I was attempting to say if it was racist or racially insensitive as ifmanis was pointing out, that's on Pedroia as Shank was stealing his nickname for Ellsbury. Not that I thought it was. Nothing to see here.John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
Dan Shaughnessy: Taking a dump in your mouth one column at a time
- Thread starter weeba
- Start date
I have to admit I thought it was a veiled racial reference and ridiculously tasteless.
I appreciate MVORG linking the backstory.
I don't have that kind of recall on CHB's past columns, so I hadn't seen the previous reference to that moniker.
Although I may be extra-sensitive because it's CHB, perhaps he should consider that others may not have remembered the context of that nickname and would be somewhat curious about (if not offended by) that dig.
I appreciate MVORG linking the backstory.
I don't have that kind of recall on CHB's past columns, so I hadn't seen the previous reference to that moniker.
Although I may be extra-sensitive because it's CHB, perhaps he should consider that others may not have remembered the context of that nickname and would be somewhat curious about (if not offended by) that dig.
I get most if not all of my CHB fixes here, so I didn't remember/know about the past reference either. I googled it hoping to see some pictures of Ellsbury with a crazy orange tan and that story came up before the more recent one. I agree that he shouldn't expect his readers to recall an idiotic six-month old nickname.Dick Pole Upside said:
"OK. But just once fans would love to hear him say he’d love to finish his career in Boston. Can he give us that?"
God, this is bad, even for Shank. "Please tell us you'd love to finish your career in Boston so we can excoriate you for saying that when you sign somewhere else for a fuckton of money." Good for Ellsbury for not taking the bait.
And of course he completely ignores the fact that the Red Sox don't necessarily have a strong desire to sign Ellsbury to a 5+ year deal for huge money. No, it's all on Ellsbury. He's right that there's no chance Ellsbury returns, but it's because it's in neither side's best interest.
God, this is bad, even for Shank. "Please tell us you'd love to finish your career in Boston so we can excoriate you for saying that when you sign somewhere else for a fuckton of money." Good for Ellsbury for not taking the bait.
And of course he completely ignores the fact that the Red Sox don't necessarily have a strong desire to sign Ellsbury to a 5+ year deal for huge money. No, it's all on Ellsbury. He's right that there's no chance Ellsbury returns, but it's because it's in neither side's best interest.
Bump.
There was a spectacularly whiny bitch & moan session by CHB on Gresh & Zolak.
It was about how BB is insulting every fan & violating our "right to know" by not answering questions, specifically this piece of exchange between Bert Breer & BB:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlflaNGxpA0[/youtube]
There was a spectacularly whiny bitch & moan session by CHB on Gresh & Zolak.
It was about how BB is insulting every fan & violating our "right to know" by not answering questions, specifically this piece of exchange between Bert Breer & BB:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlflaNGxpA0[/youtube]
Dummy Hoy said:
The whole "how close was he" is yet another useless media construct. Either you can play -- in the eyes of the team -- or you can't.
BB did say one thing that wasn't "inactive": "Do you want percentage points or something?," which to me, was BB-speak for "My God you are being an asshole."
I'd like to think that if I was in that room, and I wasn't simply trollng for non-answers so I could write a story about how BB gives non-answers, that I would ask a question like, "Does a guy have to be 100% to be active;?" or "Would the team put a guy out there who can't do everything as usual, just so he could help out in specialized ways." I would NOT keep asking the same question, when I KNOW he won't talk about injuries to specific players. Ironically, (I think), the team's mantra is "do Your Job." Yet the reporters that cover the team can't be bothered to even try to ask questions in a creative way that might get a different answer. THAT would be doing their jobs.
I think another facet of the stupidity of CHB's harangue is to address the fact that he, CHB, is not likely to change his behavior even if BB began to provide extensive, forthright answers to questions. The leopard can't change his spots, so why should Shaughnessy feel as if Belichick is obliged to change his approach?
I know this isn't news to anyone, but CHB's penchant for blithely dismissing the talents of our teams' opponents is just utterly obnoxious. He's done it regarding the Pats for years, and now today he has this:
This is the first line of his story today. The Sox beat them in 4, so clearly they must've been frauds.
What a piece of shit he is.
This is the first line of his story today. The Sox beat them in 4, so clearly they must've been frauds.
What a piece of shit he is.
This was one of Shank's better columns. No agenda, just some amusing local insight. I liked this line in particular:
Mary J. Blige sang the anthem, we had the traditional window-rattling flyover, and Carl Yastrzemski — the greatest living Red Sox — delivered the ceremonial first pitch. Minutes after Yaz’s nifty toss, we heard the ceremonial screeching of tires on Ipswich Street. Everybody loves Yaz, but the private captain hasn’t gone nine innings since he hung ’em up in 1983. Twenty-three seasons was quite enough, thank you.
While Yaz was driving toward the Kowloon, the Sox put the game away against the sloppy visitors and Boston fans waited for Ortiz to put another one in the bullpen...
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/10/24/red-sox-have-easy-game/GlL3i8GarwBB8RvtghXt0H/story.html
Mary J. Blige sang the anthem, we had the traditional window-rattling flyover, and Carl Yastrzemski — the greatest living Red Sox — delivered the ceremonial first pitch. Minutes after Yaz’s nifty toss, we heard the ceremonial screeching of tires on Ipswich Street. Everybody loves Yaz, but the private captain hasn’t gone nine innings since he hung ’em up in 1983. Twenty-three seasons was quite enough, thank you.
While Yaz was driving toward the Kowloon, the Sox put the game away against the sloppy visitors and Boston fans waited for Ortiz to put another one in the bullpen...
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/10/24/red-sox-have-easy-game/GlL3i8GarwBB8RvtghXt0H/story.html
Where? It's well known Yaz doesn't like the spotlight, isn't especially fond of being at Fenway and left the first game of the World Series right after his pitch. What's wrong with that, are you that Red Sox sensitive? Jeez.
I agree, especially considering there's no one that really denies it. Of course he took off immediately.John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
That being said, I knew as soon as I saw Yaz last night that someone would make that joke. It's a bit tired, and sorta less funny as he gets up there just in the "can you blame him?" sense. I hate stale jokes.
Tired, less funny, and stale? That's a 3-1 fastball to Shank. The Shaugnessy trifecta.JohntheBaptist said:
It's interesting that he remains much less Shank on the radio. I actually listened to some of "The Baseball Reporters" show last night, and was prepared for a total shitshow with the Mazz/Shank combo. Instead they spent a lot of time talking about what a fun season it has been, how wrong they were, and how anything they do against the Cardinals is truly gravy.
It'd be great to come back and debate this once the off-season begins (hopefully Monday...) and I'm not trying to put Yaz down, but as far as greatest living Red Sox - here's a few stats (really check out the last column) as to why Ortiz might need to be considered the greatest living Red Sox player...drleather2001 said:
(Wasted a lot of time trying to make a table - so formatting isn't how I'd like but) :
Red Sox Career BA 30+ HR Seasons Red Sox Career WAR MVP Top 10 Finishes Post Season HRs World Series Titles
Carl Yastrzemski: .285 3 96 5 4 0
David Ortiz: .292 7 42 5 16 2*
I get that there are more playoff games now - but the career WAR numbers don't reflect the playoff performances and those are certainly important parts of a player's career.
There is definitely plenty to debate on this, but certainly it may be time where a passing line like "Yaz, the greatest living Red Sox player" may not be indisputable. If you want to include intangibles, etc. - it may skew things further toward Ortiz....
Anyhow, this helped pass a bit more time, and as mentioned above, is probable best left for an off-season discussion. (Heck, and at that time, maybe there's a pitcher that could be/should be included in the discussion of greatest living Red Sox ever).
We can discuss it more, if you like, but I'll just point out two key factors as to why those stats don't tell the whole story.
1) Offense in Yaz' time was far below what it has beein over the past decade. Despite his lower career batting average, Yaz won three batting titles, once with a BA of .301. Likewise, Yaz' home run totals (three times over 40) in his era were just as impressive as Ortiz' were, on a relative basis.
2) Yaz played the outfield, and played it generally pretty well. He also had a strong arm. Ortiz' defense is, well, nonexistent.
1) Offense in Yaz' time was far below what it has beein over the past decade. Despite his lower career batting average, Yaz won three batting titles, once with a BA of .301. Likewise, Yaz' home run totals (three times over 40) in his era were just as impressive as Ortiz' were, on a relative basis.
2) Yaz played the outfield, and played it generally pretty well. He also had a strong arm. Ortiz' defense is, well, nonexistent.
At last night's post game press conference, Ortiz:
"Where's Don Shannassey?"
Someone in the crowd replies "He has a bus to catch.".
Great sports journalism, Don.
Anyone have a clip of that?
"Where's Don Shannassey?"
Someone in the crowd replies "He has a bus to catch.".
Great sports journalism, Don.
Anyone have a clip of that?
Shaughnessy's column today did the public service of linking to this:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/1975/10/22/carlton-fisk-home-run-beats-reds/BlpIMG4g0xLVwVsUarZBNI/story.html
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/1975/10/22/carlton-fisk-home-run-beats-reds/BlpIMG4g0xLVwVsUarZBNI/story.html
Years and years later, I still marvel at that opening line. And every single time I read, it, I get goose bumps.
"But here’s the reality, people: The 2013 Red Sox might be really bad."
Dan Shaughnessy, Feb 24, 2013
"Worse, they might be really boring."
Dan Shaughnessy, Feb 24, 2013
"Worse, they might be really boring."
From today's effortless dribble column.
Curly Haired Bitch, please note that we don't know why Ortiz was on that list in 2003. It could have been a substance other than steroids. I suspect it was indeed steroids, but it's misleading to write that David has a positive steroid test on his resume. We know, you don't care about misleading people when you have an agenda.
And, having opened that door, the Bitch continues with a passive aggressive PEDs accusation regarding the present. If you're going to go there, Danny, be straight up.
So damn true.
And it's not just Dan. As Chris Connelly wisely pointed out, the whole PEDs issue is a witch hunt without the hunt part. Dan, (and other sports writers) if you're so consumed with this nebulous 2003 list, do some actual reporting and figure out what actually happened, instead of what you're doing now- lazily hurling insults that neatly fit your own half-assed narrative.
And it's not just Dan. As Chris Connelly wisely pointed out, the whole PEDs issue is a witch hunt without the hunt part. Dan, (and other sports writers) if you're so consumed with this nebulous 2003 list, do some actual reporting and figure out what actually happened, instead of what you're doing now- lazily hurling insults that neatly fit your own half-assed narrative.
Dan: "I'm a columnist. I don't investigate and I don't report. That I am a columnist gives me free reign to mislead, be lazy, make baseless allegations and further my agenda. Duh."ifmanis5 said:
When Tiz mocked the CHB after game 2 of the Tigers series -- "where's Shaughnessy?" -- my assumption was that Dan loved it because he loves being part of the story. A lot of what he does is designed to call attention to himself. But maybe that got up his ass and today's little jab has a bit of payback attached to it. And maybe Dan is just a terminal douche bag and this is par for the course.
I honestly hate Dan Shaugnessy. Like, I wish him ill. There aren't many people on the planet who can claim that honor.
Picked-up pieces while tying to sneak into the women's restroom at Gillette Stadium to go #2...
Former Patriot Randy Moss recently signed on with FOX, and was also inducted into my Hall of Grudges.
I once saw Nomar take a penny from one of those Jimmy Fund jars.
Would love to see UMass go deep in the NCAA tournament. "Yes we Cam-by" Heh, heh, heh. Plenty more where that came from.
One disgruntled ex-player in 30 years is a pretty good average if you ask me. It's not like it was two.
Anecdote about dead person to show you I knew famous athletes.
Does Nomar lead a team back from a 24 point deficit like Tom Brady did last Sunday? Unlikely.
Former Patriot Randy Moss recently signed on with FOX, and was also inducted into my Hall of Grudges.
I once saw Nomar take a penny from one of those Jimmy Fund jars.
Would love to see UMass go deep in the NCAA tournament. "Yes we Cam-by" Heh, heh, heh. Plenty more where that came from.
One disgruntled ex-player in 30 years is a pretty good average if you ask me. It's not like it was two.
Anecdote about dead person to show you I knew famous athletes.
Does Nomar lead a team back from a 24 point deficit like Tom Brady did last Sunday? Unlikely.
ifmanis5 said:
(I think I've related this before...)
Back in the day, when "Letter to the Editor" were actually "letters" written to an "editor," I wrote the Glob to complain about Shaughnessy making a similar insinuation against Manny Ramirez. He called me at home. When I suggested that if he wanted to accuse Manny of cheating, he should do it, instead of his poorly disguised innuendo. He said something ablot libel laws. This told me two things:
1. He does not have any guts. Not that you have to be Sgt. York to be a sportswriter, but just in a general sense, if you have something to say about someone -- especially if its your job --- then say it. Preserving some shred of plausible deniability ("I didnt say that...") is chickenshit.
2. He really does not understand libel law. Obvious innuendo ("I wouldn't let Father O'Shaughnessy near those kids.....") is no different than a direct accusation ("Father O'Shaughnessy is a didddler.")
(It does not matter that he was right (either then or 10 year later). Both his chickenshittedness and lack of understanding of libel do not depend on his accuracy.)
Via the Globe on my Twitter feed, Shank is trying to sell me on the idea that he's here to write, not root for the local teams. He wants us silly fans to understand things are not always rosy in Boston sports, and sometimes he has to point that out. But it's ok, because it's just sports.
As if our issue with him is that he's negative, and we're all a bunch of naive fanboys who don't understand how the world operates.
He's a troll with an agenda who loves to insert himself into the story. He's despicable, and I'm frankly annoyed at this attempt to justify his nonsense.
As if our issue with him is that he's negative, and we're all a bunch of naive fanboys who don't understand how the world operates.
He's a troll with an agenda who loves to insert himself into the story. He's despicable, and I'm frankly annoyed at this attempt to justify his nonsense.
This is the biggest lie this vile piece of shit has ever uttered. He made a killing writing a book that celebrated 80+ years of not winning the World Series. He most certainly does care; he wants the local teams to lose because to him that's a better story.
It's tough to think he might be the most loathsome of the scribblers over at the Globe sports department; after all, they employ KPD and Cafardo already. But by now it's clear he's the worst.
I think actually if it's true he doesn't care, that's the best news ever: that means that he's witnessed a fantastic run of unprecedented success by the local teams over the last decade+ and hasn't been able to enjoy any of it...because, you know, he's not a fan. Good. Fuck him.
Dummy Hoy said:
If his intent is to state that reporters shouldn't root, they should report, I think that's fine. But coming from him, it is a totally illegitimate message.
He's a columnist, not a reporter. He baits, he goads, he incites... facts be damned. He is a twisted, self-serving schmuck.
He used to be a reporter, but he gave up the ghost on that role a long time ago (too bad, because he was certainly a more-than-capable reporter when that was his job).
As DH said, he is the original Boston sports troll... far before that term became popular in the digital/social media world.
In this case, may we shoot the messenger?
Tell me why reporters can't root for teams. There's no good reason they can't do a good job reporting AND still want their teams to win. I don't see the conflict.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
It depends.
Reporters shouldn't root for teams, because it's not good business. If you're a good reporter, you should try and be an impartial observer of the teams you cover. Otherwise I think that your writing will suffer. You'll be unduly harsh when the team makes a move you don't agree with, you'll be syrupy when then they do something good. I want a beat writer to give me the news and give me the context of that news. With a columnist, I want him to tell me about the news but from their point of view.
This isn't a hard-and-fast rule. Bob Ryan is a fan of the Boston sports and he's able to put his fandom aside. If you can do that, great. But there aren't a lot of writers (especially young ones) that can do that. I'd rather have a writer be a fan of the game, not the team. One of the reasons why I like Joe Posnanski is because he genuinely likes the sports he writes about and it comes out in his stories. Same thing with Ryan.
Yeah, his argument that he's just honestly depicting stories and that many of them are ones we don't like and we're dumb so we blame the messenger is obviously ignoring the nature of his depiction, which is all anyone ever gets on him about. When people ask him variations on "don't you even like these teams?" it's actually him that is (possibly willfully) misunderstanding the point--that no one takes his perspective on things seriously because they're so clearly agenda-driven. The "negativity" isn't disliked because it's too honest, it's all worthless because none of it is--as mentioned, he's a troll. That's how human beings react to the "troll" in society.
The question people should be asking him isn't "don't you want them to win?" it's "don't you want me to enjoy reading your work?" There's a way to communicate with your audience and deliver information they may not love to hear. He's got a well-known and deliberate history of antagonizing his audience, and pretending that the best they got is to stupidly wonder whether he roots for the teams he covers (only to then chastise based on this strawman) is a perfect example of this.
I read stuff like this and still chuckle when people want to tell me he's "really a good writer, he's just an asshole/ lost his way/ whatever." Nope.
The question people should be asking him isn't "don't you want them to win?" it's "don't you want me to enjoy reading your work?" There's a way to communicate with your audience and deliver information they may not love to hear. He's got a well-known and deliberate history of antagonizing his audience, and pretending that the best they got is to stupidly wonder whether he roots for the teams he covers (only to then chastise based on this strawman) is a perfect example of this.
I read stuff like this and still chuckle when people want to tell me he's "really a good writer, he's just an asshole/ lost his way/ whatever." Nope.
Shank's condescension and derision towards his audience just drips off the screen.
He is living in a fantasy land, playing the stalwart guardian for truth, when in reality most people have just tuned him out because he hasn't been a good read for years.
He is living in a fantasy land, playing the stalwart guardian for truth, when in reality most people have just tuned him out because he hasn't been a good read for years.
That was great.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Also, nice of Dan to once again assume the worst in all of us- which is all he ever does. I post on the internet and I'm interested in Boston sports, ergo I am a brainless fanboy. Go away, Dan. Go away now and never come back.