Showing posts with label peter king. Show all posts
Showing posts with label peter king. Show all posts

Monday, January 28, 2008

It's Increasingly Like Watching a Train Wreck

That's the excuse I just gave Chad Bahamas as to why I keep reading SI.com. Here's the part where the caboose breaks off and does 9 full rotations as it rolls down the rock slope before bursting into flame, killing all on board and 4 baby bunnies that (used to) live in a den by the tracks:

I think my advice is short and sweet for Jerry Jones, who, according to Chris
Mortensen of ESPN, is pondering trading up to get the first pick in the draft so
he can take Arkansas running back Darren McFadden.

Don't even consider making such a foolish trade. That's right. It's foolish. Never, ever, ever, ever pay a ransom for a running back. They're too plentiful and too easy to find down the line, and too easy to make a mistake picking.


Okay, fine. Good advice- even if you act like you're the first person in the world to figure it out. Let's jump forward all the way to one single sentence later:

And to think of including restricted free-agent Marion Barber III in the deal
... lunacy. Pure and simple. Barber's a top-10 NFL running back right now (the
only reason he might not be in the top five is he hasn't proven he can carry it
20 times a game every week; he's had 339 carries over the past two years). Under
no circumstances should he be dealt.

Let me paraphrase:

"Top running backs are incredibly unbelievably replaceable; Top running backs are incredibly unbelievably irreplaceable."

Peter King, you are just awful at what you do.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

I Hate You So Much, Peter King

Peter makes assumptions. And you know what they say: if you assume, you're a complete shithead. From MMQB:

We can roll our eyes at the control Belichick and Coughlin exert over their teams, and we can seem sure that without independent thinkers like Tiki Barber and Jeremy Shockey and Drew Bledsoe around either team's locker room that it's going to be easier to stay singularly focused. Maybe. But I do know this: The Patriots have bought into Belichick and the Giants, now, have bought into the Coughlin way.

I gotta think that writing about football for a living probably tends to get old. And more often it probably tends to make you want to drastically over-analyze the game- to assign way more importance and insight to the game for the sake of feeling like your energies are for something of greater worth.

This is completely fair; as an increasingly avid football fan, I'm like this too. I want to know why some teams lose and some teams win. I want to know why the Patriots are so good at winning. I want to know how the Giants, who are clearly not as good as the Patriots, have nonetheless also reached the Superbowl. I want to know that one key reason why these two teams have made it over all the other 30 teams. But I also realize that there's not just one reason- it's a bizarre combination of player talent (esp. at the QB position), psychology, health, quite a huge element of luck, and, mostly, turnovers (which are a function of everything else)- and even if there were just one reason, it would ruin the fun of being a fan to find that out. Thus, I stay away from stupid/weird/overly generalized/brash/panacean assumptions about success/failure in the NFL.

But Peter is a professional, so it's fine for him to declare stupid shit like that.

Thanks to Peter, we now know that the Patriots and Giants won because:

a) lack of individual thinkers (which is really creepy if true...1984 anyone?)
b) the players "bought into" their respective head coaches' philosophies

This explains EVERYTHING. Why didn't the Giants win last year? I know this: Tiki Barber was busy individually thinking about all sorts of crap.

Why didn't Coughlin reached a Superbowl in any of the, like, 9 years he coached the Jags? Simple- his players weren't buying his bullshit. Also, unlike the rest of the team, Fred Taylor wears briefs. I would stake the life of my daughter Mary Beth who goes to Colgate University on this.

What does it mean to buy into your head coach, anyways? I guess something like this:
These guys aren't just saying they're not thinking about 19-0 yet; they've totally bought into Bill Belichick's consistent rant that the only way to be perfect is to live in the moment, selflessly. "Win today, today,'' Seau told me. "Tomorrow, we win tomorrow. And leave me-you-I in the locker room on game day.''
Are you fucking kidding me? That's Belichick's big secret? Fuck, Peter, that's the most universally touted NFL head coach bullshit in the entire game. That's like the only thing that Marvin Lewis ever says at press conferences and the Bengals went 7-9 this year. Don't look ahead to the next game. Concentrate on today. Keep the past in the past. Donkey punch next week's game while doing today's game from behind. This isn't journalism, Turd; this is tiresome rehashing of common cliches that are supposed to but don't actually mean more just because they're now coming from the member of a team that is 18-0.

More:
3. I think, in the end, there was a faction in Baltimore that wanted John Harbaugh to be the coach, and a smaller faction that wanted Marty Schottenheimer. I don't think that. I know that. [emphasis his]
I don't really have anything to say about this. I just hate it so much when he does the whole My vast stores of knowledge easily trump the presentation of factual evidence that might support the crazy things that I know Tuesday Edition thing.

Here's where it gets f'ed up, though:
g. Brett, Brett, Brett. Take it easy. No reason to throw the pick to McQuarters. None.
Oh. My. God. Peter King is - actually and truthfully - lecturing one of the greatest quarterbacks in the history of the NFL after one of the greatest seasons of his career...on quarterbacking.

What. Inside. The fuck. AND, go figure, IT'S NOT EVEN HELPFUL ADVICE!!!!!!!!!! "Take it easy"???? No, Peter, YOU take it easy! "No reason to throw the pick to McQuarter." REALLY??? THANK YOU, PETER, BECAUSE I AM QUITE SURE THAT BRETT FAVRE ACTUALLY INTENTIONALLY THREW THE PICK ASSUMING THAT THE BIG HITTERS ON HIS OFFENSE WOULD IMMEDIATELY FORCE A FUMBLE THAT WOULD LATER LEAD TO A FIRST DOWN AND THEN TO A GREEN BAY TOUCHDOWN. IT WAS A GAMBLE BUT IT COULD HAVE PAID OFF HUGELY.

...

...

Sigh.

And, finally, just to be a dick:

f. Do the Devils ever play a game NOT decided by one goal?
Yes, last Wednesday (Jan 16) they lost 3-1. Fuck you.

Monday, October 29, 2007

That's It: Peter King Should Stop Writing About Football

It's about time we've come to this. I don't care if he stays up until 4 a.m. all jittery from 800 espressos pounding out this nonsense just so's the lay folk can have their Monday morning football summary- this quality of writing and lack of editing/fact checking is absolutely abysmal. Edit this shit, SI. God.

We'll start with some minor objections:

6. Green Bay (5-1). Not to rub it in, but the Giants' Derrick Ward was inactive Sunday -- and still leads the entire Green Bay team in rushing, 448 yards to 394.

Yes, also Green Bay hasn't played yet this week. Still maybe a kind of crazy stat, but weakened by this fact. So just leave it out. Edit it out. Somebody, please.

Another:
Want to see a brilliant series against the Colts? Get a tape of Vinny Testaverde's game-opening, 18-play, 80-yard, 11-minute touchdown drive Sunday. It included a six-yard Vinny sneak, terrific play-clock bleeding, and 12 rushes for 37 yards.

What exactly is it about 3.1 yards/rush that is so brilliant, Peter? Tell me, you asshole, and it better not have anything to do with taking lots of time. I mean, I guess it's good to take time away from Peyton...and I guess anytime you see a 78-year old run for 6 yards, it's pretty cool...but it's also good to be able to move the ball quickly in large chunks. Do you really think Vinny didn't want to just throw an 80-yard bomb and be done with it?

But here's the real kicker, re: the Patriot's schedule:

...the other game that has a chance to be competitive -- notice I didn't say "the game they have a chance to lose?'' -- is the Monday-nighter on Dec. 3 at Baltimore. No team gets up for a prime time, national TV game like the Ravens.

Baltimore Ravens, since 2003, on Mondays, Thursdays, and in the playoffs (and they haven't played any NBC Sunday nights):

1 -7, including this season's opening loss to awful awful Bengals.

Honestly, Peter, where the fuck are you getting this? I'm no journalist, but I would think a telltale sign of a shitty journalist is someone who writes dumb shit based on gut feelings instead of proven facts.

~FLASH SIDEWAYS~
We are in an alternate universe in which Peter King has decided to become a doctor.

Nurse: Doctor King, the patient's leg is hemorrhaging from a 5 cm deep cut to his thigh- shall I prepare the wound to be stitched up?

Dr. Jerk: Legs don't bleed. I have never seen a bleeding leg. I guess except that one time that I cut my leg. But in general, legs never bleed. Mark my words.

Nurse: Um, but Doctor- look...I mean, you can see the blood exiting the wound...the wound on his LEG.

Dr. Jerk: I'm going to call Dr. James Andrews on my cellular phone- did you know I have a cellular phone, nurse? AND I have THE Dr. James Andrews on speed dial!!! Pretty cool, huh?- and ask his opinion about bleeding legs that don't exist. You can carve that in stone.

Nurse: What? Doctor, this is a bleeding leg, not an obscure elbow injury. You should be qualified to do this yourself.

Dr. Jerk: You can take it to the bank.

Nurse: Take what to the bank? You didn't even say anything...doctor, the patient is losing blood rapidly...

Dr. Jerk: Indictment. Scintilla. This patient is unacceptable and should know to show WAY more respect to his doctor if you ask me about it. I have four words for him: not in MY lifetime.

Nurse: [stabs self w/ used syringe]

Patient: [pries open wound to increase blood loss]


Okay, so Peter, let's make sure we have this straight- you're no longer allowed to write about baseball, politics, or football. As far as I know, you haven't said anything inaccurate about foamy lattes, though. But I'm sure that only b/c I'm not paying attention.


Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Debunking an Inane Football Journalist

[title courtesy of the headline makers at SI.com]

I'm going for the throat. I'm gonna take down PK- and on his own, non-fantasy football turf.

From Monday Morning Quarterback, Tuesday Edition (re: Games Played on Sunday, Except for that One on Monday. Tomorrow is Wednesday) by Peter King:


I want to begin my Tuesday morning by thanking Arizona coach Ken Whisenhunt for debunking the biggest myth in all of football: that you can't replace your starting quarterback for three or four series during a game because you'll ruin his psyche.

Okay, now re-read it and make sure you understand the BIGGEST MYTH he is all sweaty and salty about debunking: that you MUSN'T temporarily replace your starting QB in the middle of a football game, OR ELSE, BECAUSE IF YOU DO...he will be upset. His confidence will be shaken. He'll go nutty.

To argue his point, PK boldly presents this rock-hard and conclusive peice of evidence: a quote from Matt Leinart after being replaced temporarily by Kurt Warner in the last two Cardinal games, both wins:

"If I'm the franchise quarterback, play me and let me stumble, because I'll
fight through it, and that will help me and our team in the long run. I know
coaches want to win now, and they have their reasons. But I don't understand,
and this switching back and forth is almost worse than getting benched.''\


Bullseye!

Bingo!

Jenga!

The Title of That Stupid Movie With Robin Williams Where that Fucked Up Board Game Came to Life and Tried to Kill You that was Weirdly Marketed to Children and Can You Believe They're Making a Sequel of Some Sort What the Fuck!*

You've done it, Peter!

You've proven beyond reasonable doubt that YOU CAN'T replace your starting QB in the middle of the game BECAUSE IT WILL MESS WITH HIS PSYCHE with this telling quote from a bothered, tortured, pained, confidence-beaten, priority-fucked, psyche-shat Matt Leinart, a starting QB who was replaced in the middle of a game.

I mean, I'm no professional sports journalist, but "I don't understand and this...is almost worst than getting benched," sounds pretty psyche-damagy to me.

Okay, look. I know I'm being overly literal. Read the whole article, and it's clear that PK is ACTUALLY arguing against a "myth" that sounds more like:

Under no circumstances should you ever temporarily replace your starting QB or you will lose.

...which the Cardinals have apparently disproven by winning the past two games by doing just that. Okay, that's completely fair. But...but he doesn't say that. Mr. Monday Morning says this [paraphrasing]:


Temporarily replacing your starting QB midway through a game will smush your QB's confidence.

There's a big fat logical disconnect here. He cites as the "myth" not the myth itself but the reason that the myth exists. Peter use brainy. (p.s. pickiness makes me feel better about myself.)


And I still have to berate P. Jerk for his unnecessary and large-cock claim that this is the "biggest myth in all of football." Ergo:


Bigger Football Myths Than the QB Thing:

Eli and Peyton are blood-relatives
Devin Hester can be stopped
LT was born on the planet Earth
Gnomes hold the ball in place at kickoff
The lady in the Chunky Soup commercials is, in fact, Donovan McNabb's mom
Terry Bradshaw is socially graceful human being
Punting is a good idea
Touchdown celebrations kill pupkits, the genetic combination of puppy and kitten
Pac-Man Jones didn't do it
Fuck! My guy was right there and I pressed B! That shoulda been a pick! Fuck Madden.


In conclusion: Peter needs to pay attention to what he writes.



*It was Jumanji. That's what I was thinking of. Stupid fucking movie.

Friday, September 28, 2007

Thanks, Peter, That's Very Helpful

I'm going to go ahead and follow FJM's lead by criticizing Peter King's weekly fantasy advice article. For those who haven't read these things, rest assured that PK's otherwise pretty solid knowledge of the players/teams/game does not translate to the world of fantasy sports. In fact, I'm pretty sure he's only played fantasy football, like, once. If that.

This particular foible isn't really about bad advice, though, per se, so much as..."huh?" advice:

Got Cedric Benson? This is the week he blows up against the Lions.

Peter...uh? Wait wait wait- what does that even mean? Does that mean he "explodes" with lots of yardage and touchdowns? OR does that mean Benson completely "falls apart" against a ferocious(uhhh...) Lion defense?

Personally, I really hope that he literally meant that Cedric Benson's body will shatter into thousands of pieces rapidly moving away from each other. That would be....AWESOME (ifnotgrossandsad).

Also, in a possible sequel to last week's advice to sit Brian Westbrook, this week he's advising to sit Larry Johnson for "any warm-bodied running option." Will do, Peter.

Thursday, June 7, 2007

The Inaugural Fantasy Celebrity Hottie Draft

Okay, the Reds blow and I'm lacking inspiration, so I'm resorting to posting about this ridiculous and amazingly enthralling fantasy draft (initiated by both loyal readers midre and Kris) that has taken place via a 375+ message long email thread among myself and 10 friends/friends of friends over the past week and a half .


The long and short of it for the zero readers who weren't already involved: 9 rounds, 9 categories: 2 Movie, 2 TV, Model, Musician, Politician/Newsanchor, Historic, and Athlete.
The results would be too difficult to post, but here's some post-draft analysis courtesy of some famous sports analysts that were kind enough to offer their take on the draft...inside jokes and inability to see the actual results aside, I think it makes for some decent infotainment...

THE INAUGURAL FANTASY HOTTIE DRAFT FINAL RANKINGS ANALYSIS SHOW
Featuring CHRIS BERMAN, MEL KIPER JR., and PETER KING


CB: BAM BOOM WELCOME TO THE SHOW EVERYONE THIS HAS BEEN A HEART-WRENCHING WEEK LET’S GET THINGS STARTED MEL WITH A RUNDOWN OF THE TEAMS LET’S START WITH JOHN ‘IF YOU’RE GONNA ZAG THEN I’M GONNA” ZIEGLER.

MKJ: I can’t stress this enough: if you’re going to choose someone from Now and Then, it simply has to be the My Girl* girl. Atrocious. B-minus.

PK: I give this team the following overall ratings: 93 Funny, 95 Handbag Stealing, and 98 David Rogoff’s Facial Hair, but where’s the plenty-on-the-plate, no scintilla of not hotness, half-double-mocha-espresso quick whip bombshell?! D-minus.


CB: LET’S MOVE ON TO BRYAN “IT’S OKAY IF IT RAINS BECAUSE WE PLAY IN A D”OEMLER.

MKJ: Can’t-go-wrong-ers up and down the board, my favorite pick being the out-of-nowhere blonde Victoria’s Secret Model in the last round out of South Fresno State. She’s got blonde hair, she wears lingerie, and she’s a girl. GREAT pick. B-minus.

PK: Absolutely, Mel and I’d also like to stress that…..

CB: CALM DOWN PETER, MOVING ON. SAMMY SAM’S CLUB SIMKOFF CITY 2000!!!!! BOOM NOISE!

MKJ: Awful team. Uglies all over the place. Goofed up a potentially awesome music selection in M.I.A. B-minus.

PK: I LOVE this team. Grit. Hustle. Character. Ambition. Dislocation. This is like a team of Ryan Freels: not a lot of talent, but huge amounts of production. Also, with exceptions of Scarlett Jo and Kate Hudson, they all appear to frequently dive headfirst into walls at breakneck speed. A for Sam. Oh, and B-plus for Bryan.


CB: MOVING ON TO “I’M GOING GOING BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK BACK TO CALI’” CALLIE VINCENT.

MKJ: Astonishing- with John Ziegler, Callie got arguably the hottiest hottie in the draft with the very last pick. B-minus.

PK: Agreed- but unless the rumored last minute hostage-exchange goes down with Rogoff, count on him being cannibalized by his red-headed teammates. B-momma.

CB: WHAT ABOUT DAVID “I’VE ALWAYS WONDERED HOW GAMBIT GOT” ROGOFF?

MKJ: Spandex unitard, Chris. This is an extraordinarily well-rounded team featuring representatives from multiple species/sexes/ethnicities/religions/blood-types/ages/heights/accents/skeletal structures. Reminds me of D2: The Mighty Ducks. B-minus.

PK: No foolin’. Clearly this guy has more than a scintilla of…STREET SENSE!!!

CB: LAME

MKJ: WEAK

PK: Do you guys want to talk about the Sopranos?

CB and MKJ: GODDAMMIT NO, PETER.

PK: Fine. A-squiggle for Rogoff.


CB: JAMES “JAMES BIXBY” BIXBY ON THE DOCKET!

MKJ: Phenomenal pick in Veronica Kay- she’s been soaring up my big board since I first saw her taking swim lessons at the age of 5 at the Newark Municipal swimming pool.

CB: CREEPY, MEL.

MKJ: …yes…B-minus.

PK: I’ll tell you what, Bixby’s is a team that shot 2,394 pounds of meat but was only able to carry 80 lbs. back to camp…

CB: ...STILL WITH THE OREGON “HERE COMES PETER COTTONTAIL HOPPING DOWN THE BUNNY” TRAIL II REFERENCES…

PK: …seriously, so much hotness, but how’re you going to carry it? I’ll tell you how: wheelbarrow. C-question-mark.


CB: MIKE THE FURCHINATOR FURCHGOTT MILK? WATCHA GOT, MEL?

MKJ: An erection, Chris. B-minus.

PK: I’m with you, Mel- this guy really turned it around with some fantastic…

CB: COWABUNGA!!!!

MKJ: ?

PK: …late round picks in Andress and Heard. A-plus.


CB: OOOOH ME LIKEY HOW ABOUT KRIS THE SWEDE THE SCANDINAVIAN THE NORDIC TERROR LOFGREN

MKJ: Stone cold hotties all over the place. Snagged Alba for next to nothing. And Aahoo Jahansooooootjhoushmandzadeh is a huge sleeper who’s a strong tackler on defense and can also play out of the backfield and on special boob teams. Special teams. B-minus.

PJ: I disagree- Melissa Theuriau is quite easi…

CB: HENRY DAVID THOREAU!!!

PJ:...ly the hottest hottie taken of anyone in the Politician/News anchor category. That’s a lot to give up. D-tilde.


CB: LETS GO TO HIS TRADE PARTNER GREG “LET’S SET UP THE LEADING NATIONAL SPORTS NEWS NETWORK IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT IN A CITY CALLED” BRISTOL!

MKJ: Chris, tone it down.

CB: [whispering] APOLOGIES!!!!!!!

MKJ: Gotta love the keeper picks in Watson and Locklear 1981. B-minus.

PJ: Agreed, although you gotta wonder why he took Misty May considering the management’s well known firm stance against sandy v*****s. D-troit.

CB: I PULLED MY VOICE MUSCLE MOVING ON TO FLYIN’ RYAN SMOKEHOUSE SAN FREEZY BREEZY COVERGIRL SAINT MARTINAEU BROTHER WHERE ‘ART THOU?!!

MKJ: Jesus.

CB: THE J-MAN A B C D E F JE-‘YOU’RE NOT FULLY CLEAN UNTIL YOU’RE’-SUS-TFULLY CLEAN

MKJ: Speaking of, God would be pissed if I didn’t grade his mom’s team highly. B-minus.

PJ: I LOVE this team. But with mega-diva-hotties Pam Anderson (DD, Florida State) and Virgin Mary (B, Bless U.), you gotta wonder about chemistry. THAT’S where Janet Reno comes in. Ryan M: Empire builder. C-whatever.


CB: LAST UP WE GOT MIKE ‘WHO’S PAYING? OH WE’LL PAY; YOU TOOK US OUT. OH NO NO NO- YOU’RE THE GUESTS; WE INSIST. BUT WE ORDERED THE LOBSTER TAIL. FORGET ABOUT IT, YOU ONLY LIVE ONCE, EH? WHAT IF YOU LET US BUY ICE CREAM LATER? THE FUCK? ICE CREAM IS LIKE, 10 BUCKS TOPS; ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT’S EQUAL TO A FIVE COURSE MEAL? WE’LL LET YOU GET JIMMIES. OKAY, YOU KNOW WHAT- SERIOUSLY, JUST LET US PAY THE” BILLMIRE!

MKJ: This is a team I would love to have a pillow fight with. It makes me cry with joy. B-minus.

PJ: I’ll tell you what, Mel, I don’t have a scintilla of a doubt that you could be up all night with these gals EVEN WITH ALL THOSE ZZZ’s (Ziyi Zhang, Zooey Deschanel)!!! C-porpoise.

MKJ: Seriously? “Scintilla” of humor in that.

PJ: That’s MY word, Mel.

MKJ: Peter, nobody uses that word. Except you, in like 50% of your columns. It’s idiotic, and furthermore, it’s an ugly word; It sounds like a multi-legged parasite that crawls into your ear at night. Enough.

PJ: Your hair is stupid.

CB: WELL THAT’S ALL SHE WROTE THANKS FOR WATCHING AND COME AGAIN NEXT YEAR FOR MORE BOOM YELL LOUDNESS SCREAM!

Dr. Z: I hate you all.
*[apologies, I was totally thinking of the movie Gold Diggers: The Secret of Bear Mountain which starred the My Girl girl (Anna Chlumsky) and Christina Ricci, who WAS in Now and Then. God, this really doesn't matter.]

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

The Only Thing Worse Than Signing Gil Meche to a $55 Million Contract…(PLUS MORE PETER JERK!)

…might possibly be apologizing for criticizing the signing of Gil Meche to a $55 million contract, as one of my favorite friends Jon Heyman does in his latest article.

First of all, if you are going to do something blatantly ignorant, surely you wouldn’t want to make a fucking Broadway production out of it, right?

WRONG:

Last week I did something I don't like to do. I apologized. And, worse yet, I
admitted I was wrong.

And man, was I ever.

I know I wasn't alone in laughing aloud when the notorious nickel-squeezing Royals paid $55 million for Gil Meche. But I laughed the loudest.



Why…he came without losses! He came without walks!
He came without wild pitches, earned runs or balks!
And he puzzled three hours, `till his deadline had passed.
Then the Heyman threw together some crap real m’er f’ing fast!

"Maybe Meche’s signing," he thought, "was not without reason."
"Maybe Gil Meche...perhaps…whose career ERA+ is an utterly average 100 including this year has put up an ERA+ 240 in his first nine starts of the 2006 season!"

And what happened then...?
Well...in ‘merica they say,
that the Heyman’s small heart
grew three sizes that day!

Over the next few months, Meche came back to earth
And the Heyman continued to expand hugely in girth.

He’s fat. Heyman is. ‘Cause fat = stupid. I can't stress this enough.

I speculated that Royals GM Dayton Moore got confused during negotiations,
that whenever Meche's people were calling Moore by his last name, he mistakenly
assumed they wanted more money. And that eventually they got to the $55 million by giving Meche either a million dollars for every win he had in his career, or
to match his uniform number, or to memorialize the fact he's had a 5-plus ERA
two of the past three years.

I wrote that Gil Meche was "French for flushing money down the
toilet."


First of all: Jesus, Heyman, chill out, man. God, yes, Meche did nothing to deserve $55 million, but you don’t have to get all faux-clever about it. It doesn’t take a PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL ANALYST to see that that was a bad deal, so seriously, no need to have belabored the point.

And most definitely no need to retract your statements.

I like how he directly quotes himself with the “French is blah” thing. He also reminded his screaming hordes of fans of his cuteness in last week’s mailbag.

Whooza clever boy?! Is it Jon-Jon oooo?! Go play with your Legos.

Also, why French? Because it has a soft ‘ch’? Is that even a characteristic of French words? I don't know- I never took French- YOUR MOM. Anyway, if so, then I say Heyman is English for “douche,” and I don’t care how little sense that makes. I don’t get paid for this.

See, it would make sense if Heyman was apologizing for being a lame-o. But no, he’s actually apologizing for asserting that it was a bad deal.

I mean, here’s the thing, even if Gil Meche wins the next three AL Cy Young Awards, any and everyone who ever criticized that contract was still entirely correct in doing so. Because at the time all anyone had to go on was six years of amazingly consistent mediocrity. And no one in their right mind who isn’t a GM for a tiny market baseball team with little to entice free agents/fans to his/her team in a heavily seller-favoring market is going to sign the poster child of mediocre pitchers for 5 years at $11 million per year.



On to Peter Jerk


I swear that at some point in my life I respected Peter King as a journalist, but I’m beginning to think that that time was when I was 5 years old had just learned how to spell the word “think.” Honestly, though, ever since SI.com started ferociously plastering MMQB all over their front page on Mondays, I think Peter Jerk let it go to his head.

E. to the G.:

[re: of all non-football related things he might possibly think to write about...sigh...the rebuilding of New Orleans]
My problem, quite frankly, is the rebuilding is too slow. This country should be
mobilized by the federal government, like yesterday, to attack the
reconstruction of a tattered city.


Where in the flying horsefuck does PJ get off thinking his no doubt uneducated opinion about Katrina disaster relief holds any merit whatsoever? Oh, wait, hold on- my secretary just handed me this:


TRANSCRIPT OF CONVERSATION BETWEEN G.W. BUSH AND CARPET, OVAL OFFICE

G.W.: Golly. This King Peter of the Interland fella is absolutely correct. I must dispatch my federal hordes to Mrs. Katrina ex post facto!

Carpet: PLEASE WASH YOUR FEET CARRY ON THANK YOU



I just hope Dr. Z isn't planning to retire anytime soon.

Monday, April 16, 2007

Ah Ha! Got You, Peter Jerk!

That's my new name for Peter King when he talks about baseball: Peter Jerk.
It's got a certain ring to it.

Here's what Mr. Jerk said in Monday Morning QB ("QB" referring to the position in game of American football, a game that is not baseball):

Mike Scioscia's a great manager [the Angels are 6-6]. Charlie Manuel's not. The Phillies [3-8] look like they never went to spring training.

Here are multiple reasons why this is a dumb thing to say:

(Preface) First of all, I'm going on the premise that PJ is basing his wise observations solely on the records of the managers' respective teams. Am I missing something here? Did Scioscia reportedly do something really inspiring or noble in the past week?....
And did Manuel kick Jimmy Rollins in the shins for only OPSing 1.177 in the first couple weeks? BP has no quotes from either in their weekly roundup, so I guess not.


1) Managers have little to no control over wins/losses. It's been estimated that the most influentialest managers affect the outcome of only 10-12 games per year*. That's less than one every 15 games or so. No team has played more than 13 games as of today.

Beep beep boop bop beep bop bup. I just put the numbers in my calculator and it told me that Mike Scioscia and Charlie Manuel have probably only influenced the outcome of 0.815 games so far this year (and that's rounding up). This means that they are not solely responsible for the performance of their teams.


2) But even if they were, the Angels are technically underperforming (keeping in mind #4 below). They're only at 6-6 and they were predicted by most to be in the World Series! How does that make Mike Scioscia a great manager?


3) I'm still confused; robot helping aside, how is Mike Scioscia a great manager?


4) Small sample-size, dickhead. And this is something that writers of ANY and EVERY sport should be aware of (and violate constantly even so), so several extra "you are suck"s heading your way, PJ. It's been two weeks; The Yankees are in 4th and the Reds are atop the NL Central. These things might change.


There, now you've had it, Peter King! Surely you have learned your lesson and will never try to write about baseball again. Surely!


*UPDATE:

References:

-"a team that has a good versus an average manager is likely to win several more games over a season, all else equal"

Singell, L.D. 1993. Managers, Specific Human Capital, and Firm Productivity in Major League Baseball. Atlantic Economic Journal 21(3): 47-59

-plus, a whole bunch of stuff in the article "Is Joe Torre a Hall of Fame Manager?" from the book from the Baseball Prospectus guys: Baseball Between the Numbers: Why Everything You Know about the Game is Wrong [check out a preview on Google books].

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

The Ultimate Insult

Forget the predicted last place finish in the NL Central. Forget the 27th overall ranking.

The real slight here is assigning none other than Jack-of-All-Sports, Thoughts, and Ideas Peter King to write the Reds preview for SI's MLB Preview feature. On an only slightly less insulting note, the entire article is about how the success of former BOSTON RED SOX guy Bronson "Used to Be a Red Sock" Arroyo of the Not-Boston-Red-Sox-Anymores will determine the Reds' fate this season.

Surprisingly, despite the enormous potential for making me angry, it's not a bad article (except if you want to nit-pick at the misspelling of Cincinnati ("Cincinatti") in Theo Epstein's quote (although it's possible that that is not a misquote at all, but that Theo actually verbalized "Cincinatti" and that Peter King (who frequently writes about the Bengals, and so must actually know the correct spelling) is actually poking fun at the silly child-GM) but probably 70% of those living in Cinci spell it that way too. So fuck it).

And I do kind of agree that the Reds are very likely effed if Arroyo doesn't perform close to how he did last year (or someone else- douse me with water, but I still have faith that Eric Milton might revert to 99-01 form; also there's Bailey and of course Kirk Saarloosoos(!!)).

Also, props for the interesting tidbit about the Reds ranking 9th last season in runs scored despite being 2nd in the NL in both homeruns and walks. Although I disagree with the explanation that it was due to low team BA. Au contraire, it was lack of heart. Don't dispute it.

You win this time, Peter King. But someday you're going to write something brainless about baseball again...probably next week, in fact. Then I'll get you. Grrrr.

Monday, March 19, 2007

Sometimes What You Are Looking for is the Rule that is Right Under Your Exception to the Nose; Also Peter King's Opinions About Not Football Must Stop

I don't know what that means. But what I was conveying clearly, I think, was that I found a reliever-turned starter who has had success after being mercilessly converted with little prior experience.

His name is Dustin Hermanson and he is apparently the front runner to assume the closer role for the Reds. He qualifies in that he had never even started in the minors (dating back to 1994) before the Montreal Expos converted him in 1997 to a pretty darn successful starter (successful for the first two years, at least).

Dustin Hermanson (switched to full-time starter age 24 in 1997)
-before: 7.35 ERA, 1.74 WHIP (in 32 games)
-after: 4.10 ERA, 1.35 WHIP (in over 300 games)

So clearly there's a pretty small sample size with the before #'s, but I think it works. However, I am going to go ahead with some irresponsible analysis and pick out from among the myriad of variables that no doubt contributed to his success the fact that he was fairly young (24) when converted. Which may be why his arm/mentality/capacity for adaptation/magic-pitching-dust wasn't permanently compromised as seems the case for the other examples. Except I just looked it up and Kim was also 24 when he was converted, so, y'know, shit. At least Kim is arguably the second-most successful conversion.



And just because I'm tired of semi-serious analysis, I wanted to berate Peter King (as I find myself wanting to do every Monday morning for some reason- and I know I'm not alone) for continually forgetting that his lofty status as SI's #2 NFL guru does not give him license to pretend that he's intelligent- or that his readers give a flying fuck about what he thunks he thonk - about things that aren't football.

I've seen better examples of the above (especially when he tries to talk about baseball) in the past, but this week there are at least a few inane comments:

Just discovering the iPod, one of the great inventions of all time, and my one recent find was Norah Jones. What an incredible voice. Shows what a music dolt I am that I barely knew her.

One of the best discoveries of midlife: St. Patrick's Day. Never thought I'd love Guinness, but it's pretty close to the perfect beer.

Goddammit, Peter. Nobody gives a shit about how pop-musically out-of-the-loop you are. And saying Guinness is "pretty close to the perfect beer" is like beer-connoisseur and journalist Ephram Monarchyson declaring in his weekly column "Tidbits I Ponder that I Ponder" that Steve McNair is pretty close to the perfect quarterback. It's just plain ignorant.

And furthermore, in these two statements, Mr. In-Truth-Only-a-Pretty-Good-NFL-Writer feels qualified enough to declare that a) the iPod is "one of the great inventions of all time," b) Norah Jones has an "incredible voice," and, again, c) Guinness is "pretty close to the perfect beer."

Please, Master Peter- I am lost without your insight! - enlighten me with your knowledge of the best Tex-Mex restaurant (of all time) in Indianapolis!

Also- Really? Really?! The mp3 player is one of the great inventions of all time? Does it really rank up there with the, er, wheel? The printing press? The world-wide-web? Antibiotics? Steel? The microcircuit? The aeroplane? The internal combustion engine? The bow-and-fucking-arrow? Gunpowder? Duct tape? A Google search of "great inventions of all time" gave me chicken broth, how about that? Light bulb? Steam engine? Kirk Saaarlooos's arm? Cotton gin? The number "0"? Gary Majewski's hairstyle? Ryan Freel? Here's another gem from Google: the potluck dinner party? More Google results: Bic pens, "my new Bissell steam vacuum," plywood, spreadable butter, or dental floss? Any of those as great as the mp3 player? I do hope he writes about those next week.

I should stop. I have a sarcasm clog in my toilet, and that shit is thick.