Here's how Roenicke actually responded to the question 'Is [Gamel] open to embracing a utility role?': "I haven't have enough conversations to really know that answer," Roenicke said, "but you would think that if you're in his shoes, you would be open to anything. Nothing out of the ordinary, Roenicke being honest that he doesn't know Gamel well enough to say, & assuming Gamel would absolutely be open to it. McCalvy provides context & doesn't manipulate the quote. And here's how TH presented the comment, independent of noting that anyone asked anything specific about Gamel adjusting to a utility role: "The guy can hit. If he makes us believe he can play a lot of positions, it helps him make the team. If I were in his shoes, I'd be open to anything." While the difference is subtle, TH's version made at least two posters (AKA Pete & me... & we couldn't be further apart on our opinions of Gamel) question what prompted such a chiding/taunting response. Just presented as a challenge out of the blue imo. I will say that if this was the first time TH had appeared to want to paint Gamel in a certain light, I'd be willing to chalk it up to me reading into it too much/just making too much of a stylistic choice. This is what I assume as well.