SAN JOSE – A couple of hockey fans who played the 50/50 raffle at two San Jose Sharks games last month got pretty lucky – and might not even know it yet.
They better figure it out or find that ticket soon. Their winnings are about to disappear.
Per the Sharks’ foundation website, a $3,330 prize from San Jose’s game against the New York Rangers on Jan. 23, and a $2,235 prize from the team’s game against the Seattle Kraken on Jan. 30 have gone unclaimed, as of Tuesday night.
Per the contest’s rules, winners have 30 days from the raffle date to claim their prize.
The winning number from the Jan. 23 game is 38063751012.
The winning number from the Jan. 30 game is 39671454002.
Potential winners should call 408-999-5874 or email 5050Raffle@SJSharks.com for more information.
A $8,925 prize from the Sharks’ Oct. 12 game against the Vegas Golden Knights went unclaimed.
Money raised from the 50/50 raffle goes to the Sharks Foundation. To date this season, over $180,000 has been split between wagerers and the foundation.
Photos of Shantieya Smith, as displayed in her mother’s living room. (Photo: Sebastián Hidalgo)
by Trina Reynolds-Tyler, Invisible Institute, and Sarah Conway, City Bureau
This story is part one of the 7-part Chicago Missing Persons project by City Bureau and Invisible Institute, two Chicago-based nonprofit journalism organizations.
Shantieya Smith was a proud, protective mother.
Every morning, rain or shine, the slender 26-year-old would sling her young daughter’s backpack over her shoulder, and hand in hand, they would dash across the street to the neighborhood elementary school.
Smith was a protector in her North Lawndale home, where three generations lived under one roof — the cousin you’d call when there was trouble, who’d teach anyone the latest Chicago dance styles in the living room, and whose cherry red or bottle blonde weaves mirrored her bright energy.
So when Smith walked out her front door on a warm May afternoon in 2018 to run a quick errand, her mother, Latonya Moore, didn’t think much of it.
“It was a trip that was supposed to be so fast she didn’t even bring her cell phone,” Moore remembers. Moore didn’t realize this would be the last moment she would see her daughter alive.
In fact, it was the beginning of a two-week odyssey where Moore would confront Chicago police about their response to the case, hold press conferences to accuse police of inaction, and even call out then-Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson himself. She would collect evidence on her own and scrape together as many community resources as possible to search for her missing daughter.
Two weeks later, Smith’s body, disposed and desecrated, was found in a nearby abandoned garage. Her case joined the 99.8% of missing person cases from 2000 to 2021 that Chicago police have categorized as “not criminal in nature.”
Black people have made up about two-thirds of all missing person cases in Chicago over the past two decades.
“I am still getting the runaround to this day,” Moore says, years after Smith’s body was found. A killer has still not been charged. If police had taken her case seriously, things might be different, she says.
“When it comes to justice, I get angry,” says Moore. “I get to the point of, why me?”
Chicago’s missing person crisis is a Black issue.
Black people have made up about two-thirds of all missing person cases in Chicago over the past two decades. In particular, Black girls and women between the ages of 10 and 20 make up about 30% of all missing person cases in the city, according to police data, despite comprising only 2% of the city population as of 2020.
Already distrustful of police due to decades of racial profiling and abuse — including a legacy of police torture and a federal investigation that led to a still-active court-mandated reform plan — Black Chicagoans say that police do not act urgently or sufficiently to find their missing loved ones.
While police officials have publicly claimed that services for families are equal and fair across race and ZIP codes, massive gaps in missing persons data make it impossible to prove, according to a two-year investigation by City Bureau and the Invisible Institute. Instead, interviews with current and former police officers, national experts, and researchers, along with dozens of anecdotes from impacted family members, reveal a pattern of neglect, incompetence, and illegal behavior from police officers in missing person cases:
Latonya Moore poses with Shantieya Smith’s urn inside her home where she lives with her granddaughter, 150 miles away from Chicago. Photo: Sebastián Hidalgo
Under Illinois law and Chicago police policy, police officers cannot deny a missing person report for any reason. However, reporters found dozens of people who say they were told to wait, or outright denied the ability to file a report — delaying investigations during the critical early hours of missingness. Read more.
Families of the missing say that police officers are dismissive of their cases, neglect their investigations, and stigmatize their loved ones — including multiple cases where police declined to investigate key leads or lost evidence, leaving families to conduct their own searches. Read more.
Analyzing police data on missing person cases from 2000 to 2021, reporters found discrepancies that call into question the department’s data-keeping practices. Current and former police officers say that the missing person report is one of the last remaining paper reports used by Chicago police. Police records also show that, from 2017 to 2021, a little over 45% of cases are missing a key data point about the time and date police arrived to investigate these cases. And reporters identified multiple cases that ended in homicide that were marked “non-criminal” in the data — as well as four cases where detectives explicitly noted that the missing person had returned home, despite family members saying their loved ones never returned home alive. Read more.
Not only does this erode the community’s already thin trust in Chicago Police, but even sources within the police department say that bad management and inefficient systems leave detectives burned out and unable to help families in need. It also means that a recently formed state task force that is examining the issue of missing women and girls in Chicago will face a near-impossible hurdle in linking missing person cases to crimes like murder and human trafficking.
Smith’s young daughter still struggles with the loss of her mother. In her room, a sticker on the wall reads, “Mom.” Photo: Sebastián Hidalgo
In a moment when missing person cases are garnering more attention, both nationally and locally, public officials and community members agree that tackling the missing persons issue will require holistic solutions: from changing state laws, to retraining police officers and allocating resources to missing person investigations, to funding community programs like safe houses, mental health services and neighborhood searches. But filing a police report is many people’s first step when their loved one goes missing — and community members want to know what they could, and should, expect from police.
A spokesperson in Mayor Brandon Johnson’s office recognized there are inequities in how police handle missing person cases in Chicago.
“The historical disparities that exist in our city when it comes to solving missing person cases among Black and Brown Chicagoans — and Black women, in particular — is an example of the lack of visibility for marginalized communities,” says spokesperson Ronnie Reese. “We need to see people in order to care for them, and ultimately protect them from wicked systems that have been a threat to these communities for generations.”
Despite City Bureau and the Invisible Institute reaching out to the Chicago Police Department media affairs over the course of months to better understand the department’s data management and missing persons pipeline, department officials declined to be interviewed or to answer any specific questions about cases or data.
This story is part of the Chicago Missing Persons project by City Bureau and Invisible Institute, two Chicago-based nonprofit journalism organizations. Read the full investigation and see resources for families at chicagomissingpersons.com
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) predicted Tuesday that former President Trump’s numerous legal challenges could be decided before November’s election.
Kemp was asked on CNN’s “The Source with Kaitlan Collins” if he believed Trump’s cases “should go to trial before the elections” so that voters can make a decision on the outcomes of his cases.
“Well, listen, I think most voters probably feel the same way I do,” he told Collins. “I mean, we’re a country that was built on laws and the Constitution and it is up to us really as elected leaders to be the ones that exemplify that in a lot of ways. So we’ll see where the process plays out. I think probably they will be ruled on before the election.”
Trump is facing four separate criminal cases as he campaigns on his third bid for the White House. He has claimed that he should have presidential immunity in the federal 2020 election interference case, but the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Trump’s claim earlier this month.
The three-judge panel ruling the former president is not immune from criminal prosecution as a former executive. He has since urged the Supreme Court to delay the federal election interference case — where he faces charges on four counts stemming from alleged efforts to overturn the election — as he appeals the panel’s ruling.
“Well, listen, I don’t think anybody’s above the law, you know, Democrat, Republican, independent, myself or anybody else. So that’s my personal opinion,” Kemp told Collins when asked what he thought about Trump’s immunity claims.
Trump is also facing 13 charges, including making false statements, impersonating a public officer and conspiracy and racketeering, in a separate 2020 election interference case in Georgia’s Fulton County.
Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Pro-Biden media espouses vulgar profanity reporting to viewers Biden on hunt for Trump verbal flubs.
CNN on Tuesday obscenely reported Joe Biden’s presidential campaign has been instructing aides to focus on highlighting “crazy shit” former President Donald Trump says.
Reporting live from the White House Tuesday, CNN correspondent MJ Lee explicitly told viewers the “thrust of [Biden’s] direction was to significantly ramp up the campaign’s efforts to highlight the crazy shit that Trump says in public.”
CNN's MJ Lee just reported the Biden campaign is working to more aggressively "highlight the crazy shit that Trump says in public."
Yesterday, she asked Biden if "Alexei Navalny's blood is on the hands of House Republicans."
In a follow-up article reporting Monday, Lee pointed out Biden had made the instruction toward his “senior-most staff,” adding that Biden “believes it is critical to paint his presumptive Republican opponent as unhinged and unfit for office.”
Speaking to CNN, Biden campaign rapid response director Ammar Moussa noted the campaign is acutely aware Trump will be the Republican nominee.
Save 40% on DNA Force Plus NOW! Try it today and see why so many listeners have made it an essential part of their daily routine!
“The president knows the stakes this November could not be higher for the American people,” Moussa said. “Donald Trump is the polar opposite of everything President Biden stands for and has accomplished since he took office, and the campaign’s top priority over the next nine months will be laying out that stark choice for voters.”
Biden’s effort to paint the former president as an unhinged verbal mess comes as losing Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley has also taken to claiming Trump is “at risk of dementia.”
While the Biden campaign is on the hunt for Trump verbal flubs, their own candidate consistently struggles to verbalize coherent statements.
Meanwhile, the shrews on ABC’s The View are worried a Biden debate versus Trump could “legitimize” the former president, while it’s possible the current president may “flub.”
WATCH: The View hosts say Joe Biden should skip the debates against Donald Trump because it “legitimizes [Trump]” and Biden might “flub”.pic.twitter.com/XTnxKqvpz2
The Nigerian Institute of Public Relations (NIPR) has urged Nigerians to imbibe the culture of positive mindset and promotion of the nation’s unique values against the current habit of speaking ill of the country.
In his presentation as a Keynote Speaker during the 2024 Annual Conference of the Niger State Chapter of the NIPR Tuesday in Minna, the President, Dr. Ike Neliaku said that there is need for citizens to desist from negative attitudes capable of destroying the reputation of Nigeria.
The President who was represented by the Vice President, Prof. Emmanuel Dandaura, noted the challenge of trust deficit as a factor influencing people’s attitudes and called on public relations practitioners to always uphold professionalism, ethics, integrity and deploy tailor made communication strategies to navigate the daunting multifaceted challenges impacting their practice environment.
“May I clarify that propaganda is not part of Public Relations. It has elements of deceit and falsehood, and what it does is that the innocent victims may follow you for a while, but when they discover your lies, you lose them completely, at the detriment of your organisation. That cannot be associated with PR”, he said.
While condemning poor leadership across various strata of the nation’s institutions, the NIPR boss said PR practitioners have a duty to bridge the trust gap between the leaders and the people, noting that trust remains a fundamental pillar in relationship management and nation-building.
He tasked practitioners to leverage technological innovations to navigate the myriad of operational and environment challenges.
“You must create engaging content to tell your stories and be innovative in your communication approaches” he said, stressing that data and technology play critical roles in modern public relations practice in a challenging environment like Nigeria.
‘End Habit Of Speaking Ill Of Your Country’ – NIPR Calls for Attitudinal Change Among Nigerians is first published on The Whistler Newspaper
Did President Joe Biden announce a program that would effectively bring back slavery? Social media users feared as much after a supposed announcement of a new tax incentive program.
“Just in: President Biden announces tax incentives for families willing to take in slav– migrants in a new ‘Housing for Labor’ initiative,” read the text in a Feb. 18 Instagram post. “‘You can now apply to keep a migrant in your home in exchange for cooking, cleaning, picking crops, and landscaping.’”
(Screenshot from Instagram)
This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)
We checked, and there’s no such initiative. The claim originated from a satirical post.
The text came from a Feb. 16 X post by the account “U.S. Ministry of Truth.” Its bio says, “Satire or prophecy depending on the day.”
It tagged the IRS’ X account, but the agency’s social media accounts and website showed no such initiative. We also found no news reports and no Google or Nexis search results show such a program exists.
IRS spokesman Eric Smith told PolitiFact that “the IRS has not announced or been involved in announcing any housing-related initiatives.” We also reached out to the White House for comment.
The State Department does have a private sponsorship program called Welcome Corps, in which groups of five or more Americans voluntarily assist refugees during their first 90 days in the U.S. Initial services provided include assistance with securing affordable housing.
But Biden didn’t announce a “Housing for Labor” initiative that would give tax incentives for families willing to take in migrants. We rate that claim False.
Pending regulations under review by the Biden administration could greatly increase the number of electric vehicles sold in the U.S. But if implemented, the proposals to reduce tailpipe emissions and raise the fuel efficiency standards of cars and trucks would not “ban” the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles, as a trade group for fuel makers falsely suggests in an ad campaign.
Policy experts told FactCheck.org that carmakers – particularly under the suggested federal regulations – would have flexibility in how they meet the proposed requirements, including by making vehicles with internal combustion engines more efficient.
“Requiring vehicles to be more efficient and emit less is something that regulators in the US have done for decades, and automakers are free to comply with those standards in whatever strategy works best for them,” John Helveston, a George Washington University assistant professor of engineering management and systems engineering, said in an email.
However, two ads airing in seven states and the Washington, D.C., area give viewers the impression that cars that run on gas soon will not be allowed to be made and sold in the U.S. The ads are part of a reported $7 million issue-ad campaign the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers began on Feb. 12.
“We don’t all live in cities, but President Biden’s EPA is rushing to ban new gas-powered cars even though some of us drive long distances, live too far from a charger, or can’t afford an expensive electric vehicle,” say the narrators in the AFPM ad titled “All of Us.”
In the other ad, called “Open Roads,” a narrator makes an identical claim, adding that the Environmental Protection Agency “wants to end” the “freedom to travel where you want” and “how to get there.”
In a press release, the AFPM says its ad campaign informs the public about “various Biden policies designed to eliminate gas vehicles,” including one from the EPA and another from the U.S. Department of Transportation. On its website, the fuel group also says it is concerned about a California policy that needs EPA approval before the vehicle emissions regulations a state agency adopted in 2022 can be put into effect.
We’ll review the three proposals in question, and why experts told us the policies are not an EPA “ban” on gasoline-powered cars and trucks.
EPA’s Proposed Emissions Rule
We’ve already written that President Joe Biden’s EPA has not “dictated that nearly 70% of all cars sold in the United States must be fully electric less than 10 years from now,” as former President Donald Trump misleadingly claimed in a September speech at a Michigan auto parts plant.
Instead, five months earlier, in April, the EPA announced new proposed rules designed to reduce pollution from vehicles by setting stricter limits on the tailpipe emissions produced by newly made light-, medium– and heavy-duty cars and trucks. As written, most of the proposed standards would begin to phase in as early as 2027, with updated standards for some heavy-duty vehicles starting the following year.
Companies that are not in compliance could face penalties, including fines.
The EPA said in a statement that the proposed standards are “projected to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles,” which have zero tailpipe emissions when running only on electricity. In order for auto manufacturers to meet the new standards, EVs “could account for 67% of new light-duty vehicle sales and 46% of new medium-duty vehicle sales” in 2032, the agency said.
That is in line with Biden’s stated goal to have electric cars account for 50% of new vehicle sales by 2030 – up from 7.6% in 2023, according to Kelley Blue Book estimates.
A New York Times article in May said the EPA’s proposal was “designed to ramp up sales of electric vehicles while ending the use of gasoline-powered cars” — a quote that was paraphrased in the AFPM’s “All of Us” ad. But an April New York Times article used different language, saying the proposal was “designed to ensure two-thirds of new passenger cars and a quarter of new heavy trucks sold in the United States are all-electric by 2032.”
For its part, the EPA said that the number of EVs produced in the future ultimately would depend on “the compliance pathways manufacturers select” to meet the standards.
Automakers, in theory, could use alternative strategies to ensure their fleets meet the lower emissions targets without needing to manufacture as many EVs. That’s what Joseph Goffman, principal deputy assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, said in congressional testimony last June.
“We know that Americans need and want flexibility in the types of vehicles they drive,” he told lawmakers on a House Oversight and Accountability subcommittee. “The proposed standards are performance-based emissions standards and are technology-neutral, meaning that manufacturers choose the mix of technologies, including internal combustion engines.”
However, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an auto industry trade association, said the standards “are neither reasonable nor achievable in the timeframe covered in this proposal.”
Now the New York Times reports that, as of February, the EPA is planning to revise the proposed rule, slowing the pace at which companies would need to comply. The newspaper said the EPA’s final rule is expected to be published by early spring.
DOT’s Proposed Fuel Standards
As for the Transportation Department, its National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in July proposed updating Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards for passenger cars and light trucks, as well as heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans.
NHTSA said the proposal “includes a 2% per year improvement in fuel efficiency for passenger cars, and a 4% per year improvement for light trucks, beginning in model year 2027 and ramping up through model year 2032, potentially reaching an average fleet fuel economy of 58 miles per gallon by 2032.”
For heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, the efficiency standards would increase at a rate of 10% per year for model years 2030 through 2035.
The agency said the proposed standards will “complement and align” with the EPA’s proposed emissions standards for similar vehicles.
While the AFPM argues the standards “are so severe they can only be met if the new vehicle fleet is primarily composed of cars and trucks that run on electrons rather than gallons,” NHTSA said “manufacturers may use all available technologies – including advanced internal combustion engines, hybrid technologies and electric vehicles – for compliance.”
California’s Plan for Zero-Emissions Vehicles
Prior to the introduction of those federal proposals, regulators in California adopted a plan in 2022 to eventually prohibit the sale of certain new vehicles powered only by gasoline and other fuels.
The Advanced Clean Cars II rule, which was approved by the California Air Resources Board, would require an increasing percentage of new vehicles sold in the state each year to be zero-emissions vehicles, or ZEVs, and plug-in hybrids, or PHEVs. Beginning in 2026, “sales of new ZEVs and PHEVs will start with 35% that year, build to 68% in 2030, and reach 100% in 2035,” the resources board says on its website.
Cars travel along Interstate 80 on Jan. 16 in Berkeley, California. Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images.
To meet the requirements, automakers would only be able to use full battery-electric, plug-in hybrid and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. In addition, the board says, plug-in hybrids, which run on fuel when the vehicle’s electric battery is almost depleted, cannot make up more than 20% of an automaker’s fleet. Also, the PHEVs must be able to travel at least 50 miles while in the all-electric range.
The requirements, which still need EPA approval, would apply to all new passenger cars, trucks and SUVs sold in the state. Notably, the plan also would allow Californians to continue driving their existing gas cars, as well as purchase a used gas car.
Under the federal Clean Air Act, California is permitted to set its own vehicle pollution standards – that other states can then follow – but officials must get a waiver from the EPA to do so. The EPA has not yet issued its ruling.
In September, 214 House Republicans and eight House Democrats passed a bill that would block the EPA from granting a waiver to California or another state that sets standards to “directly or indirectly limit the sale or use of new vehicles with internal combustion engines.” But the measure has not been taken up in the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats.
The AFPM argues that if California receives a government waiver, it could lead more than a dozen other states “to adopt California’s ban as their own.”
No EPA ‘Ban’ on Gas Cars
But experts told FactCheck.org that the AFPM ads go too far by claiming that the proposed federal regulations are equivalent to the EPA “rushing to ban new gas-powered cars.”
“I think the statement is exaggerated, because the various federal policies do not ban gasoline vehicles — explicitly or implicitly — anytime soon,” Arthur van Benthem, an associate professor of business economics and public policy at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, said in an email.
Jeremy Michalek, a Carnegie Mellon University professor of engineering and public policy, agreed.
“[T]he new standards are not a ban on gasoline vehicles, and I don’t think anyone expects automakers to stop making gasoline vehicles in response to these standards,” Michalek, who also heads the school’s Vehicle Electrification Group, wrote in an email.
They both acknowledged that the proposed federal rules are quite strict, and would require manufacturers to make a portion of their fleet all-electric to comply. But Michalek said automakers would still have the flexibility to include some gasoline-powered vehicles.
Even under California’s state policy, which is “close to a ban by the year 2035,” van Benthem said, “plug-in hybrids can still be sold and they do partially run on gasoline.”
“In short, all three [proposals] would allow gas-powered cars to remain on the road – they would just have to be much more efficient than the cars today,” said Kenneth Gillingham, a professor of environmental and energy economics at Yale University.
Still, “the standards are ambitious and would provide a strong incentive for automakers to produce and sell more electric vehicles,” he said.
In December, 216 House Republicans and five House Democrats passed a bill that would block the Biden administration from moving forward with the EPA’s proposed vehicle emissions regulations. The legislation was referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, where it stalled.
Editor’s note: FactCheck.org does not accept advertising. We rely on grants and individual donations from people like you. Please consider a donation. Credit card donations may be made through our “Donate” page. If you prefer to give by check, send to: FactCheck.org, Annenberg Public Policy Center, 202 S. 36th St., Philadelphia, PA 19104.
GLENDALE, Ariz. — The San Francisco Giants have used the same designation on each of their past two first round draft picks: Two-way player. But less than two years into either player’s professional career, they have each abandoned that dream.
Bryce Eldridge, the hulking high-schooler taken 16th overall last July, will exclusively pursue hitting this season and going forward, general manager Pete Putila said Tuesday. In giving up the two-way path, Eldridge joins the 30th overall selection in 2022, Reggie Crawford, who said last week he will only pitch.
“We haven’t completely ruled out anything there (in terms of pitching). But this year is going to be first base,” said Putila, speaking from the Glendale Civic Center, where managers and front office personnel from all 15 Cactus League clubs were on hand. “We’re super excited about the bat and we just want him to focus on getting as many plate appearances as possible, shoring up his defense as well.”
Unlike Crawford, who was drafted out of UConn, Eldridge is only 19 years old. Their similarities lay in their phyiscality, with Eldridge standing 6-foot-6 and Crawford at 6-foot-4 and 235 pounds. Eldridge has coupled that size, according to scouts, with elite swing mechanics to create explosive batted-ball data that jumped out in his pro debut last season in the Arizona Complex League and at Single-A San Jose.
In 31 games between the two levels, Eldridge batted .294/.400/.505 with six home runs and 20 walks to 34 strikeouts.
“It’s a pretty special mix of ingredients, just with regard to his size but also his quick, compact swing with a lot of bat speed,” Putila said. “I think his ability to make contact coupled with his size and a strong history of plate discipline is a pretty special mix. He’s kind of checking all those boxes for us.”
It hasn’t been determined where Eldridge will start the season, Putila said, but San Jose is a good bet. Both Eldridge and Crawford ended last season there.
While neither player will be the next Shohei Ohtani, Putila said there were no regrets about allowing them to pursue that path initially.
“I think it’s gotten more attention over the past few years for obvious reasons, but I think most of our position players, if you put them on the mound, are going to be low- to mid-90s,” Putila said. “I think it just gets a lot more consideration in the draft now.”
Giants’ young arms ‘even deeper’ than Astros
Although currently sidelined, Crawford (lat strain) is one of a large group of the organization’s most promising pitching prospects training with the big leaguers this spring, including Carson Whisenhunt, Mason Black and Hayden Birdsong.
Putila compared the crop of young arms to the one he oversaw in Houston, which turned into one of the game’s top homegrown rotations with Framber Valdez, Cristian Javier and Luis Garcia, except he said the Giants’ group was even more numerous.
“I’ve actually drawn a lot of comparisons to the arms we had in Houston around 2019 or so,” said Putila, the assistant GM in Houston before being hired by the Giants. “Internally we felt confident about the arms we had. Externally prospect rankings, farm rankings and whatnot, maybe it wasn’t as high. But we had that confidence.
“I think it’s an even deeper group here. … We’re firing on all cylinders pitching development-wise.”
Lopez love
The Giants were interested enough in Otto Lopez to send cash to the Blue Jays earlier this month to bring him into their infield mix. That alone put the 25-year-old utilityman in good position to carve out a reserve role on the Opening Day roster.
But it would appear Lopez has only improved his odds in the first days of camp. His name was the first to escape Putila’s mouth when he began to note the early standouts, followed by Jung Hoo Lee, whose batting practice has also impressed staff in the organization.
“It’s exciting to see Otto Lopez,” Putila said. “New guy in the organization. He’s been standing out in batting practice so far.”
However, he said, “It’s that time of year where we don’t have a lot to sink our teeth into besides some BP and sides, so we’re excited to get going.”
That question was on many minds after NBA legend Shaquille O’Neal said last weekend that his “dumb***” mistakes and errors in judgment cost him “his whole family” — including his six children — and left him living alone in a vast, empty mansion.
In a moment of introspection on his podcast, “The Big Podcast With Shaq,” O’Neal told Jason Kelce, a pro football lineman for the Philadelphia Eagles, to embrace being a husband and father when he steps away from the NFL. Kelce, brother of Travis Kelce, a star tight end for the Super Bowl-winning Kansas City Chiefs, has said he is thinking of retiring.
“My advice to you is if you are going to retire, accept it, enjoy your family, brother,” O’Neal said. “I made a lot of dumb*** mistakes to where I lost my family, and I didn’t have anybody. That’s not the case for you.”
“So, enjoy your beautiful wife, enjoy your beautiful kids, and never dwell on what we had” as pro athletes, O’Neal said. “What we had is what we got — you got the ring, people know who you are, enjoy. Because, again, I was an idiot, and I’ve talked about it a long time. I lost my whole family (but) I’m in a 100,000-square-foot house by myself.”
The candid advice for Kelce, and tacit admission of loneliness, was a remarkable moment of vulnerability for O’Neal, an NBA Hall of Famer, pro basketball analyst, and celebrity pitchman for products ranging from computer printers to a national pizza chain. On the surface, Shaq seems to have it all.
The admission to Kelce, however, was so sad it led Slate staff writer Joel Anderson to comment on X, formerly known as Twitter, “I really hope Shaq is seeing a therapist. He sounds so regretful, so lonely.”
At the height of his career, O’Neal — 7 feet 1 inch tall, some 300 lbs. and a dominant force on the court — was the image of success, invulnerability, and Black masculine power. Winner of four NBA championships and several Most Valuable Player awards, many consider him among the greatest players in league history.
In his conversation with Kelce, however, O’Neal went fully against type, frankly discussing the price he paid for womanizing and putting his career ahead of his family. He also inadvertently put a spotlight on a serious health issue among Black men: loneliness.
A Hidden Epidemic Among Black People
A study by the Mental Health Foundation suggests that loneliness is a hidden epidemic among Black people, with 1 in 3 reporting they had frequent feelings of loneliness. By comparison, among whites and other ethnic groups, 1 in 4 people had reported loneliness some or all of the time.
Compounding the issue: stigma among Black people when it comes to mental health.
Black people “hold beliefs related to stigma, psychological openness, and help-seeking, which in turn affects their coping behaviors,” according to Mental Health America. In a study, MHA found that participants “were not very open to acknowledging psychological problems, but they were somewhat open to seek mental health services,” and Black men were significantly less likely to seek treatment than women.
Last year, creators of the popular dating app BLK held a “loneliness retreat” exclusively for Black men at a resort in the California desert. Called Brotherhood Reimaged, the retreat was designed to help Black men connect with one another, learn about their feelings, and explore a range of topics, including sex, dating, and masculinity.
In his conversation with Kelce, O’Neal did not say he is grappling with depression, but he has hinted at it in the past, referring to his absent children.
“I don’t like to use the D-word because I don’t really know what it is, but I was lost — 76,000-square-foot house by yourself — lost,” O’Neal said in 2022 on the Pivot Podcast, reflecting on his mistakes. “No kids. Go to the gym, nobody’s playing in the gym. You go to their room, nobody’s there. You start to feel it, you know.”
It’s widely known that O’Neal, 51, had been involved with many women during his NBA career but only married once. The basketball star previously confessed he was a “serial cheater.”
He married Shaunie Nelson in 2002 after their son, Shareef, and daughter, Amirah, were born. The couple had another son, Shaqir, and a daughter, Me’arah, but broke up in 2007. They reunited in 2009 but split for good not long afterward; she married Keion Henderson in 2022. Both O’Neal and his ex-wife each had a child from a previous relationship.
In his advice to Kelce and admitting his mistakes, Shaq was matter-of-fact and not particularly emotional — and he says learning how to deejay, among his other projects, gives him the same rush as playing in the NBA.
But it’s clear that O’Neal would rather be a family man.
Extradition to U.S. puts WikiLeaks founder’s life at risk, claims Amy Peikoff.
BitChute policy officer Amy Peikoff joins Alex Jones live to discuss the unjust treatment of Julian Assange, and how we can secure journalistic freedom for all.
