But playoffs?
Please. Get a grip.
This raises an important question: What purpose does Shaughnessy serve?
Does he raise the collective knowledge of the readers? Does he enlighten or entertain? Does he shed light on problems that need correcting? Do his rantings, accusations, malignings and bitterness serve the public?
The answer to all of the above, of course, is no.
His impotence is shocking. Accomplishing at least one of those "feats" on any given day is not all that hard to do. Christ, even Joan Vennochi hits a single once in awhile. Meanwhile, day after day The CHB trudges back to the bench, club in hand, having swung and missed yet again.
He's a waste of newsprint and money. It's high time the New York Times shareholders questioned why their investment dollar is being used to support what is clearly a weak and incompetent Globe management team.
20 comments:
CHB should just write: The Red Sox suck; it's Theo's fault. The Red Sox suck; it's Theo's fault. The Red Sox suck; it's Theo's fault. The Red Sox suck; it's Theo's fault. Save himself the time and us the aggravation.
He just sucks. What a miserable hack. When is the Globe going to wake up? Bring back Montville.
"The only glitch in the proceedings was another victory"
"Once again paying no attention to the master plan"
"Disregarding the symbolic memo from above"
Nice way to hide your own personal investment in the Red Sox losing, CHB. I hope he walks into the clubhouse today and sees his column on the bulletin board with a hi-liter across this line: "To their credit, the men in the Boston dugout are still playing as if the games count."
We are going to have one very angry CHB if the Sox come back and make it to the post-season.
It's high time the New York Times shareholders questioned why their investment dollar is being used to support what is clearly a weak and incompetent Globe management team.
I'm not so sure about that, Cheif.
I haven't seen the Globe's books, but I'm sure the publishing biz is all about readership - eyeballs to advertisments.
I realize that this is anecdotal, but I'm a literary masochist like yourself: I read the columnists I like and never miss the ones I can't stand.
Now we're resorting to infantile name-calling, having run out of anything remotely resembling intelligent discourse. The team tanked. management screwed up. Shaughnessy predicted a fan backlash and called the club on it. Unlike the Sox starters, Shaughnessy had his fastball in August.
What's the "personal investment in the Red Sox losing"?
And then there's Jenny. Could someone please provide a translation from the original Esperanto?
Gee, Bruce, have you forgotten about Shaughnessy kissing the butts of every one with a Red Sox ID card over the offseason trades?
That's what I thought.
Objectivebruce said...
Unlike the Sox starters, Shaughnessy had his fastball in August.
Let's see. When the Sox were hot, Dan didn't have much to say. When they started stinking up the joint, Dan was cranking out columns at a furious pace. Dan likes to quote old song lyrics, so I'll add: "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."
What's the "personal investment in the Red Sox losing"?
Possibly the fact that Dan's meal ticket for a decade was a book about the Red Sox' failures and futilities? Agendas don't come any more paper-thin than this.
Good points, all (except you, Bruce) but I particularly liked the visual image of CHB "trudging back to the bench..."
Shall we just start calling him the "Javy Lopez of the Boston Globe"?
Bruce, all CHB wants is to come out looking better than Young Theo and he will write anything to get him there. He is not predicting a fan backlash. He is trying to lead one. The only dissapointing thing about this season was that too many guys got hurt/sick at the same time, a time where meaningful deals are rarely made. Oh well, it happens. There's nobody to blame and no deal would have made up for all the missing production. No, not even the legendary Bobby Abreu and David Wells would have done it.
//Unlike the Sox starters, Shaughnessy had his fastball in August.//
Oh, good lord, this is just too damn funny. Hahahahahahahahaaaaa.
Like it or not, Shaughnessy pointed out the Emperor's nudity in August, as the team endured its worst month in years. The sycophants may not like it but Theo has had a Rotten Year. Throwing rocks at someone who points that out doesn't change things at all. By merely pointing it out -- and correctly so -- Shaughnessy had a much better August than the local entry's hurlers.
As for "personal investment," how is it "personal investment" to write a factual book chronicling the club's horrid record from 1918 to publication? The history of the club is the history of the depths of the plunge of what was the league's dominant franchise, through the Frazee giveaways, where Ruth was merely the biggest name among the Hall of Famers exported to New York; the stagnation of the Quinn era; the failed attempts of Yawkey to buy a pennant; Pesky/Slaughter; the malaise of '52-65; Gibson/Brock; Aparacio falling twice; Lee's eephus pitch; Dent; the failure in the '48, 49, '72, '74, and '78 pennant drives; Game 7 in '67, Game 7 in '75, and Game 6 in '86; Lonborg goes skiing; Jack Hamilton; Fingers/Rudi; and a multi-generational failure to win it all. He ties it together with a metaphor, the curse, and publishes a must-read Red Sox history. It was a classic bit of sportswriting. No matter how die-hard a Red Sox fan one may be, to deny that the book is a premier work on the team's decades of turmoil is folly.
To call this a "personal investment" in failure is as logical as suggesting that William L. Shire had personal investment in Hitler, or, to use a local example, that Benzaquin had a "personal investment" in tragic nightclub fires.
As for Jenny, your Esperanto was in that reply, and that's what I referred to -- the convoluted point about observing that a team is playing badly being analogous to busting up your host's BMW.
"Malice sucks up the greater part of her own venom, and poisons herself."
--Montaigne
Bruce, like it or not, Shaughnessy loved all the moves when they were made. What special genius did it take to mock them later? And, since we are on the subject, which special genius has declared the Red Sox dead before -- as in after Game 3 of the 2004 ALCS -- only to see them pull off only the greatest comeback in sports history? That's right.
Face it: Shaughnessy's bloviating had nothing to do with sports, nothing to do with reality, and everything to do with making a personal and unncessary attack on Theo Epstein.
So you condemn Shaughnessy for stating what, at the time was the obvious?
AT least he had the courage to say something, and don't tell me that 87 percent of New England, given the team's history, didn't think the same thing after Game 3 of the 04 ALCS.
My basic point about this blog is that you object to Shaughnessy because he doesn't provide the spit-back pablum desired by "The Fans" who do such insipid things as imitate the Wrigley denizens by tossing back baseballs hit by the opponents.
Grow up.
I think we need to start doing something to rectify this situation - we need to write to his bosses (and the sports page advertisers) that no one will buy anything that is advertised when CHB writes a column. Otherwise, his bosses won't get the hint ... regarding the "worst August ever, if it was the starting team that was actually doing the losing that's one thing ... if no one from the opening day lineup was in the same position except for Lowell, that's pretty extenuating circumstances ... (heart palpitations, a couple knees, cancer, hamstrings, etc. of course this would have all been better had theo made a deal ...)
OB, you know damn well it isn't the publication of the book itself people have problems with. It is the fact that in the 20 or so interceding years, he has turned the theme of that book into a schtick, and in doing so, is basically cheating both his employer and his readers, who expect a columnist from the Boston Globe to engage them with thoughtful, lively takes. Have you noticed there is no Bob Ryan-bashing blog? No Jackie MacMullan-bashing blog? I wonder why that is? Maybe because the two writers I just mentioned continue to producers quality journalism week in and week out, and if they do occasionally misfire, they've built up enough of a resevoir of good will that readers are willing to give them a pass?
My basic point about this blog is that you object to Shaughnessy because he doesn't provide the spit-back pablum desired by "The Fans" who do such insipid things as imitate the Wrigley denizens by tossing back baseballs hit by the opponents.
I object to Shaughnessy because his columns do not
1) educate
2) entertain
3) provoke thought.
Almost without fail, they either
1) re-cover old ground
2) stir crap up for its own sake
3) reveal the columnist's own axes to grind
And I'll take a "Fan" who throws a ball back on the field, over The Wave and "Sweet Caroline" and all this hokum that "Red Sox Nation" (gag) seems to pay more attention to than the game.
Bruce, your basic objection to this blog is that you are either 1) The CHB himself or 2) one of his copyeditors.
Get real.
This whole debate really comes down to what the Sox did not do at the trade deadline... make an actual trade. CHB is very happy to point this out at every single turn when he writes an article.
Abreu (underachieving in a band-box home park and way overpriced) seems like a good idea but I really doubt that he would have had good numbers in Fenway park, which while a good hitter's park, is not the best power park in the league.
There really was no good pitching out there, I think everyone needs to realize that. Kip Wells is not the savior of the rotation, and I would not be willing to take Clemens right now (especially if ESPN was right, and the Astros wanted Big Papi for the Rocket).
As for any other deal (read Oswalt, Schmidt, Lidle, et cetera) I'm pretty sure those teams were probably asking for way to much. Example: Oswalt being offered to the Sox for Andruw Jones (after trading Lester to get him), and then the Astros pull out of that deal too.
CHB was very happy with most of the moves made by the front office this year. He was ESPECIALLY happy about getting Beckett (especially since it happened while theo was not with the organization at the time, that means that Luchinno helped that deal). By now deciding that all the moves were awful, and killing theo for not making another trade, is absolutely hippocritical but not out of character with him.
Hey Mike,
Bruce notwithstanding, and it's your blog and you can cry if you want to.
BUT
it's too bad you focus so much on DS. You make good points as a baseball analyst. Branch out a bit. Having a blog hang on such a simple hook makes you seem like a one-note.
I appreciate that, Steve.
However, my whole goal was to shine the floodlight on Shaughnessy and expose the hypocrisy and laziness behind his so-called work.
Which, with the help of several others, we have now done in spades.
Post a Comment