An Uncertain Man, And Then Some

At the beginning of the month, Shank was leading the Patriots bandwagon to Houston. Today, he's not so sure:

Picked-up pieces while waiting for Thursday night’s Celtics game in Cleveland . . .

■ Why do I feel like I’ll still be saying I’m not sold on this Patriots defense when the Duck Boats are parading down Boylston Street Feb. 7?

Shank has always hated numbers and statistics. Today he loves them both, because it suits his agenda (this and his next paragraph):

■ Stat geeks and Patriot toadies are twisting themselves into knots to tell us that the Patriots really didn’t have an easy schedule this year, but we know what we saw. We saw them play a bunch of bum quarterbacks and almost zero elite offenses.

On Saturday, Shank didn't know much about the 2016 New England Patriots (this is a week after going to Denver and winning, 16 - 3):

Tomato Can season of 2016 marches on. Yet another game in which we learn nothing about the Patriots.

— Dan Shaughnessy (@Dan_Shaughnessy) December 24, 2016

Four days later, however, he knows all about their defense:

When the season ends Sunday, the Patriots will have played half their games against teams in the bottom third of the league in offense. They faced none of the top six offenses. Here’s hoping they are ready if they face a competent QB/offense in the playoffs. Matt McGloin, Tom Savage, and Matt Moore no doubt have Bill Belichick lying awake at night.

Stolen from yesterday's Boston version of ESPN is this little tidbit - how few differences can you spot?

Since Belichick became Patriots coach in 2000, the AFC East has had 23 head coaches (including interims).

The rundown:

■ Since Belichick took over as head coach of the Patriots, the Bills, Dolphins, and Jets have had 23 head coaches and interim head coaches. The list includes legends such as Perry Fewell, Joe Philbin, Chan Gailey, and Dan “Tomato Can” Campbell. Over the same 16-year span, the second-best quarterback in the division is probably Chad Pennington.

At this point, you've read blatant examples of short sightedness, rank ignorance, duplicity, overuse of canned cliches (canned - get it?), stolen column themes and / or trolling behavior. While he didn't throw in an obligatory mention of Larry Bird, he came close with Kevin McHale. These are the problems with Dan Shaughnessy in general and especially with his mailed-in Picked Up Pieces columns.

Rewriting History - III

Shank, as is his usual Tuesday gig, appeared on the Gresh & Zo radio show to deliver this absolute whopper:

“This start is somewhat predictable,” Shaughnessy said. “As I keep reminding everybody, they weren’t that good last year. They weren’t this dominant team that just steamrolled everybody. They were really good, they won 97, everything came together, they got super hot at the end.”

While I must note that Shank was careful in the wording of those statements, and with the possible exception of this February '14 column, I find no written evidence of Shank actually predicting, or mentioning, or hinting of a slow start prior to his Sunday column, and making what amounts to ex post facto statements of a slow Red Sox start renders the point moot, doesn't it?

As a matter of fact, Shank declared "Everything is Awesome" twelve days ago, and a glorious day for Boston the next day. He only started saying this stuff on Sunday, when the Red Sox were well into racking up more losses than wins. Once again, are you really standing on firm ground when, in typical Shank fashion, you jump on or off a bandwagon and make self-serving (and demonstrably misleading) statements two days later? Consistency has never been his strong suit.

Bruce Allen over at Boston Sports Media Watch must have lost a bet recently. He decided (or he was possessed by demons) to examine Shank's 100 most recent columns, the result being further support of the point made above - that Shank turned on a dime, wrote one column on Sunday pointing out the shortcomings of the 2014 Red Sox, then goes on local sports talk radio and basically misleads the audience with the barest mention of the timeframe in which Shank now draws this 'conclusion' of his. I sure hope some of the callers pointed this out while he was still in the radio booth.

The Near Ultimate Dan Shaughnessy Column

In seven hours the Boston Red Sox and the St. Louis Cardinals will play for the 2013 World Series Cup (that's what Mayor Menino's calling it). Naturally, Shank needs to write a column about it, a tour de force which encapsulates nearly every criticism of Shank over his three decade career.

Welcome to the 2013 World Series. I have just one question.

Where’s the hate?

We have the Red Sox and the Cardinals and one giant bowl of respect. Everybody loves everybody. The opponents are all worthy.

The Sox and Cardinals both worked out at Fenway Park Tuesday, and you could have gotten diabetes from the sugar pouring out of the clubhouses.

All You Need Is Love. Love Train. This World Series is all about Parliamentary Procedure, Marquis de Queensberry Rules, and (Dave) Roberts Rules of Order.

In no particular order, this column exhibits the following: Shank attempting to create controversy, Shank inserting himself (to a degree) into the column, Shank presuming to speak for the entire Red Sox fan base ("Sorry, St. Louis, but most of us here in Boston would rather have the Dodgers in town right now."), Shank lying once again about Carl Crawford ("We’d have asked Carl Crawford why he made up all that stuff about a “toxic” atmosphere in Boston."), waxing philosophic about Harvard, lame song lyrics, a random Larry Bird reference, and sundry others.

This is a true Shaughnessy masterpiece, right up there with the Velvet Elvis...

Team Redemption?

I find Dan Shaughnessy annoying nearly all the time and at other times duplicitous and mendacious; that is not exactly a news flash to regular readers of this site. What really pisses me off is his repeated attempts at rewriting history, like no one will notice (like he was able to do before the ascent of the internet) when he tries to airbrush his own past handiwork / bashing of athletes when good things happen in the present. No finer example of this can be presented than yesterday's win by the Red Sox over the Tigers in an absolute pitching gem (emphasis mine):

DETROIT — John Lackey is the poster boy for Team Redemption.

Nobody was more loathed coming into this season.

Not even the 'Texas Tough Guy', Josh Beckett?

Lackey got blamed for chicken and beer. He got blamed for Theo Epstein’s bloated payroll. He was blamed for the collapse of 2011. He snarled at the media on that night in New York, asking who called his cellphone. Fans wanted him out of town ASAP. Folks didn’t like the way Lackey showed up his fielders and his manager. Nobody liked the results. In 2011, Lackey had the worst season (6.41 ERA) of any Sox starter in history.

I will point out for the umpteenth time this use of the passive voice by Shaughnessy, a favorite rhetorical device used by douchebag columnists to deflect blame and accountability from themselves by the things they wrote in previous columns, betting that you don't remember any of it. He is nothing short of pure chickenshit when he tries to deploy this subterfuge in a pathetically weak attempt to deflect blame from himself when he was one of the critics right out of the blocks on John Lackey:

Your turn, Josh Beckett. You, too, John Lackey. Time for the rest of the beer-swillin’, biscuit-eatin’, fried-chicken munchin’ Red Sox starting pitchers to fess up.

The 1919 Chicago White Sox had Eight Men Out. The 2011 Red Sox have Three Men and a Bucket of Popeye’s.

The Red Sox hideous off season of 2011 continues, and today we had more truth set free when Jon Lester returned a phone call from the Globe’s Pete Abraham and confirmed information which until now has been only a “sourced report’’: instead of staying on the bench pulling for their struggling teammates, Red Sox starting pitchers were back in the clubhouse drinking beer and diving into the 16-piece family meal ($31.99, includes three large sides and eight biscuits) during the 2011 season.

Then, once Lackey was on the disabled list after Tommy John surgery, it was no longer necessary for the self-righteous columnist to continue his barrage on Lackey, since he was no longer in the news. The damage was done; mission accomplished.

After Lackey beats Justin Verlander in an epic pitching duel? We're good, right?

Now everything has changed, and Tuesday at Comerica Park, Lackey had his finest hour in a Boston uniform. He beat the Detroit Tigers, 1-0, in Game 3 of the American League Championship Series. He outpitched Justin Verlander, a former Cy Young Award winner and Most Valuable Player. Lackey allowed four hits and zero walks, fanning eight before he was lifted (against his will) by manager John Farrell with two out and one aboard in the seventh.

“It was awesome, for sure,’’ said the Gomer Pyle soundalike. “I knew I was going to have to pitch pretty good today.’’
...
All the themes have changed for Lackey. Now he is viewed as a great teammate who takes care of the clubhouse workers and the rest of the “little people” around Fenway. His teammates love hanging with him. He has an unsurpassed work ethic and has lost more weight than Lenny Clarke. Despite getting little run support, he pitched very well throughout the magical 2013 season.

Unbelievable - John Lackey pitches one of the best games of his life and Shank still feels the need to further disparage and take a steaming shit on the guy. He is beneath contempt.

Other than that, I liked the column.

The Day Skynet Became Self-Aware

Shank wonders aloud why his good buddies Carl Crawford, Adrian Gonzalez (& Josh Beckett) won't talk to him anymore.

Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford won’t talk about Red Sox

Truth in advertising - Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford won’t talk to me about Red Sox

LOS ANGELES — I am standing in the swanky, though not overly spacious, Dodgers clubhouse. It is just after 3:30 p.m. Friday and the room has just been opened to the media. No sign of Josh Beckett. No sign of Adrian Gonzalez. No sign of Carl Crawford.

I am not discouraged. I have emptied bigger rooms than this.

This should surprise none of us! Surely he didn't just figure this out?

Suddenly, Crawford is at his locker. A radio guy is with him and it looks like they might be planning an interview for later. I walk toward Carl. He sees me and bolts for the door that leads to the “no media” area with the food room and trainer’s room.

Shank not scoring free food; war has just been declared...

Carl is muttering something as he disappears into the safe haven. From my distance, all I made out is, “[expletive] talk to the [expletive] Boston media . . . ’’

What could have ever been responsible for this change of heart, I wonder?

It’s not like we weren’t warned. Back on Wednesday in San Francisco, Boston reporters asked Red Sox PR people to approach Dodgers PR people to see if Crawford and Gonzalez would be made available before the first game in Los Angeles. Early Friday afternoon, we got word that Carl and the Cooler (Gonzalez in the last three seasons has been part of historic folds by the Padres, Red Sox, and Dodgers, hence, “the Cooler”) would not be speaking with us.

“You can try,’’ a Dodgers PR guy told me. “But that’s what they’re telling us. Adrian was pretty firm about it.’’

...

Despite failing after signing a $142 million contract, Crawford was rarely critiqued in Boston. But he has reinvented his time in the Hub, characterizing the Boston baseball experience as “toxic,’’ and telling the LA Times, “I knew with the struggles I was having, it would never get better for me. It puts you in a kind of a depression stage. You just don’t see a way out.’’

The italicized part of the first sentence, to be blunt, is a lie. Shaughnessy has a well-documented three decade history of criticizing professional athletes in Boston, and in particular members of the Red Sox. I've already noted numerous instances of Shank giving Carl Crawford the business. He writes (at a minimum) five articles where he rips Crawford, not to mention anything he may have said about Crawford when he's on the radio with Gresh & Zo on 98.5 The Sports Hub, and has the balls to write something so demonstrably false? That's just further evidence that Shank does not have an editor looking at his columns.

Hop On The Green Line

Shank takes a walk down memory lane before tonight's Celtics home opener against the Milwaukee Bucks.

Ode to the Celtics.

Paul Pierce played with Antoine Walker, who played with Rick Fox, who played with Larry Bird, who played with Dave Cowens, who played with John Havlicek, who played with Bob Cousy.

This is one of the things I love about the Celtics. There are only five guys separating Truth from the Cooz.

Friday night is the 67th home opener for our local NBA franchise.

This is one of his better efforts in recent memory, aside from the following disingenuous paragraph:

But this current Celtics group has given us little to challenge. Wyc Grousbeck, Steve Pagliuca & Associates are fans, but they aren’t calling plays from the bench. They deliver a pretty good product. They haven’t insulted or pandered to their fans. We were skeptical about them in the early days, but as owners go, they have ranked surprisingly low on the buffoonery scale.

Robert Kraft has owned the New England Patriots since 1994. They have won numerous division titles since that time, have appeared in six Super Bowls in that time span and won three of them. Has Robert Kraft given 'us' little to challenge? Yes. Has that prevented Shank from taking all sorts of shots at Kraft? No bleepin' way - I can't link to all the examples.

John Henry & Tom Werner have been the lead owners of the Boston Red Sox since 2002. They have won two World Series championships since that time, when many fans would think they would pass on before the Red Sox would win a World Series, let alone two. Has this ownership group given 'us' little to challenge? Until September 2011, that answer would be yes. Has that prevented Shank from taking all sorts of shots at, let's face it, John Henry (since Tom Werner got Shank's daughter an internship four plus years ago)? Once again, no way in hell, and once again, I can't link to all the examples.

It's too bad Shank has to trash an otherwise good column with demonstrably false statements like the above paragraph.

Cold Shoulder, Side Of Bullshit

Shank stayed in Miami yesterday to cover the Heat's win over the Celtics, 120 - 107. Let's skip the game stuff and go straight to the Ray Allen story:

MIAMI — Does it really have to be like this?

Ray Allen didn’t like losing his starting job in Boston (to Avery Bradley - ed.). Ray didn’t like Rajon Rondo. He didn’t feel appreciated by the Celtics.

So Ray made a deal with the hoop devil. He signed with the Miami Heat.

And now Kevin Garnett gives him the Sicilian “you’re dead to me’’ attitude.

KG's reaction, or lack thereof, isn't exactly a secret - was Shank expecting KG to send flowers and a box of chocolates?

Allen’s role as a reserve with the Heat is somewhat amusing to Celtics fans who trash him for leaving because he was no longer a starter in Boston. Still, it’s understandable why he would go to Miami: it’s a shot at another ring, he’ll always be open, and the weather is significantly better than it was in his last four basketball outposts: Boston, Seattle, Milwaukee, and Storrs, Conn.

There's a wee bit more to the story than Shank lets onto, which may be understandable, given that this is Shank's first column on the subject.

Let's go ahead and watch the butchering of what's left of the column:

But the takeaway moment of opening night was the Big Chill from Garnett. It was a cold moment, almost Red Sox-ian.

Has anyone figured out why Shank needs to insert a Red Sox reference into nearly all of his columns?

And it made you wonder . . . why does it always end badly in Boston?

You know something? I wonder about that myself. You might want to ask Nomar Garciaparra about that. Or Manny Ramirez, or Theo Epstein, or Pedro Martinez, or Curt Schilling, or Roger Clemens, or...

Dirty Laundry 2.0

Now that the season is more or less over for the 2012 Boston Red Sox, Shank wants to assign some, most or all of the blame on Theo Epstein.

ANAHEIM, Calif. — The Red Sox owners are here, and they’re having a hard time keeping the smiles off their faces after what they did to the Dodgers last weekend.

It’s hard not to gloat when you dump more than a quarter of a billion dollars in payroll on the Los Angeles Dodgers. The Dodgers, by the way, are 2-3 since the trade was announced, including a 10-0 beating (Josh Beckett’s start) at the hands of the last-place Rockies. Los Angeles Times columnist T. J. Simers wrote, “They appear lifeless and uninspired in three consecutive losses to the dead meat likes of the Marlins and Rockies.’’
...

But enough about the Sox snookering the Dodgers. John Henry, Tom Werner, and Larry Lucchino are still angry. And I think I know why. It really bothers them that Theo Epstein isn’t getting enough blame for the train wreck that is the Red Sox of the last 12 months.

Since Shank owes Tom Werner for helping to get his daugher an intership six years ago, he'll gladly go to bat for ownership. The representative from Massachusetts now has the floor!

Epstein made a ton of bad moves in the later years of his tenure, then went to Chicago for a $19 million contract and watched from afar as the Sox decomposed. John, Tom, and Larry would like to remind you of this.

So I will do it for them.

Mistakes were made. Money was spent badly. The Sox lost their way and tried to throw money at their problems.

Remember who one of the advocates of higher spending was?

They dished out millions for Johnny Damon, Keith Foulke, Daisuke Matsuzaka and J.D. Drew. They raided rosters of the Have Nots. Now they are complaining about Yankee payroll?

It's absurd. Epstein, like Brian Cashman, can afford to make mistakes. Edgar Renteria and Julio Lugo are examples A and B of Theo's biggest blunders. This year the Sox will pay $18 million to have Lugo and Mike Lowell (trade pending with the Rangers) play for other teams.

Epstein is touting organization prospects named Jose Iglesias, Ryan Kalish, Ryan Westmorland, Casey Kelly and Lars Anderson, but they are a couple of years away. In Boston the message needs to be "win now.''

And that means "Beat the Yankees.''

Of course, you're not fool enough to think Shank did the heavy lifting to make the compelling argument against Theo Epstein, are you?

That’s why it must have felt good this week when the owners read a carve job on Epstein, penned by Tom Van Riper at Forbes. Van Riper said Epstein, “has to go down as the decade’s most overrated baseball executive.’’ The piece said Dan Duquette built the core of the Sox 2004 championship team and that Epstein won the World Series by “tinkering with Duquette’s blueprint.’’

These aren't exactly news flashes to us, but read on to marvel / laugh at Shank's transparent attempt to look fair and impartial.