Bill Simmons: Good Luck With Your Life.

[bbc23]

Doesn't Magic suck anyways? I've never watched the NBA stuff they do but I seem to recall many people essentially calling him a blabbering mess that made little to no sense, consistent with his work as a color guy way back when at NBC.

Magic did suck, and since he is one of the greatest players to live, all the other analysts there felt the need to suck up to all the nonsense he spouted (see Wilbon calling him Earvin).  Simmons has also denied the report in a tweet, though I would love the show to be more focused on him and Jalen.  

 

[Bergs]

Magic did suck, and since he is one of the greatest players to live, all the other analysts there felt the need to suck up to all the nonsense he spouted (see Wilbon calling him Earvin).  Simmons has also denied the report in a tweet, though I would love the show to be more focused on him and Jalen.  

 
This.
 
I've had a passionate dislike for Magic's studio work since he started*. I have nothing against Wilbon, but Simmons and Rose work really well together, so anyone who tries to shout over that dynamic (say, Wilbon) is hurting the show.
 
*In fairness, I've had a passionate dislike for him since 1984 or so...

 

[The Social Chair]

I don't know what his contract is like with TNT, but I'd love to see ESPN hire Chris Webber to replace Magic. His history with Jalen would make that pairing even more interesting.

 

[Morning Woodhead]

Who knows what is really going on, but on his podcast, Simmons goes out of his way to praise Magic. Seems to genuinely like the guy.

For espn, this is a plus. Just let Rose and Simmons do the show.

 

[JBill]

Magic leaving is addition by subtraction, in my opinion.

Here is a report with all the parties denying Simmons had anything to do with it, worth it for this quote alone.

"Magic and Bill Simmons got to be very close and continue to be close," Rosen told USA TODAY Sports. "Bill Simmons and Earvin Johnson are friends. Earvin's close to Bill. We called Bill before the release went out. Bill has been to parties at Earvin's house. He's been to Dodgers game with Bill. He likes Bill a lot."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2013/10/10/magic-johnson-espn-leaving/2960031/

 

[DLew On Roids]

I only hope this brings us closer to my dream of a regular Campaigning and Champagning segment on NBA Countdown.

 

[dirtynine]

If it was a power struggle, who was ostensibly fighting for Magic?  The ESPN establishment?

 

[PC Drunken Friar]

Wow, what a career BS has had.  He really is living out his childhood dream.  Good for him.

 

[Merkle's Boner]

Wow, what a career BS has had.  He really is living out his childhood dream.  Good for him.

It really is remarkable. For those of us who we're reading him in the early days, to think he could be referred to as the "shadow president" of fuckin ESPN is amazing.

 

[TheGazelle]

Yeah, the Magic/Simmons thing seems strange.  Simmons frequently praises Magic in his podcasts, and has hinted at going to games with him, and so forth.  I wonder how much of this comes from Deadspin wanting to take more shots at Simmons.  That seems to be a side project for the site (of course, Simmons frequently opens himself up to those attacks). 

 

[Number45forever]

Simmons also tweeted that Magic will be on the podcast next week.  I don't get the impression that these two would ever have a power struggle.  Isn't really just as simple as Magic has a million other things going on with his business ventures, the Dodgers, etc.  The ESPN show take a ton of time for these guys over the course of the basketball season.

 

[Orel Miraculous]

Apparently the reason Bill Simmons hasn't written about baseball in 5 years isn't because he's lost interest the game and doesn't understand it anymore, it's because he cares too much about the Red Sox!
 

I am desperately trying to obey all jinxing rules and stick to my self-imposed "Don't jinx the 2013 Red Sox season by writing about them" rule. Last night made it really, really hard. Really hard. Really, really hard. So please, don't consider this an actual column about the 2013 Boston Red Sox. All jinxing strategies remain intact.

 
This man once published a book about the Red Sox.  A book that was a compilation of all the stuff he had already written about the Red Sox as they were on their way to winning the World Series for the first time in 86 years.  But he can't do that anymore because...it's a jinx, I guess. 
 
I've spent a good deal of time in this forum defending this man.  While I do think he often gets unfairly maligned, there is no question that he can be a clown.

 

[JohntheBaptist]

I am desperately trying to obey all jinxing rules and stick to my self-imposed "Don't jinx the 2013 Red Sox season by writing about them" rule. Last night made it really, really hard. Really hard. Really, really hard. So please, don't consider this an actual column about the 2013 Boston Red Sox. All jinxing strategies remain intact.
 

 
This is some weeeeeeaaaak-assed shit.
 
And sorry, nope.  Jinxing strategy clearly fucked up.  We're going to lose now and it is all Bill Simmons fault.

 

[JohntheBaptist]

He doesn't even have enough of a spine to say he'd bailed on them and came back?  He has to create some lie that'd make an 11 year old redfaced to tell so it seems like he cares and can fully own it if they win.
 
He deserves shit for this.

 

[DJnVa]

Not only will he fully own it, he'll pepper the season post-mortem article with lines like "I had a feeling that Lackey would bounce back" and "I could tell early on that Gomes would be important because X".

 

[Leather]

Lots of hand pounds and dances in this team.

 

[m0ckduck]

It really is remarkable. For those of us who we're reading him in the early days, to think he could be referred to as the "shadow president" of fuckin ESPN is amazing.

 
I vaguely remember a column written towards the end of his pre-ESPN era where he went to visit ESPN HQ in Bristol by virtue of his friendship with somebody who works there (thinking about this now, I guess this must be occasional BS Report guest 'Gus') and basically came across as breathlessly amazed and wide-eyed about the whole thing. Truly shocking, as you say, that he eventually scaled to the top of the ladder. 
 

Apparently the reason Bill Simmons hasn't written about baseball in 5 years isn't because he's lost interest the game and doesn't understand it anymore, it's because he cares too much about the Red Sox!

 
I'm sure it's already been maligned to death in this thread, but I had the misfortune to listen to the podcast with his dad where he forgot there are two wild-card teams and treated his father's reference to a WC play-in game as some sort of quixotic, Nostradamus-like vision of a 162-game tie. I generally stick up for Simmons, but that was sad.
 
In general, I concede that his issues with covering baseball are largely factual, but I also think that his emotional connection with the team and the Henry ownership group has been askew since '04 and that this has contributed to the disconnect. Through '04, he may have lacked some analytical rigor, but he was able to speak to the frustrations of being a Sox fan that made him a perfect spokesman in most respects. Since '04, he's seemed to pinball back and forth between full-throated enthusiasm when things are going well (I recall his 'everything is great!' mid-season column about the 2011 Sox here) and knee-jerk, old-grumpy-guy-in-Dunkin-Donuts-style reactionary carping at the eggheads running the team when they are not going well. I can't even count the number of times I heard something like, "I've got an idea... how about resigning [fill in the blank player] since he proved he can play here-- is it really so complicated?' in his podcasts with Jack-O that I once used to love and now can't listen to a single second of. I'm also thinking of his insistent sailing-into-the-wind-of-factual-evidence pining away for Orlando Cabrera and near-instantaneous mindless defense of Manny Ramirez after the trade (still the worst thing he's written, in my opinion).
 
Whatever-- love him for other stuff but, yes, he should stop covering baseball. 

 

[Ralphwiggum]

Well, he basically has stopped covering baseball, at least as a writer (I don't listen to the podcasts).  I mean, he's almost exclusively a basketball guy now who also writes an NFL picks column (which can be funny but no serious gambler would consider him a good source) and occasionally throws in a mailbag with a bunch of random stuff in it, and that's pretty much it.  The only thing he really covers seriously anymore as a writer is the NBA.  As much as I do miss his take on the Sox (and I largely agree with m0ckduck's take above), this is probably a good thing, and he'd largely get skewered here if he wrote more about baseball.
 
I agree that his excuse for not writing about the Sox is B.S., however. 

 

[ifmanis5]

It's simple, really- Bill only follows the NBA and NFL. Writing about baseball would unmask him and Bill hates criticism. Silly, since he should be writing about it from at least a fan's perspective which he used to do quite well. He just doesn't want Jonah Keri or the SABR guys making fun of him, so he bailed. Thin-skinned Bill for ya.

 

[Orel Miraculous]

And you know what?  It's completely fine that he doesn't care about baseball anymore.  People change and their priorities change with them.  But if you're going to stop caring about it, then (a) don't lie about your reasons, and (b) don't let your own lack of personal interest cloud your professional judgment while you edit a major national sports website!  Grantland does a piss poor job covering baseball.  Jonah Keri is great, but he is literally the only regular baseball writer on the site.  The only other writers on the site who could be classified as "baseball writers" are Michael Baumann, who was only added this season and isn't nearly as prolific as Keri, Jazayerli, who only wrote 10 pieces this season, and Shane Ryan (I guess) who clearly is a fan but doesn't contribute anything other than "The Weekend Baseball Top 10."  Meanwhile, Grantland begins blanketing the site with NBA and NFL coverage months before the seasons begin.

 

[JohntheBaptist]

And you know what?  It's completely fine that he doesn't care about baseball anymore.  People change and their priorities change with them.  But if you're going to stop caring about it, then (a) don't lie about your reasons, and (b) don't let your own lack of personal interest cloud your professional judgment while you edit a major national sports website!  Grantland does a piss poor job covering baseball.  Jonah Keri is great, but he is literally the only regular baseball writer on the site.  The only other writers on the site who could be classified as "baseball writers" are Michael Baumann, who was only added this season and isn't nearly as prolific as Keri, Jazayerli, who only wrote 10 pieces this season, and Shane Ryan (I guess) who clearly is a fan but doesn't contribute anything other than "The Weekend Baseball Top 10."  Meanwhile, Grantland begins blanketing the site with NBA and NFL coverage months before the seasons begin.

 
In fact, it seems to fit into his whole schtick or whatever--"yeah, I've drifted away from the Sox a bit these last few years, but holy crap this team just sucked me right back in!"  Who would have a problem with that?

 

[The Social Chair]

 Meanwhile, Grantland begins blanketing the site with NBA and NFL coverage months before the seasons begin.

 
Do you believe MLB should have the same amount of coverage as the NFL?

 

[AlNipper49]

He has probably cried himself to sleep every night since SJH dared disagree with him (about OC I believe) and he left in a huff.

 

[Seabass]

He has probably cried himself to sleep every night since SJH dared disagree with him (about OC I believe) and he left in a huff.

 
To be fair, season four really blossomed after they killed off Marissa Cooper.

 

[URI]

He has probably cried himself to sleep every night since SJH dared disagree with him (about OC I believe) and he left in a huff.

 
It was Renteria.  Which is funnier.

 

[Dogman]

And SJH, which is I don't know what.

 

[soxfan121]

Richard Deitsch of SI.com with an interview with Bill Simmons on the departure of Magic Johnson. 
 

SI.com: Deadspin reported last Thursday, via unnamed sources, that you were responsible for Magic Johnson being removed from Countdown. What is your response to that assertion?
Simmons: Those unnamed "sources" are liars. Someone planted a fake story to try to make me look bad, and there's a 99.3 percent chance it came from someone in Bristol (which presents its own set of concerns). I was upset; I can't lie. Maybe this happens to people more often than I realize, and maybe it comes with the territory, but man ... I can't properly explain how fantastic it was to watch basketball with Magic for nine months. I brought my dad to our show for the whole day once and he absolutely loved it. He just couldn't believe they paid me to watch hoops with Magic.
 

Much more at the link for everyone interested in shitting on Simmons.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

He has probably cried himself to sleep every night since SJH dared disagree with him (about OC I believe) and he left in a huff.

 
I don't think i ever got to read that thread.
 
Is it still alive anywhere?

 

[ifmanis5]

Would it kill Billy Boy to write something about this World Series?

 

[Dummy Hoy]

Why would you want his opinion on it? 

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Do you really want him to though? He hasn't really written about baseball in, what, five years? What's he going to say? He'll end up pissing off more people who think he's a bandwagon jumper and he won't have anything interesting to say, though I'm sure he'll talk about his family and how the Series is affecting him. And you're going to get his perspective on Friday when he writes a disjointed mailbag about the 2013 postseason.
 
This isn't 2001 or 2002 anymore. He's got a whole stable full of capable baseball writers, I'd rather read them.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Simmons never really knew much about baseball, though.  He was a passionate fan who wrote about the thrills and pains of being a pre-04 Sox fan and did so with more authenticity and emotion than most.  But let's face it---baseball writing on the internet has come a long way in the last dozen or so years, and he's no better equipped to write a serious baseball column today than T&R are to do a sabermetric interview.  Being good (overall) does not mean you are good at everything.   I'm glad he sticks to the NBA, because he actually is one of the more entertaining and knowlegeable NBA writers out there; better he focus on where his knowledge lies.
 
On Renteria, wasn't Simmons basically right in the end?  

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

On Renteria, wasn't Simmons basically right in the end?
 

 
Sorta. But his rationale was, and this was his quote, "When the Red Sox played St. Louis (in 2004), he wasn't afraid of Renteria." (emphasis mine) I mean, that's a pretty dumb way of determining whether someone is worth a long-term deal. Renteria had a bad year in Boston, the Sox got rid of him and he went on to do well elsewhere. By this logic, in 2010 Renteria batted .412/.444/.765 with a couple of dingers and I'm sure Rangers fans were "afraid" of him coming up, does that mean that he should have received a five-year deal after the season ended?
 
The World Series is a classic example of a SSS and using it to determine who you should sign in the offseason is foolish.
 
And BTW, Renteria batted .333/.412/.533 with a homer in the 04 Series, he wasn't a slouch.

 

[Shelterdog]

 
Sorta. But his rationale was, and this was his quote, "When the Red Sox played St. Louis (in 2004), he wasn't afraid of Renteria." (emphasis mine) I mean, that's a pretty dumb way of determining whether someone is worth a long-term deal. Renteria had a bad year in Boston, the Sox got rid of him and he went on to do well elsewhere. By this logic, in 2010 Renteria batted .412/.444/.765 with a couple of dingers and I'm sure Rangers fans were "afraid" of him coming up, does that mean that he should have received a five-year deal after the season ended?
 
The World Series is a classic example of a SSS and using it to determine who you should sign in the offseason is foolish.
 
And BTW, Renteria batted .333/.412/.533 with a homer in the 04 Series, he wasn't a slouch.

 
To pile on Simmons a little more, whether Simmons is "afraid" of a player isn't a particularly useful metric, particularly if he's not following the sport: it ends up being a mixture of how big a player's name is, body language, and whether the player had a hit in the six at bats Simmons watched. I listened yesterday and he was explaining how Holliday is the only Cardinal he's afraid of.  Well whether you're afraid of Carpenter and Beltran and Molina and Craig or not, those are four really good hitters who can hurt you plenty. 

 

[NatetheGreat]

Honestly, I'd much rather have Simmons do stuff like his NBA Previews with Jalen, which are fucking fantastically entertaining and frequently insightful, than focus on baseball where he really doesn't have much to offer at this point. I'm sure if the Sox win, he'll do one column about how much he "loves" the team and how awesome Papi is or whatever, and then it'll be nothing but NBA and terrible NFL picks columns for a while. I'm ok with that. I think that as a rule Simmons these days is at his best when he plays to his strengths (finding and hiring really good talent for his various projects like Grantland and 30 for 30, establishing a really good, fun  rapport with whatever celebs and sports figures are on his podcasts and videos, and writing and talking about the NBA) than when he tries to pretend he's somehow the same dude from Boston he was 15 years ago.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

 
Sorta. But his rationale was, and this was his quote, "When the Red Sox played St. Louis (in 2004), he wasn't afraid of Renteria." (emphasis mine) I mean, that's a pretty dumb way of determining whether someone is worth a long-term deal. Renteria had a bad year in Boston, the Sox got rid of him and he went on to do well elsewhere. By this logic, in 2010 Renteria batted .412/.444/.765 with a couple of dingers and I'm sure Rangers fans were "afraid" of him coming up, does that mean that he should have received a five-year deal after the season ended?
 
The World Series is a classic example of a SSS and using it to determine who you should sign in the offseason is foolish.
 
And BTW, Renteria batted .333/.412/.533 with a homer in the 04 Series, he wasn't a slouch.

 
Right---was not suggesting Simmons got there the right way only that in this particular case his assessment actually did capture a part of what made Renteria fail here (Simmons talked a lot about Renteria's makeup, too).   More often than not, I believe Simmons' emotionalizing players leads to bad analysis; Renteria is the outlier where that factor was underemphasized by many of us here (certainly including myself at the time).

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

As this point, with many of you Simmons is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. He's clearly moved on as a writer/entertainer/person since 2004, but although he's clearly morphed into someone he never thought he'd become back in his Digital City days, he deserves credit for growth - if not as a writer, where a lot of his shtick hasn't moved on, then certainly as a broader communicator (30 for 30, Grantland, etc.). I'd rather applaud him for making that transition than getting mad at him for not being the same guy he was back in 2004...and because of that, I'd rather *not* read what he has to say about baseball this time around, insofar as he clearly has nothing new to say about it.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Right---was not suggesting Simmons got there the right way only that in this particular case his assessment actually did capture a part of what made Renteria fail here (Simmons talked a lot about Renteria's makeup, too).
 

 
I'm not trying to pick nits with you here, because I think that we're on the same side, but I don't remember him talking about Renteria's makeup too much. Or if he did it was through the prism of Bill Simmons.
 
Anyway, I was looking at Renteria's only season and it wasn't as bad as I remember, at least hitting-wise. He hit .276/.335/.385 with 175 hits, eight homers, 70 runs driven in and was paid $8M (which is a lot lower than I thought). His career average was .286/.343/.398 and the year before he hit .287/.327/.401, so he was well within his career and previous-year norms. The one thing that killed him was his defense where he made 30 (official) errors at shortstop.
 
So errors aside (and I know that's a big caveat) but perhaps Renteria wasn't to blame, but the fans and their expectations were.

 

[dirtynine]

I hope Simmons limits his commentary on the 2013 Red Sox to what it has been thus far:  inane "asddzzzkzjjijdijfdfdf!!!!1!!!" tweets. 

 

[ifmanis5]

Yeah, I'd like something. If even just from a fan's perspective, which is all he ever really was anyway, I'd like to read it. Even if it's just personal anecdotes, or big picture musing, the guy's an entertaining read when he puts away his tired-ass Teen Wolf crutches.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

 
I'm not trying to pick nits with you here, because I think that we're on the same side, but I don't remember him talking about Renteria's makeup too much. Or if he did it was through the prism of Bill Simmons.
 
Anyway, I was looking at Renteria's only season and it wasn't as bad as I remember, at least hitting-wise. He hit .276/.335/.385 with 175 hits, eight homers, 70 runs driven in and was paid $8M (which is a lot lower than I thought). His career average was .286/.343/.398 and the year before he hit .287/.327/.401, so he was well within his career and previous-year norms. The one thing that killed him was his defense where he made 30 (official) errors at shortstop.
 
So errors aside (and I know that's a big caveat) but perhaps Renteria wasn't to blame, but the fans and their expectations were.

Here's a 2005 article (best I can quickly find) where he notes Renteria's 'mortal seriousness'
 
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:r2_9wO2N1QoJ:sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story%3Fpage%3Dsimmons/050930+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
 
I definitely agree there was a perception issue about Renteria; fans loved OC and saw Renteria's contract and wanted him to be more than, I think, the team actually thought he was every going to be.  
 
He also was expected (at least, based on what we heard at the time) to be a plus defensive SS with a decent bat; the second half of that was a little less than expected, but the first part was an utter disaster.  A guy who was an excellent defensive SS (using Fangraphs UZR or WAR numbers) from 2001-3 and very solid in 2004 became somewhere between 'below average' and 'bad' in 2005.   All that together is a really bad mix.

 

[bankshot1]

I hope Simmons limits his commentary on the 2013 Red Sox to what it has been thus far:  inane "asddzzzkzjjijdijfdfdf!!!!1!!!" tweets. 

and for old-time sakes, a Shawshank analogy about the '12 off-season and swimming 500 yards through a shit-running sewer to find redemption.

 

[Dummy Hoy]

As this point, with many of you Simmons is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. He's clearly moved on as a writer/entertainer/person since 2004, but although he's clearly morphed into someone he never thought he'd become back in his Digital City days, he deserves credit for growth - if not as a writer, where a lot of his shtick hasn't moved on, then certainly as a broader communicator (30 for 30, Grantland, etc.). I'd rather applaud him for making that transition than getting mad at him for not being the same guy he was back in 2004...and because of that, I'd rather *not* read what he has to say about baseball this time around, insofar as he clearly has nothing new to say about it.

 
I think almost all of the critique you'll find on him here has to do with his hackneyed and unchanged writing style. Most of us give him full credit for the work he has done as a producer/ideas man and especially as a locator/purchaser of talent. 
 
Yet he continues to act as some sort of Boston Sports authority, and that's when most of the criticism comes out.

 

[JimD]

and for old-time sakes, a Shawshank analogy about the '12 off-season and swimming 500 yards through a shit-running sewer to find redemption.

 
No way.  Pre-2004 was swimming through the foulness to reach sweet redemption.  As bad as 2012 was, it was more akin to Andy running out of Tequila at his hotel bar and Red having to spend a frustrating afternoon wandering all over Zihuatenejo to find a new supply.  We're still in paradise and we're never going to back Shawshank again.

 

[brs3]

I haven't read Simmons in a long time. Is he a fanatical Bruins fan these days? That would be the route I'd expect him to take.

 

[kenneycb]

Not to my knowledge.  Though I don't really care and wonder why others do.

 

[JimBoSox9]

Love/hate spectrum doesn't really even enter into it, he's Bill Freaking Simmons, part of the small handful of 'really prominent Sox fan sportswriters'.  He's still the guy I went through 2004 with when he was still at the peak of his BSG style.  "Now I Can Die In Peace" will never be considered a Definitive 2004 Red Sox Book, but it holds up quite well as the definitive example of his columnist work.  His silence on the topic in 2013 just feels odd as a result.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Love/hate spectrum doesn't really even enter into it, he's Bill Freaking Simmons, part of the small handful of 'really prominent Sox fan sportswriters'.
 

 
I have no idea what this means.
 

 He's still the guy I went through 2004 with when he was still at the peak of his BSG style.  
 

 
Really? I went through 2004 with my friends. I understand what you mean, but that was nine years ago. A lot changes in almost a decade.
 

"Now I Can Die In Peace" will never be considered a Definitive 2004 Red Sox Book, but it holds up quite well as the definitive example of his columnist work.
 

 
Him not writing about the 2013 changes nothing about the book that he published eight years ago.
 

His silence on the topic in 2013 just feels odd as a result.
 

 
Until today, I literally have not given this a second thought. Serious question: does this year's run somehow feel less legitimate or special to you because Simmons isn't writing about it? Because there are plenty of baseball writers who write the same way and there are literally thousands of words typed in the last week that would probably provide better insight. Simmons hasn't really written about the Red Sox in five years (at least), I'm not sure why you'd want him to start writing about them right now. It would seem really phony to me.

 

[bankshot1]

I liked Simmons way back when, and I still like him today just not as much as way back when. I suspect with all his new responsibilities he's too busy to do the pieces he used to do on a weekly and then monthly basis, way back when, and its possible its not entirely his call on how his work day is divided. 
 
My guess is that if the Sox win, we'll read all about how he and his daughter played hooky, flew into Boston and watched Game 6 with dad/drand-dad, and they all did blood meds together,  .

 

[ifmanis5]

Until today, I literally have not given this a second thought. Serious question: does this year's run somehow feel less legitimate or special to you because Simmons isn't writing about it? 

God no, the run is still an epic feat of mental strength. The whole team (save Papi) is in a terrible slump yet they still are one win away from a Chip.
But it does feel odd that someone who literally made their career writing about Boston sports has contributed no written account of it. If you had asked me in 2004 that ten years later Simmons would contribute basically no writing on a potential WS winning Red Sox team, I'd be shocked. That's why it feels a bit odd.