Northeastern and the Beanpot

(I have had a bad track record lately--keep missing these Dan columns. My regrets)

Dan's piece yesterday focused on the Northeastern hockey team and how they can top off a stellar season by winning the Beanpot. He discusses how Northeastern is the team on the local scene that gets no respect and even though they are ranked #4 in the country this season, they would dearly love a Beanpot win to answer any lingering questions of how far they have come aand how good they are.

The one strange bit comes in the first paragraph...Shaughnessy compares Northeastern to Ringo Starr (ok - fair enough - but I think Shaughnessy has used that more than once and it is a little dated now) and then to Teddy Roosevelt on Rushmore (since all the other guys have monuments). Hey Dan, Teddy has his own island in DC (http://www.nps.gov/this/) and he is featured in some great recent movies (Night At the Museum and its upcoming sequel). Not too bad for ole Teddy :)

It's a solid piece but anything would be better than the Brady crap from the other day (For those people who said the Brady piece was satire, can you fill me in on what actually Shaughnessy was satirizing?)

Pathetic

Dan has a meaningless column that offers nothing except the silliest notions of sports talk radio callers.

I guess when you are as bankrupt of ideas as Shank is, anything will do.

A Look at Ray Allen

Dan takes the occasion of a Celtics' blowout to focus on Ray Allen, who scored 23 yesterday, 20 by halftime.

Dan starts with an interesting anecdote from Ray Allen's childhood and goes on to describe the game while discussing Ray Allen's improved season.

Varitek and Other Things

Totally missed this piece...thanks DBVader for mentioning it. Shaughnessy writes about Jason Varitek: Varitek needs a job; the Sox need a catcher and therefore they need to work this out. (Despite the bad blood with Boras). Actually, a decent piece though I take issue with this sentence:

Reward him for past contributions. Put together a deal that makes it look like something less than capitulation.

The whole "reward him" thing...first, Varitek has been paid handsomely enough already, has he not? Second, this is coming from Shaughnessy who has bitched and moaned about Schiling's contract from last year...a contract which I personally think had a "reward him for past contributions" aspect to it.

Totally different topic. I am reading the book "Juicing the Game" by Howard Bryant. He references a 1990's CHB special in which Shaughnessy declared that there was no relationship between steroids/performance enhancing drug use and a baseball player's performance. Shaughnessy was writing just after McGwire got caught by a reporter for having andro in his locker. Shaughnessy wrote

It's no wonder players loathe the media. In McGwire's case, it is misleading to write that he's using a performance enhancing drug. He's a baseball player, not an Olympic sprinter. There's nothing sold at drugstores that would help any of us hit a home run in the big leagues (unless that store has a book on hitting written by Ted Williams.) Facing Randy Johnson and hitting a ball over the fence requires bravery, timing, hand-eye coordination, reflexes, leverage, and strength. Most of all, it requires practice."

Sure, I admit it's very easy for me to criticize Shaughnessy with 20/20 hindsight. But I still would argue that this was lazy and shallow analysis, which is all too typical of Shank

Picking Up Sides Has Never Been So Difficult

So, who are you pulling for?

Dan Shaughnessy in all his laziness?

Or the new, Curt Schilling-infused WEEI?

I cannot root for either, unfortunately.

This Will Be Interesting

Dan on President Obama's love of basketball. I don't see how this would set off the readers of this site.

Dan Back to His Roots

In a head scratcher, The Globe sent Dan Shaughnessy to Phoenix to cover the NFC Championship game. Christopher Gasper busted his hump all season and gets to read Dan. Life is unfair.

And the game piece sucks. Dan uses the first two-hundred words of the article to give the history of the Cardinals and tweak Patriots fans. It took only fifty words before Dan mentioned the Super Bowl XLII.

But what about the notes column, you ask. It sucked too. Unless you consider this nugget as something that adds something to your enjoyment and understanding of football:

Donovan McNabb had an easy commute after the game. McNabb owns a home in Phoenix

And Dan even manages another Super Bowl XLII mention.

Isn't It Ironic?

I loathe Dan Shaughnessy. Okay, he represents the face of Boston Red Sox for the rest of America. He "invented" the Curse of the Bambino. He is a local kid who grew up in Mass and went to Holy Cross and has labored for the Boston Globe for more than 20 years. Still, I can't forgive him for the drivel he writes day in and day out for the Boston Globe...It is a disgrace.

How ironic it is that once again Shaughnessy (the poster child for "mailing it in") attempts to take the higher ground as he rips the Arizona Cardinals for their performance against the Patriots in December? And how ironic it is that Shaughnessy is rewarded with a trip to a warm climate when his company is a sinking ship? (Exactly why did he need to be in Arizona to write this particular piece?)

As a disclaimer, I thought Arizona's performance against the Patriots was a joke as well...but to use that as a springboard for an all-out attack like this is over-the-top. The Cardinals did what they had to do to get the playoffs. If they were such a joke, they would not be in the NFC Championship game - more power to them.

You Knew It Was Coming

Dan's view on Jim Rice and the counterarguments have been well hashed out on this site and others. Yesterday was a day for Dan to celebrate. And he managed a good column, capturing some of the factors at work and giving a little bit of color to Rice's career.

But he couldn't resist this one shot:

there was a backlash among new-age, basement-dwelling number crunchers who found flaws in Rice's résumé (always borderline by Cooperstown's lofty standards).

Two points:
1) If Rice's case for the Hall is borderline, then criticism of his career is legitimate, not the result of misguided stats geeks.

2) Rob Neyer doesn't need me to defend him, but I have to say this: Rob watches more baseball in a season than Dan has in the last 10 years. Rob has forgotten more baseball history than Dan remembers. To dismiss him out of hand is insulting and a sign of Dan's blissful ignorance of all things new.

Real Simple

Dan's Celtics column in three easy steps:

1) Things are going bad - insert clever remarks about losing to the Lakers, Knicks, and Bobcats.

2) There are many theories as to why things are going bad - insert a bunch of quotations; list the many theories, never offer a solid opinion on any of them.

3) Things will get better - Don't try to explain, just simply conclude the Celtics will do better:

He means it. Fans and media might be a tad nervous, but the guys in the locker room are not worried. They've got a ton of experience and they've got a ring and they know how to fight through the NBA's midwinter blues.

Ignorance Fuels Indignation

Dan starts today's column with a question:

Precisely when did a contract become a one-way deal?

And the answer is pretty simple. When it's an employment contract. Because of that whole no slavery or involuntary servitude thing in the United States, people cannot be forced to work under a contract if they don't want to. Yet the employer is always on the hook for the money if it wants to get rid of an employee under contract without just cause. Them's the breaks.

It's obvious who the focus of the column is going to be, but Dan cannot get to things before getting a few lashes in on Manny Ramirez and Curt Schilling, the latter who had the gall to get injured after signing a contract.

Dan goes on to spout off, blithely ignorant of both the facts and the law. Coaches skip out on contracts all the time. When a head coach opening comes around they cannot wait until the end of their contract to take it because someone else will. It's the nature of the system. And do you know what? Everybody knows it; the players, the coaches, the athletic directors.

And do you know what else? A smart AD can do something about it. When Rich Rodriguez left West Virginia for Michigan, he had to pay WVU something like $4 million to break his contract. That's what smart people do, they negotiate the terms of the contract in order to protect themselves. Dumb people rely on a handshake and looking somebody in the eye

Dan has all the other BC talking points that the media has picked up: "But Jags promised" (Look up the parol evidence rule, Dan); "he has no shot at the job"; and "it was more about not telling DeFilippo." These scattershot arguments belie their validity.

Finally, who cares? It's BC and the coach took decent teams to the conference championship in a weak league and promptly got smoked.

Wrestling with the CHB

Another year, another CHB column extolling the Hall virtues of NESN "analyst" and erstwhile Red Sox leftfielder Jim Rice.

This is followed by two extraordinary takedowns, one by EPSN's Rob Neyer and another by Patrick Sullivan at Baseball Analysts.

Some highlights:

From Sullivan: "[S]ticking to his guns in the face of well reasoned dissent, Shaughnessy simply asserts 'Guess you had to be there,' a statement so bankrupt, so lacking in creativity or thought that [Bill] James was able to respond to it 23 years earlier."

From Neyer: "If you do read that Rice was "feared" and you don't read anything (substantive) about his defense or the significant advantage he gained from playing half his games in Fenway Park, then what you're reading is not serious. What you're reading is propaganda."

Enjoy, and Happy New Year!

Boston has a pro hockey team?

Dan heard through the grapevine that the Bruins are doing well so he thought it might be a good idea to get back to the Garden, Joni Mitchell references in hand. (The song was written by Mitchell but sung by CSN&Y). What a week…Jethro Tull followed by Joni Mitchell. Jimi Hendrix and Jim Morrison must be pining for some Shank love. He ups his hipness quotient however with a Five for Fighting reference.

It is quite a statement that we are this far into the season before the Shank took notice of the Bruins' success. Must be too busy sucking money from the Globe’s travel accounts traveling with the Patriots. In a part game recap/part reflection of the glory days of the early 1970s, Dan looks at last night Bruins' game. For those of you who only follow the Red Sox, he compares Vesa Toskala stint in goal last night to a Time Wakefield start. Gee, thanks Dan. It is amazing that he was able to get through the column without comparing Julien to Belichick. I wonder if Julien ever utters the phrase “C’est que c’est”?

Lazy, Thy Name is Dan Shaughnessy

Dan must read Deadspin, or any other number of websites that aggregate sports news. When will he learn that his picked up pieces bit is a dinosaur in the internet age.

If he's not mentioning something that has been all over the internet, he is writing drivel like this:

Nice day for Newton North basketball alums last Saturday. Corey Lowe (now a 1,000-point scorer) went for 19 in Boston University's narrow loss to 12th-ranked Notre Dame, while Anthony Gurley played 27 minutes and scored 5 points in UMass's upset of defending national champion Kansas. Lex Mongo is also on the UMass roster. Lowe, Gurley, and Mongo were teammates on the North squad that won back-to-back state championships (53-1) in 2005 and '06...

Word games: The Patriots have Jarvis Green, and BenJarvus Green-Ellis. The Bruins sometimes have Johnny Boychuk. Boychuk's last name is an anagram for Oh Bucyk. So, he's Johnny Oh Bucyk.

EDIT: And I forgot the unwarranted attack on Bob Kraft:

Patriots in London next October? New England in Olde England? What a ghastly idea. Wonder if Oxford has a lightweight football team.

Annotated Dan Shaughnessy

Just in case you are under the age of 45, this is what the cover of Aqualung looks like:



Nothing connects better with readers than references to almost 40 year old album covers.

Cassel, Father and Sons

Dan writes that Matt Cassel will be playing with a heavy heart today, just a few days after the death of his father. It is a sentimental piece that talks about the relationship between fathers and sons. On one level, it is the type of writing that Dan typically excels at. When Dan put aways his petty jealousies of professional athletes and focuses on the human dimension and what he refers to as the "universal truths", he writes well and dare I say sometimes compelling fare? (I am one in the minority who really enjoyed Shaughnessy's book about his own relationship with his son)...so you would figure I would love today's column...buy you would be wrong.

What do I found so problematic? To use a sports analogy, Dan is guilty of forcing the ball into triple coverage. Dan relies heavily on Bob Hohler's story about Cassel's father's history to provide a backdrop of the interesting life Cassel's father lived. Then Dan launches into an idealized portrait of the relationship between fathers and sons, intimating that this Rockwellian bond existed between Cassel and his Dad. It's a great way to think about it but we just don't know if that bond existed...as Shaughnessy himself leads the column, "We don't really know Matt Cassel."

There is no doubt that a strong bond likely existed between father and son but we don't know to what extent...there are so many extenuating circumstances and questions...why was the Dad living in a trouble in what seems almost like a pauper's existence--was he too proud to accept help from his kids? Did the kids offer to help? We don't know. And Shaughnessy doesn't know that either but that doesn't stop him from talking about trips to Dairy Queen and playing Nerf football with the kids.

In contrast, when Belichick's father died, the relationship with his Dad was very well chronicled and you had a strong sense of bond between father and son. In Cassel's case, the picture is just not complete. Shaughnessy tries to complete it ...and he may have hit it right on but again, he may have been totally off. And think I it is irresponsible for him to paint this idealized picture without knowing more, no matter how touching the piece may come across.

Call me a scrooge and call me a cynic but I think this column reflects Shaughnessy's laziness...a touching piece on one level but problematic on many others because "We don't really know Matt Cassel."

Dan Hates People Who Use Numbers

Dan Shaughnessy has his annual appeal for Jim Rice in the Hall of Fame. It was the same last year.

And I have the same opinion.

Rice had a few great years in a career that was short in comparison to the greats. His greatness in no way approaches the greatness of Koufax, which sent him into the Hall.

Dan recaps yesterday game, putting it in perspective of the whole season.

Good effort, although the snide attacks on Belichick almost overwhelm it.

Seattle Sucks

After a string of happy columns about the prosperity of local Boston teams and players, Dan taps the Globe's travel accounts to go all the way to Seattle to tell us that the situation in Seattle stinks. From NFL football to NBA basketball (no more) to college football to MLB baseball, Seattle fans have it rough.

Whenever Dan writes about Seattle, he can't resist Sleepless in Seattle references (you could look it up). Dan also gives us references to Starbucks, grunge, and Fraser Crane. Dan is a pretty hip feller. Unfortunately, he can't even take credit for the best line in the column:

"It's so bad around here that people turn from sports to financial pages to cheer up," wrote Art Thiel, the estimable Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist.

At least he was smart enough to throw it in there...

BC Oranges

Dan tells us that the Boston College football team will advance to the Orange Bowl if they beat Virginia Tech in the ACC Championship Game and that would be pretty nifty and rare for a New England area college football team.

As a writer, Dan has become so masterful in setting the bar so low that when he writes something that is not over-the-top incendiary, he has quite often lulled me into occasionally concluding “Well, that was not such a bad piece.” No more. This piece was relatively innocuous (as many of his pieces have been lately – the rare times when he actually seems to write) but it was also relatively bad.

First, let’s bring in the tired Belichick reference:

“They are trained in Belichickian ways and we know it's a mistake to look past your next game.”

First of all, is Belichick a consultant for the BC football team? (That would be big news) And why is focusing solely on the next game and refusing to talk about the implications of a win or loss “Belichickian.” Come on…this is one of the oldest clichés in the athletes’ book. What’s funny is that Shaughnessy closes the piece with a quote from one of the players:

"Every young player in high school - they want to go to a BCS bowl. We were close last year. We want to get there this year."

I guess this kid missed the Belichick lecture series?

Two other complaints

- Is this an article about BC getting to the Orange Bowl? Or is it a piece about the history of New England colleges getting into major bowl games? Shaughnessy wanders aimlessly between the two themes. It's a writer's laziness feeding a lack of writing coherence.

- Speaking of meandering. How about this paragraph?

All they have to do is beat a team they've already handled this season. The Eagles defeated Virginia Tech, 28-23, at Chestnut Hill in mid-October, despite turning the ball over five times. Now the Eagles go at the Hokies with a novice quarterback (redshirt sophomore Dominique Davis will be making his second start
in place of the injured Chris Crane) and a top-10 defense (three shutouts) led by junior linebacker Mark Herzlich, the ACC defensive player of the year.

Very odd paragraph when you think about it, esp the part about the novice quarterback. The tone of the paragraph is that this is going to be easy –“All they have to do” sets that tone. He talks about the defense being phenomenal but he strangely packages this around the fact that the team is missing their starting quarterback and replacing him with a guy who has one previous start….as if to imply this is a good thing?

It’s poor writing, pure and simple.