Dan Shaughnessy: Taking a dump in your mouth one column at a time

chonce1

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
191
CHB may have driven his agenda, but those questions are still relevant. It gives him fodder for a column. I don't like CHB but I don't think he did anything wrong here. If anything it is nice to see him try, sort of, for a column
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,042
I'm not sure how columnist decisions so often devolve in to what he had a right to do it or if it was wrong.

It's the sports page, not the Supreme Court. The standard is quality, not morality.

I don't read lots of people whom do not do anything wrong of which I am aware daily. Hourly even. Not doing anything wrong is hardly a reason why I should care what a person has to say, much less spend my time on it; saying a column sucks isn't an argument that always requires an ethical defence.
 
Last edited:

Humphrey

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2010
3,163
Yes, I was. I still can't believe he got an award that had anything to do with Major League Baseball specifically. Good writing, much as I don't like him, sure.

And, oh by the way, he beat another dead horse in his latest column.
 

joyofsox

empty, bleak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
7,552
Vancouver Island
CHB claimed in that column that he cannot truly embrace this team because he remains haunted and scarred by (a) Gump and (b) Chicken & Beer.

Putting aside the laughable notion that he did not do handsprings over those two events, would any Red Sox fan on Earth ignore 2004, 2007 and 2013 and be scared of embracing this team because of Gump's idiocy from 15 years ago?
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,299
deep inside Guido territory
CHB claimed in that column that he cannot truly embrace this team because he remains haunted and scarred by (a) Gump and (b) Chicken & Beer.

Putting aside the laughable notion that he did not do handsprings over those two events, would any Red Sox fan on Earth ignore 2004, 2007 and 2013 and be scared of embracing this team because of Gump's idiocy from 15 years ago?
Why would those 2 teams have any impact or importance towards this year's team??
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,042
Why would those 2 teams have any impact or importance towards this year's team??
Because there are no even remotely objective reasons to hate this team directly, so he's trying out some indirect temporally osmotic hate tech of his own design.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
CHB claimed in that column that he cannot truly embrace this team because he remains haunted and scarred by (a) Gump and (b) Chicken & Beer.

Putting aside the laughable notion that he did not do handsprings over those two events, would any Red Sox fan on Earth ignore 2004, 2007 and 2013 and be scared of embracing this team because of Gump's idiocy from 15 years ago?
What you are putting aside is the real rub with me. Lack of sincerity. Yes, he did handsprings, cartwheels and probably had the best sex of his life.

But ghosts are real and no amount of success can kill them. There is an indelible memory of a perfect season ruined, in substantial part, by a guy who caught a football with his fucking helmet. A guy who washed out of the NFL shortly thereafter.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,042
What you are putting aside is the real rub with me. Lack of sincerity. Yes, he did handsprings, cartwheels and probably had the best sex of his life.

But ghosts are real and no amount of success can kill them. There is an indelible memory of a perfect season ruined, in substantial part, by a guy who caught a football with his fucking helmet. A guy who washed out of the NFL shortly thereafter.
"Is this glass half full or half empty?"



"That's poison, isn't it?"
 

Humphrey

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2010
3,163
Now he's tweeting about how the Yanks using this kid reminds him of The Zim using Bobby Sprowl. Not.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,548
That only makes sense. The Sox played 162 games solely against the Orioles, Jays, Rangers, Royals, White Sox and Tigers.

All this was happening while the Yankees, A's, Indians and Astros played a season-long round robin crucible against each other and a time-displaced 1927 Yankees squad. I mean, it's only basic science to equate how the Red Sox and Patriots' schedules are both exactly, the same*.

* BTW, even the Pats' schedule isn't as easy as Shank would have you believe. But Shhhhhh, he has a deal with Ragu that's just about finished!
 

Humphrey

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2010
3,163
He mentioned the 1969 Orioles TWICE last week.

They won 108 games and lost to the Mets in the World Series. Finished the season losing 5 out of 6 and Shank said that his beloved Earl Weaver lamented later (had to be later, Shank wasn't even at Holy Cross in 1969) that he didn't push his team hard enough the last week of the year.

All well and good.....EXCEPT THE ORIOLES PLAYED THE TWINS IN THE ALCS BEFORE PLAYING THE METS. They swept that series (3-0 in those days) and then won Game 1 of the WS.

So they lost 4 straight to the Mets after a 4 game winning streak.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,548
He mentioned the 1969 Orioles TWICE last week.

They won 108 games and lost to the Mets in the World Series. Finished the season losing 5 out of 6 and Shank said that his beloved Earl Weaver lamented later (had to be later, Shank wasn't even at Holy Cross in 1969) that he didn't push his team hard enough the last week of the year.

All well and good.....EXCEPT THE ORIOLES PLAYED THE TWINS IN THE ALCS BEFORE PLAYING THE METS. They swept that series (3-0 in those days) and then won Game 1 of the WS.

So they lost 4 straight to the Mets after a 4 game winning streak.
Totally relevant to bring up the 1969 Orioles. I'm sure Baltimore writers were writing all about the 1920 World Series in their 1969 post season previews. I mean, what happened 50 years ago in Major League Baseball is a blink. Absolutely nothing has changed from then to now. Perfectly cromulent comparison.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Awesome comp.

1969 Orioles finished 19 games ahead of a 90-win team. They had no significant weaknesses. Their loss to the Mets ranks as one of the all time WS upsets.

The 2018 Red Sox falling to the Astros, by contrast, would rank as no upset. Not a mild upset, or a little upset. No. Nada, zero, zilch.

Clown shoes.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,101
Shaughnessy is not paid to make logical arguments and comparisons, he’s paid to do exactly what he’s doing.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Shaughnessy is not paid to make logical arguments and comparisons, he’s paid to do exactly what he’s doing.
He's paid to stir shit, yes. He's not paid to invent facts. Given his age, the O's sweep of the twins, and their easy game 1 WS win (hr of seaver on the first pitch, iirc) either shaughnessy is making it up or Weaver was.
 

JohntheBaptist

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
11,399
Yoknapatawpha County
He's paid to stir shit, yes. He's not paid to invent facts. Given his age, the O's sweep of the twins, and their easy game 1 WS win (hr of seaver on the first pitch, iirc) either shaughnessy is making it up or Weaver was.
No no, you don't "get it." Technically he's not paid to tell the truth either! Or to represent reality in any kind of human, rational way. The sky is the limit on what he can do as long as he stirs shit, see. He's not paid to make sense, or be good at his job, or be "good" in any sense of the term, so all this discussion is moot and we're all being weird and ignoring reality.

He's just paid to stir shit! By any means necessary. Pack up your things, everyone.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,101
He's paid to stir shit, yes. He's not paid to invent facts. Given his age, the O's sweep of the twins, and their easy game 1 WS win (hr of seaver on the first pitch, iirc) either shaughnessy is making it up or Weaver was.
He’s paid to create a narrative and get noticed. I’m fairly certain (though not 100%) that he realizes his storyline would not withstand rigorous examination.

I never pay attention to him; I’m not even sure what prompted me to click on this thread.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,372
The CHB was literally balancing his checkbook one afternoon while sitting in as a guest on Eddie Andelman's show eons ago.
 

joyofsox

empty, bleak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
7,552
Vancouver Island
And two of Baltimore's 1969 WS losses were by a 2-1 score.

Game 2: 1-1 after 8 innings, Mets score in T9, Os leave runner at 2B in B9.
Game 4: BAL scores in T9 to tie game 1-1, but Mets win in 10 when run scores on an error

Yeah, they got pounded, those Os.
 

Detts

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
5,165
Greenville, SC
I always read his fucking article the day after the Sox were eliminated. I’ll always remember his bull shit rah rah mailed-in columns during the 2004 WS. I haven’t read him since.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
And two of Baltimore's 1969 WS losses were by a 2-1 score.

Game 4: BAL scores in T9 to tie game 1-1, but Mets win in 10 when run scores on an error

Yeah, they got pounded, those Os.
That error was on a sac bunt. The pitcher's throw hit the batter near first base. I'm guessing that Weaver went to his grave muttering "Fucking JC Martin was out of the fucking baseline." (He was).
https://sabr.org/bioproj/person/3622c41b


OK. now back to dumping on Dumpy Dan.
 

CantKeepmedown

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,581
Portland, ME

He has to be trolling here, right? I mean, Edelman is literally coming back from a torn ACL

"Love how football folk characterize Edelman’s return tonight as a “comeback”. As if he were recovering from a disease or an ACL. The guy cheated and got caught. It’s death penalty for MLB guy. Celebrated in NFL"
 

gmogmo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
768
Hingham, Ma

He has to be trolling here, right? I mean, Edelman is literally coming back from a torn ACL

"Love how football folk characterize Edelman’s return tonight as a “comeback”. As if he were recovering from a disease or an ACL. The guy cheated and got caught. It’s death penalty for MLB guy. Celebrated in NFL"
Additionally, it's half a season suspension in MLB (far from the death penalty) vs. a quarter season in the NFL.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Dan hates his readers. He thinks that anyone who is a fan of any of the Boston teams is a fanboy. Any defense, any positive word, anything not negative causes Dan to accuse fans of that.

And layer in his hatred for the Krafts and Belichick and tweets like this are what you get.

Oh, and Dan is good at it. There's a kernel of truth in what he wrote. A baseball player coming back from a PEDs suspension would not get the same fanfare. On the other hand, there's the actual ACL injury comeback, the fact that the NFL and its fanbase looking at PEDS differently than baseball is hardly old news and that the CHB is just a miserable, bitter man.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,548

He has to be trolling here, right? I mean, Edelman is literally coming back from a torn ACL

"Love how football folk characterize Edelman’s return tonight as a “comeback”. As if he were recovering from a disease or an ACL. The guy cheated and got caught. It’s death penalty for MLB guy. Celebrated in NFL"
But he's kind of right here. There is a huge hypocrisy in this country when in comes to PEDs. Certain athletes are crucified for doing them (baseball players, Olympians, cyclists) and others get a pass (football players). Edelman got popped for the steroids and was suspended for the first four games, two of which the Pats lost. I think that they could have used him in one of those games, but no one seems to give a shit.

And that's fine. I'm not a guy who loses his mind over PEDs. If a person understands the risks and wants to put that stuff in his or her body, more power to them. Shaughnessy has been extra dickish this last month, so I have no real love for him either. But I don't think that he's entirely wrong here. Look at Robinson Cano in Seattle this past summer. No one was throwing bouquets at him when he came back, at least that I can remember. It's a weird double standard that I'm not sure will ever change.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
But he's kind of right here. There is a huge hypocrisy in this country when in comes to PEDs. Certain athletes are crucified for doing them (baseball players, Olympians, cyclists) and others get a pass (football players). Edelman got popped for the steroids and was suspended for the first four games, two of which the Pats lost. I think that they could have used him in one of those games, but no one seems to give a shit.

And that's fine. I'm not a guy who loses his mind over PEDs. If a person understands the risks and wants to put that stuff in his or her body, more power to them. Shaughnessy has been extra dickish this last month, so I have no real love for him either. But I don't think that he's entirely wrong here. Look at Robinson Cano in Seattle this past summer. No one was throwing bouquets at him when he came back, at least that I can remember. It's a weird double standard that I'm not sure will ever change.
Perhaps, but it was also kind of a big nothing. The days of people wetting their pants a la Clemens, Bonds and others over guys getting caught are apparently over. I don't know if Seattle fans were welcoming Cano. But we also know that Cano hasn't been a key part of two championships, like Edelman has.

Like I wrote above, there IS a baseball/football divide on PEDs tolerance. But it's probably not as big as he's saying and so what? Old news. I think the CHB's only real objective was to call Edelman a cheater and tweak Pats fans. And draw attention to himself, of course.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,548
Perhaps, but it was also kind of a big nothing. The days of people wetting their pants a la Clemens, Bonds and others over guys getting caught are apparently over. I don't know if Seattle fans were welcoming Cano. But we also know that Cano hasn't been a key part of two championships, like Edelman has.

Like I wrote above, there IS a baseball/football divide on PEDs tolerance. But it's probably not as big as he's saying and so what? Old news. I think the CHB's only real objective was to call Edelman a cheater and tweak Pats fans. And draw attention to himself, of course.
I think that we'll have to agree to disagree on this. What Edelman did was "wrong" and it probably* cost his team a victory or two.

* Obviously, we don't know this for sure. But losing your number one slot guy makes things more difficult for the rest of your team and that difficulty can lead to losses.

As far as him trolling Pats fans, I don't see it. I see him trolling football people and showing the difference of how baseball handles a PED suspension versus how the NFL handles PEDs. That's all. And like I said, there is validity in that observation.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,101
Yes, there is a double standard between the NFL and MLB. However, while there is no way to know, I would wager the word "comeback" was much more about the ACL than the suspension. Also, if Mookie Betts got busted got PEDs, he would get an enormous reaction at Fenway for his first game back.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,548
Yes, there is a double standard between the NFL and MLB. However, while there is no way to know, I would wager the word "comeback" was much more about the ACL than the suspension. Also, if Mookie Betts got busted got PEDs, he would get an enormous reaction at Fenway for his first game back.
But he didn't say anything about the fans, he said "football folk". Also Edelman took part in training camp and a couple of preseason games.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
Why do people still give this guy time and attention? I can't say what I think of him since I'm sure it would get me banned. But, he should have been irrelevant for everyone, at the very least, 14 years ago - and really it should have been 20+ years. Whatever insights or legitimate information he may provide should be - BY FAR - overridden by the terrible things that he's done in the course of his time here. How anyone could witness the things he's done - I'm not just talking about views and opinions, but horrible actions against people (again, I feel like going into detail more on this would result in a ban, so I'm going to have to leave it as that. It should be blatantly obvious, however) - and still give a read or a click to him - for any reason whatsoever - is just utterly beyond belief.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
Yeah, Vaguebooking isn’t winning you any fans among the Dopes. Is this the “Dominicans do steroids” thing or something else?
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
Apologies, I didn't mean to be annoying by being vague, it was a combination between not wanting to be over-the-top with slander or anything, and also a belief that this was all still common knowledge. I suppose it has been going on long enough where it might just be in the background for some people.

Here's a decent article summing up a bunch of the issues - from back in 2002, hence me saying that all of this should have been dealt with 15+ years in the past.

https://bostonsportsmedia.com/2002/12/04/shaughnessyget-a-life-bsmw-column-from-2002/

The title of the article is somewhat off-track, but the contents of it are a pretty good summary of the various matters.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
11,875
Apologies, I didn't mean to be annoying by being vague, it was a combination between not wanting to be over-the-top with slander or anything, and also a belief that this was all still common knowledge. I suppose it has been going on long enough where it might just be in the background for some people.

Here's a decent article summing up a bunch of the issues - from back in 2002, hence me saying that all of this should have been dealt with 15+ years in the past.

https://bostonsportsmedia.com/2002/12/04/shaughnessyget-a-life-bsmw-column-from-2002/

The title of the article is somewhat off-track, but the contents of it are a pretty good summary of the various matters.
Wait, that's what your vaguebooking was about? His 'horrible actions against people" (describing which might get you banned) was his descriptions of Carl Everett (one of the few times when it was probably earned)?

His saying Offerman was useless is one of the "terrible things he's done" that goes beyond "views and opinions"?

I don't like or read Shank, but you might want to ease up on them pearls a bit.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
11,875
(unless you're actually José Offerman, then I'd just like to say that you were tremendous going back on pop flies)
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
But he didn't say anything about the fans, he said "football folk". Also Edelman took part in training camp and a couple of preseason games.
I want to touch on this for a second: Shank said it was a "death penalty" for baseball players but that's objectively not true. Melky got 50 games and his career continued and no one cared, Cano got 80 games this year and his career will continue and no one will care. Once a suspension system is in place, a lot of the outrage dies down because there's a clear action=consequences timeline.There's no more outrage because there's no longer this idea that the players cheat for years and get away with it, not with testing.

So as usual Shank's dead fucking wrong. And not to mention, Edelman WAS coming back from an ACL after all.

He's wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. He's always wrong.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
https://www.si.com/si-wire/2013/05/10/david-ortiz-dan-shaughnessy-steroids-racist-discrimination-peds

Boston Red Sox slugger David Ortiz said on Thursday that he thought a recent Boston Globe column had racially tinged elements in its questioning of whether he has been helped by steroids in his prolific start to the 2013 season.
http://www.espn.com/boston/mlb/story/_/id/9260558/david-ortiz-boston-red-sox-says-ped-suggestions-discriminatory

Yesterday, the guy came to see me and asked some questions about steroids, and when you see the writing, it basically focuses on the fact that I'm Dominican and that many Dominicans have been caught using steroids
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
There's a difference between "dumping on" someone (which often involves actually reading what he's writing) and thinking that someone is a horrible person who does terrible things, and who should be removed from any position where anyone is going to read him or where he can have an impact on any other people.
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,087
Rhode Island
If there is a clear pattern of racially driven animus from Shank I missed it. He equally shits on everyone, which is the difference. (FTR, I don't think the Ortiz / Domincan angle was racially driven. That was not made out of nothing. There was clearly a PED pipeline in the DR. Ortiz may not have been part of it, but Shank didn't make it up. I will now shower for wading into that cesspool.)
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
There's a difference between "dumping on" someone (which often involves actually reading what he's writing) and thinking that someone is a horrible person who does terrible things, and who should be removed from any position where anyone is going to read him or where he can have an impact on any other people.
I just think he's trolling/pampering for clicks and Ortiz, Everett and Offerman are easy targets but I say that as a white guy. Ortiz is a legend and Everett/Offerman were pretty well hated by the fan base. I haven't read CHB in years but I'm guessing he trashed white players too. If that's not actually the case, I could easily be convinced to side with you.