Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo
* * * * - 9 votes

Joe Posnanski: your new Senior Writer for SI (Not No More, He Ain't)


1162 replies to this topic

#1 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15195 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 10:32 AM

If you're not reading this blog, then shame on you. It's quite possibly the best baseball blog out there (with apologies to the House that Dewey Built and Jose's Keys to the Game). Anyway, whether you're a fan of Bob Knight or not (I think he's an ass) he has some interesting things to say about baseball and he seems to know his stuff. Check it out (and make the site one of your favorites):

Joe Posnanski's Awesome Baseball Blog

#2 JohntheBaptist


  • SoSH Member


  • 7924 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 10:46 AM

Not to hijack too much, but the article immediately preceding it, on Chief Wahoo, was fantastic.

Love Posnanski.

#3 Maalox


  • full of shit, and proud of it


  • 49118 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 11:12 AM

Not to hijack too much, but the article immediately preceding it, on Chief Wahoo, was fantastic.

Love Posnanski.

No, it was stupid. And wrong. And not very impressive intellectually. Sportswriters should not think - they suck at it.

Bobby Knight, by contrast, has a brain in his head, the real work of which he does not choke to death by thinking.

And that's basically why everything Knight says is insightful and everything Posnanski says is pabulum. Opposites that work contrapuntally.

#4 JohntheBaptist


  • SoSH Member


  • 7924 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 11:25 AM

No, it was stupid. And wrong. And not very impressive intellectually. Sportswriters should not think - they suck at it.

No, it was awesome. And right. And fairly well presented. Good sportswriters should think, and Posnanski's a good sportswriter.

This is fun, let's keep doing this.

Edited by JohntheBaptist, 18 October 2007 - 11:28 AM.


#5 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15195 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 12:09 PM

I agree with John, for years I've been thinking that Indians were being too sensative about the Chief Wahoo thing, but Posnanski's blog has turned me around. I thought that he made his points in a rational, well-thought-out manner.

#6 Fratboy


  • Mr. MENsa


  • 11973 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 12:50 PM

Joe's one of the top 5 sportswriters in the country. I've read the blog since Olney (or was it Neyer) pointed it out. Excellent stuff.

#7 E5 Yaz


  • Transcends message boarding


  • 25523 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 01:44 PM

Posnanski's blog is a must-read for sports Web surfers. He doesn't always hit a home run, but he's always readable. His self-deprecation is a welcome change from the Neyers and Caples and others who are so insecure that they have to stress how right they are all the time.

I'd disagree slightly with BANZAI!!! here about the Knight give and take, only in that Knight's coherency on this topic came about because Posnanski asked him the right questions ... questions that Knight didn't deem beneath his dignity to answer. The result was that the answers were intriguing.

I especially liked the answer to the Wake question, because Knight is absolutely correct. You can make the right choice and still not have it work out the way you'd want. That doesn't make it the wrong decision.

#8 dirtynine

  • 3029 posts

Posted 22 October 2007 - 12:55 PM

Today's take on the game was very well done.

#9 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25517 posts

Posted 22 October 2007 - 01:08 PM

Today's take on the game was very well done.

I changed the title of the thread, because I think Posnanski's a fantastic writer and he's getting some traction around here.

#10 JayMags71


  • SoSH Member


  • 5518 posts

Posted 22 October 2007 - 02:27 PM

No, it was stupid. And wrong. And not very impressive intellectually. Sportswriters should not think - they suck at it.

Bobby Knight, by contrast, has a brain in his head, the real work of which he does not choke to death by thinking.

And that's basically why everything Knight says is insightful and everything Posnanski says is pabulum. Opposites that work contrapuntally.

While the arguements you present on this board can be well written and well intentioned, it is these arguements that are less so.

You owe it to yourself to explain why you're lining up against Ponanski, and aside one of the more loathsome characters in American sport of this era. Honestly, Knight is right next to Don King and SIAS in my book, under the category of "people whose painful death in a fire would cause me great joy".

#11 Drocca


  • darrell foster wallace


  • 15216 posts

Posted 22 October 2007 - 02:29 PM

Thanks for pointing this guy out. Excellent stuff.

#12 Sea Dog

  • 2126 posts

Posted 22 October 2007 - 03:21 PM

I've always read Posnanski, since when he first joined the KC Star years ago, when I grew up there. But I never knew he had a blog. Thanks for providing the link, I've bookmarked it.

And that was a great column on Chief Wahoo.

#13 esaskysinnerear

  • 83 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 10:05 AM

If you have time, go back and read some of his archived blogs on this site... http://thesoulofbaseball.blogspot.com/


All good, interesting stuff for baseball fans... I managed to procrastinate for almost an entire day reading these.


EIE

#14 Uncle Mumford

  • 124 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:14 PM

In all sincerity, I am curious to know what, specifically, BANZAI!!! thinks is stupid, wrong and intellectually unimpressive about the Chief Wahoo column.

Edited by Uncle Mumford, 23 October 2007 - 03:15 PM.


#15 TheRooster

  • 1775 posts

Posted 23 October 2007 - 03:20 PM

Honestly, Knight is right next to Don King and SIAS in my book, under the category of "people whose painful death in a fire would cause me great joy".


You realize that there is organized death in King's past, right? And are you aware of how his ex-fighters end up? Poor and often in ill-health. Whereas Knight's players generally end up doing quite well in the proverbial game of life. Few people have a worse track record than Don King and Knight is unquestionably not one of them.

#16 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 23243 posts

Posted 31 October 2007 - 02:31 AM

Yesterday, Joe took a light jab at Dave O’Brien for a comment he made in Game 4 of the WS. O’Brien defended himself and Joe was cool enough to post it. I enjoyed reading that.

#17 Freddy Linn


  • SoSH Member


  • 6125 posts

Posted 22 January 2008 - 01:37 AM

Posnanski is the shiznit. From his latest here.

Yes, I’ve had experiences with Marino. The most telling one happened when I was a very young columnist in Augusta — 24, I believe — I was sent to Florida to write a story about John Daly. This was just after Daly won the PGA Championship, back when he was an absolute phenomenon. I was a bit nervous about the whole thing, honestly, but I approached Daly, and he said, “Hey, sure, just come out tomorrow and you can walk with me during the Pro-Am and we can talk as much as you like.”

Next day, I get out there, and there’s a HUGE crowd around Daly. So I’m thinking, “Oh man, no chance now.” Well, then Daly sees me and he shouts, “Hey man, come on over.” And so I walk on the course and just start walking with Daly, and he’s talking, and it remains one of my favorite interviews ever.

What does this have to do with Marino? Well, it turns out that he was in the same Pro-Am group. And he wasn’t too happy about me interviewing Daly on his time. After a few minutes, Daly’s talking, and Marino starts shouting at me. “Hey,” he screams, “you know some of us here paid good money to play with John.”

And then John Daly, bless his soul, turns to Marino and says, “You are playing with me Dan. Pipe down.”

And so the official political position of this blog, no matter what events may happen over the next thousand years, will always remain as so: John Daly = Awesome. Dan Marino = Not Awesome.



These types of stories - when one sports celebrity brings down another - are the pearls of what they call journalism/sports reporting today.

Edited by Freddy Linn, 22 January 2008 - 01:40 AM.


#18 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15195 posts

Posted 22 January 2008 - 08:40 AM

I agree. I love reading anecdotes like this because it humanizes the players. Listening to Dan Marino robotically spout cliches every week into a reporter's microphone doesn't really do anything for me.

But whether the story shows the player in good or bad light, that makes the player more human to me. I actually don't think that Marino was being a complete dick in this, BTW. If I was playing golf with a guy and a reporter was buzzing around, I'd be a little pissed too. However, that doesn't mean that I disagree with Posnanski either. It's more on Daly than anything, I guess.

#19 drleather2001


  • given himself a skunk spot


  • 14313 posts

Posted 22 January 2008 - 10:05 AM

I actually don't think that Marino was being a complete dick in this, BTW. If I was playing golf with a guy and a reporter was buzzing around, I'd be a little pissed too. However, that doesn't mean that I disagree with Posnanski either. It's more on Daly than anything, I guess.



Maybe, but I think the fact that Marino was so tactless ("Hey, I paid a huge sum, one that you could never afford doing the job you're trying to do right now, to play with this guy. Fuck off.") speaks to his character more than the fact that he was irritated. If he had a problem with it, he should have taken it up with Daly, as Joe was Daly's guest.

Edited by drleather2001, 22 January 2008 - 10:06 AM.


#20 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15195 posts

Posted 22 January 2008 - 11:33 AM

Leather, I completely agree with you and I wasn't trying to take Marino off the hook, but I'm thinking that Daly and Posnanski were talking/conducting the interview as the other three guys in the foursome were hitting their shots. That was probably annoying and if that was what Marino was talking about, then I agree with him ... there is a time and a place for interviews.

However, if Marino was bitching just to be a bitch then all bets are off.

#21 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 22 January 2008 - 05:38 PM

I read Posnanski daily and his dry wit really is the best. From today Joe talks about going to the St. Louis Baseball Writers’ Dinner and guess who was there?

"Bud Selig didn’t really say anything especially newsworthy other than, not sure if you know this, baseball is really popular right now. The most newsworthy Bud moment happened when Mike Shannon said that, like Harry Truman, Bud would not be appreciated until after he retired. In fact, he would be remembered as the greatest commissioner in baseball, maybe the greatest commissioner ever in sports. Without commenting on that, I will say Bud somehow managed to get out of snow-and-misery covered Wisconsin to attend the banquet, so good on him."

#22 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15195 posts

Posted 23 January 2008 - 08:46 AM

I thought that it was interesting that Ozzie Smith and Tony LaRusa were there. I asked him about it in the comments section (also, I asked about Marino).

#23 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 24 January 2008 - 12:21 AM

Did you see today's hysterical column where Joe writes a news story as through the Royal got Santana? Go here

Some of the funniest parts --

"Over the last few weeks, several teams — in particular the New York Yankees, Mets and Boston Red Sox — have been rumored to be close to acquiring Santana, so it would be quite a coup for the “small-market” Royals to beat them to the bunch. As one scout who would prefer to remain anonymous said on Tuesday when first told about this potential Santana-to-the-Royals trade, 'Are you drinking and taking medication at the same time?'" "Santana would be a very likely candidate to break a few somewhat disheartening trends for Royals starters:

1. The Royals have not had an 18-game winner in 15 years. Santana has won more than 18 twice.
2. The Royals have not had a pitcher strike out 160 batters in a season since 1997. Santana has struck out more than 200 batters each of the last four seasons.
3. He would not suck, as many Royals starters have over the last decade-plus.

Commissioner Bud Selig was not available for comment about this potential trade, but two days earlier, when speaking to the St. Louis Baseball Writers Dinner, he did say that competitive balance in baseball was at an all-time high and that he expected the game to only get more balanced. This would prove that point, wouldn’t it? Selig also announced publicly, without any prodding at all, that baseball is popular."

#24 JodyReedFan

  • 320 posts

Posted 24 January 2008 - 11:40 AM

Did you see today's hysterical column where Joe writes a news story as through the Royal got Santana? Go here

Some of the funniest parts --

"Over the last few weeks, several teams — in particular the New York Yankees, Mets and Boston Red Sox — have been rumored to be close to acquiring Santana, so it would be quite a coup for the “small-market” Royals to beat them to the bunch. As one scout who would prefer to remain anonymous said on Tuesday when first told about this potential Santana-to-the-Royals trade, 'Are you drinking and taking medication at the same time?'" "Santana would be a very likely candidate to break a few somewhat disheartening trends for Royals starters:

1. The Royals have not had an 18-game winner in 15 years. Santana has won more than 18 twice.
2. The Royals have not had a pitcher strike out 160 batters in a season since 1997. Santana has struck out more than 200 batters each of the last four seasons.
3. He would not suck, as many Royals starters have over the last decade-plus.

Commissioner Bud Selig was not available for comment about this potential trade, but two days earlier, when speaking to the St. Louis Baseball Writers Dinner, he did say that competitive balance in baseball was at an all-time high and that he expected the game to only get more balanced. This would prove that point, wouldn’t it? Selig also announced publicly, without any prodding at all, that baseball is popular."



I just recently discovered this guys blog. It's fantastic. He's got a style of writing that's hard to find these days! Great stuff.

#25 Hildy

  • 1583 posts

Posted 24 January 2008 - 12:37 PM

This blog has become my morning fix--terrific writing, and the ability to pique my curiousity about Skyline Chili.

#26 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 24 January 2008 - 02:34 PM

This blog has become my morning fix--terrific writing, and the ability to pique my curiousity about Skyline Chili.


Hildy, I hail from Cincy, home of Skyline Chili. It's not like your Texas variety which is hot, hotter and hottest, but spicy seasoned beef with spaghetti, beans, cardomon and cinnamon! The city loves it and along with White Castles, another Cincy fixture, makes for real chili pride.

#27 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 04 February 2008 - 10:47 AM

Faulkner might say today we lay dying, but Posanski has a typical gem at the end of his SB post today -- here


"One more tidbit from this Super Bowl — you'll love this. A few minutes after the game ended, I got an email from a public relations firm. The headline was: "Patriots' loss is win for children and families in need."

You may ask: How could that be? Well, it turns out that some place called World Visions has received hundreds and hundreds of Patriots T-shirts, hats and stuff and they are sending those to families in need in Nicaragua, Romania and several other countries. This is a very kind thing to do, and I am not in any way shape or form trying to mock this charitable effort. But I have to say, I cannot help but smile thinking that there will be kids in Nicaragua walking around with "World Champion Patriots" T-shirts. It just seems right."


And then there are those Nascar guys with the advertisements all over their uniforms that showed up, just when I was thinking we were getting a litle less crass commercialism than usual in the SB ads.

#28 MannysDestination


  • is not a republican


  • 11062 posts

Posted 12 March 2008 - 11:48 AM

Joe is really unbelievably good. A true oasis in the desert that is sports writing these days.

While credit goes to Neyer for introducing me to him, the following entries should be required reading for any/all baseball fans. He's really on a roll lately:

http://joeposnanski....0/stats-i-like/

http://joeposnanski....-and-true-wins/

http://joeposnanski....a-poetry-break/

(Ok, that last one isn't necessarily "required reading", but anyone who rails Drew Berrymore for any amount of time gets a big thumbs up in my book)

Anyone who follows the Royals passionately is clearly a baseball superfan. He really loves the game and it shows. Anyone who follows the Royals passionately is also clearly a cynic and masochist, with a little bit of undying hope sprinkled in.

#29 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 29 April 2008 - 04:32 PM

Joe is really unbelievably good. A true oasis in the desert that is sports writing these days....

Check out yesterday's post. No one like Joe can sock it to you. Look how brilliantly he deals with Pete Rose,Bruce Springsteen, the Cincy Reds and aging in his April 28th post here

A snippet:


Rose had that tiddlywinks intensity — no matter how much you wanted to win, he wanted to win more. If he was 4 for 4, and the score was 11-2, and the crowd had already filed to the exits, and the other regulars were out of the game, and even the umpires just wanted to go home, Pete Rose damn well wanted ONE MORE HIT, and he didn't just want that hit, he wanted it with the sort of white hot ravenousness few people ever feel for ANYTHING. Remember when the Terminator wanted to kill so badly that after he was blown up in to a liquid droplets, those droplets came back together? Yeah, that's how much Rose wanted the next hit.

....Motivation is a tricky thing. I asked Pete Rose why he played so hard for so long, and he said that came from his father who had told him that the way to win a fight is to hit first. Maybe that makes sense to you. Maybe it doesn't. I thought about Rose and how much baseball mattered to him as I listened to Springsteen wail those familiar words for the 10,000th time in his life — runaway American dream, stepping out over the line, guide your dreams and visions, strap your hands 'cross my engines, baby, I'm just a scared and lonely rider, I want to know if love is real. I can't say he sang it like it was the first time, but he sang it like he meant it, he still hit first, and I just think there's something inspiring about that.



#30 Guinevere

  • 508 posts

Posted 20 May 2008 - 07:58 AM

He was actually in Boston last night for Lester's no-no. His regular column has a terrific take:

Joe Knows

From there — from a fight for his life — to here, Monday, raw night, packed stadium, harsh wind, everyone's hearts in their throats. He threw 130 pitches, the last his fastest of the night, maybe the fastest of his life, a 96-mph fastball, high and away and rising. Kansas City's Alberto Callaspo waved the bat helplessly.

That's when the loudest sound that 37,000 or so people can make detonated, a World Series-clinching sound, a Secretariat thundering down the stretch sound, a birdie putt to win the Masters sound. Catcher Jason Varitek charged the mound to jump on Lester. Red Sox players rushed in from all directions. Fans all over the park unfolded their cell phones and called someone — anyone — to say they were here. They are still here. Outside the losing clubhouse, a half hour after the last pitch, they're still talking into cell phones, still hugging and laughing and asking each other, "Can you believe it?"

Inside here, the Royals' clubhouse, it is quieter than a bank vault.



ETA:

And now his blog is up, discussing yesterday. Again, He Gets it Right

Edited by Guinevere, 20 May 2008 - 08:17 AM.


#31 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 20 May 2008 - 08:21 AM

He was actually in Boston last night for Lester's no-no. His regular column has a terrific take:

Joe Knows


His blog today does have some amazing writing, as always. Some of my fav parts:

Monday night, at Fenway Park, it seemed to me from the first pitch that something amazing was going to happen. I chalked that up at first to the aura of Fenway — I'm as susceptible to it as anyone. Before the game, I sat in the dugout with Brian Bannister, and we talkcaled about how soon the new/old Yankee Stadium would be gone, and this would be the last place left in the American League, the last old ballpark, the last real connection to Gehrig and Ruth and the Big Train and DiMaggio and Williams and Feller and Doby, the last connection to black and white moments, to Mel Parnell, to Bucky Dent, to Fisk waving it fair, to Perez' seeing the slow curveball, to Gods dont' answer letters.

So few words for so many memories--


The wind was cold and it was whipping, the fans were on their feet, Callapso swung and missed pitch 127, a high fastball. The next pitch was up in Callaspo's eyes — and he still had enough sense of himself to lay off. The next pitch, another fastball, bore inside, and once again Callaspo fought it off, once again his hands had to hurt. If you looked around Fenway you mostly saw black — people were all bundled up in their winter coats — and the sound was like a wailing, like the wind blowing through your garage, and then Jon Lester reared back and threw the most unhittable pitch of an unhittable night, a 96-mph fastball, high and away, rising, Callaspo swung, missed by two feet, and the no-hitter was done. Then there were celebrations and moping, hugs and cell phone calls...

And as I left Fenway Park, I thought again about that feeling I had, that feeling you get sometimes as a sports fan, that feeling that "Hey, I'm going to see something unfortgettable." Truth is, most of the time, the feeling dies inside you because unforgettable things don't happen very often. Here's the great thing, though. Sometimes, they do.


Edited by Redkluzu, 20 May 2008 - 08:21 AM.


#32 InsideTheParker


  • SoSH Member


  • 10920 posts

Posted 20 May 2008 - 08:31 AM

He seems to count Pedro's "no-hitter."

There have been 214 no-hitters thrown in the major leagues since 1900, just about two per season. They have been thrown by the greatest names and nicknames in the history of this great game — Hubbell, Noodles, Big Train, Feller, Koufax, Seaver, Ryan, Unit, Pedro. They have been thrown by names lost to history — Koob, Shoun, Kralick, Halicki, Bosio.


Kansas City Star 5/20/08

#33 Guinevere

  • 508 posts

Posted 20 May 2008 - 08:48 AM

I noticed that as well. Under the '91 rule change, it couldn't be counted because he gave up a hit in the 10th. "An official no-hit game occurs when a pitcher (or pitchers) allows no hits during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings."

Edited by Guinevere, 20 May 2008 - 08:50 AM.


#34 cannonball 1729

  • 1945 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 08:29 PM

I don't know how no one has mentioned this entry yet; Joe details exactly why it is that Derek Jeter annoys non-Yankee fans so much:

http://joeposnanski....-i-do/#comments

Edited by cannonball 1729, 24 May 2008 - 08:30 PM.


#35 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 07 August 2008 - 08:37 AM

IMO, this is a pretty fascinating look from Joe about how Albert Pujols is underrated by GMs. In a discussion of Heyman's SI article, players to build your team around from the GM perspective, he makes his case. This was, of course, before Joba's injury etc etc. First he gives us the rankings (this has probably been posted elsewhere but I thought I'd include it for a refresher):

As you might guess, I love polls like this — not only because they can give you a good idea of who, in the truest sense of the word, are the most valuable players in baseball but they also because they give you a good idea of the baseball mindset of 20 general managers...




Here, to start, are the Top 10 players, with first-place votes in parentheses, just like they do it for The AP college football poll

1. Hanley Ramirez (5), 40 points.
2. Alex Rodriguez (3), 29 points.
3. Chase Utley (1), 27 points.
4. Felix Hernandez (3), 23 points.
5. Joe Mauer (3), 9 points.
6. Grady Sizemore (1), 18 points.
7. Josh Beckett (1), 15 points.
8. Albert Pujols (1), 11 points.
9. Evan Longoria, 10 points.
(tie) Joba Chamberlain, 10 points.
(tie) Johan Santana, 10 points.
(tie) Edinson Volquez, 10 points.

Then he makes his case about Pujols being better than ARod this year.


Alex Rodriguez: .307/.390/.579 for his career. Best season was probably 2007 when he went .314/.422/.645 with 54 homers and 24 SBs. He probably had four other seasons that roughly compare, and is having a terrific year this year.



Albert Pujols: .333/.423/.619 for his career. Best seasons was probably 2003, when he went .359/.439/.667 with 51 doubles and 43 homers. He probably had five other seasons that roughly compare, and he is having a terrific year this year.

He goes on to say he doesn't get why GMs wouldn't see this and put Pujols in their top 5 since he considers him "the player of this generation":

Pujols has had a better-than-150 OPS+ EVERY SINGLE YEAR OF HIS EIGHT-YEAR CAREER. Babe Ruth didn't do that his first eight years as a hitter. Barry Bonds didn't do that. Joe DiMaggio didn't, Willie Mays didn't, Hank Aaron didn't, Honus Wagner didn't and so on.

Beyond that, if you are into such things, there are those ill-defined qualities that baseball men love to talk about. A-Rod, by the account of many around him, is a pain in the neck....

Two more Pujols things. One, I remember a Cardinals fan once sending me a list — I wish I could find that — where he charted Albert Pujols for 30 days and tried to determine how many winning plays he makes. These were relatively objective things — going first to third on a single, scoring from second on a single, a stolen base, making a great defensive play like taking out the lead runner on a bunt or stealing a double, hitting a sacrifice fly, having a ferocious eight or nine pitch at-bat, and of course the obvious stuff, the doubles, the home runs and all that good stuff. He said that he tried to be a very tough grader and he still found that of the 30 games he charted, Pujols made two or more winning plays in 28 of them. He made at least one winning play in 29. He made a total of 75 winning plays, if I remember right. I don't have anything to compare that to, but I remain in awe.

Thoughts?

Edited by Redkluzu, 07 August 2008 - 08:39 AM.


#36 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10114 posts

Posted 07 August 2008 - 09:11 AM

Well, other than ARod, who has been called the best player in baseball rightly or wrongly forever, all the players listed above Pujols are up the middle players, so I'm not sure I'm that surprised.

The one thing I am surprised at is Hanley, since he can't play shortstop...the annoying things about these polls is that we don't get much analysis of them from the people that vote...I would love to hear if they are just picking Hanley, or if they are picking him with the knowledge that eventually he's going to have to move, or his value is mitigated.

For the record, I would probably take Longoria, with Pujols second.

#37 Nator

  • 1306 posts

Posted 07 August 2008 - 09:11 AM

IMO, this is a pretty fascinating look from Joe about how Albert Pujols is underrated by GMs. In a discussion of Heyman's SI article, players to build your team around from the GM perspective, he makes his case. This was, of course, before Joba's injury etc etc. First he gives us the rankings (this has probably been posted elsewhere but I thought I'd include it for a refresher):
Then he makes his case about Pujols being better than ARod this year.
He goes on to say he doesn't get why GMs wouldn't see this and put Pujols in their top 5 since he considers him "the player of this generation":

Thoughts?



That's obviously an incomplete analysis, as it doesn't take into account his intangibles. :rolling:

#38 maufman


  • SoSH Member


  • 12237 posts

Posted 07 August 2008 - 09:19 AM

IMO, this is a pretty fascinating look from Joe about how Albert Pujols is underrated by GMs. In a discussion of Heyman's SI article, players to build your team around from the GM perspective, he makes his case. This was, of course, before Joba's injury etc etc. First he gives us the rankings (this has probably been posted elsewhere but I thought I'd include it for a refresher):
Then he makes his case about Pujols being better than ARod this year.

He goes on to say he doesn't get why GMs wouldn't see this and put Pujols in their top 5 since he considers him "the player of this generation":

Thoughts?


First, let me wash Posnanski's balls a little. My friend in KC introduced me to him a few years ago. He's a great baseball writer-- probably the best among those who still write for traditional media outlets (i.e., newspapers and magazines). The Soul of Baseball, which is the story of Posnanski's travels with Buck O'Neil during (what turned out to be) the final year of O'Neil's life, is imo the best book written about baseball since Ball Four.

As for Pujols, Joe is 100% right. He's widely regarded, by scouts and statheads alike, as the best defensive first baseman in the game. In this decade, he's obviously the best hitter not named Barry Bonds-- A-Rod has only two seasons where he equalled or surpassed Pujols's career OPS+. And unlike A-Rod, no one has said a cross word about Pujols's off-field demeanor. And Pujols is only 28 years old. The only plausible reason for the results of the GM poll is that most of them think Pujols's lingering elbow issues will eventually result in a catastrophic injury, from which he won't recover fully. I hope they're wrong.

Edited by maufman, 07 August 2008 - 09:21 AM.


#39 Euclis20

  • 2491 posts

Posted 07 August 2008 - 10:05 AM

The Soul of Baseball, which is the story of Posnanski's travels with Buck O'Neil during (what turned out to be) the final year of O'Neil's life, is imo the best book written about baseball since Ball Four.


I ordered it from Amazon a few weeks ago (haven't read it yet, I'm a couple books behind) after seeing the current price:

http://www.amazon.co...NCM/ref=ed_oe_h

#40 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 07 August 2008 - 10:13 AM

I ordered it from Amazon a few weeks ago (haven't read it yet, I'm a couple books behind) after seeing the current price:

http://www.amazon.co...NCM/ref=ed_oe_h


As a writer, I can tell you -- grab this book now if you want it. It's being "remaindered" most likely, but once Amazon dumps a bunch of the books, the price may go back to the original. It's happened to me.


Uri -- Remy would probably agree with you since I notice he's been singing Langoria's praises a lot

Edited by Redkluzu, 07 August 2008 - 10:13 AM.


#41 Mad Johnny

  • 203 posts

Posted 08 August 2008 - 04:32 PM

From what I've seen, Longoria is going to a be a special player. However, it's important to note that Pujols already is one while Longoria is still a rookie (a fuckin good one to be sure). It's a shame he doesn't get the praise he deserves enough because he doesn't play for the Red Sox or the MFY. I love Youk, but really, Pujols is lightyears better than him in every conceivable way.

EDIT: Joe Posnanski fuckin kicks ass.

Edited by Mad Johnny, 08 August 2008 - 04:38 PM.


#42 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10114 posts

Posted 08 August 2008 - 04:48 PM

From what I've seen, Longoria is going to a be a special player. However, it's important to note that Pujols already is one while Longoria is still a rookie (a fuckin good one to be sure). It's a shame he doesn't get the praise he deserves enough because he doesn't play for the Red Sox or the MFY. I love Youk, but really, Pujols is lightyears better than him in every conceivable way.


Talk about an understatement...

Anyway, I would pick Longoria because of contract/age reasons...not because Poo Holes isn't a better player right now.

#43 PC Drunken Friar

  • 3523 posts

Posted 19 August 2008 - 06:24 AM

http://joeposnanski....-big-blog-news/

Congrats to Joe, S|I.com will be reprinting his blog and he gets a once a week column on si.com.


he deserves it.

#44 Rudi Fingers

  • 1160 posts

Posted 19 August 2008 - 08:12 AM

http://joeposnanski....-big-blog-news/

Congrats to Joe, S|I.com will be reprinting his blog and he gets a once a week column on si.com.
he deserves it.


Absolutely deserved. I am halfway through reading Posnanski's The Soul of Baseball - let me add to the chorus telling you it's an absolute must buy at $5.98 for the hardcover at the link Euclis20 posted above.

#45 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15195 posts

Posted 19 August 2008 - 08:34 AM

I had a feeling he was going to SI. Good for him.

#46 Mad Johnny

  • 203 posts

Posted 19 August 2008 - 10:12 AM

This is great news for SI, and Joe Pos.

#47 johnmd20


  • voice of soccer


  • 16451 posts

Posted 19 August 2008 - 10:40 AM

I had a feeling he was going to SI. Good for him.

Absolutely good for him. His blog is fantastic, informative, and hilarious.

#48 pedros hairstylist


  • Allison?


  • PipPipPip
  • 5577 posts

Posted 19 August 2008 - 12:37 PM

This guy's actually too good to be just a newspaper sportswriter so good for him. Actually, I hope he gets enough financial security from this that he can find time to do more books...am pretty sure he's got a few good ones in him.

#49 Redkluzu


  • tortures mice


  • 1625 posts

Posted 19 August 2008 - 05:09 PM

Truly one of the great sports writers today IMO. Thrilled for Joe for his new Wednesday gig and glad his blog will stay as is, a part of Kansas City's soul.

Here's what I loved from today. As a writer, I think his passion, use of language, ability to pull as along is just what he admired in Deford:

Anyway, I was reading a story Deford wrote for Sports Illustrated called "The Boxer and the Blonde," about the boxer Billy Conn. I did not know then that the story is considered one of the greatest magazine stories ever written. I did not know that Deford was viewed by many as the greatest living sportswriter. I did not know anything at all. I started reading the story, and I was mesmerized. I mean Billy Conn's story was good, really good, but what mesmerized me was the way Deford used the words. I was not exactly a voracious reader growing up — I pretty much only read sports books by Alfred Slote — so I probably never had quite the feeling I was having, this feeling of, "How does the guy do that? How does he get me to read this sentence fast and this sentence slow? How does he move me from one paragraph to the next until I lose time? How does he have me caring SO much when I know what's going to happen, when I know that Joe Louis will knock out Billy Conn*?



#50 brs3


  • sings praises of pinstripes


  • 3565 posts

Posted 05 September 2008 - 11:48 AM

Today's entry

One more Jeter thought. When I talked with Pete Rose (Did I mention I’m writing a book about the 1975 Reds … come on, you knew I couldn’t make it through a sprawling blog post like this without mentioning it), I asked him if he thought Jeter had any chance to catch him on the hit list.

I wish I’d had a camera at that moment because the look of pure disgust on Pete’s face was beyond priceless, it was worth more words than every blog post I’ve ever written. He said, “Come on.”

I said, “Well, he has about as many hits as you had at his age.” And if anything Pete’s look became MORE disgusted, and he smirked and he said what might be my favorite quote of the year, and one that (sadly) I probably won’t be able to get into the book so I give it to you now:

He said: “You tell Derek that the first 3,000 are easy.”


Good blog today, hits on all sorts of random stuff!



Reply to this topic



  


1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users