Bruce's piece featured on FJM

[Tyrant]

No, they have been getting on my nerves for quite some time. I could understand trashing a piece by a sportwriter that uses a bunch of cliches to prop up some player he supports, but this was a direct one on one interview with the player himself. What is Theriot supposed to say? "Well, yeah, I'm aware I suck" Of course not, he is going to present his best case of why he believes he deserves the starting job. And their whole little gimmick of "Next your going to tell me...." Yeah they need to stop using that. OMFG I CAN PARSE AN ARTICLE AND PUT THIS LINE ABOVE ANOTHER ONE! OH MAN I AM SOO COOL...NEXT YOUR GOING TO TELL ME YOU DO THINGS THAT DON'T SHOW UP IN THE BOX SCORE! ZOMG! SEE I CALLED IT! I AM SO COOL!

 

Really, it has all become a bunch of crap.

 

So don't read it anymore.

 

Also, using "ZOMG" in an argument means automatic failure.

[Tyrant]

This is the first time I've checked out FJM.com and a couple comments:

 

1. There is no way that this site is run by professional writers. (especially ones who claim to have writen some pretty good comedy shows).

 

2. It appears that the writer does nothing but sit and read this site all day long and steal opinions from posters. There is nothing groundbreaking or original in what they state in their blog. Its just a recessitation of arguments that have been made ad naseum.

 

3. Out of all journalist that cover the Cubs, why in the world would they pile on, or call out the one reporter out of the group that actually "gets it"??

 

You have to be kidding.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

No, they have been getting on my nerves for quite some time. I could understand trashing a piece by a sportwriter that uses a bunch of cliches to prop up some player he supports, but this was a direct one on one interview with the player himself. What is Theriot supposed to say? "Well, yeah, I'm aware I suck" Of course not, he is going to present his best case of why he believes he deserves the starting job. And their whole little gimmick of "Next your going to tell me...." Yeah they need to stop using that. OMFG I CAN PARSE AN ARTICLE AND PUT THIS LINE ABOVE ANOTHER ONE! OH MAN I AM SOO COOL...NEXT YOUR GOING TO TELL ME YOU DO THINGS THAT DON'T SHOW UP IN THE BOX SCORE! ZOMG! SEE I CALLED IT! I AM SO COOL!

 

Really, it has all become a bunch of crap.

 

So don't read it anymore.

 

Also, using "ZOMG" in an argument means automatic failure.

It wasn't used in my arugment, it was used to mock their writing style. Please tell me what is so orginal about taking an article, and then picking a section you wish to address, and countering with "Next thing your going to tell me is..." I guess it would be funny if this was a face to face debate, but in reality they have run out of clever things to contribute so are stuck with these Juvenile tactics. I'm guessing anyone who found this FJM funny is the same person at work that stands up in their cubicle, blasts "Who let the dogs out", and assumes that people find this entertaining.

[abuck1220]

I'm guessing anyone who found this FJM funny is the same person at work that stands up in their cubicle, blasts "Who let the dogs out", and assumes that people find this entertaining.

 

i definitely see the connection.

[jersey cubs fan]

This is the first time I've checked out FJM.com and a couple comments:

 

1. There is no way that this site is run by professional writers. (especially ones who claim to have writen some pretty good comedy shows).

 

2. It appears that the writer does nothing but sit and read this site all day long and steal opinions from posters. There is nothing groundbreaking or original in what they state in their blog. Its just a recessitation of arguments that have been made ad naseum.

 

3. Out of all journalist that cover the Cubs, why in the world would they pile on, or call out the one reporter out of the group that actually "gets it"??

 

1. Not sure why you think this.

2. What an absurd statement.

3. They are equal opportunity attackers. There was an article about a crappy short white baseball player who is unjustifiably worshipped for all his gamey scrappiness, and they poked fun at it. What's the problem. They didn't necessarily poke fun at Bruce Miles, as they mostly picked on the actual quotes made by Cubs people, namely Theriot.

 

We know Bruce "gets it", but if you were to take one look at that article and not know anything about it, you might come away confused about Bruce's personal opinions. There's no clear indication either way that he buys what Theriot is selling, or that he thinks it's all bunk. But it's an interview, not an editorial.

 

Personally, I could do without any articles of that nature. Baseball would be such a better game if words like that were never spoken again, but that's not happening anytime soon. Bruce is a beat writer who reports on the team, and the guys involved with this team think this way.

 

As much as things make look like they've changed for the better, with players like Fukudome drawing interest by the Cubs for things like patience, it's important to note that when Theriot says "I've been lucky to have coaches and management who don't buy into that stuff." it really summarized the truth about any number of horrible baseball players the Cubs have employed. They are all lucky that Cubs management has been so bad that they think guys like this are worthy of jobs. It's no wonder they've been such an expensive club who still looks at 88 win seasons as the holy grail of their possible success.

[Tyrant]

I'm guessing anyone who found this FJM funny is the same person at work that stands up in their cubicle, blasts "Who let the dogs out", and assumes that people find this entertaining.

 

Holy cow man. Get out of my head!

 

This morning, I drove to work in my 1991 Toyota Camry (it's my mom's) and had a breakfast burrito from Sonic. I arrived at work about 20 minutes late and saw my boss. I said to him, "Wazzzzzzuuppp, boss?!?! Get it? You know, that commercial?" He found it totally hilarious, and totally forgave me for being late to work.

 

Then I sat down at my desk and played with my bobblehead collection and forwarded about 15 e-mails to the entire staff of my office. I even CC'd some of our clients. One of the e-mails was about a fart machine shaped like Danny DeVito's head.

 

Then I pooped.

 

After that, I came back to my desk and cranked up my iTunes EXACTLY like you said. "Who Let the Dogs Out" was blasting and bumping in my office. If that wasn't enough, I followed it up with an encore of "Whoomp There It Is." People were lovin' it. I was the Monday Morning Office hero.

 

Then I read Fire Joe Morgan. It's been a great day.

[rocket]

if last year fjm picked apart a st. louis writer's article on david eckstein, the same people bashing fjm would think it's hilarious. but since it's bruce's article, they act like fjm crossed some sort of line.

 

you can't tell me theriot's quotes aren't ridiculous.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

if last year fjm picked apart a st. louis writer's article on david eckstein, the same people bashing fjm would think it's hilarious. but since it's bruce's article, they act like fjm crossed some sort of line.

 

you can't tell me theriot's quotes aren't ridiculous.

I think the differnce is that article on Eckstein was written by a 3rd party and this article were direct quotes from Theriot himself. I asked this before, what should Theriot say? I think any baseball player with a marginal skill set such as Theriot will do whatever it takes to paint the rosiest picture.

 

I'll have to go back and read the Eckstein article from a while back, but I believe those coutnerpoints had more substance. Now they just assume everyone is on the same page.

 

Holy [expletive], man, that's awesome. "Gamer," "mentally tough," "intangibles," "great makeup," and "seizing the opportunity?" You packed all five into one graph. That's just great work. Give me another one.

Now I do agree such cliches are worthless, but where is the substance in all of that? In seems in the past they used to bring a nice blend of comedy & statisical refrence to attack articles, but that has long gone.

[jersey cubs fan]

I asked this before, what should Theriot say?

 

What does that matter. Sure, that's probably all he can say, maybe. But that's the point. He sucks, but he has a job because Cubs brass doesn't understand that simple fact, and he can't bite the hand that feeds him. The problem is baseball is still filled with all this nonsensical ignorant gibberish. It's not much of a problem when the player thinks it, because what players think doesn't matter (unless the players think they have to swing at everything in order to get jobs). The problem is that not only players think it, but executives, including many Cubs executives, think it.

 

 

I'm a big Bruce Miles fan, but as soon as a I read the article I knew it was fair game for FJM.

[rocket]

the reason they did that is because they've probably picked apart a few dozen articles about the scrappy white player, and ryan theriot really was spouting off every cliche used in those past articles. in all honesty, if there's an article on theriot being written, fjm is right in assuming that the article will be predictable and will certainly use the exact same phrases past articles have on scrappy white players.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

 

I'm a big Bruce Miles fan, but as soon as a I read the article I knew it was fair game for FJM.

 

And they really swung and missed. Really the article wasn't funny at all, that was my point.

[CubinNY]

 

I'm a big Bruce Miles fan, but as soon as a I read the article I knew it was fair game for FJM.

 

And they really swung and missed. Really the article wasn't funny at all, that was my point.

It was very predictable, if that is what you mean. But so far they are batting near 1.000.

 

That's the problem, it was too easy.

[jersey cubs fan]

 

I'm a big Bruce Miles fan, but as soon as a I read the article I knew it was fair game for FJM.

 

And they really swung and missed. Really the article wasn't funny at all, that was my point.

 

I believe it was, and that you think otherwise because you are upset that they ripped a Bruce Miles article.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

 

I'm a big Bruce Miles fan, but as soon as a I read the article I knew it was fair game for FJM.

 

And they really swung and missed. Really the article wasn't funny at all, that was my point.

 

I believe it was, and that you think otherwise because you are upset that they ripped a Bruce Miles article.

It really has nothing to do with Bruce Miles, I guess the standards for humor are pretty low these days.

[seanimal]

 

I'm a big Bruce Miles fan, but as soon as a I read the article I knew it was fair game for FJM.

 

And they really swung and missed. Really the article wasn't funny at all, that was my point.

 

I believe it was, and that you think otherwise because you are upset that they ripped a Bruce Miles article.

It really has nothing to do with Bruce Miles, I guess the standards for humor are pretty low these days.

 

You should see the standards for debate points on message boards.

[UMFan83]

Oh jeez, the cool police has determined that FJM is no longer cool. I knew it would happen sooner or later.

[bukie]

Oh jeez, the cool police has determined that FJM is no longer cool. I knew it would happen sooner or later.

 

If people like it, it can't be good.

[David]

This is the first time I've checked out FJM.com and a couple comments:

 

1. There is no way that this site is run by professional writers. (especially ones who claim to have writen some pretty good comedy shows).

 

2. It appears that the writer does nothing but sit and read this site all day long and steal opinions from posters. There is nothing groundbreaking or original in what they state in their blog. Its just a recessitation of arguments that have been made ad naseum.

 

3. Out of all journalist that cover the Cubs, why in the world would they pile on, or call out the one reporter out of the group that actually "gets it"??

 

You have to be kidding.

 

Also, it appears that he's under the impression that FJM is a Cubs-centric site.

 

As for #2, is NSBB the only place you think people would have those types of opinions on baseball? Really?

[Banedon]

Oh jeez, the cool police has determined that FJM is no longer cool. I knew it would happen sooner or later.

 

They also decided you aren't cool either....ZING!!!

[Bruce Miles]

It's OK, really. I hit Ryan with a lot of tough questions and all the numbers and said the stats say unkind things about him. That's part of this whole sausage-making process nobody sees. (Yes, I get a little hung up on the anonymity thing, probably because as a beat writer, it's a point of pride that if you write something critical, you show up the next day and are accountable. I'll stop short of calling some of these anonymous writers "cowards" because I do understand the the blogging world is different, but I do think it's easy and cheap to make fun and then hide behind a screen name. That's just me. And just like I'm one of the few beat writers to "get" and understand the whole statistical viewpoint, I actually like most of the blogs and get a kick out of them. Andy Dolan over at Desipio pokes fun now and then, but he puts his name on things, and I got to admit he gets me to laugh at my own expense a lot.)

 

Ryan didn't like all the points I brought up, and he gave his response. He did so in a very friendly and professional way, too. I've pointed out his OBP and OPS for a long time. Let's remember: Knowing Lou, Ryan will either perform or they'll get somebody else. Whether they should have addresed SS during the off-season is a whole other story. They got what they got now.

[haltz]

There is nothing groundbreaking or original in what they state in their blog. Its just a recessitation of arguments that have been made ad naseum.

The whole premise is him recognizing that. "I have eight minutes to mail in a post pointing out a million scrappy white guy cliches". The longer you've been reading the blog the funnier this particular post is probably going to be. Half the humor is how it's completely and intentionally canned.

[CuseCubFan69]

I have no problem with what Theriot said. I like that he works hard and knows his ability level and it would be nice if all the players on this team worked as hard as they can to be better ball players. I really think this is what is shooting Cedeno in the foot, his work ethic. If you give a lot of managers/coaches two guys and one works his butt off and the other who is marginally better that is lazy, 9 out of 10 will take the guy that works harder, just like any business would. Now, if the Cubs actually think that a player is is average or a little below it but works hard is a better choice than a player who is really good, then they have some problems when it comes to evaluating talent. I really think there is a plus/minus in this type of evaluating just like offense and defense but not as important as O/D.

[jersey cubs fan]

It's OK, really. I hit Ryan with a lot of tough questions and all the numbers and said the stats say unkind things about him. That's part of this whole sausage-making process nobody sees. (Yes, I get a little hung up on the anonymity thing, probably because as a beat writer, it's a point of pride that if you write something critical, you show up the next day and are accountable. I'll stop short of calling some of these anonymous writers "cowards" because I do understand the the blogging world is different, but I do think it's easy and cheap to make fun and then hide behind a screen name. That's just me. And just like I'm one of the few beat writers to "get" and understand the whole statistical viewpoint, I actually like most of the blogs and get a kick out of them. Andy Dolan over at Desipio pokes fun now and then, but he puts his name on things, and I got to admit he gets me to laugh at my own expense a lot.)

 

Ryan didn't like all the points I brought up, and he gave his response. He did so in a very friendly and professional way, too. I've pointed out his OBP and OPS for a long time. Let's remember: Knowing Lou, Ryan will either perform or they'll get somebody else. Whether they should have addresed SS during the off-season is a whole other story. They got what they got now.

 

While I didn't have a problem with their original anonymity, it was alwasy a weakness that "real writers" could point out, justifiably. Now that they have spilled the beans, I believe they would be better served to use their real names.

[Warren Brusstar]

Yes, I get a little hung up on the anonymity thing, probably because as a beat writer, it's a point of pride that if you write something critical, you show up the next day and are accountable. I'll stop short of calling some of these anonymous writers "cowards" because I do understand the the blogging world is different, but I do think it's easy and cheap to make fun and then hide behind a screen name. That's just me.

 

 

I wonder why this same principle doesn't seem to extend to journalists' use of "anonymous sources." Why is it not okay for a blogger to write anonymously (i.e, "hide behind a screen name") but it's okay for a newspaper columnist/reporter to print comments from "unnamed" or "anonymous" sources? If it's cowardly to criticize someone while using an screen name, isn't it just as cowardly for a journalist/reporter to criticize a public figure through the use of unnamed or anonymous sources? Yet, I don't see the same collective outrage from journalists regarding unnamed or anonymous sources (who generally make a journalist's life easier) as I do regarding anonymous bloggers (who generally make a journalist's life more difficult).

[Derwood]

Yes, I get a little hung up on the anonymity thing, probably because as a beat writer, it's a point of pride that if you write something critical, you show up the next day and are accountable. I'll stop short of calling some of these anonymous writers "cowards" because I do understand the the blogging world is different, but I do think it's easy and cheap to make fun and then hide behind a screen name. That's just me.

 

 

I wonder why this same principle doesn't seem to extend to journalists' use of "anonymous sources." Why is it not okay for a blogger to write anonymously (i.e, "hide behind a screen name") but it's okay for a newspaper columnist/reporter to print comments from "unnamed" or "anonymous" sources? If it's cowardly to criticize someone while using an screen name, isn't it just as cowardly for a journalist/reporter to criticize a public figure through the use of unnamed or anonymous sources? Yet, I don't see the same collective outrage from journalists regarding unnamed or anonymous sources (who generally make a journalist's life easier) as I do regarding anonymous bloggers (who generally make a journalist's life more difficult).

 

because the journalist wouldn't get the quotes in the first place if they didn't promise anonymity to the source