessed to have their lives because it could have been any of the other players. But his tone made it sound horrible, as if he really only cared that he was alive. Sure, I'm reading into it too much - especially considering that the rest of what he said was deeply hearfelt, but they should have never used anything like that which would have left any viewer with any other impression than true compassion; it was edited terribly. I know what he was trying to say, but the lead copy suggested the following interviews were going to be of how Nick impacted the clubhouse and how everyone liked him. Manager spoke, front office administrator spoke, then Torii Hunter saying he was glad to be alive. I'm sure if you didn't see it this way the first time, if given this little bit before watching it, you could see how I got this impression.

Then the worst part. Scott Boras was given the chance at a press conference to "speak" about what happened. Ok, I don't like him, (he is one of the more despised men in sports), but at any rate, they had a part in the piece where he cried and barely was able to say the words "He was a good kid". I hate to speculate, I hate to flat out judge, but I'm sure that his cry was fake. I mean, it looked really forced and it bothered me. He is either a really bad actor or a man who expresses himself very strangely. Either case leads me to believe SC should not have used the sound byte. Why did we here from his agent in the first place? Is it because he's a high-profile agent? Did this imply that Adenhart was going to be good because his representative was THE Scott Boras? I just do not know.

Then, at the end, Colleen, smiling, kicked it back to Neil Everett. This is what he said, "Now, Nick will be playing for another angels team" closed the tribute.

I wish I knew what they were all thinking. I mean, I know that they needed to find sound bytes and I know they got, in their minds, the ideal candidates. Torii Hunter is undoubtedly a likable guy; he has been media friendly and fan friendly for years. I'm sure he totally felt that he was glad to be alive as a perspective check. I get it. SportsCenter, unfortunately, should have known that they should not have used it in that way, out of context, totally not fitting the story flow. The complete interview, or at least the first 10 seconds, is much better fitting for the gravity of the loss.

They should have never used Scott Boras. Colleen, who was apparently glad to be at the scene, should have found more players, even fans to fill the rest of the segment. I wanted to hear more from the guys who rode together on the buses with him, the roommates, the guys who worked by his side to help him along the way to becoming a major leaguer. I wanted to hear from a 8-year-old about how he looked up to Nick Adenhart. These things would have created a stronger sense of unity for me. I did not want to hear from the guy who negotiated a ball player's deals.

And finally, the "angels team" comment. That statement came from an earlier story about a baseball that said Nick would be playing for another angles team left by a fan at a memorial at Angles Stadium. My problem is that Neil "made it his own". He did not say, "Like the baseball that says it, let us speak for the fans in saying...". He said "Now..." to close the piece. It came across slightly forced and cliche. Unfortunate, do you think?

That little diddy made me lose a lot of respect for Neil, Colleen, and SC. Please tell me I'm not out of line. I feel as if they took the easiest thing in the world to show a human interest story and kind of turned it into a "I have a deadline in twenty minutes" shoot. Obviously, they do have to meet deadline, but when things are this obvious to someone like me, I feel like they should know better and not show something this delicate unless made and handled as such. Again, I'm sure they had the best intentions, but they failed in my mind.

The story gave this impression that the loss was more than a young man full of enormous potential to live a long, fulfilling life. Why was this not enough? Using Boras for sound implied that the loss was that of one of the best baseball players in the game. Using the bytes and the copy and the "sentimental" banter detoured from the purpose: Nick Adenhart was a young man who, because of reckless behavior from a drunk driver, was killed far too early in life. SC did not keep it in this perspective. They made it worse when it could not get any worse. What happened to him, the rest of the victims, their familes, and Adenhart's teammates is a horrible, irreversible catastrophe because of what those young men will never get to do.

Nick will be remembered for the tragedy that happened and for the mystery of what could have been. Adenhart ended his career with his big league club, vying for a shutout, leaving fans and teammates with nostalgia, but mostly with amazement. He very well could have been the next three hundred game winner, but we will never know.