FIRE JOE MORGAN

Take it away, Mr. Excellence:

Memo to 30-year-old stat geeks combing through Jim Rice's numbers: Get out of the house and look at the sky one time. I know personal contact frightens you, but let go of OPS for a moment and try talking to someone who saw Rice play, or better yet, played against him.

An excellent idea. And excellently presented. I should have thought of this. Here I am, a 30 year-old stat geek, living here in my mother's basement, eyes glued to my computer, playing God by determining who should be admitted to the Hall of Fame via Excel spreadsheets. It never occurred to me -- I mean, it literally never even occurred to me -- that I could go watch these games in person. (Truth be told, I actually didn't know they were live events, presented in front of an audience. I assumed -- and who can blame me, given my half-carbon-based, half Intel© Celeron Processor-based brainputer -- that baseball games were avatar simulations run from a Cray Supercomputer somewhere in Langley.

I should definitely talk to someone about what baseball looks like when human men play it. Perhaps I can ask my friend Walter, whose family has had season tickets to Fenway for like 60 years. Or my friend Dave, who essentially lived in Section 41 for the years 1992-1998. Or maybe I can reprogram my frontal lobe algorithm to access stories from my dad, or any one of the hundreds of Sox fans I know, or even from the dark recesses of my own pre-robotic-conversion brain, where live memories of (rough estimate) around six or seven hundred live baseball games I watched, live or on TV, in which Jim Rice played.

That would certainly help me objectively evaluate Jim Rice's candidacy for the Hall, instead of just analyzing the millions of lines of Matrix-style code that I see when I look at a picture of him.

Please stop writing things like this, Dan. Thanks.

Love,

KT

P.S. I just climbed up the 1000-foot ladder leading out of my basement and looked at the sky for the first time. Holy fucking shit! It's huge!

Labels: dan shaughnessy, hall of fame, jim rice, mother's basement, statistics

Hey everyone! Never read Dan Shaughnessy and want to see two jokes that demonstrate how lame and out-dated his sense of humor is? Okay.

He blew two games in three days in Baltimore, first spitting up a 5-1 lead, then coughing up a game-tying two-run homer to Miguel Tejada...He was Eric Gag-me-with-a-spoon.

Eric Gagné was a bomb. Then he was the bomb.

Emphasis his.

I put "gag me with a spoon" at maybe...1982? And referring to someone as "the bomb" is roughly as embarrassing in the modern day as was that moment in the "Bringing Down the House" trailer wherein Eugene Levy (white) says to Queen Latifah (Black), "You got me straight trippin', boo."

Labels: dan shaughnessy, eugene levy

From annoyingly intentionally controversial Dan Shaughnessy, writing about the Red Sox' Opening Day loss:

Worse than Ellen DeGeneres's first night hosting the Oscars. Worse than Arsenio Hall's first shot at late-night television. Worse than Patriots coach Clive Rush's first press conference, when he was nearly electrocuted.

I get it. The Red Sox were bad and Dan Shaughnessy has watched TV.

Now, I would just like to add the sentence "It's one game" after the following paragraphs.

Blogmaster Schilling threw like a man suffering from carpal tunnel syndrome, yielding five runs on eight hits and two walks in just four innings. 38pitches? That's almost how many Schill needed to get out of the first inning, when he threw 33 and walked home a run. It was his shortest outing since July 2001 and hardly a good start to his 2007 campaign for a new contract.

It's one game.

(When Curt Schilling pitches poorly, it's computer-related.)

Meanwhile, Bill James-mandated shortstop Julio Lugo started his Red Sox reign in Renteria-esque fashion, fanning in his first three at-bats, Japanese lefty Hideki Okajima yielded a home run on his first big league pitch, two Sox runners were cut down at second base, and spring strugglers Jason Varitek and Coco Crisp had hitless starts. Sox pitchers yielded 12 hits and two walks in eight innings.

It's one game.

(When Julio Lugo does something bad, it's because a computer liked him.)

Facing the widely mocked Gil Meche ($55 million over five years?), the Red Sox lineup was hardly the relentless run-producing machine that Theo and the Minions envisioned when they hovered over their computers during the wild-spending winter. The Red Sox struck out 10 times, and six of their eight hits were singles.

It's one game.

(Whenever the Red Sox lose, it's because of computers.)

In conclusion, it is my belief that Dan Shaughnessy's daughter once had sex with a computer and he is not comfortable with that.

Labels: curt schilling, dan shaughnessy, red sox

First of all, if you read the post below and care to follow-up on Schilling v. CHB, Schill has responded on his blog.

Secondly, everyone should go to the comments section in the post below and read Schilling's interview snippet about the on-line game Everquest. In the Media-Blogger-MLB Superstar world, I think we all know who the true nerds are. God bless you, Scythehands Voxslayer.

Labels: blogs, curt schilling, dan shaughnessy, everquest

At some point in probably like 1974 or so, comedians everywhere, in a sort of collective unconscious kind of way, all started talking about how hard bags of airline peanuts were to open. This led jokes about that subject to become something people in the professional comedy world call "hacky." Some other examples of jokes/observations that became hacky, over time, include:

If the black box survives plane crashes, why don't they make the whole plane out of the black box?

If the Professor can make a radio out of a coconut, why can't he fix the hole in the boat?

When I smoke weed, I get the munchies so bad!

There were two different guys who played "Darin" on "Bewitched": Dick Sargent and Dick York.

Also, who do you think was hotter -- Jeannie or the Bewitched chick?

-- Ginger or Marianne?

Men like to watch television and scratch themselves while women want to talk about their feelings.

Women shop a lot.

Monica Lewinsky!!!!!!!

And so on. You all know what I am talking about.

Now, officially, today, I would like to nominate a new member to the hacky joke Hall of Fame. The notion that bloggers live in their mom's basements.

And who better to put the final hacky nail in this hacky coffin than Boston's own Dan Shaughnessy.

Shaughnessy wrote this column because Curt Schilling has started a blog, 38pitches.com, so that he can communicate directly with his fans. Seems like a good thing to do. Why not? Unfortunately, Shaughnessy, it appears to me, has now seen the writing on the wall for muck-raking journalists like himself, who have careers mostly because they get access to athletes beyond that of the general public and thus get to poke and prod them for quotes and then write articles detailing their every move. If the athletes get to talk right to their public, what use is there for middlemen like ol' Danny? Some real estate agents are going to disappear eventually because of on-line video tours of houses. Brokers took a hit from e-Trade. Brick-and-mortar bookstores suffered from Amazon. The internet is a highly effective middleman reducer.

Now, far be it from me to downplay the role of journalists in sports reporting. There are many good ones, and I personally enjoy the old-timeyness of the on-site reporter. And, just as in politics, I believe that the public does benefit from professional prodders professionally prodding athletes. (I wish they had prodded more over the last 20 years, when it must have been blindingly clear that everyone in the league was juicing and not one single journalist had the guts to report it. Or even raise it as an issue. Their fancy journalism degrees didn't serve them -- or us -- very well then, did they?) But I also, as you might imagine, see the great benefit in the personal blog. It simply cannot be a bad thing to have more outlets for athlete-fan communication, if for no other reason than giving the average $80 ticket-buyers a chance to speak directly with those whose services we are paying to see.

Shaughnessy thinks differently. He thinks blogs are for nerds who live in their mom's basements. He thinks Schilling is just an attention-seeking glory hound. (Which I'm sure has nothing to do with the fact that Schilling has been critical of the media in Boston.) He thinks this whole blogging business is something to sneer at, deride, dismiss, and ridicule. And that is why he is a dinosaur who will grow up to be more bitter and miserable than he already is.

(The premise of his article is that it's excerpts from Schilling's chat.)

38 Pitches: Fire away guys. I've got a few hours of spare time before my next start and would be happy to answer questions about anything. Like I've been saying, the idea of this blog is that it allows me to communicate directly with my fans without any misrepresentations from those nitwits in the media.

Sycophant38: Hey, Curt. This blog is so cool. I can't believe you actually communicate with us directly. You will always be a god to me, Curt. You and the bloody sock. You honor me and my friends with this blog. So, let me ask you, do you think you would have won 25 last year if the umps weren't squeezing you?

38 Pitches: You'll never get me to say anything bad about the men in blue, Sycophant38. But thanks for joining the chat.

I like that enjoying the ability to chat directly with a player makes you a "sycophant."

Lapdog38: Hey Curt. This blog is awesome. I mean, I can't believe it's really you. I'm nervous just typing, knowing you are there on the other end. Let me tell you a little about myself. I am 38 years old (pretty cool, huh, 38?) and I have your jersey in XXL (both home and away versions). I'm living at home, in the basement, rent free, and I've got cable and plasma TV. Domino's delivers. I guess you could say I'm living the dream. Anyway, I was wondering if you could tell us who's going to be on the final 25-man roster for the Sox this year?

I'm sorry -- it makes you a lapdog. A fat lapdog. A fat lapdog who lives in a basement.

Yes: here's the first instance of "living in [mom's] basement." Well done. Good parody. By the way, Danny, parodies of things need to have grains of truth in them. Your parody of the questions on Curt's chat is clearly taking the position that the questioners are sycophantic nerds who live in their moms' basements. I will now cut and paste a bunch of the actual questions that were asked of Schilling, so we may contrast and compare:

Q-Who else has upgraded their starting pitching in 2007?

Q-I understand the desire to not face AL East teams, but isn’t the reverse true? Might you learn something from them by facing them in ST?

Q-Does one hitter protect another in the lineup, in the pitchers mind?

Q-I read that Beckett’s problems last year were him relying on his FB too much, doesn’t Tek make sure that doesn’t happen?

Q-What is the one thing you need in a game to be successful?

Q-Worried about pressure on Pedroia?

Q-What’s Daisuke been like to watch in person?

Q-Can the O’s overtake us?

Q-You have set incredibly ambitious goals for 38 Studios and its role in the gaming industry. Are you worried at all about losing sight of your goals, or the company being passed down into incapable/corrupt hands? If so, what measures have you put in place (or wish to put in place) to prevent that from happening?

Q-Your recap reminded me, I’ve always wanted to know; what goes through your mind between innings when things aren’t going well or you are worried that you don’t have all the tools you want or need on the mound on any given start?

Q-On SoSH awhile back there was a discussion what is more valuable: A catcher with an exceptional bat or exceptional catching skills?

Q-Who do you think is the best lefty of all time? Does RJ beat out Koufax?

Sorry to clip so much, but I wanted to show that the questions were not particularly sycophantic. Not at all, in fact. They actually seem like pretty interesting and thought-provoking questions. There is no indication that the Qers are lapdoggish, to me.

To be fair, there are also a fair number of questions about on-line gaming, because Schilling is a hard-core gamer, and is even developing his own gaming studio. These questions are pretty nerdy. But not sycophant-y.

None of these facts will stop ol' Shaughnessy, however. Some more excerpts...

Suckup38: Curt, you are the best. Thank you for this blog. It completes me. You had me at hello. I have blood stains on all my white socks. I was wondering if you would please consider going back to the negotiating table with the Red Sox during the season. If you leave Boston, I'll be forced to leave, myself.

Fanboy38: God bless you, Schill. You are the greatest human being, ever. I'm glad you have this blog because I could never speak to you face-to-face. It's so much easier to communicate anonymously, without eye contact or using my real name. That's why blogs are better. Anyway, I was wondering if you'd consider running for Senate or perhaps President? The White House could use a guy like you, Schill.

I don't understand this criticism. So what if you don't have to use your real name? This is an informal Q and A. It's not an article voicing an opinion. Schilling is using his real name, which is all that matters -- and which is the whole point of the exercise.

This is a criticism we here at FJM get a lot -- anonymity. With us, since we're bitching about things, I see the validity. We stay anonymous for several reasons, most of them having to do with our real jobs (I am at my desk right now, as I type this). But I get why someone whose work we attacked might find it distasteful that we don't use our real names. To them I say: sorry, I guess. But in this case, who cares if the Qs are anonymous as long as the As are not? What is the problem there?

38 Pitches: That's flattering, Fanboy38, but I just feel there is so much good I can do with my other ventures, saving the planet, saving mankind, etc. I wouldn't want to be stuck in a stuffy Oval Office all day, unable to speak my mind. I much prefer a forum like this where all of you can say whatever you like about me. No holds barred. Good spontaneous give-and-take. Just let it fly.

Another insinuation that these questions are softballs. Again, the questions on Schilling's site are actually pretty tough. There's

Q-Does [the Sox'] “no renewal” stance make you feel like they are, in effect, betting against you having a big year? Does that bother you?

and

Q-Why should the Sox pay you 13 million dollars for the 08 season?

and

Q-Baseball is incredibly out of sync with the rest of the world.

But Shaughnessy has just decided that all of the questions are sycophantic, and is presenting that view, without actually looking at the material he is "parodying." That's journalism! And this is comedy:

Loser38: I used to go to Star Trek conventions and comic book trade shows. No more. Now this blog is my life. My girlfriend says I'm spending too much time on this site. I say she's being ridiculous. I mean, what's six hours a day when you have a chance to communicate -- cyberspace to cyberspace -- with a legitimate Hall of Famer? Do you think I'm being reasonable, Schill?

Loser 38. Star Trek conventions. Wow. That is original and fresh. William Shatner himself made fun of Star Trek conventions...on Saturday Night Live...on December 20, 1986. And here, only 20 years later, you are making the same joke. Well done.

Also, don't you know anything about making fun of nerds, Dan? Nerds don't have girlfriends! Nerds masturbate to pictures of Princess Leia in the gold bikini outfit from the Jabba's palace scenes.

LonelyHeartClub38: Any chance you can blog during games this year?

38 Pitches: Funny you should ask. I've been toying with the idea of blogging between innings. I mean, how cool would that be? I come into the dugout after punching out Vernon Wells, then I tap out some thoughts for all of you and return to the mound for the second inning.

This is a joke. But I think that would be kind of cool. I'd rather he prepare for the next inning, but if he strikes out Vernon Wells a lot this year and then comes into the dugout and writes: "Fuck yeah!" and posts it, I'll be happy.

CHB38: What do you say to those media morons who contend that you are a self-important blowhard with an ill-informed opinion about everything and an insatiable need to be worshipped by sheep-like fans and late-night blog boys who live in Ma's basement?

First of all, the moniker "CHB" that Shaughnessy has chosen...for those of you who do not obsessively follow Boston sports, that stands for "Curly-Haired Boyfriend" (sometimes reported as "Curly-Headed Boyfriend.") It is a thing that Crazy Carl Everett said to Globe writer, Gordon Edes, I believe, about the jheri-coiffed Shaughnessy: "Where's your curly-haired boyfriend?" I'll refrain from postulating why Danny would use that little bit of code for himself at the end of this article. I would add, however, that if he really wanted to drive his point home in re: anonymity, he should have just had it read: Dan Shaughnessy, Boston Globe.

And then, of course, we have the hilarious and cutting remark about us late-night blog boys who live in Ma's basement. Ouch! Ya burnt, blog boys!

Schilling is a loudmouth. He is an attention-seeker. These things are true. But this blog is kind of awesome, I think -- if more athletes did this, perhaps people wouldn't feel so alienated from the sports stars they worship. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to walk up a flight of stairs to my mom's kitchen so she can cook me some pasta shaped like TIE-fighters, which I will eat before rewatching last night's Battlestar Galactica season finale, which was the most exciting thing I have seen since Leroy Jenkins hit YouTube.

Labels: blogs, carl everett, curt schilling, dan shaughnessy, mother's basement

I'm torn. Genuinely so. At around 6 pm PST today, I put up a post called "Dan Shaughnessy Still Hates Theo Epstein." It was okay. A little light on hard analysis, perhaps. A lot of digs at Shaughnessy. Mainly, I felt the need to respond to Shaughnessy's most recent column because he took some fairly cheap, name-calling-style shots at the Red Sox front office, most of them in the computer-nerd-bookworm-cyber-spreadsheet vein. You know, he entered the Plaschke zone. That kind of stuff boils my blood.

But then I got to thinking: sure, Shaughnessy didn't write a good article. I disagree with the way he went about attacking Theo Epstein (basically, through insinuation, strange veiled threats, and schoolyard name-calling rather than substantive roster move analysis). That said, isn't the Red Sox front office partly responsible for what's happened in the years following the 2004 championship? If you're a Red Sox fan, you have to start considering the 2005 and 2006 (barring a miraculous turnaround) seasons as failures. Why? The team has an enormous payroll and a core group of talent that theoretically could be built around to form a championship-level team. I'm speaking mainly of two MVP-caliber hitters performing at peak or near-peak levels and a near-Cy Young-caliber starter. And yet for whatever reason, championship-level ballclubs have not been assembled. Essentially: shouldn't Red Sox fans be worried that David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez' remaining superstar-type years are being squandered on teams with next to no pitching? And shouldn't some blame for that lack of pitching be placed at the feet of Theo Epstein and those working with him? I think these are legitimate questions, so I'm a little concerned about whether my defense -- if you want to call it that -- of Epstein in the post below is completely fair. If a front office is failing to do a competent job, they should be criticized, no matter if they're using sabermetric methods or picking players' names out of badly soiled stovepipe hat.

Let's not forget, however, that (let's get horribly, stupidly nerdy) the philosophical telos of this site isn't to assess whether front offices are doing a good job or not. It's to lambaste bad sportswriting and commentary. And I think this Shaughnessy piece is unequivocally bad. Am I bending over backwards to defend Theo because he doesn't claim Moneyball was written by a three-headed robot made of tin, wax and papier-mache? I don't know. Tell me what you think.

Here's the original post.

---

You're Dan Shaughnessy. For years, you pay your bills selling the idea of a magical curse dooming a baseball franchise forever. The more famous the curse becomes, the higher your profile. You write a book about the curse. Documentary filmmakers come to you for your curly-headed opinions on the curse. You're pretty much known as Dan Shaughnessy, That Curse Guy.

Then, sudddenly, it's all over. You write your cash-in book about the end of the curse. But uh-oh, now no one cares about the curse anymore. It's done. It's almost like this supernatural curse was never real to begin with.

There's a guy who a lot of people are cheering as the non-player most responsible for reversing the curse. He's young, handsome, and he has used a computer before. Perhaps numerous computers. He hasn't paid his dues. He's not a "baseball man." And he's a pretty boring quote.

Do you a) hate this guy or b) really, really hate him and take every opportunity to needle him in your columns whenever possible?

I see you have phrased your answer in column form.

The Red Sox brass set sail on John Henry's big boat last night. The owner held a party to celebrate the engagement of his star general manager, Theo Epstein. Nice gesture. Toasts all around, no doubt. A three-hour tour.

Funny stuff. I remember that show. If the Professor could build a radio out of a coconut, why didn't he just build a boat? Am I right, people? (general silence, the soft clinking of glasses)

It was undoubtedly nice to get away for a few hours, but there is no safe place for Epstein and Sox management at this moment -- not even on the high seas. The SS Red Sox is sinking fast in the American League. The sun no longer shines on the handsome head of young Theo (wonder if he's signed his much-celebrated contract yet).

I only mentioned that Theo was handsome earlier because Shaughnessy really likes bringing it up all the time. Also, did you know that he's young? Shaughnessy would like everyone to know that.

The computer-geek management style has been thoroughly exposed in the last two days and there's a perfect storm brewing upstairs on Yawkey Way.

Ah. Here we go. Get those claws out, Shaughnee! These geeks can't run a baseball team! They don't even chew tobacco or drive mud-splattered pickup trucks to minor league games in the boonies. What exactly has been exposed in the last two days, no matter how horrific they've been for the Red Sox? A lack of pitching? That Josh Beckett is severely underperforming almost everyone's expectations? That the Yankees' lineup is capable of feasting on chumps like Jason Johnson and Kyle Snyder. I think we knew these things? I don't see a lot of solutions to these problems, and I didn't see too many at the trading deadline. If you want to go back further in time, the Beckett trade doesn't look all that great now, but I don't recall too many people objecting to it at the time. Hardly anyone projected Beckett to stink as much as he has. Bronson Arroyo for Wily Mo Pena? Still doesn't look that bad. Maybe what's being exposed is that Matt Clement was a terrible signing? Is Shaughnessy still misty-eyed for Pedro and Lowe?

The way things are going, Young Theo --

He's young.

-- might don that gorilla suit again, but this time he might need it to hide from an angry Nation of paying customers who want to know why nothing was done at the trade deadline and how you try to win a pennant with no lefty in the bullpen and a collection of dead arms and dead presidents (Mr. Van Buren, I presume) posing as major league pitchers.

Get it, "Nation"? You should be angry! Angry at Theo Epstein! Not angry at Beckett for being terrible or Wells and Wakefield and Foulke for getting hurt or Seanez and Tavarez for totally falling off from what they did last year. Did anyone think Seanez and Tavarez would both pitch this historically badly? Or that Ramon Ortiz would have a better ERA than Beckett? I see a few hands raised. Fine. Congratulations.

Three of the five crucial games against the Yankees have been played, and the numbers are more ghastly than snakes on a plane.

NICE. That'll get the kids on board. First hit 'em with Gilligan, then boom! SoaP. Dano, my boy, you've still got it.

The first three games of this series have been equally hideous, and young Theo,

Not old.

who was unavailable after yesterday's carnage, is getting his lunch fed to him by one Brian Cashman as the Sox threaten to suck all the wind out of what's left of summer.

Brian Cashman, who personally drove in 23 of the Yankees' 39 total runs. Brian Cashman, who led the team in pitches per plate appearance, eating up the Sox' bullpen. Brian Cashman, who hid in Jason Varitek's wine cellar for weeks before sneaking into his bedroom and inserting a time-release poison capsule into his left knee, causing its cartilage to rapidly deteriorate.

I'm not saying that you can't talk about the construction of these ballclubs when you see one beating up on the other so thoroughly and devastatingly. But is the story here that the Red Sox front office has unconscionably failed? I haven't seen any actual analysis yet. Wait, here we go:

Oh, and is anybody rethinking that Johnny Damon decision now?

Sort of? I think it's pretty clear that the problem here is pitching, not hitting. Even after those three amazing performances by the Yankee offense, guess how many more runs the Yankees have scored than the Sox this season? Seven. I'm pretty sure that as recently as about four days ago, the Red Sox led the majors in runs scored.

Then Shaughnessy has a quote from Larry Lucchino. Hmm. The article bashes Theo and includes thoughts from Lucchino. Anyway, the quote is boring. Let's skip it.

Manager Terry Francona, ever the company man, will not state the obvious and tell us, ``How am I supposed to beat these guys with this pitching staff?" but he is clearly as frustrated as a lot of Red Sox fans. Yesterday he watched the talented and hard-headed Josh Beckett walk nine (most by a Sox pitcher since Rogelio Moret in 1975) while giving up a career-high nine earned runs in 5 2/3 innings.

So ... maybe Beckett is at least partially to blame for what happened?

Beckett's ERA is 5.35 and he looks like he needs to stop listening to Dave Wallace and Al Nipper and go see Dr. Phil.

Another sweet reference, man. The Shaughn-man is on fire.

To his credit, Beckett answered all questions and assumed full responsibility for his outing (``unacceptable, brutal").

To his discredit, his performance so far is one of the biggest reasons you're bashing Theo Epstein.

The last time the Yankees scored in double digits in three games in one Fenway series was in 1927 when the Pinstripes had guys named Ruth and Gehrig in the lineup. The Yankees have batted around five times in three games. One wonders if perhaps even cyberowner Henry has seen enough spread-sheet baseball for one season.

That's what I call bad pitching. Spread-sheet baseball. Ooh, that John Henry! Maybe if he would stop hitting on girls on MySpace all day he would learn how to build a damn baseball team! Computers bad! Computers make baseball team lose!

Odd that Henry would be celebrating Epstein's engagement at a time when the honeymoon is officially over for the most popular and bulletproof general manager in Boston sports history.

What exactly is odd about this? Odd that John Henry likes Theo Epstein and wanted to do something nice for him? Odd because you're forcing a false connection between an actual engagement between two humans and a theoretical "honeymoon" that you made up in your brain? It seems like you're angry that Theo Epstein seems to be "bulletproof." Is it really so strange that people sort of like a guy who was the general manager when the team finally won the World Series after 86 years? This paragraph has too many rhetorical questions in it. In fact, this whole post is infested with them. I apologize. I'll try to do better the next time.

The cruise is over and so is the free ride for Theo. No disgrace in that, it happens to all of them, but the Sox need a quick turnaround to keep Epstein out of the shark-infested waters that devoured the likes of Lou Gorman and Dan Duquette.

The crazy, crazy, crazy thing about this concluding paragraph is that Dan Shaughnessy is one of the very sharks in the "shark-infested waters" he's writing about. He's basically saying, Hey Theo, you better watch out -- if the team doesn't start winning more games, people are going to try to get you fired. In fact, watch: I'm doing it right now. Me, Dan Shaughnessy. I am one of the sharks I'm talking about here.

Isn't that neat?

Labels: dan shaughnessy, red sox, theo epstein

Boston's favorite cursemonger, Dan Shaughnessy, has probably been in a foul mood for the last calendar year given that his silly Curse of the Bambino myth was finally shattered.

So naturally, he's going to try to shoehorn a curse into this year's World Series even though it's an idiotic thing to do and there's no such thing as curses and people should have stopped believing that nonsense some time around the Renaissance and everyone should learn more about the scientific method and less about ghost whispering.

The money quote (and thanks to reader dave2380 for the tip):

The White Sox face a much tougher opponent than the Red Sox did last October. No, I'm not talking about the redoubtable Houston Astros and their stable of aces. I'm talking about the larger forces, the gallery of the baseball gods where superstition rules over science. The White Sox are up against the granddaddy of all bad karma.

Gallery of baseball gods? I know this stuff isn't supposed to be serious. It's supposed to be entertaining.

It's not. It's drivel.

Curse of the Bambino? That was nothing. It amused some, offended others (the estimable Gammons said it was more moronic than the wave), and made life easy for headline writers, but it absolutely pales when compared with the plague that has infected the Pale Hose.

It offended rational people with brains. Thank you, Peter Gammons, for calling this guy on his bullshit. Also, thank you for putting up with John Kruk and Harold Reynolds on Baseball Tonight.

The 1919 White Sox did something to earn a lifetime of hardball purgatory. They threw the World Series. And they have not won another one since. It is the big, dirty secret that no one wants to talk about as Chicago prepares to play host to the World Series for the first time since the ChiSox were beaten by the Dodgers in '59. Counting the Black Sox scandal, the Second City has lost the last seven (five by the Cubs) World Series played here. The last time Chicago had a baseball champion was in 1917, which was the year before Boston beat the Cubs, which was a year before the White Sox took money to lose.

It's all there in John Sayles's excellent movie, ''Eight Men Out" (John Cusack does a great Buck Weaver), or the book (same title by Eliot Asinof). Angry at cheapskate owner Charles Comiskey, eight of the White Sox, including all-world Shoeless Joe Jackson, took cash to intentionally lose the World Series to the Reds. They were beaten, five games to three, in a best-of-nine event. Two years later, after they were acquitted in a bag-job trial, commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis banned them for life. And the White Sox never won again.

Blah blah blah blah scandal no one wants to talk about? What? People talk about it all the time. I saw "Eight Men Out" on TV this morning! I'm totally serious. It was on a few hours before Game 1 of the World Series. Not sure which channel.

** SPECIAL ADDENDUM **

"Big, dirty secret that no one wants to talk about"?

FOX just opened its coverage of the World Series with an elaborately produced (okay, it looked sort of cheap) short film entirely about the Black Sox scandal, complete with actors in period costumes. And yes, they used the word curse. Because someone somewhere at FOX thinks that people watched the World Series last year because the Red Sox were cursed, and they're hoping they can trick people into thinking the White Sox are cursed, too.

So Shaughnessy, you're not the standard-bearer of baseball history you think you are. FOX has the exact same angle you had. FOX.

** END SPECIAL ADDENDUM **

Understandably, ballplayers, coaches, and managers want no part of this. They don't care about history.

They don't care about historical stories you make up to sell newspapers and your own books.

In the days before the miracle of 2004, the Red Sox routinely spit on the ground any time the old stuff was mentioned. Curt Schilling and Mike Timlin had nothing to do with Denny Galehouse and Mike Torrez. They didn't want to be asked about it and there was nothing relevant they could say about it.

Exactly. Because it wasn't relevant. You made it up.

Red Sox first baseman/outfielder Todd Benzinger once said, ''I don't know why people keep bringing up 1978. We're different players. It's not like we're related to those guys, like we have the same genes or something."

Thank you, Todd Benzinger. I'm extending to you a coveted invitation to post comments on FJM.

Labels: curse boner, dan shaughnessy, red sox, white sox